Mashin's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 172988353 | 2 months ago | Thanks for the edits!
|
| 172551915 | 3 months ago | Hi,
|
| 172279373 | 3 months ago | Hi,
|
| 172065805 | 3 months ago | Hello,
|
| 171744210 | 3 months ago | Hi,
|
| 171690459 | 3 months ago | Hi,
Cheers |
| 171642796 | 3 months ago | Hi,
|
| 171314109 | 4 months ago | Hi and thanks for improving OSM!
Cheers. |
| 171106403 | 4 months ago | Hi thanks for improving OSM! just please don't forget to fill city/town in the address field.
|
| 170766441 | 4 months ago | Hi and thanks for improving OSM! Just a small thing for the next time. No need to create a separate building for restaurant. You can just create a point and label it as restaurant. |
| 170608022 | 4 months ago | Hi, from what I know cycleways are considered more for "urban" cycling infrastructure and having cycleways in the middle of a forest would be misleading. Also I've seen that some of them have hiking difficulty scale tags which tell that those are used by hikers as well. When it comes to safety, if there are actual physical sign that restrict movement of people or designate the use for bikes this can be added using access tags: bike=*, foot=*
On a side note, are those actually official MTB trails endorsed by the landowner? It somehow seems to me that those biking features were built on top of existing hiking trails. Cheers |
| 170232506 | 4 months ago | Hi and thanks for helping OSM! Looking at these short roads that are branching of Byrne Court, it seems to me that they are driveways leading to individual houses. Are you sure that they are named and there are street signs posted on them? Cheers |
| 158536402 | 5 months ago | Hello Ravinder,
Please correct as needed.
|
| 169825551 | 5 months ago | Hi and thanks for improving OSM! Businesses like this one have to be placed on a building they reside in. Right now it points to a random place next to a highway, which is not correct. Cheers |
| 168898298 | 5 months ago | Hi and welcome to OSM! Thanks for your edits, here I just noticed two small things. * for simple stairs we typically don't create building:part area, but rather draw a simple line tagged as highway=steps.
* Driveways are more suited for reads leading to a house/garage. For parking lots, we use service=parking_aisle Cheers |
| 168818536 | 5 months ago | Here again addr:full should be expanded to individual fields. Opening hours should be conflated. |
| 168817999 | 5 months ago | Hi,
Problem is also in opening hours:
Should be simplified to Mo-Fr 09:00-17:00; Sa 10:00-16:00 I would suggest to revert all import changestes, discuss and review your proposal with members of OSM first and then redo the import. |
| 168818593 | 5 months ago | Hi,
The problem I see here that addr:full is not good way how to add address to POI. Especially it should not replace good address data that was already parsed to addr:* subfields. |
| 113974011 | 5 months ago | I believe that if the multipolygon relation has only a single member (which is the outer way) then is should be deled and the tags moved to the closed way. |
| 113974011 | 5 months ago | Hi,
|