OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
135313819 over 2 years ago

Hi,
You have tagged buildings with "Building=True". Just so you're aware, we never use capitals except in names and abbreviations. Also, for general buildings, the correct tag would be "building=yes". I have fixed all the buildings you have mapped so far, so I wish you the best with further mapping!

121943344 over 2 years ago

Hi,
You have tagged way/1066709847 as build=yes. Is it a typo of building, or what is it supposed to be?
Best regards

130386715 almost 3 years ago

Hi,
Sorry for not getting back earlier. And thank you for spotting my mistake! I have fixed it now!

130336442 about 3 years ago

Ja, är inte helt säker på hur man bäst ritar det … Det står att building-outlinen ska innefatta hela byggnaden, men i de fall där entrétaket bara är typ en glasskiva så känns det konstigt, så då ritade jag taket som egen byggnadskropp. Men jag är inte konsekvent 🤷

127611560 about 3 years ago

Hi,
I see that you have tagged the power output in MWh, which I spotted on openinframap, where this plant looked huge! Do you have a source for the correct numbers in MW?
Best regards

124566301 over 3 years ago

Oh absolutely. Didn't find a tag so I went with ATYL, but solar:tracking is obviously superior, then. Feel free to fix them, or I will do it in a few days!

66744801 almost 4 years ago

Fick du något svar från kommunen?

118244821 almost 4 years ago

Thank you for finding it! Fixed the typo.

103294595 almost 4 years ago

Looked into it, and no, couldn't find any information regarding copyright. Should I remove the features not visible from aerial/streetlevel imagery?

113771097 about 4 years ago

Hi! Thanks for the tip! I found a few other buildings as well with redundant nodes. Will keep that in mind in the furture!

106372690 over 4 years ago

Oh, of course. I'm thinking backwards.

106372690 over 4 years ago

Will that impact routing engines though? Because I'd imagine it's more important not to route buses or lorries there, than erroneoysly excluding tractors.

106372690 over 4 years ago

Hi,
Not really sure, to be honest. The main sign used is "Limited vehicle length" (in Swedish: https://transportstyrelsen.se/sv/vagtrafik/Vagmarken/Forbudsmarken/begransad-fordonslangd/), with an additional sign stating "Does not apply to tractors". The additional sign is not defined by law, but the formal definition of "traktor" according to Swedish traffic law is this: https://transportstyrelsen.se/sv/vagtrafik/Fordon/Fordonsregler/Traktor/ This is one of the signs in question: https://www.google.com/maps/@56.1634435,14.7526736,3a,15.7y,306.01h,84.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slNO6UqaRVK3CMGMVLVkqsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
However, the additional sign has since been changed, removing the "with trailer" part. No idea why there is a length limit, or an exception to it, in the first place. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

105107883 over 4 years ago

Got it! I assumed all "upgrades" that the iD editor suggests were implemented to make it easy to manually check that all objects are tagged according to the latest standard.