Heya, thanks for filling in these gaps.

You’ll have noticed that the houses already mapped recently in Seascale are offset from the aerial imagery. This is because I aligned the imagery with the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels layer before editing.

If you’re going to be adding a lot of geometry, it would be great if you could do the same. :) The aerial imagery is not guaranteed to be aligned to ground truth, and its alignment changes across the country (from one kilometer to the next) and across time as the imagery is updated. The easiest way to align geometry to ground truth is to align the imagery to the Cadastral Parcels, which are guaranteed to be aligned as they come from the government.

You can find the Cadastral Parcels layer in ‘Overlays’ under ‘Background Settings’ on the right in ID.

The offset I was using for the Bing imagery for the middle of Seascale was -1.27,-2.03 metres (see the changeset comments from my edits). The offset will likely be different at the northern and southern ends of the village.

Another advantage of using the Cadastral Parcels layer is that it can often help determine whether a building is a detached/semi/terraced house, as it will be split into separate parcels.

Hope that makes sense, happy to answer any questions you might have. Happy editing :)

Fixed in changeset/177423212, thanks

Thanks for the fast reply. I’ll partially revert the changes so the tagging gets re-added with history.

Hiya, welcome to OpenStreetMap. Why did you delete the tagging for the holiday cottages here? Have they closed down?

Their website is still running and there are reviews up from last month (https://www.holidaycottages.co.uk/cottage/79466-shearers--kirkland).

(See discussion on changeset/176898454)

(See discussion on changeset/176898454)

I’ve gone ahead and reverted this change as changeset/177419363, since the on-the-ground signage starts at the art by the picnic benches on the west side of the dock (https://www.cyclestreets.net/location/188250/cyclestreets188250.jpg).

I’ve also then made changeset/177419593 to merge the two disjoint relations for the cycle route.

Happy to discuss further if you think this is definitely not the right solution :)

Well, the big sign / artwork which lakedistrict linked to. It’s huge and says ’Bay Cycle Way’.

heh, fortunate timing with me checking osmcha this evening. I hope I didn’t cause you any problems!

I think it would make sense to have the swing bridge included in the route relation, given that the art is on the west side of the dock. It’s a big bit of art and I would be miffed to not visit it if I were cycling the route without local knowledge!

Also, somehow it looks like OSM has ended up with two disjoint route relations for it:
- relation/7024538/
- relation/14960194/

Hiya, you deleted a load of detail around Memorial Road/Gardens in this changeset and replaced it with less detailed mapping. Why? Was the original mapping irretrievably wrong?

Please bear in mind osm.wiki/Keep_the_history

Hi, I don’t know if you saw my comment on changeset/176859965, but please do consider aligning the aerial imagery to OSMUK Cadastral Parcels before adding lots of geometry like this.

The houses look great, and Thornhill is better mapped now, but someone is going to have to realign them all to ground truth at some point in the future and that could have been easily avoided. :)

Heya, thanks for adding all these houses.

Please remember to align the aerial imagery to OSMUK Cadastral Parcels before adding or significantly changing a lot of geometry. As you may know, the aerial imagery is not guaranteed to be aligned to ground truth, and it can be up to about 2m out in each dimension.

The OSMUK Cadastral Parcels (available in the ‘Overlays’ section of the ‘Background Settings’ on the right hand side of ID) are guaranteed to be aligned to ground truth in the UK, so the aerial imagery should be aligned to the Cadastral Parcels before starting to edit. Alignment can vary across a village or across time (as the aerial imagery is updated) so it’s important to do this at the start of every edit.

From a quick check, it looks like the offset for Bing aerial imagery is about -0.32, -1.27 metres in the middle of Thornhill at the moment.

Hope that makes sense, happy editing :)

Removed it on the basis that it’s likely a purely online business from a home office. changeset/176858235

Fantastic, thanks :) I see you’ve been using it already. If you mention the offset you use for a particular edit in your changeset message then other editors can use the same offset in future, to keep things consistent in a given area.

Happy editing :D

Hiya, thanks for adding all these houses.

If you’re going to be adding significant amounts of geometry in future, please make sure to align the aerial imagery to the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels layer before starting. Otherwise you’ll end up with an up to 2m offset of your edits from ground truth.

The Cadastral Parcels layer can be enabled in the ‘Overlays’ section of ‘Background Settings’ on the right in the ID editor. It gives the cadastral parcels from the Land Registry, which are known to be accurate. It can also help with working out whether a building is a detached or semi-detached house.

This is important because the offset of aerial imagery from ground truth varies by several metres between villages (or even across a village), and it changes when the imagery is updated.

See osm.wiki/Using_aerial_imagery#Binding_objects for more information.

I think the offset in Holme for Bing imagery is currently about -0.45, -0.4 metres.

Note you can also use the ‘Q’ key when a building is selected to automatically square its corners, which can be useful for houses.

Happy to chat about this further if you have any questions. Happy editing! :)

Hiya, thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap!

Is this business one which potential customers can turn up to without an appointment, and walk in? Or is it a home office, with services offered exclusively online?

The shop= tag is for the former (businesses which are like a traditional shop) and not the latter. See shop=*

If this business operates purely online and this is a home office address then it probably shouldn’t be tagged in OpenStreetMap at all — OSM is a map of the physical environment, not a business directory. :)

Hopefully that makes sense, happy to answer any questions

Hiya, why did you delete this footpath? It’s a public right of way according to the council’s definitive map (see the Public Rights of Way overlay in the ID editor).

What’s the situation on the ground?

Please put more detail in your changeset messages in future, as ‘fiexed’ doesn’t tell anyone anything about what you’ve changed or (more importantly!) why you changed it and what sources you used. See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks, and happy editing :)

I reverted the IATA changes as changeset/176541500

Are you the same user as silver1549?