the campground with the same name node/4735232633
so it's a campground with several pitch area ? I only find one pitch area

Hello,

Are you talking about this one node/316021215 ?
the localisation seem to be inside the building. I wrote a message to the initial contributor changeset/23741

Regards,
Marc

Hello,
about node/316021215
Is it in the building? Another contributor can't find him changeset/61103245
Regards,
Marc

both at the same location ?
2 objects is better in this case

Hello,

I think 'camp_pitch' is not yet rendered for 3 reasons: 1) nobody coded it yet :) 2) there were 3 different schemas for camp_pitch, it's only last year that 2 schemas were depreciated in favor of the 3rd one. 3) there was a pronounced confusion between a camp_pitch<>camp_site.
It's also to help the rendering that I'm working on correcting as many objects as possible. I hope the rendering will come soon. anyway the number of objects with the old schemas is decreasing dramatically and the confusion rate is decreasing strongly.

I understand the problem of the render disappearing if you fix the error. Some contributors use tourism=camp_site fixme=tag for the render, it's a tourism=camp_site
I understand if you do that even if I won't :)
but at least it allows to reduce the number of camp_site=camp_pitch which is already a first improvement.
if no one wants to convert camp_site=camp_pitch then we get stuck with problems 2 and 3, which gives arguments to the rendering team to postpone it until later

tourism=information + information=signpost is display on osm.org

Regards,
Marc

Hello,
node/778779564
you can also remove type£=associatedStreet on the node, it's for relation only
Regards,
Marc

Hello,
way/763446441
you have added type=associatedStreet on it, but it's a tag for relation only.
you also have 2x no 203
Regards,
Marc

Hello,
node/278443870
is this survey point at the exact junction of those roads ? if not, add a new point.
I also didn't understand why you add a type=associatedStreet on it. it's a tag for relation only.
Regards,
Marc

Hello,
warning about the diff British English <> American !
camp_pitch and camp_site are incompatible on the same object,
camp_site=camp_pitch is a now depreciated tag.
2 other tags replace it
tourism=camp_pitch represents a part of the area. that seems to be the case for those objects.
tourism=camp_site represents the whole area (campground in American).
Regards,
Marc

Hello,
arround node/4960864321
are there 3-5 tourism=camp_pitch (a part) in a tourism=camp_site (the whole area) ?
take care of diff British English <> American ! link to the doc
tourism=camp_site
tourism=camp_pitch
Regards,
Marc

Hello,
are there 2 tourism=camp_pitch (a part) in a tourism=camp_site (the whole area) ?
take care of diff British English <> American ! link to the doc
tourism=camp_site
tourism=camp_pitch

Hello,
node/5176278349
what's this ? a camp_site or a picnic_site ?
Regards,
Marc

Hello,
node/5634129183
what's this ? a camp_site or a picnic_site ?
Regards,
Marc

Hello,
node/2515345706
what's this ? a camp_site ? or a picnic_site ?
Regards,
Marc

Thanks for the reply by message.
Have a nice day too!

the change should have been discussed but i'm ok and happy with it (it's indeed a mistake for me to have a tag on a route_master that doesn't concern the route_master).
if the revert is done because of "not following mecanical edit rules", I will propose a mecanical edit following the rules in the local communities where I am active.

as said before, a hard rule in josm or at the api level would not solve the problem because there are usecases where a huge bbox is justified. if you change the train relation in moscow-paris relation/7363930, if you change the relation France relation/2202162 , that 'll use a hudge bbox size. but in this case you don't change a bar in London and a restaurant in Brazil in the same changeset, make it easy for mapper to understand what's modified.
i will however consider making a ticket to josm to cause a "huge bbox" alert when that happens.
however if you don't understand the remark about mecanical edit and if this alert exists, i guess you'll click "ok continue, I don't care".
I 'll also start a thread in talk mailing if ppl agree to add itin osm.wiki/Good_practice

Regards,
Marc

yes osmcha for exemple. but also osm-suspicious and most importantly: the human eyes.
in short, anything based on the changeset.
Implementing a patch in these tools would be complicated, it would be like having to transform one changeset into several fake changeset. but some node at the border of one country may be more logicial to include in the changeset of the other country (for ex if a mapper improve the shape of a forest overflowing into the neighboring country, it wouldn't make sense to make two changeset.)

Hello,
node/4723906746
is "luxury campsite" the name of it ? or only a descriptive quality of it ?

Hello,
node/5777856316
what's the meaning of / in the name tag ?
are those two names? if yes use name for one, and alt_name for the other.
or loc_name + name.
Regards,
Marc