I moved `place=neighbourhood` + `name=Darling Square` to a new way way/1470170829 since the name is for the whole precinct, not just the plaza/pedestrian area.

I've reverted this changeset in changeset/177120254

There have been significant changes on the ground here, which I'd previously traced to align with these changes based on ODM imagery, but this changeset reverted a bunch of those changes to make the data match the outdated DCS NSW imagery.

wouldn't wheelchair=yes be needed to indicate that for this railway stop position you can board/alight in a wheelchair?

node/10294488709 would be better as healthcare=medical_imaging

I think healthcare=medical_imaging from osm.wiki/Proposal:Medical_Imaging would be a better fit for node/13164289072

I think healthcare=medical_imaging from osm.wiki/Proposal:Medical_Imaging would be a better fit for node/10250283804

I think I think healthcare=medical_imaging from osm.wiki/Proposal:Medical_Imaging would be a better fit for node/10856069485

I think healthcare=medical_imaging from osm.wiki/Proposal:Medical_Imaging would be a better fit for node/12077904909

in case you didn't see, the discussion is at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/is-locality-name-gabba-hill-useful/140437

I think `loc_name=*` is acceptable to indicate that the name is more of a locally used name only, but I agree with removing official_name since that only applies to the suburb.

I'll mention on the thread above.

curious one you're placement of way/1441543300 from the imagery it looks more likely to be the building across the road, based on all the rooftop cooling, vs where you placed this one there is none.

I think this could just be `ref=8822`.

This was the only instance of `highway_authority_ref=*` in NSW, but I understand that tag should be used for the TfNSW Road Numbers. In the dataset at https://opendata.transport.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset/nsw-state-roads-vertical-clearances there is a "Road Descriptions" sheet which includes all the Road Numbers of State managed roads in NSW and 8822 doesn't appear.

I was thinking if I need to do an import proposal to manually add those road numbers from that spreadsheet as `highway_authority_ref=*`...

Comments like "do not delete" aren't very helpful, I find it more helpful to other mappers to use the changeset comment to document why you made the changes, and if applicable referencing wiki guidance or documentation or another discussion elsewhere on the community channels.

> actually required for the entrance names to appear in https://transport.vic.gov.au/

The way features are mapped and tagged needs to accommodate a range of downstream data consumers, doing it a certain way just to make things easier for any single consumer might make it less useful for others.

@cs09736 is spot on here, regarding tagging for the renderer and verifiability. For your specific use case of the data, you could try to post-process the data to format the name as you need from other tags like entrance=* and ref=* on ways leading to a railway=subway_entrance.

> way/1430177324

"indoor pathway" could also be something you add into your application based on highway=footway + indoor=yes.

surface=*#Surface_for_footways_and_cycleways has an example of a segregated shared path, footway:surface=* + cycleway:surface=*

Hope it's okay I deleted the construction cycleway way/1377140432/history and replaced it with way/1459444640 with segregated=yes since the path is now open and doesn't have any physical separation between the foot and cycle parts, just paint (unless they are planning on adding physical separation later)

Good one Hugh. I was watching this to see who'd be first to update it, I really thought it was going to be ❤️‍🔥.

also for way/573748608 I think it's simpler to omit turn:lanes=*. Because in general the way within the intersection may be used by different vehicles coming from different directions and the turn:lanes usually only make sense leading up to the intersection for that reason.

If you think it should have turn:lanes, we might need to have a wider community discussion.

only one lane from Russel Av can turn right into Forest Way.

should way/288405561/history really have a turn:lanes tagged? given there's no markings once you enter the intersection and the way is used by both traffic going straight/right from Ferguson into the intersection, but also from Warringah Road eastbound turning into Starkey St, where there is only one lane turning.

there are no marked turn lanes on way/962492250 so I don't think it should have a turn:lanes=* tag at all. Even if it did, the turn lanes would stop at the northbound carriageway, not continue through to the southbound one.

Same for the lane count, I'm not sure if we should have a lane count here since there are no markings, but even if it did it would be lanes=1 since the forward and back share the same space.

grumble grumble... in my view this is excessive to split such small sections due to a small barrier in the middle and how they were mapped before was much simpler.