next chunk:-
I use three fields to carry the name or number or assoiciated marks of garages and referances to teach OSM about the offical groupings and blocks used by operators to manage there garages stocks {this was to allow better data services on to the back processing of annotated website maps for customers to pick and find new garages to rent}

see:-
http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decH/GarageLocationsSouthfieldParkandStClements.htm
http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decH/Garages_to_rent_occw.htm
and
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=z0nFLiwzFNIc.kVKYCvg26Rew&msa=0&ll=51.754028,-1.230125&spn=0.103077,0.220757

next chunk:-
I did specific site surveys to collect the marks, numbers and and names on all the garages I've mannaged to put into osm plus other that ran out of time for.

ok in chunked formed:-

I intended to promote OSM to the garage management teams of operators like the council, whose then system was relient on google and was so week that it had confusion-making location descrepancies on it.

ok I just wote a very long essey about the tags that I need left and fetures I need to restore to make the systems I use that rely them to work and the deeaper phlosiphy behind the tags I'd used but moentarilly left the edit box an the text has just all been lost. So I'll try it chunks or put into a diary edit instead. I've been to repair the broken data links but my time is short and the diversion a waste of effort.

I found that they are still using it as an option on elgin/google/warkishire roadworks site that actually covers most of the contry which is handy. I have a picture (screen shoot of a bridge restiction on a road ref of C205/01a which is on the bridge in the middle on the road I marked as the C205 the suffix might be about directions acarrageways or serial numbering along a rout with more than one prehaps?
This sigt also lists the
NPLG-USRN's too if you set the customise my map function for NSG options then click on the highlighted streets and then the USRN link gives more info about the road. So this being country wide could be useful elsewhere too.

My mistake I found it was Stratford's councial site. I'm out of time tonight but I am going to have a at them in the next few days.

I did this because the Council "rubbed-out" the cycleway, it is deceased cycleway at that point. a solitary line is present as some type of guide to stop something (not defined) from going into the bus stop. but if you actually stand there there is no cycleway for a patch.
so it is Bicycle=no there!!
I looked yesterday and there's another bit cut at the crossing so with not even any guide line (I still not quite sure what is supposed to have meant) that bit will revert to bicycle=no foot=yes type footway=sidewalk I can appreciate that this might cause problems but it'd be better to think about the cyclist using this road-feature and make the mapping system cope with breaks if the council is going to start cutting the cycleways more often.
ie. don't shoot the messenger!!! Go talk to Oxfordshire County Council about it.

Sorry it tock a while to get back to this I think I had a lot of things elsewhere demanding my attension. I had a lock back at this this morning and I think it was based on a old maintinance schedual that has been removed since I began a A for Alcester.
It tried looking for some of the original maps but I wasn't looking I think in the same place as before so still to work on that they really do seem to be my text orintated some from reports and others clearly spat out of a database by the looks of things. Its on my pending list to look some more later tonight.

With regard to the only a few D roads covered, thats down to the fact that was the one in the first report I was working from so the wear of the rooads didtated who got in the list I first used and that it took a suprisingly long time to figure some of them out. Its not somewhere I know well so it was a bit of a hunt for some. Some were hard to judge the start and finish of and I helped whith a mystry gardencity road naming anomerly along the way.

My plan was to work steadly on a small batch at a time till I either hit a critical mass or run out of roads to find, so there was planned to be more of them.

There are some places were C, D and U roads have been found on signs but these were out of paperwork.

there's a posibility that the papers won't be availble soon so Iwill have to look out for them I wanted to re serch the council contact of the web team/highways but this morning I spent the time looking for the map instead. I'll let you know when I get a breackthrough. OSM and bing both have C roads in Kent and Reading. Readings are fairly new so may have made it to signage.

Thank you for the nice information. I am wondering how closely people bound the area to the past when they use it in the present for indirectly linked purposes like:- http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decH/GarageLocationsCowleyAirfieldandBarnsRoad.htm ? Maybe close but the edges might have been conveniently adjusted by officials. IMHO I've no idea just it would be good to know and have it mapped so people could understand those that still use the term.

Where is the list?

I've received complaints about this road being misrepresented.
Ordence Survey and Goverment Departments local and National treat this as a major road.
It has been rebuilt twice this mellenium because it has become worn out with traffic use.
It has so many vehicals that it can still have a traffic queue stretching from Longwall to Turl Street in the rush hour when the through traffic restictions are still in place.
Its the main 24hr spine route for two of the lorry access zones.
Its wide enough to take five lanes of traffic and two more are dedicated to masses of local student tourist pedestians.
It collects all the bus routes from the west side of the city to run down it and around and down St. Aldate's.
As the Buses act as the Citys mass transit system and the majority of people working and living in the city avoid driving to the City Centre as it is officialy discoraged through inflated parking charges and a rejection of additional private parking provisons such as adding an underground car park to a college building when its not been already...

In what sort of way is it *not* a major primary road???

I can understand that a simple representaion of a way running like there is no time restrictions on minority users like cars, but I have spent 7 hours drawing features to highlight and premote the rendering of the traffic gate the runs for only about 10 meters about the width of the carrageway there.
Unlike in the past when it was a single line of one colour I left it delibratly as a tertiary middle (when it should be the same as the rest) to delibratly force renders to make it look different to map readers. So on this basis the Note tags should be and had had a bit more time would have been removed for being out of date. I stopped short of using area:highway tags to show the area of a central reservation runnig from the gate to just beyond Queens Lane. For the reasons noted on the notes entered into OSM at that place.

I had warned these routes were likly to be reupgraded when I got the Ref's reentered on these roads last time they went as they are used in some signs and directions espcially for lorry drivers whose delivery diagrams include them.

So where do I have to take the argument to it mentions a list but not where to find it..

I'm looking into want the council prefers as they use them and a default rendering of OSM so I want to let them be aware of the changes that might occur plus how to re render them back first. So its on my pending list...

I don't use the site plans for traceings wich could be questionable or direct data conversion to enter on to OSM which is not likly to pass at all but I do use the planning records to understand more about what I trying to map espcially when other sources of potential traceing imagery are diffcult to understand and use because of trees and sites are either new or difficult to access.
Effectivly I'm not useing OS data directly and am combining it with a range of data sources and survey visits to effectivly redraw from scratch into OSM (its why it is oftern only relitly possitionly accurate and of low sensitivity {in meseament terms obvioussly}.

planning documents can allow you to understand why an old wall is where it is and what it used to be related to for positional queing with a bing/sat image.

Also the non map documents can give additional information for tagging and ref's such as tree surveys hight data. roof and level and basement info etc.

I think this use of publicly available infomation to make a better informed entry is probably ok. It kind of like avoiding plagerism while reading around a subjuct for an assey entry.

Note should be taken also that infomation given in planning might not have produced a end result that matches the plans so site investigations are still important, to check stuff.

sorry page update missed your reply. I´ll talk to some local residents and continue to sort out the schools there. I think I just hyjacked someones land use and cut it to fit the district nammed after the main road in and the Hall at the centre which owned the whole estate originally. I think other part begins with Ty... see the long school address I put in from local planning dept..

ok I just found some evidance for the link but the area is bigger and nammed as a different district, so a boundy shape tagging needs seperating from the landuse?

I was wondering how you determined the extension of the estate boundry?
I split the two as both areas are different on the ground and just neighbour each other.
Idon't think you easily reach White cross lane without traveling out over the river on the B4263 first?

Hello TheKnightWho, I've been looking at your continuation of the C107 in this changeset and wondered if you had seen a sign about it?
I ask as the initial infomation I've found out about it only relates to it being numbered only within the Reading Borough hence I thought it was stopping at the border. There is a logic if it is being sign to continue it in oxfordshire but that isn't a common thing as the numbering for C,D,E,F,U (or in Gloss road classes 3-6 [https://web.archive.org/web/20090208223826/http://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=3731]) is locally arranged internally for maintinace and other purposes like : [http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/corporate/committe.nsf/0/84afe92892deed4480256bbf0048230b/$FILE/ww1%20Highway%20Maintenance%20Plan%202002%2003.pdm.pdf]. if you have seen signs or no that it extends further I'd be intreasted to know. The records on reading most cited are the following [http://www.cbrd.co.uk/c-roads/img/reading.jpg] & [http://www.cbrd.co.uk/c-roads/reading.pdf]

ok made these corrections though the building needs work I wanted to get a part in so the relation ship for offsetting to imagery made more sense it's a scale thing with bing vertical imagery and fuzzy closeups with too much shadow and overhanging things the bing non-vertical images are miles better most of the time but not good for vertically view horizontal aligning by trace. the parallax lean has the building coming over the bin overspill area so it is tough to comprehend IMHOATT.

ok I think I was rushed I only had a 5 miniute slots to log in and draw at that time because the computer was a reboot timer in a library, so it is a bit rushed in those places.

Disabled symbol = 267F in unicode (I didn't have time to look it up

the building needed realigning and the note should have passed into a fixme tag from the name tag.

I read your confirmation after making the change last night. I'm looking at adding the council boundries to it.

The United Nations has the following deposit:-
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/IRL_2014_Order86.pdf
I think that may go south of the Rockall site.
I think that Ireland was not so intreasted in the land than the waters around for future mining. I think the UK had the strongest claim on the land but other places in the old Viking empire wanted in on any oil or gas, so it became under debate for some years but if the eez in this submission goes south then take the claim off on OSM.
I find OSM stuggles with sea boundries a lot {look at gibralter vs spain} probably as its increasingly global wiki system and if boundries on land can sometimes be disputed boundries in the sea are even more so poorly universaly recognised until the treaties get signed.
Another confusion is that EEZ's and the newest international law of the sea are still only several decades inforce so old notions are still being tested by conflicting ones.
Eventually most places with overlaps will have signed demarcation treties like the one worked out in the north sea, so people can be comfortable. The south china sea might sea it dealt with by war though first.

So if you find the lines in the above miss it change it. I'd just left n the quandry as I'd not found a good enough answer at the time from the UK's foriegn office website.