Hello,

Thanks for contributing to OSM. Unfortunately, I have reverted the change to the Mexicali admin feature. Please do not repurpose existing data for totally different features like that. Instead make a new feature if you wish to add a shop.

Please feel free to reach out if you need assistance.

-Jeff

Hi Andromeda64,

You appear to have duplicated a large stretch of coastline with this edit. This could cause major issues for coastline rendering. Was this intentional? If not, I can revert this edit for you.

-Jeff

Hi rah_em,

Thanks for your contributions to this area.

We are actively working to add roads here using a grid based project so over time these floating ways will be resolved by our team as we complete additional task squares. Feel free to fill them in still, but we will address them ourselves as well.

Happy Mapping!
-Jeff

Hey Andy,

We appreciate the feedback. I agree that this is not a necessary change. I reverted the changeset and discussed it with the team so it shouldn't happen going forward.

In regards to the organized editing wiki, sorry its taken a bit, but its ready to go and we'll have it up as soon as we get internal approval to post it. Thanks for your patience in that.

-Jeff

Hi Imagener,

I’ve noticed you’ve made a lot of complex buildings lately but are marking them as type=multipolygon. For rendering these properly, you would be better served using type=building as that matches the style of mapping you are doing. osm.wiki/Relation:building

The only real difference is using the roles outline and part for the final feature, rather than outer and inner.

Let me know if you have any questions :)

-Jeff

こんにちはImagener、

最近、複雑な建物をたくさん作っていることに気づきましたが、それらをtype = multipolygonとしてマークしています。 これらを適切にレンダリングするには、実行しているマッピングのスタイルに一致するtype = buildingを使用する方が適切です。 osm.wiki/Relation:building

唯一の本当の違いは、外側と内側ではなく、役割のアウトラインとパーツを最終的な機能に使用することです。

ご不明な点がございましたらお知らせください :)

-Jeff

Hi lake3kfe9w3,

I’m from the Map With AI team.

We saw you have been adding large amounts of AI data using the JOSM Mapwithai plugin. Some of these large changesets were added in a very short amount of time and contained a lot of AI data without any further improvements which makes it appear that this was not human validated. These AI based features will often need some amount of additional detail or fixes and need to be manually reviewed before uploading to OpenStreetMap.

The plugin has some safeguards in place to discourage this type of mass upload and we are curious if these changesets were unintentional? Either way, could you share your workflow so we can improve the plugin?

If you would like to use Map With AI tools for imports, you can potentially do that, but you will need to follow the import guidelines, which I have linked below, and propose an import to the affected community. Undiscussed imports can be reverted by the DWG, which has happened to many of your changesets.

osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines

Please feel free to reach out if you have any other questions on using our tooling. We are glad to see you are enthusiastic about Map With AI and want to help you map successfully.

Hi Francescotix,

I saw that this relation wasn't rendering correctly. I updated it to be renderable and kept the building sections you added as separate building:part relations.

Let me know if my corrections were not what you intended and I can change it.

Thanks,
Jeff

Hi Alexey,

I see your solution was to simplify the relation and break the interior pieces into smaller school relations. Is that how you would recommend resolving similar malformed multipolygons while retaining the intent of the creator?

-Jeff

Hi Literan,

This relation captures connected building sections which multipolygons are not really designed to do as they don't work with the normal inner and outer roles. Building relations function similar to multipolygons but work to model these situations better. A building relation will look very similar on Mapnik, but it helps renders understand how to use these extra pieces of the relation properly, whether for 2D or 3D mapping.

osm.wiki/Relation:building

If you feel that it is best to leave it as a multipolygon, that is fine, but this was the reason for the change.

-Jeff

Hi jdd 3,

This changeset was just to address some presumably unintentional damage to these relations from changeset/90385410

If someone wants to tackle breaking up this river into more manageable pieces, they are welcome to of course. :)

-Jeff

Hi goldfndr,

At the time, I believe I was thinking that landuse=residential were unnamed features so these named polygons were more describing a place=neighborhood. However, looking at the wiki, I see that it is less common but perfectly acceptable so I've reverted them back now.

-Jeff

Hi Limes,

This was an accidental revert of an additional changeset while fixing the relation.

I have reverted the changes in Belgium in this changeset. Luckily, it was very minor.
changeset/86740143

Thanks for letting us know!
-Jeff

Hi habi,

Thanks for the feedback. Letting us know when the AI gets things wrong definitely helps! We have significantly improved the model since this time and continue to make improvements on it.

-Jeff

Hi units,

We've been adding a fair amount of paths to the area as the road ways do not appear to be drivable by cars, at least on satellite.

Do you know this area personally? If so, are these narrow tracks drivable typically? We can of course adjust our tagging based on local knowledge and requests, we were just being cautious for routing purposes.

Thanks,
Jeff

Hi 8212,

My team is mapping in this area and saw you added a few cycleways.

We've been adding similar looking roads as highway=path as we figured that they probably support motorcycles and pedestrians as well.

Since you seem to have local knowledge of the area, can you confirm if these are strictly for cycling or serve other purposes as well? We are new to Vietnam and want to map according to local tagging conventions.

Thanks for the help!
Jeff

Hi angys,

On the peninsula, we are currently working on projects centered around Kluang as well as Gua Musang. Our teams do jump around a little bit though to avoid causing editing conflicts with each other.

We have a couple of projects slowly wrapping up in East Malaysia as well.

-Jeff

Thanks for the response!

My team was mapping in the area and was curious where the data came from.

-Jeff

Hi roadless,

I ran across your massive contribution in Malaysia. Great work!

I was wondering what source are you using to determine these roads are abandoned?

Thanks,
Jeff

Hi rab,

The layers are very similar but not always identical. They are the same Maxar imagery product but generated at different times so you may see more up to date imagery in one over the other in some places.

If you would like to view the FB maxar imagery layer its available in our RapiD editor here mapwith.ai/rapid

-Jeff

Thanks for the info!