Just checking that you’ve read and are following osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines …

Erm - as well as the content, you might want to check the formatting of what you have posted here. Diary entries are parsed with “Kramdown, which is a markdown-like processing. You can re-edit it and swap between “edit” and “preview” to make sure that it looks OK.

Some of the discussion history from even earlier is also worth a read - for example here and here.

@RobJN I agree that it absolutely makes sense to add tags like that. It’s also true that “footway” in England and Wales is used on a wide variety of “ways you can walk from A to B” (see osm.org/way/839038651/history , the discussion on osm.org/changeset/135293564 and links from there for discussion about “difficult” footpaths). It’s not been used for things like the “scuba path” though, and the incident where cyclists were told they could cycle along footpaths in royal parks wouldn’t have happened had footway been used instead of path.

Making the label text smaller means that it looks a bit less rubbish most of the time. Water names are now dependent on way area (but there’s more to do with other features there).

Re prow_ref, both maps should have that - raster and vector. There are a couple of obvious differences though:

• The vector text is mostly larger and a bit more uniform in size.
• The vector text sometimes appears only at vector zoom 17, which is probably due to label clash issues, and needs investigating.
• The label text sometimes looks rubbish which I believe I have seen logged somewhere, but it might also be something that I can work around.

@ابوبندر العصم I’ve answered one of your previous numerous questions at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/how-to-install-garmin-maps-in-a-local-language-such-as-arabic/120517/3 .

Hello,

I’m guessing that you’re complaining that some software on your mobile phone is displaying a location that is not correct.

That’s nothing to do with OpenStreetMap; you will have to complain to whoever makes that phone software.

Today, near Bor osm.org/#map=17/6.178444/31.578194 , another masterpiece: a lot of triangular (one 2600 sqm trapezoidal) buildings, and 3 tourism=camp_site

To be clear, this wasn’t created today. From looking at an example edit osm.org/way/1003640656 , the changeset was 3 years ago: osm.org/changeset/114107972 . The mapper made 19 edits in 2021, and contributed no further to OSM. The HOT project is https://tasks.hotosm.org/projects/11218 and the organiser of that project is osm.org/user/ngumenawesamson . They are still active in OSM, and I have commented on a recent changeset of theirs suggesting that they may wish to read this diary entry.

What we don’t know is who ran the mapathon (or whatever) that prompted the changeset that created the triangular buildings (or if there even was anyone supervising it). We do however know two things:

• that the person who created the HOT task hasn’t bothered to look at the quality of the work done in the name of that HOT task, or has looked and hasn’t bothered to tidy it up.

• that there aren’t enough people looking at “changesets by new users” in this part of the world. The problem changeset here even had review_requested=yes (automatically set by iD, I guess), and no-one has noticed it for 3 years.

In this particular example it’s probably too late to contact the original mapper. It’s not too late to tidy up the problem data (now there’s a diary entry pointing at it, I’m sure someone will de-trangularise the buildings). However, what would be really useful would be to have a look for much more recent review_requested=yes changes, and offer helpful advice (after an initial “hello and welcome” message).

Best Regards,

Andy

Hi tyr_asd,

What are your thoughts about resolving the issues that make iD basically unsuitable to edit relations at all in OSM? Most of the edits that you can see at osm.org/user/SomeoneElse2/history are fixing issues that were intrduced by mappers using iD (comments such as “filled in gap in” etc.). I’ve raised a number of these at https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+author%3ASomeoneElseOSM+relation (and other people have created “relation” issues too). The most egregious problem is simply this:

iD does not display the object IDs of relations

It’s not possible to distinguish from membership of a “relation of ways” from a higher level “relation of relations”, leading to errors that need to be fixed such as at e.g. osm.org/changeset/155217400 . iD also does not display other relevant details of relations (see the iD issue list) but the lack of display of the object ID literally makes it impossible for a user to check that they are adding something to the correct relation.

Best Regards,

Andy

Is the name perhaps a problem? We already have https://openstreetmap.community/ (“OSM Communities”) and https://community.openstreetmap.org/ (“OpenStreetMap Community Forum”).

pedestrian <> footway ?

I’m not entirely sure what the question is there if it is “is a highway=pedestrian the same as highway=footway” the answer is “no it isn’t”, even though the default access rights I’m suggesting (in the absence of other tags) are the same.

the vexed issues of highway=track and highway=service

I was planning to do that in a follow-up diary to avoid confusing the message in this one with different designations and ORPAs etc…

Please don’t get too creative. To take a recent example, I can’t see anything underneath osm.org/way/1300140005 at all.

Perhaps other people should try going to https://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id#map=19/-14.74891/-75.07396 (after creating an account on the api06 dev server) and seeing if they can see anything in the underlying imagery there?

You need to go to https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments.php?uid=10216874

Click on a changeset there, such as osm.org/changeset/151640770

For each changeset, read the comments.

Type your reply on the box.

Click “comment”.

You have just emailed me saying “I was adding new roads and other features to the map based on new imagery”.

However, let me repeat:

Lots of people have commented on your changesets. These will have been emailed to you and you can also see them at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments.php?uid=10216874 . When osm.org/user_blocks/16396 expires, please do comment on these changesets in reply.

You have just emailed me saying “I was connecting the powerlines to substations and adding detail”. However, let me repeat:

Lots of people have commented on your changesets. These will have been emailed to you and you can also see them at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments.php?uid=10216874 . When osm.org/user_blocks/16396 expires, please do comment on these changesets in reply.

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM’s Data Working Group.

Hello Maps Man,

Lots of people have commented on your changesets. These will have been emailed to you and you can also see them at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments.php?uid=10216874 . When osm.org/user_blocks/16396 expires, please do comment on these changesets in reply.

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM’s Data Working Group.

As I write this comment, what this diary entry currently says is a gross distortion of what actually happened.

Do you have anything positive to offer this community or merely just more trolling and untruths?

Before thinking about making any further changes, please discuss your existing ones with the people that have commented on them. These will have been emailed to you and you can also see them at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments.php?uid=10216874 . Please do comment on these changesets in reply.

In addition, please use good changeset comments, not just things like “Updates to the map”. See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments .

OpenStreetMap is a shared map, and we need to work together to update it. You are ignoring everyone else - that is not OK.