Hi Chris,
Can I check why the A7 now goes trunk-Primary-Trunk please?

Is there a material difference between these two segments, other than the bus status, that downgraded the second from trunk to primary?
way/33650701/
way/722061473/
Thanks and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Cleveland steamer,
That's correct - the whole landuse was marked building=fire_station. I removed the building=* tag from the non-building landuse.
Only the building is a building.
Happy mapping,

James

Hi mueschel,
Thanks for an interesting point - I spent time thinking about the namespace for the reference (e.g. maxspeed:type=*), but indeed missed *uppercase* ISO alpha2 country code.
Fixed - way/1003043215/h
Happy Mapping,

James

@kawino85: In the OpenStreetMap community our tagging preferences are flexible, and deliberately NOT set in stone. Often, the best way to understand how to tag a feature is to see how others in the community have modelled similar situations.

I've been contributing to OSM since 2007 so am still learning, so find tools like taginfo useful to look for examples e.g.:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=wastewater_plant#combinations
The variation in OSM feature tagging may create complexity for data consumers, however the same variation adds richness and detail to our project. Indeed, this is the same reason why "mechanical editing" is discouraged - running what looks like a simple SQL update may erase "ground truth".
Adding tags is usually better than deleting those added by others - e.g. adding utility=sewerage, even a industry:type=* may be useful even if a data consumer may infer from man_made=wastewater_plant.
In addition, "ground truth" is important here as although this facility is a Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW), the name=* reflects the sign at the gate - which suggests man_made=pumping_station.
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,

Clean water.

After working as a chartered engineer for a large water company, the process of processing of raw sewage is most definitely industrial. Lift pumps are 2m tall. Screens use chain conveyors to remove detritus up 5m inclines. The whole process is packaged chemical engineering - very much industrial.
And more to the point, I've stood outside the gates of _this_ very plant and listened to the sound of all the automated industrial processes.
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Dave,
That's a very good question, and frankly, I've only got conjecture.
The imagery shows a rectangular area of concrete/ tarmac along the permanent way of the old St. Boswels & Reston railway, so I decided to tag it as a platform. Shadows suggest it's too low to be a building and it looks old with lots of overgrowth.
The NLS OS 1:10k and the more detailed 25-inch shows two tracks leading into Reston Junction, but nothing else. The NLS OS 6-inch says "Trough" a bit West, suggesting a water supply, but would expect engines to bunker on the main line depot?
It'd take a ground survey to confirm, but what ever it is, it seems too closely aligned to the track formation not to be railway.
The Reston Station construction drone footage looks North away from this area (and even if it were licensed, is a bit oblique to be useful).
Any ideas?
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi GinaroZ,
Wow - that TMS is a _lot_ higher resolution! :-)
The data matches what I saw pretty well, so will add in the connecting pieces of the footpaths.
BTW - the Mapilliary imagery of the bridge is now processed and available here:
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1044543182947517

Thanks again, and Happy Mapping!,

James

Hi Matthew,
We've all gone back to edits and wondered how on earth the tags got there!
Thanks for improving the map,
James

Hi MPaine,

Just for information, highway=path regularly confuses as it is for a general use trail (e.g. horses, cycles, just not vehicles), and not just a footpath.

Some of these ways have horse=no, suggesting they could be UK Footpaths, rather than UK Bridleways, so could be better as highway=footway with designation=public_footpath.

More info to help you consider the best option is here:
osm.wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom#Public_Rights_of_Way

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi MPaine,
Hello, and welcome to OSM!

Can I ask you to review this edit as you have set the _entire_ length of this unclassified highway as a bridge, not just the bridge itself!

You've done the hard part by splitting the bridge into a separate way, so I suggest you need to remove both bridge=yes and layer=1 from ways:

way/112184262/

way/952313225/

Thanks, and Happy Mapping.

James

(Bing offset = 0.97; -2.61)

Hi GinaroZ,
Looks like cadastral (likely RoS) data is available in Duns, but not around the estate example as it's likely never been sold.
Duns centre seems to be within 1-1.5m (OSM buildings - OSMUK Cadastral Parcels) with OSM about 1.2m NNW.
To compare notes, are you seeing the same please?
Thanks,
James

Hi GinzroZ,
Yes - the discussion on talk-gb was very interesting (down to geoid transformations!).
The challenge (as ever) is the Borders have a lot of high-res detail mapped well by ctait to a different baseline. Better aligning one feature rapidly spreads into unpicking unusual building/ landuse/ highway area alignments.
'it's hard' isn't a reason not to do it though - I'll have another look!
Happy Mapping,
James

After reading again recent Talk-GB discussions, I wonder if Mike Collinson may have touched on the root of this changeset and wider debate:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2021-April/026626.html

Better understanding your desired outcome (here or over on Talk-GB) and level of detail you aspire to would help us all improve the map. Are you aiming for cadastral level, with residential only for occupied plots? What goes in the gaps? (lots of landuse=grass for these pre-war geometric estates?)

As mentioned in my last note, Stakeford was (ISTR!) initially mapped before imagery. One surrounding landuse=residential resulted from the low-resolition geolocated data available (GPSr on a bike and possibly landsat).

Okay - we've got high-res imagery and even land registry parcel data (partially) available now, so more detail is achievable. So how far do we go on this next pass?

Hi DaveF,

Thanks for your reply.

Open Street Map is a project created by a community, not just individuals. As a community we work collaboratively to improve the overall map, and an important part of this is both limited changesets and useful descriptive comments. A change set spanning from Cornwall to Northumberland makes it difficult for others to see what you have changed, and although it may be within one country, this makes you changes hard to track.

Please upload your changes *before* you move to a new area.

This change set discussion centres on contributions to the overall map, rather than to validation software. I presume your point is related to if **landuse**=recreation_ground and/or **leisure**=recreation ground is most relevent in this instance?

You might see a lot of leisure=pitch as it came from a 2016 UK OSM quartly project guide*, but recreation_ground is much a better description. Based on both the wiki**, and TagInfo, I believe landuse=recreation_ground is the reccomended tag, but left both.
* osm.wiki/UK_2016_Q1_Project:_Schools
** landuse=recreation_ground

It is a key principle of OpenStreetMap's free tagging system that unlimited tags are allowed.

A useful method to model landuse is to first define the boundary (e.g. barrier=fence), then align landuse areas on all sides with this way (no including highway ways). This gives a precise boundary with neither gaps nor overlap.

Although badly explained in my comment, that's what I meant by 'align the way to existing natural boundaries'. Your current modelling leaves gaps and overlap around the school boundaries, which I suggest can and should be improved.

My understanding is that areas such as car parking, public grass, and even schools are part of landuse=residential. Your edit suggests you may disagree - can I ask what your thoughts are here please as understanding then would help me edit with you?

Can I ask your thoughts as to why split an island 14x semi-detached houses, when the main area connects across Front Street please? Is it better to split the areas across Front Street?

This approach has created several 'islands' of Guidepost where one landuse=residential area existed before all of which are seperately named, e.g.:
way/931433057
way/931433056
way/931433061

Although to me complex for a contiguous residential area, going with it, how about a place relation linking the 'islands' to the central place=village tag, moving the name up a level to:
node/247792684

You seem to have deliverately mapped around areas such as Ashington Mews, making a complex island at the NW corner of Cleasewell Hill School (to avoid a multipolygon relation?)
node/2450268606/

These islands also don't align to natural boundaries with overlap and gaps, which to me needs more work - e.g. :
hedge: way/629804778
landuse: way/931433056

I can assist, but would like to understand your thoughts behind the changeset first.

As for the name - friends who live there use both Guide Post and Guidepost. I originally went with one word, as that's what they suggested, however as the sign at the Western boundary says 'GUIDE POST', so perhaps name='Guide Post' alt_name='Guidepost'.

Thanks for reading this detailed discussion, and happy mapping,

James

Hi Dave,

Firstly, can I ask why this changeset ranges from NE England to Cornwall?
Such an extreme area makes it almost impossible to track changes within a changeset - can you upload smaller areas with descriptive comments to help fellow mappers please?

Secondly, you have split a landuse=residential area in Stakeford Northumberland into two (breaking the way and landuse), and added barrier=wall to the Eastern section, effectively walling in several thousand residents!

West section:
way/910044237/history
East section:
way/910044237/history

Unfortunately, the new area (well, as-is it is a way) you have created does not align with existing boundaries - such as walls, property boundaries, and the clear fence of Cleasewell Hill School:
way/23644359

I also note you have removed my deliberate tagging of the school recreation grounds, deleting a tag with over double the usage in the UK:
way/397319739/history
13.5k instances:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/landuse=recreation_ground
6.1k instances:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/leisure=recreation_ground
As there is some discussion as to which tag version is preferred, I add BOTH to assist data consumers.

As this changeset was 2 months ago, and covers almost the whole of the UK, a revert would seem challenging.

Can I ask you to restore the Stakeford landuse (without the barrier-wall across A roads), restore laduse=recreation_grounds tagging, and align the way to existing natural boundaries please?

Thanks and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi jimstn,
Just wanted to say - good spot and edit! :-)
I was completely unaware that the Golf Club had flogged of a green for housing, and was instead expecting big changes if the new Blyth A189 junction is connected a tad North.

When we are able to get out more, I can add the site it to my Blyth cycle survey route to see if there's any names (Portland, Crofton, Crawford, etc).
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi jimstn,
Are you aware that you've upgraded the access to South Nelson Road to highway=tertiary please?
This modest access to the industrial units is still highway=service:
way/234777747/history

It looks like you may have had an editing issue splitting the way to create relations for the Town Council 'Tubeway Map', and created a new stub way as highway=tertiary:
way/884223293

Can I suggest retagging this stub as highway=service?
Thanks and Happy Mapping.

James

Hi GinaroZ,
You're right - stadium is rather an exaggeration, likely mis-picked from a JOSM preset.

The wiki for leisure=golf_course has come a long way since I last looked - golf=bunker is a lot better than natural=beach!
leisure=golf_course

That update alone looks worthwhile across several local courses (Arcot Hall, Bedlington, Blyth, race course, etc).

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi again,
I probably need to get out more ( :-) ), but after poking about taginfo at the various surface=* tag values in use in the UK, the popular values suggest lots of roads and footy/rugby/cricket pitches, which makes sense:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/surface#values

tarmac (0.02%) is usually expressed as asphalt (52%), and tartan is even less common (0.01%). Must just be we few using JOSM preset templates!

Ta for checking!

James