http://binged.it/YgRdrO

Perhaps residents swapped homes on the same street and kept their house numbers to avoid needing to notify everyone of their change of address, except the postman. Perhaps homes 53 and 55 were merged into a single property. Or perhaps someone switched the house number numbers around for a prank.

Happy Spammy Christmas

SPAM

There seems to be a large number of highlighted segments that are attached to highway=service closed-ways with area=yes. The routing does not seem able to use highway=track, tracktype=grade1.

Thank you for this wonderfully helpful advance.

Spam

Spam

Spam

Wait for it and you’ll get the usual response that the OSM map is purely for demonstration and for checking what has been mapped. Except there does need to be a site to demonstrate what can be done with OSM, comparable to Google Maps, and it may as well be done on the main OSM site where everyone goes expecting just that.

I’ve always thought that “associatedStreet” was a poor choice of relation type name, since the relation also represents the addresses associated with a street. Since there should also be parsing for type=street it seems better to use the shorter name with the associated smaller risk of spelling error.

Presuming the cost is less than that of purchasing satellite imagery.

Spam - with target URL on profile page description.

Bonus points for Markov Chain phrase production.

If the name is still visible on the building then keep the tag. Set disused=yes and change amenity=restaurant to disused:amenity=restaurant. See disused=*

Was any consideration given to the reaction bot for retaining clean tags from agreeing users of ways deleted through loss of all nodes?

If so, a technique like the ITO OS OpenData Locator site could then be used to roughly show prior tags for rectangular areas for future road remapping. Though that does require two points based on the original node locations, which might not be possible given the re-licensing requirements. That could be averaged into a single point, though that might also be considered to be derivative.

Failing that, I just hope that some of the original notes were retained from the original survey to assist in rebuilding the map.

There are road sections like that in England, where the main road name is often used for the addresses of the buildings off the branches that are unsigned (or signed with house number ranges). For those I use highway=residential and use the same road name. It is ambiguous in the case you point out and it would have been better had he messaged you first to ask about the changes before reverting them. Has he seen this diary entry?

The OSM wiki does associate name with highway=service, but the discussion page hints at this being used only if the service road has been given an explicit name on the ground. For the majority of service lanes there is usually no name.

I was involved with one of those Freedom of Information Act requests and you’ll note that they didn’t provide the latitude/longitude of the postboxes, just rough locations based on streets/junctions. I have surveyed a city’s worth of postboxes since. Note, that the collection times are rather out of date now.

It would be considerably preferable for the source data provider to release the information directly and to maintain it. In the mean time the links you posted should help prompt others into action.

I suspect it’s to avoid the building from causing inaccuracy with the GPS position, and perhaps to avoid looking too suspicious if they are not delivering letters at the time.

I rather hope that they build a dataset of their postboxes and release that (and the collection times) to the public for free. That would actually benefit their business operations and be somewhat better than now where only the delivery personnel know the exactly locations.

Not a good time to be using OSM data for navigation it seems.