Thanks for fixing this :)

Oh good. Thanks for checking!

Heya, this is a great load of house numbers to add, thanks for taking the time to survey!

I’ve just split up the one building which was accidentally a semi, at 37/38 Aspen Close (way/1413247767). I had to guess which way round the house numbers are, so if you can remember which way round they are and double check my edit (changeset/172130377) that would be great :)

Super, thanks! And thanks for the rest of your edits around Haweswater recently. It's nice to see some more detail being added to the place :)

Heya, please be mindful of osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions and consider using more specific tagging for Bowderthwaite Bridge and the sheepfold SW of it, rather than labelling them in their names.

e.g. A osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix for the bridge, and building=sheepfold or man_made=sheepfold for the sheepfold.

Ta :)

Reported where?

Deleting the name from a campsite won’t mark it as closed in OSM. Instead, you need to change name=blah to old_name=blah, and tourism=campsite to disused:tourism=campsite as per the osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix documentation. Thanks

I’ve changed the church access road to maxspeed=5mph in changeset/172003094 as per the above reasoning.

Thanks! :) That should reduce the chance of future confusion.

Perhaps also add tourism=attraction and sport=parachuting as per sport=parachuting?

Their website seems to position them as an attraction (anyone can book a skydive) rather than, say, a club (you have to become a member before you can skydive).

Thanks for the updates here! A quick note on deletions: where possible it’s better to keep an existing area, tweak its layout (including splitting or combining it if needed) and change its tagging to reflect its current use; rather than deleting it and creating a new area.

This keeps the editing history, so people can see the evolution of an area over time.

See osm.wiki/Keep_the_history :)

Resolved in changeset/171791746 I see, thanks for that

Did you intend to add bicycle=no to way/1427124073? It seems unlikely that cars are allowed on that road but bicycles aren’t.

If it’s a weird signage setup, I suggest adding a note:bicycle tag to the road to explain it, otherwise someone might remove it in future because they don’t understand the situation on the ground.

Right, thanks for surveying. The fact that the church access road was previously 5mph would surely mean that
(a) it’s a private road (I don’t believe 5mph speed limits exist or are valid on any public road) and
(b) if the 5mph sign is still there then the speed limit on that road is 5mph, even if it’s within a 20mph zone?

In changeset/171457594 you added maxspeed:advisory=5mph, but I think maxspeed=5mph would be better for it. aiui, maxspeed:advisory is meant for advisory speed limits on bends (sign: https://www.drivingtesttips.biz/images/recommended-speed-limit.jpg). See maxspeed:advisory=*

The alignment on the second load of houses you added looks fine. Basically you need to align property boundaries to the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels overlay, as that’s a source of ground truth about alignment. The aerial imagery can be offset by up to about 2m in either direction, and that offset varies unpredictably across the country. It also changes every few years when the imagery is updated. The Cadastral Parcels don’t as they come from the Land Registry which is surveyed on the ground quite accurately.

There’s also parallax error to account for, so if you can see the side of a house in the aerial imagery, then move the geometry you’ve drawn so it lines up with the base of the house (not the roof).

It’s a bit complicated, but once the geometry is drawn and lined up, it should basically never need to change :)

Thanks for your edits around Torrisholme recently, and thanks for picking up the detailed mapping style and aerial imagery offsets after I tweaked the houses on Holbeck Avenue. :) I’m local and happy to answer any questions you might have, though it seems like you’re getting along just fine. Happy mapping!

Hi. You changed the speed limit on the church access road (way/70457804) from 5mph to 20mph in this changeset. Was that as the result of a survey? It was previously surveyed as 5mph in changeset/70506361

Great, thanks for checking :)

That sounds fantastic :D

Sounds good! I assume the ranger team have a way of feeding back path changes to you so the map continues to be updated over time?

Yeah, there’s a watercourse visible on the OS OpenData StreetView imagery. It might be seasonal, if it wasn’t visible when you cycled through.

I originally mapped this as a bridge on a survey in 2019 (changeset/70642115), but I might have been lax about the difference between bridge and culvert.

I’ve added the stream/ditch and changed the bridge to a culvert in changeset/171142902. Please let me know if that matches what you saw, as I haven’t visited for a few months :)