highway=pedestrian on a linear way is only meant for Roads mainly / exclusively for pedestrians. way/546930679 is a corridor, not a road for pedestrians.

As a closed way, it's appropriate for plazas, but not really for corridors.

Chatswood mall is occasionally used as a road during market setup/setdown, so I think it's okay there.

Even Post Office Lane could be highway=pedestrian given it's predominantly used by pedestrians and only rarely for delivery vehicles.

Hi @aalanar, Welcome to OSM. Just double checking that you dropped the name "Heritage Drive Reserve" from that park, but the LPI Basemap shows a name. If you know the area, please add in the name as signposted, if you don't know please leave the existing name.

Secondly, when adding someones backyard pool, it's best to add access=private otherwise people might rock up expecting a public swimming pool.

It's just QSpatial is run by Department of Natural Resource and Mines which didn't grant the extra permissions OSM requires. That said I believe TMR did have a state roads dataset, so i guess it depends which dataset you used and which agency published it.

All else fails a local survey is undisputed ;)

Sorry I see you've already worked this out with node/5268872555

I know it's you're first edit so, it's the important thing is thanks for mapping this bike rack!

But keep in mind the name tag is only meant for a proper name, not a description. In this case
amenity=bicycle_parking indicates this already. See osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things

If you want to say it's a bike rack as opposed to other types of bicycle parking you can use bicycle_parking=* (but that's optional).

If you want to leave a note for other OSM mappers you can add this to the note tag.

Further the TMR "permission" seems to me a bit weak legally. I'd suggest we try to get the OSMF CC BY waiver signed, and if not don't use TMR data.

That link is for TMR. The website gisservices.information.qld.gov.au doesn't work for me, could you please point to which service this data came from?

QTopo from DNRM has not allowed their CC BY data to be used in OSM. See the thread at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2017-October/thread.html

You can map out the new routes without stops, but again without a CC BY waiver from TfNSW you shouldn't just copy the routes from their map you'd need to survey this yourself independently.

In JOSM. Data > Revert Changeset. However I don't really know the area well or exactly what you've done in this changeset. Eitherway you'll need to remove the imported data until we have the waiver from TfNSW. You're free to map independently from ground survey though.

I've reverted your change to the landuse polygon which flooded perth with green.

I don't agree with that landuse way, but I think it's fair to leave it as a placeholder which can be reduced while it is mapped with better detail to exclude non residential areas.

Probably best to remove, as no response and can't see any visible signage outside from Mapillary.

Looks good to me!

Those new roads look quite different to typical residential roads, do you think highway=living_street would be more appropriate?

Thanks for fixing this. The name is only meant to contain the name not a description too, see osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Since it's all one school, it might be better to use a multipolygon relation to have a singe name tag.

See grades=*

Hi,

I see you dropped the sport tag (after briefly changing it to soccer) from way/180611935.

Wikipedia says "the stadium is Sydney's premier rectangular field venue for rugby league, rugby union and soccer.".

Given it's mult-purpose use sport=soccer;rugby_league;rugby_union is the best way to tag it IMHO.

Hi Yourock17, where did you discuss this import? See osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines for the process for importing data into OSM.

As far as I'm aware we don't have a CC BY 4.0 waiver from Transport for NSW yet, so can't use their data in OSM.

On the LPI Base Map way/36925960 is named differently. Are you sure about your name here?

With the survey marks you've added like node/3245917272

How about:
* use the ref tag for the number so it's machine readable
* use survey_point=mark or something like that to distinguish from trig stations with a pillar
* what's the value of repeating the coordinates in the note? the coordinates should simply be the nodes geometry right? are the two the same?
* what's your source for the coordinates in the note, where did they come from?

Got it, thanks for the detail! Since it's all the one car park what you've done to mark out the footprint is correct. I'll map the building:parts separately so each can be assigned a building:levels.

Ideally v1 of would be a building:part since it has more levels than the other part that v2 covers.