|
Hi, I;ve come across a couple of names that are missing, that are generally used and appear on other maps and in documents, but are not on Open Street Map. They are:
|
|
If a name for something (natural feature or locality) is used as an actual name by actual people, I'd add it to OSM as a name (perhaps "name", perhaps "alt_name", perhaps "local_name" - exactly which tag will depend on the individual example). I would ignore the fact that a name exists on wikipedia - that just means that it's been copied from somewhere else (and of course wikipedia itself isn't licence-compatible with OSM, although its sources may be). Similarly "sources" such as Lonely Planet - adding that to OSM would just be an example of citogenesis. If something has no actual evidence behind it as a name in use now, don't add it to OSM. It might be suitable for OpenHistoricalMap, but not OSM. Thanks. I'm confident both these names are in active use. The links were just examples to show their use by peope other than me. My problem is that they are not marked so there is nothing to tag. "Points" seem to require a definition, and "headland" is not a natural feaure in the list. An "area" could be used but there is no specific defined area that I can accurate create a border for these - it would be an arbitrary choice. It is not a "line" object, obviously. So what kind of object to I create in order to be able to add a name tag?
(24 Jan '21, 13:41)
Jim Killock
Braich y Pwll is attested on the OS StreetView Open Data(https://os.openstreetmap.org/#zoom=16&lat=52.7975&lon=-4.76485) which is available in editors as a background layer (but not on OS OpenMap Local which seems to have removed a number of topographic place name elements around here). It's also on old 6 inch maps on the NLS site & therefore features in the dataset captured by crowd sourcing by the National Library of Wales (1900 project), as seen on the RCHMW site https://historicplacenames.rcahmw.gov.uk/placenames?q=braich+y+pwll. Modern maps seem to add hyphens. Coombeswood is mapped, as the current business park seems to cover the same area as the former tube works, and prior to that it looks to have been more a house or estate rather than a suburb or locality. The variant name without the "e" is used on OSM, and there seems an inconsistency between the spelling you provide with the named street on both OS & OSM data. The treatment of the name on historical OS maps is also inconsistent, so I dont think they provide adequate evidence of it as named place=* in OSM terms.
(24 Jan '21, 13:46)
SK53 ♦
For the avoidance of doubt, I'd be reluctant to use the existence of a name on only "OS StreetView Open Data" on its own as evidence to add it to OSM (simply because I know too many examples where no-longer-in-use names or simply descriptive names such as "Poultry Houses" appear there), but if names are in active use then yes, they should be in OSM.
(24 Jan '21, 13:54)
SomeoneElse ♦
1
On the second issue ""Points seem to require a definition", yes, any name has to apply to something. There are a number of possibilities - see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/natural#values for what "natural things" people have tagged in the past; "cape" may be one possibility? A fallback placename where there is no population might be "place=locality". I'm guessing that you're using OSM's browser-based editor - try searching for various things in there.
(24 Jan '21, 14:01)
SomeoneElse ♦
So Google Maps and OS current maps mark Coombeswood as a locality, for instance. People living in the area frequently mention it on web pages. https://getoutside.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/local/coombeswood-dudley - shows it as a "suburban area" - it's history can be found going back to medieval times; there was more recently a colliery named "Coombeswood" as well as the tube works. http://hawnebasin.org.uk "Coombeswood Canal Trust" for instance shows people using the name for projects in their area (I spotted a few more, but just for example). Nevertheless I don't quite understand OSM criteria on names. On Braich y Pwll: hyphens are generally regarded as wrong in modern usage of Welsh, they are more typically how English speaking Victorians wrote Welsh for English readers. In both cases, what I am completely not understanding is how to classify a "Point" - all the types presented do not seem appropriate in either case.
(24 Jan '21, 14:06)
Jim Killock
thanks for both of your help. The issue was that the visual editor pushes you down a list of simple choices for object type, none of which apply. Once you helped me understand that I needed to look through the tag options, it was clearer. I've added both, but the positioning of "Coombeswood" is up for debate. As for "Braich y Pwll", I added this to the headland. The positioning that Ordnance Survey are giving it out to sea cannot be right; the name means "Arm of the pool" and refers to the land area, not the sea beyond it.
(24 Jan '21, 14:28)
Jim Killock
showing 5 of 6
show 1 more comments
|
