Hi,
I suppose you wanted to tag that area, too? ;) I just did that, tagged as a lake.

cheers,
Matthias

No, really, water=tank doesn't exist. It makes no sense because there are other tags that do the same. Also, please don't add any reference numbers to the name, they just make the map confusing for everyday users. If those are internal references from the Water Board or something, the "ref" tag is where they can go. That way you can retrieve an object by reference without having that number rendered on the map for everybody else.

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
just a note regarding your tags: the tag water=tank doesn't exist. OSM uses British English, "tank" is Indian/Sri Lankan/Australian usage. natural=water + water=lake would work, although considering those tanks are mostly artificial, I guess landuse=reservoir + reservoir_type=water_storage would be even better.

Cheers,
Matthias

Hi Rinos, thanks for those additions!
I'm not so sure about the highway classification here though. A tertiary highway that is only connected to anything via tracks doesn't make sense. It seems like those "tracks" are actually proper dirt roads, so I recategorized some to higghway=unclassified, surface=unpaved. I don't know the area personally though, so if you do, could you have a look and see if you agree?

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
that name would be fine as "description", but it's not actually what the place is called, right?

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
are you still going to complete this in some way? Because as it is, as a one-way motorroad that's not connected to anything at the end, it doesn't make sense.

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
water=tank is a very "Sri Lankan English" usage, so that tag value isn't recognized by any renderer. OSM uses British English; the list of generally accepted values is here - you want water=reservoir
water=*

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
on Maxar imagery it looks like this areas is completely flooded now. Besides, the road isn't going anywhere ... are you sure this exists?

cheers,
Matthias

Huh? What are all these tags about? access=no means absolutely no public access, but then all kinds of traffic is allowed again? That doesn't work. asphalt with tracktype=grade2 doesn't make sense either, and this is not a bridge. Only living_street looks OK according to imagery.

Hi,
I noticed you're setting a whole lot of nodes on straight ways. They don't really add any useful information but inflate the data volume and makle routing slower. As you're using JOSM, you could try selecting a way and pressing "Y" ("simplify way"). If the result is too far off for your taste, try lowering the "Simplify Area" thresholds in the preferences.

cheers,
Matthias

Careful: that there are no buildings on the image may also be because they are newer than the image! Bing imagery is quite old here, if you use the layer icon to switch to Maxar, you'll see them. I just added them back in as for some reason reverting didn't work.

cheers,
Matthias

Hi, thanks for your additions!
You are adding quite a few superfluous tags though - they don't hurt but just increase the data volume. Something like a track or a living street is usable by all kinds of traffic by default, so adding something like "bicycle=yes" does nothing. That's only necessary if it's a footway, cycleway, motorway or something that's usually restricted. Same with tidal=no or salt=no for wetlands. You only need to add these if they are "yes".

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
you set "name" and "name:en" differently - I suppose "name:en" is the correct one?

cheers,
Matthias

Hi, thanks for your additions! Please remember though to name-tag things only with their *name*. "Guesthouse" and "Monastery" is *what* they are, not what they are *called*. If you don't know the name or can't spell it in Lao, it's fine to leave it blank, too.

cheers,
Matthias

Oh, you're right, there are even a few trees :) But still, like in some other places in the city, a bunch of trees on a small city plot is not quite a forest. landuse=farmland would probably be the best classification, with seasonal=dry_season I guess?
I've left it alone, feel free to fix.

Hi,
sorry, but have you ever visited those places? There's absolutely no way this could be called a forest by any stretch of the imagination. There are hardly any plants more than a meter high except for a few reeds. I'll just revert his, eh?

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
are you sure you wanted to separate those two mini_roundabout nodes? At least on Maxar imagery it looks wrong.

Please don't add private phones.

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
there is currently no way to map catchment areas in OSM. Please don't add them as natural=water as that's for areas that are more or less permanently under water!

cheers,
Matthias

Hi,
are you sure about that ford? On the aerial imagery it looks very much like a bridge. Big difference for people who are not driving 4x4s :)

cheers,
Matthias