Wow, just spotted these. Impressive progress on solar in Northern Ireland!

@Millhouse: they have been at times, but: a) tagging is unclear, they're not really admin divisions for instance; b) it's easier to use the OS file direct for most purposes; c) they're difficult to verify on-the-ground; d) not of much interest to many. I think even polling stations are relatively poorly mapped & they are definitely useful, but also awkward things.

Indeed, as someone who lived for some years in the current Hanworth (Village) ward, much of the Hanworth Park ward includes areas which I would have said are in Feltham (the military/industrial areas N of the park).

@Millhouse: actually ward boundaries & MSOA & LSOA are all available as open data. Ward boundaries are in the OSGB Boundary Line download. MSOA & LSOA from ONS IIRC. Wards although named after local areas, often only loosely correspond with them & change with every boundary review so aren't particularly good representations of how people think about an area (plus sometimes they have made-up names, although I think that's been deprecated).

Please avoid making these changes which do not reflect the standing UK consensus for place names. We use place=suburb for locations like Cranford

Hi BorekSigar,

The OSM Community has been quite happy with the Hounslow node as a town for the past 15 years. Before making changes like this it is best to consider that perhaps a consensus exists as to the tagging. Greater London contains many towns which existed long before the expansion of the urban area. These are all recognised locally as towns.

Personally, I think you have confused Hounslow, the settlement, with The London Borough of Hounslow which is a local government district far larger than Hounslow itself including places such as Feltham and Brentford. The London Borough is mapped separately already.

Either way this is too large a divergence from a long established consensus to be allowed to stand. I am reverting this to the status quo ante.

If you feel that other places should be changed can you discuss this on talk-gb first.

Regards,

Jerry

Hi Mark,

It looks like Casey Boy has already changed it to permissive (way/893627652#map=19/53.66967/-2.29298). Probably an advantage of sharing these discussions, as someone else interested in accurate mapping of paths will pick it up.

Jerry

In this changeset you added a service road (way/824880656) between Pettingale Road & Llanthewy Close. A more detailed look showed that the connection at Llanthewy Close was a private driveway. In addition this type of alley service road is very unusual in post-WWII estates.

Can I ask if this addition was based on driver feedback? If not I will remove it because I dont think it is a road.

Jerry

Specifically this house (& the one next door) way/243536822. Also this one in Cambridge way/172026862 (which I know because I've been there, not because I've surveyed it).

Looks like this is it https://www.stmartinoftours.org.uk/services/davenant-road/. Possibly a social facility, but perhaps tread warily with such tagging. It may be they want to stay discrete. I know of group homes which are not visible as such from the road.

No data consumer will read changeset comments & these days source will be on the changeset, so removing operator does impair usage by data consumers (removing the source much less so). It's not a trivial point as I have found trees in an open data set which were not actually owned by the organisation who made the data (they had asset identifiers of another organisation). Asset numbers (ref) are usually assigned sequentially by an organisation so when trees are mapped in detail the operator is the only way to uniquely identify them. Tree ownership may be quite difficult to work out: I was surprised to see that trees in a local churchyard are owned by the council.

Jerry

Hi meteorquake,

Standard way is to retain building=church with disused:amenity=place_of_worship. If used for a new purposed building:use=residential (say): churches often still look like churches (particularly from a distance). Many redundant churches are also listed buildings, but not this one by the looks of things.

HTH,

Jerry aka SK53

Interesting question.

In practice Hilbre is not accessible by car for anyone other than people with very specific permission (the Land Rover when I visited belonged to a bird ringing group). The owners, Wirral Council are quite clear that it can be visited by foot only https://www.wirral.gov.uk/leisure-parks-and-events/parks-and-open-spaces/hilbre-islands-local-nature-reserve. So other on Sunday mornings in the Spring when bird ringing is taking place evidence of cars is unlikely.

However, the tracks on the island itself are very obviously tracks, but across the sands most of the time there is nothing (a few buoys between West Kirby & Little Eye).

I think current tagging is probably a reasonable compromise between showing the route, warning of dangers & not encouraging other transport modes. It's by no means perfect, we should be making use of hazard tags for well-known foot routes which cross tidal areas.

No, thanks for the reminder

Hi,

I wonder why you removed operator from these trees. They are owned & maintained by the London Borough of Southwark (they were imported from the dataset maintained by the council), so the operator tag would seem appropriate and even useful if one wanted to report a problem.

Jerry

Damn, iDs autocomplete! Thus was adding tags to existingbtooftop solar

Not sure that Holistic Emporium is accurately tagged as shop=cosmetics (found at random following a query on IRC about "metaphysical supplies"). There are 2 tags in use which are more precise (and probably synonymous) shop=new_age (favoured in UK) and shop=esoteric (mainly DE). We have 3-4 in Nottingham, so might expect several hundred across the UK, with some specific areas of concentration (e.g., Glastonbury).

I'll have a go at documenting both on the wiki shortly.

Jerry

Hi Brian,

Really sorry to hear about your health. As someone who has been shielding for getting on for 2 years & who's health also limits surveys I do sympathise.

I'll merge your area with the node I've added over the farmhouse. Solar certainly does get moved about as you suggest.

Jerry

Hi Brian,

The solar at Tan yr Eglwys farm seems to be on the wrong building; there's an obvious unmapped panel on the farmhouse, but nothing resembling a panel where the current one is mapped. I suspect imagery is much better than a couple of years ago. I'm happy to fix, but just wanted to check that you dont have more up-to-date local info.

Jerry

PS. You may have noticed me mapping sporadically around here. My great aunt lived at Blaenannerch, latterly in the bungalow next to the old post office, so was to trying to reconstruct some childhood memories.

Interesting. For reference, this (node/6368780677) panel's output is available on the web https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2014/12/a-year-of-solar-panels-open-data/ and has 12 vs 22 panels.

Unfortunately Terence Eden moved 2 years ago & I dont know his new address so cant correlate number of panels, output & an OSM element :-).

Jerry