Could you say what routes you’re talking about? I can’t see any huge divergences. The two York-Tadcaster routes are missing and so too the spur off NCN 67 in Harrogate, but that just needs someone to go and survey them.

The Regional Route 52 mentioned above (did you edit your posting?) has been renumbered and slightly rerouted to become National Route 165 - as is the case for most Regional Routes outside East Anglia.

Brilliant. Haven’t seen that code in years!

Just the bit about introducing the version number on objects. The version number was already present in the db - see https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/blob/06f3473d1c64d2e0a1ecc6f1a9c4679a52bc4761/db/create_database.sql - it just (IIRC) wasn’t visible through the API. So “exposed” would be better than “introduced”. Only a minor gripe - I’m just slightly aware it’s good to get these things on the record before we all forget them. :)

I don’t think that’s quite accurate.

OSM has always been versioned, from the very first pre-Rails site onwards. (All of this was managed in a file called dao.rb, I think, if you can find it in trac.) However, when segments were abolished in the move from 0.4 to 0.5, the history was not migrated into the revised database schema.

I believe someone (Firefishy?) has a database dump from the time of the changeover, so it would theoretically be possible to reconstruct the pre-0.5 history.

https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/1576

Have just spent half an hour down a Google Street View (wash my mouth out…) rabbit-hole. :)

Hooee, that’s a difficult one. Having a frontage road as trunk really does seem to break the purpose of the highway tag, but on the other hand the physical characteristics in this case are pretty compelling. So I can see your point now along TX-121, though I could also see the case for https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=primary with a lanes= tag.

But (say) the road alongside I-35 in Waco looks fine as a secondary to me, or could even be a tertiary. Alongside US-34 in Waco is either tertiary or unclassified.

Eeek. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=trunk for frontage roads doesn’t make any sense to me.

The highway= tag is meant to reflect a road’s importance in the through-highway system. It isn’t solely a reflection of physical characteristics.

A frontage road is by definition unimportant in the through-highway system: its purpose is to serve local traffic (and, importantly, to provide an alternative route for traffic that might be prohibited or uncomfortable on the main road, such as bikes or slow-moving agricultural vehicles).

That suggests https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=tertiary, or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=secondary at a pinch. Definitely not trunk.

Martin - personalising the issue like this is really unhelpful and exactly the sort of thing that made me burn out after however many years of maintaining Potlatch. Please please don’t do it, we have few enough developers as it is.

Yay! Welcome back.

Great to see all your work - from the other side of Oxfordshire!

most errors are generated using Potlach and ID

“Why can’t contributors check/correct their own work!”

It’s called “Potlatch”. With two ‘T’s. You should use the validation tool in your browser (the spell-checker). ;)

Understood. Happens to us all. :)

Suggest reporting it to the Data Working Group who, I imagine, will ban the user in question, and rightly so.

Do you have a link to the shapefiles?

Add a mew issue at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto

Yeah, the problem with the most popular (and successful) captcha is that it’s used to crowdsource data for Google’s proprietary mapping database, which is kinda contrary to the OSM project.

In particular see https://github.com/gravitystorm/blogs.osm.org/issues/17

Do you know which changesets removed the Spanish names?

Does using the new menu at the bottom not work? It does for me on (say) the inner way of Worcester Cathedral at osm.org/edit#map=19/52.18845/-2.22070 .

Cool, thank you. (I misspoke about the 16th century though. P2 does support shapefiles and they’re probably early-medieval.)