jremillard's Comments
Changeset | Қашан | Пікір |
---|---|---|
52641316 | over 7 years ago | The node added on this changeset, needs other tags to say what it is. Just a name and description, nothing can really use that data. |
56595182 | over 7 years ago | I got it! |
56595182 | over 7 years ago | Hi! Check out the map. This change set merged the pond and conservation property into a one relation. This is a super tricky area to map, I think it requires sharing the same "way" across several relations to handle the islands. JOSM might be required. |
53323698 | over 7 years ago | This looks like a change for Pokemon. I am reverting them. Felony, please only map real parks and waterways. |
50535922 | over 7 years ago | Hi! I Way 509977764 is not mapped correctly. The sports=baseball tag should be on the entire baseball field, not just the infield. If you want to map the infields you should use a different tag. |
46996172 | over 7 years ago | Hi!, Is way 83195084 correct? None of the sat images don't show any baseball fields. |
33685066 | 9 жыл бұрын дерлік | Could you look at this changeset. osm.org/changeset/41456917
|
34738606 | шамамен 9 жыл бұрын | The change set comment is perfect. Thanks for making this update! |
35698586 | over 9 years ago | Also, I guess it would make sense to remove the landuse=forest from the relation.... |
35698586 | over 9 years ago | The Wachusett Mountain State Reservation includes the ski area. Changing the boundary of the reservation around the ski slopes renders nice but it is not tagged correctly. The reservation boundary should match the MassGIS parcel, the ski slopes should be a new ways with something like natural=grassland, or landuse=meadow, etc. |
22153054 | шамамен 10 жыл бұрын | admin_level=4 on osm.org/relation/187118 ? State parts are not administrative boundaries? |
30735592 | over 10 years ago | Hi, Is this a public trail. Is on private property? Should it be access=private? |
22987292 | over 10 years ago | Hi Shawn, I was looking over the Barnstable County relation osm.org/relation/2294308. This node is present in addition to a "label" node. I think only one of them should exist, unless this node is some kind of Barnstable County administration building? |
23113082 | over 10 years ago | Why did you change all of the piste:type=downhill to piste:type=yes? I think piste:type=downhill is a valid tag? |
19902570 | over 10 years ago | Hi, ski trails should be connected like roads for roating. I fixed a bunch of them at Attitash Mountain. Just FYI, in case you are working on other ski areas. |
29059403 | over 10 years ago | Hi! I changed some tags used on this changeset. When you are mapping cross country ski areas, you should use piste:type=nordic. surface snow is not valid unless it is covered in snow all year long. If some of the trails are only cross country ski paths, they should not get the foot=yes, highway=footway tags. Lastly, I put them into a site relation so they will get rendered in opensnowmap.org. osm.wiki/Piste_Maps
|
29193535 | over 10 years ago | The tagging includes all of the source files attributes and there are duplicates. Please revert the changeset, and follow the import process. The tagging issues and duplicate points can easily be addressed with a bit more more up front preparation time. |
29038115 | over 10 years ago | Please following the import process. osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines
|
28224236 | over 10 years ago | Please stop changing the tagging on Fitch's bridge. The old rr bridge was torn down last year, it was tagged correctly. |
26510923 | 11 жыл бұрын дерлік | Testing changeset comment feature. |