Andrew Kvalheim's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 154191333 | over 1 year ago | What I entered for the changeset comment was “Add detail to business” but it changed to this when I tapped Commit. 🤷 |
| 152628981 | over 1 year ago | It also missed the reconnection of crossing nodes 6902505427 and 9938424611. |
| 152628981 | over 1 year ago | This change applied sidewalk=left to the missing section, but it previously (way/1064471021) had sidewalk=right. |
| 152174708 | over 1 year ago | Looks like this inadvertently deleted way/1064471021. It was recreated in changeset/152628981. |
| 149966205 | over 1 year ago | Yeah I thought JOSM handled these as well and testing now it appears to, so it’s not clear to me how the break happened. In general this can happen if JOSM hasn’t downloaded the relation and so doesn’t know to update it, though that should be an unusual situation. I’ve encountered it when sparse editing or occasionally due to bugs in the continuous download plugin. |
| 149966205 | over 1 year ago | FYI this broke a turn restriction on NE 100th St; after splitting the street the relation needed to be updated to reference the new segment. I just noticed it in Osmose and made the update. |
| 149414171 | over 1 year ago | Ah that’s reasonable, thanks for the explanation. I did get as far as acquiring a slightly more precise GPS device but got lost going down the rabbit hole of identifying survey markers and interpreting government control point datasets. |
| 149414171 | over 1 year ago | Thanks for working on this! For this kind of change I think it’s important to document which imagery you used as a reference since the various options aren’t all in agreement. You can do this with the source and/or imagery_used tags on the changeset. Much of Seattle’s building alignment issues appear to have originated with the 2013 import and it would be nice to come to a broader consensus on what to do about it. In this case it looks like you aligned to the current Bing aerial imagery. If you haven’t yet, do also consider King County orthoimagery which seems to be of high quality but differs in alignment from Bing. I’ve been meaning to do a more thorough comparison but haven’t personally gotten to it yet. |
| 148446729 | almost 2 years ago | Thank you! |
| 143907783 | about 2 years ago | Misclick due to lagging phone UI inadvertently reused previous changeset comment. |
| 138446103 | over 2 years ago | See changeset/110697397 and more recently Bing aerial imagery. Your first clue should be the construction site already on the map here. |
| 138446103 | over 2 years ago | The buildings you added to Viewlands Elementary do not exist. |
| 137081339 | over 2 years ago | I think this might be on the wrong building. This building looks like it’s in the same lot as 417 N 87th St. |