Hi @ohiomapper. Indeed I did make this change and it is problematic and I will revert it. However, there is something wrong with putting two nodes at the same location with different data. For example, passing through that entrance doesn't simultaneously put you in two different units. So those nodes should be moved to different locations or different levels, or at the very least, use the same node with `name=822;824` or something along those lines.

Hi fcphantom,

Can you reduce the number of points in these circles? There is no need to have 2000 nodes to represent a round building. Even 100 is probably too much.

See osm.wiki/Generalization for some info on it.

Thanks.

FYI,
way/703521442 is broken. Would you like a chance at cleaning it up? It doesn't make sense as is.

I believe your comment said that I added or modified an address, but that is incorrect. The bot edited another tag in the object and your changeset comment (that I agree with in general) shouldn't have been made since my (bot's) change didn't actually touch the address.

Oh, the houses shouldn't be part of the boundary relation either. Otherwise walking into someone's home would take you out of the neighborhood, which would be odd.

You've named every house in the neighborhood as "Summerlake". AFAIK, that is not the right use for the "name" tag on a house. Also, some of the paths in the area I've noticed double back on themselves, which isn't allowed. Any chance you could clean things up there? Thanks.

Thanks @Wulf4096! I have created a bug (https://gitlab.com/b-jazz/https_all_the_things/issues/11) and will look into it.

This way really ought to be deleted. It doesn't match what is on the ground (no separate physical path exists) and it is causing lots of validation errors. It violates one of the first tenets of mapping: map what is on the ground.

If there is truly a cycleway that needs to be represented, it would be better to do this with a route relation of by adding bike lane tags to the appropriate routes. But a separate way is just wrong as far as I can tell.

Do any of you object to me deleting this?

I think between what @DFH808 did and what I did, the way is pretty accurate now.

I didn't place it there. I just changed a tag after the fact. You might want to ask the original mapper (changeset/71534748) the question instead. It looks like you corrected the location in the latest update. Thanks.

Hello. I'm guessing you are doing this as an SEO company on behalf of a client, right? (There is nothing wrong with that, but there are a couple of guidelines that you should be following.) Can you reply so that we can discuss this? Thanks.

Does this consulting business actually exist at this location? The satellite imagery (which can be a few years old) for where the marker was placed shows it in the middle of a grove of trees.

Reverted this change (changeset/74371182) since it was made to an existing point in the middle of a road. If you want to create a point of interest for your business, you should drop a new point on top of your building, not in the middle of the road.

Welcome to OSM @kepesk.

If you ever have any questions about mapping and want to talk to a local mapper, I'm in the area and would be happy to help.

Thanks for your contributions.

Hi fellow Bryce,

Are you familiar with this neighborhood? Does the park boundary really include private homes? That seems unusual, but not out of the realm of possibility.

Hi there @asanad,

I'm trying to track down a problem with building imports and a specific error that I've been seeing. Maybe you can help me with where you get your data. What is the gpx data file that you are using? Can you provide a link/source?

The error I'm particularly interested in is around node node/6581044967. See how the way goes in towards the middle of the house and then doubles back on itself and crosses over itself. I see this a lot and am trying to find the source of the errors.

Any lead you can provide will be helpful.

Thanks.

Thanks for letting me know of the issue. I've added a bug (https://gitlab.com/b-jazz/https_all_the_things/issues/10) to add checking for long descriptions before making a change.

As abbreviations aren't "allowed" in ways, I've changed "S Lafayette St" to "South Lafayette Street".

I'm not quite clear what you're saying as I had to run this through google translate. It sounds like you are debating some aspect of a node I recently changed. It might be helpful to know that I only changed the website and didn't create or change anything else. If you have an issue with another tag, you might want to look back in the history and find the person that created/changed the tag you are debating.

Is there any significance to breaking up the Big Bend WMA into those adjoining regions? Seems like it should be combined into larger areas, shouldn't it?