Hi, I wondered why you deleted way way/48551505 and then re-added it named as Stafferton Link in a later edit?

The current Stafferton Link is clearly not on the correct alignment as it passes through houses rather than through the green space (clearly mapped) which was kept clear for this road. Additionally the new road clashed with the building named the arena.

I've tried to adjust the alignment, but was wondering what sources you were using for this edit.

Dont think this worked out quite as you intended: the new roundabout at E end of Stafferton Link has ended up with highway=turning_loop when I think you want highway=mini-roundabout. I can fix it if you like, or you can do it yourself. Let me know.

There is some useful advice on the wiki about how to sort out parallax/perspective issues with imagery: osm.wiki/Roof_modelling.

Very kind of you to welcome me, but it's a bit late: I've been on OSM since Dec 2008.

I've looked very hard for the dragged node, but can't find it. In future please provide the url of the actual object. It saves a lot of time. It may be that whatever you were referring to was changed in later edits (this was one of a long series in this area).

The whole reason I'm looking at this is because I want to map other places in St Anns which have similar layout. I may have taken notes & photos last year of Kelvedon Gardens because I was searching for an example with the addresses mapped on the doors.

OSM is fundamentally a collaborative project and it works at its best when we collectively use a common style of mapping things. Yes we can have different points of view, but they should are best substantiated by widespread practice in OSM: not "this is my way tough".

In the main it's more important that things get mapped as long as there's enough info to make the mapping more elaborate over time. For instance the info you've added for Jedburgh Close is extremely useful for understanding how these buildings are laid out internally, with which levels each house number is located on : in fact if you provided this on others I could live with it as it's clearly more informative than what I can achieve not living in the area.

A couple of points: it's a database not a map; we're trying to represent RL reasonably accurately, not keep residents in place X happy (or we'd have very different boundaries in many places in the world).

The problem with this as a halfway house representation is that the mapped thinness of the residences is obviously unlikely & inaccurate.

We can do better.

The current, entirely achievable, method for complex blacks like these is, as I said, to map the addresses on the doors. Also in general it's usually better to try & capture the actual situation : a few people working out how to do it is how OSM advances. The problem with these being terraced is that it makes it rather harder to change them with a more accurate representation.

Hi Alex,

You seem to have terraced a number of buildings in St Anns (e.g., Kelvedon Gardens) which are more complex, typically with 3 apartments in each section accessed by doors on ground & first floor. Ideally these need to be mapped with the address nodes on the doors, which will require fiddly things with access bridges, balconies & steps. With the places terraced they look (accurately) too thin for convenient living. I'd rather we wait and get it completely right than have to change from all these terraces.

Jerry

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).