I guess he's talking about this. Trivial damage, you can revert it yourself easily.

Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Mushroom Mushroom

Is exactly the wrong attitude.

I don't recall people regularly calling each other trolls on the OSM lists until you turned up.

Also, you're a spammer!

That looks better. Have to wean you off using "highway=road" though - in this sort of area it's almost certainly going to be highway=unclassified, and it's much more useful to have a 95% guess (which someone can come and correct in the 5% case) than such an unspecific tag!

Oh, referring to their maps is definitely out-of-bounds - no question about that. This is about aerial imagery. Agreed absolutely that a dialogue has to help.

P.S. Just a few short of 500 votes now!

I suspect it's the contracts, not the copyright - there doesn't seem to be anything preventing it in most copyright law; and contracts are just an understanding between two parties. If Google want it changed, it can be changed!

We're now at 227 votes and in first place - almost twice as many as the next most popular. Amazing result so far - let's keep it up.

No, it isn't ok.

Have messaged user accordingly.

Interesting issue.

It depends very much where you are. OSM already has good public footpath coverage in popular walking areas such as the Brecon Beacons and Snowdonia; and also in areas with dedicated contributors such as West Oxfordshire and the New Forest. These are very much up to the standard required by a hiker. Indeed, they can often be better - many OSMers map stiles and gates, for example, which are not typically shown on OS maps.

OSM will not, however, ever replace the 'Definitive Map' - by its very nature it can't. Is this a failing? Not necessarily. If the real, live footpath is somewhere else than where the Right of Way says it should be, then either the landowner is at fault (and should fix it) or the RoW should be diverted (and the council should fix it). It doesn't affect the validity of the map as long as you've mapped what really is on the ground.

I think you also underestimate what can be gleaned from extrapolation. Those of us who map cycle routes are accustomed to figuring out where the route goes despite the scantiest (or most inconsistent) signage. It's one of the reasons why OSM's cycle map is so good - it's made by cyclists who have a real interest in the routes, not highway engineers who understand little and care less.

There will always be very rarely used RoWs where the signs are unclear, there's no evidence of a path on the ground, and so OSM can't map it. Fair enough. We more than make up for that with our other strengths.

(Personal opinion: I actually don't have much of a problem with "inviting people to trespass". England & Wales law is ridiculously biased in favour of the landowner, who has very few responsibilities to balance up the benefits he derives from a natural resource. I remember the time years ago that a "git orff moi larnd" farmer shouted at me for following a derelict canal across his entirely uncultivated, neglected land - "how would you like it if I walked across your garden?". Sorry mate, but if there was a derelict canal across my garden, I'd have got volunteers in to restore it so that the public could benefit from it.)

They're not meant to be so thick, that's a bug that was introduced the other day and which'll be fixed again in a day or two.

Please do use trac.openstreetmap.org for reporting bugs in the editor, if you can!

That's excellent. I passed the Oxfordshire Way over by Otmoor the other day - was wondering where it went from there...

Presumably you can find peaks from SRTM (where there aren't voids), no?

You could just turn on the Cycle Map as a background layer in Potlatch and find the contours there.

Using Potlatch (which I would recommend :p ), when you're drawing a line, just mouse-over the road/cyclepath you want to connect to. The nodes on it will light up blue.

Then click, and a new point will be added with a black box [_] around it. This shows it's a junction.

As ever, when you want to finish drawing, either double-click or press Enter.

Wikipedia locations are typically from copyrighted sources (see mailing lists passim).

Not to worry. It's not exactly one of the more intuitive aspects of OpenStreetMap!

:) Thanks.

*deep breath*

OSM trunk does not mean UK-legislation trunk. Nor does it mean US-legislation trunk, or French-legislation trunk, or anything. It's. Just. A. Word.

If you tag the A10 in OSM as primary while it still has green signs, You're Doing It Wrong. And someone else will come along and correct you.

We have been over this a million times before. The settled will of the community is that green-signed roads are tagged with highway=trunk. Please try to read up on what the community thinks before threatening "the map is going to get a lot redder".

*fires up Potlatch*

Agreed absolutely with Circeus's first post - that's a really good description.

"the wikipedia people said to me that facts are not copyrightable"

The wikipedia people are not renowned for their understanding of the complexities of geodata law. ;)

If you zoom in, you'll see there's a weird messed-up junction where Gilman Drive crosses a primary_link road, with too many nodes. If you sort that out, you'll find the parallel way (P) works as it should.