👍

Heya, you’ve changed the name of node/11288138877 quite significantly, from ‘Great Slack’ to ‘Seathwaite Fell South Top’. Are you sure this is correct? Great Slack is shown on the OS maps and should be mapped as some kind of feature in the area (even if it’s not the name of the summit). As I understand it, the names on DoBIH are not necessarily historically researched, and are often constructed by whoever listed the hill. They’re not particularly canonical.

A nice improvement, good work :D

Thanks

Thanks

There is no prominence distinction between natural=peak and natural=hill, but natural=hill does no harm here so I’ve changed it in changeset/161701761

Heya, should Hartrigg be a hamlet (node/12523533576)? It’s the farm there, so I’m not sure it’s correct for it also to be a hamlet.

Why change Badger Rock (way/507498775) from natural=boulder to natural=bare_rock? It’s a single boulder, so I suggest natural=stone would be the most appropriate tag (see natural=stone).

Hiya, I’m not sure this change does what you intended: the note on the way says “pass is open to vehicles and horses with permits for one day per month.”. You removed the access=permit tagging (which sets the default access for all modes) and added motor_vehicle=permit, but didn’t add horse=permit. So now the horse access tagging is unspecified.

I think setting the default using access=permit was a bit more robust than specifying the same for each mode of transport.

Why change Hall Hill from natural=peak to place=locality? It’s a small hill: https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/7454714

Hiya, thanks for these updates to Kentmere! When editing, please remember to keep the history (osm.wiki/Keep_the_history), so rather than deleting and re-drawing Kentmere Tarn, it would have been better to modify the existing area. This preserves the record of other people’s contributions to the area.

I’ve restored the history while keeping your updated geometry in changeset/161582135, but it was quite a complex process. Let me know if anything in that changeset doesn’t look right.

I’ve re-added and re-tagged them in changeset/161568957

Hiya, instead of deleting the areas for the cut forests south of Cowgill, it would have been better to change their tagging to man_made=clearcut (man_made=clearcut). That renders them as clearcut on the map (which is useful for navigation when walking) and avoids losing the history of other people’s contributions to that bit of the map.

Fun times 🙃

Thanks, that was in Middlesbrough right? There seem to be some changes in Swansea too, meaning this changeset spans most of England

What change were you making here? There’s no changeset comment. :)

Hi again, and thanks again for trying to make sure the map around your area is correct :)

Can you please confirm what kind of way this is? Is it possible to drive a vehicle up it (with permission)? If so, it should remain mapped as highway=service. highway=path is only for footpaths (i.e. not physically possible to drive a vehicle up them). From the aerial imagery it looks like this is a driveway, not a footpath.

The access tagging (access=private) already looks correct for this way to mark it as private (to all: vehicles, pedestrians, bikes, horses, etc.).

If that’s all the case, it sounds like All Trails may have given you incorrect advice. Would you be able to summarise the conversation you had with them and what advice was given?

What’s mapped in OpenStreetMap needs to reflect what’s on the ground in reality. Changing something which is mapped as a driveway to being mapped as a path might fix routing issues on some clients for now, but if it represents a driveway in reality, someone is going to come along and change it (in good faith) back to being a driveway on the map in future. We need to get to the bottom of the routing issues.

Do you know what map software is routing people incorrectly along this way?

Thanks, and happy new year :)

Great, thanks :)

Heya, the access=private tagging on way/500401928 was probably correct, and the error there was the missing foot=designated + designation=public_footpath tagging.

access=private sets the default access, which in this case would affect the access for vehicles. foot=designated would then override that for pedestrians.

It looks like a private drive, so I suggest the correct tagging is: access=private + foot=designated + designation=public_footpath.

Hiya, does the Travelodge definitely have a storey in the roof? They didn’t last time I visited (and there are no skylights in the latest aerial imagery), so I guess some building work must have happened recently? Ta