This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65083029 where the changeset comment is: OSM is not a paintbox for Pokemon fiction, but a serious mapping project. Please draw only what exists in real life, else your changes will be reverted as vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65083017 where the changeset comment is: OSM is not a paintbox for Pokemon fiction, but a serious mapping project. Please draw only what exists in real life, else your changes will be reverted as vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65078827 where the changeset comment is: At under 100 metres and 14 degrees north, this is no alpine hut. #maps.me #randomtags

Translation into english: SHAPE UP OR GET THE FECK OUT.

This is no way to address a community member; if you have a legit beef then let the DWG handle it rather than making repeated threats over the past weeks.

And this for the minor sin of tracing roof outlines from available legal imagery, which appears to be common worldwide for obvious reasons.

Divert your anger to the HOT mappers whose buildings barely match reality, and by comparison a roof outline unless done to HOT standards in austria is hardly worth ruffling feathers about, much less frothing at the mouth. Or to maps.me users who get amenity categories totally wrong or place multiple nodes for the same amenity, none near the actual location.

I hardly see adding missing buildings as suspicious of an unspoken sponsored agenda as who benefits? The competition? Hardly. Commercial organised mappers who have gotten involved with OSM seem to be entirely concerned with the road network - telenav, lyft, amazon, microsoft to name a few, or mapbox and their outsourcers, with other interests, to name a few I am familiar with.

Enough from my side. It gets tedious to repeatedly read these repetitive and increasingly rabid rants about a trivial violation of the wiki guidelines, and demands to leave, like above, are the sort of de-motivation that OSM can do without for non-vandalism.

By the way, I have exclusively drawn roof outlines in my mapping, even when I got a view through a Dachfenster in hurricane country that the roof overlapped the actual building by 1,6 metres. Your tone is like threatening the banhammer if someone fails to square their outlines, for which Frans S among others can be seen politely chastising HOT mappers on a regular basis, never escalating.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65058300 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me Whatever, spammed as private residence

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65058165 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus personal maps.me Whatever, spammed as private Whatever

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65057557 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me Whatever, spammed as private residence

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65056349 where the changeset comment is: OSM is not a paintbox, but a serious mapping project. Please draw only what exists in real life, else your changes will be reverted as vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65056334 where the changeset comment is: OSM is not a paintbox, but a serious mapping project. Please draw only what exists in real life, else your changes will be reverted as vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65056283 where the changeset comment is: OSM is not a paintbox, but a serious mapping project. Please draw only what exists in real life, else your changes will be reverted as vandalism

aieeee....

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bielefeld-Verschw%C3%B6rung

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B*******d_Conspiracy

Nitpicker alert:

No worries about keeping the editor open for days; after a length of time (20 hours? 24 hours? don't ask how i know this) the changeset will be automagically closed, just as it will be closed after an hour of inactivity.

Saving with my potlatch 2 editor is a bit different, as i can work for hours to create a boatload of local changes in a limited area, then after sleeping, awake in order to upload the changes and continue working, only to find out the editor stroke browser crashed or was killed and my hours of work were all for nowt (don't ask how many times that happened to me to finally have given up on that idea of getting Top OSM Contrib Rankness).

Instead i used to edit taking the tutorial advice of saving regularly, with the twist that my editor does not automagically close the changeset for each `s'ave, rather, i need to manually `c'lose the changeset before i turn my interest elsewhere, but until then it's all one monster changeset. unless i forget to watch the clock and the witching 3600 seconds passes and i start a new changeset, and can no longer skew the average potlatch edit size stats in the eternal editor wars.

i don't know if it is possible to change your iD default if you like so you can do a large edit in a small area of osm whitespace, regularly saving to avoid data loss, but keeping all the context into one changeset for that area.

anyway, enough off-topic. i might have to analyse the problematic lyft changesets using iD that somehow break things, to see if they can do the same, grouping the changes for one road segment into one change so i don't get lost following the chain.

:wq
^X^C

swimming pool means swimming pool, nothing is implied about access.

private pools should be tagged with access= as appropriate, not deleted. private pools are commonly mapped around the world.

they are big enough to be used as landmarks, unlike, say, a private grill; and more importantly, have a practical use for rescue workers who make heavy use of osm data, in particular, firefighters, who may need a convenient potential source of water in a hurry.

'Allo,

you have added a short unconnected primary highway way/607487715 over top of a waterway here.

can you fix this?

also, it looks like the building outlines you are drawing have not been given right angles. your editor should have an easy way to do this, and the resulting map will look much better.

thanks!

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/65027300 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me castle which does not exist in the middle of the road

one can be added manually.

but even then it would not get filled out automagically, so due to that extra bit of effort, i personally preferred to detail how i used my source(s) as part of an overly-long changeset comment, and in case of regularly switching and comparing layers, adding a diverging source= tag to any appropriate item, for better detail than the default changeset source= or aerial-imgery-used fields i have seen get used.

Mojn zmoore, moin moin Spencer, e ciao Team Lyft...

i have taken a closer look at this missing section of the cycle route (found earlier today in a different changeset comment), as it has undergone complex editing in the past month and was not so easy to analyse at sleep-deprived discovery, as were the bus routes (broken much more recently).

i believe this is the problem edit, made in iD editor.

if you look below at the listing of the two ways, the original 2234... revision 6 of cali ave was split in two, leaving a very short original segment southwest, intersecting the separate bike path. that still remains today as part of the cycle route:

Part of

Relation Dumbarton - East - West Connector (1109585)

the longer segment looks to have then been split repeatedly into short segments such as the next changeset visualised at
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=64060805
and so on.

it is my guess that we are seeing a bug in iD that i have not yet read about (i spent last night trying to read and learn about what issues iD has in editing routes like this, and could only understand there is an ordering issue which i do not believe is at all applicable here).

it appears that iD splits a way that is a member of such a relationship and at least sometimes, loses one (maybe more, not yet spotted by me?) of the way relations - i am guessing from the newly-created segment as here, that being in this case the longest one.

well, i have no conclusions, i just wanted to present the results of my research and hope someone from osm with far more knowledge of routes like this, or of iD internals, will jump in here, even if i am not sure how likely this changeset comment is to attract any attention.

And i don't know where the best way to find these mapper experts is, perhaps the general questions forum... we will see. :-)

yours &c.

Is source given in the changeset comments involved with this tagging? no. therefore it is not redundant information here and by deleting it you have caused a loss of info that was presented in an accepted format at the time it was created, as well as a defended possibility even today (there was a statement from a DWG member, probably not in official capacity, that source-tagging individual objects is an accepted and encouraged procedure as of a week or so ago for certain types of mapping).

If source= is not damaging the data, it should not specifically be deleted, particularly when people are more concerned about legal source data rights than in the past.

If you do not understand the osm.wiki/Tag:note=, then your schooling was lacking, but for those unfortunate enough not to have had to learn and speak fluent latin before we were even allowed to *think* about learning german or any living romance language, you should refer to a dictionary, in which the actual north-american-biased legal specifics of one coöperative living, which term is clearly based on the more generic definition applicable here, does not even appear until much further down in the list of possible definitions.

A machine translation is highly likely to be more US-centric and reflect the increasing dominance of that culture and is equally likely to give more howlers like that in a search for a simple if not logical replacement of a term without actually having any understanding or trying to impart some wisdom. (which is why i do not even refer to such translations for my worldwide work in osm.)

Try feeding this load of bollocks into a machine translation into your native tongue, and see if i'm not right.

if you do not understand, as your last question appears to indicate, then show your fellow mappers some respect before destroying their contributions out of ignorance and depriving others, such as myself who appreciated seeing and learning of the condomium relationship without need to ask, `what the fsck is this'.

If my tone here is inappropriate for osm communication and needs work, it is because i have been unable to sleep for well over a week as my osm activity will reveal, and probably because i am overreacting to the actions and comments here in typical osmf-list manner, as well as dealing with a growing number of increasingly aggressive anonymous osm users. for which i apologise.

(seeks some other way to let off steam, and spies a little puppy to be kicked)

Hola Team Lyft / Spencer,

can i ask you to take a look at this changeset, using the cycle layer as the background for its bbox,
changeset/64420119#map=17/37.43184/-122.14026&layers=CN
?

It looks to me that there is a gap in the cycle route 03 here, that i would expect to be mostly continuous.

I found this with a specific view towards the route relations touched by other changes, including
relation/105445#map=14/37.4291/-122.1326&layers=CN
which i manually checked for gaps similar to the bus routing, and happened to notice near the north end of it, a nearby gap just west, that i suspect to be related to these edits.

i am not familiar with this cycle route, nor how it has been mapped in the past, but it looks to me a bit strange that the gap seems to correspond to lyft edit boundaries, as seen to the right of this comment.

thanks.

as i do not know a better way, i am manually inspecting the different route relations in this area for obvious gaps, as while i was able to refer to the osm inspector to better visualise things, i fear i do not know how to use it, or any other route validator tools out there, as i am but a beginner despite my years in the project.

thanks!

thanks, barbari