At https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=549884120042438 on the blue sign at the right of the image "Military Road E-Ramp"

> Yes, what's the matter with that ?

Eventually you run out of characters in the tag value, it also creates more noise in terms of edits and changesets which makes it harder for mappers reviewing changes finding changesets etc. and if it's something that can be done as a post-processing step by data consumers from the iNat > OSM link then why would a data consumer rely on the OSM tag rather than the iNat > OSM link?

> I think it's the same goal of key:panoramax or key:mapillary keys, for example.

I'm not a fan of those keys too for the same reason, that it's arbitrary how you select who's image to use as the value, or if you list them all then there's no end...

iNat observers may continue adding new iNat observations over time, do we then keep adding more and more iDs to ref:inaturalist.org? If you limit it to 1 who decides which observation(s) are in that list?

I'm all for improving linkage between the two projects, but as others mentioned you can add the OSM Object ID as an observation field within iNat and can derive the reverse.

I'm just talking about the change that moved the natural=tree area outside of the landuse=residential area.

> but I’d like to see a distinction between the forest way/138280435 , residential area way/218206724 and the park way/815796655 above it would look better.

Why? A residential area can be covered in natural=wood, the two areas may overlap.

> Do we even know who owns the trees by the house? If they’re already on the property, that is!?

If you enable the DCS NSW Land Parcel Lot layer you can see the property boundaries, trees within that are owned by the property.

The PLM25 dataset isn't listed as part of Vicmap, so likely isn't covered under the existing waiver we have. Therefore it should not have been, or continue to be used as a source.

We can request a new waiver to cover it, but given that may never come (there was a request for an organisation wide waiver that was rejected), or may take a long time, as much as I don't like it, it seems we must remove this data from OSM.

Some of the data is available in Statewide Public Land Classification Boundaries - Vicmap Lite VMLITE PUBLIC LAND which we can use under the waiver, but it doesn't spell out the state forest names or even provide a polygon for each one....

hi, why was the tree coverage reduced here, around the buildings? On the imagery you've used, it does appear the tree coverage extends into the residential area as it was previously mapped.

Thanks for cleaning these up!

I've also set healthcare:for=children;parents which I think is probably correct.

I've restored the tag with the correct spelling, any reason you preferred to delete?

Welcome to OSM @rkurytnik. It looks like you may have accidentally dragged an address node onto a power line which doesn't look right. It's too easy to make that mistake in the iD editor, so just something to try and avoid in the future.

refering to way/1043256280/history

Usually the name only contains a "proper name" not something like "comming soon..." see osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

If needed that can go into the description like you have, but usually shop=vacant is sufficient.

hi, you've listed your source as knowledge, but your prior "Courtesy and Emergency moorings" changesets appear to have systematically added data from another source. These appear to align with Maritime NSW data at https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset/2-maritime-nsw-public-mooring

Could you please clarify where the data you've been adding here was sourced from and your process?

osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines document the steps which must be taken to perform an import

It's okay, mistakes happen, but glad we caught this early.

osm.wiki/Australian_Data_Sources#Victoria specifically lists each Vicmap dataset that is available, which doesn't include the aerials. Though based on this, I think we better add it to that list as red to make it clear it's not compatible.

If we were able to use Vicmap Aerials, then we would have made them available by default in iD, JOSM, Vespucci.

was adding a street name to the residential area at way/1206858534/history intentional? looks wrong to me.

Didn't realise there was a track there, thanks.

Thanks for the contribution!

It looks like you've accidentally dragged a bus stop https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/12644854029 it's too easy to accidentally drag nodes in the iD editor.. I've fixed that.

I updated the tags for node/13461688921/history and in doing so I changed the operator:type

I just improved some of the geometries from Esri World Imagery and Mapbox imagery which shows the changes.

I'll add a note.

though I can't see it on https://www.casimaging.com.au/our-locations/ so perhaps they closed down or are a different brand now?