I mean I noticed there was such a footpath which connected the Rail Corridor and Bukit Merah bus interchange. Just walked past there this evening :)

Dear junior20,

Could you share the reasons for doing this changeset?

I find that this changeset is inaccurate and doesn't reflect reality.

1) Hong Lim Park has been tagged as forest. Although Hong Lim Park has some trees and covers, it is not a forest. It is more a park which has events every now and then.
2) The Singapore River has been added with park features which extend on both sides of the river. I just walked Singapore River earlier this evening. First, some parts of the Singapore River do have parks on both sides, but not all parts. Second, the proportion is way off. In reality, the river is much wider than the parks, not the other way around. I don't think it's right to make the parks dominate the Singapore river, while the Singapore river then becomes very thin on the map.

Please share your reasons, or revert these edits. Thank you!

Ok thx!

If not the entire Caspian condo is covered by all these thick road displays and can be hard to view, especially at low zoom levels. I agree that roads are critical data, but their display should not come at the expense of almost completely obscuring the building and condo features (especially at low zoom levels)

Apparently the Google Street View for this area is completely outdated as well! Have submitted a report to Google for them to review the Google Street View.

Would appreciate if other mappers, especially those more experienced, can review the pathways drawn on this area! I have been frequently walking here recently and I don't think these path displays here are 100% accurate. I've tried adding some paths and features which exist in reality but are missing from OSM.

When editing, I noticed there were many pathways listed as "demolished" in the editor*

Also when editing, they were many pathways that were listed as "demolished". Is there any value in keeping these pathways that are labelled "demolished"? If not, I would suggest that we remove them so that the map is more clean cut and not cluttered. We also wouldn't want to get confused with paths that actually don't exist in reality anymore.

Hi Andy, ok no worries and noted.

Hi Andy, sorry and noted. Appreciate if you can help rectify it. Thank you!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170874975

Appreciate if you can help to correct and rectify it, especially if you know better. Thank you!

Sorry Andy, it was unintended. Thanks for letting me know!

I agree and am ok with adding key routes back, especially those that are essential for navigation. I agree with GrabSG_Zack and GrabSG_AndyAng that it’s important, too.

What I hope and appreciate moving forward is that we have discretion when mapping and perhaps no need to map out every single carpark pathway in detail if it doesn’t help in map navigation. Ultimately, those are that driving to malls might also be walking around the mall areas after they park their vehicles. If the map is too bloated with many heavy road inlays, it might be not helpful for them, too.

If we can all be mindful not to make the map look too bloated with excessive details (i.e. overmapping), I believe we will all win.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171233115

Hi, if I may clarify, I’m not against GrabSG_Zack and GrabSG_AndyAng. I understand the perspectives they have shared and appreciate their efforts to ensure mapping routes are comprehensive.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171233115

Hi Andy, with some guidance, I have tried to revert and add back the roads. Hopefully they should be updated soon.

Hi Chetan, I think it would be great if you can help to revert. Thank you! It will be my first time using JOSM reverter.

Hi Chetan. Thank you for your message. Will try to revert.

Hi Chetan

Thank you for your message. Appreciate your guidance as I try to figure out how to revert the edits. Thank you!

Hi Andy, ok thanks for your feedback. Feel free to edit as necessary.

Hi Andy,

Thank you for your comment.
RWS is a popular area with many features already displayed on the map and many buildings are in close proximity. As such, the map features on OSM map around RWS area are already very dense. Adding thick road displays on top of the already dense feature makes the map look extremely overwhelming.

Please feel free to make any edits that you think are necessary on your end. I just hope there can be balance so that the map does not look too overwhelmed. Hope we can all keep this in view. Thank you.