Those new roads look quite different to typical residential roads, do you think highway=living_street would be more appropriate?

Thanks for fixing this. The name is only meant to contain the name not a description too, see osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Since it's all one school, it might be better to use a multipolygon relation to have a singe name tag.

See grades=*

Hi,

I see you dropped the sport tag (after briefly changing it to soccer) from way/180611935.

Wikipedia says "the stadium is Sydney's premier rectangular field venue for rugby league, rugby union and soccer.".

Given it's mult-purpose use sport=soccer;rugby_league;rugby_union is the best way to tag it IMHO.

Hi Yourock17, where did you discuss this import? See osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines for the process for importing data into OSM.

As far as I'm aware we don't have a CC BY 4.0 waiver from Transport for NSW yet, so can't use their data in OSM.

On the LPI Base Map way/36925960 is named differently. Are you sure about your name here?

With the survey marks you've added like node/3245917272

How about:
* use the ref tag for the number so it's machine readable
* use survey_point=mark or something like that to distinguish from trig stations with a pillar
* what's the value of repeating the coordinates in the note? the coordinates should simply be the nodes geometry right? are the two the same?
* what's your source for the coordinates in the note, where did they come from?

Got it, thanks for the detail! Since it's all the one car park what you've done to mark out the footprint is correct. I'll map the building:parts separately so each can be assigned a building:levels.

Ideally v1 of would be a building:part since it has more levels than the other part that v2 covers.

PS. once this is resolved we can add in that footbridge connecting Douglas with P2.

What's your source for changing P2 as shown in https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/53663839 ?

If you look at the Mapillary imagery https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=n_XySOWOiOvah91TDXfS_w&focus=photo&lat=-33.821719&lng=151.19080397220682&z=17&x=0.15626994051340276&y=0.5274092764743991&zoom=0.33670345817231884 you can see that the way it was mapped before this changeset matches the Mapillary photo (ie. the building doesn't go further south as per your change, but rather stays as a rectangle), but now it doesn't. I don't think it's been changed since the date of the photo as it was taken post construction.

It looks like you've added this twice, did you want to delete one of them?

Was your edit to way/188020579/history a typo?

Looks fine, good job! There's plenty more missing turn restriction in OSM that are just waiting to be added.

Getting closer... currently you have the members correct but spread across three relations for the left turn only each with a different member, but you need one relation with three members.

Try JOSM, it's much easier when working with relations and turn restrictions.

These are the 3:
relation/7713776
relation/7712221
relation/7707282

but it should only be one like
relation/7707084

https://ibb.co/hg20iG

There has been an influx of poor quality SEO entries where we don't hear back on changeset comments when things don't add up. Sorry you got caught up in this @Dynamic HVAC, but glad to see things have been worked out in the end. Thanks @tonyf1 for always being on the ball!

Is this rock pool, a swimming pool? leisure=swimming_pool can be used for man mad outdoor rock pools too.

If you're trying to get this to shop up on the map, it's probably best to pick either shop=butcher or shop=greengrocer, as this is the primary tag which is going to classify this feature.

Or if they occupy different spaces within the same building, place two nodes, one shop=butcher and the other shop=greengrocer, all within the building=retail.

No worries, try this guid https://www.mapbox.com/mapping/mapping-for-navigation/adding-turn-restrictions/. http://learnosm.org/en/ is also a good entry point for guides.

Yeah I had to split the way to add the turn restriction. Definitely try JOSM it's much better for relations. There you can fix up the southbound on Willarong relation. PS. you've duplicated the node so you'll need to fix that up in josm.

I don't have a strong opinion either way. Just chiming in with further facts from the ground to help guide what should be in OSM. Even if we did split the Blue Mountains out, You should be able to include both the Blue Mountains and Sydney in overpass together.

The left_turn_only relation is missing some members for from and to and the role for the via node, see relation/7707084. The relation needs 3 members, from via and to, but it only has one member the node and no role.

osm.wiki/Relation:restriction#Members

https://ibb.co/jvdJ0w

I find JOSM much easier to work with when doing relations/turn restrictions, as when you select the relation in ID you can't add members to it, you have to select the ways then add it to the relation. Maybe give JOSM a go?

For this one I've fixed it up in changeset/53525466, but it looks like you'll need to add one for when you head southbound towards the Kingsway too.