Changeset: 118375694
Updates on Saltway approach to Chipping Norton
Closed by Wookey
Tags
created_by | JOSM/1.5 (18303 Debian en_GB) |
---|---|
source | Bing; survey |
Discussion
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
Hello,
I just happened to notice that this changeset seems to have deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/835498714/history (which isn't very near Chipping Norton) but left the nodes that formed part of it. I wonder if something went a bit wrong?
Best Regards,
Andy -
Comment from Wookey
Yes. Well spotted. I got a conflict on this object and josm wouldn't let me resolv it as 'leave the other version' (that left the 'resolve' button greyed out. So I had to give my version.
Now ideally JOSM wouldn't be including objects from another trip a month ago and miles away, and I did try to 'purge' everything in the data layer outside the chipping norton zone, but this was clearly still there (possibly becuse it was a deletion?), and I don't know how to make it 'only upload stuff within given rectangle'.
I keep ending up with this problem because I use Vespucci, but it can't upload anything directly, so I end up saving an osc file, tidying it up in JOSM and uploading, but the vespucci file just gets bigger every time covering everywhere I have mapped in the last 4 months. I've not found out how to reset that either.
I found 'purge' this time which does seem to have removed everything from Nottingham, but not this change in Fowlmere.
If you know how to fix any of these things (vespucci 'backlog' reset, vespucci uploads, JOSM area restriction on changesets, or how to tell it to just forget about a particular conflict) I'm all ears, otherwise I'll try and work it out.
And yes I'll sort this deleted way out too. Thanks for the prod.
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
Thanks. For Vespucci issues it might be worth mentioning it at https://github.com/MarcusWolschon/osmeditor4android/issues - maybe the way that you're using it hasn't been anticipated? I've not seen it myself since I always upload directly from Vespucci.
With Josm I try and do new things in new data layers (and deleting data layers when I've finished with them) - that should work around any issues there. -
Comment from SomeoneElse
One question about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/833213512#map=18/52.14932/-0.03204 though (since you were there recently) - the southern bit doesn't exist on imagery, but it previously included a section north of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4463958420 where something is visible on imagery - does that exist, and if so what is it? https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gPN shows ways in the area a couple of months ago, https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gPO just that one way.
-
Comment from Wookey
There is only one (quite high quality) track on that whole route from the farm buildings (bottom left) to the tree belts (top right), despite the doubled paths that appear on bing imagery and https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gPO
There is a grass path from that crossover point going downhill across the field, but it's not strong and could easily change from year to year - it's mostly how the grass has been cut. After editing last night I left it as connecting to the farmyard as that was indicated by previous edits and the imagery, but I'm not sure that is still true.I spent a while last night removing parallel track/footpath/bridleway instances in this area and getting the designations/permissions right (SFAIK).
Next time I visit I'll have a proper look at this area to make sure it is correct. It has clearly changed a few times over the last few years.
The NT have changed quite a lot around Wimpole over the last couple of years (new carpark, major new paths, closing major paths, resurfaced tracks like this one, (that was probably 3-4 years ago actually)). Those works may partially explain the appearing/disappearing parallel routes here, although some of what was there is definitely just duplicate mapping.So to answer your question clearly: No the northern parallel path does not exist. There is a (much less permanent) southern secondary path, but I'm not sure it's correctly aligned in current OSM.
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
Thanks for sorting it out!
-
Comment from confusedbuffalo
Unrelated to the above discussion, you've added a couple of objects with phone=pole (and no other tags)
It's not clear what you've meant by this, is it something like
man_made=utility_pole
utility=telecomor
man_made=mast
tower:type=communication
communication:mobile_phone=yesphone= should only be for the phone number of an object
-
Comment from Wookey
I put these in temporarily whilst using vespucci as I didn't know the right tags. I thought I had fixed them all afterwards in JOSM after looking up the tags, but it seems I missed two. I've fixed those now. Thanks for spotting that.
- 1039409699, v1
- 1039409700, v1
- 1039409701, v1
- 1039409702, v1
- 1039409703, v1
- 1039409704, v1
- 1039409705, v1
- 1039409706, v1
- 1039409707, v1
- 1039409708, v1
- 1039409709, v1
- 1039409710, v1
- 1039409711, v1
- 1039409712, v1
- 1039409713, v1
- 1039409714, v1
- 1039409715, v1
- 1039409716, v1
- 1039409717, v1
- 1039409718, v1
Relations (3)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |