The problem on this occasion was the node added by Adormo was poorly named and located, hence raising initial suspicions. Further checks this morning resulted in the node being added back because it was part of notable place, albeit poorly named and poorly located (it was in fact part of the London Open House at some point). However, the problem still stands because I have struggled to verify a marketing business near Finsbury Park.
I have got in touch with Adormo, who added the node, with the following recommendations to make it less spammy: which is as follows:
Checking that the location is accurate, if possible.
Checking that the address and post code of the location, including the house number, is correct, if possible.
Checking that the name and description of the location is not spam-like, or better still, put it under the tag “adormo:name” and “adormo:description” respectively, similar to what we did with Naptan bus stops in the UK.
Using “source=Adormo”, so we know where it is coming from.
Anything else to add?
Driving trips over the last three years, as well as recent public transport trips within the M25 (see 20 November 2012 post).
That’s not the only problem Googel users are facing: check out the dispute over road colours as well here and here.
Personally I don’t mind doing very detailed information such as sidewalks and individual crossings. I may not be the one with a GPS but even with the stuff I have, with what’s given as a base, I aim to make the curves as curvy as possible.
I don’t know, maybe one day we would have a route planner for planes, so taxi-lines might be needed in future. Who knows?
I did fix the primary road issue. That was a mistake.
I don’t remember there being a forum for OSM other than the help service at https://help.openstreetmap.org. Is that the forum?
Maybe hide the editing options until they are logged in and explicitly allow remote editing. That might reduce confusion.
Only OSM has street light data and speed limit information, but OSM has more for detailed analysis and demographics than just planning an odd journey.
If a relation was boundary-based like how the boroughs are done then we would have an issue at, for example, Hyde Park Corner where the A4 underpass is part of the zone but the roundabout that carries the Inner Ring Road above it is not. What I have done this morning is create a relation-based prototype which associates affected ways. It can be found at http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2792532.
So far, I am not aware if I can create “toll:motor_vehicle=yes” as a relation.
Try using the tag natural=sand. ;-)
@robbieonsea It is perfectly fine to cover trunk roads because cyclists will use them as they are legally all-purpose, unless signed. The city of Rome already has comprehensive lighting data (ITO World) and I am hoping that London will follow suit to become one of the largest metropolitan areas with lighting information on OSM.
The current progress can be seen here, yet I only e-mailed ITO just now about inconsistent data updates, where newer information were showing before those introduced over 7 days ago.