there is something very wrong with your editing here. you are leaving detached residential roads as you delete the main roads and shortening if not deleting their connections altogether.

this whole area is looking very messed up now. please stop making it incomplete and inaccurate.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70867983 where the changeset comment is: reverting my own revert; it seems to have made things as much worse as it minimally partly fixed things, although a triangular tennis court is an interesting concept.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70867969 where the changeset comment is: reverting my own revert; it seems to have made things as much worse as it minimally partly fixed things, although a triangular tennis court is an interesting concept.

not quite sure what went wrong here - https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=67830195 shows what can be confirmed below, that you re-created a lot of nodes but almost no ways here.

the nodes were then deleted in changeset/69891223 some time later.

i am (after three months :-/ ) attempting another revert with traditional unintelligent tools, with limited success.
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=70867216 partly deals with the note bringing this to my attention, but obviously fails miserably overall.

serves me right for going offline for two months...

https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=70867520 is not much better. probably worse even.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70867520 where the changeset comment is: three months failing to defend deleting the items clearly seen here. is this golf mapping like pokemon except accompanied by mass deleting things clearly seen in all aerials and obviously needing to be present? reverted too, to the best of my ability

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70867216 where the changeset comment is: nearly three months without a response or justification, and the deletions here and elsewhere have come to my attention through other means, and i see nothing in aerials to suggest they are the least bit plausible. inaccurate is no reason to delete.

now that the original data is visible against aerials for a real comparison better than guessing from https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=61513974 , i can give my observations.

it was immediately obvious while making the above revert that these were untouched TIGER imports. which is no justification for a mass deletion.

viewing a random one showed me it had the access=private key, the lack of which is the usual justification to delete driveways. they also have highway=service due to TIGER limitations; the added service=driveway to distinguish from, say, business access, is an osm-ism that needs manual addition.

with the above achavi page, changing the base layer to OSM from the default dark i'm-going-blind-and-the-sun-is-directly-overhead, then disabling `old' on the overlays lets me see the restored drives and i checked that they all appear rendered private, so nothing wrong there.

with no significant difference between the three actually-different TMS imageries i can view here, i chose the archive bing clarity as i know it's reasonably aligned around the world even if old. the other clear layer showed no major changes here.

the usual TIGER Barf criticism applies in that there are a couple howlers here, but many are Good Enough For OSM Work, and certainly do not merit deletion on that ground.

the biggest thing to strike me is how many unmapped driveways there are as this is far more densely populated than osm alone implies. i've done detailed house and driveway mapping in random rural areas only to find long overnighter hours of work deleted later, so i find my motivation here to fill out all these private residences in detail to be lacking.

anyway, my approach here would be to improve what is lacking and add what is missing, obviously. there was nothing here to merit a wholesale deletion, unlike some places where tiger bears (tiger-bears? oh my! TIGER bears) no semblance to any reality i've experienced.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70862402 where the changeset comment is: private driveways are most welcome in osm, especially if added to comply with eu directives to guarantee a minimum wage to plebs who trudge said driveways in order to earn a scrap of mouldy bread after 32 hours daily barefoot uphill both ways in the snow

CAPITALISATION IS IRRELEVANT, SEEN BY OSM AS VIEWING MARKETING DRIVEL THAT IS LIKE YELLING AT YOU AS LOUD AS POSSIBLE. (like what the wireless adverts i hear hourly have become, shhhh)

osm follows a style guide like plenty of publications that reject ever more firms wanting to appear in ALL CAPS on osm.

Note BMW nearby. that is obviously an acronym of the bavarian company that can be spelled out in full.

Mini is too ambiguous, like some people will think of MAN, another german motor company that can be written out in full.

Does M.I.N.I. mean anything? if so, write it out in full as osm does not use abbreviations. if it is short for miniature, it has established itself as much as radar is a common word and it should not be capitalised in osm past the first letter.

osm does not care about self-inflicted style in general as that is for marketers. osm does respect such case-isms as `dm' the drogerie chain to differentiate from the `DM' that used to be used for payment there, but not ALDI or more correctly AlDi, that also being a spoken word as implied by the case of Aldi. Same with Mini. I don't know how fans refer to MAN, man, and caps are a hint to spoken software what to do with the letters

dunno why i'm flying off the handle at this so much.

but just to be sure, i checked and wikipaedia refers to the all-caps as an own stylisation, and then uses `Mini' in every following reference, and does not list anything to suggest as any possible expansion, backronym or otherwise.

i better stop and do something else now. like wonder what that icon i've not seen before is and what it meant to be.

sorry.

i don't know if it worked the way you expected, but you appear to have broken relation/1140415 so a chunk of woods fails to render, with osmi pointing to unclosed ways at the north, river part of said polygon.

i see you have been continuing to edit worldwide and applying iD so-called fixes without review, so let me point out another wrong `fix' that has since been reverted here:

node/2281886746/history
it is clear from the aerial imagery that a cyclist needs not cross the tram line to merge from the pavement onto the road, and also nearby rail crossings which iD has decided should have been added also do not exist in reality but are the result of the conflict with a centrally mapped schematic single highway line when in reality it is an area encompassing the separately mapped tram lines so that here the traffic flow is actually outside.

i recommend ignoring what iD suggests be fixed unless you actually view the imagery and understand what is going on, as in Züri the local mappers are far more likely to get things right than the proposed iD fixes, even if i see things like controlled almost-zebra crossings partly implied by a signal placed in part of the crossing, which iD cannot fix automagically today.

and further, the nearby way/90372910/history caught my eye in achavi, as this looks like another automated edit without review. a manual review would have caught immediately that this is a mis-tagged swimming pool, while i see nowhere in the basin wiki page suggesting it should be a water feature and i would expect most true basins as simple landuses will usually be without water much of the time so that retagging to a natural=water feature is to me misleading.

i can probably go on, but reviewing the re-tagged no-longer-zebra crossings, it is obvious to me that these (as i commented in the uk) should *not* be edited in an automated fashion, and in ch likely only with on-the-ground experience to identify presence or absence of accompanying signals to tag properly as controlled or not, both of which have been changed by this automated edit where decent aerials allow me to determine the difference.

are the railway (tram) v1 level crossings and changes to geometries i see when inspecting https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=70743780 zoomed into Schaffhüüüserplatz a manual edit, or is this more of what iD is doing automated, as the changeset comment mentions only starbucks as a manual change?

in looking at the first page of this edit, i see you have changed tagged zebra crossings to generic (undocumented) non-specific marked crossings with no legal significance.

however, in viewing the imagery behind node/5161893249/history it is quite clear this is a zebra crossing. there is an alternate _ref tagging that is available, but instead here you have adopted the idea that because in the us, painted zebra stripes are no different than any other marking, that tagging is not relevant to osm anywhere. and in the current tagging you changed, the info about legal status for pedestrians and drivers of the previous tagging, has been lost.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70748773 where the changeset comment is: no mapper response; this is golf mapping of which i know nothing, but the deleted areas look superficially factual and match recent imagery, and i have seen too many golf mappers deleting visible things wholesale recently for no obvious reason

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70748439 where the changeset comment is: no mapper response; this is golf mapping of which i know nothing, but the deleted areas look superficially factual and match recent imagery, and i have seen to many golf mappers deleting visible things wholesale recently for no obvious reason

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/70747918 where the changeset comment is: restore visible standard layer buildings after no mapper response or explanation

a track road provides access to agricultural fields or forest, while it is pretty clear that this is all industry and so should be re-tagged differently here.

the imagery shows the so-called track has the same surface as the added service drive, passes through a parking/loading/whatever area just as a service drive and in fact reaches the highway again, likely through a gate, with a second highway access again west over a similar concrete surface.

there is another track mapped southwest which is far more suitable, those more like farmhouses to my eyes, even if the track surface there does not meet the standards of construction found near me over a variety of surfaces, the worst case being the unmapped track heading north off the mapped track over grass.

way/132157675 v22

you touched it.
(and the others)

would this maybe be an iD auto-fix related to but different from https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6440 as hinted at by the referred changeset comment?