@bastik: heh, precisely... if it were trivial to program iOS in AS3 I'd be right at it. Apple don't really like that idea though ;)

Mark: you'll find that there are several more that are available as areas. If you draw a box, then select from the menu on the left under "Sport and Leisure", you'll see some others.

If the ones you want still aren't there, then either draw a box, or put a 'generic' point-of-interest in by double-clicking. Then have a look at osm.wiki/Map_Features . This has a vast list of 'tags' you can add for pretty much anything you like. You add these by switching to 'Advanced' mode and then using the 'Add' button for each one.

Sanderd17: you've misunderstood the question; this is about presets in Potlatch 2.

Potlatch developers are always happy to listen to reasoned argument if you contact them. :)

I've not found one either. The world is crying out for a native iOS editor...

Bye.

Here's how to add a turn restriction in Potlatch 2: http://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/2966/entering-relations-in-potlatch-2

Looking forward, Lightspark is probably more likely to support P2 than Gnash is.

Glad you're enjoying Potlatch. As one of the principal authors of Potlatch I'm desperately looking forward to the change to ODbL, as it will mean that my mapping work starts to be distributed under an equitable licence designed for data and those who want to build on it. If OSM stuck with CC-BY-SA I'd not feel at all motivated to continue developing Potlatch. (Potlatch itself, of course, is released under a much more liberal licence than either.)

Go to the right part of the map. Zoom in until the phantom street is shown and not much else. Click 'Edit'.

Once the online editor has loaded, click on the phantom street, then hold shift and press delete (or backspace). It'll disappear.

Click 'Save'. Enter a little comment explaining what you've done.

The map will be updated a few minutes later and the street will be removed!

Your headline is also missing two letter 'E's. You mean "something" and "interesting".

You should also use a full stop after the word "FATTY". As you appear to be a Colonial, you may know this as a "period".

Interesting post, but I can't find any common ground with your last statement: "please do keep an eye on what OSMF get up to with your data".

The mapping I have done for OSM isn't my data. I gave it to the community, to everyone. That, to me, is what "Open" means.

You might find the FAQ helpful.

"trunk is intended to designate fast routes with four lanes, few at-grade intersections and many bypasses"

No it isn't. Ever since we started using in in the UK, highway=trunk is the core long-distance road network of the country - hence the name. Local countries are free to define their own criteria according to the highway construction and classification standards of their nation, and it's good that you've defined your own criteria in Germany. But please don't try and impose German usage on the rest of the world.

Slight correction: that is claimed by some to be a problem with OS OpenData - not everyone believes it is.

Regardless, it'd be helpful if those declining were to add something to their user page explaining why, whether it be "I'm declining until I hear more detail on attribution" or "I'm declining because ODbL is teh evil!!11!!1111*^%£$". If it's the former I agree that remapping would be premature. If it's the latter, I can't really fault Rovastar, tbh.

The one thing that depresses me about all of this is the talk of "they", and the passive voice ("this was done").

OSM used to be a community where people mucked in and helped. Where people got involved, found out what the arguments were, and if they thought something could be done better, lent their time to make it so. That's what built a terrific, unique project.

Now, instead, people just sit and moan in diary entries. A real shame.

Chris is right on this one IMO - if we find that OS OpenData isn't compatible with the new license+terms (and I don't believe we will), we'll simply go through the database and delete anything with 'source=OS OpenData' or similar. After all, if we'd been told that it was incompatible, how could we leave such ways in?

Good luck. Shall be sorely disappointed if you come back without any unmapped roads...

paulbiv: define "many" - I'd estimate that the number clicking 'decline' because of OS concerns is less than 10.

alexz: either you're confused or I am. We're not moving from CC-BY to CC-BY-SA. We're moving from CC-BY-SA to ODbL.

No, I don't think it's being done for obscure reasons, I think it's being done for good reasons.

As for "just have to assume" - of course you don't. It's a community project. You can help.