zstadler's Comments
Changeset | When | Comment |
---|---|---|
48474210 | about 8 years ago | האם השביל שמיפית בראש החומה צריך לעבור גם מעל שער יפו
|
50506183 | about 8 years ago | Hi RTtect,
|
48194277 | about 8 years ago | Hi,
|
50492845 | about 8 years ago | Hi,
|
45363818 | about 8 years ago | הורדתי את תגית הצבע מהשביל ועכשיו זה בסדר
|
49413025 | about 8 years ago | I'm not an historian, but I think there was a no man's land area/שטח מפורז between the Israeli-controlled and the Jordanian-controlled areas. |
49413025 | about 8 years ago | I appreciate your listening and open-mindness! |
49413025 | about 8 years ago | A dispute can only be on a boundary claimed by some entity. No claim implies no dispute. Way 288825225 is part of the boundary claimed by Palestine and disputed by Israel.
|
49413025 | about 8 years ago | If you refer to osm.org/way/288825225, then it is a member of a (disputed) boundary=administrative admin_level=2 relation - osm.org/relation/1703814 |
49413025 | about 8 years ago | I think that the line should not be rendered. |
38247099 | about 8 years ago | Yes, I'm the original mapper of all recently corrected entries, and they should have been "natural=cave_entrance" in the first place.
|
50154823 | about 8 years ago | I've fixed the trail type. osm.org/changeset/50499250 |
50152974 | about 8 years ago | It looks like the trails are created (the "operated" tag) by this local organization: "תיירות חבל בנימין", and that's why they are not mentioned by the ITC.
|
49413025 | about 8 years ago | If the 1949 armistice line is an historical line. Currently, it does not serve as an administrative boundary, not even a disputed boundary, because it was superseded by the Oslo agreements.
|
48499750 | about 8 years ago | Thanks! I didn't notice the "building:part" tag... |
38247099 | about 8 years ago | The proposed "natural=cave" proposal applies to ways and areas.
|
49685823 | about 8 years ago | Hi,
|
50154823 | about 8 years ago | Hi Yaniv,
|
49228864 | about 8 years ago | Is these new ways part of an officially marked ITC red trail?
|
50152974 | about 8 years ago | Is this new way osm.org/way/506220396 an officially marked ITC red trail?
|