Thank you!

Yes - it's the indoor what does it. Now you've set it back to area=yes, it's triggered.

There is a green tag at the second link below - it says "Redundant area tagging Tags, `indoor`, already make this an area. ", it's connected to way 152107576. The first link below shows more other bits of inscrutable metadata.

http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/error/c76368e1-3768-2170-b4dd-35a54e14184e

http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#username=DaveF&zoom=18&lat=51.515731&lon=-0.098684&item=3200&level=1%2C2%2C3&tags=&fixable=

(I think)

It doesn't flag railway=platform. It flags indoor=yes.

Looking back it it now, I think was was the rule that matches everything "indoor".

https://github.com/osm-fr/osmose-backend/blob/master/plugins/TagFix_Area.py#L29

If you look at the indoor structures of Bank LUL station, they also are highlighted for area=yes removal - http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=18&lat=51.513054&lon=-0.088181&item=3200&level=1%2C2%2C3&tags=&fixable=

In case it helps you figure out what went wrong - it looked like some of the building:parts got reduced to lines... as if all their nodes were selected, and then the 'L' key was hit to make them all conform to a straight line. In a few other cases groups of nodes got snapped together.

It's all sorted now - I was able to revert those two changesets, and then ONLY upload the Stratford nodes and objects. So phew!

The changes you where trying to do should all be intact too.

The complex part was figuring out which changesets caused the problem. It turns our object histories don't include node movements!

OK, tried it myself, with changeset 88181456 . I don't think I've borken anything you were working on here. Learned a lot about JOSM in the process!

Hi - Something has gone badly wrong with the shape - the painstakingly 3d-ifyd shape of the Moxy Hotel, Unite Students and Legacy Tower. I think this changeset has something to do with it please please have a look and consider reverting. Changeset 88094856 also relevant? The buildings involved are in relations - 9062169, 9221112 and 9221111.

It's always struck me as unfortunate that the UK two-letter code is GB. (Since I grew up in the part of the UK that is not part of Great Britain). Perhaps that makes me over-sensitive to this sort of thing.

Agreed that if it is there, it should be ISO3166-1.

I wonder if the KZ/SU folk are tagging what the *wish* to be the case, not what the facts on the ground are?

Thanks again for your patience.

I had always thought of the addr:* tags as being like postal addresses. E.g. what would you write on an envelope destined for that letterbox. But having now read all the way to the bottom of the "addr" page on wiki, I see what you mean.

If you want to tell what country, province, nation, county etc. the building is in you can consult the relevant boundary relation (e.g. osm.org/relation/62149). This one is appropriately tagged with the ISO code for the UK, e.g. GB.

My conclusion is that it's not necessary to modify existing addr:country tags to match the ISO code. And it would certainly be a big job to do it thoroughly and consistently!

Thanks for taking the time and effort to respond so fully.

Why would the country part of an address follow the ISO two-letter country system?

Having poked around a bit, I now think it *was* a national school, but not any more. I'll take the amenity tag off it later today.

Hiya - In this changeset, you added Cairncastle National School no.1. Are you sure that's what it is? Asking because that naming convention is not normally seen this side of the border, and because there is no school at that location on the NI DoE lists.

hoorah!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/87052314

Good stuff. We'll need to keep our eyes peeled when the hoardings come down - there is some chance that some of the construction sites include temporary storage/access/marshalling areas that could be returned to park use in due course.

I would be for those areas to come out of the Park. The truth-on-the-ground is that they are not available for park activities, so they should come out of the OSM park area.

I suspect the current boundary is actually the area ceded to LLDC (the park operator) who 'own' that land (or administer it on behalf of the boroughs) and receive rents from users like UCL. That sort of thing is not usually shown on OSM.

Though we do have the larger area where LLDC are the Planning Authority. (r10642038)

Fantastic!

You're correct! I've fixed this via changeset 85425225

osm.org/changeset/85425225

I think it's a pity there's no widely-used OSM tag of that expoxy'd(?) gravel onto asphalt stuff. I think the trade call it pea-grit. There's acres of it at QEOP!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84892792