TheSwavu's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 172193553 | 3 months ago | Hi, There are a number of problems with this: 1. Seperate ways are only used for highways that are physically seperated.
I have reverted these changes. The better way of mapping the lanes you need to be in is by using turn=* Limits on where you can change lanes can be mapped with change=* Happy mapping. |
| 171019487 | 4 months ago | I was also confused. It didn't help that searching for "Southwest National Park Marine Nature Reserve" returned only results from websites that clearly got their information from OSM. Switching the source to "CAPAD 2014" certainly didn't help. |
| 171019487 | 4 months ago | They are not included because they are in effect "negative reserves". Normally you can't fish in a National Park, however some parts of them have restricted fishing allowed. See https://www.legislation.tas.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/sr-2019-067#JS2@EN So there is no "Port Davey Marine Reserve", but there are parts of the Southwest National Park where you are allowed to carry out some fishing. |
| 170982586 | 4 months ago | I would have thought the bigger problem would be that this is now a U-GO servo. Also, why would they sell diesel (fuel:GTL_diesel = yes) and not allow hgv? |
| 170960484 | 4 months ago | Hi, This changeset broke the boundaries of Chatswood and Roseville. When JOSM tells you that a way is used in a boundary relation it is a good idea to pay attention to that and not just delete ways. Thanks. |
| 170960129 | 4 months ago | This changeset has been reverted because it broke the boundaries of Greenwich (2013719) and three other suburbs. |
| 143234759 | 4 months ago | It crazy complicated. There is relation/8383494 (Montebello Islands Conservation Park). Which has been gazetted in 2 parts. I have not put them in separately because it's getting busy enough as it is. They have the same name and IUCN category. There is relation/16229842 Montebello Islands Marine Park which has four different IUCN category areas that are mapped as sub-areas of this relation. |
| 170461199 | 4 months ago | Hi, Do you know if you can exit the centre via node/13070375209 ? From the aerial imagery it looks like you should be able to walk out to the car park. Thanks. |
| 170546651 | 4 months ago | Hi, I fixed the motor_vehicle:conditional on node/13075257284 However, you've got locked=yes which means the gate is "usually locked and not accessible without the key" and opening_hours = 24/7 which indicates the gate is always open. You might want to adjust those. Thanks. |
| 170227204 | 4 months ago | Hi, Just for future reference: for a pedestrian crossing with no line markings or traffic signals, the correct tag is crossing=unmarked. I have fixed these ones. Thanks. |
| 169452028 | 5 months ago | OK. Was just worried if you were running a script it might have needed a small change. Cheers. |
| 169452028 | 5 months ago | It's not clear what "autofix" means here, but you've added another reference to node/1800088617 in relation/16692201 which is not valid. Thanks. |
| 168895967 | 5 months ago | I added a citation needed. Let's see how long till they delete that ;-) |
| 168895967 | 5 months ago | I'm not sure that this belongs in OSM. I have never heard anyone refer to this area as "Brickfield Hill" and everything I can find online says "was known as" (except for Brickfield Hospitality, who would like you to call it that for obvious reasons). Maybe something for OpenHistoryMap? |
| 169542196 | 5 months ago | This is not "Cape Le Grand" it's the Lucky Bay camping area. |
| 167514365 | 5 months ago | This is not "Booth" it's Caloola Farm. https://www.facebook.com/caloolafarm/ Booth is not a settlement. |
| 168514681 | 5 months ago | OSM place classification is not based on Wikipedia |
| 163077552 | 5 months ago | Can't help you then. |
| 163077552 | 5 months ago | You're going to have to be more specific than that. |
| 168960125 | 5 months ago | Wrong changeset. You may have more luck asking at changeset/166964739 |