OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
152304395 about 1 year ago

Not sure why you would make this changeset, but data is data; routing problems should be fixed on routing program side, but not by editing OSM data "just because".

150429168 about 1 year ago

One thing I do notice is how the iD editor cannot easily allow us to change the order of bus route contents, which according to the wiki is important.

150429168 about 1 year ago

I do have JOSM, but then I was not aware that iD editor could break bus relations.

This seems like something that should be bug-reported.

149093410 over 1 year ago

You know what, given the complexity of this irl road change, I might as well redo the changeset. I think I can redo the changeset in another style.

147535530 over 1 year ago

I can fix this up a few days later by reviewing the other nearby features. I was kinda worried about this changeset that I am avoiding non-flat calibration. (EG avoiding Chi Fu Fa Yuen.) And then if I go for a throughout review, the changeset size could be huge; you may see how I have made several 100-item changesets already just for calibration.

It is especially annoying when the buildings are also misaligned because sometimes there are a lot of other "dependent" features drawn on top of the misaligned buildings. To limit the changeset size I sometimes just pretend the other parts are correct, and then smoothen the curves near the start and the end, to make it less obvious.

But still I am noticing and learning to center on the road median, that you can be assured.

But wait, it seems iD editor has a measurement tool? I swear iD editor has too many features that are not obvious.

147494574 over 1 year ago

It kinda feel like Phase 2 was an afterthought when planning the buildings, so I am really not sure how to approach this. Kinda like "oh we need something extra, then here are some proper shopping malls", and name those Phase 2.

My guess to mapping these, is to create a relation of areas and give that relation shop=mall, but not sure how it would appear on the map.

147535530 over 1 year ago

Let's not get started on eg why Island Line HKU station, the tracks and the station area is not consistent.

147535530 over 1 year ago

Tbh, at some point I was also thinking maybe I should avoid calibrating elevated portions of roads, due to the inherent "transformation" that may or may not exist for satellite imageries.

But then the unexplained space between HKU Main Building and Pok Fu Lam Road is too obvious. And the old shape seems inconsistent with the sidewalk shapes.

As long as it is still mostly accurate, then it should be ok. No point in pursuing 100% accuracy: even satellite coordinates might shift slightly every once in a while, and then we will all be building houses on sands. When it looks nice (ie shape form, relative positioning, etc), and is mostly accurate, then it is a good map.

147494574 over 1 year ago

The problem is, Phase 1 is just 2 small buildings, and Phase 2 is 2 large buildings. It seems you mean that we should have exactly 1 shop=mall for the entire Yan On Shopping Centre? The problem is, with that approach, we may lose information about which part is "phase 1".

145290405 over 1 year ago

To whom it may concern:

This changeset was later rolled back after discussion with international OSM mappers on the forum.

Thanks!

144435963 over 1 year ago

Notice how everyone responded until a month later, with me mistakenly believing another changeset was to blame.

144435963 over 1 year ago

Not sure about the osmcha tool, but I am someone who uses OSM/osmcarto more often than the average user.

And then one day I saw a sus path shape near Chung On Estate.

145503514 over 1 year ago

Note: found the correct changeset to blame here: osm.org/changeset/144435963

144435963 over 1 year ago

Hi there, this changeset has caused a path mapping blunder near Chung On Estate; please double check that your changes do not have unintended side effects next time.

Fixed via osm.org/changeset/145503514

140900287 over 1 year ago

Update: I eventually found the correct problematic changeset: osm.org/changeset/144435963

My knowledge is that moving a node will mark the way as changed, so I was looking at this changeset. It turns out the offending node is actually in the above linked changeset instead.

Apologies for the wrong accusation!

140900287 over 1 year ago

tbf now I am also secondguessing what really happened

I should really look again who did it, seeing that your changeset really did not contain the affected segments

145503101 over 1 year ago

ref osm.org/changeset/145539177

145503101 over 1 year ago

hmmm... either I was wrong, or the physical signs there were wrong.

will double check later.

140900287 over 1 year ago

(specifically, Sai Sha Road)

140900287 over 1 year ago

The paths near Chung On Estate looks like a mapping blunder. Please double check that your changeset do not have side effects next time.