Hi, You'll have to refresh or reload the browser page to force it to re-render. The pin/POI, (a node in OSM terms) will then be seen over a building that I added. It is your original node, it's just moved over. Can you say if that's the directors house?

Regards Bernard.

Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Unfortunately you joined your POI node onto the residential area outline. I've moved the node to a position over the nearest house. Could you please say if this is the correct building?

There are also problems in that the company and address are a bit mixed up. Is there a website for the company? What does the company do?

With more info I might be able to advise further.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've replied to your comment regarding Changeset: 7421561 that concerns this path.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I really can't remember, I think at that time the ruins would have been open. But it's quite likely that things may have changed in ten years. There are several instances of church ruins once open to walking through that are now fenced off for safety reasons. If I were you I'd amend the paths to what you found on your recent walk.

It's nice to look back and remember what one did, where one tramped about in the past.

Regards Bernard

Sure, 84 tags removed.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Yes you're correct just remove those capacity=1 tags. No great problem I left them in so you could see what I meant. I can remove them if you wish.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I just wanted to point out that in the absence of a capacity tag on a parking space the capacity is implied as 1. Therefore the tag capacity=1 is not needed. Please see amenity=parking_space

Regards Bernard.

Hi, No response so I've removed the duplication and tagged to suit amendment.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, The path is placed on top of the old railway which is tagged foot=yes
highway=path. So it's a duplication which I've removed .

Regards Bernard

Hi, I've tweaked the building outlines around there a bit, if not exact they should be better. I placed the studio over the convenience shop and AgeUK. I tagged the studio as building:part=yes and level=1 because it is a building part only, level=1 means a first floor part. I added shop=tattoo so it will show in searches for a tattoo shop.

I hope that helps, if it needs amending please let me know.

Regards Bernard.

Hello Jasmine, I'm sorry I've made a mistake with my query, I meant to ask if the studio is over Barratt & Cooke.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I wonder if the Studio really does span over both the convenience shop and AgeUK shop.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, These areas you've tagged as landuse=grass are actually made up of private gardens, access=private
leisure=garden. Could you please amend the tags to better reflect reality?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Way: 939526205, yes that's perfect. You could also add tunnel=building_passage to the section under the building as that's what it looks like to me.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I added the tag boundary=postal_code to the polygon to suit OSM practice. Please see postal_code=*

Regards Bernard.

Hi, yes it's not always easy to work out how to do things and the iD editor has very few instructions.

To section up any way/line/outline in the iD editor.

Zoom in sufficiently, double click at the point you want to split a way so that a new node is created. Right click the node, select/click the scissors icon to split the way. Do this again and you have two splits making three ways. (In the case of inserting your steps into a footpath). Select/highlight the center section of footpath (where the steps are to go) and change/add the tag from footpath to steps, adding any other relevant tags as well.

Hi, I'll try to explain the anomalies you inadvertently added. It was in your Changeset: 104000314

You drew the footway as a continuous line joining to the footways at north and south, tagged as highway=footway
layer=-1. The footway passed through a section of building. It seemed that only the section of footway under the building was actually layer=-1 so I sectioned up the footway. Tagging the section under the building as layer=-1, the rest with no layer tag. (The layer=-1 could be joined to the building.)

The second problem, the steps were added on top of the footpath making for duplication of a highway, one atop the other. Thus possibly messing with routing. I sectioned off and removed that section of the footway where the steps are.

I hope that's understandable if not ask away. Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You requested a review, I'll try to point them out. You've named two nodes (Point 1 and Point 2), names should only be given to formally named and verifiable objects so another mapper can come to the same place and collect the same data. The same applies to the cycleway. If the cycleway is part of a formally named route the name should be held in a relation containing all sections of the route.

The cycleway has in part been placed on top of an existing footpath. This makes for duplication and possible disruption of routing. The cycleway is also joined onto the stream at the eastern end, (ignoring the bridge). If a way needs amending/correcting then the correction should be done to the existing way, this allows for the history of the way to be maintained, (please don't delete and redraw).

I've not made any corrections so that you can see what I'm talking about. If you wish I can soon make the corrections? Why are the two nodes named?

Regards Bernard.

Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You requested a review, well you added lots of fiction and made many mistakes, (even with the fiction).

OSM is a live worldwide database from which thousands of maps are compiled. Please do not add fiction here, it corrupts the data. (You can make personal maps without uploading.)

I've looked at all the ways you've added, I've removed all the fiction I can see, and made many corrections. So everything now looks good. Your genuine additions look good, if you need any help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've disconnected the track Way: 938479212 from the underground culvert Way: 938479214. The track doesn't join onto the underground waterway.