Yeah, that sounds fair. I'll restore the previous node then.

Oops, yeah, thanks for letting me know I missed the duplicate. I've modified the parking tags and copied the taxi stand node tags over to a relation combining both areas (like in relation/15030337), but I'm not entirely sure how well supported taxi stand relations are 🤔

That's the interpretation I used, wiki's definition matches. Not sure how much use my re-tagging of farmland is (how often is arable farmland converted to pasture/vice-versa?). In any case, I was mainly focusing on splitting up large farmlands based on fence/wall dividers, tagging meadows was just a fun little side mission :)

Hey DorneyLake123, can't speak for the other places of worship, but what's the basis for adding building=yes to the Shrine of St. Margaret? As far as I'm aware, the shrine is a marble platform, not a physical building per se.

Looks like node/4883817270 (Scotland) should not have been moved, I've reverted this node back

Ah, thanks, I'll try to be more careful next time. Figures the first time I'm working with huge objects, something goes wrong 😅

Hi Dnichols14, welcome to OpenStreetMaps 🙂

The path you added in Forres, is this just an informal shortcut across the grass?

And did you delete the driveway in Stubbington by accident, or was there a reason for the removal?

Apologies! I jumped the gun and did not notice that you only in fact swapped the order of tags and removed the white space.

Hi MapSpot,

Why did you remove the parking_space tag? it's unusual, but from survey, this parking space really is designated as disabled only and a charging space.

Thanks Jorisbo

Hi Jorisbo,

Why did you remove the core path designations from these paths? This should still be a core path per (https://www.nature.scot/enjoying-outdoors/routes-explore/local-path-networks)

I'll bare the private parking tagging in mind, thanks.

Thanks, been running low on things to actually add in the local area haha.

It's been made flush now? Nice, I remember how it was raised in the past, and thought it was tagged as flush because of the nearby driveway having a dropped kerb.

I'll change this back shortly.

Ah yes, I was maybe too hasty to change the spelling, if newer sources say so. Older historical sources (OS 25 Inch, 1892-1914) and this OS name book (https://scotlandsplaces.gov.uk/digital-volumes/ordnance-survey-name-books/fife-and-kinross-shire-os-name-books-1853-1855/fife-and-kinross-shire-volume-74/68) from the 19th century use "Clinkhill".

I did also, come across a recent story (https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13097547.Police_find_body_in_missing_jogger_hunt/) where a "Clinthill" is mentioned, so fair, I'll revert my rename, and maybe verify by survey sometime I'm in the area.

Hi JJ5r,

First thing, thanks for contributing, address data is sorely lacking in many places in Scotland.

Second thing, note that a house can only be considered semi-detached if the building has two address units on it. Some of the buildings you've added are actually 3-4 houses together which should be more accurately tagged as "terrace".

Happy mapping,
ExoMal
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146445411

Hi Malc147,

Your edit looks pretty good, I've just removed the name from the garage though, the "name" key should only be used for things that have a real-world name.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145058218

I've ran through dozens of features with superfluous descriptions today, but I'll admit my standards will have slipped over that time, I see now the description is fine. I'll revert this changeset in a moment.

@Cebderby, no problems there, I initially aligned my imagery with a bunch of GPS traces I took and then compared to Cadastral parcel layer, which happened to fit properly anyway.

In any case, since not all of the local map features will have been created with the same alignment, I'm fitting/refining everything together at the same time.

Should look much neater after I'm done, and if need be, everything can be re-aligned mechanically after that point.

I set-up my imagery alignments to match multiple GPS traces I took in open areas around Dalgety Bay, which seem to match up with Cadastrel parcels as well.

And while I acknowledge that the alignment I'm using might not be perfect, I'm using it for the whole of Dalgety Bay at once so everything is aligned consistently before I start adding crossings and sidewalks.

Related, that kink you point out is intentional: I'm realigning Dalgety Bay square-by-square which means things on the boundaries of these squares will have weird kinks in them until I get round to aligning them with everything else.

By my estimate, I'm about 70% done re-aligning Dalgety Bay, so hopefully should be finished in the next 2 weeks or so.