Hi,
I was unaware that you changed the State Forest from landuse=forest to other tags. As the primary function of State Forests is to produce timber the tag landuse=forest is best. While State Forests have secondary functions for recreation and nature conservation the tagging should reflect the primary function of the feature. Note that landuse does not necessarily imply a land cover. It is the entirety of the State Forest that gets the landuse tag, not simply the area of the trees.

If you want to tag the area of the trees seperatly then use the tag nature=wood ... note that the key 'natural' applies to both natural and unnatural things!

Ways 888019420 and 888019432 had no track information, nor were they part of the formal boundaries of the State Forest.

Rendering - see osm.wiki/Rendering

IF your quick you can see what attracted my attention at https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=145.45605&lat=-30.87017&zoom=6 It will get up dated some time tomorrow .. say 3 pm~

However I have have re-included the school tree area. And I have roughly updated the tree area so it doe not cover the non tree areas .. until the next updated imagery comes along.

There would be more benefit in detailing the long straight bits of this tree area. Mater of time and inclination.

Excellent!

I exclude 'state forests' from tree areas because from time to time they will be harvested, so from time to time they will have no trees. I also render them differently - and having both things on the same area confuses things.

Hi,
What do you mean by 'overtraced'? If the meaning 'too detailed' ... detail can be removed by a program, but it cannot be added. So more detail is better. Look at the straight lines of the tree area south of Winmalee as an example of poor detail.

Spiting land cover boundaries because they cross some administration boundary (eg a school) is not required and adds some confusion..

This changset broke the relation for the trees and that has lead to a partial reversion in order to restore the trees.

As stated in the second comment .. "I'll retag them as leisure=nature_reserve", and I have done that.

I note that one of them is named a 'park', whatever that means locally. Those that have other names carry as part of their name 'reserve'.

The choices are ?

Not to map them in OSM at all ... despite knowing they are public lands.

Map them, but without the full technically correct detail that is not shown on our source.

------------------------------------
I take the second option, rather like mapping a building=yes where the kind of building is unknown. Any other ideas?

Also conflates boundary with NP boundary.

natural=wood is for a tree area, Some bits of these may not have trees. So I would not use this.

I'll retag them as leisure=nature_reserve, not certain of their protection status. They are clearly shown on the LPI/DCS base map. I would like them identified as being 'public land' so that anyone trying to deny use of it is know to be wrong.

Hi,

There is an error on one building.

Firstly Relation: 11991963 "type"="multipolygon" "building"="house"
has only one member and that relation can be deleted.

Second Relation: 11991964 "type"="multipolygon" "roof:colour"="#F2EEE7" "building"="house"

referred to the above relation .. but with no role. Instead the outer way for this building should be referred to with the role 'outer'.

Hi,
Relation: 11863112 "landuse"="grass" "type"="multipolygon"

has only one member and that member has the same tags... suggest you delete it.

Note I find these errors using https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=151.75568&lat=-32.94248&zoom=12

Hi,

Relation: 11884302 "highway"="pedestrian" "type"="multipolygon"

has only one member - an inner. Suggest you delete it.

Hi,

This looks like you are saving a copy of your changes to a local disk. The problem is that the save is before the upload to OSM, as such the local data has flags that says it is not uploaded. When you upload again follow some change the data that was uploaded is uploaded again creating a duplication. So far there are 3 instances of rooms, lifts and stairs.

If you are saving locally (I do it too) please save after you upload to OSM so the present 'loaded' status is saved.

You may find JOSM to be a better editor for what you are doing... it certainly picks up more errors such as duplicated features, and self intersecting ways.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM...

Name are not usually all caps.

The name tag should ONLY be used for names , not descriptions nor for things that should be obvious from other tags e.g. stairs, lifts... See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

The 'name' 'PRIVATE ROOM #' looks to be more of a description or reference .. please see the OSM wiki for the tags description and reference...

Yep. The memory fades over time. I'll remove the name as it does not appear on the presently available sources.
Good luck with the new mapping.

Admin boundaries not closed...

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=148.93322&lat=-35.73180&zoom=10

Are we allowed to use that source?

Base map will give you bridges - solid lines either side of road/track.

It is free form text. So no real rules, you can use whatever you like. As long ass the meaning is clear.

Six maps is NOT an approved source for use in OSM!!!! It is a commercial arm of LPI/DCS and should not be used in any way. Please use LPI/DCS.

Local government data usually includes copyright statements that are not compatible with use in OSM.