Bitte achte bei deinen Changesets darauf, dass der Datenbestand mit dem Changeset stets konsistent und möglichst fehlerfrei ist! Es könnte jederzeit jemand die Daten zum derzeitigen Stand abfragen und in einer Karte für ein Navi verwenden.

Sowas wirft dann mitunter ein schlechtes Licht auf die Datenqualität der OSM.

Daher fände ich es klasse, wenn das vor Dienstag erledigt sein könnte.

Bitte schau dringend nochmal über die Linien drüber! Hier kreuzen etliche Linien andere, das wirkt nicht gewollt.

Looks better. Please avoid adding paths like 689311621 (on the Marktplatz), as it is a fictional path, non-existent in reality. Please ask in the forums of openstreetmap how to deal with such fictional paths, as I'm not sure how this should be done. I'm just almost certain that adding paths is not the right way to do it. Refer to your changeset on the forum. node/6466435003 looks rather unnecessary as well.

Keep in mind that (as far as I can tell from the press release of Stadt Darmstadt) the Ostparkweg is mostly a fictional route consisting of paths and streets which have other names. So "Ostparkweg" should not appear on the usual map, but only on rather specific overlays/maps using the informations found in the relation "Ostparkweg". An exception to that rule might be the path along the Darmbach ahead of the woog (along the Felsinghalle). You seem to be involved with the Ostparkweg and thus surely know better than me :).

The key thing, the relation, looks good! At some places it might be necessary to split paths to only include the parts of the path which belong to the Ostparkweg to the relation.

One more hint: Think about using a 'proper' editor like josm instead of the in-browser one (called iD). This involves some learning curve but it pays off!

Again: Thanks for contributing to the map, and thanks for your will to learn "how the map works" :).

I have now reverted this changeset (see changeset/70130705) as well as the others you did yesterday evening. See osm.wiki/Relation for a feature of openstreetmap, which is exactly designed for representing hiking trails consisting of existing paths, like the one you wanted to add. If you have questions don't hesitate to visit and ask in the forum(s), http://forum.openstreetmap.org . The map and its contributors appreciate all work done to the map -- but it should be compliant to the rules and consistent with existing data :).

(now also in english, sorry for commenting only in german :) )

Hi lempinet,

you have added paths in parallel to already existent paths or even overlaying them -- is there a good reason for that?

In my humble opinion the hiking path "Ostparkweg" should have been created as a relation with the existing paths.

In the current version (with your changeset) I only see problems for the map.

Could you please comment on these issues rather quickly? I'd go for a revert beginning of next week, if not getting any response.

Thanks for your understanding and best regards
t

Hallo lempinet,

du hast Wege parallel zu einigen vorhandenen Wegen erstellt -- gibt es dafür einen Grund?

Meines Erachtens nach hätte der Wanderweg "Ostparkweg" als Relation mit den vorhandenen Wegen getaggt werden müssen.

In der derzeitigen Version gibt es eigentlich nur Probleme mit den Daten.

Könntest du dich zeitnah zu den Beweggründen äußern? Ansonsten veranlasse ich gegen Anfang kommender Woche einen Revert deines Changesets.

Beste Grüße
t

Hi antnrslr,

afaik this is an area with industry, thus your marker "tourist attraction" "vibrant village" confuses me.

As you haven't given a changeset comment may I ask you to give a short explanation for me?

Thanks in advance and best regards
tudacs