Hey Wilburl,

No stress at all. :)

Public transportation routes are a bit tricky to map! Any information which you've sourced directly from PTV does need to be removed, but the data you've remembered or gathered from aerial imagery can be kept.

So, for example, stop reference numbers from the PTV website should be removed, but numbers you've collected by going to the bus stop and recording it can be kept.

Hope that makes sense!

Hi Wilburl,

Thanks for your contributions to SE Melbourne. :)

Unfortunately, the PTV website does not have a compatible data license and cannot be used as a source for contributions into OpenStreetMap.

The Australian mapping community has compiled a list of compatible sources on the OSM wiki: osm.wiki/Australian_Data_Sources.

Happy to answer any questions you have.

Dian
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/128416002

No problem at all. :)

Hi Pkyle,

You've updated the address for Highvale Secondary College to 2 Capital Avenue, which does not appear to be correct. 2 Capital Avenue is up the road adjacent Karou Court.

According to official sources, the address of the school is 2 (or 2-20) Troy Street?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/128152652

Hey Volga. :)

All sources I can find online refer to this park as "Wenden Road Park", in particular official government sources.

Would you be able to confirm the source of your change?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/128151412

Hi Volga.

In this change, you've added flares to the Pindari Avenue at the roundabout, but you've missed the oneway tags. I've adjusted that for you now.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127755060

Hi Volga.

Continuing from my previous comment, roads should not be duplicated as dual carriageways if there is no physical separation.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127755213

Hi Volga,

The way you have modelled this intersection is unfortunately incorrect.

Turn lanes that are not physically separated should not be represented by a different way. Instead, the turn: and change: keys can be used to indicate where a turn lane exists. osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway

We use a "box" as an abstract representation of the intersection for easier routing. osm.wiki/Junctions#Dual_carriageway_intersections

I've reverted this change, but I'm happy to answer any further questions you might have.

Dian
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127815151

Hi Supt,

In regards to not splitting ways where there is no physical separation, you can refer to both osm.wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Divided_highways and osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway.

Both articles make it clear that physical separation (ie, a barrier) is necessary for determining if a carriageway should be split.

Specific guidance on dual carriageway intersections is documented osm.wiki/Junctions#Dual_carriageway_intersections.

Before notifying you in your edits, I have also reached out several times to the mailing lists and confirmed my understanding, beginning with:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html

There is documentation about the preferred method of indicating turn lanes, where it is legal to change lanes, etc on the following wiki pages:
turn=*
change=*.

I'd encourage you to jump on either the mailing list or the #oceania discord server. There are many people who are extremely passionate mappers, and it lends itself to discussion much better than changeset discussions. :)

way/1106500183 extends well past the point of physical separation, and even extends past where the carriageways split.

I have adjusted the geometry to meet best practice. I have also adjusted the highway type to be a link road, as it is a slip lane and not a main carriageway.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127979775

As discussed many times previously, these turn lanes have been modelled extending far beyond the point of physical separation.

I have changed the geometry to match best practice.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127979346

Hi Supt,

I'm aware the busway on the other side had been mapped incorrectly as well, which is why I didn't point it out as part of your edit. :)

The busway is separate as there is physical separation under the bridge with bridge supports.

I've previously mentioned how (https://osmcha.org) OSMCha allows users to easily verify changes within a specified area; it doesn't take very long at all to review all changes in Victoria over the last day or so.

Hi Supt.

way/1105994200 is not physically separated from the main carriageway. and should not be mapped separately.

Dian
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127913794

Hi Ant!

Thank you for your contributions.

Unfortunately, the license for MetroMap is incompatible with OpenStreetMap's license, and it cannot be used when contributing to OSM.

Specifically, Terms of Use (https://metromap.com.au/documents/Aerometrex_Data_Licence_Agreement.pdf) states "You may incorporate data extracted from the Products in documents
(e.g. project deliverables, reports, maps, brochures and other
printed or Digital material) for any purpose as long as these
documents are not offered for resale to third parties or otherwise
distributed to third parties for monetary value. To avoid doubt, you
may use such data extracted from the Products in perpetuity after
the expiry of any licence to the Products, provided that such use
remains in accordance with the terms and conditions contained
herein.

We try and keep the list of valid sources up to date here: osm.wiki/Australian_Data_Sources

Dian.

No problem at all. Your edits, from what I have seen, have been generally quite good so keep editing! :)

If you're a social person, I'd encourage you to check out the mailing list (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au) or the discord (https://discord.gg/openstreetmap).

Both are great places to ask questions and meet people, and they helped me out a lot. :)

Hey Supt,

Based on the conversation on Discord, it’s best we keep these roads as service/in the hierarchy. Also, apparently the Spirit of Tasmania is moving to Geelong during the month?

You’re always welcome to join the conversation: https://discord.gg/openstreetmap

Hey Supt!

I genuinely appreciate the reply. Makes me know that you are still a human. :)

You raise some good points; I don’t believe the National Highway declaration changes the fact these are service roads, but I’ll reach out to others for a second opinion to make sure I’m not off base.

Take care,
Dian

Hi Volga Shibe,

Thanks for your edits to the local area!

I've made a couple of minor adjustments to this intersection. I've shortened the length of the slip lanes to diverge closer to the actual point of physical separation. It's best practice to use the turn=* and change=* tags to indicate where there is an extra turning lane in those instances.

I've also added oneway tags to the segments inside the dual carriageway intersection, and changed the segments to match the roads around it. It's generally best to keep the road as the same classification as it passes through a major road, and data consumers can use the abstract representation of the intersection to adjust routing accordingly.

I hope this makes sense! Happy to help out further if required. :)

Dian
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126914792

Hello,

The roads at the Spirit of Tasmania carpark do not meet the definition of a primary road.

osm.wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads

Please consult the tagging guidelines before making a similar change again.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126912494

Hi Melb_Guy.

Why did you add a curve to the end of way/6682975699? The road doesn't have a curve when it meets Main Road.

Also, you've extended way/6682975699 well beyond where there is physical separation for the way. It was correctly mapped before your edit?

Dian