Yes, it is now working. Thanks for such a swift resolution.

My work is also stuck on MSIE 6

Unless I'm much mistaken, Henley Women's Regatta starts tomorrow. Probably why there are more visitors in town than usual.

I was thinking of going, but saw the poor weather forecast.

Sounds like I missed out. Weather was awful at times in North Cheshire.

I've also noticed that your junction has a set of unconnected nodes at the northernmost highway=traffic_signals node. Can I assume that these should be merged?

I guess you'd have to be blind to change it back again now! But there must be plenty of places where Yahoo is now out of date. I can think of several. In addition, I can also think of areas where GPX traces are now out of date.

Some way of removing out of date GPX points would be good. Could be tricky to implement though.

Have you uploaded your GPX trace via the "upload" tab? If not, I can't see why your trace should still be visible.

JOSM uploads the map data only

I get the same with Firefox and IE.

I even made sure I downloaded the latest version of flash - and reset - but still it says I need to install Flash

In my experience - new-ish road signs tend to leave out the apostrophes - even if older road signs include them (and perhaps the 'official' name includes them). It's not uncommon to have different spellings at either end.

If you are mapping the very northern part of the M6 - between Carlisle and Gretna - remember that this is a new piece of motorway which has been re-aligned in many places (replacing the old A74)

There was a discussion recently on the talk@ list about the "Wikipedia:Obtaining geographic coordinates" page suggesting one of the ways that editors source coordinates is from Google Maps for example - something which OSM specifically does not condone. Wikipedia has a different idea of copyright to OSM in this instance. Normally OSM takes the view that we "play safe" where possible.

Usually however, when we're doing a large-scale data import, this gets discussed on one of the talk@ lists

Have you discussed this on the list? Can we be happy that the Wikipedia data hasn't been taken from copyrighted sources?

I tend to keep the existing object, unless it's a complete mess to begin with. Adding a name to an existing object should be really easy with all of the standard editors. I don't tend to use Potlatch very much, but adding extra points in JOSM is also pretty easy usually. Splitting ways should also be straightforward in all editors.

Your data should appear shortly. The online maps don't update instantly.

Just looking at your data for that area, there are quite a lot of kinks in the track you've created - but there is more than one GPX trace - which when you average them out, might suggest that the track might not actually turn quite as much. Note that I don't know the area in question - so obviously use your judgement.

On the tracking site, the line in the HTML IE is having issues with is;
" new GitHub.Issues.Issue(2, 1.0, 0, 1240513243) "

It says, "Line 1112, Char 5, Error, 'GitHub' is undefined, Code 0"

There isn't an error report for the new OSB site, The text and various links etc on the left is there in a white band, but there rest of the screen is completely blank (and a dark gray colour)

Or rather, it would if I typed it correctly!
http://github.com/emka/openstreetbugs

Funny enough, the bug tracking thing doesn't work on IE7 either. Or at least the "issues" page doesn't. It just says "Loading..." but never actually loads. When I went to http://github.com/emka/openstreebugs that loads fine.

The link provided doesn't seem to work with IE7. Firefox looks ok. The old one does work.

I don't know what needs to change to make it work, but given the intended audience of OSB, it should support IE.

Depending exactly on the layout, the usual way is to put a short length of e.g. pedestrianised road, cycleway, footway etc. representing the length that is not drivable. This will still allow foot/cycle traffic to proceed when routing - but will prevent cars from being routed down there. You can then furnish the gap with whatever e.g. bollards etc.

Remember that the pedestrianised road, cycleway etc. should be a short way - bollards are normally on nodes.

Oh, and whilst I remember, usually the vertical accuracy on a consumer GPS is much worse than the horizontal accuracy. Even if the points were close in height, they could all have fairly large deviations from the true height (height here is of course relative to the WGS84 Geoid - not necessarily from local sea level)

Technically I doubt you could call observations an hour apart truly "independent" due to the fact that the satellites may not have moved *that* far, the atmospheric conditions could be similar.

You'd probably need to spread observations several days (weeks?) apart - but then that could take ages!

I'd be interested to see how much difference sampling every hour gives compared to sampling every second

Can I suggest also that the Getmapping imagery, as I recall, was created in or around 2000, so will be getting on for a decade out of date.

Apart from the usual things that are hard to survey on the ground, rivers, field boundaries, building outlines, landuse areas perhaps - it's not going to be much better than actually going out with a GPS and mapping properly. Some features on the imagery are probably no longer there. There will be other features on the ground now that aren't on the imagery.