trigpoint's Comments
Changeset | When | Comment |
---|---|---|
101660986 | over 4 years ago | Then the motor_vehicle=no is redundant. |
101920017 | over 4 years ago | What is DA? Cheers Phil |
101181262 | over 4 years ago | I have changed this to a track, it is certainly not a footpath and it is certainly usable by farm vehicles. The edit history suggests it may be used by Amazon vans. Cheers Phil |
101660986 | over 4 years ago | Hi, a oneway street on which there is a node prohibiting motor vehicles seems a bit odd. Are you sure? Cheers Phil |
101919793 | over 4 years ago | Leads to a farm, so service |
101920017 | over 4 years ago | Restored footpath, certainly not a track |
70980491 | over 4 years ago | However amenity=yes is totally meaningless, although that was fixed by a maproulette challenge and if the polygon was incorrect then most mappers would spend a few minutes fixing it rather than doing the bare minimum Cheers Phil |
101506439 | over 4 years ago | Hi again, I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here. There is no reason why motor vehicles cannot be routed through a pedestrian area with the correct tags, however it is unusual for there to be no restrictions. This certainly looks like a typical pedestrian street to me https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/31Dad9bVfm3PJGw9z-V1vQ However your statement that it accessible to vehicles is only partly true, it is accessible to certain vehicles at certain times. It certainly should not be used for through routing. See https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/fWvsdJF_gvUihfXK1uuZ2g Cheers Phil |
101775658 | over 4 years ago | Hi Ell
If they are, then whilst I would consider a router for motor vehicles passing a bollard to be an error, you could add motor_vehicle=no to the bollard and split the way and tag that as motor_vehicle=no. Cheers Phil |
101775658 | over 4 years ago | Hi, this edit has gone a little wrong. There was a bollard mapped, which prevents routing by motor vehicle but allowed routing for pedestrians an cyclists. By breaking the connection this is no longer usable by pedestrians or cyclists. I have reverted this edits, or is there really no connectivity here? Cheers Phil |
101571491 | over 4 years ago | Hi, this edit is not quite correct. The public highway was as previously mapped, the kerbs and pavements can be seen on bing imagery. The part you have added should be mapped as highway=service, service=driveway. Cheers Phil |
101572039 | over 4 years ago | Hi
Please spend an extra few seconds to improve the map beyond the basics of navigation. Other objects are important to the quality of the map. Cheers Phil |
101005062 | over 4 years ago | Hi, just wondering what you were trying to achieve here? The A50/515 roundabout was split due to bus route relations. By merging the ways the routes are no longer correct and need to be repaired. Cheers Phil |
100635296 | over 4 years ago | Hi, thank you for these edits. Very useful. In OSM highway=unclassified implies a normal minor road open to all traffic which contradicts the rights of way classification. In these cases it usual to use highway=service and tag as motor_vehicle=private as motor vehicle usage is only for access to adjoining properties. In an international like OSM it is also helpful to clarify our quirky England/Wales access rules by being specific about access. The application to upgrade to a restricted byway is interesting, whilst meeting a horsedrawn vehicle is extremely rare, it is a right horse people seem very keen on. Cheers Phil |
100828615 | over 4 years ago | It should be a service road beyond where it was previously mapped. It is quite clear on bing imagery. Cheers Phil |
99829815 | over 4 years ago | Has the building been demolished? I imagine if Argo has closed then it is now an empty building. Please do not deleted tags which are still valid. Cheers Phil |
99838894 | over 4 years ago | Hi, please be careful when removing closed businesses that you do not throw away still valid tags. It is better to update as for example osm.org/node/1097110333/history tags such as the address information will be valuable to mappers when it becomes something else. It is also nice to keep lifecycle history of what was there previously. Cheers Phil |
100828615 | over 4 years ago | Hi, this edit has gone a little wrong. The public highway ends where it was previously mapped. The section you have added is a service way on private land and should not be an extension of the highway. Cheers Phil |
100724192 | over 4 years ago | Hi
Cheers Phil |
100506926 | over 4 years ago | It means that you can collect tickets that are already paid for. |