Yes I think so also. If you want to alter it go ahead, I don't really have time at the moment to do it myself - it looks like it might be quite fiddly as there are quite a few bus route relations which go across this junction which would need altering if the roundabout junction is removed.

Actually I think these are shops I deliberately didn't include a building=yes tag as they are just part of a building rather than occupying the whole building. The building itself is mapped as a separate area larger than that of the shop.

I definitely think it's worth rethinking the tagging used in Spain - real ale has a much more specific definition than craft beer - real ale is a term which was invented and defined by the Campaign for Real Ale in the UK. It can be brewed by small or large breweries, not just small craft breweries. By using this it becomes unclear whether somewhere is selling real ale or craft beer. Only the Spanish language wiki page is different - on the English language wiki page it states the tag should be used for "traditional draught cask beers". I'm also not quite convinced that mailing list discussion with just a handful of people involved is really an agreement to significantly change the definition of a well established tag, and change it away from the definition that people use in reality.

Hi. No, this was for craft beer bottles sold in a shop it is mistagging to use the real_ale tag. To be real ale it needs to have secondary fermentation in a cask or include yeast in the bottle. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ale. Real ale is mostly sold in the UK only.

Thanks,
Paul

Sorry for the delay in replying. Yes, feel free to change them although I'm not sure I'd really think of #b5651d as being light brown, these buildings are probably a typical London brick colour which is paler than that - more of a yellowy brown.

Yes this has been changed to something that is completely wrong. It's not a maximum weight limit, but as I understand it this is a limit on HGVs which are rated as being allowed to carry that weight. So a lorry which is permitted to carry 7.5 tonnes (or any permitted to carry a higher load) in this case is not allowed on the road even if it was considerably lighter than that - it's basically a lorry ban though some small lorries (rated less than 7.5T) are allowed. They are quite common - known as environmental weight restrictions - e.g. most of Derby is covered by these restrictions though with 'except for access' plates underneath so that they can deliver to businesses in the city.

I tagged this road following the proposal osm.wiki/Proposed_features/gross_weight, but this has since been simplified as maxweightrating=*. The restriction only applies to HGVs not to buses etc, so in this case the correct tag would be maxweightrating:hgv=7.5 following the updated proposal. I'm not sure about the none@destination conditional restriction tag which was added later - there was no 'except for access' sign when I surveyed it - as indicated by my note tag, but that may have changed since.

Cheers,
Paul

Yes I think so, feel free to change it.

I'm not saying software isn't also important, but mappers must always come first - without mappers they wouldn't have any data to use! There are far too few people doing actual mapping on the streets, so the priority must be on the mapper. Software develops over time and if those developers want to use it they'll need to adapt to changing mapping.

At the moment I don't have the time for the hassle of putting together a proposal to change the spelling, and it wouldn't be right to do it without discussion first on the Tagging mailing list. I've already spent a ridiculous amount of time discussing this with you when I could be doing some actual mapping, and don't want to spend any longer on this. It's not a particularly essential tag when there is already a handrail:left and handrail:right, so who really cares if there are two spellings? I personally am not though going to add tags which are an error, when I do the work in surveying and mapping this in the first place.

If you followed the principle of just using tags commonly understood and rendered then OSM tagging would have never evolved. Your suggested method of creating a way for every building level is far too time consuming and makes the map more complex than necessary with multiple overlapping ways. A new method is needed - it is very common for buildings to have different colours or materials on different levels. For taller buildings you'd perhaps need even more building parts!

I'm not bothered at this time whether anything can render it now, I just want to record the data rather than lose it. Mapping needs to be easy and quick from the mapper's perspective - software and use of the data should only be a secondary consideration.

Perhaps one day when I've got time I'll do a formal proposal, but right now I've got too much of a mapping backlog to do that!

The preset has presumably been copied from the wiki, and is probably part of the reason why the 'center' spelling (which I consider incorrect in an OSM context) has become established rather than following the standard OSM convention. It's a relatively low usage tag and using the American spelling will cause confusion when other much more common tags eg leisure=sports_centre use the British English spelling. If you were to change any tags, it should be the ones with the 'center' spelling.

This is an experimental tag under the osm.wiki/Any_tags_you_like principal. The building:part is designed for use mainly with parts of buildings that have different heights. If it were used I would need to create overlapping ways for every building. In this particular example three ways would need to be created with complex tagging (instead of one way with just one extra tag for each house). That is not practical for mappers, it is too time consuming to do this all the time, and will discourage people from mapping buildings in 3D. If I had to create three ways for each of these houses, I wouldn't map this information at all - I don't have the time. I think it's much better to record this data than lose it, even if it's not rendered. Also, it's not a completely new idea, I based it on a similar tag (building:colour:level:0 etc) which has been experimented with for building:colour.

Yes, but the Taginfo statistics are meaningless when people other than the original mappers are changing it just in an attempt to standardize tags. I can't see any reason why this should have the American spelling, I think someone just made a mistake on the wiki! Pretty much every other tag with the word 'centre' uses this spelling eg leisure=sports_centre. I intend therefore (unless there is a good reason otherwise) to continue using this spelling. Thanks, Paul.

Hi, this change is incorrect, the spelling of the tag should be handrail:centre as I originally mapped it. OSM uses British English for tag spellings, not American English. I will revert. Thanks.

Apologies for the delay in replying. Looking online (e.g. https://memoirsofametrogirl.com/2018/08/05/william-blake-gravestone-bunhill-fields-unveiled-2018-history/), it seems there are indeed two separate memorials to William Blake which probably explains this. There is one apparently dating to the 1920s which is node/2060872272. I'm guessing that node/8147999733 might be the location of the new stone dating to 2018. The new one wasn't there at the time I was mapping there so can't confirm whether it is or not.

Cheers,
Paul

Please do feel free to change it! As I mapped it so long ago and haven't been in that area since I've got no idea whether it's correct or not. Also as this was some surveying I did using a GPS it's possible I made a mistake when taking notes.

No the correct surface for the road is sett, as was previously mapped. See surface=sett. I will revert it back to sett.

No I don't know sorry, it looks like they have just started work on the site. A stub of a road into the development has been built off Newton Lane, and there are several construction vehicles and portakabins on the site.

Hi Bernard,
Thanks for the suggestion though I'm not sure about that, I reckon the surface tag is more something you add as a secondary tag to describe something like a road rather than as the main tag for an object.

I don't think it matters too much if it renders, it's only a bit of grass outside some flats, most other little bits of grass like this within a property aren't mapped and it would be perhaps better if it wasn't rendered.

The landcover tag I think is perhaps the best one to use for micromapping insignificant areas of grass within a property rather than two overlapping landuses.

Cheers,
Paul

You can change it by zooming into where the place name is. It is here osm.org/#map=16/33.6165/71.1609. Click the Edit button. There is an icon named Landi to represent the village. Click on this. On the left hand side you'll see where it says Landi under name. You can now change this to Landi Kachai. Under sources you should delete US Defense Mapping Agency map and replace with the source you used, for example "Local knowledge" if it's from your own knowledge of the area. Then click the save button when you are finished.

In case this is useful there is more advice on how to map at https://learnosm.org.

By the way I think you made a mistake previously by adding the name Landi Kachai to somewhere in Sweden by accident (see way/469778675#map=14/59.7494/17.7965). I can fix this for you if you like. To avoid that problem you just need to be careful when you edit to make sure you're looking at the correct area.