BCNorwich's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 140184025 | over 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. You've placed this building over several other buildings which can't be correct. Changing a landuse area into the building. Thus I've reverted the Changes. Regards Bernard. |
| 140162000 | over 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. I've removed the advertising from the description and amended opening hours tag to suit OSM practice. Regards Bernard. |
| 140121926 | over 2 years ago | Hi, Your new highway duplicates the highway that it is mapped over, this can disrupt routing. It is OSM practice to correct/amend existing features when necessary rather than adding new features or mapping over the existing feature. Thus the new cycleway should be removed and the existing footpath tags be amended/corrected. I've therefore removed three sections of highway that duplicated existing highways and amended the tagging of the original feature to a cycleway. Regards Bernard. |
| 140110833 | over 2 years ago | Hi, I see you recently edited Way: 378446548. Is this grass area correctly outlined and is it still access=yes? I ask because some grass areas mapped within Way: 378446548 are tagged access=private. Regards Bernard. |
| 139627449 | over 2 years ago | No response so amended to building. |
| 140040470 | over 2 years ago | Hi, I've removed several duplicated building outlines that you added. Regards Bernard. |
| 140040724 | over 2 years ago | Hi, I've removed several duplicated highways in this area that you've inadvertently added. Regards Bernard. |
| 139910529 | over 2 years ago | Personally I'd reinstate it as a straight line as on the Bedford Council map but I don't think most folk would worry about it. I've just reverted your next changeset as they are two separate paths. The short piece to north is the truncated section of the Bedford FP 1 footpath. Bedford FP 1 carrys on down Brookfield Road where it's tagged as highway=residential, designation=public_footpath and foot=designated. Please don't be put off mappin by this, there's a lot to learn in OSM. Regards Bernard. |
| 139910529 | over 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Just to be quite clear that is a public footpath, Bedford FP 1, the reason it can't be walked is because it is obstructed. Bedford Council like many others is somewhat relaxed in its duty to uphold public rights of way. Regards Bernard. |
| 139850631 | over 2 years ago | Further, I've removed all 5 highways, for the same reason. |
| 139850631 | over 2 years ago | I've removed Way: 1197847104 as it's duplication, please be careful to not duplicate highways. Regards Bernard. |
| 139656004 | over 2 years ago | No response. So I've corrected all problems I can see. |
| 139820477 | over 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. I've reverted your changes because the duplicated highways seriously disrupt routing on this live worldwide database. Regards Bernard. |
| 139656004 | over 2 years ago | There are also a lot of duplicated sections of highways. |
| 139627449 | over 2 years ago | Is it really a highway, (unconnected to the highway network), or is it a building? |
| 139626896 | over 2 years ago | Duplicate highway removed. |
| 135880766 | over 2 years ago | Hi, Yes have a go, there's some pretty good info here as well:- osm.wiki/JOSM/Advanced_editing Please feel free to message me if you think I might be able to help. Regards Bernard. |
| 135880766 | over 2 years ago | Hello There, That was three months ago!
I reverted the changeset to see how it was before your edit. You had inadvertently dragged 5 or 6 nodes out of place. Including a node from the building Way: 782816185, the node was dragged across the building outline making for a self-intersection of an area outline. I've saved a screenshot of it to Google here:- https://docs.google.com/document/d/14o4IcueIcCIA9NrY7bVODKr0juhDlR386V-Z2KqMI54/edit
Regards Bernard. |
| 139559010 | over 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. You added the tag highway=unclassified to Way: 112575500 which is the Chaliyar River outline. I've now removed the tag but just wanted to let you know the problem. Regards Bernard. |
| 139130859 | over 2 years ago | No response so I've corrected a lot, the others have also now been corrected |