Är det Glasmästargatan eller Glasmästaregatan?
way/566115392#map=18/56.79018/14.44480

Byt namn på endera väg så att bpda får samma namn!

Vad är detta?
way/813903892/history

Början på en man_made=bridge kanske?

Okej. Jag var inte helt säker. Det ser rätt annorlunda ut på olika flygbilder. På maxar ser det ut som gräs i fina rader så jag tänkte att någon hade börjat med typ halm där.

I think it woul dbe pretty much impossible to implement general routing like that given the state of the current data. Many landuses are drawn straight through impassable objects.

It's a good argument for _allowing_ merging of tags though.

Osm is hard to change. People talk of consensus but in my opinion it seems more like "we keep doing it like some people in the past chose to do".

As a pragmatist, I support stronger standardization because it takes the responsibility away from mappers, and frees us (i. e. gives us mandate to change things). OSM doesn't do this. Instead you are urged to create some kind of community that can agree on guidelines. What defines a community is unclear though. Is it enough that you and me spoke about it? Let's merge all landuse and highway nodes! Yay!

It's a bit harder than that. Work on real change should be done on a higher level. It kind of is too late to just choose your own style, as mappers of the past could. We might not agree with their style but trying to change it will take some hard politics work.

Good luck! :)

I'd say there is a consensus globally to try to avoid merging landuse with "highways". I don't really understand why though. The main argument seems to be that it is harder to edit them separately, making it an argument about time spent. We do spend a lot of time being careful not to merge them though, so that argument is shaky...

Landuses are not used for routing, pretty much only for rendering, searching (if they are named), etc.

I agree about the voids. Adjacent landuse can be merged together even if the highway nodes are not, so the "seam" between two landuses moves along a way but is not connected per se.

I think you are talking about highway _areas_ like the pedestrian area you are working on. They should _definitely_ be merged with adjacent highways fir routing purposes! Notice there is a highway tag there, and probably an "area=yes", which is default for multipolygon relations. You could, however create a highway=pedestrian that is not an area, just a pedestrian street.

Nice work on Finn Malmgrens Plan!

I think, however, you have misunderstood the real value of multipolygons. You have "added" a bunch of polygons together but you can also subtract from the area by marking a member as an "inner" polygon.

You could draw a simpler outline around the whole square and then add the grass areas as inner, thus excluding them from the square.

The wiki page describes it well with images:
osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon

That is weird. I've seen the same from other mappers. Layers seem to be added when the software is trying to avoid collisions. There should be a (few) warnings before saving the changes.

I'd say there should be no need for a layer tag at all here so yes, you could just remove it!

That new footway looks great!

What I'm talking about is you added the tag "layer=1" to the existing cycleway just north of there. Layer should only really be used when things are above or below each other, like in tunnels or bridges.

Both the cycleway and the playground is on the ground, so in my opinion, you should avoid using layering there. They are on the same layer.

Extra layers are not a problem per se but in this case not needed and would probably just lead to future confusion.

You are doing a great job! Keep at it!

Why do you add layer all over the place?

This way is not off the ground and isn't overlapping anything conflicting:
way/188745712/history#map=19/59.29441/18.10024

Is this a path? There is no tag:
way/967578962/history

I guessed cliff since the terrain is already very steep there. The planning map has even tighter looking height lines converging here. We can change it to cliff later when it's more clear how it will look!

Fast du behövde ju inte ta bort alltihopa! Vägarna över torget fyller fortfarande en funktion (och är snygga)

Du behöver inte rita gångväg _runt_ torg - ytterkanter av highway med area fungerar redan som vanliga vägar. I det här fallet pedestrian, vilket tillåter fotgängare.

Flytta hellre torget så att det passar bättre med verkligen! Nu har du ritat gångväg in under byggnaden, stämmer det? Kanske ska byggnaden flytta då? Är torget större på riktigt än på kartan?

Älskar felstavningen på Kngens Kurva men kanske dags att fixa ? :)

way/956606724/history

Carl Sebardts väg stavas med gement v. Det kan man se på vägskyltarna!

This is the revert changeset:
changeset/129490059#map=17/59.22578/18.12770

I have manually reverted the moves made in changeset/124158558

The path now fits the strava heatmap and osm traces again and looks more natural.

Eftersom du inte svarar så kommer jag att rulla tillbaka positionerna. Det ser ut som att du råkat göra vägen spikrak med något verktyg.

Snyggt!

Fint mappat!

Är du säker på att det är cykelvänligt genom lekparken? Jag skulle nog snarare sätta det som endast highway=footway genom hela lekparken.

Det sticker ut speciellt eftersom resten av Rålis inte är mappat som cykelväg.

Kolla kartan nedan:
https://www.cyclosm.org/#map=15/59.3285/18.0242/cyclosm