OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
174218415 6 days ago

Hi! Thank you for helping with mapping public transit in Seattle!

I broadly agree with your changes - unabbreviating the street names in the `name`=* value is in line with OSM best practices, and I'll continue forward that practice in any of my future edits.

I also agree that we need some GTFS feed namespacing as doing so is the best way to avoid key conflicts.

I'm not sure about the format, though: I see you went with `gtfs:$field:$feed`=*, but namespacing in `ref`=* (for example) generally follows a `ref:$identifier:$field`=*, as in `ref:US-WA:SDOT:UNITID`=*.

What are your thoughts on switching to `gtfs:$identifier:$field`=*, as in `gtfs:stop_id:US-WA-KCM=29640``gtfs:US-WA-KCM:stop_id=29640`?

I don't have a very strong opinion one way or the other, but I'm happy to discuss! Thanks again.

172234447 23 days ago

Hi! What is meant by "light:count=4.20"?

174847936 23 days ago

Hi! Thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap.

A bit of feedback: There's no need to add "*=unknown" tags - the absence of the tag is considered equivalent to "*=unknown".

I've removed these in changeset/175259523.

Happy Mapping!

175259360 23 days ago

Because of a JOSM bug, this changeset was uploaded with the same changeset comment as changeset/175258261. Apologies.

The actual comment for this changeset should be: "Update locations and Mapillary tags on bike racks and remove their imported "note=*" tags."
Source: "Bing Aerial Imagery;King County Orthoimagery;Mapillary;Bing Streetside"

168292919 30 days ago

Hi! This edit was made based on the discussion in https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/bus-stop-aggiunta-di-bus-yes/127800/8 and the posts by ToniE, developer of PTNA, who I trust knows PTv2 better than me!

I don't feel too strongly on it - validator flags are just that, not necessarily to be followed, but unfortunately their existence forms a lot of inertia. 🤷🏼‍♀️

174717413 30 days ago

Follow-up discussion: note/4961610

174717337 30 days ago

Follow-up discussion: note/4961610

173254873 2 months ago

Hi, thanks for catching those and for reaching out to ask about them! They are present in the source dataset and not intended to be uploaded to OSM. I've removed those tags in changeset/173332231 and additionally checked using Overpass that there are no other instances of those tags having been incorrectly added. I'll also make changes to my process to ensure those aren't added in future edits.

Thank you!

172368459 3 months ago

Hi Keith, I'm glad you were able to identify the source of the issue and how to avoid it in the future! Thanks for actively responding here in the changeset comments, and happy mapping!

171655597 3 months ago

Deleted duplicate of node/13000000101