I welcome any improvement to the default style as long as we still have blue for motorways and green for primary routes in the UK. ;-)

A quick side question: do we have database backups in case of a serious vandalism incident?

We also recently passed the 4 millionth relation.

Not all zoom levels will update like magic. Zoom levels 13 or closer get updated more often (from about 5 minutes to 24 hours depending on the load) than Zoom levels 12 or further (around a month or more).

After talking with will_p I can see that not every editor can see to what the demands of every locale are. At this point I am confident that this idea encouraged mass editing, whether intentional or not: as I speak someone might have come up with a new tag for a good reason.

UPDATE: unfortunately some users are objecting to the clean-up of some tags: will_p messaged me about shop=photo_studio meaning something different, i.e.:

• shop=”photo_studio” - a shop with a studio where people go to have their photographs taken. These shops do not usually sell other products or print photos except those taken in the shop.
• shop=”photo” - a general purpose tag for a shop that prints photos or sells photo or camera related materials/equipment.

I’ve acted on a few erroneous tags but shop=pharmacy is so widespread in Germany that updating them all might take longer to encourage the local editors to just use amenity=pharmacy.

Another wet day idea would be to convert railway stations into the latest public_transport scheme, adding the stop positions, station buildings and all and then combining that into a relation. This is what I do for London, with lots of details included for the manual: osm.wiki/London_public_transport_tagging_scheme

The phrase relating to vandalism was for an unlikely occurrence of such, given that I’ve encountered a few incidents (unsourced bitcoin nodes, unexplained closure of notes and the lingering effects of the “improving security” vandal that someone told me about.

The problem on this occasion was the node added by Adormo was poorly named and located, hence raising initial suspicions. Further checks this morning resulted in the node being added back because it was part of notable place, albeit poorly named and poorly located (it was in fact part of the London Open House at some point). However, the problem still stands because I have struggled to verify a marketing business near Finsbury Park.

I have got in touch with Adormo, who added the node, with the following recommendations to make it less spammy: which is as follows:

1. Checking that the location is accurate, if possible.
2. Checking that the address and post code of the location, including the house number, is correct, if possible.
3. Checking that the name and description of the location is not spam-like, or better still, put it under the tag “adormo:name” and “adormo:description” respectively, similar to what we did with Naptan bus stops in the UK.
4. Using “source=Adormo”, so we know where it is coming from.

Anything else to add?

Driving trips over the last three years, as well as recent public transport trips within the M25 (see 20 November 2012 post).

That’s not the only problem Googel users are facing: check out the dispute over road colours as well here and here.

Personally I don’t mind doing very detailed information such as sidewalks and individual crossings. I may not be the one with a GPS but even with the stuff I have, with what’s given as a base, I aim to make the curves as curvy as possible.

I don’t know, maybe one day we would have a route planner for planes, so taxi-lines might be needed in future. Who knows?

I did fix the primary road issue. That was a mistake.

I don’t remember there being a forum for OSM other than the help service at https://help.openstreetmap.org. Is that the forum?

Maybe hide the editing options until they are logged in and explicitly allow remote editing. That might reduce confusion.

Only OSM has street light data and speed limit information, but OSM has more for detailed analysis and demographics than just planning an odd journey.

If a relation was boundary-based like how the boroughs are done then we would have an issue at, for example, Hyde Park Corner where the A4 underpass is part of the zone but the roundabout that carries the Inner Ring Road above it is not. What I have done this morning is create a relation-based prototype which associates affected ways. It can be found at osm.org/browse/relation/2792532.

So far, I am not aware if I can create “toll:motor_vehicle=yes” as a relation.

Try using the tag natural=sand. ;-)

@robbieonsea It is perfectly fine to cover trunk roads because cyclists will use them as they are legally all-purpose, unless signed. The city of Rome already has comprehensive lighting data (ITO World) and I am hoping that London will follow suit to become one of the largest metropolitan areas with lighting information on OSM.

The current progress can be seen here, yet I only e-mailed ITO just now about inconsistent data updates, where newer information were showing before those introduced over 7 days ago.