Hi, I know you're only new to OSM, so no worries with the process you've used. But if you feel like getting more advanced, you can use the More Tools > Replace Geometry feature in JOSM to draw a new way but retain the object history.

Was this split for any particular reason? Generally you only need to split a way if you need different tags on different segments or making only one segment part of a relation.

Do you know who can actually use T-Ways, the signage I've seen just says "No Entry, Authorised T-Way Vehicles Excepted".

psv includes Taxis (access=*) are you sure Taxis are allowed to use the T-Way?

I've removed the subway tag as per feedback on that thread, subway in OSM means metro which means mass rapid transit. These stations are for regular heavy rail.

I opened the thread https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-September/038787.html

Hi, I noticed this changeset added subway=yes to a lot of features, unfortunately Tag:subway subway=* is undocumented on the wiki so could you please describe what you understand subway=yes to indicate and how it us used globally, is it used by any data consumers?

osm.wiki/Metros does describe "Metros" as "a rapid transit train system" which use railway=subway and station=subway, but these stations here are not Metros/rapid transit, they are regular heavy railway.

I have a tendency to go with this description that they are not subways, they are underground as per the location=underground tag already.

I've opened a discussion about https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/157934548 at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2018-August/012045.html

That's okay, mistakes happen. Can see here the whole area is a construction site for new Sydney Metro https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/HxPA-pEB7nQsgIsjXHwccg

Hi, I've reverted this changeset as it doesn't reflect on the ground. A tip for next time to prevent this happening again, you can check the history of the objects and notice they were only recently mapped by survey (which should trump outdated satellite imagery), also please check street level imagery like Mapillary which has updated coverage of this area.

Great. If the data is CC0 then it's compatible, if its CC BY then we need the waiver at https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Waiver_and_Permission_Templates

In the past I've tried to obtain permission to use listdata https://listdata.thelist.tas.gov.au/opendata/ in OSM but they came back unable to provide the permissions OSM needs, see osm.wiki/Australian_Data_Catalogue

If they aren't from a survey, and just copied from another source, we need to ensure that copyrighted data is compatible with the OSM license terms.

Hey I changed this to just cycleway=lane as I can see bike lanes on both sides at https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=uYPm2IS5vAvhMykbyxRyrQ&focus=photo if it's changed since then (Map 2018) please say so.

I've reverted this to bring back the objects since you noted the path does actually exist on the ground. Likely you'll want to downgrade it to highway=path

If the track exists on the ground, it should be in OSM. If it's not specifically designed for foot traffic, you can use the lower class highway=path or if it's specifically for bicycles use highway=cycleway.

I'll leave it to you, but I would recommend the JOSM reverter, it ensures you don't miss anything and lets you know about conflicts if things have since changed (which they did for Mount Wellington, see changeset/61163943)

Hi, I noticed you removed the indigenous name here, what was the reason for that?

the `aus` in name:aus refers to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Aboriginal_languages (ISO639-3) it's a broad classification of 290–363 different languages. It should only be used when we know the name is in an Australian Aboriginal language, but not sure which exact language.

In ISO-639-3 xtz is the broad classification for tasmanian languages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasmanian_languages. We should use the more narrow language code where known.

I can revert this changeset if you like, I noticed that you've made some other minor changes in the process.

I don't think it's correct to add the station name to the platform. railway=platform suggests mapping either the platform name if it has one or the platform number (should also go in the ref tag).
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61903964

I think it's better to leave the name tag for the platform name if exists, most of the time it doesn't. The station name is already mapped.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61912852

Are you sure https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/373201074 is Louis Street, there is a Louis Street further north and it doesn't match the LPI Basemap, could you confirm with local knowledge?