ACS1986's Comments
Changeset | When | Comment |
---|---|---|
54843480 | over 7 years ago | Hi,
|
54743078 | over 7 years ago | Hi, Has the house on the corner of Tabley Ln and Lightfoot lane really been turned into a Post Office? It seems odd with Cottam's post office on Hoyles Ln being so close (unless that has been closed?). Anyway, if it is correct it needs an amenity=post_office tag adding. Also, the name tag should include the name of the post office. As ever, if you're unsure of anything I'm happy to help. Adam |
54784361 | over 7 years ago | Hi GMc89 and welcome to OSM. I'm writing to welcome you to OSM and because you requested a review of your first edits in the ID editor. So far everything seems fine. Please do continue to map the rest of the estate as it is completed. If you need any help, I'm a Preston-based mapper and more than happy to help/collaborate at any time.
|
54331313 | over 7 years ago | Welcome to OSM.
|
54300938 | over 7 years ago | Hi and welcome back to OSM. Firstly, I see you've been adding Morrisions supermarkets from their website data. We cannot use this without permission. Can you please confirm that you have explicitly been given permission to add this data to OSM? Secondly, please use building=retail and shop=supermarket for tagging supermarket buildings. The landuse=retail tag is for the whole premises (incl. car park etc.). Regards, Adam |
54118875 | over 7 years ago | Hi Bob
|
53985699 | over 7 years ago | Hi and welcome to OSM, I'm another Preston-based mapper. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, want to discuss something to do with local mapping etc.
|
53740770 | over 7 years ago | Hi Peter,
|
53345341 | almost 8 years ago | Sorry, I meant Anglezarke to Brinscall, not Brindle.
|
53345341 | almost 8 years ago | The access tags like bicycle= just indicate legal access, additional tags such as surface etc. indicate the characteristics of the path. A road cycling routing engine worth its salt should not route road bikes down unsurfaced tracks just because bicycles are allowed. We can't be expected to leave bicycle tags off all off- road routes - to the detriment of all off road cyclists who want to use our data - just to cater for a proportion of road cyclists with poorly coded routing software.
|
53345341 | almost 8 years ago | Hi Tom, certainly agree that I wouldn't call the path alongside The Goit a cycleway. Paths with detailed mtb:scale tags still need the basic bicycle=yes access tag or map users and most routers will think cycling is not allowed. The only exceptions are cycleways and bridleways which are taken to imply bicycle access by default.
|
52679481 | almost 8 years ago | Hi Mike
|
53091043 | almost 8 years ago | Thanks for your quick reply. Yes, I've ridden the better section as part of NCN Route 6.
|
53091043 | almost 8 years ago | Can it be cycled on a mountain bike with knobbly tyres? Changing a cycleway to a footway implies no cycling is allowed. There are lots of towpaths in England where cycling is allowed but the surface is too poor for road or touring tyres. These tend to be tagged highway=footway, bicycle=yes, surface=unpaved (there's also a smoothness tag osm.wiki/Key:smoothness which can be used). |
52982104 | almost 8 years ago | Hi manny,
Bus routes are mapped as 'relations' which effectively list of all the different road sections making up the route. Rather than delete the whole relation (ie. the whole bus route) you wanted to delete the incorrect road sections from the relation (and add the correct new sections of the route). I appreciate that this is far from obvious. Relations aren't the easiest starting point for a new mapper. I've corrected the bus route so it now goes along Pottery Lane and Southgate.
|
52982104 | almost 8 years ago | Okay, sorry. That's an unsual one. I've put that back how it was. I assume the bus route deletion was unintentional? We can't use Google maps as a source by the way.
|
52982104 | almost 8 years ago | Hi Manny,
|
52203917 | almost 8 years ago | Great stuff, thanks :) |
52203917 | almost 8 years ago | Thanks for the reply. Are you saying that the council haven't yet signed the route or allocated road numbers? If so, highway=tertiary would be appropriate until it is signed with road numbers. We are not allowed to copy information from copyrighted sources (such as council maps) unless we have explicit permission, so we do rely on the signs on the ground/local knowledge. If/when these sections are signed as the A5034 and B5569 they do need to be tagged as primary and secondary respectively. For consistency, in the UK we always use the official road number/signage for classified roads. If it's a B-road it's always 'highway=secondary' in OSM, even if it's a busy dual carriageway. If it's a white-signed A-road it's 'highway=primary', If it's a green signed A-road it's 'highway=trunk' even if it's a fairly quiet road in the Scottish Highlands.
|
52203917 | almost 8 years ago | Hi Tom,
|