Taya_S's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 171197536 | 3 months ago | Reverted |
| 171197406 | 3 months ago | Reverted |
| 171197342 | 3 months ago | Reverted |
| 171197298 | 3 months ago | Reverted |
| 169969189 | 3 months ago | It seems that someone deleted the old Soul buoy/null island a bit before you created a new one. I've asked the user that deleted it why they did so. |
| 169531102 | 3 months ago | Question, why did you delete the null-island/Soul Buoy in this changeset? |
| 172124021 | 3 months ago | Actually, `roundabout=yes' itself is also pretty meaningless and even discouraged junction=roundabout |
| 172124021 | 3 months ago | You might want to check `roof:shape=y` on way/32844781 |
| 171992709 | 3 months ago | I have removed the relations and the id=0 tags in changeset/172100209 |
| 172082490 | 3 months ago | Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091 |
| 172082435 | 3 months ago | Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091 |
| 172082420 | 3 months ago | Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091 |
| 172082401 | 3 months ago | Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091 |
| 172082389 | 3 months ago | Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091 |
| 172060916 | 3 months ago | Nodes like this node/287558718 do not describe any features that exist in real life, they just describe the shape of other objects. Such nodes should not have an operator tag. You might also want to check objects such as
When you add the operator tag you're essentially stating that they control that object and have the ability to close it down, and that they are responsible for it. Best regards,
|
| 172060916 | 3 months ago | Hello, In this changeset you added the operator tag to everything including thousands of untagged nodes and several untagged ways used by relations. Please revert those changes. Best regard,
|
| 171992709 | 3 months ago | The normal workflow would be to just adjust the existing objects instead of replacing them with new ones. You always have to be mindful of already existing data. Otherwise you might end up with situations like this, where a previously mapped road overlaps with newly added buildings way/1115154608 |
| 171992709 | 3 months ago | Thank you for your response RKhabib, Please in the future list the sources you used in the changeset. Furthermore, it is generally encouraged to not delete old data and replace it but rather update the existing data. So please be mindful of that. And also please do not create relations for buildings like you've done now.Both relation/19610655 and relation/19607211 should be deleted. Each individual building should just be tagged on its own with no relation at all. Please also explain what you mean by "id=0" which you've added to all the buildings (Example: way/1430433074) Best regards,
|
| 172040724 | 3 months ago | Please see osm.org/user_blocks/18739 |
| 171992744 | 3 months ago | What "latest image maps and data retrieval" did you use? |