This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/67030817 where the changeset comment is: bad mapping, overlapping crude buildings that are not visible and according to a note, likely do not reflect reality any more than the fake park already reverted

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/67030492 where the changeset comment is: delete a fake fantasy park that in no way reflects reality clearly seen in aerial imagery. osm is not the place for fiction or personal wishes, but to document reality.

this actually didn't affect anything here except correcting the syntax, while in plenty of other locations where i've carried out this possibly semi-mechanical edit, the end result was a change in the map rendering to reveal islands, gaps in forest areas, and so on, or to facilitate further additions which would result in the just-mentioned issues if uncorrected, particularly with the canvec import-in-progress where it is clear that data which would be affected is still missing.

just wanted to toss this out in advance should someone question my motivation for the last days' senseless editing activity and indecipherable changeset descriptions.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/66935558 where the changeset comment is: Oops. That did *not* work. Back to the well-worn drawing board.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/66934952 where the changeset comment is: Delete Yet Another #Fake maps.me bogus wilderness hut in a large city

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/66934769 where the changeset comment is: Delete Yet Another #Fake maps.me bogus personal home alpine hut in a city residential neighbourhood

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/66934691 where the changeset comment is: Delete Yet Another #Fake maps.me bogus alpine hut in a city residential neighbourhood

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/66934622 where the changeset comment is: Delete Yet Another #Fake maps.me bogus personal home alpine hut in a city residential neighbourhood

should i revert this changeset before i lose track of these deletions?

thanks

> This presumes that people should check their e-mail daily. I barely check my e-mail once a month. I do know however that if a PM is left for me on my account, it IS flagged in JOSM AND when I'm viewing the map in my browser.
>
> This type of notification only by e-mail needs to be rectified.

This has been brought up in the past, see for example https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1387 which itself refers to https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/908 .

but this has not yet been implemented, and after my recent experiences, i am not sure that automated dumping every notes or changeset comment within the one-to-one communication currently comprising Messages is optimal (keeping them separate is almost essential for active mappers with heavy activity, lest important things get lost in the noise i expect to see from past experience).

Another thing about taking the comments out of the changeset commentary is that unless they return, they become non-public, so that outsiders like myself cannot follow discussions and contribute nothing of interest like myself here.

as an aside, i should take a look to see if the 'bot-wrangler might have automated the messages to me, before i try to think through how best to intermingle Messages with further notifications (see issue 1543 at the above URLs - it is not possible to spam-filter your personal Messages as another mapper has confessed to me privately after coming onto the 'bot-wrangler's radar, while in issue 1543 mappers admit to needing to filter away a particular class of messages due to abuse issues).

i will not comment on the rest, other than to note that i am trawling my way across canada in search of errors, some of which appear abandoned for multiple months to a year, and i have simply attempted to correct them to the best of my ability, and should it happen that any of your changes been flagged and i have addressed the issue stepping on your toes, my apologies, in advance if necessary.

ach, sorry, i overlooked this was not your own changeset.
ignore me :-)

hallo,
glad to see you noticed my changeset, and apologies i did not contact you a week ago when i analysed the OSM inspector area and decided a simple node revert with my tools to restore the dam and river boundaries, was not trivial.

the problem was that somehow, a node on the southeast side of the dam, joining the dam, river, and landuse got pulled out of position and joined/merged to your adjustments of the admin boundary, resulting in the original dam node being deleted/recycled and your admin boundary node serving two purposes.

the OSMI errors visualised by the rendering were that half the dam disappeared and the landuse did not render due to the overlapping ways, which drew my attention to this area.

viewing my own changesets in achavi, i can see the version revert did not work at all as intended in this changeset, when the intent was to restore your last boundary edit version, with the joined node replaced.

i have seen this too often when potlatch restores a pulled node to its correct position in the display, yet finds nothing to update and upload.

anyway, i believe my grave error was to save the boundary to a previous state before your corrections (in order to restore the pulled node back to the dam), and this changeset which attempted to undo that action, turned out to be a no-op.

i am satisfied with your changes, and my apologies for my focus on the pulled node while attempting to understand how best to remedy such changes with unintended errors, like across canada where the original mapper has disappeared.

in retrospect, i should have aborted the multiple changesets, as i abandoned my efforts a week earlier, rather than trying to slog along and achieve some sort of result, correct or not. i lay the blame at michigan state university where i restored a mangled circular intersection to a reasonable state after multiple passes with different tools for each affected segment.

i hope you will forgive me for my blind, pig-headed blundering in this area in a futile attempt at learning, and again, apologies for the additional work it imposed on you.

cheers

i just commented in changeset/66769717 about the `en' locale used by JOSM for that changeset. but then, that does is only one of the many independent LC_* locale settings and it may say nothing about LC_NUMERIC:
$ numfmt 34,46
34,46
$ numfmt 34.46
numfmt: invalid suffix in input: '34.46'
$ LC_NUMERIC=C numfmt 34.46
34.46

here your settings shown above are
locale de
yet this is with editor iD, which may ignore the locale numeric format and impose the culturally insensitive US-centric view upon all locales. i know it annoyed me to see distances in meaningless miles whereas at least potlatch measured distances in sensible metres, despite my system being configured to reflect my location and learned preferences.

but this is for someone more familiar with the internal workings of modern OSen, browsers, and the editors themselves, to explain properly. these should be the interface between the user's native language and conventions and the native osm data format and should operate logically and consistently.

interesting - with the above created_by JOSM/1.5 (14620 en)
i would expect it not to work, although my LC_* locale settings only work part of the time, leading to excessive head-scratching when I fail to add LC_ALL=C to scripts working with raw OSM data with decimal formats not in the system locale.

would your locale-specific decimal format be expected to work with a `de' build of JOSM?

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/66888516 where the changeset comment is: dunno what went titsup here but obviously i removed the tags from the totally wrong item. do i need sleep? am i incompetent? you bet. #PokemonFail #Vanderlismus #IRID10T #ShootMeNow #AndRevertAllMeEdits #A96YearBlockWouldBeNiceToo #mapsme

sounds good, after i satisfied myself that the added detail did not point to the pokemon mapping of rectangular streams i have seen too often slapped atop a house.

so, essentially it is like a miniature moat, or ditch. except that it appears the idea of a moat in osm has been abandoned, and i suspect that a ditch, if correct, will fail to render as desired.

i've cut holes in the reservoir so that the added island and islets will appear from already, to within a few days, as before now the main map showed neither the island nor the ring on it (which my editor treats as an area and displays the same as a lake or pond, thus my confusion earlier).

thanks

hallo,
i was drawn to this changeset of yours due to a number of zero-length segment errors around here, and what caught my eye is that you have added quite a number of near-circular streams.

a stream should be a linear water path flowing from one area to another, so may i ask what you were trying to depict on the east side of the reservoir?

thanks

actually, it was joined as fence/residential before being pulled, where it looked too close for comfort but never got snapped to the nearest object.
just for pedandicity.
like anyone cares.
they don't.
with good reason.
kthxbye

hallo,
i've been trying to fix errors reported like those seen originating from this changeset for v1 of relation/8019612 .

i would guess the closing of this boundary should be what is implied viewing https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-59.00936&lat=48.54864&zoom=12&opacity=0.80&overlays=ring_not_closed,ways

but since this is a boundary with which i am unfamiliar, and i am more likely to guess wrong when there is no history of the object, can you confirm my guess?

the OSMI url above shows several more broken admin boundaries in the area where again i could guess at the missing coastline segments, but again, while i was able to mend the alleged woods nearby by guessing, i do not feel comfortable guessing admin boundaries far from me (or even nearby) without some sort of hand-holding and extensive review.

thanks!

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/66868407 where the changeset comment is: a walkway should not be mapped this way atop a road where that access is implicit, nor should it intersect itself as drawn. not needed.