According to https://www.tollambulancerescue.com.au/news/our-bases/bankstown/ "The Bankstown Base also includes The ACE Training Centre" so should be place the "ACE Training Centre" feature as a node inside relation/13778946/history ?

I've mapped the Toll Rescue Helicopter base as a osm.wiki/Tag%3Aemergency%3Dair_rescue_service as a node at node/12908879644 inside but think we maybe should swap them?

looks good

I'm not from the ACT, but if there are a few houses where people live here then that seems ok. There is place=isolated_dwelling but it looks like there are 5 houses here so hamlet is probably correct.

There is the District of Booth at relation/11911812 but that's just the district admin boundary, the place=hamlet can and should exist too.

It's possible mark this place=hamlet node as the centre of the district boundary, but I'm not familiar with the local situation to comment.

I'll leave them. I looked through the original contribution and it seems they were mostly from Strava surfing heatmaps, which is mostly just mapping the popular surfing spots. It just seemed odd seeing them mapped but the more I think about it the more I think it's reasonable.

near the fire hydrants, or on the fire escape maps throughout the building or sometimes within lifts are good places to look

It's okay, it happens. While it's nice to try and keep the history it's not essential, one can still attempt to reconstruct it via a lookup of the changeset looking at the deleted node's tags and the tags on the way.

Thanks, fair enough.

pretty much every beach along the coastline has opportunities for surfing, unless it's it has a specific local name you'd like to map should we really be adding sport=surfing off each beach?

furthermore, the "water" here is already mapped via the coastline, so we shouldn't double up with natural=water

hi, please don't map for the renderer see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_for_the_renderer

moving the way to from it's true location just to improve the cartography isn't good practice in OSM, this is left to the cartography software to decide where it ultimately draws the ways, for example it could decide to offset the way in it's processing to solve this.

coincidentally I had just "fixed" the road alignments just now before noticing they were shifted in this changeset.

ah I can see you did that sometimes here, sorry I just saw the ones you didn't first.

In JOSM, under the More Tools menu there is a "Replace Geometry" tool, which when you select for example a node and a way will automatically move the tags from the node to the way, place the node as one of the way nodes (which helps with retaining the link between the node and way in the history). It's preferable to use that where possible over just deleting the node.

Did you recently survey this? When I did in June 2024 the new building at way/1296216101 was still under construction but there seemed to be a driveway (the one you deleted here) running parallel to the other road (the one you made oneway). Just wanted to check if things have changed on the ground since then.

Shared path as shared with pedestrians, off the street where the footpath would be? If so you'd need to at a minimum add foot=yes to say pedestrians are allowed, then segregated=no to imply that pedestrians and cyclists share the same space.

The outline you've drawn seems to line up with Sentinel imagery which shows it. Well done.

is it surface=fibre_reinforced_polymer_grate ?

OSRM is adding area routing, so hopefully this will soon be not needed (maybe once enough routers follow too)

the ballot thing really depends when you want to visit, it's only for peak times, other times you can rock up and by a day pass at entry.

I've updated this to motor_vehicle=yes + fee:motor_vehicle=yes. To say that anyone can drive here if you pay a fee. In particular it's open to the public which I associate with access=yes. access=private is a very strict access value usually for staff/maintenance/the owner only. I think access=permit is a bit different as you really can just buy a entry pass at the gate (when it's not peak times) and access=permit implies I need to organise a permit before I travel.

What do you think?

https://www.holtestate.com.au/bhp1

Thanks. Okay I won't change anything, but just going by their website it does seem like "Derwent Ferries" would be better and more understood by users for the operator tag.

PS. This is why I like to tag `operator:wikidata` as well, because Wikidata has more flexibility to record the ABN, etc. which can then be used to lookup the entity structure and different names.

hi, where did the ferry operator "Navigators" come from? According to https://derwentferries.com.au/travel-info/ it seems like "Derwent Ferries" is the operator?

Thanks for improving this. Generally addr:suburb, addr:postcode and addr:state aren't needed as they can be derived from the admin boundaries, indeed when we did the import of these addresses it was decided to intentionally not include suburb, postcode and state.