clay_c have been discussed with 104 replies of this contributorclay_c have been discussed with 104 replies of this contributor| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 167410890 by clay_c @ 2025-06-09 17:40 | 1 | 2025-06-09 23:58 | Glassman ♦5,219 | The wiki discourages the user of railway=facility. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Arailway%3Dfacility. Can you change this back or let me know why you think facility is more appropriate? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/1... |
| 2 | 2025-06-10 16:37 | clay_c | Hi, Clifford. I hadn't heard about this tag being deprecated. I had been using railway=facility for years, not for any real semantic purposes, but to discourage other mappers from using another invalid value of railway=*, in this case railway=station. A public_transport=stop_area relation shoul... | |
| 134040282 by clay_c @ 2023-03-23 20:47 | 1 | 2025-04-23 06:37 | 3ngineer ♦47 | Hi, you seem to have tagged all SkyTrain ways as being "UTO" which is not true. Please undo this, and pay closer attention to the existing tags for "ATC" which are more accurate and specifyt which ways provide ATC (CBTC). |
| 2 | 2025-04-25 20:38 | clay_c | My bad, thanks for pointing it out. Reverted here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165441674 | |
| 162102183 by clay_c @ 2025-02-03 21:02 | 1 | 2025-02-06 22:46 | clay_c@watttime ♦1 | Oops, this should have been under my work account |
| 160319858 by clay_c @ 2024-12-17 20:14 | 1 | 2024-12-17 20:14 | clay_c | forgot to specify, source=survey |
| 158516414 by clay_c @ 2024-10-29 20:49 | 1 | 2024-11-01 03:32 | clay_c | oops, I meant LaSalle Street Station |
| 100121464 by clay_c @ 2021-02-28 02:02 | 1 | 2024-09-13 04:02 | dknelson9876 ♦34 | Hey Clay, what's the meaning behind note="temporarily restricted" that you added to a bunch of rails here? Also, I think I recognize the disconnected portions that you upgraded from railway=light_rail to railway=rail as the portions that still run freight at night every once in a ... |
| 2 | 2024-09-13 13:20 | clay_c | Temporal restriction, not temporary—in other words, these tracks are restricted to certain types of trains at different times of the day. Even though these tracks carry light rail trains most of the time, they're still built to a higher standard to support conventional freight trains. Mor... | |
| 87735689 by clay_c @ 2020-07-09 02:43 | 1 | 2024-03-31 13:37 | HubMiner ♦271 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9709546/historyOsmose link:https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=11&lat=40.7754&lon=-73.8131&item=3250&level=1%2C2%2C3&tags=&fixable=&useDevItem=all&issue_uuid=631b548b-2ba5-c880-9dae-14ac6fdcd414Hello! Sorry to... |
| 64544219 by clay_c @ 2018-11-15 20:46 | 1 | 2024-02-20 09:26 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,627 | what you meant by review=disused at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/7236951/history ? |
| 2 | 2024-02-20 14:02 | clay_c | Just a typo, thanks for catching. Should be railway=disused. | |
| 133411406 by clay_c @ 2023-03-07 17:11 | 1 | 2024-01-24 16:35 | TNS-MN ♦6 | nerd |
| 2 | 2024-01-24 17:07 | clay_c | I've already told you not to message me in private. While this is a public communication medium, perhaps my intent wasn't clear enough. Do not leave comments on my changesets, unless they're relevant to my mapping. | |
| 143758215 by clay_c @ 2023-11-07 23:50 | 1 | 2023-11-18 21:51 | wireguy ♦548 | clay, can you look at jefferson park ave, your change may have chopped it... https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16435745/history |
| 2 | 2023-11-19 00:48 | clay_c | fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144193626 | |
| 134796670 by clay_c @ 2023-04-12 03:01 | 1 | 2023-11-06 01:41 | StellanL ♦11 | This seems to be contrary to the entry for busway: "The following features may allow access for buses while restricting other forms of traffic, but they should not be tagged with highway=busway: " item "Bus-only service roads - short service road that leads away from the main carriag... |
| 2 | 2023-11-06 02:05 | clay_c | The Transbay Terminal is a passenger bus station, not an employees-only garage as in the example given. This roadway has high importance to bus passengers and prohibits all other traffic, which should qualify for highway=busway. | |
| 130394324 by clay_c @ 2022-12-22 22:15 | 1 | 2023-10-23 04:06 | Allison P ♦1,136 | Yiddish name has been removed again in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142397567#map=19/41.34204/-74.16792 |
| 142010427 by clay_c @ 2023-10-01 23:51 | 1 | 2023-10-03 01:37 | xem0861 ♦7 | Is this a new thing that route relations can only have numeric info in it? |
| 2 | 2023-10-03 12:48 | clay_c | No, it's been a thing for years. In route relations, ref=* should only contain the text displayed on the sign, without any extra prefixes like the ones we use on ways. | |
| 3 | 2023-10-03 19:38 | clay_c | Now that the tiles have been updated, I can share this: https://zelonewolf.github.io/openstreetmap-americana/#map=12.55/41.68593/-88.88492This renderer uses the network and ref values of route relations to determine which shield icon to use, and what text goes inside. Prior to this change, the r... | |
| 141651916 by clay_c @ 2023-09-23 16:13 | 1 | 2023-09-25 04:57 | Udarian ♦399 | I could be wrong here, but my understanding was always that Turnpike is tolled, (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9043777664 and others), so then why did you set it to toll=no. if I'm wrong obviously please correct me, I just want to ensure that everything stays as accurate as possible. |
| 2 | 2023-09-25 12:22 | clay_c | It appears that there is no toll collection between exits 11 and 13 on the HEFT, and that you can traverse this segment without paying. Other parts of the HEFT, where you must pass through a toll gantry at some point, remain unchanged. | |
| 141651612 by clay_c @ 2023-09-23 16:06 | 1 | 2023-09-23 16:07 | clay_c | These are not toll roads. Reverted here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141651612 |
| 134654660 by clay_c @ 2023-04-08 14:14 | 1 | 2023-07-13 04:00 | El ArquiPachuca ♦11 | Hola Clay, me parece que las líneas de rutas de combi que editaste en el mapa tienen la etiqueta errónea. El tag highway=bus_guideway no sería valido para una ruta de bus/combi, muy pocas ciudades alrededor del mundo poseen este sistema y Morelia no. |
| 2 | 2023-07-13 04:03 | El ArquiPachuca ♦11 | Puedes leer el sig. articulo sobre el tag que utilizaste y en que casos se debe de utilizar: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbus_guideway | |
| 3 | 2023-07-13 04:12 | El ArquiPachuca ♦11 | Te recomiendo utilizar la relación de ruta de bus para añadir rutas de combis, en el sig. enlace puedes encontrar info. de como hacerlo: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:routeTambién he visto que se utiliza el tag highway=busway para sistemas de transporte, pero ... | |
| 4 | 2023-07-13 04:17 | El ArquiPachuca ♦11 | Recuerda evitar el Tagging for the renderer y así reducir confusiones con datos erroneos. Sin más, espero tengas un feliz mapeo 👍 | |
| 5 | 2023-07-13 12:18 | clay_c | ¡Hola!Gracias por responder. No fui yo quien etiquetó originalmente esto como highway=bus_guideway. Lo encontré y vi que estaba mal, así que agregué un fixme, con la esperanza de que un mapeador local lo arreglara. | |
| 6 | 2023-07-16 09:47 | El ArquiPachuca ♦11 | Ah esta bien. Como vi que apenas se había hecho la modificación supuse que fue reciente. Gracias por contestar | |
| 118348974 by clay_c @ 2022-03-11 06:27 | 1 | 2023-06-25 16:15 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | Should these numbers go in ref rather than name? I suspect most renderers and routers that understand junction names would also understand junction refs. |
| 2 | 2023-06-25 17:01 | clay_c | At time of writing, there are over 36,000 objects on OSM with junction=yes + name=* [1]. But there are only 908 instances of junction=yes + ref=* [2], 512 of which also have name=* [3]. Many of these appear to be tagging errors, using the ref=* of a nearby highway.Carto doesn't expose ref=*... | |
| 3 | 2023-06-25 17:33 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | Globally, many more intersections are named (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Named_spots_instead_of_street_names ) than numbered in the real world (especially in Japan), so I’m not surprised about the disparity in the database. I had been under the impression that OSRM calls out junction r... | |
| 4 | 2023-06-26 18:09 | clay_c | Fine by me. Redundant tagging added here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/137803578 | |
| 120093573 by clay_c @ 2022-04-23 14:48 | 1 | 2023-06-12 14:58 | web_c ♦1 | Good morning clay_c,I am part of the group that worked on the Pioneers Park and other related areas to the two major reservoir areas in west Houston. I would like to know on what basis you decided to overwrite a significant portion of our work, and on what measures you utilized. |
| 2 | 2023-06-12 15:36 | clay_c | Hi web_c,I was going off accepted practice as documented on the wiki [1]. A detention basin is dry most of the time, and periodically filled up with stormwater. Most of the parks within the Addicks and Barker Reservoirs are flooded after heavy rains and close down temporarily. This implies that ... | |
| 76671262 by clay_c @ 2019-11-05 23:30 | 1 | 2023-05-29 23:56 | nereocystis ♦17 | Could you tell me why you changed the spelling of Macdonald Avenue to MacDonald Avenue.Do you have a reference to a capitol "D" in MacDonald.I don't see this in standard maps.Anything from Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macdonald_Avenue |
| 2 | 2023-05-30 00:07 | clay_c | Honest mistake. At the time, capitalization of this street name was inconsistent on OSM, so I went with the one I thought would be more common. I didn't think to check street-level imagery or official sources. Feel free to fix. | |
| 3 | 2023-05-30 00:27 | nereocystis ♦17 | Thanks for the quick response.I have no idea where this spelling is from, but it seems consistent in city stuff, including street signs, as I noticed yesterday.Today, I looked at the AC Transit info, including GTFS files.It is still spelled inconsistently there | |
| 136672808 by clay_c @ 2023-05-28 21:31 | 1 | 2023-05-28 21:34 | clay_c | see discussion here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135198660 |
| 136671914 by clay_c @ 2023-05-28 20:50 | 1 | 2023-05-28 21:04 | clay_c | see discussion here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135196157 |
| 133348942 by clay_c @ 2023-03-06 05:44 | 1 | 2023-05-19 05:47 | Greg_Rose ♦175 | Hi Clay - Was wondering why you're doing this? I understood it was agreed that the railroad name/operator should be prefixed on N American railroad mains - especially with all of the UP/BNSF and CSX/NS parallel lines with identical subdivision names. Would love to know the reasoning behind your... |
| 2 | 2023-05-19 14:07 | clay_c | The operator prefix is a convention we sometimes use where two different operators have nearby lines with the same name. I've left it unchanged in cases like the UP and BNSF Mojave Subdivisions, but only BNSF has a "Scenic Subdivision" in this area, so the operator prefix is not neces... | |
| 134784686 by clay_c @ 2023-04-11 17:36 | 1 | 2023-04-14 00:25 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | How come revert this?https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Metros#Station --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134784686 |
| 2 | 2023-04-14 00:58 | clay_c | Because these are the outlines of underground excavated areas. All stations of the New York Subway are already mapped as nodes, and every time these outlines get retagged, it introduces duplicate stations. | |
| 134824273 by clay_c @ 2023-04-12 15:50 | 1 | 2023-04-13 01:06 | impiaaa ♦420 | Are you sure about this? I was under the impression that highway=busway is only for BRT roads, and service=busway should still be used for bus-only service roads, like the ones here. |
| 2 | 2023-04-13 01:34 | clay_c | My understanding is that highway=busway is for bus-only roads that are of high importance to bus passengers, and shouldn't be used for service roads that lead to a bus maintenance facility, for example. Roadways within bus stations are commonly tagged this way in the Netherlands, another major ... | |
| 134193624 by clay_c @ 2023-03-27 20:29 | 1 | 2023-03-28 16:09 | ToniE ♦1,229 | Hi Clay,I've seen your edit here because the fix has popped up on PTNA [1], a tool for public transport network analysis.Together with some fellow mappers from US 'stevea', 'Mundilfari' and others I set up some analysis tasks for the US [2].It is quite easy to ad... |
| 2 | 2023-03-28 17:38 | clay_c | It's unclear what in particular this changeset fixed, but thanks for letting me know. I may add more areas to the analysis tool in the future. | |
| 3 | 2023-03-28 18:06 | ToniE ♦1,229 | I forgot to point you to the "diff":https://ptna.openstreetmap.de/results/US/AK/US-AK-Anchorage-PTD-Analysis.diff.html#12445740the four relations with 'ref' = 'GD' and closing the gaps"PTv2 route: has gaps, consists of 3 segments. Gaps appear at ways: &... | |
| 4 | 2023-03-28 19:17 | clay_c | I see. Strange that the Alaska Railroad is included with the Anchorage Public Transportation Department. It should probably have its own page, though I guess that's something I can fix when I have time. | |
| 5 | 2023-03-28 19:35 | ToniE ♦1,229 | Usually, PTNA is configured to filter specific 'network's values. This is not the case here, so 'ARR' is not excluded.In addition, there is no CSV list which contains all routes that exist in reality.See the others (e.g. Amtrak), rightmost column of the US page [2] above. | |
| 133416882 by clay_c @ 2023-03-07 19:52 | 1 | 2023-03-15 02:50 | AntiCompositeNumber ♦30 | I restored a segment of the Freight Main Line you deleted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133691110. |
| 2 | 2023-03-15 12:43 | clay_c | My bad, thanks for catching that. | |
| 133383917 by clay_c @ 2023-03-07 00:31 | 1 | 2023-03-14 05:11 | Adamant1 ♦222 | Hello. I'm just wondering if you discussed this anywhere before you did it per the comment by Hiausirg in the Name-Suggestion-Index issue that you opened related to this. Also, what's your source for the import?Thanks |
| 2 | 2023-03-14 05:13 | Adamant1 ♦222 | BTW, I also see that you changed "UP Valley Subdivision" to "Valley Subdivision" a few days ago. I'd also be interested to know where exactly that change came from since as far as I'm aware it's still referred to as "Union Pacific Valley Subdivision." | |
| 3 | 2023-03-14 14:18 | clay_c | > Also, what's your source for the import?This is not an import. The source is the OSM data itself. No external data, other than Wikidata items, was added here. I did cross-reference with a GIS dataset produced by the FRA (Federal Railroad Administration), though OSM data already largely... | |
| 4 | 2023-03-15 01:56 | Adamant1 ♦222 | >This is not an import.I could be wrong, but I think anytime some does a single, mass edit based on an external source like this it's an import. At least colloquially if not in actual policy. Although I think cross-referencing with GIS dataset produced by the FRA would count. Although it... | |
| 5 | 2023-03-15 02:00 | Adamant1 ♦222 | BTW, that's not to say you couldn't argue Union Pacific shouldn't be in the name if it was there purely to donate the operator, but that part of track wasn't tagged or called "Union Pacific's Valley Subdivision." It was/is "Union Pacific Valley Subdivision.&qu... | |
| 133425452 by clay_c @ 2023-03-08 02:58 | 1 | 2023-03-10 15:22 | zluuzki ♦224 | Uhmm ... where was this discussed?This greatly reduces the data's accuracy. |
| 2 | 2023-03-10 15:28 | clay_c | What do you mean about accuracy? None of the nodes have been moved. | |
| 3 | 2023-03-10 15:36 | zluuzki ♦224 | mi:100 means somewhere at mile 100, mi:100.0 means exactly mile 100 | |
| 4 | 2023-03-10 15:46 | clay_c | No, mi:100 means mile 100.Railroad mileposts are whole numbers. I'm not sure where you picked up the habit of appending ".0" to the value displayed on the actual signs, but it's not necessary to add that to mileposts when they are always signed as whole numbers. Railroad feat... | |
| 5 | 2023-03-10 15:56 | zluuzki ♦224 | "Railroad features other than mileposts often have linear referencing positions in tenths and hundredths of miles"Exactly, since many other railway:position's use decimal numbers, I'm apprehending .0 here to clarify that those mileposts haven't. If data consumer's a... | |
| 6 | 2023-03-10 16:28 | clay_c | "since many other railway:position's use decimal numbers, I'm apprehending .0 here to clarify that those mileposts haven't."This is comparable to tagging `foot=no` on `highway=motorway`. Motorways imply `foot=no`, so it's unnecessary to add the `foot` tag unless the... | |
| 7 | 2023-03-10 17:28 | zluuzki ♦224 | Decimals might not be used on US mileposts, but they are very commonly used on other countries' mileposts - and OSM is a global database. While it's pretty save to say that foot traffic is forbidden on every motorway, worldwide.Anyway, this obviously violates automated Edits code of ... | |
| 8 | 2023-03-10 17:43 | clay_c | Are you reverting this changeset specifically, or more? It seems you are reverting many unrelated changesets without warning.https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133527496https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133527496https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133527514 | |
| 9 | 2023-03-10 18:23 | zluuzki ♦224 | Yeah, they also, because they're having the same problem as here.(By the way, I have no intention to revert any other changesets which add wikidata - even when they're also againest the automated edit guideline-, because a) they unify normal operator which I find to be a very good thin... | |
| 10 | 2023-03-10 20:35 | watmildon ♦243 | When there's disagreement about the tagging, it seems good practice to leave the changes and not do any reverts until a resolution has been reached. Either by the two of you or in consultation with the broader community. Reverting without resolution just encourages more map fighting and edits. ... | |
| 11 | 2023-03-11 01:19 | A Hall ♦53 | Zluuzki, I think it would be helpful to share some supporting information regarding the decimal precision on whole numbers. Even becoming aware of this via your comment, there’s nothing in the wiki that appears to shine clarity on the subject. Further, some restraint in reverting others’... | |
| 133388647 by clay_c @ 2023-03-07 05:50 | 1 | 2023-03-10 15:39 | zluuzki ♦224 | Where was it discussed to add those pointless wikidata duplications and replace "CSX" with a longer variant (and all other edits within this massive automated edit series)? |
| 2 | 2023-03-10 15:53 | clay_c | Nowhere.Tracks all over the country have been tagged over the years with various names for the same operator (e.g. "CSX", "CSXT", "CSX Transportation"). I went through and made sure all tracks operated by the same company have the same operator value, and added oper... | |
| 3 | 2023-03-10 15:59 | zluuzki ♦224 | How exactly is "operator:wikidata" helping to "mitigate this sort of data degradation in the future"? It especially degrades the data when people forget to update both tags and they conflict with each other. | |
| 4 | 2023-03-10 16:23 | clay_c | If someone forgets to update both tags and they conflict with each other, please talk to them and try to figure out what they were attempting to do, and help them finish the job. I've added an issue on the Name Suggestion Index repository to hopefully make it less complicated to keep these tags... | |
| 5 | 2023-03-10 18:16 | zluuzki ♦224 | "Plus, data consumers can deduce much more information from `operator:wikidata` than from `operator`. If, for example, I want a renderer that displays the reporting marks of railroads, I can determine that by checking the statements in the Wikidata item attached to it."Sorry, but all o... | |
| 133414921 by clay_c @ 2023-03-07 18:49 | 1 | 2023-03-07 18:49 | clay_c | ...and operator:wikidata=Q267122 to BNSF trackage |
| 133386283 by clay_c @ 2023-03-07 03:25 | 1 | 2023-03-07 03:27 | clay_c | Actually added operator:wikidata=Q125943. Disregard changeset comment |
| 131972476 by clay_c @ 2023-02-01 17:52 | 1 | 2023-02-03 19:02 | jmarchon ♦426 | Hello,"Eugene, OR Amtrak" is the name which is signed on location. Does that not mean it is the right name?jmarchon |
| 2 | 2023-02-03 20:13 | clay_c | Hi again. Other stations around the country also have redundant or trivially derived info signed on the ground, such as the state abbreviation or some combination of the words "Amtrak" or "Station", but this is extraneous and not meant to be included in name=*. For most railway s... | |
| 3 | 2023-02-03 20:54 | jmarchon ♦426 | That makes sense. If I remember correctly from being there last, there is also conflicting information on site. Some signs do say just "Eugene", and others the name I put in.Thanks,jmarchon | |
| 132021072 by clay_c @ 2023-02-02 22:31 | 1 | 2023-02-03 00:21 | Glassman ♦5,219 | Wikipedia calls orting a city so does the orting website. Why downgrade it to a village? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/132021072 |
| 2 | 2023-02-03 00:48 | clay_c | See discussion on reverted changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130999959 | |
| 3 | 2023-02-03 03:17 | Glassman ♦5,219 | Thanks for the information. | |
| 86377622 by clay_c @ 2020-06-09 02:37 | 1 | 2023-02-01 13:22 | daniel_solow ♦79 | Hey I got a question regarding the stairs/escalator you tagged. Are these meant for the passengers to transfer from the walkway towards the airtrain to the train platform or from platform to street level? There is only a single staircase and single escalator. I’m not well versed with the later... |
| 2 | 2023-02-01 14:13 | clay_c | I think that's meant to be from the AirTrain walkway to platform level. I'm not local to NYC and I haven't been to Jamaica station in years, so if you have more context on the stairs and escalators, feel free to fix them. | |
| 131698124 by clay_c @ 2023-01-25 14:26 | 1 | 2023-01-25 14:39 | clay_c | Discussion here: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mapping-small-special-exclaves-of-symbolic-but-legal-foreign-ownership/7771/5 |
| 131549642 by clay_c @ 2023-01-21 18:04 | 1 | 2023-01-22 17:06 | Hans Thompson ♦106 | great edit. |
| 129944053 by clay_c @ 2022-12-10 19:35 | 1 | 2022-12-12 04:48 | ZLima12 ♦252 | Thanks for the good edit! The names without MT* make for a more pleasant map. |
| 2 | 2022-12-12 04:52 | ZLima12 ♦252 | Having the track number in railway:track_ref feels appropriate, as you've already done. Thanks for taking the time to work on all of this. | |
| 126376427 by clay_c @ 2022-09-19 14:07 | 1 | 2022-09-19 14:09 | clay_c | Oops, changeset comment should say "realign and add missing tags to streetcar lines" |
| 125315292 by clay_c @ 2022-08-24 12:53 | 1 | 2022-08-24 12:54 | clay_c | Oops, meant SR 46 |
| 76320786 by clay_c @ 2019-10-29 02:03 | 1 | 2022-07-01 17:16 | jidanni ♦51 | At Larkspur Landing the bus picks up on one side of the road and drops off on the other. It doesn't use the same side of the road for both operations, as per your map. Please see the discussion on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122801395 . |
| 2 | 2022-07-01 17:19 | jidanni ♦51 | "From David Hughes on 2022-07-01 06:18Sorry. I don't know how to use your mapping software. I've indicated below where our stops are. Going to SFO we pick up on westbound Sir Francis Drake. Coming from SFO we drop off across the street at the bus stop on eastbound Sir Francis Drake,... | |
| 3 | 2022-07-01 17:28 | jidanni ♦51 | Just like company Maps shows on https://marinairporter.com/stops-schedules/larkspur-landing/ . | |
| 4 | 2022-07-01 20:56 | clay_c | Thanks for the tip. Fixed here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123100929 | |
| 122584823 by clay_c @ 2022-06-19 15:59 | 1 | 2022-06-19 20:51 | EllieNyaa ♦22 | What is the benefit from splitting these relations in this case? |
| 2 | 2022-06-19 22:38 | clay_c | Route relations are used by OpenStreetMap-Americana, an alpha-stage OSM renderer, to determine which shields to display on roads. Most renderers, like OpenStreetMap-Carto (the "Standard" style on this website), just put the ref of the way in a rectangle. In this case, the unsigned status o... | |
| 3 | 2022-06-20 00:19 | EllieNyaa ♦22 | Ah, I see. I'm not sure if it's really beneficial to suppress the display of the shields, or if that's worth splitting these into discontinuous relations (feels like it's tagging for the renderer in a way? ideally the renderer would see from the tags on the ways that these design... | |
| 122138361 by clay_c @ 2022-06-08 22:38 | 1 | 2022-06-08 22:38 | clay_c | oops, changeset comment was supposed to say Arizona county roads |
| 93689318 by clay_c @ 2020-11-07 00:02 | 1 | 2021-07-17 22:52 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | This changeset somehow replaced the route relations for northbound and southbound U.S. Route 101 between Los Angeles and Hopland (71162 and 108619) with the members of a bus route relation, presumably for Golden Gate Transit. The relations were then deleted as tagging mistakes in changeset 98079317.... |
| 2 | 2021-07-17 22:57 | clay_c | My bad! Thanks for taking the time to fix it. | |
| 3 | 2021-07-18 01:06 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | Any idea which Golden Gate Transit bus route got conflated with U.S. 101? I’m afraid I’m not familiar enough with that system to know what the stops should correspond to. | |
| 4 | 2021-07-18 01:13 | clay_c | I'm out in the mountains with limited internet access at the moment, so I'll check when I get home tomorrow. My first guess would be GGT route 101. | |
| 5 | 2021-07-29 20:46 | gpserror ♦221 | Spotted this issue http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4780282 while inspecting errors from another tool, marking as a dependency. No U-turn restricion at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/55962287 was lost | |
| 6 | 2021-07-30 15:11 | clay_c | Did a partial revert here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/108898114 Please double-check and let me know if there are still issues. | |
| 7 | 2021-07-30 21:18 | gpserror ♦221 | Thanks, I fixed up the rest of relation 4780282 so good to go on my front! | |
| 8 | 2022-05-23 07:36 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | This changeset did the same thing to the route relation for California State Route 1, which ended up getting deleted as a tagging error in changeset 98079414. Changeset 121350189 restored the relation and 121351794 reverted it to being a road route again. | |
| 119181741 by clay_c @ 2022-04-01 01:30 | 1 | 2022-04-01 19:39 | ZeLonewolf ♦557 | Ahh you beat me too it :-D |
| 117373045 by clay_c @ 2022-02-14 00:08 | 1 | 2022-02-15 03:13 | Trevor_1 ♦270 | Hi Clay, it looks like you changed some of these to Tertiary Link, instead of Tertiary Road. |
| 2 | 2022-02-15 03:15 | Trevor_1 ♦270 | This is one you changed: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/21190895 | |
| 3 | 2022-02-15 03:36 | clay_c | Good catch. Fixed here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117416657 | |
| 84585385 by clay_c @ 2020-05-04 00:20 | 1 | 2022-02-14 05:08 | ZLima12 ♦252 | Looks like you somehow removed the part of the Hutchinson River Parkway that you were working on from the route relation. I'll go ahead and fix it |
| 97463903 by clay_c @ 2021-01-13 20:54 | 1 | 2022-02-11 07:00 | Jacorp ♦5 | The new Amtrak station just opened in Middletown, PA in a different location on a different track segment. Do you know how to move train stopping points to a different track segment without removing them from their respective relations? |
| 2 | 2022-02-11 15:34 | clay_c | Took care of it here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117292540I used JOSM to separate the nodes from the track segments and moved them over.The new platform at Middletown looks very thin. Do you know if the tracks have been shifted over a few feet to accommodate the new platform? | |
| 3 | 2022-02-11 21:20 | Jacorp ♦5 | Great, thanks. And yes, the tracks have been shifted apart, but none of the satellite imagery sources show it yet so it's just a matter of guesswork based on the video footage I have here: https://youtu.be/zY5Vwhn2mzgI went ahead and did the best I could: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changes... | |
| 116718465 by clay_c @ 2022-01-28 18:21 | 1 | 2022-01-28 18:35 | clay_c | oops, meant west |
| 116688535 by clay_c @ 2022-01-28 02:28 | 1 | 2022-01-28 02:30 | clay_c | oops, rolled another change into this one. also added expressway=yes to US 77 between Three Rivers and Edinburg |
| 87866761 by clay_c @ 2020-07-12 01:15 | 1 | 2022-01-08 01:03 | zyphlar ♦52 | Is there a reason why SMART has been changed in OSM to "light rail?" It fits no definition of "light rail" that I'm aware of. |
| 2 | 2022-01-08 02:07 | clay_c | Hi - I'm on vacation for a week. I'll take a look at this when I'm back. | |
| 3 | 2022-01-14 04:32 | clay_c | So SMART is an oddball. It's a temporally restricted passenger railroad, like the Oceanside-Escondido Sprinter and certain lines of the San Diego Trolley, where freight movements are only allowed when passenger service is shut down. The consensus is, when light rail is temporally restricted, th... | |
| 4 | 2022-01-14 06:44 | zyphlar ♦52 | It seems odd to call something light rail that isn't; not only the distance, speeds, track configuration and stations are different but the rolling stock itself is different. I can imagine plenty of rail where passenger service takes the majority but freight is also run in between at odd hours,... | |
| 5 | 2022-01-14 15:29 | clay_c | Top speed for the Sprinter is 50 mph, and top speed for SMART is 79 mph. Those are tagged as `maxspeed=*` on the underlying tracks. Does light rail have a speed restriction that I'm unaware of? Are there any public transit routing services that are affected by this change? Which data consumers ... | |
| 6 | 2022-01-14 21:08 | zyphlar ♦52 | It definitely "feels" like commuter rail to me -- I'd have to be a real nerd to notice a difference between it and LIRR or suburban overland NYC MTA for example besides age, style, number of cars, and electrification. But I'll let my vote be one drop in the bucket for wider conse... | |
| 50514986 by clay_c @ 2017-07-24 03:15 | 1 | 2021-12-21 21:29 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | Hi, do you recall why the U.S. 62 designation needed to be moved to the end of the list of route numbers in these ref tags? Comparing https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/255092322 to https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1919723721518855 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/197144648 to https://www.map... |
| 2 | 2021-12-22 04:19 | clay_c | Honestly there wasn't much thought behind it. I put it in that order because I felt US 62 was sort of a hodgepodge of other roads that formed a neat grid. It doesn't reflect any on-the-ground reality. | |
| 103110137 by clay_c @ 2021-04-17 16:24 | 1 | 2021-11-21 01:53 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | Are these county roads actually ever referred to by prefixed route numbers like “CR 600 E”? I’m afraid you might’ve copied some mistaken tagging I did years ago in counties to the south. I even blithely ignored the north–south part of the street names because they didn&... |
| 2 | 2021-11-21 16:50 | clay_c | These roads are variably signed as "CR 600 E" or simply "600 E". I can see the rationale for removing the route relations. I'll pop in on the mailing list. | |
| 113003822 by clay_c @ 2021-10-26 17:14 | 1 | 2021-10-27 03:16 | skquinn ♦804 | Huh? Speed limit is 35 mph, I wouldn't call that "high speed" travel. Memorial Drive might qualify as an expressway, but not Allen Parkway. |
| 2 | 2021-10-27 19:00 | clay_c | It may not necessarily be high speed, but it does at least have relatively low intersection density and it's designed for continuous traffic flow. Would you consider the lower speed limit to be a dealbreaker for expressway=yes? | |
| 103219106 by clay_c @ 2021-04-19 19:17 | 1 | 2021-04-23 17:01 | wrivlin ♦1 | Hi, can you please explain this revert? |
| 2 | 2021-04-23 17:22 | clay_c | It looks like you added the bus stops to the Metro station's stop_area relation. Instead, create a new stop_area relation for the bus stops and add both stop_area relations to a stop_area_group relation. | |
| 101944142 by clay_c @ 2021-03-29 23:39 | 1 | 2021-04-01 16:41 | 3ngineer ♦47 | Why can't the name tag be used on yard tracks in addition to track_ref? Otherwise, the track names don't appear on most maps. |
| 2 | 2021-04-01 19:04 | clay_c | Track numbers are not names. I don't think they belong in the name tag. That said, it's a pretty small issue and I don't care if you re-add them. If you're looking for a renderer that surfaces track numbers, check out OpenRailwayMap. | |
| 88800826 by clay_c @ 2020-07-31 22:06 | 1 | 2021-03-15 18:04 | colgza ♦32 | The bounding box for this changeset includes both the PAAC Silver Line (in Pittsburgh), and the MBTA Silver Line (in Boston). |
| 2 | 2021-03-15 18:04 | colgza ♦32 | What did you do? | |
| 3 | 2021-03-15 18:35 | Horza ♦110 | Had a quick look at one of the lines changed in Boston, the Green Line, looks like this changeset added alevel=-1 tag to itLarge scale tag fixing gone wrong maybe? | |
| 4 | 2021-03-15 19:22 | clay_c | Well that's weird. Thanks for calling this to my attention; I'm taking a look | |
| 5 | 2021-03-15 20:51 | clay_c | So here's what it looks like happened. I had been using JOSM to review MBTA rail and I must have thought I had finished, so I moved on to reviewing Pittsburgh's light rail. Turns out I had some unsaved changes in Boston and accidentally rolled those into the same changeset.The changes ... | |
| 100929252 by clay_c @ 2021-03-12 20:03 | 1 | 2021-03-12 20:04 | clay_c | changeset comment should actually say Seattle Streetcar |
| 55825797 by clay_c @ 2018-01-28 10:50 | 1 | 2021-02-25 09:32 | skquinn ♦804 | Why was Harbor Town Drive upgraded to tertiary in this changeset? |
| 2 | 2021-02-25 14:33 | clay_c | I upgraded most streets that pass through stoplights to at least tertiary. In retrospect, that particular street probably shouldn't have been upgraded and I probably wouldn't have done the same today. Goof on my part. | |
| 83910377 by clay_c @ 2020-04-22 04:07 | 1 | 2021-02-23 04:31 | Mashin ♦556 | This one was probably supposed to be attached to somethinghttps://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7432177407 |
| 2 | 2021-02-23 04:43 | clay_c | No, it's in the correct place. | |
| 98029750 by clay_c @ 2021-01-23 17:39 | 1 | 2021-02-21 13:40 | blackboxlogic ♦458 | I'm curious why add these? Also, is there a data-source for the name tag? Seems you used the town name as the station name.This came up because searching for <town name> returns train stations (which don't exist yet). |
| 2 | 2021-02-21 13:41 | blackboxlogic ♦458 | To clarify: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6533062790 | |
| 3 | 2021-02-21 15:06 | clay_c | Train station names are often, you guessed it, the same as the name of the locality they serve. I couldn't find any info on whether these future stations would have more catchy monikers (like maybe "Rockland Waterfront" or "Wiscasset Gateway") so I went with the safe assumpt... | |
| 95776625 by clay_c @ 2020-12-14 02:11 | 1 | 2020-12-17 11:55 | zaizone ♦63 | Thank you ! |
| 91163783 by clay_c @ 2020-09-20 00:44 | 1 | 2020-09-20 00:44 | clay_c | https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/90059286 |
| 2 | 2020-09-20 10:34 | General Updating ♦6 | But is Fluffy or are you wrong? | |
| 3 | 2020-09-20 13:08 | clay_c | Fluffy has been making large-scale edits to reclassify roadways around the country, ignoring the local community. These edits are safe to revert. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3918 | |
| 56233060 by clay_c @ 2018-02-10 04:47 | 1 | 2020-08-27 23:59 | skquinn ♦804 | What exactly was the logic for reclassifying the westmost ~270 feet of Torry Yucca Lane as highway=living_street (which is generally not used in the US)? Specifically, what was wrong with service or residential? |
| 2 | 2020-08-28 02:10 | clay_c | This was a while ago, I don't even remember. I'm cool if you reclassify it. | |
| 89600625 by clay_c @ 2020-08-19 01:38 | 1 | 2020-08-21 22:36 | SomeoneElse ♦13,362 | Hello,I'm guessing that there's more to this change than just "adding stop_position nodes to Metra stations" as it's a revert and it removed things like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/836261452/history which aren't stop position nodes. Would it be possible to prov... |
| 2 | 2020-08-21 23:23 | clay_c | Hi Andy. As I was reviewing Metra stations to repair stop positions and get things back to a working state, I noticed details were added in the same changesets where the stop positions were deleted. While some of the information was added in good faith and was useful, much of it was complaints about... | |
| 3 | 2020-08-22 00:11 | SomeoneElse ♦13,362 | For completeness - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3850 .I added that after noticing changeset comments at https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C4WKKHH0V ; unrelated to this edit. | |
| 4 | 2020-08-23 03:24 | Zol87 ♦42 | I'd be more willing to work with him if he was willing to learn the protocols of OSM and willing to explain the reasoning behind his changes instead of being so stubborn. It would also help if he was more descriptive in his changes so we can understand them. The problem is that these changes af... | |
| 88473454 by clay_c @ 2020-07-24 18:54 | 1 | 2020-07-24 19:02 | Mike Raust ♦81 | Is this rather a manual or a mechanical retagging? |
| 2 | 2020-07-24 19:18 | clay_c | Manual. I'm using aerial imagery and doing a little internet research to determine whether places tagged as railway=station are actually disused, as well as creating station nodes wherever railway=station is erroneously tagged on a building (should usually be retagged building=train_station). | |
| 87999166 by clay_c @ 2020-07-14 22:34 | 1 | 2020-07-14 23:30 | stevea ♦304 | Truly, sweet, nice work here at building up the PTv2 efforts! |
| 87052754 by clay_c @ 2020-06-23 22:11 | 1 | 2020-06-23 22:41 | jdd 3 Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | 2020-06-23 22:57 | clay_c | Feel free to survey the stop positions and add them. This is valuable information and people would definitely appreciate it if you could add it in.If you don't feel like doing this work, that's fine—just leave the stop_position nodes as they are and move on to mapping something e... | |
| 87051726 by clay_c @ 2020-06-23 21:22 | 1 | 2020-06-23 21:39 | clay_c | JOSM crashed during conflict resolution here. Hopefully I got everything straightened out but if anyone comes across anything fishy, let me know. |
| 77347678 by clay_c @ 2019-11-20 23:15 | 1 | 2020-05-25 16:57 | Viajero Perdido ♦243 | Hi. You changed rail at Fort Edmonton Park from railway=preserved to =miniature. This is a historic park, so I doubt it is truly miniature (narrow gauge). I expect it would be the gauge used historically.Could you please confirm? Thank you. |
| 2 | 2020-05-25 18:14 | clay_c | You're probably right. Feel free to change it back. | |
| 3 | 2020-05-26 16:56 | Viajero Perdido ♦243 | Done. I actually cycled past there yesterday and confirmed it's standard gauge, or at least not narrow or miniature. | |
| 85229408 by clay_c @ 2020-05-15 02:12 | 1 | 2020-05-19 06:30 | IsStatenIsland ♦19 | I like to think of the easements as road beds. You shifted them from layers -2 to -1. They should essentially be at the same layer as the lowest object.Any thoughts? |
| 2 | 2020-05-20 18:29 | clay_c | Ah, good point. Do what you want with it - I'm gonna be taking a break for about a week to help with family stuff | |
| 3 | 2020-05-22 03:43 | IsStatenIsland ♦19 | All done, back to layer -2. | |
| 85047785 by clay_c @ 2020-05-11 21:49 | 1 | 2020-05-16 03:54 | IsStatenIsland ♦19 | Nice. The station fits perfectly against several diagrams. The north pool overlaps the platform to the left of Track 5; you can see the north tower's footprint encased in glass in the westernmost platform. (can't find any pictures of it)Good call on railway:preferred_direction=forward,... |
| 82893701 by clay_c @ 2020-03-31 23:40 | 1 | 2020-04-28 00:29 | Greg_Rose ♦175 | Hi there - Please explain what is meant by "needs station verification" for the Empire Builder route (relation 10946021). Is there a question of accuracy here, or is there something else at play? |
| 2 | 2020-04-28 02:31 | clay_c | Not really sure. It was there before I edited it and I didn't want to remove it as I split the route into its constituent parts. All the stations are mapped in detail now, so it can probably be removed. | |
| 83415493 by clay_c @ 2020-04-12 02:55 | 1 | 2020-04-17 04:13 | chachafish ♦462 | Howdy :) I noticed you changed the name, "Union Station", to "Denver Union Station". Do you have a source for this? The name is simply, "Union Station". The wikidata source you added here reflects this as does the National Register of Historic Places. Thanks :) https://... |
| 2 | 2020-04-18 20:24 | clay_c | Different train operators often have different names for the same station. Amtrak refers to the same station as just "Denver, Colorado" with "Union Station" as a subtitle, as is common with other major central stations around the country: https://www.amtrak.com/stations/den.html\... | |
| 3 | 2020-04-19 01:26 | chachafish ♦462 | No problem. I'll change the name back to Union Station and add alt_name=Denver Union Station. Cheers. | |
| 72917182 by clay_c @ 2019-08-01 22:48 | 1 | 2020-04-12 02:25 | stevea ♦304 | Please identify the source for "Burnlingame Bicycle Routes." (relation 915719) |
| 2 | 2020-04-12 03:54 | clay_c | I have no idea. I didn't add it. | |
| 3 | 2020-04-12 03:58 | clay_c | Looks like the only changes I've made to it were splitting up ways to add a bus route (hence the changeset comment). I pretty much ignored the bike routes relation and worked around it. | |
| 4 | 2020-04-12 04:00 | stevea ♦304 | OK, I'm trying to harmonize lcn route relations with signs I see for "local bike routes" (San Mateo County).It's a work-in-progress and there is some noise in existing data to clean up (things tagged lcn which aren't lens as OSM defines them).Consruction zone, basica... | |
| 82472573 by clay_c @ 2020-03-22 00:14 | 1 | 2020-03-23 01:50 | stevea ♦304 | I politely disagree with the tag route=tram on BJWR. It's a route=train, it simply happens to run on miniature tracks. There are lots of these, they are trains, not trams. |
| 2 | 2020-03-23 01:51 | stevea ♦304 | I think we leave passenger=local off of these, for sure. | |
| 3 | 2020-03-23 03:18 | Allison P ♦1,136 | Ditto for Disneyland Railroad and some amusement rides. | |
| 4 | 2020-03-23 05:04 | stevea ♦304 | Yes, while "amusement park" rail has yet to be fully fleshed out semantically (very well, very comprehensively), I'm 100% certain we don't do so with route=tram. That's a particular thing (not this). A tram might get passenger=local, but amusement park trains (like miniatu... | |
| 5 | 2020-03-23 13:45 | Dr Kludge ♦69 | I appreciate the passion of this change. However, you edited out local knowledge. I left comments about my last change in the hopes that other mappers would understand that my public transportation network is different. I am removing your edits. | |
| 6 | 2020-03-23 13:46 | Dr Kludge ♦69 | A mass edit list this across a large area is never good! | |
| 7 | 2020-03-23 17:22 | clay_c | Alright, I reverted the amusement park rides to route=train. The railway infrastructure ("subdivision") relations I reclassified as route=railway remain that way. | |
| 8 | 2020-03-23 17:30 | stevea ♦304 | Yes, that seems better; correct in both cases (underlying infrastructure as route=railway and "small" trains like miniature and amusement park are route=train, not route=tram). Thanks. | |
| 9 | 2020-03-23 18:01 | clay_c | Hi Dr Kludge,I appreciate your work keeping Phoenix's light rail system up-to-date. I've addressed your criticisms of my changeset here. I left a comment on your changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/82526320), which you have clearly read because you've already fixed ... | |
| 80979434 by clay_c @ 2020-02-14 00:22 | 1 | 2020-02-14 10:11 | oba510 ♦256 | I'm not sure it makes sense to tag the stations themselves as "level=-2". I would consider the entire facility (the concourse level, platform level, elevators, etc. to be the station. It would make sense for the individual elements inside the station to get a level tag though. |
| 2 | 2020-02-14 17:18 | clay_c | I see what you're saying. I would consider the platform level to be the relevant level to assign to the station, the rest being just indoor pedestrian circulation. Either way, I guess it's unclear whether the level tag belongs on the station node in the first place.I want to think thro... | |
| 80055665 by clay_c @ 2020-01-25 00:05 | 1 | 2020-01-25 02:18 | Jarek 🚲 ♦321 | Hi Clay. Can you expand on why you renamed the Niagara train to "Lakeshore West" train? This is not how they are branded by GO and that's not what is announced on the trains. |
| 2 | 2020-01-25 02:19 | Jarek 🚲 ♦321 | Also, some of the PTv2 relations are now broken. When using JOSM, try to check for errors with gaps in ways. | |
| 3 | 2020-01-27 17:20 | clay_c | At the time, the information I had available to me indicated that they are branded as Lakeshore West trains. I'm checking now and some online resources brand them as Lakeshore West with a dotted-line extension to Niagara, and some brand them as Niagara. Was this a recent change?Looks like y... | |
| 4 | 2020-01-28 01:53 | Jarek 🚲 ♦321 | Hi Clay,Yeah, it's a bit of a fluid situation. The Niagara trains were made year-round last September, but some maps are not yet updated and still say "summer weekend service" or similar.On the weekend trains, the passenger announcements made are usually "This is a Niagar... | |
| 5 | 2020-01-28 20:06 | clay_c | Fair enough—I'll go ahead and re-separate the relations. Looks like there's a lot of route variants and one relation could become unwieldy.As for the name=* tag, in the context of route relations it functions more like description=* and often duplicates data found in other tags. ... | |
| 6 | 2020-01-30 02:23 | Jarek 🚲 ♦321 | Yeah the names seem alright now. Personally I'm still not a fan of the "from => to" duplication but I'll live with it | |
| 77741508 by clay_c @ 2019-11-29 18:58 | 1 | 2020-01-24 00:00 | shuui ♦16 | Hi, I'm curious why the name of this train station was changed? Milwaukee has 2 train stations. One at the airport and one downtown at the Intermodal Station. The website lists the name as "Milwaukee, Wisconsin - Intermodal Station." |
| 2 | 2020-01-27 17:04 | clay_c | It shows up on Amtrak's schedules as simply "Milwaukee", although the complex is of course called "Milwaukee Intermodal Station". I chose to leave the name of the building as such, which I typically do in cases like this.I'm assuming you're local to Milwaukee, ... | |
| 3 | 2020-01-27 17:47 | shuui ♦16 | I think if someone asked about how to get to the Milwaukee train station, the intermodal would be assumed one unless you live on the south side of the county. Either way, I think your explanation makes good sense and I'll just leave it as is. Thanks for taking the time to explain! | |
| 79358497 by clay_c @ 2020-01-08 22:41 | 1 | 2020-01-09 21:08 | InsertUser ♦444 | Where was this automated edit discussed? |
| 2 | 2020-01-10 00:17 | clay_c | https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2020-January/019902.html | |
| 77750479 by clay_c @ 2019-11-30 05:45 | 1 | 2020-01-06 08:16 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | What’s the reason for moving Amtrak to the front of the list? Is there a convention that the national service should be listed first? Previously, Caltrain had been listed first at the two stations it shares with Amtrak. Signs at these stations and roads leading to them always place Caltrain fi... |
| 2 | 2020-01-07 00:00 | clay_c | I primarily wanted things to be uniform across stations shared by Amtrak and a local operator. I observed that most cases across the country listed Amtrak first, while Caltrain and FrontRunner had it the other way around.Suburban trains nearly always show up more often than Amtrak regardless of ... | |
| 77959450 by clay_c @ 2019-12-04 20:28 | 1 | 2020-01-05 10:55 | SomeoneElse ♦13,362 | Hello clay_c,Is there a definition of railway-halt for the US that you're using anywhere? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=halt just says that this "might differ from country to country"; if there was a shared definition in use anywhere it'd be good to have it t... |
| 2 | 2020-01-05 16:27 | clay_c | Hi Andy,I'm using the definition of a railway station without switches or crossovers, as in the German examples on the wiki. Unstaffed-ness happened to be a convenient heuristic to find such stations. I visually checked each one to see if there were switches nearby or not.Best,Clay | |
| 3 | 2020-01-05 17:27 | SomeoneElse ♦13,362 | Thanks. Is that definition widely used in the US as well as in Germany-speaking countries? As far as I can tell it isn't in the UK, for example. | |
| 4 | 2020-01-05 19:18 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | That definition isn’t generally used in the U.S. railway=halt is used for flag stops. Some unstaffed Amtrak stations are flag stops, but for instance the Oakland-Coliseum/Airport station (OAC) is a fixed stop, about as built up as most stations along commuter rail lines. An extreme example is ... | |
| 5 | 2020-01-05 19:23 | clay_c | I don't think people generally understand the distinction between a station and a halt in North America, unless they're railroad employees or otherwise have sufficient technical knowledge on railroad operations. I think it's inaccurate to say this definition isn't generally used ... | |
| 6 | 2020-01-05 19:34 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | What’s the rationale for making so many stations into undifferentiated halts, other than a rule on the wiki that was meant for very different countries? The distinction between fixed stops and flag stops is common among American passenger rail systems (and bus and light rail systems for that m... | |
| 7 | 2020-01-05 20:11 | clay_c | What makes the presence of switches "arcane"? They're quite important in railroad operations and scheduling. The halts are all tagged simultaneously as public_transport=station and train=yes, which I would argue are the tags relevant to passengers.Cincinnati Union Terminal has a l... | |
| 8 | 2020-01-05 21:07 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dhalt primarily refers to size, the presence of a platform, and whether trains stop always or only by request. If you had instead changed these nodes to railway=halt on the basis that there’s no shelter or station building, that would’ve b... | |
| 9 | 2020-01-05 22:21 | clay_c | Fair enough, I'm convinced. I'll keep that in mind going forward. I should probably mention that I've been mapping commuter rail stations across the Northeast according to the switchless definition. I'll follow up in a private message about what to do going forward.That said,... | |
| 77955737 by clay_c @ 2019-12-04 18:21 | 1 | 2019-12-06 08:28 | Carnildo ♦905 | Is this really a worthwhile thing to do? Sure, it's typographically better, but nobody's got an en-dash on their keyboard. Someone searching for "Croton-Harmon", for example, had better hope that the search engine understands that all short horizontal lines are equivalent. |
| 2 | 2019-12-06 22:11 | clay_c | Searching for "croton-harmon" and "croton harmon" with Nominatim yields the railway station and nearby details. Looks to me like the search engine recognizes it as a word boundary. It's a punctuation character according to Unicode so that's more or less what I'd ex... | |
| 3 | 2019-12-20 20:43 | SomeoneElse ♦13,362 | Just to confirm, this does break search. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=Croton-Harmon#values does not find the value amended below.OSM tries to proceed on the "principle of least surprise", and having hyphens in names where there actually is a hyphen in the name sounds lik... | |
| 4 | 2019-12-20 21:36 | clay_c | As far as I can tell, both Amtrak and Metro-North variably use hyphens and en-dashes in the name of Croton–Harmon station (among others). The designer in me thinks the en-dash is preferable for hyphenated station names, and the grumpy software engineer in me wants to submit issue tickets to th... | |
| 5 | 2019-12-21 11:45 | maxerickson ♦234 | Taginfo is a tool for data inspection and it shows you what you ask for https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=Croton%E2%80%93Harmon#valuesIt could plausibly be extended to show "extended results", perhaps just a second list called "similar results"What I wonder is wh... | |
| 6 | 2019-12-21 12:03 | SomeoneElse ♦13,362 | In OSM we don't generally use the "house style" of shops etc. - we use the commonly accepted name. See for example https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=toys#values and https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Pam for the former "Toys R Us" - people don't typically use some wa... | |
| 7 | 2019-12-21 12:37 | maxerickson ♦234 | The "house style" for Toys“R”Us in text is Toys“R”Us.Anyway, my point was that a prescriptive house style (or rather, an official dictionary of station names) is more or less the only way to argue that the official names use en-dash, because we can't trust ... | |
| 8 | 2019-12-21 23:09 | clay_c | reverted here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78723287 | |
| 9 | 2019-12-21 23:13 | SomeoneElse ♦13,362 | Thanks | |
| 10 | 2020-01-05 21:47 | Minh Nguyen ♦564 | For what it’s worth, I also use en dashes in situations where a name would properly include an en dash in running text. It doesn’t particularly matter whether the sign or the agency’s house style applies proper punctuation. Longer dashes and curly quotes are usually excluded from s... | |
| 78601376 by clay_c @ 2019-12-18 21:14 | 1 | 2020-01-03 15:25 | colgza ♦32 | Do you know what happened to the Wikidata tags on the various SEPTA regional rail routes? I had previously used them to create an interactive map of them on Wikipedia (see link below), but I noticed that this map is now broken. Was there something wrong with my use of these tags?https://en.wikip... |
| 2 | 2020-01-03 15:34 | colgza ♦32 | Ignore the above link. I just commented out the map on that Wikipedia page, so it won't show up. | |
| 3 | 2020-01-03 17:16 | clay_c | I moved the wikidata tags to the parent route_master relations. I assumed this was the proper way to represent things—I didn't realize that {{maplink}} was dependent on it.Ideally, {{maplink}} itself should be updated to support route_master relations as well. But in the meantime, fee... | |
| 78946287 by clay_c @ 2019-12-28 02:05 | 1 | 2019-12-28 02:07 | clay_c | wrong changeset comment - this edit is actually about layer tag and bridge end fixes |
| 78609221 by clay_c @ 2019-12-19 02:47 | 1 | 2019-12-19 21:30 | azakh-world ♦282 | Hi.Don't you mix up network and owner corporation for New Jersey light rail system? As I can find in the Internet, the network is called Hudson-Bergen Light Rail (HBLR) and the owner is called "NJ Transit". Aren't they?Best regards,Alexey |
| 2 | 2019-12-19 22:06 | clay_c | Are they truly part of a different network? NJ Transit owns them, NJ Transit operates them, NJ Transit sets fares and sells tickets, and NJ Transit is what's painted on the vehicles. In my opinion, that justifies changing their network tags to match NJ Transit's bus and rail services.T... | |
| 3 | 2019-12-20 22:33 | azakh-world ♦282 | The main advantage of putting network name to "network" tag and operator name to "operator" tag is to reflect the true state of things.I think the three networks: Newark Light Rail, Hudson-Bergen Light Rail and Philadelphia River LINE - should be considered as separate networ... | |
| 4 | 2019-12-21 04:53 | clay_c | Should the Atlantic City Line be its own network, separate from the rest of the NJ Transit rail lines? Should the 'A' and 'B' divisions of the NYC Subway be separated into networks?The issue you're having seems like it could be solved with a spatial query. If you're... | |
| 5 | 2019-12-23 10:35 | azakh-world ♦282 | I could meet my needs with a spacial query, fortunately these networks are not overlapping, what might not be the case. I still see a serious disadvantage of your approach: data coarsening/merging may be simply done at any time, while it's hard or impossible to restore details out of coarsened/... | |
| 78016497 by clay_c @ 2019-12-05 20:51 | 1 | 2019-12-08 11:54 | mueschel ♦6,565 | Hi,could you check the two nodes of the railway station? Something went wrong with the name tag:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7036935130https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7036935131 |
| 2 | 2019-12-08 18:22 | clay_c | Thanks for catching that! Fixed in changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78115624 | |
| 56046612 by clay_c @ 2018-02-04 06:55 | 1 | 2019-12-08 07:29 | skquinn ♦804 | Burnett Street at North Main Street never did have traffic signals that I remember and definitely does not now. The current version of Texas Orthophoto is too blurry for me to reliably see traffic signals, much less anything more than basic road alignment; was it any better in 2017? |
| 77397252 by clay_c @ 2019-11-21 20:46 | 1 | 2019-11-21 20:52 | stevea ♦304 | I haven't had a chance to look at everything comprehensively here, but thank you very much for what appears to be substantial and awesome work! |
| 71463295 by clay_c @ 2019-06-20 23:07 | 1 | 2019-06-21 05:03 | oba510 ♦256 | I see a number of stops here (and a few in other changesets) where you have removed the shelter=no tag. Please don't do that. It's just as valuable to know which bus stops *don't* have a shelter as it is to know which ones do, and people (ie, me) have spent time surveying these thing... |
| 2 | 2019-06-21 16:09 | clay_c | I'm honestly sorry for removing shelter=no. I think a JOSM plugin I'm using might be assuming it's equivalent to a missing shelter tag. I'll spend time today undoing that and figuring out what happened.Sorry as well about moving the bus stop, I'll go ahead and revert tha... | |
| 71035427 by clay_c @ 2019-06-07 19:01 | 1 | 2019-06-09 02:33 | canardanonyme ♦1 | It may be better to exclude the description of the bus routes from their names (e.g. "County Connection 7: Shadelands => Pleasant Hill BART" instead of "County Connection 7-Shadelands/Pleasant Hill: Shadelands => Pleasant Hill BART".) The areas served by a route should be c... |
| 2 | 2019-06-09 16:38 | clay_c | I guess that's fair. I'll go ahead and clean it up | |
| 3 | 2019-06-12 10:16 | oba510 ♦256 | Isn't the County Connection route 4 a continuous loop? In this rare instance it might make more sense to only have a single route relation, with the start and end at the BART station. | |
| 4 | 2019-06-12 15:37 | clay_c | Oof, you're right. My mistake. I'll change routes 4 and 7 back to a single route=bus with roundtrip=yes | |
| 70426000 by clay_c @ 2019-05-20 04:36 | 1 | 2019-05-20 08:11 | stevea ♦304 | Offering you encouragement on nice work so far; keep it up! |
| 67751400 by clay_c @ 2019-03-04 01:43 | 1 | 2019-03-04 04:59 | oba510 ♦256 | Why are you changing all the railway=tram_stop nodes to railway=stop? It seems like a less-specific way of tagging the stops, and causes them to stop rendering on most maps. |
| 2 | 2019-03-04 20:59 | clay_c | See this section in the [OSM Wiki](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trams#Tram_stops). Following the updated public transport schema, `public_transport=stop_position` with `tram=yes` is semantically the same as `railway=tram_stop`, and it is up to the renderers to begin supporting that. In fact, ... | |
| 3 | 2019-03-04 21:07 | clay_c | So to be clear, each tram stop will still end up having a `railway=tram_stop` once my work is finished. This is just part of a process to add more fine-grained, quasi-standardized details to the public transport systems here. What I've done in this situation before is to retag the nodes on the ... | |
| 4 | 2019-03-05 09:57 | oba510 ♦256 | About a year(?) ago I systematically went through all of the Muni Metro lines (but not the cable cars, and didn't finish the F line) and added every stop and platform in the city, and tried to standardize it as best as I could, given that it's an odd system where modern light rail trains o... | |
| 5 | 2019-03-05 18:37 | clay_c | Thank you for your work! I don't think any of the details you've added to the map conflict with an additional center/label node tagged railway=tram_stop. I'll admit the wiki article on that tag is pretty unhelpful and needs to be updated. It mentions the new schema, as you pointed out... | |
| 6 | 2019-03-05 20:26 | clay_c | As for distinguishing railway=* for stops on Muni trackage, I think it seems fit to use railway=tram_stop for flag stops and railway=station for the wheelchair-accessible stops where trains always call (in other words, all the labeled stations on the official Muni Metro map). | |
| 7 | 2019-03-06 08:26 | oba510 ♦256 | That had been my first thought, but some of the surface-level wheelchair accessible stops are actually a separate ramp that can be a block or more away from the normal stop. In practice they are hardly ever used unless someone specifically needs them, since the steps on the train need to be raised a... | |
| 8 | 2019-03-06 23:17 | clay_c | Yeah. We can map wheelchair support with wheelchair=yes or wheelchair=designated. I think what's important is that the non-flag stops are one level up from the flag stops in the railway=station vs. railway=tram_stop hierarchy. | |
| 66751955 by clay_c @ 2019-01-29 21:24 | 1 | 2019-01-29 21:59 | stevea ♦304 | What is your source for the lcn=15 route? You might say "an on-the-ground sign" and I'd be OK with that. Here is a map which does not show route 15: https://www.marinbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Marin-Bike-Map-full.jpg |
| 2 | 2019-01-29 23:00 | clay_c | I wasn't the one who added lcn=15 to these routes. | |
| 65138197 by clay_c @ 2018-12-03 20:16 | 1 | 2019-01-23 03:12 | stevea ♦304 | Hi Clay. I think OSM's data can express what I believe you're doing here with simple tags rather than Relation: 7453451. I think what you want to do is tag all elements in that relation with owner=UP;operator=BNSF and you're done. Relation: 7453451 can then be deleted.Steve |
| 2 | 2019-01-24 00:58 | clay_c | Looks like you're right. I wasn't the one who originally added that relation, but I'll be sure to clean this one up and others like it as I go along. Thanks! | |
| 3 | 2019-01-24 01:15 | stevea ♦304 | You're welcome, thanks and a polite wave in your direction. | |
| 65356597 by clay_c @ 2018-12-10 21:05 | 1 | 2018-12-12 00:29 | azakh-world ♦282 | Hello.When you've created stations as nodes and moved station properties (tags) from buildings to them, you should have moved relation membership as well. I've done that.Also, could you check if nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5845162743 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/... |
| 2 | 2018-12-12 02:51 | clay_c | Thanks for pointing that out! I'll make sure to fix these issues as I continue my work on BART infrastructure. | |
| 3 | 2018-12-12 03:52 | clay_c | As for the two nodes, they seem to have information relevant to buses, and I guess I don't know enough about the public transport schema to know if whoever added them intended for them to represent the BART stations themselves or AC Transit's bus plazas. | |
| 64856629 by clay_c @ 2018-11-25 00:14 | 1 | 2018-11-25 01:11 | clay_c | Whoops, I messed up a lot of geometry in southern Oregon. Reverting... |
| 2 | 2018-11-25 01:46 | clay_c | https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/64857246 | |
| 63847208 by clay_c @ 2018-10-24 20:59 | 1 | 2018-10-24 21:07 | clay_c | description inaccurate. this was actually copied from Google |
| 48835246 by clay_c @ 2017-05-20 02:54 | 1 | 2018-09-30 06:50 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi!You used the very unusual tag highway=minor for this road:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/13515159Why not unclassified? |
| 2 | 2018-10-05 20:03 | clay_c | whoops, not sure how that got there. fixing | |
| 57870860 by clay_c @ 2018-04-06 16:28 | 1 | 2018-07-11 17:07 | vorpalblade ♦101 | Absent objections, I'm going to revert this change.Problems with it: 1) The official names of the roads ARE NOT decimal. They are actually fractions. They may have the decimal as an alternative name, but not as the primary name.2) Nominatim DOES NOT equate ½ with 1/2, which is wh... |
| 55822890 by clay_c @ 2018-01-28 08:07 | 1 | 2018-03-08 18:58 | maxerickson ♦234 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/217742231 was not correctly connected to crossing streets after this update. You may want to review these changes for other connectivity problems.max |
| 56539662 by clay_c @ 2018-02-21 06:07 | 1 | 2018-02-21 18:20 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | I still have some concerns about this mass attempt at priority creep on the highway=* tag. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Secondary_taghttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Tertiary_highways |
| 2 | 2018-02-21 20:37 | MikeN ♦352 | I agree about concerns with mass priority creep. DOT / Government classifications do not directly translate to an OSM classification. Routers will still select a road when it best matches the travel itinerary and mode. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-21 22:56 | clay_c | Alright, I'll put a pause to this change for a bit. I want to continue this discussion later, though right now I think I just need to take a break. Thanks for being patient. | |
| 4 | 2018-02-22 01:50 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | No problem, thanks for being open on this. Last time there was someone who went a little too strict with the tagging, we ended up with the entire US highway system tagged trunk nationwide | |
| 5 | 2018-02-26 22:47 | clay_c | Alright, I'm back and my head's clear. Thanks for giving me some time.I want to make sure we're on the same page with a few things. I'm avoiding being strict on tagging, and there's a few FM/RM roads I've tagged higher than secondary as well as state/US highways low... | |
| 6 | 2018-02-27 01:51 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | RIght, generally a good idea to weight the local functionality with the classification to kind of rank it out. Like a major thoroughfare through a city (like, say, FM 2786 or CR 150 in Allen) might be underrated even as a secondary. But, say, FM 1885 or FM 920, northwest of Weatherford? Yeah, tha... | |
| 7 | 2018-02-27 01:56 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | Also, yeah, I'd fully agree that Texas makes for especially odd classification owing to it's huge number of auxiliary routes, of various and often nebulous significance, such as, despite signage, there is only one Ranch Road (RM 1), and *all* of the rest are properly FMs, and while the FMs... | |
| 56508945 by clay_c @ 2018-02-20 03:33 | 1 | 2018-02-20 04:23 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | Generally FM/RM roads would be tertiary. Maybe higher if it's a big multilane boulevard in a city or something like that. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56508945 |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 20:31 | clay_c | Texas has rather high standards for maintaining FM/RM roads. Many of them connect up with regular state roads in OK and NM that are already tagged as secondary. I believe FM/RM roads should be secondary whenever they form a connective network of well-maintained roads in between state/US highways, wh... | |
| 3 | 2018-02-21 01:03 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | My concern would be parity with surrounding states. Typically speaking, state highways default to highway=secondary unless there's additional capacity, and highway=primary would be a US highway, and a highway=tertiary being pretty much anything with a centerline at lower levels or state auxili... | |
| 4 | 2018-02-21 02:22 | clay_c | State highways and US highways in Texas are often built to the same standards and are otherwise indistinguishable. Sometimes they may be widened, but that can happen anywhere regardless of whether it's a state highway or a US highway. I don't see a convincing case for why similarly-built h... | |
| 5 | 2018-02-21 02:40 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | > State highways and US highways in Texas are often built to the same standards and are otherwise indistinguishable.That's fairly typically the case everywhere.> I don't see a convincing case for why similarly-built highways in Texas should have different designations just ba... | |
| 56504627 by clay_c @ 2018-02-19 21:55 | 1 | 2018-02-20 04:23 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,108 | Looks like a lot of pretty clearcut secondaries got upgraded to primary here. Generally speaking, a two lane rural state highway would be a secondary (primary primary if it's a four lane undivided or a major street in a city), and auxiliary state highways would be a secondary or tertiary. ... |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 20:19 | clay_c | Most of the "two lane rural state highways" in Texas have already been tagged as primary roads. It makes sense for them to be tagged as such, because they form a connective network of uniform, well-maintained, high-speed roads across the state. If you'd like to add lane numbers and sp... | |
| 48319256 by clay_c @ 2017-05-01 21:42 | 1 | 2017-09-28 23:08 | compdude ♦169 | I noticed you removed the primary_link way that represents the left turn lane from 205th St/ Lake Ballinger Way to 205th St. (the secondary road) This is physically separated by a barrier from the thru lanes that continue southeast to Ballinger Way. The reason for the existence of a separate way i... |
| 52321542 by clay_c @ 2017-09-24 07:30 | 1 | 2017-09-25 19:01 | Harald Hartmann ♦827 | Hello claysmalley. At your blog you haven't mentioned, that you will introduce the new and so far unkown and undocumented key `frontage_road`. Is this key really necessary? #newkey |
| 2 | 2017-09-26 17:28 | clay_c | Ah, I should mention that. I chose to add it because most of these frontage roads are already marked as `note=frontage`. I didn't like that it was taking over the `note` tag, but I didn't want to delete useful information, so I moved the information to a new tag. I'm okay with having ... | |
| 47923957 by clay_c @ 2017-04-19 03:39 | 1 | 2017-04-19 05:03 | DavidKewley ♦195 | In Laguna Niguel, CA (near me), you deleted all tags http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=321217297 from the Lifetime Fitness parking area http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/321217297 except amenity=parking. The tags you deleted looked probably accurate and helpful to me. Why did you delete them?... |
| 2 | 2017-04-19 08:20 | clay_c | Oof, there are some tags that shouldn't have been deleted. I'll fix that.As for the Lifetime Fitness issues, someone had gone through and added in all the Lifetime Fitness locations across the country... poorly. There was a lot of messy data: parking lots drawn as one giant zig-zagging... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-19 14:55 | DavidKewley ♦195 | Thanks very much! Makes more sense to me now. | |
| 44797142 by clay_c @ 2016-12-30 23:06 | 1 | 2017-03-31 10:45 | skquinn ♦804 | Not everything that goes in a circle is a roundabout: way 462670713 is not a roundabout and should not have been tagged as such as it is simply a circle drive in the middle of a residential roadway. Contrast with way 462670700, which is correctly tagged as a roundabout as it is an intersection of mu... |
| 43719875 by clay_c @ 2016-11-17 06:57 | 1 | 2016-11-20 13:15 | mueschel ♦6,565 | Hi,you put the tag "true=A" on 30 ways - could you check that?Cheers, Jan |
| 2 | 2016-11-21 22:18 | clay_c | wat. dunno how that happened; i'll fix it | |
| 3 | 2016-11-21 22:21 | clay_c | are you sure it's 30 ways? i could only find 6 with that tag | |
| 4 | 2016-11-21 22:32 | mueschel ♦6,565 | Seems the other 24 are in Russia from another user... Strange that they appeared on the same day. Thanks for fixing! |