Mashin's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 84923458 | over 5 years ago | Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG. |
| 84923447 | over 5 years ago | Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG. |
| 84923391 | over 5 years ago | Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG. |
| 84922859 | over 5 years ago | Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG. |
| 84923472 | over 5 years ago | Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue. |
| 84923458 | over 5 years ago | Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue. |
| 84923447 | over 5 years ago | Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue. |
| 84923391 | over 5 years ago | Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue. |
| 84922859 | over 5 years ago | Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue. |
| 84923391 | over 5 years ago | These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state. |
| 84922859 | over 5 years ago | These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state. |
| 84923472 | over 5 years ago | These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state. |
| 84923458 | over 5 years ago | These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state. |
| 84923447 | over 5 years ago | These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state. |
| 84957160 | over 5 years ago | Hi, cities are not defined by population. These cities are defined by CT and are subsidiary to towns. That is why there are two admin levels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_towns_in_Connecticut Also some CDP are still active villages or boroughs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Mystic,_Connecticut
|
| 84841075 | over 5 years ago | In iD, you can add new tags either thorough "Add field" or scroll down and expand "Tags" section. I see. In more complicated situations, more nuancing and personal judgement might be required.
|
| 84841575 | over 5 years ago | All good. Keep on going! |
| 84841075 | over 5 years ago | Is the "Riversdale Farms building 1" an official name of that building or just its description? If the latter then the name tag should not be used. One could mark it as operator = "Riversdale Farms". (if there are more buildings then ref = 1 can be added).
|
| 84477940 | over 5 years ago | This is just a problem with AllTrails not using OSM data properly for rendering. Maybe a bit of poking would get them going on this. |
| 84539150 | over 5 years ago | There is a better imagery for this purpose. In iD go to background settings (or press B) and select "Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta". Just keep in mind that these images are few years outdated. |