Problem with way/768742227, intersecting segments.

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=150.68980&lat=-33.74825&zoom=18

Looking at it .. I don't think there is a hole in that building at all, so there is no need for some internal segments.

Comment from Hb- 28 minutes ago
Warin61 wrote:
> Deleted 'path'.
Why didn't you change to highway=track? By simply deleting you killed a lot of data.

Because I don't know that it is a track. Fire vehicles don't stick to tracks. They can and do pick there way through things. The video is too poor to say that this is a track. The fact that is not on the LPI Base Map to me says it is very questionable that it is there.

Comment from Hb- 28 minutes ago

> A fire truck does not say on roads or paths.
What means "say" here? A typo?

It should be "stay" .. missed a "t". Apologies.

The facebook page does not appear to give a specific location for Sugarbum Fairy Farm.

It may have been a track at some point. As it is not on the LPI Base Map I would think at best is is an abandoned track. Splitting hairs: an OSM path is not wide enough for a vehicle...

Some more errors.

The power is carried on POLES not TOWERS. See the OSM wiki for the differences. Change these.

The line voltage would not be possible to judge from the listed sources, delete these.

As you have not responded to a comment from 21 days ago I will refer this changeset to the DWG.

Deleted land covers. 'Scrub' looks to be not scrub.. possibly heath or grass. 'Grass' could be heath .. no way to tell without further information - preferably survey.

No source for Sugarbum Fairy Farm. Where did you get this information as to where the farm is?

way/764873469 is tagged surface=compacted. Source of this information?

Deleted 'path'. A fire truck does not say on roads or paths.

I don't think this is a swamp. The LPI Base Map shows this as different from a swamp rendering. It also shows it as a larger area, so I have expanded it and deleted the tag swamp, leaving it as wetland.

The way: 761755058 resembles a christian cross, has no source and appears completely artificial. There is no source justification for it. Remove it.

OSM landuse=brownfield is NOT for burnt areas! OSM does not have tagging for burnt areas. Please remove all of your landuse=brownfield entries.

Where crop cycling occurs the land use is not forestry, but farmland ...

Agreed that mapping from imagery is a good start .. but I would map what I see .. trees .. and I would not map them as a land use without more information.

I would not assume the land is owned by anyone, or any group of people and see no point in any discussion of this.

My understanding is that a 'village crop area' is worked until the soil becomes less productive, then a new area is opened up and the old area left to regenerate. So no 'village crop area' is permanent, it may exist for some years and then it is moved.

Some say that unless you are prepared to update the information on a regular basis then you should not map it. I take the view that some indication of what to expect is better than nothing.

Presently, landuse=forest and natural=wood has no effect on most rendering. However the presence of trees does not match any present OSM interpretation of landuse=forest,.

Hi,

It cannot be determined if the trees are a land use .. or just tress. natural=wood is a far better tag in this circumstance.

More fixing.
Drawing 'on top' .. ok .. but delete the things 'underneath' when finished!

Hi,

The Scout Camp Kariong presently shows it going over into the National Park (as shown on the LPI base Map). The area shown on the LPI Base Map is far larger than that mapped into OSM, while not all of it is used for camping .. it could be said that it is a "recreation ground"?

Hi,
How do you know this is wetland?

Head office vs local office? Go with what is on the ground. I have camped in this area for a few decades, while I don't know all the area I have some interest here.

Hi,

There are a few problems showing up
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.54418&lat=-29.15792&zoom=8

Good luck.

Hi,

Question, why did you make a multipolygon?

This looks like a simple building, or two joined together. Actually it looks to me like several buildings with connections .. but anyway.

Muiltipolygons outer ways should not touch along edges.. and this one does. Simple solution? Delete the relation - leave the ways and tag those ways as buildings. Job done.

Hi,

The whole of this nature reserve I don't think is a swamp. So I have removed that tagging.

way/40431925 - tagged as wetland. According to the LPI Base map .. this is the wet land. So I have left that.

Not a silly question at all. Think a legal eagle would be required... and I think the answer will be no :(
Good luck.