FK270673, please feel free to add these streets to that page. My wiki skills aren't great with tables etc. :(

I think I'll do a bit of tracing using this imagery - it looks very impressive.

Seav, I'm not sure which image you are talking about, but if it's the first one on the nearmap wiki page, I think it's from JOSM.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway
Does this help at all?

Could it be to do with how you are carrying the GPS? It needs to have a clear view of the sky and I've found that it took a bit of experimentation when cycling to find a good arrangement. Putting it in the back pocket of my bag didn't work as well as I expected.

Always great to hear of new people adding to the map :)

PS if I could program, I'd start programming these things, but I suck at programming :(

My opinion is that people are donating data to Google rather than to OSM because they want to be able to USE it EASILY. OSM is great, and I've given a lot of time to it, but I think until the output tools are there (think equivalent of google maps on your phone, that lets you access all the cool data in OSM, eg ask "where is the nearest public toilet?") then people will put their time into something that gives them a useful end product.

OSM is great but it won't get widely used until using it is as convenient or more convenient than the GOOG.

Probably crack-heads and I'd imagine they dropped the charger by accident. Sorry to hear about that, anyway :( No suggestions on what to buy I'm afraid, though.

PS also see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Coastline_error_checker for info.

In my experience PGS is quite inaccurate and often misses small islands and islands where the contrast isn't very high. It can also get confused with marshlands. Alternatively, someone may have deleted them accidentally. (or worse...)

It's great that you can map these islands :) On Osmarender it looks as though there could be a problem with the direction of the coastline, though I guess you may have already fixed this.

Have you seen the coastline error checker? Check out http://dev.openstreetmap.nl/coastlines.html?lat=3.553&lon=125.71&zoom=10&layers=B00T

Interesting perspective. Can I make a small request? That you don't go deleting data I've entered because you believe it isn't correct in some way but you can't think of a way to correct it?

I'm not a fan of meaningless mess being entered into the database, but I can easily imagine searching for all the places to play tennis (or actually, for me, something much more obscure, model aircraft flying) in a new town when I move there. Please don't delete meaningful data just because you can't imagine someone using it.

It is widely stated on the wiki that OSM is not to be restricted to map features only, and people can add data that isn't there. While I don't like the inconsistent data this produces, it allows people to map things that no-ones agreed a tagging scheme for, and that's useful. With the tagwatch facilities we have, hopefully things will become more consistent in time.

Lastly, all the validators have serious flaws in them. Please don't change data that makes perfect sense just because a validator like lint doesn't like it. As an example, the JOSM validator complained about tertiary roads with no reference recently. In the UK most tertiary roads do not have any publically available reference. That doesn't means someone should go change them to unclassified.

Crazy stuff! Maybe it would be good to label which ones are open during holidays!! :D

The problem with OSM at the moment is like that of many open source projects - the geeks think that it's easy to render your own map so no-one programs a nice front end. Normal people take one look at the instructions for installing Mapnik and think "no way am i even going to attempt making my own map".

Thus the project doesn't attract even reasonably technically minded people because they aren't familiar with playing with Python etc. Just because they aren't a major geek doesn't mean that their contribution to OSM isn't worth attracting.

I am *almost* an example of this. I've stuck with contributing despite the lack of user friendly output options, and my edit history shows that. However, I found outputting a usable Garmin map of Madeira for my father-in-law to be a very tricky and time consuming task. When family members have asked why I spend time doing this "mapping" thing, unless I can show them useful, easy to use, output options, they think I'm crazy. To be honest, I'm starting to think they're right and I've really cut down on the amount of data I'm contributing. Until OSM geeks start seeing things from a non-geek perspective, this project is not meeting it's potential. I agree that Zarbitter's response was arrogant. It basically implies that unless you have the techical known-how to make your own renders, you aren't valued here and your contribution and uses for the map data aren't worth considering.

I know that the default renderers are not the most important output of OSM, but EASILY available output is what will persuade people that it is or isn't worth contributing.

Until those within the community that can program (that certainly isn't me!!) start programming output utilities for OSM with average-Joe users in mind (no command line, for starters!) we are a missing huge opportunity to gain contributors.

(and no, I wasn't thinking of one of these: http://www.amazon.co.uk/SHOPZEUS-Garmin-Handheld-Gps-Keychain/dp/B001B1XSLK/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1254152725&sr=8-3-fkmr1) ;-)

In terms of kit, though perhaps you could use one of the keychain logger type things that aren't too expensive?

I think you're more quite a bit more trusting than I am! If it was me, I'd keep the GPSs with me :)

Am I missing a humourous allusion, or is this just traditional trolling? :)

That would be great actually, though if someone could put a gui front end on it I'm sure it would be welcomed by newcomers!

I didn't mean that as a complaint at people for changing things based on signs they see, more that the signs are inconsistent. I'd quite likely have done the same myself. Yes, it's definately "highway=trunk" status in OSM terms within West Sussex. I received further clarification that the end sections, outside of West Sussex, do have sections with "non-primary route" status in Surrey (between the A3 and A31), and also also in East Sussex, which confusingly means that in OSM terms those sections should be "highway=primary". Perhaps someone could contact ESCC to find out what the situation is there?

Welcome to OSM! Always great to read about new people joining in. Hope you enjoy contributing.