bridge=footbridge and highway=footway are not redundant. It provides extra information about the nature of the bridge: notably that it was solely designed for foot traffic, and is narrow. I am reverting this because you did not discuss it first, and you have removed information in changing the tag to yes.

At least one NSA (Small Isles) has been mapped as a National Park (I did it & for a long time it featured on worstofosm): it was the only NSA where it was feasible to define the boundaries at the time. I think in general both NPs & AONBs get the national_park tag in E&W. I agree that it's not altogether satisfactory, and having 3 categories in Scotland (NP, NSA & RP) makes that worse. I think the designation tag has been used to help discriminate between the various types.

Exactly as described. Put one name in name, the other in alt_name. The OSM geo-search engine Nominatim will find either: just as it finds London and Londres. If data consumers (such as cartograpers) want to show both names they can do name || ' or ' || alt_name. Making that choice up-front for them makes consuming the data much more complicated.

I should add that the wild flower meadow was already mapped: way/407689213.

I also understand that your edits may have been Pokemon-Go related.

I'm sorry but these landuse tags you have added in Wollaton are in the main wrong & inaccurate. All were mapped quite accurately a long time ago. Harrison's Plantation is not a meadow (there is a small area of wildflower meadow) adjacent to the Old Coach Road. In Nottingham we only use landuse=grass for small patches of amenity grassland which are not covered by other tags which imply grass: park, recreation_ground, pitch etc. landuse=forest should only be used in the UK for commercial forestry plantations (usage may be different elsewhere).

I have therefore reverted your changes.

Thanks Andy. I've added this to the wiki osm.wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines#Unpaved_Country_Roads. It's largely based on the discussion here, but I should also add some examples from Northumberland too. I think pressure of use in SE England, Peak District etc has largely led to the status of such roads being changed. Two I know in Berkshire were v. rapidly downgraded to Restricted Byways shortly after they appeared on satnavs and became rat runs.

Just thought I'd add links to the similar highways which I mentioned earlier:

Tillington, West Sussex: way/273951783

Two in Marefield, Leics:

Red Lodge Road: way/198802841
Blackspinney Lane: way/195159159

I will try & document all this on the wiki because I remember my own puzzlement about these three on coming across them 2 years ago.

This does indeed appear to be classified as an unclassified road by the county council. There will always be edge cases where the rules-of-thumb fall down, and this is one of them. I don't believe that it should be mapped as such on OSM: highway=track is much more appropriate. A couple of important principles apply: "of least surprise" and duck tagging (osm.wiki/Duck_tagging). In general the vast majority of unclassified roads in UK will be paved, and this will be the expectation of users of the maps. Someone ending up using this data finding they are on a track with an unsigned ford is likely to be rather disgruntled. A check on OS maps show this is marked with green blobs showing that OSGB have taken a similar tack. A useful rule of thumb when checking how to tag roads of this nature is to check against the OS StreetView layer: in general public roads are shown in white with a casing; tracks, service roads etc., as uncased grey lines. I would therefore recommend: a) return the tagging to highway=track; b) change the ref to admin_ref which is the agreed standard in the UK for this type of internal administrative reference (talk-gb ad nauseum); c) add access=yes, motor_vehicle=yes (& other access tags); d) possibly add a designation tag with value public_highway. There are a number of similar tracks in rural Leicestershire, and I can recall one in West Sussex too (but trying to drive any kind of vehicle along it would be madness). All are in general mapped as tracks.

I really wish you'd let me do these edits. The Impasse de Couchant is not a highway=residential it is a footway with steps.

Will just add that around Flintham this section of road was updated just as soon as practicable after it opened, see my blog post from 6 years ago: http://sk53-osm.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/along-fosse-way-mapping-new-road.html

Hi Stan,

You changed the tagging on Scalford FP 23 adding highway=footway. Unfortunately this is highly inaccurate: there is a designation line but the line passes through buildings and is totally inaccessible, exactly as my original tagging showed with disused:footway.

Please be careful not to update information which has been carefully surveyed by field walking.

I have returned the tagging to what it was before. I have also received confirmation from LCC that this situation is long standing and will be resolved in "due course". OSM aims to represent what is on the ground and should be more useful to walkers than an OS map in that respect.

Jerry

Very nice, couldnt remember it but just checked my Mapillary photos https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/iEEeGscf-bMROp_PLYWCrQ.

It means I've been guerilla mapped again! See http://sk53-osm.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/ive-been-guerilla-mapped.html (that post box didnt last very long btw).

This wikidata tag added is erroneous. It refers to Carshalton, not Carshalton Beeches. No doubt because there is no wikipedia article about the latter, merely a re-direct to the Carshalton article. This has then been replicated on Wikidata. I have removed this value as it is wrong. Do please check such items before adding them to OSM.

In the ID editor you can either scroll down until you see a box labelled add field. This will autocomplete with widely used values (such as tourism) and then give you a pick list. For unusual values (e.g., chalet=holiday_cottage) you have to scroll even further down to an area labelled "All tags" which shows the 'raw' values of the tags, clicking on the plus button gives a new row. Put the "chalet" in the left side and "holiday_cottage" on the right side. It will be understood that the chalet on the lefthand side is a clarification of the tourism=chalet pair. HTH

Hi Susan, Unfortunately someone decided that tourism=chalet should mean holiday cottages too (probably by some daft extrapolation from the Swiss Alps, where chalets are often large buildings with several separate apartments). Often tags are invented by non-native English speakers or by people who dont check on British usage which is the agreed standard fr tags.

So I agree with you, but the current tagging is tourism=chalet & then it shows up as a tourist feature. You could always add chalet=holiday_cottage which gives the chance to separate them out from ones in Butlins etc. Jerry

place=farm is generally not regarded as a valid/useful tag in the UK. Standard practice is to map actual farms with landuse=farmyard and ones which are now residential (lots) with landuse=residential. Sometimes place=locality may also be used if widely used (remote highland areas). In most of lowland Britain farms locations are a result of enclosure and so are recent & not representatives of historically used placenames. The exceptions are mainly the (highly inaccurate) work of one mapper who has been asked to desist but does not respond to messages. I'm sure this has been discussed on talk-gb several times in the past.

This is an import, I'm not aware it has been discussed on the imports list or at talk-gb. OS Vector Map District is not suitable for building imports: the buildings are generalised so that several detached houses are combined into one. You are better off tracing the outlines from OSSV, still not very accurate, but usually better than OSVMD. Even the newer OS Local Map buildings are still too generalised. Other problems with this as an import include imported buildings with footpaths running through them. This sort of thing is precisely why we have an imports policy.

This is one of a number of edits which seem to be large scale & should follow either or both the automated or mechanical edit policies (osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct) Please try & reply promptly as to your reason for these edits. These edits are likely to be reverted as they do not appear to conform to these policies.

Removing tags which you deem redundant may inconvenience many other data consumers. The cost of an explicit tag over an implicit one is minimal (and much less than storing the previous & current versions of the data).

Isnt this really a Casa de té not a coffee house?

Hi Luke,

Many thanks for adding this info to OpenStreetMap. I have a few suggestions which may make the edit more useful:

1. There are several buildings on the site. Presumably the original Harston Lodge is the house in the centre. Individual buildings can be mapped and addresses added.
2. We have a tag craft which could be used to add information. You could use craft=guitar_repair instead of/or as well as office. See craft=*#Craft
3. The driveway to Harston Lodge is currently marked as a track (mapped by someone passing on the main road). It looks to me that it could perhaps be better mapped as a driveway (tags highway=service, service=driveway) which would also mean better routing for any one who wished to find your premises via OSM.

This is quite a lot of different things, they should improve the visibility of your business on OSM and OSM-derived apps & maps. However, I'm interested in tapping into your local knowledge, and am willing to help out. OSM thrives by having this kind of local detail.