OpenStreetMap
ndm's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 98220962 | almost 5 years ago | The previous alignment was closer to the GPX tracks I walked -- I think there's probably an offset to the imagery. |
| 98185675 | almost 5 years ago | They are traced from Bing and could be considered "indicative" :-) |
| 98166772 | almost 5 years ago | Near Wooten Road, the track looks like it goes through the corner of a garden and maybe somthing like a substation / gas small green box (on Bing). Maybe its old imagery? |
| 98154267 | almost 5 years ago | Look like a bad idea to delete carefully surveyed on the ground routes using Strava copyrighted information. |
| 97994136 | almost 5 years ago | Or maybe also add a man_made=bridge drawn "underneath" with a "real" name -- in case it gets deleted again? |
| 97994159 | almost 5 years ago | |
| 97946315 | almost 5 years ago | Good job on the euro route, but ncn 4 looks very short now? |
| 97656990 | almost 5 years ago | Your edit broke two major cycle routes:
Please fix if you can. If not see if I can. |
| 97923853 | almost 5 years ago |
Inside lane doesn't enter the roundabout - so mapping as a separate way (even though there is no physical separation) as wer're not allowed "tangents" to roundabouts. |
| 97855985 | almost 5 years ago | The wiki is supposed to document best practice and de facto mapping styles - it’s obviously missing the idea of micro mapping islands and geometry. I think there’s probably a reasonable approach that will match both the macro and micro mapping styles - I’ll try that and see how it goes. I’ll also try to fix the routing issue that your edit has caused. I’m sure the land use changes are fine. Hit and run edits that don’t match local mapping styles don’t have local knowledge aren’t always helpful - local mappers have to be able to keep stuff up to date in the long term. |
| 97854907 | almost 5 years ago | Why? You're deleting useful info -- it may not be relevant to you but the number of lanes was a physical fact -- you can see it on Mapillary. If you have any excuse then please explain yourself. |
| 97856699 | almost 5 years ago | I cnsider these edits to be vandalising the map and removing useful changes. You are removing islands and road flares that exist and have been carefully surveyed. if you have any reasonable excuse then please explain yourself. |
| 97855985 | almost 5 years ago | Ok, if you have any reasonable excuse then please explain yourself. |
| 97855985 | almost 5 years ago | I cnsider these edits to be vandalising the map and removing useful changes -- I have reverted it. You are removing islands and road flares that exist and have been carefully surveyed. |
| 97788745 | almost 5 years ago | Added back a few good bits. |
| 97788543 | almost 5 years ago | |
| 97771310 | almost 5 years ago | You need to adjust your imagery to match the current map rather than just drawing outside of the parking area. |
| 97775869 | almost 5 years ago | It’s planned by the council but the responsible developer is not proposing to build it. Should be deleted. https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/incredibly-frustrating-delay-50m-bristol-4870185 |
| 97656990 | almost 5 years ago | You're removing/changing stuff that was carefully surveyed on foot -- at least check on Mapillary before modifying things -- will revert items as necessary (again). |
| 97499758 | almost 5 years ago | Ok, so you moved the info to a newer building that doesn't really have that name. If it's really obvious it isn't a typo, then just add a note -- don't just modify it -- let local mappers check. I'm only grumpy because this is the second time you've modified stuff without a survey that wasn't obviously wrong. |