Thanks for understanding.

The messages from others may seem a bit heated, but that does tend to come from recurring issues with users of the same software you are using. It's a pain point for a number of mappers.

I'd definitely encourage trying to push the developers of the software you use to correct it to handle golf courses as they are meant to be mapped, or to be able to take a .osm file in like other software can (i.e. Farming Simulator map makers), that way you can download an area in JOSM, make the changes you require, and save those changes locally for the software to use, instead of uploading to OSM itself.

Hi tpatte02,

Andrew from the Data Working Group here, what other mappers are telling you in this and other changesets is correct, in that both your edits done to suit a particular data consumer are incorrect, and that data should not be uploaded into the live database as a test.

The mappers commenting on your changesets are just trying to do the right thing and ensure OpenStreetMap data is correct.

Please stop any invalid edits or test edits, and if the third party data consumer you use isn't able to understand how things are mapped when done correctly, they will need to adjust this on their end.

Kind regards,
Andrew Welch, on behalf of the OSMF Data Working Group.

I've reverted this changeset for you, so it's all been removed now.

Changeset reverted at request of mapper

changeset/164708443

Hi there,

If you're editing as part of an organisation, you'll need to be aware of the Organised Editing Guidelines [1].

With the edits themselves, I'd start by making sure you've pulled down what already exists in OSM, edit those, and then upload it. If you just add data to a blank JOSM workspace and upload it, it will only ever add new data, not replace any existing data.

[1] osm.wiki/Organised_Editing/Guidelines

Not a problem, thanks for that!

Hi cashwin111,

Usually on OSM we prefer to keep the histoy of data, so the best way to do this would be to upload the GPX files into an editor (iD and JOSM both definitely support this) and then use those to help you adjust the existing data.

Currently all the data you've uploaded has some across with a lot of invalid tags, so I'd definitely recommend those being removed and adjusting the existing data after that.

Hi, Andrew from the DWG here,

It looks like you were trying to upload some GPX traces into OSM as traces, but you’ve actually uploaded them directly into the map.

Are these meant to be added directly, and if so, can you please tag them correctly?

If not, let me know if you need a hand removing them.

Thanks,
Andrew Welch
OSMF Data Working Group

Hey, are those house numbers on Muirkirk Street in Jamestown correct? The ordering is 22, 16, 108 which doesn't make sense.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164673592

Hey there, is foot=no being marked based on a legal perspective, or just a lack of a footpath? Any =no on an access tag generally means access with that method is prohibited by law.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164671246

Hi there, I'm just wondering if surface=compacted would be better for this? There's an image with the differences between the two at surface=gravel
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164662123

From aerial imagery, that looks unintentional, plus the original traffic_signals value looks like it was correct.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164584696

Hi there, if you're looking for somewhere to make maps over the top of OSM data, uMap is a good place to look.
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164575431

In that case, would you be able to add in the correct driveways where they are, if you're local you'd be best placed to map them correctly compared to others using aerial imagery.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164457780

Only issue I can find other than what Alliegaytor has pointed out (and I agree with their comments) is that building:levels = 0 is incorrect, the only time that would be valid is if the building is underground and accompanied with building:levels:underground as a tag. If it's a single story building, you'll want building:levels = 1.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164532006

If it's going to be like that for more than 6 months I'd look at mapping that it's a single lane road, and potentially even as alternating one-way.

Looks like the whole thing is already tagged with railway:preserved=yes anyway, which I think is preferred over using railway=preserved for historic railways that are still used like Pichi Richi and the Cockle Train.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164505084

Hi, the guard rail tag should be placed on a separate way where the guard rail is located, not on the road way it is alongside.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164414758

Hi there, the name for the bridge section should remain as Gorge Road. If 3768 is just a reference number, you can put it in bridge:ref, otherwise, I'd put it in bridge:name if it's the name of the bridge.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164414840

Thanks for fixing my typo!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164366404