Thanks for these updates. I merged the data you added on a node for the Tramore beach campsite with the area that was already mapped for it.

Their website seems to be domain-squated, I emailed them about it.

I checked the first handful of changes, which are fine, but could you please reduce your changesets to smaller geographical regions, so that tjey are easyer to review by locals ? It'd also make your own pre-upload review safer :)

Welcome to OSM :)

You might want to fill in the name of the shop as well, and try to locate it a bit more precisely (right now it's on the road itself, not on a building). You can use the editor at osm.org/ for that, it'll show satellite imagery to help pinpoint the location.

Lastly, you might prefer to enter a website url or an email address named atfer the shop rather than a personal email address.

Hope this helps. Don't hesitate to ask if you've got questions :)

Welcome to OSM, thanks for adding that business name :)

You'll probably notice that the object has disappeared from the rendered map instead of gaining a name. This is because you removed the building=yes tag, so you should at least add that back.

You'll also want to add a tag to describe what kind of business this is (typically one of osm.wiki/Shopor osm.wiki/Amenity or osm.wiki/Office). Otherwise it's not clear what "name" refers to, and it probably won't be rendered.

Feel free to ask if something is not clear.

Just seeing your s/planned/proposed/ now. A bit late to complain (I'll try to survey soonish and update the whole area, tagging more stuff as construction) but please note that "planned" was used instead of "proposed" on purpose. The difference between the two tags being the level of advancement of the project.

Hi, welcome to OSM editing :)

The bar you added is on the road itself and has a strange name, I wonder (looking at imagery and existing osm data) wether you meant to update the existing pub called "Maunsells" instead ?

Also note the difference between a pub and a bar as defined by OSM (which doesn't match the difference in all cultures) : osm.wiki/Bar osm.wiki/Pub

Is that a different restaurant than the already-mapped one called "Treacy's Bar" ? Bing imagery suggest there is only one establishment here.

Hi, welcome to OSM :)

Seem like your first foray into editing turned into something that wasn't intended for uploading. I cleaned it up. Remember that we are all editing one common database.

Don't hesistate to try editing again, perhaps something simple like adding a shop or fixing a street name. One possible stating point for documentation is osm.wiki/Beginners'_guide .

Have fun.

Not bad for a first edit :)

A couple of improvements you can make:
* amenity=parking_space is used for individual spaces inside a bigger amenity=parking
* You can refine the higway=service by adding service=parking_aisle
* The service roads should be connected to the main road somehow. I suspect one goes via the Orchard house's car park ?
* access=private is the most restrictive access type, it notably excludes excludes customers/staff. I guess that service road is at most access=customers, but you might as well leave it blank.
* bicycle/foot/horse/etc tags are only useful if they have a different value from what is implied by the highway type or declared by the access tag.

highway=service
osm.wiki/Parking
osm.wiki/Access

Got the message once. You can always look at changeset/39117035 to get the canonical version of the discussion (you can also reply directly from there).

I am not 100% sure, but your description of the separate farm track and driveway seem to match the changes that I made. They are no longer connected, and they are better tagged. Please check that what I did matches reality; you'll have to force a browser refresh or to use the editor to see the latest version. Feel free to make further improvements, or to explain what is wrong (ideally add notes using the button on the right).

OSM isn't here to encourage tresspassing, even if any path that actually exists is ok to map. We have plenty of ways of tagging road type and access restrictions, and we probably don't want to map a path that goes through someone's garden or similar.

Hi, welcome to OSM :)

Your first approach to mark the road as access=private was the right one. Deleting a road that actually exists isn't right, so I [reverted the deletion](changeset/39118437) and tweaked the tags by marking this as a driveway and removing the redundant access tags.

From what I could make out via satellite imagery, the geometry of the driveway was pretty bad and incorrectly mixed with a nearby farm track. I corrected that as well, but if you know the area you'll hopefully be able to improve uppon my work.

Cheers.

Oh, and you really should map the school itself :)

osm.wiki/School

Hi, welcome to OSM editing :)

What is that area supposed to represent ? A catchment area for the educate together school ?

It would need to be tagged a bit more explicitly to be useful. The problem is that there's no established tagging scheme for catchment areas. osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Catchment touched the question but isn't used at all in the db.

I'm unsure wether that kind of data belongs in OSM at all. Unless it is somehow regulated by the county council, it seem like a private decision by the school board that doesn't belong in OSM (but could well be mapped using osm tools - do you know about osm.wiki/Umap ?)

In its current state, I'm inclined to delete way/381127731 but I'd really prefer to hear from you first.

Hi, welcome to OSM editing :)

Unfortunately it seems like you contributed personal details (a stay duration in various hotels) rather than general information about those places (like their website, opening hours, etc).

Remember that OSM is one big public database used by everyone. If you want to plan a trip using maps.me, I suggest droping/naming pins instead of using the edit feature.

Because of this, I've [reverted your changes](changeset/38843451). Don't hesitate to tell me if I've misinterpreted things somehow.

I encourage you to try editing again during your travels. Add a missing restaurant, update a changed name, etc. Just as long as it's public information :)

Ok :) This is a great location to get started with osm editing. Lots of details can be added, especially if you can survey. Have fun. Don't hesitate to ask me or the commmunity if you have questions.

I suppose that should be amenity=social_facility ?

Also look at http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/social_facility:for#values to get a feel of possible values. By osm convention, parsable values shouldn't contain spaces. My guess is that 'disabled' would fit best (balancing genericity for data use against more positive terms for human interaction) but it's up to you.

Lastly, it seems like all these buildings are part of the same site ? It might be better to map a social_facility polygon that encompasses them all, and tag individual buildings with the non-shared properties only.

Hi Conal, welcome to OSM :)

Your contributions look ok so far, but just a few tips before you continue:

Your addresses are a bit mixed up:

* "addr:city" is for the actual town, like "Roscrea". Only add it if the house belongs to that town, not if is fully in the countryside.

* "Ofaly" would go in the addr:county key, except that it is completely unnecessary because we can fetch that information from the county's shape.

* addr:housenumber should be a number :p and addr:housename is something like "River view". Many houses in Irland lack one or both, so it's ok to not tag it.

If you can, map the building outline rather than just a node. You can use the satellite imagery for that.

Lastly, grouping your changes a bit might help reviewing them. For example, add all the houses along the road in one go.

Happy mapping :)

Please use changeset comments to explain the changes you made, not as an advertising platform.

The actual changes seem fine in this case, but somebody reading just the comment is likely to flag the changeset as spam and revert it.

While at it, it the restaurant you added accessible to anybody ? If it is only accessible to hotel guests, it's probably not a great idea to map it like this.

No problem, we all make mistakes along the way.

Concerning the hotel (and POIs in general), it's pretty much always better to map them as areas if possible. Reducing an area to a node loses information, so don't do that. If the mapped hotel area was indeed too big, you should have changed it geometry to reflect that.

But are you sure that the buildings at the back aren't part of the hotel ? Did you survey that fact ? It is pretty common in the west of ireland for hotels to have dependencies like this. And the original mapper of that feature did so after a survey (see how changeset comments are useful ? :)). I'll invite him over to this discussion.