OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
106964046 about 4 years ago

Oooops, wie kommt aus zeitgleich geöffneten Nachrichtenseiten etwas in den Maustastenpuffer von OSM? Mir ein Rätsel. Danke fürs Korrigieren...

110384286 over 4 years ago

Hallo, das Problem mit abgerissenen Gebaeuden kenne ich auch. Hatte beim Durchfahren Hausnummern etc notiert und mich beim Editieren gewundert, warum da kein Gebaeude steht. Alles klar :)

102352354 over 4 years ago

Ups, es soll natuerlich post_box heissen. Hab's korrigiert, danke.

94285116 over 4 years ago

Dear Elyana,
thanks for your comment and sorry for my poor Spanish (in any event, the local language would probably be Portuguese).
As I am just a hobby armchair mapper from Europe, I can not tell how the situation is locally. Most probably it is one reservoir, a road embankment crosses it, and the two parts of the reservoir are connected by a culvert. Not being there I cannot tell. For the moment being, I have split the reservoir into two so it won't give any more conflicts when running checking algorithms.
Kind regards

102923226 over 4 years ago

Typefoutje verholpen, bedankt.

74192539 over 4 years ago

Thanks for the flowers but I just added a comment, the tag creation is due to kreuzschnabel :)

98436815 almost 5 years ago

Hello, thanks for correcting and please indicate that you corrected the typo. I thought it was still wrong and started to check the buildings...

96122560 about 5 years ago

Twee soorten building:part ingevoerd, attributen van gebouwen verwijderd. Bedankt voor de discussie.

96122560 about 5 years ago

Dag Leo,
nog een opmerking:
Ik geb nu in de editor gekeken en zie dat je mijn wijzigingen heeft verwijderd voor ik iets aan kon doen.
Omdat er nu de witte kleur van de bovenste verdieping ontbreekt heb je de informatie die ik met moeite heb ingevoegd vernield. Je kunt nog die shape points zien die bij de verwijderde building:parts hoorden.
Gelieve de wijzigingen terug draaien AUB. Ik sta graag klaar voor discussie.

96122560 about 5 years ago

Dag Leo,
ik had goede redenen om een tweede building:part net binnen de omtrekken toe te voegen (de gebouwen zijn niet dubbel ingetekend, maar men moet wel heel nauw kijken).
Namelijk, de twee verdiepingen beneden hebben een andere kleur (het aangegeven rood) dan de bovenste verdieping (wit). Ik wilde deze situatie correct weergeven.
Als je gewoon de rode kleur aan het hele gebouw toevoegd, mis je belangrijke details.
Mocht je een andere manier vinden om verschillende kleuren aan verschillende verdiepingen te geven hoor ik graag erover. Het was namelijk een "workaround". Er zijn ongetelde andere voorbeelden van tweekleurige gebouwen hier in de regio. Ik vind dat die een realistische weergave verdienen.
Alvast bedankt.

93335132 about 5 years ago

Yes, that's a problem which arises if you have a physics dossier open on another screen with formulae ;-)
Thanks mueschel for correcting.

87405407 over 5 years ago

Bedankt voor de navraag. Ik ben vandaag nog een keer langs gefietst. Het korte stukje dat de fietspad kruist is inderdaad eenrichtingsverkeer (behalve voor fietsers) maar het stuk strat ten oosten niet, dit zat fout en is nu gecorrigeerd. Hetzelfde geldt voor een deel van de Slot Loeveseinstraat. Ik denk dat nu alles weer netjes in elkaar zit.

68570530 over 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment, I guess you are right about inherited attributes. The way already existed and had a name (which I could never have given from aerial imagery). I assume I extended it, i.e. the trajectory is indeed based on satellite images. However I am not sure whether my predecessor took the name from Google. This might be the critical point.

89426638 over 5 years ago

Hallo Arndt,
das Abbiegeverbot fiel mir bei der Durchfahrt in Mayen Anfang August auf und ich habe es schnell notiert. Irrtuemer sind da durchaus moeglich.
Vor Ort kann ich erst wieder im Dezember nachschauen. Ich bin jetzt erst aus Ferien zurueck, konnte daher nicht schneller reagieren, haette es aber auch vorsichtshalber geloescht. Danke fuers Vorgreifen. Wie gesagt, ich werde es in einigen Monaten vor Ort checken koennen. Bis dahin kann es so bleiben.
Gruss Tanja

68570530 over 5 years ago

Dear Andy,

thanks for your comment, however I am extremely surprised by it, even slightly shocked.

When editing in Indonesia 1-2 years ago, I *exclusively* relied on aerial imagery available by Bing or Mapbox and *never* on anything from Google. Neither did I add such a tag. I am of course aware since the day I started contributing to OSM that proprietary data must not be used for contributing.

I am a hobby mapper located in Europe who either uses aerial imagery in OSM or local knowledge/survey, so I feel somewhat offended by the above allegation.

You say that there was a source=Google tag on the above way. However, it has been deleted and I can not find the alleged tag anymore.

It is 100% impossible that I provided such a tag in all the 9 years that I now contribute to OSM.

Can you provide me with a screenshot or other proof that this tag was actually present?

I am even beginning to wonder whether my account has not been hacked. No idea if such a thing has ever happened in the OSM world...

Thanks for enlightening me,

Tanja

74214461 over 5 years ago

It seems you have done the corrections already, so I won't touch this piece anymore. Thanks for the hint and corrections.

79413840 almost 6 years ago

You are right. I corrected it to field. Seems it was a copy/paste error. Sorry for that...
Stay healthy, everyone...

66066805 about 6 years ago

Good afternoon,
thanks for your comments, however I can not comment on the layer problem, as you did not provide # of ways.
Instead of the cloudy bing aerial imagery, in this area I used mapbox aerial imagery, which is extremely high quality, and usually I only tag a bridge when it is clearly visible.
Thanks in advance for providing numbers.
Concerning the way #515867542, all I can say is that it had been created wrongly as secondary road, and that from aerial imagery it seemed to me that the class had at least to go down by one (from secondary to tertiary). If you have local knowledge that allows you to attribute to running within a residential area only, fine with that.
This is what we call iterative optimization. I see nothing fundamentally wrong with that, especially because classification of roads can never be done based on aerial mapping alone. What finally counts is someone on the spot who can provide official data and/or local knowledge.
Best and happy mapping

60035614 over 6 years ago

Hello ravalim,
thanks for your comments. I have reviewed the edits and agree with you. I have changed the attributes.
Best regards.

72829003 over 6 years ago

Korrektur: eing*e*tragene