Hello, you might want to read up on golf=hole

I noticed that several of your holes (the line marking the path of a well-hit ball) had extra nodes in them that shouldn't be there. I'll clean them up this time but wanted you to know for future reference.

Can you post a link to more recent imagery? The three imagery providers I use all seem to have indications of a golf course here. Even the behemoth company's sat imagery doesn't show the construction of apartments yet. I'm not doubting you. I would just like to see evidence.

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish. You are creating duplicates of existing fairways and laying them on top of the fairway that is already there, sometimes with trivial modifications. I'm deleting what I find, but please be aware so that you don't do this again in the future. Thanks.

This sounds right to me. Thanks.

What you (and many, many others) are doing is called "mapping for the renderer". It means adding tags so that a particular "view" of the map by an app or website looks just how you, the mapper, want it to look. The proper thing to do is add things in a structured way so that it is easy to interpret by all. And then those who want to display the data have an easier time understanding the format and can then choose to display it. The ref tag for golf holes should be a simple number from 1 to 18. The course name should be found elsewhere in a known tag. (Ignore the fact that it isn't defined yet get in the way.)

And yes, there will be a ton of golf courses that need editing. Over the past year or two, I've edited over 30,000 golf holes trying to get them standardized. It's a long process, but the goal is to always be moving things towards the "right" way.

sure, but replacement sod is a description, not a name. That's like saying your name is "Human" instead of "maddog107". It's a description, not an actual name. ;)

RE: way/1471468423

Please don't use the "lollipop" style of mapping golf course elements as you've done in the URL above. You need to create proper multipolygon relations in order to map features like roughs/bunkers that are within other features like fairways. Please see leisure=golf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls and osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon for help in understanding how to map this situation. If those aren't clear, please let me know and I'll help explain them further. Thanks.

Hi Wayne,

Thanks for working to improve golf courses on OpenStreetMap. But I wanted to let you know of a small problem with the work you did on a couple of holes. If you look at the fairway on the second hole here, you brought the fairway right up to the green, but then you overlapped the green by only sharing a few of the nodes. You need to share all of the nodes at the border. Thanks.

I'm going to leave this "broken" now in case you want to see it and fix it up yourself. If you're too busy, don't worry about it and I'll get to it in the next week during regular golf clean-ups.

Thanks for bringing golf courses closer to standards. There's an important one that you missed on a bunker in this change. There is a patch of rough that was correctly mapped with a multipolygon, but you deleted the inner polygon and drew a lollipop* around it instead. This is incorrect. Please avoid these in the future. Thanks.

* Example: osm.wiki/w/images/5/58/Golf_Course_Lollipop_Example.png

You should move "extra turf if needed" to something like a "note" or "description" tag. I don't imagine the grounds crew actually named that chunk of turf.

If it were me, I think I'd put the overpass query in JOSM directly (File -> Download Data... -> Download from Overpass API), select all of the items that match your query. then edit just that misspelled name.

When you go to upload the changeset, you'll see that they are all modified objects, and no objects are being added.

You might want to try with a small subset and make sure things are working correctly before making a change over a large area.

Good luck.

There's a discussion on the topic of multiple courses within a golf_course boundary.

osm.wiki/Talk:Tag:golf%3Dhole

Nothing has been decided, and probably won't be for a long time. That doesn't prevent you/me/others from just starting a defacto standard and getting some traction that way.

What I'd like to see on the "Wizard 7" golf=hole way is this:
* golf=hole
* ref=7
* course_name=Wizard
* name doesn't exist

Again, the standard doesn't exist, but this is the direction I'll be taking things in 2026. If you want to save your work from being replaced, you could start editing in this way. I'm open to discussing other schemes.

The multi on 7 looks perfect. Thanks!

I spot-checked 3 of the 98 objects changed and they all show the same pattern, duplicate a problem object, correct some misspelling, add a strange "@id" tag, leave the old version in place, and destroy history. Fix objects, don't replace them. Thanks.

changeset/177313602

Also, holes shouldn't have the course name in them ("Wizard 1", "Wizard 2", ...) The tagging of course names hasn't really been nailed down, but it will likely be a separate tag on the golf=hole. Just a heads-up that I'll start cleaning those up at some point.

Hey maddog,

I love that you are adding the multipolygons as you map. Thanks for that.

The 7th green wasn't done quite right though. Your multi has the green as one of the inner ways, and then the rough/bunker multi as the other inner. The correct thing to do is set the rough way as the inner, and not the entire multipolygon. Does that make sense?
The rough/bunker multi is correct. It just shouldn't be included in the larger multi. Only the rough way itself needs to be.

If you want me to fix it up, let me know. Otherwise, I'll let you mess around with it. I'll clean it up in next Thursday's pass if it's still there. Thanks.

FYI, I reversed a bunch of the golf=hole ways on this course so they lead from the tee to the hole. Direction matters. Just letting you know for any future golf mapping you do. Thanks for the contributions.

People using golf simulator tools are often lead down the wrong path and make problematic changes to the map. I hope you aren't using Chad's Tool.

FYI, golf holes don't have names, they have "ref" numbers. Please don't add "name" tags in the future. Thanks.

RE: way/1464143120

When drawing golf course areas (i.e. greens, fairways, bunkers, tees, etc.), please be aware that the ways (lines) used to outline those areas must not cross over each other. Fairway outlines shouldn't cross over greens or bunkers or other fairways for example. Take a look at osm.wiki/File:Golf.png for an example of the "Wrong" way to map a fairway and a green along with the right way. There are some cases where a fringe exists around a green and you should draw the fairway outline completely around a green, leaving room for the fringe. Other times, the fairway and green butt up against each other. In that case the fairway and green should share the same nodes at the boundary between the two, and every node at the boundary needs to be shared leaving no gaps. When drawing these shared nodes, editors like iD (built into openstreetmap.org) will "snap" to an existing node if you get close enough. If you have any questions about golf course mapping, feel free to reach out. Thanks.