Excellent! I don’t know how you are supposed to to a mass edit like this, but your way seems fine. Good logic and excellent communication.

Not much content in my comment, bur I just thought you deserved some credit for your work :)

I don’t like this idea I’m afraid.

Sometimes you leave a node for a not yet mapped crossing road.

You also reduce the trustworthiness of the data. On a straight way without nodes, you don’t know what the real road does between the mapped nodes. But if you have a node in the middle, you know that the road is probably straight, and that is not just a lack of “resolution”.

Data storage and computer speed will increase parallell to a growing database. So I can’t see the problem.

Looking great!

But some pitches are not rendered with lines. For example is only one the left pitch rendered here. Surface tag and maybe lit tag seams to be a problem. http://osm.org/go/0ZtWOR~kW–

In a way they relate to each other, but I would say that one of the reasons to use a multipolygon is that they do not relate.

For example, if you are in a playground in a park, you are still in the park (no multipolygon needed). But when you are on an island in a lake you are not on the water any more. So then I would use a multipolygon to define that the surrounding area is water, but everything inside the island is not water.

Have a look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon

Regards

Anders

Islands should not be tagged with waterway=riverbank since they are not made of water. I used a multipolygon to define the riverbank and the islands. You can take look if you want to see how I did.

I wonder about the administrative relation. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/903822 Should that really be on the river?