Hoi Frank,

Om dit helemaal netjes te mappen horen de (meeste?) vestingen een binnengrens te hebben, maar dit heb ik zelf (nog) niet op die manier gedaan. Het zou ideaal zijn om deze grens aan limietpalen te linken, maar deze zijn lang niet overal gemapt.

Als je een meerwaarde ziet in het mappen van binnengrenzen van vestingen, dan kan dit zeker gedaan worden. Ik weet alleen niet hoe snel ik hier zelf mee zal zijn.

Er bestaan ook een paar forten waar een weg of spoor dwars doorheen gaat. Zie je die ook graag als multipolygoon met twee "outer" onderdelen?

Mvg,

Casper

Hoi AnkEric,

"Graslanden" zoals osm.org/way/1019799535 die je over wegen heen mapt vind ik afbreuk doen aan de kaart. Wegen zijn namelijk geen grasland. Dat de berm uit gras bestaat vind ik geen reden om een grote gras polygoon over de weg heen te mappen.

Op een wat positievere toon, dankjewel voor je recente edits in Nieuwegein. Ik kom daar regelmatig, dus als je lokale kennis nodig hebt kan ik je daarvan voorzien.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Casper

Hoi Tilia,

Witte gaten laten vallen waar anders een incorrecte 3dShapes landuse ligt vind ik juist nuttig, want door die witte gaten valt het goed op dat er iets ontbreekt, zoals hier dus een voetbalveld. Op dit soort dingen kom ik vaak zelf nog eens terug, of een andere attente mapper voegt dingen toe in een gebied dat ik op deze manier heb voorbewerkt.

Die witte gaten zijn dus geen eindproduct, maar ze maken latere edits in hetzelfde gebied wel overzichtelijker.

Mvg,

Casper

Hi again. I've restored admin_level tags for all 30 governments for which I had removed the tag earlier. admin_level=Provinsi is now admin_level=4.
Have you been able to make any progress with the other questionable values yet?

Hello and thank you for joining the conversation.

I just read the documentation a bit better (which I should have done sooner), and I found that osm.wiki/Tag:office%3Dgovernment mentions admin_level=* as a useful combination with office=government "to indicate the administrative level (national, provincial, etc)."

With that bit of information and the OSM convention to give numbers to admin_level=* tags (osm.wiki/Key:admin_level), I'll make an effort to restore the tags and change them to admin_level=4, which corresponds to the provincial level, if that's okay with you.

My apologies for my inconsiderate deletions of this tag, but I hope the restoration that I plan to do tomorrow will make up for it. I might also update some Wiki pages once I've done more research following NiLaKol's information that many more buildings contain an admin_level tag.

@adiatmad May I ask you to look for more admin_level=* tags in Indonesia that are not a number? I've seen on Taginfo that there are a few and I suspect that some of them are also in this country, so we might be able to improve those tags as well.

I hope we can settle the matter this way together. Good day to both of you :)

I wouldn't call my POV European per se, as I'm just following the documentation relevant to admin_level=*. The tag I removed wasn't a number or in English, as is customary in OSM, it's not consistently used and it's undocumented, which is why I am treating it as a tagging mistake, as so many tags in OSM. If you know about an alternative tag that would fit in its place I would be happy to add it.

Hi there. Thanks for having a look at my edit.

It's not common as only a few dozen of these buildings had the tag. This use is not what admin_level=* is intended for, so I cleaned it up. I looked at each individual case, and they are many years old, so the tag doesn't seem to be actively used.

Hi there. Thanks for your contribution here.

What did you mean by the tag highway=Route 53 ? It is unconventional to use a highway=* tag for undocumented purposes.

Kind regards,
Casper

It's my own proposal and I've moved away from using defensive_structure=*. See osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Defensive_structures

I plan to put the proposal up for voting once I've had some time to expand the Examples paragraph. Comments on the proposal are welcome.

The matter is that many buildings are tagged with tags that are duplicates of what this Wiki page recommends and which are already marked as deprecated on the Wiki, such as building:height=* instead of height=*, building:roof:colour=* instead of roof:colour=*, building:roof:shape=* instead of roof:shape=* etc. In this changeset I changed some duplicate keys to the more common and better documented variants.

Hoi Jelle,

Sorry, dit was me compleet ontschoten. Ik moet je ook eerlijk vertellen dat ik persoonlijk het concept van highway=pedestrian + area=yes maar vreemd vind, dus als jij er iets moois van kunt maken zonder deze changeset volledig terug te draaien, dan heel graag.

Mvg,

Casper

Misschien staat er een naambord op het huis, dan zou het correct zijn. Anders zou ik de naam verwijderen om verwarring met het echte fort te voorkomen. Laat vooral weten als het je te binnen schiet!

Mvg :)

Hoi Frank,

Waarom heb je bij osm.org/way/443761142 de naam van het fort op een gebouw gezet?

Mvg,
Casper

Hi RobinSJ,

Why did you duplicate the fort here? It has already been mapped in full, see osm.org/way/954093813 .

I have removed the duplications in osm.org/changeset/114221452 .

Kind regards,

Casper

Hoi dikkeknodel,

Dankjewel voor de aanvulling :)

Mvg,
Casper

@grin I recommend also fixing other issues while you're doing mass edits. The easiest way is to run JOSM's validator by pressing shift+v. Doing some QA adds extra value to your changeset and makes it so that you're not changing tags purely for the sake of changing tags, but also to improve OSM in a broader sense. The time investment is worth it.

@hfs They must have missed that. I just edited it for you: osm.org/changeset/113522122

I would love to do more edits to look for these redundant ...=* tags, because they're very easy to query and fix. Sadly, according to the DWG such an would require requesting approval from each regional community and contacting each mapper who has mapped these tags, which would make this process practically impossible.

Hi & thank you for asking.

I hope you won't mind that I continue in English. My German isn't super good.

Every object that had more than the basic tags for pitches (leisure/sport/surface/name/lit/access=*) was manually checked for relevance and correctness. If I was unsure about an object, I excluded it from this changeset.

"Bolzplatz" is as much a description as "Spielplatz", so tagging it with name=* is incorrect, but since it describes a football field with public access I thought it was still valuable information, so I kept the information as description=Bolzplatz.

See also: osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Best regards,

Casper

Love you too, Lee <3

Anyway, grin, you can select a cluster of objects and upload only the selection. If you do that a couple of times you can make regional boundary boxes, which might save you some unfriendly comments from Lee Carré here.

Thank you for taking your time to fix these tags :)

Hoi West Erop,
Helemaal prima, zal ik doen.
Mvg,
Casper