bhousel's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 79722619 | almost 6 years ago | @atomwaffen, if you have an actual issue with the iD validator please say what it is, so that we can correct it. |
| 76779477 | about 6 years ago | Thanks @interestingaftermath - your changes look excellent! Welcome! 👋 |
| 76654730 | about 6 years ago | Agree with MikeN that either way of doing parking lots is acceptable, however consider that each polygon will probably be rendered with a "P" in the center, so I try to just join them together and not make too many of them. Re: Harris Teeter, I personally prefer mapping all businesses as points and all building footprints as areas. I know a lot of people would say to merge the point with the building, but I prefer leaving them as separate features, in case the business closes down or moves, and it also gives you more control of where the point appears on the map. Like MikeN said if there are multiple businesses sharing a building, you need to map them as points anyway, so that may as well be the way to do it always. |
| 76654730 | about 6 years ago | Hey MikeN and mechrock - thanks for adding all these parking details to the map. As a rule of thumb, we often recommend using the `highway=service` roads to create a "skeleton" throughout the parking lot - the roads entering/exiting and main roads (e.g. where a truck may go), and using `highway=service+service=parking` roads for the aisles which really are just for parking (e.g. where a truck should not go). I'm going to make a few edits to this lot to demonstrate what I mean.. Sorry for the nitpicking - I really do appreciate your work.. Keep it up! ✌️ |
| 76499960 | about 6 years ago | Thanks for this edit, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! |
| 69210691 | about 6 years ago | Picking "destination" in the access dropdown should do what you want. It means that people may use that road for local traffic or if they have a good reason (e.g. to deliver something).. For more info see the descriptions of the access values here: access=* |
| 50929921 | over 6 years ago | skquinn, please be nice. It was one of the user's first edits, and they even added a `fixme` tag because they didn't know what tag to use. Also - it was 2 years ago. Just fix it if it bothers you. If it hasn't been fixed by now, maybe nobody cares. |
| 74376654 | over 6 years ago | Hi Richard Pates, welcome to OSM and thanks for your contribution! We aren't allowed to use Google Streetview as a reference for editing OpenStreetMap.. However this area does have a Bing Streetview image that shows the stop sign, and we *are* allowed to use that. In the editor, you can press "F" to open the data panel which shows different map data that you are allowed to use, including Bing and a few others. Thanks! |
| 72629480 | over 6 years ago | freebeer, the issue about the duplicate nodes is https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6327 |
| 72255504 | over 6 years ago | freebeer - they are using an internal fork of the iD editor. The publicly available iD editor does flag overlapping and disconnected ways, and will add changeset tags to say whether the user has ignored the warnings. Please keep your thoughts about what editors people should use to yourself. |
| 71802723 | over 6 years ago | Oh, this looks like a bug in iD 2.15.3
I'll release an update soonish and we can cleanup all the misspellings. |
| 71481717 | over 6 years ago | You just helped them by copying their spam tags into a changeset discussion. |
| 69948294 | over 6 years ago | Hi dieterdriest - it is not an undiscussed mechanical edit. I visually reviewed all the buildings while scrolling around in iD and used the new square building validator to fix them. Squaring multiple items is a capability that JOSM users have enjoyed for a long time, so it's great that iD will be able to do it now too. (You would probably be surprised how big a deal this is for some people, but we get a lot of requests for this feature). Thanks for reviewing my changeset, and have a super day. |
| 63840791 | about 7 years ago | This changeset was reverted in #64233874 |
| 63876642 | about 7 years ago | This changeset was reverted in #64233620 |
| 63880905 | about 7 years ago | This changeset was reverted in #64233538 |
| 63733841 | about 7 years ago | This changeset was reverted in #64233017 |
| 63734421 | about 7 years ago | This changeset was reverted in #64232830 |
| 63734992 | about 7 years ago | This changeset was reverted in #64232736 |
| 63737071 | about 7 years ago | This changeset was reverted in #64232577 |