way:309568632 heeft als tags waterway=canal bridge=yes, op basis van de luchtfoto's lijkt het echter een glijbaan en is dit waarschijnlijk een geval taggen voor de renderer, wat wel meer het geval is in dit waterpark.

The old-style multipolygon was next to these areas and I changed their tagging because landcover is not rendered. Feel free to change it back.

De mapping hier is voor verbetering vatbaar. Ga je gang zou ik zeggen.

Please stop creating old-style multipolygons (with tags on the outer way instead of on the relation). These will no longer be rendered in the near future.

You should also update your JOSM to the latest tested snapshot (12039) which no longer renders old-style multipolygons by default and has improved validation rules for area objects.

Please stop creating old-style multipolygons (with tags on the outer way instead of the relation).

These will not be rendered anymore in the near future.

Please use a separate relation for each building with an inner courtyard.

Also update your JOSM to the latest tested snapshot which no longer renders old-style multipolygons with helps prevent creating new ones.

Please don't create old-style multipolygons (with tags on the outer way instead of the relation).

Also update your JOSM to the latest tested snapshot (12039) which doesn't render old-style multipolygons any more to help prevent this issue in the future.

See also: http://area.jochentopf.com/

Please don't create old-style multipolygons (with the tags on the outer way instead of on the relation).

Also create a separate multipolygon for each building with an inner courtyard.

You also need to update your JOSM to the latest tested snapshot (12039) which no longer renders old-style multipolygons.

The tags seem to imply so, double check with satellite imagery.

There were a lot of duplicate node issues in this area. Those were fixed after the JOSM validator reported the issues before uploading the previously old-style multipolygons.

Please adjust the tags as you see fit.

The the tags from the outer way were simply moved to the relation as part of the old-style multipolygon fixing effort.

There is a lot of import data in these regions, that is for the local community to deal with.

Please don't create old-style multipolygons for buildings with an inner courtyard. The tags for those mulitpolygons need to be moved from the outer way to the relation.

See: http://area.jochentopf.com/ & osm.wiki/Multipolygon

I don't use a script, I use the 'Update multipolygon' feature in JOSM. This is a mostly manual process.

Automated edits in OSM are frowned upon, so your edits won't automatically get fixed. Your edits are just easily spotted due to the ongoing area project.

My experience with pointing out flaws in others edits hasn't been good, often resulting in long and unpleasant conversations because too many people don't deal well with criticism. So I opt to do instead of talk.

The tags are moved from the outer way to the relation. I process the newly introduced old-style multipoloygons on an almost daily basis.

This is part of the area fixing project by Jochen Topf. See: http://area.jochentopf.com/

If a riverbank consists only of a single closed way, having the tags on the way is appropriate.

As soon as the riverbank has islands it needs to be a multipolygon relation with the tags on the relation instead of the outer way. The inner ways can have tags describing island (place=islet/place=island, landuse=*, etc).

If you can update your script to not create old-style multipolygons that would be great. Starting with osm2pgsql 4.0.0 old-style multipolyons will not be rendered any more. It is not in production on the OSM infrastructure yet, but that's only a matter of time.

You're welcome.

If you don't want people to touch your relations, they shouldn't be in the OSM database that anyone with an account can edit. They should live in your own system to which only you have access.

Have a look at this project currently underway:

http://area.jochentopf.com/

On the comparison map, and in the old-style.osm.pbf file, you'll find your relations. If you improve your relations so that they won't be considered old-style multipolygons, neither I nor anyone else working on this project will be tempted to remove those relations.

Likewise for reverting edits.

If you want to keep those relations in OpenStreetMap you should improve their tagging so they are not considered old-style multipolygons.

Neither the "note" nor "note:de" tag is sufficient to not have those relations be considered old-style multipolygons.

If you want to keep those relations in OpenStreetMap you should improve their tagging so they are not considered old-style multipolygons.

I'm not german BTW.

Likewise for reverting edits.

If you want to keep those relations in OpenStreetMap you should improve their tagging so they are not considered old-style multipolygons.

No, the "note" tag is not sufficient to not have those relations be considered old-style multipolygons.

If you want to keep those relations in OpenStreetMap you should improve their tagging so they are not considered old-style multipolygons.