Actually - I suspect it might have been rerouted. See relation/2293737#map=17/55.647246/-4.813637 . I asked the person who added the new names in the earlier changeset.

Erm - "office=goverment" for a "building=houseboat" way/1410525442 ?

What actual evidence do you have for that any part of way/470459862/history is controlled by China?
AS I said at osm.org/user_blocks/19719 you really should discuss this in the forum .

Thanks!

I've fixed the two most serious problems in changeset/177845809 and changeset/177846221 .
The "30mph limits that should be 20" obviously need someone to survey them properly on the ground.

Hello,
Is there really a gap in the Ayrshire Coastal Path at relation/1756394#map=19/55.432354/-4.713113 (perhaps a rockfall or something)?
Best Regards,
Andy

That explains it - I've restored the original post office node node/5743772095/history and moved it to a likely location.

Thanks!

Isn't that what the OSM tag is for, though?
We don't include the word "restaurant" in the name of every reataurant.

For completeness, see osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only . No name shows on https://www.comune.castelfrancoveneto.tv.it/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/aree-di-emergenza.pdf , just the reference "R".

Many wiki pages just reflect the view of the person that wrote the text and are never effectively reviewed - this appears to be one of those.

I am sure that most people would agree that having a name on a `man_made=bridge` object makes sense. I suspect where fewer people agree is about removing related `bridge:name` tags on the ways over the bridge - there are > 100k uses worldwide.

Raise a topic in the forum and see if you can get agreement with your edits to https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/111682889 .

Actually, ticket Ticket#2026012710000541

Hello,
Andy from the DWG here.
@misterte Please don't argue about something as ridiculous as this. According to https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/111682889 someone added a name to way/111682889 . That name makes sense; it matches way/369428486 . You removed it. Someone added it back, and you removed it again. Please don't do this.
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks!

Hello,
I've nudged node/3236462244/history slightly south to make relation/4280408#map=20/52.6479168/-9.3162372 a valid multipolygon again.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I wonder if the `checkpoint=hiking` tag has crept onto node/12086089044/history by accident?
Hiking checkpoints checkpoint=* aren't much of a thing in the UK (the only other one is at the Hay end of the Offa's Dyke Path).
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
Andy from the DWG again:

More feedback from the locals - apparently the northwestern part of way/1469590576/history is "gorse/woody shrubs and rocky outcrops" (so perhaps natural=scrub in OSM) and the southeastern part "is indeed a grassy field" (which would actually suggest meadow in OSM rather than grassland, to be honest).

Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I've removed highway=bus_stop from node/9953084903/history , as it's actually the "PTv2 stop position" and the actual bus stop is actually there as node/972310424/history .
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/public-transit-stop-vs-point/140924 has a bit more about this sort of thing.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,

Andy from the DWG here. Unfortunately, there are a couple of problems here that have caused one of the locals to contact us. For reference I'm using http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=177490636 to see "before and after" of this change.

One issue that I can see with it is the deletion of way/1184613232/history . I added that back in 2023 as someone had been trying to create a "path" from the driveway to the nature reserve by knocking a hole in the wall at osm.org/#map=20/55.8952239/-4.6184957 . You've deleted that line saying "there is not a path here", and there is now nothing to indicate that there is definitely NOT a path there. There have been attempts to make changes in this area via "feedback" to commercial remote OSM editors, and those remote editors' verification of information received is sometimes not great.

The other is that the change in geometry of way/1171570694 is incorrect. There's a kink in the driveway at osm.org/#map=18/55.896171/-4.617857 that isn't very clear on all aerial imagery (though if you look you can see it on various Esri imagery). This was very clear on a series of photographs that the DWG were provided with by one of the driveway residents back in 2023.

A third change (of way/1171577228/history from gravel service road to track) is arguably also incorrect - there's no agricultural access here; it's just access to private properties, although this other usage of "track" is not unknown in OSM.

Also, apparently elsewhere in Kilmacolm you've added 30mph limits where they are actually 20. We haven't been provided with a specific example of a problem but I suspect that way/91006628/history may be one. We have been provided with https://www.inverclyde.gov.uk/environment/roads-lighting/rollout-of-20mph-speed-limits#:~:text=The%20speed%20limit%20on%20most,follows%20a%20comprehensive%20analysis%20of as a link to the policy.

My apologies if this reads like a list of problems when all you've been trying to do is to improve the map locally (including adding things like way/1468857032/history which were just not there before), but the issue with the driveway has been the subject of a series of legal issues.

Something that might help is to look at the history of objects and previous changesets and comments. For example, if you look at way/1171577228/history you can see I've added information not just to my changeset comments but also in detail as discussion comments too.

Best Regards,
Andy (from the DWG)

PS: If you'd like to contact the DWG directly about this ticket you can email data@openstreetmap.org with a subject line of "[Ticket#2026010810000309] changeset/177490636".

¿qué?