I rolled this back in changeset/88198008 to avoid the duplication in names

hi these buildings are already named on the footprint way eg way/423824984 I don't think this needs to be duplicate to all the parts.

looks good

There are two styles of doing traffic lights in OSM, 1. is place the tags on the intersection 2. is place the tags at the stopping position (for each road).

Looking at the change at https://osmcha.org/changesets/88190521 this now looses the pedestrian crossings which were mapped before, so probably the best way to model this one is a single highway=traffic_signals where the ways intersect and then where the 4 existing nodes were have highway=crossing + crossing=traffic_signals.

FYI I moved node/7727922877/history from on the bridge to underneath, pretty sure this is on the ground level not on the bridge https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/5-KSydn8Uy2RgITqge3BFA

Hi, the tourism=viewpoint tag is for scenic lookouts, it looks like the footway is already mapped here so I've reverted this change.

Hi was this mass edit discussed somewhere first?

Agreed with what ortho_is_hot said, the crossing would only be bicycle=designated if there is a bicycle light usually next to the walking/stop man light.

ps opening_date=* is only for future dates, now that it's open it should be start_date=* per the wiki.

no worries, trust you with the local knowledge then. It was only back in my uni days that I did the occasional lap around here.

okay if you know what's on the ground, I thought that they closed off all these roads to cars because of all the extra cyclists out during covid.

but if these are no longer open to motor vehicle traffic, we should at least add motor_vehicle=private.

Hi Russell, that makes sense. Certainly I'm not saying you're wrong, I guess this was just different to how I'd seen it mapped in other places and how I'd interpreted the wiki. But after reading that thread I can understand where you're coming from. So happy to leave it like this then, but interested in hearing what others think and seeing more examples of how other places map.

For example see https://osmcha.org/changesets/87368583 which put a building=* as the footprint and then the towers inside it with different heights as building:part=*

Though same applies to way/335699134 it would be the footprint so building=* and then the parts way/618221458 and way/618221457 would be building:part.

^ talking about way/16748116/history

hi could you say a bit more on why this should be building:part? According to osm.wiki/Simple_3D_buildings#Building_parts typically the building footprint would be building=* and then if you need to add parts which have different physical characteristics then you'd add extra building:part=* ways inside. In this case which building=* is this inside? The way itself already has building=* so I don't see the need for building:part.

+1 to the ground survey to verify. But please don't use Google Street View, otherwise your edits may need to be reverted, see https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/710/can-i-use-google-streetview-to-help-create-maps on why we don't use Google Street View for mapping in OSM.

hey @speedmeup, we can't just assume that the TfNSW Speed Zones data is 100% accurate, so it should only really be used as a guide to address areas which OSM may be wrong, or to add in missing speed zones. So it would be wrong to just change everything over blindly to match their dataset.

Hi did you really mean to move https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/3571292104 so far or was that an accidental drag?