DaveF's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 72463038 | over 6 years ago | To check:
|
| 69713108 | over 6 years ago | I've started remapping manually on the user's other changesets (primarily railway stations). I haven't reverted as:
|
| 68156369 | over 6 years ago | Epsom Railway Station updates. Needs tweaking |
| 72135332 | over 6 years ago | FYI, In the iD editor there's a option to 'square' pitches/buildings etc - select object ,right click, Square. |
| 72134380 | over 6 years ago | Also, is this accessible to the public?
Names should be official/signed names. Use osm.wiki/Tag:'description='
|
| 72134380 | over 6 years ago | Hi
|
| 72134901 | over 6 years ago | Hi
To check, is the Pathfinder Place development fully completed?
Are any of the roads accessible? |
| 71165279 | over 6 years ago | "highway=sidewalk" is the preferred tag
|
| 71945403 | over 6 years ago | Oh, please; stop diverting.
|
| 71945403 | over 6 years ago | What evidence have you that this route extends into Bristol? |
| 71944286 | over 6 years ago | *inconsistent |
| 69185292 | over 6 years ago | Why have you removed foot/bicycle tags from established ways? |
| 71525646 | over 6 years ago | > From experience I prefer to have the name of a recognised route at regular intervals when no other name is relevant, Inventing names to suit personal desires is not acceptable. OSM isn't designed just to suit the individual. > "most names were invented at some point" It is not the purpose of OSM to create those names. It reflects established, verifiable names. >an intention to walk from Avonmouth to Woolwich in 2020 Perhaps you should wait until you've walked it before making shot in the dark amendments. |
| 71944286 | over 6 years ago | You've removed foot=designated even though it's a PROW
For the above reasons I will be reverting your edit Not only are your edits erroneous, they're lackadaisically consistent (only changing the occasional way) & proves you're mapper who contributes no improvements to the OSM database. Please refrain from editing in such a manner, especially in this area. |
| 71945329 | over 6 years ago | >Neither use is dominant. The tagging, as was, implied no dominance for either user. It's location is irrelevant. it's still classed as a shared use cycleway. if the vast majority of a changeset is incorrect (as in this case - The K&A towpath relation shouldn't be extended) then a changeset revert is required.
|
| 71165279 | over 6 years ago | >To tag them 'cycleway' seems to not only an appropriation and, to an international reader, saying do not go here.
I think you're misunderstanding 'cycleway' which can be used to map shared ways Having a cycle route relation attached to a way doesn't not make that way accessible to bike riders. It requires cycle specific tags on the actual ways. Changing cycleway to path but not adding tags allowing cycling prevents accessibility to bikes.
Deleting foot=* on ways where walking is designated is wrong
"Kennet and Avon Canal towpath" is not the name of the path. There is a route relation titled "Kennet and Avon Canal towpath" >But where the response is simply "that (cycleway) is just how we do it in the UK, then no thank you. This is a tad hypocritical as you're clearly assuming it should be to suit the perspective of "an international reader," & "where I live" For the above reasons I believe this, & other changesets of Alwyns has reduced the quality of the database & should be reverted |
| 71797015 | over 6 years ago | Are you sure this access was blocked up?
|
| 71799188 | over 6 years ago | Hi
|
| 71665954 | over 6 years ago | kissing gates, by default, are unsuitable for bike riding. |
| 71612656 | over 6 years ago | OSMR should be aware of any cycling relations & prioritize accordingly. |