see reasoning at changeset/89004660

hi I reverted this change because I noticed it combined the city and suburb nodes, which broke both the suburb and city relations for Sydney.

The Sydney place=suburb relation/5729534, similar to other suburbs should have a label node per osm.wiki/Relation:boundary#Relation_members and it should be tagged with the same place= tag as the relation. So the place=suburb relation for Sydney can have a label node also with place=suburb.

The Sydney place=city (not the city of sydney lga) relation relation/5750005 also can have it's own place=city label node, and it in this case also has an admin_center node.

The way you combined the place=suburb and place=city nodes broke this. Happy to discuss this further either here, or on talk-au or on the maptimeoceania slack.

hi since this is affecting a major feature I'll revert this first, then follow up with discussion about the change is a minute.

I tried to look at Mapillary imagery, but we don't have any here yet.

From the imagery most of them do appear to be terraces (row houses with shared walls), but it doesn't looks the whole block is one, rather there are a couple of terrace buildings each with a few homes. So the previous mapping is just a rough approximation until it is improved, saying most of these are victorian area terrace houses with 2 levels, that doesn't mean we should just delete it though.

hi how come the buildings were deleted here? There was important information like that it's terrace buildings, the building architecture and number of levels.

hi did you mean to delete the track name here?

I've reverted these changes due to reasoning discussed here.

Hi a service building per building=service " represents building specially designed to contain constantly working machinery like pumps, transformers or measuring equipment. Usually such building is not supposed for people being inside while machinery works normally."

So building=commercial is a better fit for a vet where people work inside so I've changed this back.

Yeah it's the one on the concrete ramp I was talking about, but with it gone then you're right it's open!

must have only happened in the last few days then on the 24th of July there was still a barrier https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/NX3nPJVRLcH_eWl_F0qaqQ

*phones

unfortunately it doesn't seem like photos have enough accuracy as an inertial navigation system, otherwise this would be much easier.

Hi, Just looking to understand what's going on here, for example way/407224855/history is access=yes but bicycle=no and motor_vehicle=no, so who can access the road if not bicycles or cars? The same goes for other George Street sections you edited in this changeset https://osmcha.org/changesets/87895112/.
I've been keeping an eye on these roads since the light rail opened waiting for them to open but they just seem to have an orange barrier still there that the construction crew must have forgotten to take away!

Hi PJ, it's best to only add in a maxspeed from either a sign or road markings, otherwise best to discuss any other changes first.

Hi, welcome to OSM. A shopping centre mapped as an area is a more accurate representation what actually exists on the ground compared to a single node, so I've reverted this change.

I think it's okay to move the center tags to a multipolygon building relation, but to a single point looses information.

I did some more reading and found this tag came from the proposal at osm.wiki/Proposed_features/gross_weight, where the maxgcweightrating:goods tag is documented as "the prohibition applies only if the permissible maximum mass of the vehicle or combination of vehicles exceeds that figure." with further comments that "Does not apply to buses or other vehicle types except goods vehicles.". however according to https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/safety-rules/road-rules/heavy-vehicles/index.html these light traffic roads signs mean "If weight restriction sign is displayed for a road, you must not use that road if the total weight of your vehicle, including its load, is the same as or heavier than the weight shown on the sign." so it never say it only applies to goods vehicles, and it means the total weight of the vehicle including load which is what maxweight means. So I'm not sure this new tag is needed or that simply using maxweight here is incorrect.

That's okay, they are different things, one is the name of the wharf itself man_made=pier, the other is the name of the public transport stop amenity=ferry_terminal, so they can both co-exists like how you've mapped it.

Hi there is no physical separation for way/803219832 so it should be tagged as part of the road instead of as a separate way. Since way/172750202 is already tagged to say there is a counterflow cyclelane here, I'll delete the way you added.

I'll update these to bicycle=yes since bicycles are permitted here due to the lack of any bicycle=no signage and bicycles permitted on any road unless signed otherwise.