Xvtn's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 147073127 | almost 2 years ago | Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks good, except for the problem that a feature already existed here for Tacos Chalitos. In most cases including this one, duplication is no good. Perhaps there was an issue with the map you were looking at? Can you give more info on which map you used? (osm.org, a smartphone app, etc.)
|
| 146982563 | almost 2 years ago | Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Here are a couple suggestions:
I went ahead and fixed those issues. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for your contributions and again welcome! |
| 147039080 | almost 2 years ago | Hi, and thanks for your contributions! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great! One minor thing I'd suggest is to keep your changesets generally confined to smaller areas and related features. That means before moving on to another area, clicking "save" on the online iD editor. Anyway, thanks again, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! |
| 146912135 | almost 2 years ago | Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes in this set. In this case, everything looks good except one critical issue: The way is tagged as a building. It seems like it should be tagged as an apartment complex rather than a building. Since it's already tagged as landuse=residential and residential=apartments, all that needs to happen here is to remove the building tag altogether.
|
| 146799600 | almost 2 years ago | Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. Everything looks good to me, no complaints! Thanks for your contributions. |
| 146810654 | almost 2 years ago | I checked your edits on this changeset as well, since you requested a review. Everything looks great! Good job on the changeset description - that makes the community part of OSM run a lot smoother.
|
| 146811415 | almost 2 years ago | Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks good to me, no complaints! One minor pointer is that perhaps the large outer parking area could be changed to highway=services. highway=services Thanks for your contributions! |
| 146083955 | almost 2 years ago | Good to know. I'll check it out. |
| 146083955 | almost 2 years ago | That's a good point, I suppose even if something shouldn't be classified as a peak it doesn't really hurt to have the elev data still. I'll do that in the future! On a related note, I often wonder how much "topo" type data belongs in OSM. I've seen some mappers go absolutely crazy adding cliffs everywhere, which (at least on Carto) basically just become visual noise. So I definitely think the line needs to be drawn somewhere.
|
| 146478737 | almost 2 years ago | Yep, that would mean another changeset is necessary. (You can't go back and modify old changesets, you can only create new ones that undo or correct.)
|
| 146341756 | almost 2 years ago | Yep, you got it - your fix looks great! |
| 146462796 | almost 2 years ago | While looking around the area, I noticed a couple other issues: Cascade Cat Rd is tagged as a tramway, not a road. Also, the all-caps name tagging might look good to some people, but unless it's an acronym or something, things shouldn't be tagged that way. It's considered tagging for the renderer: osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer Lmk if that makes sense. If you don't feel like fixing that stuff, I'm happy to - I love editing OSM! Lol. |
| 146462796 | almost 2 years ago | In this changeset, you deleted a piste way called Cowpuncher. You won't be able to see it now because of that.
|
| 146340021 | almost 2 years ago | I'm just now seeing that you've made a bunch of changes/additions to this new apartment complex. In this case, if all the buildings have the same (397) address, I would create an outer area that encompasses the whole complex. Then add the address tags to that, and remove them from the individual buildings.
|
| 146340418 | almost 2 years ago | Hi! Since you requested a review here I looked over your changes. There is some debate to be had regarding what these "inner apt complex" type roads should be classified as. In this case I think I agree with you that they should be parking aisles. Thanks for your contributions! |
| 146341756 | almost 2 years ago | Hi, and thanks for your contribution! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. In this case, it seems to me like you meant to add an apartment complex (meaning the outer area) but you actually added a very large apartment building. In this case the critical part is building=apartments. That should be landuse=residential, residential=apartments. Let me know if you'd like me to change that for you, or if you have any questions. Thanks again! |
| 146343668 | almost 2 years ago | Hi, and thanks for your contribution! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great generally, except for one issue with the opening hours tag. This should use a 24h format, e.g. instead of 2pm you should put 14:00. So, the full opening_hours value should be Su 09:00-14:00,17:00-21:00; Mo-Th 17:00-21:00; Fr 17:00-21:30; Sa 09:00-14:00,17:00-21:30 Writing hours tags can be really tricky and frustrating, so I sometimes use this tool to make sure I've got it right:
Anyway, thanks again and let me know if you have any questions! |
| 146343671 | almost 2 years ago | Hi, and thanks for your contribution! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. Everything looks good to me here. The only minor suggestion I have is that the reference number should not be appended to the name. (way/1240334736) Especially if it's already under the ref tag.
|
| 146606489 | almost 2 years ago | Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. In this case, I see that you added the apts name to the one building. Do you know if the other nearby buildings are also part of Sycamore Village Apartments? If so, I'd say that the name tag should go on an area that encloses all of them. Let me know if you have questions and/or want to add that yourself, or if not I'm happy to add that or show you how. Thanks for your contribution! |
| 146597426 | almost 2 years ago | Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks good to me, no complaints!
|