Hi - would it be possible to be a bit more descriptive than just "correction of errors on the map"? In the case of way/366920600/history you might have said something like "deletion of a duplicate house exactly superimposed on another one" perhaps.
Cheers,
Andy

Thanks. Sorry it took so long to get around to it, but I've now updated it in changeset/33750530 (left the name as "RAF Wyton" but set the runways etc. to disused:aeroway). Let me know if I've missed anything...

Re "construction" confusing routers, I'm not seeing that at osm.org/directions?engine=mapquest_car&route=52.63936%2C-2.47228%3B52.63906%2C-2.47056 where way/121769393 has a construction tag. Can anyone find somewhere where it does? I was using http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/beW to look for candidates.

Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Please note that "OS Explorer Map 123 (Eastbourne & Beachy Head)" is unfortunately not a suitable source for OpenStreetMap (see the "Don't use copyrighted data" section of osm.wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.1 for a bit more info).

In this case of course there's no need to refer to an OS Explorer map - it's included in OS OpenData (select "OS OpenData StreetView" from the "background" menu in the editor) and you can also infer it from the name of the car park to the north.

Hope you don't mind me mentioning this, just trying to help. Any other questions please don't hesitate to get in touch.

Hi - a quick question about the new footpath. How does it cross the service road at way/368140495#map=19/52.98905/-1.63013 (there's no joining node)? Also are you sure the south end exits where it does and not at way/111354191 where there is or was a public footpath sign pointing northwest up a track?

Thanks.

"kostenlos" doesn't mean "has a licence suitable for importing into osm.org". I'd have a look or ask in the German forum - if it's a suitable source I'm sure that it will have been discussed there. http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=14

That doesn't say anything about the licence, it only says that they got the data from somewhere else. You need to find a source with an apprpriate licence.

(as per conversation on changeset/33643557) what is the source of the data here and what is the licence?

(as per conversation on changeset/33643557) what is the source of the data here and what is the licence?

Thanks. Where you've used Stuttgart's Stadtplan can you add a comment to the changeset discussion saying that the data's also available from Maps4BW and is therefore compatible as per osm.wiki/Contributors#Baden-W.C3.BCrttemberg ?

Can you provide details of the "license-free map" that you're talking about?

There are a couple of options - one is for you to ask the supplier of the data whether it's OK to add the data to OpenStreetMap. Another is, if you feel that you should be able to add the data regardless of whether they allow it or not, for you to explain why (taking into account the existing copyright notice and any other rights Stuttgart has, such as under the EU database directive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_Directive). See also https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License for general information.

Re "Are you the license police of OSM?" - I'm a member of the Data Working Group https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group . Your edits elsewhere where raised with us (copying from Google) and I'm also asking about sources of other changesets.

If you have added data to OSM which wasn't suitably licensed it'll need to be removed - please don't add any more until this has been resolved.

That link says "Programme, Karten, Daten, Dienste, Videos, Publikationen sowie Dokumentationen sind urheberrechtlich geschützt." (Programs, maps, data, services, videos, publications and documentation are copyrighted.)

The licence of that data is not suitable for adding to OpenStreetMap:

https://www.stuttgart.de/item/show/555841

"Nutzungsbedingungen

Programme, Karten, Daten, Dienste, Videos, Publikationen sowie Dokumentationen sind urheberrechtlich geschützt. Es gelten die internationalen Copyrightbestimmungen. Die Nutzung eines Kartenausschnitts mit Grundlagedaten ist für nicht kommerzielle Zwecke kostenlos. Voraussetzung ist ein deutlich lesbar angebrachter Copyrightvermerk:

© Landeshauptstadt Stuttgart, Stadtmessungsamt & GIS-AG "

Thanks.
What's the source and under what licence was it released?

it's "accuracy" that's important, not precision. it doesn't matter how precise a tag you use, if it doesn't match what's actually there on the ground, it's wrong. We'll see what the previous mapper / anyone who comments on an OSM note has to say...

Thanks

As per the comment on changeset/33537943 , can you explain what the source of the house numbers here is? What licence was it made available under?