Hi,
Thank you for the change. I'll try to go there to check details, but on first glance the updated information is probably correct, but does this mean that the nearby house 'Ashley' should not be there?

osm.wiki/Key:bridge

Hi @mapeing & welcome to OSM.

At the Western end of this changeset you've created a couple of tunnels, one on the B260, however the A2 above them is already tagged with bridge=yes - the roads under a bridge don't need to be tagged as a tunnel.

Also, the new roads that you've created as tunnels didn't need to be created? If possible amend existing features so we don't lose the history.

It's a lot easier if you keep the changesets to a smaller geographical area. I haven't looked at the rest of the changeset.

Hi @ptriol and welcome.

Quite a crowded area to start on - looks good to me & thank you for your contribution.

I often walk into the centre of Swanley, but its easy to overlook changes that are needed.

Feel free to reach out if you want to chat.

Regards, and hope to see more from you in the future.

Tallguy

Thanks for that - not sure how I ended up using the wrong key. I'll do a search and change to the correct one. Probably be able to do it Sunday evening.

Hi, not sure why I ended up with shop=angling instead of shop=fishing. I've now edited the shop so that it now reads 'shop=fiishing'.

Hi,
Thanks for picking up on that - my mistake. Have you corrected it, or shall I?

Hi, sorry about that - I accidentally left one area open without uploading, and then started on another - both were uploaded at the same time. It's not something I'm planning to make a habit of.

Regards

Nick

Hi,
I've revisited, and cycled along, this 'way' again - latest imagery is on mapillary and Kartaview. There are still no signs indicating its intended purpose. It is next to a footpath, separated by a fence. It looks just like a cycleway, and the tyre marks on it show that local cyclists are using it, but there are no signs to indicate its legal status, or intended purpose. I've returned the tags to the way I initially tagged it. It's on a route I frequently travel, so I will add designation it/when it appears.

Regards

Nick (Tallguy)

Hi,
Thanks for keeping track of the boundaries, and adding most of them as far as I can see.

I've lived in Swanley for over 30 years, but have had connections here for much longer. The names I've used are the names that friends who live in Swanley would use for the area that they live.

The 'White Oak' node was actually added by someone else a couple of years ago - it's correct for the area as far as I know. The local sports centre is White Oak leisure centre, and the Bowls centre is also white oak. Until it was renamed Horizon Primary, the school was White Oak Junior. The dentists are White Oak Dental practice. This also coincides with the local voting area. I know there is, or was, a local community group also with White Oak in their name.

St Mary's has a church, and school remaining with the name in them, both on St Marys Road, but the secondary school had St Mary's in its name at one point in the distant past. St Mary's is on our voting papers, and the leaflets currently being posted through our doors.

Christchurch has a church and community centre, and in the past the schools name included Christchurch. Its also on the voting papers for the residents.

High Firs is the name I've always known that estate as, and it has the High Firs County Primary School there.

The OS data shows another area, between White Oak and Christchurch, but I'm not aware of local people using a name for that, so I've not added it. It's probably St Bartholomews from the church and school, but the people I've known living there have always referred to places like 'off of Northview', or 'near Swanley Lane'. It could also have been 'New Barn' as Swanley Park was previously called 'New Barn Park' - really confusing as there is another area called New Barn Park, which is a couple of miles away near Longfield. Altogether too vague for me, so not added.

The data set was downloaded from the Ordnance Survey opendata site - I think the link is https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open/BoundaryLine?_ga=2.160548157.1865002306.1619649726-1447813470.1619303355, and the filename I have is bdline_essh_gb.zip

The particular boundaries are from The Polling Districts England Region, and the shapefiles were (I think from my notes) 16311 to 16316

My interest in these areas was sparked by the strange results for searches that Nominatim, and other apps, produce. At some point in the past a node was added just off of Hockenden Lane for 'Upper Hockenden'. This resulted in searches for, for instance, Crescent Gardens, producing a result with Hockenden in the name - really confusing because we have the border with London Boroughs nearby, and Hockenden itself is actually classed as part of London.

The neighbourhood nodes and borders that I've added should (maybe!) result in more sensible search results, and will fit in with the names that we all use locally.

Regards
Nick (Tallguy)

Hi,
It's definitely not "access=no", but I need to re-visit it to see what the signs (if any) say it is.

Mapillary has my photo's of it at https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.39035979277778&lng=0.16605606277777776&z=17&pKey=GekD28Phkx3wpU3svhMBUC&focus=photo - it is brand new, and looks like a cycle path, and is being used by local cyclists as a cycle path, but there were no signs when I cycled along twice in October.

Thanks for picking up on this @rskedgell

Regards

Nick
Nick

Thank you

Thank you - sorry I hadn't realised it was still there, I just saw the 'deleted' bit in the changeset.

osm.org/node/7359917960/history

Hi, in addition to the earlier discussion, it's 'separate' not 'seperate' in the tag - if you've used it elsewhere you'll have the same problem of it not being recognised.

Hi JayTurnr - I'm not sure if there are any others, but you've accidentally deleted a gate in this changeset - grateful if you could put it back please.

Regards

Tallguy

Please see discussion on osm.org/changeset/96021663#map=16/51.4130/0.1845

Hi @JayTurnr

In your first comment you have linked to an old 'help' entry last updated in 2013, but have failed to mention either;
osm.wiki/Land_use_and_areas_of_natural_land
or,
osm.wiki/Land_use
or
osm.wiki/How_to_map_landuse
all of which are considerably more recent, and indicate that there are several different ways of mapping land use - there is not one correct way.

I fail to see how I can survey an area over numerous visits, then accurately map it, and yet have my contribution labelled by you as 'I can see you've gone to a great extent to add many details, however, some of the features you added are in fact more harmful than useful.'

osm.org/way/136164600/history , until you deleted it and many surrounding features, mapped a traffic island and the turn lane accessing it. The before (mapped by me 9 years ago) & the 'after' recently mapped by you may be seen at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=101519435#19/51.41313/0.16549. Please see osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer, which also covers tagging for the router. **traffic_calming=island** has over 27,000 instances mapped as a node, over 37,000 mapped as a 'way' (drawn as an island), and a further 418 as a relation. I suggest that you have your changeset reverted - you can find out how to do this on the wiki, or ask on the Talk-GB mailing list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb. If you need any further help in having your changeset reverted, please get back in touch with me.

I notice that you have also been deleting sections of pathways with the adjacent golf course, and then retracing them - the approved method of making improvements is to adapt the original, not delete other peoples work.

Regards

Tallguy

Thank you

Hi, I'm not sure if you have any new information, but I think you will find this is actually a footpath with no vehicle access. I don't visit that area very often, but unless you have strong evidence I would not tag it with something that would allow a motor vehicle to drive there.

Regards

Nick