Please stop posting these abusive spam diary entries - they are not acceptable and all accounts posting them will be closed.

Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about this policy.

Usually that means the map you are asking for is too complicated and the render is being cancelled because one of the resource limits were hit.

There have been many such proposals over the years - pretty sure there are tickets in github already.

Biggest problem is probably finding unambigous syntax for all the sorts of mentions (node/way/relation/changeset/user) that people want.

Well that and finding somebody that actually wants to implement it rather than just talk about how nice it would be of course ;-)

Obviously I’m missing something then because I’ve searched everywhere that I can see in the MapRoulette information and I can’t even see a name for the creator, never mind a link.

Not exactly… The situation in the UK is complex - although the first attempt to introduce land registration was made in 1862 it wasn’t until 1925 that it started to become compulsory and that was then phased in over the next 65 years (yes really) and didn’t become compulsory everywhere until 1990.

In addition even in areas with compulsory registration it was only triggered when the land was sold so a farm that might have been in the same family for generations might well not be registered.

In addition the Land Registry doesn’t hold full deeds - the title register has copies of anything covenants considered important and an outline plan. There’s no cadastral registration so the plan only has what are known as “general boundaries” which basically means it gives a rough idea of where the boundary is.

There’s a small charge to get the title details but even then it’s likely the map comes with an Ordnance Survey copyright attached so that you can’t just do as you like with it.

Alternatively you can find it at https://www.old-maps.co.uk/#/Map/461636/342753/12/100765 which is probably the exact same map (1955 1:1250) that he was looking at ;-)

That one is even old enough to be out of copyright, though I suspect old-maps.co.uk will claim rights in their scans so it may be best not to use it as a source for OpenStreetMap.

Test failed.

No, your spam bot will not be welcome.

But that way hasn’t been touched in three years before DesertTrip deleted it. In fact it is in effect original TIGER import data from nine years ago as the only edits since were reverted.

So there isn’t anybody actively damaging things, which is the way I read the original entry, it’s just that this is still an area that is largely based on the original TIGER import and which, by the sound of it, had particularly bad TIGER data.

So welcome to OSM Desert Trip and please do go ahead and fix things! But do bear in mind the caveats about sources above.

Tags should mostly be view as opaque keys to be looked up in a reference source to determine their meaning rather than expecting them to be technically accurate on their own.

Although tags often use words which have a very specific meaning in a particular domain they were often created without full understanding of the details and have therefore simply become placeholders and we normally avoid going back and changing them to reflect a correct understanding and instead treat them as having OSM specific meaning.

We have everything installed because fonts-noto was already pulling them in as a recommends. Here is one of our servers:

orm [~] % dpkg-query -l '*noto*'
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:uppercase=bad)
||/ Name                                         Version                     Architecture                Description
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:+++-============================================-===========================-===========================-=============================================================================================
ii  fonts-noto                                   20160116-1                  all                         metapackage to pull in all Noto fonts
ii  fonts-noto-cjk                               1:1.004+repack2-1~ubuntu1   all                         "No Tofu" font families with large Unicode coverage (CJK)
ii  fonts-noto-hinted                            20160116-1                  all                         "No Tofu" font families with large Unicode coverage (hinted)
ii  fonts-noto-mono                              20160116-1                  all                         "No Tofu" monospaced font family with large Unicode coverage
ii  fonts-noto-unhinted                          20160116-1                  all                         "No Tofu" font families with large Unicode coverage (unhinted)

We have fonts-noto-cjk installed already on all three servers. I checked when you posted originally.

All the fonts specified by the carto team are installed.

The fundamental problem is that unparished areas do not have well defined boundaries other than where that abut a parished area, and no two people will agree on exactly where one suburb ends and another one begins - indeed in many places in London there are multiple overlapping names for example.

On top of that any suburb boundary is definitely not an administrative boundary because it does not define an area of administrative control.

So we probably shouldn’t add these areas where they are not well defined and verifiable (which I think is pretty much the default) and even if we do that shouldn’t be administrative boundaries, they should be some new thing like a suburb_boundary or something. Yes search would then have to be taught to process that but good data always comes first in OSM and we fix the consumers to understand new data rather than abusing the data to suit the consumers.

I have reverted that change in the wiki now, so it is back to the original meaning.

See also osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Tag:railway%3Dhalt&diff=1172853&oldid=1146096 where the original UK based definition was changed to the German one in the English language wiki in order to “fit content to German version”.

I rather suspect some crazy person has got at that wiki entry…

In common parlance, at least in the UK, a halt was typically a small rural station - to quote wikipedia on the subject:

A halt, in railway parlance in the British Commonwealth, is a small station, usually unstaffed or with very few staff, and with few or no facilities. In some cases, trains stop only on request, when passengers on the platform indicate that they wish to board, or passengers on the train inform the crew that they wish to alight.

Certainly I’m sure that was the definition that people had in mind when https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=halt was first used.

It may be that in Germany the definition given on that wiki page is the normally accepted one in common language, but that doesn’t mean it magically changes the meaning of the OpenStreetMap tag, though to some extent meanings can vary from country to country anyway.

Test failed

Well it’s certainly not there for you to spam people with.

Fixing Nominatim is the correct solution. All names should be entered unabbreviated in OSM.