RE: way/984095380

My opinion on mapping out roughs is that they are often so nebulous that it leads to messy course maps and is better to just leave them out. Most golfers understand that if it isn't within the fairway, it is rough. No need to really draw it out. There are some exceptions that I've seen where the boundaries are very clear and could be easily mapped. But those are few and far between.

Thanks Thunder! What's appreciated even more than people modifying the map are mappers that are open to learning how to improve their skills. So thank you so much for being open for improvement. I'll reply to you direct message next.

RE: way/1426109119

Please don't use the "lollipop" style of mapping golf course elements as you've done in the URL above. You need to create proper multipolygon relations in order to map features like roughs/bunkers that are within other features like fairways. Please see leisure=golf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls and osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon for help in understanding how to map this situation. If those aren't clear, please let me know and I'll help explain them further. Thanks.

Awesome!! Thanks so much for helping to clean up golf courses. If you're looking for more of this, check out the MapRoulette challenge: http://mpr.lt/c/50926

FYI, no need to add a "golf=tee" on the start node of a "golf=hole" when that start is already inside of a "golf=tee" area. It's redundant.

FYI, I fixed way/1424842363

Golf holes need to start at the tee and end at the green. You had it backwards. Common mistake. Just thought you might want to know.

My preference depends on whether or not that business is the only one occupying that physical space as marked on OSM. If it is, then I'll put all of the necessary tags on the building. Otherwise, I'll create an address tag and put relative tags on that address.

Thanks Learning,

As you have more information on the physical move than I do, please feel free to move the object in OpenStreetMap as you see fit.

Wait! What? How did THAT happen!? Harumph.

The fairway for the first hole shouldn't extend and surround the tee for the second hole. It should stay with the fringe around the first green. Can you take another look please? Thanks.

Thanks Bamamba, but you're doing it again. See way/1423871476 for another example.

RE: way/1423958947

When drawing golf course areas (i.e. greens, fairways, bunkers, tees, etc.), please be aware that the ways (lines) used to outline those areas must not cross over each other. Fairway outlines shouldn't cross over greens or bunkers or other fairways for example. Take a look at osm.wiki/File:Golf.png for an example of the "Wrong" way to map a fairway and a green along with the right way. There are some cases where a fringe exists around a green and you should draw the fairway outline completely around a green. Other times, the fairway and green butt up against each other. In that case the fairway and green should share the same nodes at the boundary between the two. When drawing these shared nodes, editors like iD (built into openstreetmap.org) will "snap" to an existing node if you get close enough. If you could go back and clean up where you've made this mistake, that would be great. But more importantly, if you could stop from doing this in the future, it would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions about golf course mapping, feel free to reach out. Thanks.

RE: way/13015737063

When drawing golf course areas (i.e. greens, fairways, bunkers, tees, etc.), please be aware that the ways (lines) used to outline those areas must not cross over each other. Fairway outlines shouldn't cross over greens or bunkers or other fairways for example. Take a look at osm.wiki/File:Golf.png for an example of the "Wrong" way to map a fairway and a green along with the right way. There are some cases where a fringe exists around a green and you should draw the fairway outline completely around a green. Other times, the fairway and green butt up against each other. In that case the fairway and green should share the same nodes at the boundary between the two. When drawing these shared nodes, editors like iD (built into openstreetmap.org) will "snap" to an existing node if you get close enough. If you could go back and clean up where you've made this mistake, that would be great. But more importantly, if you could stop from doing this in the future, it would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions about golf course mapping, feel free to reach out. Thanks.

Can you post a link to the imagery you are using? Your fairway seems a little bit problematic and wildly crosses bunkers (according to more standard sat imagery). Thanks.

There is my list of ~8000 fairways left to fix, but then there is a list of changes that have been made in the last 24 hours that gets generated every day. This secondary list ranges from 0 to 50 course elements to review and is reviewed nightly so that I can quickly educate new/problematic mappers on errors that they are making. Even though you aren't the one making the error, you show up having touched a fairway that is still a problem. As each one of these takes several minutes to research and construct a response to, it is some extra effort.

Having said that, I wouldn't worry about it. I'm just going to sort my list of 8000 problematic fairways looking for "high density" ways that might qualify for your nearly colinear and work on fixing them first. This should greatly reduce how often you show up in the nightly reports.

jerk!

You deleted the previous green that was drawn here to draw your own. There are some problems with that. The first is that you lose the history of the node you deleted. (osm.wiki/Keep_the_history)

The other problem is that you have deleted an object that was a member of a relation and you break the relation by doing this. The hole defined a fairway everywhere EXCEPT where the green was. But when you deleted the green, you say that the fairway is EVERYWHERE, including the where you drew the new green. This doesn't make sense because you are saying the grass in the green is also the fairway, which is obviously impossible.

Please do your best to modify objects instead of deleting and replacing them. And if there is a really strong reason to delete them, please make sure you fix the relation that you broke. Thanks!

RE: way/855583732

Hey there jdasmh,

Thanks for the efforts to clean up golf courses. It's much appreciated. There's a problem with this green (and possibly others). You aren't sharing the nodes of each and ever node at the border between the fairway and the green. That creates overlaps (that set off Q/A checks) and gaps between the fairway and green. Please make sure future edits share every single node. Thanks!

Well, it's not just Illinois (or Indiana or Iowa) that is the problem. It's the entire country. I have some rudimentary tools that watch all the changes to golf course features (greens, fairways, water hazards, etc) and if any change is made that violate certain "rules", it shows up a on a report that I look at every day. So when you reduce the nodes in a golf green for instance, that's great and all, but if that green already has errors in it (typically being crossed by a fairway due to historically bad golf course mapping), it shows up on my report and makes extra work for me.

If there is some way we could coordinate to reduce the noise in my nightly reports, it would make my life a lot easier. This could be you giving me enough heads up that I can fix these fairway/green errors before you come along, or it could be you not applying your fixes to golf course objects that have other errors on them. I'm open to suggestions. Thanks.

If I gave you a list of URLS/osm_ids in Illinois to avoid for the next month to give me time to do my clean-up first, would you be able to easily add those to an exception list?