aharvey's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 93009976 | about 5 years ago | I'd usually think of these as water=reservoir with reservoir_type=water_storage even though they might be known as "ponds". I'd usually keep pond for the kind found in council parks etc that are mostly landscaped features, not there for storing water for subsequent agricultural use. |
| 92879816 | about 5 years ago | Yeah local knowledge and your GPS data is best, there is some imagery here from Maxar and ESRI which shows some construction detail (available in most editors) which can be used too, but of course local knowledge is going to be more up to date. |
| 92879816 | about 5 years ago | Hi I've reverted these changes because you've stated you used a copyrighted source landgate which as far as I know has licensing terms incompatible with OSM. So please don't use data we don't have permission to use. If you have local knowledge of this area please do contribute from your ground surveys. |
| 67307489 | about 5 years ago | Ultimately we can only map so far as the signage on the ground indicates. "discouraging" access is quite vague, does that mean legally you're allowed to ride but the park authority prefers if you don't? |
| 92613423 | about 5 years ago | If backyard swimming pools are visible from the imagery I believe it's okay to map them, osm.wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information does touch on this and comes to the view that they are around the limit of what's acceptable to map. I think they are useful for people building out property data, people doing research, councils to check any legally required fences are there so while you don't have to map them, it's okay to and once these have been mapped they generally shouldn't be removed unless they are no longer there. |
| 92613823 | about 5 years ago | hi I saw you added way/702577536/ as a tunnel, however at https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-33.73204444444445&lng=151.00581944444446&z=17&focus=photo&pKey=FW1WjK0_GOz5K2Nwy09Zkg&x=0.19471178723412683&y=0.5153911999735892&zoom=1.5412844036697249 it looks like it's ground level, it doesn't go into a tunnel, it's just that a building was built on top. In this case I don't think it should be mapped as a tunnel. |
| 85352377 | about 5 years ago | Since I didn't hear back from you and after I did a search and couldn't find any track here, and given you added it from online refernences only without a ground survey I've removed this track. Normally I'd suggest in these cases where you can't confirm to add a note instead, but given I can't find it on the ground, I don't see the point in opening a note now. If you do find a track here, please collect a GPS trace and upload it to OSM. |
| 92541504 | about 5 years ago | this area was already mapped as wood so I deleted way/859429890/history |
| 67307489 | about 5 years ago | Hi, I see you've added this as a mountain bike route, is there signage indicating it's either open or closed to mountain bikes or bicycles? We've had a report from Horbart City Council that this is a walking track only, so trying to understand what is there on the ground. -- on behalf of the Data Working Group,
|
| 92378536 | about 5 years ago | hi I removed name=Lookout because osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things |
| 92291666 | about 5 years ago | The bottom no bicycles sign is no longer there, only the top two, I have Mapillary captured, but won't get a chance to upload it for maybe a week. |
| 52024784 | about 5 years ago | Agree with @inas here. |
| 92223206 | about 5 years ago | see also comment at changeset/92223392 about this |
| 92223392 | about 5 years ago | Agreed with ortho_is_hot here, the railway is underground so shouldn't have any shared nodes with the road nor be a crossing or level_crossing. |
| 92223993 | about 5 years ago | Did you see this was a disused railway here and also disused level crossing already tagged https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/1597385992 so I believe how it was previously by the local mapper was right. |
| 92075662 | about 5 years ago | looks good. There is a clear "Private Road" sign showing for Sea Street so all good. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-33.83224722222223&lng=151.150425&z=17&focus=photo&pKey=kX6AM3TbnIBbucyHzmHizA&x=0.4532493606392&y=0.5196650251542435&zoom=0.8103975535168195 |
| 91797243 | about 5 years ago | If signposted it's still okay to map the relation, because you're mapping the signage.
|
| 91539776 | over 5 years ago | The tag for driveways is highway=service + service=driveway, I've fixed this. |
| 91546361 | over 5 years ago | also highway=service + service=driveway is the tag to use for these driveways I've fixed that up in changeset/91570614 see service=driveway |
| 91546361 | over 5 years ago | I've unglued the power line which you glued to the road changeset/91570584 |