Kovoschiz's Comments
Changeset | When | Comment |
---|---|---|
70581392 | over 4 years ago | Please don't connect areas along roads |
70585824 | over 4 years ago | Please don't connect areas along roads |
96139017 | over 4 years ago | Also `place=` areas are unverifiable. |
96139017 | over 4 years ago | This is demolished in history. |
96358217 | over 4 years ago | You can delete the tags, without deleting the point to represent the empty shop. |
89465069 | over 4 years ago | (temporary solution for long section; tentative solution for short sections) |
89465069 | over 4 years ago | I have used `carriageway=transition` as a temporary solution for sections of "wrongly" separated single roadways as well, but it's best to make a single line. |
96031212 | over 4 years ago | There's no post code here. PRC assigns 999077 only for them internally. The validity and origin of 00852 has been commonly doubted |
96031002 | over 4 years ago | It's not encouraged to remove `phone=` and `email=` for compatability reasons. |
96012719 | over 4 years ago | It's also better to apply the higher rank address elements to the largest area, viz the estates osm.org/way/700770822/ and osm.org/way/25637794/history. Only `addr:street:*=` + `addr:housenumber=` is needed to describe each buildings, if they have different `addr:housenumber=`. |
96012719 | over 4 years ago | You need to check whether the address matches the format. There's also no need to to add HK, NT, and Yuen Long District, which are already described by `boundary=` `relation`s.
|
95946615 | over 4 years ago | To me, `proposed:*=*` is better for unphysical features, similar to `demolished:*=` et al, unlike `=construction`. |
95970726 | over 4 years ago | Need to know what kind of construction works, as in whether this section will be permanently closed. OSM doesn't record "temporary" (eg <3 months) events directly. |
95874479 | over 4 years ago | Aside from `=permit` not `=permissive`, you need to check if non-goods vehicles are allowed there. |
95873217 | over 4 years ago | The correct value is `=permit`, not `=permissive`
|
95751049 | over 4 years ago | Are you serious incapable of differentiating osm.org/node/391725397 and https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/7196472862?
|
94428780 | over 4 years ago | As another example, you haven't responded on osm.org/changeset/93761856.
|
94428780 | over 4 years ago | Concurrent: osm.org/changeset/95718255
|
95718709 | over 4 years ago | Are you going to map take every "except with permit" literally as `=permit` too? |
95718709 | over 4 years ago | 1. Do you know you can map the actual `=traffic_sign`?
|