I re tagged some of these as driveways

I've changed this to service=driveway as it's a better fit for roads which exist just to get from the main road to your house.

for the same reasons given at changeset/88828884 I've reinstated the deleted buildings.

I've re-instated the buildings you deleted here.

The imagery you've used here is from 2013, on the more recent satellite images the buildings are there which is where they were originally traced from. So if you're just deleting solely based on the NSW_LPI_Imagery, I'll revert that. Regardless since the fires went through here and we don't have post fire imagery we'll need to see if they survived or not.

I restored the trees in changeset/89459121, so long as you're not mapping every single tree in the forest, mapping lone trees which are not dense enough for natural=wood is fine.

hi I can't see way/833563902/history#map=17/-35.26330/150.44974 on the imagery and unless this was done via a ground survey I don't think it's clear enough to enter, so I've deleted it.

hi it looks like 9 degrees is already mapped at node/7769217935, if this is as duplicate best to delete yours and retain the one first mapped.

Hi are you sure about way/833563902/history it's too hard to tell from the imagery if this is a road all the way through or just a clearing, if in doubt best not make the edit.

hi I see you added the track at way/820426717 I just did a survey here and I could only see a path which I've now mapped at way/837271929 and uploaded the GPS trace at @aharvey/traces/3382863 was the track you added based on a GPS trace or just rough extrapolation, are you sure there are two tracks or was yours just not that accurate? did you have a GPS trace?

No problem, I've fixed the rest of the issues up now.

Thanks

1. Are you saying that https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/498123668 is still used by the RFB but not the main building?

2. service=driveway doesn't imply anything about access if anything a sensible default would be to assume that service=driveway is private, but accessible for deliveries, people who work there etc. You can always add the access=* tag as well

3. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/761474319 and https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/766373702 still appear to have been tagged as a building even though their geometry is covering the grounds, so these shouldn't have the building tag.

Thanks for fixing that one. A few other things I noticed:

1. There is also https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/498123668 which was already mapped at way/498123670

2. I don't think service=emergency_access is entirely correct here, these are mostly service=driveway. service=emergency_access would be for say an office building which has a separate access road specifically for firefighters.

3. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/761474319 and https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/766373702 added the building tag, but this way is for the grounds, the building is already mapped there.

Thanks for the reply, that would be tagging for the renderer osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer a practice which is not in the spirit of OSM, so I'll revert the change so that these areas accurately represent what's on the ground.

hi, while most of the changes here look good, I noticed a couple of these fire stations were already mapped as an area covering the grounds, not just the main building, in these cases the primary tags like contact etc should go on the existing amenity=fire_station. For example you added amenity=fire_station to way/397201960/history but the fire station was already mapped at way/792923178. Did you want to fix this up, or should I?

this is already mapped at node/7704878760 so I deleted the one you just added

Would the lower frequency ones you added in the residential areas be better mapped as power=minor_line?

hi in all the imagery here this is wood, not sand, and seems quite unlikely these large areas would be sand. What was your source for this change?

hi I see you've mapped way/22588137/history#map=19/-37.84019/144.91251 as a oneway road however on all the aerial, satellite and Mapillary imagery I could see this is a two way road, what was your source for mapping it as oneway?

this changeset has been reverted by changeset/89005958