Hey, I noticed this edit since you clicked "request review". Everything looks perfect, nice work :)

The wikipedia integration is a bit inconsistent, so if this change doesn't work you might need to create a "relation" so that wikipedia notices it (e.g. relation/16269661)

oops, fixed

hey, I assume you're talking about way/270742026/history ?

I have no idea why that's tagged as a `airfield=military`... might be worth asking on the original changeset: changeset/21429617

hey, sorry I don't have a photo but there's some info on this website: https://hudsonriverpark.org/activities/interim-pickleball-courts - as you noted, there's no aerial imagery yet so the size & position might be a bit off. apologies if that's the case

thanks for fixing this and taking the time to explain!

should Redfern and Blacktown be mapped the same way, since they have some platforms that are similarly far from the other platforms? The inconsistency is what confused me

hi, in sydney there is normally 1 stop_area relation per train station. In this changeset I merged the two (incomplete) relations into a single relation: relation/9802366

this was based on advice from the OSM wiki, and the tagging style used at other stations in nsw.

apologies if this is incorrect. could you please help me understand why this station needs two seperate stop_area relations?

sorry, those screenshots are from OSM Americana, for `NZ:WRR` they use the ref from the route relation (which used to work perfectly because the ref was `WR`) - https://github.com/ZeLonewolf/openstreetmap-americana/blob/3b73ce2/src/js/shield_defs.js#L3617

I guess the best solution is to design a proper svg shield, then the ref tag will be irrelevant for this scenario

hey, in this changeset did you intend to change the route shield from https://github.com/osmus/osmcha-frontend/assets/16009897/3a30f81b-5708-4c71-93ca-27d1222966a5 to https://github.com/osmus/osmcha-frontend/assets/16009897/091574aa-e220-4779-a760-ba474fdc3dbf ? I agree that "WRR" makes more sense when rendered in plaintext, but the original shield seems like a closer approximation to the actual symbol (https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3254090/182264785-4daee18f-ce5f-4a19-86ca-c474d572a22e.png )

not sure why the future CRL platforms are now visible. I don't think i edited them in this changeset

Hey, according to the linked wikidata item, this hill is genuinely called "peak"
- https://wikidata.org/wiki/Q31452031
- https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/35799
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Peak,_New_Zealand

hey, your recent edits look great. One minor thing, for traffic lights, can you please split the crossings at each kerb. Routing tools apply a time penalty for each crossing where pedestrians have to wait. However, this line way/1223624518 makes it look like you can walk diagonally in a single traffic light phase. So the estimated walking time will be a bit inaccurate.

It's not a big deal at all, but if you're going to map heaps of crossings, it would be nice to do it the official way. This would also allow other users to add accessibility info using mobile apps like StreetComplete.

osm.org/edit#map=20/-36.86388/174.76098 is a good example, where crossings are split at each kerb

hey, the colours are used on the signposts at bus stops, on timetables, brochures, and network maps and wayfinding at the big bus interchanges. The colours I added might not be exactly the same as what AT uses but I think having an approximate colour is still useful

Hi, what is your source for this edit? This street-level imagery from 2019 shows that the speed limit is 60 through the junction: https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=3acff657-5de0-4c96-a467-8d09ac863908&cp=-37.196688%7E175.552607&lvl=17.0&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027&pi=-2.2&style=x&dir=168.6

Has the speed limit recently been raised from 60 to 100?

hey, nice work. when mapping curbs (or cliffs), the arrows should be on the lower side. I've corrected a few along great north road, you may want to review any other ones that you added

p.s. you might find it easier to map kerbs as a single long line, and add the "raised/lowered" info using points. this method is more widely supported, and allows mobile apps like StreetComplete to prompt users to add accessibility info.

here's an example: osm.org/edit#map=21/-36.84503/174.76803

perfect, thanks for confirming

Hey, thanks for your edit. Just wondering what source you used for this name change? LINZ says this is called "Pitt Road", and the businesses along this road use "Pitt Road" as their address (e.g. https://theplantmarket.co.nz/contact-us )

I'm curious because I can't find any information online about "Aintree Way". Cheers

I'm not sure what the comment above means. I have reverted this in changeset/142305155

Hey, thanks for the reply, what you've done so far with route=bicycle looks good, one thing to note is that there should be a single route-relation for the whole route, rather than many route-relations which each have one member.

If these routes have a name that's even better, but I don't think that's a strict requirement.

Another thing to keep in mind is that some navigation software doesn't allow bicycle along "footways" or "footpaths" because cycling on the footpath is illegal. The solution would be to add `bicycle=yes` or tag the path as a "Shared Path" if there is an explicit sign (e.g. osm.wiki/File:New_Zealand_road_sign_R4-11.svg ).

In this case, the footbridge would ideally have `bicycle=yes` or be changed to a "Shared Path" if cycling is officially allowed. Otherwise some validation tools will flag this as an error, since a bicycle route can't include a path where bikes are banned

hey if you want to include a portion of the stream beyond the coastline you can map it as `waterway=tidal_channel` - see way/987561246 for a local example and waterway=tidal_channel for the docs

Hey, you requested a review on a few of your earlier edits - I haven't looked at everything but what I did check looks great. The main thing to consider (which you seem to have noticed) is that wikidata tags for streams/roads should go on a relation, rather than the individual segments. thanks for your work!