It is a highly dubious statement that "healthcare is the accepted tag". Certainly in the UK medical facilities are much more likely to be mapped using the amenity key. The various healthcare tagging schemas advocated on the wiki have never received much mainstream support from mappers, by far and away the most popular tag in the UK for medical or health centres is amenity=doctors. I would argue also that healthcare=centre is a poor choice of name for tags as there are many different medical facilities with centre in the description.

No, he's built a list of values which he finds useful. One of the main points of OSM is to allow the description of the unusual & idiosyncratic because a rigid list of approved values inevitably cannot cope. People enforcing a set of values devalues what OSM is about. For instance you have changed a number of bridge=footbridge which I have added over the past few months. It may be an inadequate tag to capture what I want to do, but it certainly has more meaning than bridge=yes. For a start it makes them much harder to find if I wanted to enhance the tagging. If unusual bridge values upset you I suggest you render your own map & stop tagging for OSM-Carto.

And it is only polite to comment changesets, particularly when you are tag fiddling.

So you are also the person silently removing my bridge=footbridge tags too. Can you at the very least ask about these before changing them.

On the contrary information has been lost: changing a tag to a note is always information loss. You are changing tagging for the renderer, a practice which has been discouraged for many years. Instead you should a) file an issue with the rendering github repository and b) improve the wiki documentation. There are NO APPROVED VALUES, only widely used tags. This particular bridge seems to be unusual and therefore has historic value.

I would not expect the object tagged with building to have any height information if tagged using S3DB, rather everything on building parts. I was looking at the data on a phone so only looked at the outline, and I must have read a comment on another changeset in the object history rather than this one or I would have looked more closely. So in practice my objections are very minor: a) separate building part for the lower section; and b) would be nice to have building:levels for other building parts (but I imagine this is far too much work).

The alterations made in this change set a) removed useful & important information ( that a building has 41 storeys) and b) replaced the height with a clearly erroneous value. I hope that these changes "to the new tagging scheme" were an accidental one-off. The continued use of Manhattan buildings in visualisations suggests that this is the case. I'd be grateful if you could review any similar edits which may have caused similar discrepancies.

If the information is accurate then it is not 'tagging for the router', merely making access permissions explicit. Routers which implicitly route on service roads may cause other problems.

The person who did Great Britain didn't ask either. Somehow we'd managed fine without it for something like 8-9 years.

කලින් පණිවිඩවල ගූගල් භාවිතයෙන් ස්වයංක්රීය පරිවර්තනය:

ආදරණීය වේෂේෂ්කුමාර්,

OpenStreetMap ඔබගේ එකතු කිරීම් ගැටළු ගණනාවක් ඇති කරයි. විශේෂයෙන් ඔබ වර්ග කිලෝමීටර් දහස් ගනනක් ප්රදේශයක් සහිත ගොඩනැගිලි එකතු කරන බව පෙනේ. මෙම ගැටලුවේ මූලික හේතුව කුමක් විය හැකිද යන්න හඳුනා ගැනීමට කරුණාකර ජොඑස්එම් සමඟ සංස්කරණය කිරීම නවත්වන්න.

SK53

OpenStreetMap වෙත ඔබගේ සියලු එකතු කිරීම් ඉවත් කිරීමට මට සිදු වී ඇති අතර, බොහෝ දායකයින්ගේ දායකත්වය සහ වැඩ ප්රමානය බරපතල ලෙස බලපා ඇත.

එසේ වුවද, ඔබගේ දායකත්වය සාදරයෙන් පිළිගනිමු. ඊළඟ වතාවේ වෙනත් සංස්කාරකයක් භාවිතා කරන්න මම යෝජනා කරනවා.

@bgirardot2: not every contributor has the time to assess the full aspects of contributions which are interfering with their use of OSM. They may be in the middle of a complex series of changes or trying to achieve something quickly. It has taken me around 90 minutes to get to grips with this: not everyone can afford that time. Yes we should avoid the vandalism word, but I think calling people out for doing so rarely helps too.

I'm afraid I have had to remove all your additions to OpenStreetMap as they were seriously affecting the contributions and workload of many other contributors.

Notwithstanding this, your contributions are welcome. I would suggest using a different editor next time.

Dear Vatheeskumar ,

I'm afraid your additions to OpenStreetMap are causing a number of problems. In particular you seem to be adding buildings with an area of several tens of thousands of square kilometers. Can you please stop editing with JOSM and engage in a conversation with us to identify what the root cause of this problem might be.

SK53

If you must add Ireland as a multipolygon it would have been : a) nice to ask the Irish OSM community first; and b) add name tags for all the languages natively spoken on that Ireland (i.e., at the very least the Irish name).

Because it hasn't, please read: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/19609/saint-or-st-is-there-an-official-osm-policy and osm.wiki/Invalid_Abbreviation_Expansion.

I would also suggest being a little lighter in the tone of your comments: it might be offputting to newcomers.

Yeah, fairly marginal. There is an island separating the turn lane from straight on. Don't think there are turn restrictions though. I was meaning to add the unrestricted speed limit from the M1 roundabout :-)

Forgot to mention I'd changed it! From aerial imagery it looks as if the house is a slightly different shape from that shown.

With maps.me you can also add a note which puts a marker on the map saying something like "Yew Tree House".

Someday I'll do more mapping in Hickling, last time I only added housenumbers on Harles Acres.

Some 'buildings' are errors: patches of dark earth. If you cross check against DigitalGlobe Standard Imagery you can see this more clearly. Examples: way/524785250; way/524785249. Both either are bounded by walls/hedges or in latter case have walls/hedges inside the polygon.

A few points, largely noticed whilst looking at the (old) CCW vegetation survey data and my own photos and notes:

Quarry Spoil is not usually mapped as landfill, man_made=spoil_heap seems to be the most widely used tag.

The wood mapped as Coed-yr-Allt includes some areas which are not woodland, OS StreetView is not a good guide here. I also think the name refers just to the part above the Watkin Path.

The large area mapped as bare rock by Llyn Gwynant is not so. There are occasional exposures of rock there, but plenty of grass too.

Please correct typos, no need to send me a message.