Interactiondesigner's Comments
Changeset | When | Comment |
---|---|---|
166738127 | 2 months ago | Ja, in der Tat. Den Hinweis nehme ich gerne auf und aktualisiere das noch. |
161064217 | 7 months ago | Cool – danke für die schnelle Hilfe und die Tags. Habe es so umgesetzt. Gemäss englischem Wiki soll man den Tag building=yes nicht mehr für den Ventilationsschacht verwenden. |
160927713 | 7 months ago | Hi Lezurex, danke fürs Ergänzen und Erweitern des Änderungssatzes – so macht das Spass!
Viele Grüsse,
|
151554697 | about 1 year ago | 👍 |
149193081 | over 1 year ago | Okay ... der letzte Satz war zu viel. Habe gerade den Änderungssatz von vor sechs Jahren von dir gesehen, wo du den tag hinzugefügt hast. Den tag "motor_vehicle=destination" habe ich nun wieder entfernt. |
149193081 | over 1 year ago | Erwischt ... normalerweise mache ich alles nach Bauchgefühl, manchmal pendle ich auch aus oder schaue mir Mondphasen an, bevor ich hier Änderungen mache. Das Ergebnis hat dann mehr so eine persönliche Note als exakt nach Verordnung. Was sich mein Bauchgefühl allerdings auch fragt: wenn die Signalisation seit sechs Jahren bekannt ist, warum ist sie dann nicht schon lange längst von dir so erfasst worden? |
63255972 | almost 7 years ago | Hi Stefan. Cool solution – and I learned something about making a fire inside the woods ;-)
|
63255972 | almost 7 years ago | Totally agree. The question to me is, if the firepit shall be tagged there or not. Frankly speaking, even it is there, I don't know about the legal situation – means: is it allowed to lit up a fire in the wood like it is shown there? If this firepit is illegal, I wouldn't tag it and just take the bench only. I also agree to your statement to expect more for calling it picnic site – as I wrote before a table would change the situation. When I tagged it yesterday, I wasn't so sure about either. If you come along there the next days, just decide what would be the best and if necessary erease the picnic site. |
63255972 | almost 7 years ago | Hi Stefan ... now I see that you created a bench at that part (in the current map of maps.me it was not shown yet). I think it is a question of interpretation of what is there actually. Fact is, that there are two benches with a opportunity to have an open fire (cannot judge if this is legal). By this, on one hand it can be seen as simply a bench but on the other hand it could be a picnic place ... the wiki article doesn't give a precise advice about it. If we say, we don't have a table there and the opportunity to make a fire is illegal, it would be simply a bench to me too. I chose the picnic site actually because of the fire pit, where you can do some little BBQ ... what do you think? |
63236179 | almost 7 years ago | Hallo. Danke für die Hinweise – habe die Änderungen eingearbeitet. |
60770048 | about 7 years ago | Hi Dikkeknodel,
Cheers |
59816164 | about 7 years ago | Hi dikkeknodel,
|
46760953 | over 8 years ago | The definition of "abandoned" as attribute for railways is the following in the OSM wiki: "The course of a former railway which has been abandoned and the track and infrastucture removed." For my understanding this is the case here – the still existing tracks have the correct attribute "disused". In normal maps nobody gets bothered by this "abandoned railroads" but in specialized maps like OpenRailwayMap.org it is appreciated to see the position of also already removed railroads. |