Hi Harry

Because I do not know any quicker or better way to get the info. I take it that you do not know either?

I tried to use IRC as per your earlier comment some months ago & was highly unsuccessful. So far, these diary posts are 100% successful in getting rid of the spam. Good enough for me.

Seems that the people that matter make a point of reading notes on trees in Hyde Park.

You have mis-read my post; I ask for the spam to be re-moved, not re-ported. If I could remove that user myself then I would do so.

More wiki links for you:-

• Karlsruhe Schema

This is the format that I’ve used across the last 7 months to map houses + house addresses, although I never knew until a few hours ago that it was known by this name. It uses addr:* tags; they are in the wiki here:-

• Key:addr

Hello @stragu

Takes a long while to add addresses, doesn’t it? Well done for taking the time & trouble.

The wiki that you need to refer to is probably Tag:building=apartments#addressing

My suggestion is that you think of it in this manner:

1. Address numbers are most commonly placed on a way, but this is a building way.
   Thus, for buildings which are a single number or a range of numbers (eg 6-14), draw the building, and place all addr:* tags into the building. The standard OSM map will display “housenumber housename” within the building outline.
2. Alternatively, address numbers may be placed in a node. In general, the consideration is, I think, that this will be done to quickly place a large range of addresses which later will each be incorporated into a building way.
3. A combination of the two above is used with apartments (flats, condominiums) where the entire apartment gets a building way, and the entrances are marked as nodes on the building outline (tag: entrance=*). The various addr:* tags can then be distributed between the building way & the entrance nodes.
4. Finally, your situation of a complex of buildings as an apartment complex. For this, @Glassman’s is the perfect example: draw each building in the complex, marking up the addresses for each individual building in the normal way. Then, draw an area to mark the complex perimeter, placing landuse=residential + name=name-of-complex in the area.

HTH

Hi @naoliv
Your words are interesting & would be applicable if only Junkstore (as the obvious example) had been removed 23 minutes later, rather than still in place 23 days later. So, sorry, but you are speaking the exact opposite to the truth.

Good point, @Stereo, I never thought of that. Bureaucrats using a terrorism excuse to cover up their inaction. Yup, sounds certain to me.

Humour?

This is how I’ve solved the ‘Official name’ / ‘Local name’ issue for my local streets (check out Donkey Hill to see it in action):

• Official: name=Saint Bartholomew's Road
• Local: ref=Donkey Hill

Works very well with (importantly) both names showing up on the map.

Inglés: I use OSMTracker under Android and can import GPX under JOSM and it all works fine.
Spanish: Yo uso OSMTracker bajo Android y puede importar GPX bajo JOSM y todo funciona bien.

Thanks @Stereo. I’m only human, so that comment helps encourage me a lot.

Gaah! The street is West View Road, not West End View (we cannot edit mistakes in comments, unlike posts).

(road patches) is that for the place shown in the photo?

Hi @wyrmon, I’ve just checked for you. Whilst the the Church is the same one that would claim any Chancel tax (‘Gedling’), the road in the photo above is different. That road is Chatsworth Avenue. The photo was taken from just above where Cambridge Street and Burlington Road meet Chatsworth Avenue on the northern slope at the eastern end of Marshall Hill. The embarrassing thing for Gedling Borough Council is that all 3 of those roads are their responsibility, and thus they are responsible for those useless road patches.

The chap that I spoke to lives in West End View, which is further to the east; at that point Marshall Hill has sloped down & a valley + a road (Gedling Road) passes through North-South. This is a photo of West End View:

It is typical for unadopted roads like West End View to be in a very poor state of repair, but you may notice that West End View is in better shape than that patch of Chatsworth Avenue!

Hi @skquinn

I wrote the piece on Ecclesiastical Parishes after interviewing the Revd at St James, Porchester (I believe that he may also have a position at Gedling church). After he explained the situation re: marriages I said “Ah, so there’s still not a full separation between church & state yet, then”. I knew nothing of the Chancel Tax at that stage, but he gave me a very dirty look.

I’m quite sure that congregations in the US are responsible for financially supporting their church - after all, who else is going to do it? In the UK, the Chancel Tax would originally have been perfectly reasonable, as those that owned land had pots of money to help support their church. Today, every middle-class family aspires to own their own home, but very few attend church. They worship a different god altogether.

The tragedy for the Wallbanks was in part to live in a parish that had been almost entirely denuded of parishioners, which meant that they had a perfectly unfair portion of the tax to pay. The sole bright spot in their story may be that, because of it, the Chancel tax may become the Cancelled tax.

Using 10966 2016-09-05 22:21:00 under Debian:

I use copy (Ctrl-C) + paste (Ctrl+V) all the time, mostly with houses but also other objects. Works fine, no problems.

@Vincent de Phily: > (unadopted roads)
It’d be great if you had the time to write a wiki page explaining what it is

That is the sort of thing that I save for times when it’s impossible to work outdoors mapping. Now that it is September I’m sure that such times will soon arrive (although fixing the JOSM plugin terracer is first).

@Vincent de Phily:
thanks for the link to the OSM Help site; no info there yet on unadopted roads. That site was impressive for me due to it’s auto-redirect from the HTTP link that you gave to a HTTPS url. That is the behaviour that I complained in my original post that the OSM Wiki site neglected to perform.

Hi @maxerickson

You provide compelling evidence to back up @Vincent de Phily’s assertion on use/no use of noexit=yes. Looks like I need to change my practice with that. Bugger! I cannot recall specifics on that diary entry, which raises suspicion that my recall is faulty (would not be the first time, but is still damn annoying).

You can improve your search results by modifying your use of the site parameter; never enter the protocol, normally forget the sub-domain & path:

site:openstreetmap.org/user/ noexit=yes => 9 results
site:openstreetmap.org/ noexit=yes => 377 results

Checking out the above also allowed me to spot the wiki for noexit.

Thanks for your input; most helpful. I’m still waiting for input on unadopted roads, however.

@Vincent de Phily:

What’s an “unadopted road” ?

The following comes from a UK Government publication:

‘Unadopted’ roads are those roads not maintained by a highway authority as defined by Highways Act 1980

For most unadopted residential roads the duty to maintain it falls to the frontagers, ie the owners of the property fronting that road, which may include those where the side, or length, of their property fronts the unadopted road.

Local taxes are often lower for unadopted roads, as the occupiers can be responsible for road maintenance. Thus, one of the clear signs of an unadopted road is it’s exceptionally poor state of repair.

I’ll add some of the above into the post.

Whilst I cannot recall the specifics, a Diary post on (I think) USA routing problems mentioned continual difficulties with cul-de-sacs missing noexit=yes. Since reading that post I religiously add that value to each cul-de-sac.

Thanks @Math1985.

Maybe it is due to Google Translate (using Chromium), but I found it nearly unreadable.