There may be some with airport runways across or even down them too.

Some may be mapped with ways, others with boundaries, some with both…

Yes, the hole will be moved from time to time.. and the map may not have the latest location. Work with what you have?

There is the proposal osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Golf_course Has a number of tags. Proposed for over a year now.

On that you can see a way is proposed .. would that not be the ideal ‘course’ for the gold ball? The user could enter their maximum reliable range, hole number and the app figure out where that range circle (centered on the present location) crossed the way and show that to the user.

You say “Remote mappers will be able to map geometrics of buildings, roads and land use with the help of aerial imagery. “

Remote mapping buildings .. I don’t usually map those. I’ll map them where they are unusual (shape) or a long way from anywhere else. But there it typically much to map, so I concentrate on the roads, large villages, towns. The rest … local knowledge should be used.

I take a cautious approach to remote mapping roads. I prefer to down grade a road classification rather than make an assumption that upgrades it … possibly beyond its’ actual class.

I find remote mapping land use is not precise. And orchard looks much like a vineyard … a group of buildings could be a village … or a collection of farm buildings … There can be a lot of assumptions made .. best to leave things off the map if uncertain?

Opps .. wrong entry .. sorry. I make no comment on your trees problem.

You say “Remote mappers will be able to map geometrics of buildings, roads and land use with the help of aerial imagery. “

I find remote mapping land use is not precise. And orchard looks much like a vineyard … a group of buildings could be a village … or a collection of farm buildings … There can be a lot of assumptions made .. best to leave things off the map if uncertain?

I take a cautious approach to remote mapping roads. I prefer to down grade a road classification rather than make an assumption that upgrades it … possibly beyond its’ actual class.

Remote mapping buildings .. I don’t usually map those. I’ll map them where they are unusual (shape) or a long way from anywhere else. But there it typically much to map, so I concentrate on the roads, large villages, towns. The rest … local knowledge should be used.

Hi + thanks! I note your edits to the OSM in Rwanda. Thank you for the contributions and for your ‘feet on the ground’.

Some roads I have come across elsewhere in the world have been very straight lines compared to the satellite imagery, I think that comes from a lack of time but an interest to show that there is a road between the two points. Though I have made something similar in a place where I know there is a track .. but it is hidden by tree cover. In another case the road was remade near the original road. In ‘Outback Australia’ it is not unusual for the grader driver to decide to change the course of a road .. if he, the property manager or someone decides that the road would be better off elsewhere then it may well be made elsewhere! The satellite imagery may show the old road .. as may old maps. So be careful about roads and the map/satellite imagery, they may not agree for lots of reasons.

You are very well place to ‘see’ what is needed there as you are using the map. Map.me is good .. others to try are OsmAnd and MapOut. Each has a different way of displaying the data - OsmAnd has at least 3 ways of displaying the daat - one fore cars, another for bicycle another for pedestrians. MapOut has a 3D effect for topographic information.

One of the problems ‘we’ westerners have is realizing that the world does not conform to our ideas…. If there is something that should be mapped and you cannot find a tag for it … make one up, put it (and others) on the map .. and then document it on the wiki. If you need help with that .. contact me.. or I’m sure many others.

Using the ipad to get gpx tracks may work .. depends on how good the thing works in a car. On foot should be ok. However battery life may be an issue. I’d not be too worried about roads .. usually good enough to represent them and buildings from the satellite imagery. It is the detail of where you can get water, food, fuel and camping/lodging that travelers will want first. Things like Police stations, doctors/hospitals etc come secondary but when wanted are high on the list. Those things cannot be done from the satellite imagery!

Good Luck.

Yes .. nice find .. I’ve an OSM velo map of India from October 2014 .. and it is missing there/then (and I did not notice!)

The words “on the list” may be obvious to the person who entered them … but lack clarity. I too probably fall into the same trap.

Perhaps this could have been better approached from both sides by personal contact using the OSM contact … www.openstreetmap.org/user/[user_name]? (Note that for some [user_name] should be in lower case only.) You can use the history of a node/way to find out the user_name of the last person who changed it.

Road classifications? Well that needs to be consistent across a large area to be usefull, so maybe it should stay at the present classification? It needs to be appropriate to the connecting roads too. So for me, I’d normally add features, detail .. but not change the existing classification unless there has been a large change with the road width, number of lanes, .. not just the traffic level/congestion?

I too cannot see a valid reason. I’d look forward to their explanation … could be cultural? Or just an experiment that was not meant to be seen. They may not reply. In any case worth while to contact them .. so they know things are being done and they are being ‘observed’ at least in part.

Ummm you don’t say that you contacted the person who did this… Nor that you checked that the name had not been changed from something more relevant…

Can one assume that you did this?

“Discrepancies”

of upto 10 meters can be had from a single GPS track .. and consider someone driving a car with a GPS and putting that trace into OSM.

in satellite imagery can be had due to elevation changes and a non normal view (not 90 degrees to the surface).

Does it matter? Well .. to the perfectionist yes … we all like accuracy. But as a user of the map .. you simply want a representation of what is there, some distortion is ok as long as the features are recognizable. Some paper maps deliberately distort the scale so they can better show details in certain places. So .. it matters .. a little. Don’t get to take with accuracy, better to get the more things of use on the map. If there is something you use/like that is not on the map that (to me) is far more important than getting things dimensionally ‘accurate’.

Welcome indeed! My early lessons are .. don’t delete stuff. Even if your certain it is not there.. been past it on the way to work many times.. it is not there.. go and look and I find it there… Stick to adding new stuff, minor edits to correct other stuff. If you must delete stuff .. go and look at it again .. stopped on foot, it makes so much difference.

Have to ask the Ducks if they would allow other traffic. From the press photos I’d say no other traffic as they have separate lanes alongside.

Most of the animal paths I’m thinking of would be ok, as in physically possible, for walking .. might be ok for a mountain bicycle and a trials motorcycle. Even a trail motorcycle on the easier ones. They are far from flat, never paved.

Yes it is a nice act.

As for OSM? Animal ‘paths’ can form a feature in the landscape .. and might get used by people too.

highway=path width=0.5 surface=unpaved, paved animal=yes (not documented?) animal:type=duck, kangaroo, cattle, sheep etc.

” In the West, you will find almost every road tarmaced, even the smallest one.”

Not in Australia … Both the “Plenty Highway” and the “Sandover Highway” are unpaved .. and you’d not want to run a modern family car let alone a sports car over them. There has been talk for many years (if not decades) of paving the “Plenty Highway” … don’t think I’ll see that in my life time.

I’ve just mapped a paved road from a town to a railway stop (some distance .. less than 100 but more than 40?).. there are quite unmapped paved roads around the place. But you’ll find the main unpaved roads have been mapped before all these smaller paved roads .. simply because of there importance.

Ok, The page says “This tag should only be used for highways providing access to agricultural facilities. Never use Track to mark an unpaved or unsealed road that does not serve agricultural purposes and should therefore be tagged otherwise! “

So an unpaved road in a National Park, Wildlife Reserve etc … cannot be a track? If it is sealed .. it can be a track? I mark the smaller unpaved National Park management tracks as track around here .. and that is what they are called by the ‘locals’. They look, feel and ride the same as ‘agricultural tracks’.

I think you need to remove the references to paved/unpaved from the highway classifications .. put paved/unpaved at the top. Then do the classifications, the classification should be separate from the surface. But it is my opinion! Get some others too.

Please note the Australian view, not only on highway classification but towns too. .

Hi, Thanks for your work. There are similarities to Australia .. lack of motorways etc. You might consider the page osm.wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines for ideas?

Roads .. I’ve several differences to what is on osm.wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines.

Firstly the paved or unpaved ‘problem’. I’d put this first before the road categories. At the moment a highway=track looks like it must be paved!

Secondly - unclassified roads can be used to link suburbs in a city/town .. so they can be used in urban areas.

Third … Track does not have to be used with track_type .. it is ‘nice’ when it is used but not a requirement.

There are probably some others too.

I’ll not do such ‘editorials’ myself .. I’d rather you reread it .. and compare it to the main wiki pages .. maybe even read the Australian page .. and they see what you think.

1) Rendering to ‘the map’? There are various OSM maps .. some of them bicycle specific .. and some of those at least have shown bicycle parking for some time. It is not possible for one map to show all that OSM has.

2) “Charging Stations” .. may be taken as not vehicle specific. There is discussion on this within the tagging group. It may progress to being used for ‘charging stations’ for laptops/phones in airports… Access to these ‘stations’ may be stated using the access tag. Payment methods are available by the fee tag.

I’d like to see ‘motor vehicle charging stations’ and ‘bicycle charging stations’ as separate tags. They have different on the ground appearance and different requirements.

Contributions; There is lots that can be done from satellite views. Some make mechanical additions from open sources.

These are all valuable and may be large in volume.

But the contributions made by the person on the ground may be small in volume and impact on the map… but some of these cannot be done any other way! Those are very valuable - the cost of sending a person to some far away place they don’t know to map features would be very large indeed. And as they don’t know it they will probably miss things.

So even a small contribution maybe very valuable.

Location: I have seen note with the lat/log stated on a node …. I move the node to the correct lat/log and had good agreement between the feature and bing sat view. So it is a way of ensuring the location remains with the node .. no matter if some one moves it.

Note to other mappers: I have made comments for mappers who may question a feature , for clarification.

There are many uses for the note key.. not just for the person making the note.