This is a friendly notice for your own information. What you do with it is up to you. I do not intend to threaten any user with DWG action. However, if you make any inappropriate changes, it may result in such action.
Whether other people do this or not does not matter for this.

Please use proper sources in future edits. See also osm.wiki/Good_practice#Do_not_trace_from_outdated_imagery

You are using an outdated aerial imagery layer for this area. You should use the recommended aerial imagery layers which I mentioned above.

I haven't used JOSM in a long time. If you need any help with using these layers in JOSM, try asking on the forums.

Hey Spaghetti Monster,

Please use sources appropriate for the area you are mapping and specify them actively when saving your edits.

For The Netherlands, use Esri and PDOK 8cm aerial. These should be readily available in JOSM. You can find other data sources, like the AHN (LIDAR height model), on the forums:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/de-beste-imagery-layers-om-nl-osm-te-mappen-met-josm/85393

If you need any help, comment on said thread, or start a new one.

Any inappropriate changes, being low accuracy or made using outdated sources, may be reverted by other mappers. If you continue to map inappropriately, the Data Working Group may have to step in. You are likely already aware of this.

Regards,

Daniel

At least one way created in this changeset has been removed, due to it not existing -at least on compatible aerial imagery-;
changeset/133557689
following user feedback from
note/3261130

See this wiki page to learn more
osm.wiki/Verifiability

-

(is: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8739140 )

Hey Anne,

way/1034576117
looks like a driveway on someone's private property, enclosed by walls, which happens to measure a car's length, and may not have a gate in front of it (one of many). I would suggest to remove it and add a way from the road, tagged as usual
highway=service
service=driveway

I personally do not use parking for individual houses outside exceptional cases where it looks like an open, standalone parking spot, located directly alongside the road, which may have a barrier (i.e. removable bollard), sign or marking indicating it is private/restricted. Or, where it is parking along a service road, say for an office/shop/... .

Regards,

Daniel

Hey Anne,

See way/161760101
Are you sure Penston's Garden derives its name from the River Breaghagh?

Regards,

Daniel

*correction: added two trees

Consider also moving the wheelchair tag to the POI node. This tag is more commonly associated with the POI. It is often missed by accident when moving POI information from a building to an address node and vice versa.

Could you message b-unicycling regarding this as well, please? Thanks in advance.

Ok. I'm exaggerating quite a bit since people tend to tag everything with a lifecycle prefix. Sorry.
I'll leave it as a seperate node for now and maybe it can be surveyed in the future if the building/rooms have any ref, eventhough they may not be signed anymore.

Source should be (use as reference only)
https://www.archaeology.ie/sites/default/files/media/publications/po19v1-all-counties.pdf

I would suggest using lifecycle prefixes only for main keys, not for properties such as mapillary, as this is redundant.
I would add this information to the proper object instead -which I was hesitant to do-, namely the rectangular building it is on, since it has multiple entrances which IIRC seem to lead to the same space.
or, alternatively, add a main key
demolished:tourism=information
information=sign

Regards,

Daniel

Hi,

I'm using
- mapillary for the best image of an object; and
- *:image for one property of the object. This is intended for mappers, not for general users of the data. Noteably, some of these images lie in unexpected locations and there may be many other traces hiding them.
I'm aware I've been inconsistent with the use of mapillary id vs full url, since this an uncommon approach.

b-unicycling has also used *:image for the etymology of street names in this area.
I would appreciate if you'd discuss the use of tags with both of us before changing them. This prevents removal of correct data / (un)intended vandalism and issues with other mappers.

Also, usually an object only has a single mapillary value, which would be the best image of an object rather than any number of mapillary images available for said object. A single value is also better understood by applications.
I'm using *:image preferably only for exceptions. Elsewhere in Castle Yard I used it to refer whether the name came from the map board or a sign, since these may differ.

Regards,

Daniel

Looks good to me.

Regards,

Daniel

This may be a duplicate of node/9825025724
or inaccurately positioned inside the back area of the hardware store. Make sure this is the correct position and the other object still exists. If the position is ambiguous (in front of / behind fence, close together), it may be a good idea to add a location tag to both objects.
(Sidenote: occasionally, such signs may be inside a property but be meant to be read from outside the property. It may therefore be useful to add a direction tag.)

This object is already tagged as disused with disused=yes. As such another lifecycle tag is redundant. Alternatively, you may remove it and instead add it as lifecycle prefix to the POI (disused:amenity=cinema). Both apply to the building as well as the POI unless otherwise mapped/noted.

was:* is usually used on physical objects to indicate they are still visible(recognizable) on aerial imagery, but no longer exist on the ground, or have intentionally changed use (i.e. nature conservation explicitly closes path to the public to let nature take over)

(Sidenote: If the building has since been in use again, please add/change the proper tags. Any information is welcome.)

This changeset has been reverted by
changeset/131247841

Ja, ziet er naar uit dat ze daar beplanting neergezet hebben. Dit is duidelijk slechts een voetpad, zonder enige logische plek of bebording voor fietsers. De fietsstrook zelf is in zijn geheel verplaatst naar de andere kant van de weg.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1288760338360830&focus=photo
(Mapillary is een bron die is toegestaan voor gebruik in OpenStreetMap, private / copyright bronnen zoals Google Maps/Streetview zijn dit niet.)

Ter informatie: Pas alleen dingen aan als je het zeker weet. Iets wat een voetpad lijkt op de luchtfoto kan nog altijd (bebord als) een fietspad zijn. Als je er recent langs bent geweest om dit na te gaan kan je als bron in je wijzigingenset "survey" toevoegen, of als je er (minder recent) wel langsgekomen bent en dit gezien hebt kan je "local knowledge" als bron erbij zetten.

Bedankt voor de aanpassing.

Groeten,

Daniel

bus=yes is op zich optioneel, ligt er ook aan hoe dicht je een van de bestaande tagging schema's wilt volgen. iD kiest ervoor om bus=yes voor te stellen als het een bushalte betreft. Ook deze soort oplossingen van de bewerker kun je dus negeren wanneer je begint met mappen.
(zeg maar gewoon alle oplossingen.)

Hey thickness,

De gebouwen komen in Nederland uit de BAG (Basisregistratie Adressen en Gebouwen). Veel gebouwen zijn nog niet ingemeten en hebben een plaatsvervangend vlak. Wanneer ze ingemeten zijn kun je een verse import aanvragen op het forum:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/bag-importverzoeken/3394

Je kunt de BAG hier bekijken:
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/

Als je dit nu handmatig zou veranderen zou het later waarschijnlijk ongedaan gemaakt worden met een nieuwe import.

Als er een gebouw ergens staat wat er niet langer is, kan je dit terugmelden bij de BAG zelf (wel even checken of het ook in de BAG zelf voorkomt).

(Ter informatie: Neem oplossingen van de software niet over zonder goed te kijken of het echt een probleem is / er niet iets anders voor problemen zorgt en raadpleeg indien nodig de gemeenschap.):
osm.wiki/Contact_channels

Maak je geen zorgen, alle dingen kan je leren. Het is dan ook goed dat je deze wijzigingenset voor controle hebt gemarkeerd.

Ik heb de gebouwen in deze wijzigingenset hersteld:
changeset/130839221

Groeten,

Daniel

Two empty ways:
- way/1126142325
- way/1126142338

One abandoned outer member
- way/1126142318