14 changesets created by mot_tom have been discussed with 16 replies of this contributor
Changeset # Tmstmp UTC Contributor Comment
149920422
by mot_tom
@ 2024-04-12 16:58
12024-04-12 17:04gurglypipe
♦873
For anyone reading this in future, this changeset is in response to discussion on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149881838
149881838
by mot_tom
@ 2024-04-11 20:45
12024-04-11 20:59gurglypipe
♦873
Hiya, why change https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4860056876 from natural=fell to place=locality? natural=fell is a more specific tagging for it.
22024-04-11 21:20mot_tom Hi, I saw Scales Fell to the east is tagged as a locality, and Blease Fell to the west is tagged as a natural peak. I didn't think tagging Hall's Fell (and Gategill Fell and Doddick Fell) as peaks was appropriate as at all 3 nodes, the land slopes upwards towards Blencathra. So I thought c...
32024-04-11 21:21mot_tom Also, the ID editor (which I know isn't perfect!) suggested that natural=fell should be a polygon not a node.
42024-04-12 09:56gurglypipe
♦873
Yeah I think natural=fell would be appropriate for all of them. That’s what they’re named after all! I think this is one of the cases where ID is wrong in its suggestions — the wiki says that natural=fell is OK to use on nodes (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dfell...
52024-04-12 16:57mot_tom Fair enough, I'll change these nodes back to natural=fell. Thanks for the advice.
62024-04-12 17:04gurglypipe
♦873
Super, thanks a lot :)

For anyone reading this in future, the renames were done as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149920422
111555148
by mot_tom
@ 2021-09-22 17:43
12022-10-14 09:10DuntonLees
♦1
Could the bandstand have a text label added?
124277956
by mot_tom
@ 2022-07-30 18:04
12022-08-01 18:33SomeoneElse
♦13,389
Hello,
Thanks for tidying this up.
Just wondered if the bits to the west (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17883#map=17/53.83569/-1.77262 - on Briggate and on the Otley Road) are still part of this route?
Cheers,
Andy
22022-08-01 18:43mot_tom Hi Andy, thanks for pointing this out, I've removed these isolated sections in this changeset, can't believe I forgot to check the old route fully! Thanks, mot_tom
122840511
by mot_tom
@ 2022-06-25 15:07
12022-06-26 16:29DaveF
♦1,564
Hi
What's this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1073348157
22022-06-26 16:47mot_tom Hi DaveF,
This way is meant to show how the railway (including the current station, the disused parts to the east, and the Metrolink line/High Level Road) are elevated above the surrounding area. If you think this should be shown differently on the map, I'd be happy to edit this (eg separate s...
32022-06-27 03:00DaveF
♦1,564
A bridge tag is for objects that span over other objects.

This appears to be more a raised area,of solid ground.
I would tag using landuse=railway (is all of the polygon used/owned by a railway company?)
I would add level=1 to any items within the polygon and layer=X to those that are passing o...
42022-06-27 10:20mot_tom Hi, that makes sense, I'll make those edits later this week when I've got some free time. Thanks for the advice.
57912073
by mot_tom
@ 2018-04-08 12:32
12018-04-13 15:54chillly
♦819
Did you try to contact the previous editor?
22018-04-13 16:00mot_tom Admitedly not, I'll do that now
32020-10-09 17:11tomhukins
♦217
What was the outcome of the conversation? I notice it was added back a month after you removed it in changeset 59091647 but it seems like it doesn't belong here to me. I left it as is in changeset 92248442 in case there's a good reason for it.
42020-10-10 17:27mot_tom Hi tomhukins, I didn't receive a response from the original editor. Seeing as I don't know the area, I'd err on the side of caution, but equally if you saw no evidence of the path on your recent visit, maybe it should be removed. I don't know! Sorry I can't be more helpful.\...
52020-10-13 19:24tomhukins
♦217
Hi, mot_tom. Thanks for letting me know. Cederby has done a more thorough analysis of the situation on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59091647
87472674
by mot_tom
@ 2020-07-02 22:35
12020-07-03 16:11JezCrow
♦150
Hi mot_tom,
Just wondering why you've deleted a residential street in Stillington: way 720142240? Both Maxar and Esri World imagery clearly show houses being constructed here.
Happy mapping,
Jez
22020-07-03 19:49mot_tom Hi JezCrow,
Woops, I changed this street to a track, but seeing as this was an incorrect edit based on older impagery, I've rectified this in this changeset [https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/87516290]. Thanks for pointing this out to me, and happy mapping to you too!
mot_tom
32020-07-03 21:52JezCrow
♦150
Thank you for your quick response. Looks good!
81019789
by mot_tom
@ 2020-02-14 17:20
12020-02-15 12:34CamelCaseNick
♦174
Hey,
what do you mean with your change of wikidata for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/275295901?
CamelCaseNick
22020-02-15 16:59mot_tom Hi CamelCaseNick
Woops, that was a mistake, I'll change that back ASAP, apologies! Thanks for spotting
mot_tom
63393932
by mot_tom
@ 2018-10-10 20:16
12018-10-15 08:28Benny Goodman
♦19
Why are you creating multipolygons like https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7964956 which could be easily done as multiple ways?
22018-10-15 20:29mot_tom Hi Benny Goodman. I've used multipolygons as I find them easier to manipulate in iD editor, but now that I think about it, that's not a reasonable explanation! I'll edit these ways shortly. Thanks, mot_tom
51463522
by mot_tom
@ 2017-08-26 16:59
12017-09-02 11:49DaveF
♦1,564
Hi mot_tom

In OSM it's best not to stitch polygon areas to the centreline of road ways, as you've done with residential areas.
Imagine it was a field & a gate was added. That gate would also be a node on the road, effectively blocking it. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/518873970...
22017-09-04 14:29mot_tom Hi DaveF
Thanks for the tips, I'll bear them in mind in future edits, apologies for the mistakes made here
51203607
by mot_tom
@ 2017-08-17 12:20
12017-08-23 13:28GerdP
♦2,751
Hi!
please review typo highway=footpath
on two ways:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/194442997
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/43520756
22017-08-23 20:03mot_tom D'oh! Thanks for that, I've edited them both to highway=footway as they should be
50623679
by mot_tom
@ 2017-07-27 15:55
12017-07-27 23:14DaveF
♦1,564
There is no pedestrian section. Motorists can driver right upto the bollards
22017-07-28 09:19mot_tom I agree and I only changed this as it shows more clearly on the map that it is a no through road (the bollard symbol is very small and hard to see). However, by all means change it back to how it was if that is preferable
32017-07-28 10:32DaveF
♦1,564
...Or you could rectify your erroneous edits yourself.

You've mapped for the renderer which is actively discouraged. OSM is a database from which many renderings are derived. Just because certain features a hard to see in one doesn't mean they're not prominent in another.
42017-07-28 10:40mot_tom Apologies, I'm fairly new to this so I'm still learning as I go along, but mapping for the renderer does make sense, and with hindsight, there wasn't really much need to change the area. I'll change it back immediately (I wasn't trying to be snarky either, sorry if I came ac...
52017-07-28 11:14DaveF
♦1,564
No worries. As long as the quality of the database is maintained.
50629943
by mot_tom
@ 2017-07-27 19:44
12017-07-27 22:03DaveF
♦1,564
Anybody know if these rail tracks have be removed completely?
22017-07-28 09:14mot_tom According to this website, only the sleepers remain - https://www.28dayslater.co.uk/flax-bourton-underground-fuel-depot-somerset-june-2015.t97487
The whole site is abandoned, but I don't know how to tag that onto the industrial area (other than the deprecated disused=yes tag)
49206152
by mot_tom
@ 2017-06-02 19:56
12017-06-03 13:33DaveF
♦1,564
FYI area tag isn't required for man_made=bridge