Hi,
If it helps, an easy way to add detail to OSM is with the Street Complete app:
https://streetcomplete.app/

Building detail can only be added as imagery gets released (just added detail from new ESRI and a survey), but Street Complete can add detail almost anywhere.

Thanks again for the edits you have made to make the free map better.
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Thanks for confirming that you are in fact not using their (c) material.

Please remember you are dealing with other community members.

Thanks again for the edits you have made to make the free map better.
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi T3rR0rM0nk3y,
Welcome to the OSM community!

Please don't use copyrighted data from Google to contribute to OSM as it it against their terms of service:
osm.wiki/FAQ#Why_don't_you_just_use_Google_Maps/whoever_for_your_data?

Thanks for the edits you have made to make the free map better!
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Ah - that detail helps, thanks.

A building once confounded me for a month - eventually spotted it was 4x flats with side entrances. Cadastral data doesn't help with housing associations.

I occasionally visit Barry's Bargains on the high street, so might manage a ground survey.
Thanks and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi CB,
I've used ESRI to add the remaining buildings in Chambers Court, but would appreciate you checking the UPRN/numbers (e.g. 13?, 54-58):
changeset/178532636

Thanks and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Always time to fix something!

Yes, it does look like a JOSM template slip - thanks for spotting my error.
Fixed (unless you can spot more?):
changeset/178355263
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi CarlWev,
Can I ask you to not add complex relations to existing land areas at a small-scale please?

These are difficult to maintain longer-term, and in this case broke a residential area completely with a discontinuity where two ways were not connected end-to-end.

This is exactly why relations aren't good for this use - separate area ways "just work" and are more understandable.
Relations are better suited to national-scale features like coastline where one way would have too many nodes.

I've done some clean-up, removed the broken relations, and left the detail you added which is good.
Thanks, and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
A lot has happened in in five years, but this section is about 50% complete now, with major work moving further east due to house builder activity:
https://lhcrt.org.uk/news-page/

None of this section is in water, so at best waterway=construction .
Happy Mapping,

James

Could well be - I've seen keyboard fail completely (but not mouse) on GNOME/OpenJDK where opening a terminal and typing can sometimes unblock it, and this one where input seems to slow down, or even repeat text in odd ways.

In all cases, restarting JOSM fixes input, but then you've got to reload GPX, imagery (recent Bing capacity throttling fails), and the context.

My 8Gb RAM may need an upgrade.

Hi Hirsch,
Well, the closest I know for masters of key =value is the OSM wiki! :-)

Another suggestion could be amenity=checkpoint + surveillance:type=gnome perhaps? :-)

I've mapped lots of strange things since 2007, but this little bit of someone else's humour is proving to be challenging.
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi again Mateusz,

Yes - correct!

JOSM seems to have a memory leak on a Linux JVM which can break keyboard input, causing corruption with a macro keypad (odd that it creates a repeat).

I often manage to catch these errors, but you tooling is more reliable than I am! :-)
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
I wondered if the tag might get spotted by a linter!
Someone has attached a a 100mm high gnome to the gate post.
So, gnome=yes was added even though taginfo suggests this is a unique tag, the wiki didn't come up with anything else.

artwork_type=statue seems a bit overblown, unless you have alternative ideas? :-)
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Found some Mapillary imagery confirming a flat crossing (handrail to the N):
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=259034485970364

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
After a check of survey photos and GPX, I think this is an #armchair addition likely from worse imagery.
I can remember the factory and services from canal visits to MH, but not this crossing (walked more towards Foxton/ Gumley).
Current imagery does look like an informal "flat" crossing with some grass wear on the verges.
How does this update look?
changeset/161943008

(Also added a few details to the environs.)
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,

> way/742792269/history
>looks like an aqueduct with nothing over the top of it and the stream underneath?

Agree - more of a "surface aqueduct" to bridge over a small river valley depression than a soaring structure.

I've made the changes described above to the structure:
way/742792269/history

The next way is the upper section of the leet itself. It does seem in an open cutting (layer=-1) rather than a tunnel=culvert , so I've swapped to cutting=yes:
changeset/161595012

JOSM validation doesn't like the result, but we tag for reality (don't remember cutting=yes, so one to add to the toolbox).

Does that seem better?

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Looking back some years, I'm not finding direct cycle survey images so this must be an "armchair" edit from imagery and local knowledge from nearby roads.

A fair chunk of this leet is in a "cutting" (presumably to reduce evaporation and to reduce gravity flow) so was tagged layer=-1 (see the way the accommodation bridges go up from ground level). It later goes fully underground to get to Matfen.

Comparing current Bing and ESRI, this looks to be a box structure moving from cutting to embankment with the waterway=stream at an even lower level in a presumably eroded stream bed N-S.

The stream may be better tunnel=culvert + layer=-1, and remove the layer=-1 from the leet, as this is the point where this -1 tagging was ended.

It's complicated as you can see the lower level of Whittledean threading over this stream and over a road - so aqueduct + -1 sounds odd, but... !

Thoughts?

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi ashleyneilmartin,

Welcome to OSM, and thanks for adding detail to the new phase release of West Meadows.

I cycled across to make a ground survey, and uploaded my GPSr track to improve the geometry of Wisteria Place:
@James%20Derrick/traces/11718628

I've also added scale building outlines by eye (no aerial imagery available yet) but unfortunately couldn't see any door numbers so have had to guess which was #14.

Would you mind taking another look and updating where #14 is in relation to the other homes please?

Where it is hard to estimate the shape of buildings, you can just add an address point which will still help deliveries e.g.:
node/12409927329/

Thanks and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Xvtn,
No worries - I've messed up all sorts of things over the years so it's almost a badge of honour (means you're doing something, not talking about it! :-) ).

Keep up the good fight against rubbish changesets, and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
I'm a OSM Foundation member, and mapper of over 15 years, so am rather surprised at this message!

51040082 is a 7-year old changeset to improve mapping around Rugely based on survey and imagery. It was certainly not SEO-spam, although I well understand the issue and have removed some myself.

Have you missed a few digits off in copy-pasta?

Are you planning to revert-the-revert please?

If you need help, I suggest moving to @talk-gb
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Past ground survey shows there is no beach here, and changing a highway=residential into barrier=fence makes no sense.

This changeset has made the map worse, so has been reverted:
changeset/151450984
Happy Mapping,

James