| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 49995393 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-07-04 13:40:48 UTC | Mike Baggaley | Hi, on ways 504628768 and 504628767 which are tagged as highway=footway (i.e. only pedestrian access is expected to be allowed), you have included access=private and foot=yes giving rise to confusion as to whether you meant the foot access to be private or allowed. It should not be necessary to set ... |
| 2 | 2017-07-04 14:24:36 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Mike,Thanks for your message. This is Forestry Commision land, which means that under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 it is "Access Land" with the right to roam on foot anywhere except within 20 metres of a dwelling (unless on a public right of way). The distinction betwe... | |
| 3 | 2017-07-04 14:55:34 UTC | Mike Baggaley | HI Martin, I wasn't questioning whether bikes have access, I was asking about the foot access because the combination of access=private and foot=yes on a footway gives rise to confusion as to whether the foot access is allowed or private (because although the foot tag overrides the access one, not a... | |
| 4 | 2017-07-04 15:24:59 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Mike,You have rather lost me. The land is private, owned by the Forestry Commission. There is no public right of way on these footpaths. There are on Access Land under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. That means the landowner can under certain circumstances temporarily close the ar... | |
| 5 | 2017-07-04 15:48:22 UTC | Mike Baggaley | Sorry to have confused you. I'm not planning to walk them (at least at present) - I build my own Garmin GB map from OSM data, and my build process flagged up a warning on these ways about conflicting access tags. If you put access=private on a footway, that means the path cannot be used by the gener... | |
| 6 | 2017-07-04 16:36:33 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Mike,In the iD editor, when you set some things, other things change automatically. I don't recall setting access=private or highway=footway. I selected "Foot Path" from the menu, and set foot=yes (the need to do that for a foot path is not clear to me).Whatever, it is not showing a... | |
| 7 | 2017-07-04 16:49:07 UTC | Martin Wynne | p.s. Mike,According to the Wiki, yes="The public has an official, legally-enshrined right of access; i.e., it's a right of way."These paths are not public rights of way. The public have a right of access to the land they cross, subject to certain conditions. But the actual route or exi... | |
| 49697428 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-07-02 11:51:33 UTC | Mike Baggaley | HI Martin, in this and a preceding change you appear to have set a number of ways with ref A4420. If a road has an A ref, it needs to be set to highway=primary or trunk. Can you please review and update as appropriate?Thanks,Mike |
| 2 | 2017-07-02 13:15:19 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Mike,As I understand it, that applies to 3-figure A roads, not necessarily 4-figure roads?This is a newly constructed road through a new housing development still under construction (on the site of a former sugar factory). I was surprised to see it given an A number - having driven along it I... | |
| 49769444 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-06-23 14:23:02 UTC | trigpoint | Hi Martin, is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/502622232 really a park? It looks a very odd place for a park, and aerial imagery suggests it isn't.Also it is bad practice to join areas such as this to the centreline of roads. The area will end at the edge and should be mapped as such.Cheers P... |
| 2 | 2017-06-23 15:34:17 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Phil,I use "park" for any public green space with trees or shrubs, because there doesn't seem to be any other designation available. I have noticed the same used in lots of other places on OSM. "Grass" is ok for plain grass, but this clearly isn't that - see: https://goo.gl... | |
| 3 | 2017-06-23 17:02:11 UTC | chillly | mapping landuse boundaries to the centre lines of roads is not good practice. Your explanation sounds good, but in practice we don't do it. Creating a map image is only one use of OSM data and whatever your renderer of choice does to make the result neatest is not a good justification. A park, or an... | |
| 4 | 2017-06-23 17:12:05 UTC | EdLoach | Personally I'd have mapped it as an area of (mostly) grass and perhaps added an occasional natural=tree node (similarly when I mark an area as wood or forest I don't usually map holes for every clearing in the trees). I also don't like to think about the amount of time I've had to spend ungluing lan... | |
| 5 | 2017-06-23 17:17:04 UTC | trigpoint | Please do not tag for the render, a park should only be used for area that are really parks. Mapping is not about making something appear a particular colour on one particular renderer. If I had brought my grandkids here because OSM says there is a park then they and I will be pretty pissed off.Fr... | |
| 6 | 2017-06-23 17:24:45 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Ed, You wrote " (in this case I'd have probably extended the residential area across the residential roads to the edge of the grass area)."This surely illustrates my point - a road is no more a residential area than it is a park.I found this on the Wiki: "If you choose to l... | |
| 7 | 2017-06-23 17:24:55 UTC | trigpoint | Hi MartinI forgot to say we do not have permission to use g.maps so please do not look at it, use it to check something, use it to illustrate something. Mapping must be done from what you have seen by being there, imagery we have permission to use, and out of copyright maps and information. | |
| 8 | 2017-06-23 17:33:26 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Phil,It is clearly not scrub. There is a suggestion on the Wiki to make it village_green for public green space, but that doesn't sound right here.If you want to visit a proper municipal park, it is likely to have a name, such as "Jubilee Gardens" or whatever.p.s. I have sta... | |
| 9 | 2017-06-23 17:43:35 UTC | Martin Wynne | p.s. I have been there. I use Google Streetview only to confirm my memory of what I saw. Mostly I use OS OpenData to align buildings, water-courses, etc. Also the NLS 25K maps are very useful. The Bing aerial is very poor quality for seeing details.Will the NLS 25" historic maps ever be ava... | |
| 49711993 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-06-21 15:30:09 UTC | trigpoint | Hi Martin, just wondering why you have changed The Severn Valley from railway=preserved to railway=rail?It was a perserved railway last time I was there.Cheers Phil |
| 2 | 2017-06-21 17:24:10 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Phil,I was trying to get OSM to show the line through Bewdley Tunnel as a dotted line. If I set railway=preserved it shows the line in pale grey and there is no difference for the track in the tunnel - which looks daft under Birchen Coppice.I don't think the SVR calls itself a preserved r... | |
| 3 | 2017-06-22 11:49:44 UTC | trigpoint | Hi MartinThank you for your reply.Firstly please remember that OSM is primarily a database, which is rendered in many different ways and you seem be changing the tagging to overcome a problem that exists with just one of many renderers. That is called 'tagging for the renderer' which should not ... | |
| 4 | 2017-06-22 13:02:24 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Phil,Thanks for your reply.I would think that OSM is primarily a map (the clue being in the name), rather than a database. A map should show what is physically present on the ground, which in this case is a standard-gauge railway in working order. The frequency and types of trains doesn't... | |
| 5 | 2017-06-22 17:03:52 UTC | trigpoint | Hi MartinOSM is primarily a geographic database which can be rendered in many different styles. What you see on the main page is a few styles but anybody can set up a renderer and define their own. The reason for the different tagging is for different uses is years of consensus among the communi... | |
| 48762009 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-05-17 14:59:56 UTC | The Maarssen Mapper | Hi Martin,why did you remove this boundary? |
| 2 | 2017-05-17 15:26:19 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi,There is no "Town" called Areley Kings. It is a civil parish within the town of Stourport-on-Severn, which is part of the District of Wyre Forest. The administrative boundaries of the parish are already shown on OSM.The boundary which I removed was wrong in many places, for exam... | |
| 3 | 2017-05-17 15:42:56 UTC | The Maarssen Mapper | Hi Martin,In OSM a "place" is often ill-defined, especially in the UK where there are no formal boundaries for "a named area". There are of course admin boundaries, but they often bear no relationship to the names of the places they contain. The "place" is more like w... | |
| 4 | 2017-05-17 15:57:33 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi,Thanks for the detailed reply. I will add an encompassing boundary for the area which most folks would regard as "Areley Kings", although it is not significantly different from the administrative boundary.But I won't call it a "town" because no-one here does that. &quo... | |
| 5 | 2017-05-17 16:01:04 UTC | The Maarssen Mapper | Super, that sounds spot-on, thanks! | |
| 6 | 2017-05-17 19:58:26 UTC | The Maarssen Mapper | I have updated the civil parish of Astley and Dunley and I will fix a couple of others in the area in a minute.. I can't find any record of a Civil parish called "Areley Kings" though... It looks to be included in Stourport-on-Severn CP. Do you have any pointers? | |
| 7 | 2017-05-17 20:14:30 UTC | Martin Wynne | Sorry, I may have got that wrong. It definitely has a parish church (St Bartholomew's) and the parish boundary is the River Severn. That is also the boundary of the electoral wards for the Town Council. See: http://www.wyreforestdc.gov.uk/media/979858/Areley-Kings-Riverside-Ward-Polling-Districts.pd... | |
| 48764618 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-05-17 15:04:10 UTC | The Maarssen Mapper | Hi Martin,What is the intention behind your changes to the admin boundaries in this area? They were correct, according to a reliable source (Ordnance Survey who get the data from official sources), and you seem to have tidied them up to align better with things like hedges. Boundaries are funny th... |
| 2 | 2017-05-17 15:46:04 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi,I don't intend to change them. But when adding other details along them, such as footpaths or hedges, they tend to snap together. Then when fine tuning the line of the path, the boundary moves too.Is there a way to prevent snapping? Or alternatively to undo changes to a specific object wi... | |
| 3 | 2017-05-17 15:57:56 UTC | The Maarssen Mapper | Hmm, that sounds like it is a problem with the behaviour of the particular editor you are using. Personally I prefer Potlatch2 but I think you are using iD and I can't really help you with that.The OS publish admin boundaries under an open licence and we are free to use this data in OSM - there ar... | |
| 4 | 2017-05-17 16:11:30 UTC | Martin Wynne | Thanks Colin.Yes I mostly use iD. I have tried Potlatch2 but understood it is now deprecated in favour of iD? It does have a useful function to create a new line parallel to an existing one, which is not in iD.iD recently upgraded to use right-clicking on objects, which I have found a big he... | |
| 5 | 2017-05-17 19:16:12 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Colin,Thanks for correcting the boundary.cheers,Martin. | |
| 47762476 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-04-15 14:32:56 UTC | Mike Baggaley | Hi Martin, please do not add names that are descriptive, e.g. Playground - we already know it is a playground from its tag.Thanks,Mike |
| 2 | 2017-04-15 14:54:44 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Mike,But map users don't know it's a Playground unless I give it a name. I know there are some tiny little squiggly icons, but they are too small for someone of my age to see properly or understand what they mean. Also they vanish at some zoom levels. Most things have a name used by local resid... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-15 15:04:03 UTC | Mike Baggaley | You should not add incorrect data just so because something is not visible at a different zoom level. If the icons are too small for you to see, then please set the zoom level on your browser to display larger (I don't mean zoom in on the map). In addition to an icon, playgrounds are clearly display... | |
| 4 | 2017-04-15 15:19:49 UTC | trigpoint | Hi Martin, also remember that OSM is a geographical database. The map you see on the OSM site is just one, of many renders that are available and anyone is free to create their own if what they require something different. | |
| 5 | 2017-04-15 15:26:03 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Mike,But how do map users know what the colours mean? I clicked on the Map Key and a Playground isn't listed.When I zoom the browser some icons vanish. Also the map gets very fuzzy. I can't seem to attach a screenshot here, so here's a link:http://85a.co.uk/forum/gallery/2/2_151117_37000000... | |
| 6 | 2017-04-15 15:29:16 UTC | trigpoint | Icons are displayed at different zoom levels, I cannot tell what zoom level that image was, but the playground icon (in mapnik) displays starting at z17. | |
| 7 | 2017-04-15 15:40:56 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi, I was zooming the browser (Firefox) as suggested by Mike, not zooming levels in OSM. At some browser zoom settings the icons vanish, and reappear at both higher and lower settings (which doesn't make sense to me).cheers,Martin. | |
| 8 | 2017-04-15 15:44:35 UTC | trigpoint | Use the + - zoom buttons, or simply the scroll wheel if you have a mouse.But do remember that OSM is a database and mapping should not be dictated by a single renderer. | |
| 9 | 2017-04-15 16:03:48 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi, Yes that's what I'm doing, using the mouse wheel. I have added a lot more detail to the Cemetery. Cheers, Martin. | |
| 10 | 2017-04-15 17:28:33 UTC | Mike Baggaley | Regarding items and/or icons seeming to vanish at different zoom levels, you may not be aware that each zoom level is generated separately over a period of time, so after you add something, a few hours later you may see it at one zoom level, but it may not have yet made it into the others. I usually... | |
| 47765086 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-04-15 15:21:41 UTC | trigpoint | Does this cemetery have a name? It is unlikely to be just Cemetery. |
| 2 | 2017-04-15 15:36:14 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi, Thanks for your message. Part of the cemetery is St Michael's Churchyard. The old sign on the other part is "Stourport Urban District Council Cemetery". That council ceased to exist in 1974, it is now run by Stourport Town Council. Local people just call it "The Cemetery". I ... | |
| 47738616 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-04-14 14:01:43 UTC | trigpoint | Hi, you seem to have deleted the Kidderminster Pay Scale area, why? |
| 2 | 2017-04-14 14:31:15 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi,Sorry, I'm new to all this. I'm not aware of deleting the Kidderminster Pay Scale area? I have no knowledge of what that is, and Google doesn't seem to know either.If I deleted it, it was not intentional. As far as I know I have only ever deleted things which I have added myself, and thin... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-14 15:34:13 UTC | trigpoint | Hi MartinIt is the area for which a plus bus ticket is valid. I will put it back if it was accidental.Cheers Phil | |
| 4 | 2017-04-14 15:50:21 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Phil, Thanks. I understand now.p.s. PlusBus is one word with camel case or all-caps, see http://www.plusbus.infocheers,Martin. | |
| 47725234 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-04-14 13:36:57 UTC | Mike Baggaley | HI Martin welcome to OpenStreetMap. Please note that Geopark Way is the name of a long distance route, not the name of individual path segments.OpenStreetMap already has Geopark Way as the name of the route along these paths, so please do not name the paths as well.Thanks,Mike |
| 2 | 2017-04-14 14:48:54 UTC | Martin Wynne | Hi Mike,Thanks for the welcome. You have rather lost me about the Geopark Way. How will map users know it is part of the Geopark Way if I don't label it? Should it be labelled "part of Geopark Way"?Also, I see you have removed the name of the Walshes Recreation Ground. Should I add t... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-14 15:01:17 UTC | Mike Baggaley | Hi Martin, I should have explained that the OSM standard view doesn't show long distance paths, but if you go to waymarkedtrails.org it uses the OSM data to show hiking, cycling and other routes. As for names of points of interest, they should only be added if they are proper nouns, rather than desc... | |
| 4 | 2017-04-14 15:29:18 UTC | Martin Wynne | Thanks Mike. I have only recently started on OSM after finding my local area rather lacking in detail. I'm finding the process strangely addictive. :)Martin. | |
| 47708639 by Martin Wynne | 1 | 2017-04-12 21:26:35 UTC | chillly | Welcome to OSMThanks for the detail.You have added a large area and described it as a building (building=yes). I suggest you remove the building tag.You have also added mad_made=works. This is for a non descript factory. Based on your comment I think I would tag this as landuse=brownfiel... |
| 2 | 2017-04-12 22:35:35 UTC | Martin Wynne | Thanks for your comments. I'm new to this. The site is not strictly unused/brownfield, there is some minor industrial activity in the old buildings. A planning application to convert it to a caravan park has recently been refused. | |