malcolmh participated in the following changeset discussions
Changeset # Tmstmp UTC Contributor Comment
165140804
by sheldonelectric
@ 2025-04-19 07:30
12025-04-21 06:00malcolmh If you have verified that this is so, then go ahead.
73990412
by malcolmh
@ 2019-09-02 08:02
12024-10-25 05:15plamen
♦69
Hi,
Are you sure that
"seamark:distance_mark:category=board"
is applicable in this case? Distance marks are located inside the river.
22024-10-25 05:33malcolmh You should contact the original mapper who made that tag. My change was only to the distance units tag
32024-10-25 10:48plamen
♦69
https://www.appd-bg.org/mapris# Here you can find updated positions.
I intend to replace all nodes along the BG-RO border.
128169930
by malcolmh
@ 2022-10-28 11:07
12022-10-28 19:32❤️‍🔥
♦367
hey, what's the correct way of tagging that a pile or post is padded with rubber tyres?

it looks a bit like this: https://flic.kr/p/4SSyKv
22022-10-28 20:17malcolmh That looks like a fender. The correct tagging for that is seamark:type= shoreline_construction, seamark:shoreline_construction:category=fender. The attribute "surface" is for seabed type.
32022-10-28 23:02❤️‍🔥
♦367
thanks, I wasn't sure if it counts as a fender since the wiki page says that tag can't be used on nodes - https://wiki.osm.org/Tag:seamark:shoreline_construction:category=fender
126364314
by malcolmh
@ 2022-09-19 10:11
12022-09-21 14:17Jowet
♦1
This shouldn't be tagged as a way
22022-09-21 14:21Jowet
♦1
I mean: This way shouldn't be tagged as a footpath
32022-09-23 10:11malcolmh You can edit that!
42023-09-22 05:55quantenschaum
♦35
What is this, a foot path over the water? I assume it is a ferry route. Does this actually exist? Pleas tag accordingly. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry
126364268
by malcolmh
@ 2022-09-19 10:09
12022-09-20 22:03cytryn
♦132
Hi,
Thanks for the revision - you're definitely right that these slipways are not seamarks anymore. Nontheless, I think at least disused:leisure=slipway tag should stay there.
Although one of them is built over by the wharf and the second one is a temporary storage place for some concrete pla...
22022-09-21 03:01malcolmh Done
32022-09-21 20:39cytryn
♦132
Thanks!
124839824
by Natfoot
@ 2022-08-13 04:41
12022-08-16 08:29malcolmh How come the closed clearance height is greater than the open clearance height?
22022-08-17 10:07Natfoot
♦56
I think you might be confusing attributes.
See discussion. https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1660384595469759?thread_ts=1660384595.469759&cid=C2VJAJCS0
I will be fixing this as suggested in the near future.
32022-08-17 10:23malcolmh I don't have a Slack account!
42022-08-17 18:17Natfoot
♦56
Several Problems here. Differing heights for different parts of the span. Different width for open vs closed. No height restriction when open.
52022-08-17 18:18Natfoot
♦56
As suggested in the OSM slack to use nodes as height restrictions in most recent change set.
108840685
by Lee Carré
@ 2021-07-29 18:05
12021-08-03 16:58malcolmh Perhaps your could share those thoughts with the rest of us? In particular, why did you change the "source=US NGA Pub. 114. 2011-05-26." tag on the light to "source:seamark=..."? There are about 12000 other objects in the world with the tag that you changed. Should they also be c...
22021-08-04 00:40Lee Carré
♦665
@malcolmh

Thankyou for your interest.

I presume that you refer to note:source .

I have been intending to post a diary entry detailing my analysis & conclusions on this matter, since it's received interest from several others. This will be on the next throughly rainy day, when I...
98856868
by rahra
@ 2021-02-07 16:35
12021-02-11 12:00malcolmh Bernhard,

The radius tagged is no longer used. Light sectors are now automatically rendered according to the zoom level, so as to maintain visibility of the sector arc on the screen.
22021-02-15 19:55rahra
♦2
Hi Malcolm,
Ok, so I will tag it just locally in OSM files for me.
But how would you tag lights which have sectors that are shown with different "emphasis"?
I tagged Hurst Point according to the Imray Chart C3 which shows e.g. the small sectors through the Needles Channel longer than t...
86917530
by Krille von Stralau
@ 2020-06-20 18:06
12020-10-02 11:15malcolmh Light ranges 200 Miles??!!
22020-10-02 11:31Krille von Stralau
♦3
To get any noticeable sector lights in the map, you need to set a light range of 200 miles.
I think there is a bug in the rendering of sector light range.
88213308
by maurizioa
@ 2020-07-19 22:35
12020-10-01 07:09malcolmh What exactly are the 3 ways tagged as buoys? They cannot be buoys as buoys are always on singular nodes
88288230
by mueschel
@ 2020-07-21 09:57
12020-10-01 06:27malcolmh What exactly are these objects? They cannot be buoys, since buoys are always singular nodes.
22020-10-01 06:36mueschel
♦6,575
Hi.
I didn't add these tags, this was
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/8821330
90471856
by Natfoot
@ 2020-09-06 07:53
12020-09-06 11:37malcolmh These areas should have the tag: seamark:type=cable_area.

cable_submarine is the tag for actual cables
38485682
by Dunkellin River
@ 2016-04-11 21:06
12019-12-12 12:06malcolmh What are these "Sea Rescue" objects?
78129084
by VictorIE
@ 2019-12-09 04:53
12019-12-12 07:52malcolmh What are the nodes "Sea Rescue"? I don't see any object on the satellite imagery.
22019-12-12 10:37VictorIE
♦912
I don't know. I can only assume it is some form of marker used by the local lifeguards / lifeboats. they were mapped by someone else, I just tagged them with *=yes instead of something more specific.
69204029
by malcolmh
@ 2019-04-14 14:24
12019-05-04 10:08SomeoneElse
♦13,390
Does this actually exist? It looks like a near duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4823246421 .
22019-05-04 18:14malcolmh You are correct. I edited this object blind, just responding to validation errors after mapping closeby objects. As it is just across the street from me, I will go and do a survey & make the necessary corrections.
32019-05-04 18:22SomeoneElse
♦13,390
Thanks
67229975
by Russ
@ 2019-02-15 15:15
12019-02-15 15:32malcolmh There are four substations. The 4th is on node 6273857077
22019-02-15 15:39Russ
♦56
I just found that one - thanks! Should all show up on openinframap.org shortly.
59793583
by verstaerker
@ 2018-06-12 23:45
12018-06-13 05:16malcolmh This and other changesets by the same user seem to be global mechanical edits. Were these discussed with the OSM community beforehand?
22018-06-13 08:53Nakaner
♦3,149
Hi verstaerker,

please pause your edits until a discussion with the community has happened. Mechanical edits have to comply with the Automated Edits Code of Conduct. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

In addition to the question whether the edits have been disc...
32018-06-13 13:27woodpeck_repair
♦33,903
This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 59811174 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed global edits of various maritime radio tags; please discuss such far-reaching, mechanical edits on a suitable mailing list before execution. see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w...
46900064
by malcolmh
@ 2017-03-16 14:47
12017-11-12 23:41fgouget
♦112
Attention ; les lock_ref / seamark:name se sont retrouvés dupliqués dans name:fr et name:de ce qui n'est pas correct. Par exemple name:fr=41 sur le way 81371641.
22017-11-13 08:44malcolmh I removed the "seamark:" prefixes to those tags as they were not valid. If the resulting tags are incorrect, then please feel free to delete them.
32017-11-14 19:51fgouget
♦112
In OpenStreetMap the name:* tags are for the object name and its translation, for instance 'Canal du Rhône au Rhin - Branche Sud'. Removing the 'seamark:' prefix from 'seamark:name:*' causes an obvious collision.

Maybe the right thing to do is to keep 'se...
42017-11-15 07:54malcolmh OK, I have removed those name tags entirely. In all cases the tag values were already present in other tags.
50402804
by malcolmh
@ 2017-07-19 11:40
12017-07-31 17:05juhanjuku
♦51
Osmose gives for seamarks error: Missing object kind
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=8&lat=58.642&lon=24.84&layer=Mapnik&overlays=FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFT&item=0%2C1%2C1010%2C1040%2C1050%2C1060%2C1070%2C1080%2C1090%2C1100%2C1110%2C1120%2C1140%2C1150%2C1160%2C1170%2C1180...
22017-07-31 17:07juhanjuku
♦51
Please don't remove *beacon' if you don't have better solution.
32017-07-31 17:09juhanjuku
♦51
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seamarks/Beacons
42017-08-02 08:15malcolmh The seamark tags fully describe these objects. No other tags are necessary except to add additional information.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seamarks/Buoys
52017-08-02 09:39juhanjuku
♦51
With "beacon" tag they are rendered on standard OSM, without - visible only on special maps.
I suppose, this is reason why OSMOSE algorithm shows them as error.
62017-08-03 07:07malcolmh man_made=beacon tag are mainly used for historic beacons (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dbeacon).

The rendering of seamark objects is not done by the main OSM renderer. To view these objects, use one of the seamark websites: http://opennauticalchart.org/?permalink=true&zoo...
47002420
by Steve8460
@ 2017-03-20 06:03
12017-03-20 06:39malcolmh Steve,

US lateral seamarks conform to the IALA-B system: port-hand marks are green and starboard-hand marks are red. (See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seamarks/Buoyage_Systems).

This beacon is a starboard-hand mark, not port. I note that you have made the same mistake on other lateral m...
45652310
by malcolmh
@ 2017-01-30 13:49
12017-02-12 21:45chippy
♦8
You just deleted Node 1
22017-02-12 21:45chippy
♦8
again
32017-02-12 21:46chippy
♦8
Sorry, I mean, it had been deleted and restored previously :)
42017-02-12 21:58malcolmh You had created a duplicate of node 3815077900, which has been there since 2015.
52017-02-12 22:12SomeoneElse
♦13,390
@chippy I don't think malcolmh created the duplicate - that was someone else trying to move an "important" node "somewhere important". "node 1" has been on a few continents so far - I'm sure it'll get resurrected somewhere else at some point. As for the...
62017-02-13 13:59chippy
♦8
The history of node 1 indicates that it is frequently deleted and restored.

SomeoneElse: I did not say that malcolmh created the duplicate node. But malcolmh did delete Node 1 (as the only change) in this changeset which is the subject of this changeset discussion.

I also don't think mal...
72017-02-13 14:18malcolmh I was replying to chippy! @chippy when you "restored" node 1, node 3815077900 was already in the database & had been since 2015. Therefore you had created a duplicate & that is why I deleted it.
82017-02-13 15:09SomeoneElse
♦13,390
I'm just confused because it wasn't chippy that restored node 1!
92017-02-13 15:44malcolmh Sequence of events:
24/5/15: node 1 restored as a tree in DE
3/11/15: node 3815077900 created at 0,0
1/12/16: node 1 deleted
30/1/17: node 1 restored, this time at 0,0 - on top of node 3815077900. Later that day, I deleted it.

The mapper that has created this confusion is "glglgl", ...
102017-02-13 16:06malcolmh Also, apologies to chippy, who I now realise was not the mapper who created the duplicate, only the mapper who raised the issue.
112017-02-13 23:09Geography Canada
♦104
Node 1 used to be a tree in Passau..
44681043
by malcolmh
@ 2016-12-26 12:10
12016-12-30 06:54pnorman
♦317
This doesn't align with the bridge, is that correct?
22016-12-30 07:12malcolmh You are right, the position is clearly incorrect. My contribution was only to correct the tagging, not the positioning. (See my comment on the previous changeset for this node). The original mapper imported this and many more objects using the source "http://www.notmar.gc.ca/go.php?doc=eng/serv...
32016-12-30 07:40pnorman
♦317
I've asked the original user what's going on at http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40049186, because this looks like an undiscussed import with potential license issues
41709545
by archie
@ 2016-08-26 08:40
12016-08-26 08:53Hjart
♦4,116
Is it really necessary to duplicate tags like this?
22016-08-26 09:01archie
♦1,305
Yes, it is. It's not duplicate tags anywhay because it's in an own namespace (seamarkings). Purpose: Name of harbor to be rendered on map.openseamap.org.
32016-08-26 09:03Hjart
♦4,116
Why can't you simply use the name tag?
42016-08-26 09:13archie
♦1,305
On www.openseamap.org only tags in namespace "seamarkings" are rendered concerning at least harbours. Why do you bother? It dos not interfere w anything. The information is orderly in its own namespace. Nothing to worry about. Just leave the seamark:-tags where they are if you are not invo...
52016-08-26 09:17Hjart
♦4,116
I worry because it's taking up unnecessary space in our database as well as complicating things equally unnecessarily.
Honestly I'm feeling very tempted to remove the crap
62016-08-26 09:33Hjart
♦4,116
The claim that you are not duplicating tags is complete nonsense. You have given the seamark:name=* tag the exact same value as the existing name=* tag. This to me is practically duplicating tags.
72016-08-26 10:10Hjart
♦4,116
I brought this up on IRC and I'm seeing prominent members of the community agree that the Openseamap namespacing everything needs to stop.
82016-08-26 10:17archie
♦1,305
I sent a message to Malcom Herring, who is a major representative of openseamap. I hope he will enter this discussion.
92016-08-30 07:42malcolmh "name" and "seamark:name" do not necessarily have the same value. An object may be known to mariners by a different name than that used by the local area. For example, harbour may be named after the town by the local community, but may be listed under the name of the operating ya...
33617449
by malcolmh
@ 2015-08-27 10:59
12016-07-12 21:34muralito
♦2,023
Hello malcomh.

seamark:information and seamark:information:pt could not be seamark tagging, but ¿removing seamark prefix is the right way to fix them?

Please see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:information
22016-07-12 21:40muralito
♦2,023
The user try to add some warning to the waterway, so it seems to me that some kind of seamark:* tagging shoud be used, because is important for the navegation.
32016-07-13 10:30malcolmh Sorry, I made a bad choice. Much better would be "waterway:information", since the mapped object is a waterway, not a seamark. If you agree with this, I will make those changes.
42016-07-14 14:00Skippern
♦280
I tagged them as seamark:information (rough translation) and seamark:information:pt (as in the source) for lack of better tags. This is information given in nautical charts, and should be tagged in a way that can be captured when producing such from OSM data
40033886
by malcolmh
@ 2016-06-15 08:36
12016-06-21 08:15woodpeck
♦2,431
In this and a couple nearby changesets you seem to be re-adding data that was removed by DWG because it was illegally copied from a copyrighted source. What is your source for adding this information?
22016-06-21 08:32malcolmh My source was the tags that remained after redaction. Those tags belong to a long-since abandoned tagging proposal, so I converted them to the non-deprecated seamark tags using the values in the remaining tags, in addition to a couple of default values that my editing tool generates (buoy shape &...
33268593
by malcolmh
@ 2015-08-11 14:44
12016-06-03 18:46Gschaftlhuaba
♦2
Concerning the lighthouse in Monemvasia: Is there a special reason, why all the seamark metadata is added to a separate point in OSM instead of the building polygon itself plus a man_made=lighthouse tag? Secondly do you have any information whether the disused=yes is correct? Probably one should als...
22016-06-03 19:29malcolmh If the light is located on the building, then it is a good idea to copy the node tags onto the building polygon & delete the node. If the beacon is a duplicate then delete it. I don't know whether the buildings are disused - try asking the original mapper.
32016-06-04 04:31Gschaftlhuaba
♦2
OK, thanks. I put a comment in the other changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/7850338
39196623
by AdVerburg
@ 2016-05-09 17:27
12016-05-10 08:00malcolmh Please note that the tag "seamark:type" can only take one value. This should be the master object. Other objects sharing the same node/way are implied by their attribute tags, or where they have no attributes, can be detailed in a "seamark:information" tag.
22016-05-10 10:13AdVerburg
♦144
I see, thank you.
39036312
by malcolmh
@ 2016-05-02 11:37
12016-05-02 13:11Rom1
♦389
Hi, what is your source for all these informations ?
And some text is missing in "liaison entre les ducs d" https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4161268421
Thanks
22016-05-02 13:26malcolmh The data was extracted from http://www.vnf.fr/ecdis/data/Moselle.zip. The "national_information" value should be a French translation of the English "information" tag value. It looks as if the text has been truncated.
32016-05-02 13:36Rom1
♦389
Have you understood the conditions written at http://www.vnf.fr/ecdis/ ? It is not compatible with the ODbL of OSM.
42016-05-02 14:15malcolmh Oh dear! In that case I will remove all this data.
52016-05-02 19:25Rom1
♦389
Unfortunately it's the only thing to do :( Perhaps, one day the licence status from VNF will change...
38871521
by Eugene13
@ 2016-04-25 23:07
12016-04-26 21:55malcolmh Please do not destroy recent on-the-ground surveys with out-of-date aerial photos.
22016-04-28 17:27Eugene13
♦11
Sorry about that! In future I will be more carreful!
Thank you for understanding!
38677965
by malcolmh
@ 2016-04-18 20:46
12016-04-19 19:23MCDA
♦112
Updating seamarks? How is deleting 40 nodes updating?

This is not a sea, its an inland waterway called Lower Lough Erne.
22016-04-19 20:49malcolmh Whoops! Fat finger trouble on my part. - now reverted
37516006
by kallekaden
@ 2016-02-29 08:17
12016-03-07 08:28malcolmh OSM have requested that depth data should not be put into their DB. Depths may be added to sunken objects, but not isolated spot depth soundings or depth contours. Therefore please delete these nodes.
22016-03-08 16:28kallekaden
♦1
Hi malcolmh,
excuse, I am German and have not possibly understood properly. is there to your request closer information?
32016-03-08 22:42woodpeck
♦2,431
Meerestiefen als Punktdaten mappen wir eigentlich nicht - wir mappen es, wenn irgendwo ein Wrack auf 123 Meter Tiefe liegt, aber nicht, wie tief das Wasser an einer beliebigen Stelle ist.
42016-03-11 10:32kallekaden
♦1
hi woodpeck,
eine beliebige Stelle ist das nicht. Die Punkte kennzeichnen ein natürliches Fahrwasser, welches alljährlich von ca. 100 Seglern benutzt wird. Viele davon landen dabei auf den umliegenden Sandbänken.
37225088
by malcolmh
@ 2016-02-15 13:51
12016-02-15 15:44chillly
♦819
Isn't this former drydock the one being converted into an outdoor theatre? If so, wouldn't be better to tag it as landuse = construction?
22016-02-15 16:00malcolmh The amphitheatre is being constructed to sit over part of the dry dock, but all of the dock will remain intact. As soon as I can get close enough to do a survey, I will map the new construction. The question is, what would be suitable tagging for an open-air amphitheatre?
32016-02-15 18:22chillly
♦819
amenity=theatre with, perhaps, theatre=amphitheatre to differentiate it. I might be tempted to add building=yes and layer=1 too. Just because it doesn't have a roof, it still would be a building to me. It is a separate structure from the dock as the dock is listed so the theatre is being added ...
37097704
by malcolmh
@ 2016-02-09 10:07
12016-02-09 11:05DaveF
♦1,566
Hi Malcolm
tagging waterway=riverbank is now not the preferred way to tag:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_details

Using natural=water, water=* allows data users to more easily determine whether it's a river, canal, lake etc.

https://lists.openstreetmap.org...
22016-02-11 08:27malcolmh The preferred way to tag is the way the mapping community actually tags. Since that proposal was made, only 8% of waterways are so tagged. In fact more waterway=riverbank tags have been added since then that the total of natural=water+water=river/canal tags.
32016-02-11 13:31DaveF
♦1,566
Hi Malcolm
Being in the majority doesn't automatically make it correct nor a reason not to change. If a better way to tag is conceived, making it easier for the data to be used, then it should be adopted. As in previous occurrences this is a gradual process often brought about by messages like...
42016-02-11 13:52malcolmh I do not buy the argument that this tag makes things easier for consumers. Those that I know of all use the waterway=river/canal tagged linear ways. Anyway, good luck trying to persuade the other 290,000 instances of your case!
52016-02-11 14:35DaveF
♦1,566
You appear to be misunderstanding. It's not the linear ways (waterway=river) that's the problem, but the polygon denoting the riverbanks.(waterway=riverbank).

It's disappointing you can't see the clear benefit of not tagging canal banks as river banks.
36565266
by danbag
@ 2016-01-14 08:17
12016-01-23 13:07malcolmh "seamark:notice:depth_min" is not a valid seamark tag. What exactly are these objects? If you could describe them to me, I will be able to help you with the correct tags.
22016-01-24 07:57danbag
♦9
The purpose is to show to users the depth in that position.
Another proble is to show to user the presence of kelps, floating long seaweed which prevent the navigation. I have seen you make a modification, the purpose is to fill the area with some drawing to show the kelps presence, in three state...
32016-01-25 15:33malcolmh OSM do not want depth data in the DB, so you should delete these. There are two water depth projects underwsy that are building separate depth DBs. they are: http://www.teamsurv.eu/ & http://depth.openseamap.org/
42016-01-26 08:00danbag
♦9
The projects are wonderful, but here in South America we are speaking about remote bays where in the near future and for a long long period nobody will works with these project..in the meantime the users of these remote bays cannot share the knowledge of the skipper like me .... in Italy we say &quo...
52016-01-26 08:11malcolmh OK, so if you want to put this data in, then please do not use the "seamark:" namespace. This will then make it clear to DWG that these are not OpenSeaMap tags. Perhaps a tag like "min_depth=xxm"?
62016-01-26 12:08Skippern
♦280
There should be a seamark:* for areas with kelp, but this will be an area tag to render a specific fill-symbol or shade for the area, not for point depths.
72016-01-27 04:30danbag
♦9
Yes I know the kelp tag and I use it. Thanks.
36447235
by malcolmh
@ 2016-01-08 15:36
12016-01-08 19:29AdVerburg
♦144
Malcolm, what is wrong with the object (a pole) colour and/or colour pattern?
22016-01-08 20:04malcolmh The objects “light_minor” and “light_major” are simply lights without any details of the supporting structure. If you wish to specify the supporting structure, then you should use a seamark:type such as “beacon_special_purpose”, etc. Then you may specify its colou...
29690337
by oha
@ 2015-03-23 22:08
12016-01-02 12:28malcolmh This polygon is not closed - needs completing!
35705586
by Sailor Steve
@ 2015-12-02 12:59
12015-12-02 14:39malcolmh This should be a "seamark:type=fairway", not a separation boundary.
35371412
by malcolmh
@ 2015-11-17 09:36
12015-11-17 13:00mapper999
♦377
Hi,
the groyne markers are not beacons and should also not be rendered like beacons. They are small stone plates showing the ref and the length of the groynes like this one (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Buhnenstein.jpg). I didn't find anywhere else where these are mapped, but I thin...
22015-11-17 14:01malcolmh Within the S57 object catalogue there is no such object as a "groyne_marker". The type "beacon_special_purpose" is a carch-all for any kind of marker. This tagging is the only way to make these objects visible in nautical charts. If this is not important to you, an alternative wo...
32015-11-17 15:58mapper999
♦377
I have no idea about whether these marks have any importance for nautical charts. I live near the river and just found out what these stone markers actually mean a few days ago. As I didn't find any tagging for these things, I thought it is best to adapt the seamark:distance_mark for this purpo...
34689572
by malcolmh
@ 2015-10-17 09:01
12015-10-20 11:38SomeoneElse
♦13,390
This is a changeset with a very large bounding box. What does "clear validation errors" mean? How am I, as a local mapper overlapped by this changeset supposed to know what you changed and on what basis and where?
22015-10-20 11:48malcolmh Point taken. In future I will do these type of edits in small geographical areas
33375346
by mikafinja
@ 2015-08-16 18:37
12015-08-17 12:27malcolmh Please do not put depth data into the OSM DB. Instead see: http://depth.openseamap.org/
32853141
by lars
@ 2015-07-24 15:48
12015-08-01 07:19malcolmh What is the object "Enkeliberget"? A topmark cannot exist in isolation as it has to be mounted on top of another object, usually a beacon.
22015-08-01 16:09lars
♦2
Fixed, thanks.
31890375
by malcolmh
@ 2015-06-11 08:13
12015-06-11 12:10archie
♦1,305
They do not? How should I tag depth data?
22015-06-11 12:18malcolmh No depth data, either spot soundings on on nodes, nor depth contours on ways should be put into the OSM database. If you want to contribute depth data, then see: http://depth.openseamap.org/ for details of the OpenSeaMap crowd-sourcing depth project.
30938944
by Dalesman
@ 2015-05-09 14:58
12015-05-09 15:27malcolmh Yes it will appear on marine maps! This is an inappropriate use of the "landuse" tagging, which is explicitly for features on land. Also it is "tagging for the renderer" - mis-using tags in order to produce an effect on the streetmap.

Please revert these and instead make a pro...
30159006
by Claudius Henrichs
@ 2015-04-12 09:28
12015-04-13 07:10malcolmh Fixed. There was already a seamark node there that I simply merged with this object.
22017-12-31 12:58Claudius Henrichs
♦214
Thanks
30164864
by ToniGraf
@ 2015-04-12 14:51
12015-04-12 15:09malcolmh Are you aware that you are deleting good data? If you did not intend to do this, please revert this.
29496516
by CyrusDreams
@ 2015-03-15 14:22
12015-03-15 15:06malcolmh The tag "seamark:type=rock" is inappropriate for islets. Ir should only be placed on nodes that are offshore. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:seamark:type%3Drock
22015-03-17 17:10CyrusDreams
♦1
When I searched for the tag "islet", I was referred to the overview page at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE_talk:Tag:place%3Disland
Most is in German, but in the English section the difference between rock and islet is made by size. Since the dimension of the objects was smaller th...
32015-03-17 17:30malcolmh That wiki page is discussing values for the "place" key. Therefore, you would use "place=rock", not "seamark:type=rock"
42015-03-17 18:31CyrusDreams
♦1
It isn't discussing "place", it is discussing "place=island" and distinguishes this tag from others. In fact, taginfo shows only 6 hits for "place=rock" and zero for "place=rocks". That is a strong indication that the proper use of "rock" is in ...
52015-03-18 13:11malcolmh Sorry, I mis-read. The important thing is that an area which is tagged with "natural=coastline" cannot be tagged as "seamark:type=rock" as the definition of the latter is an object which is "awash or is below the water surface". An area within a coastline is by definiti...
29427638
by BeverleyKiter
@ 2015-03-12 14:33
12015-03-13 09:39malcolmh The object at node #2705530745 is not missing! I drove past it this morning.
22015-03-13 21:26BeverleyKiter
♦2
Must have been a mistake. I don't recognise this as being something I edited!
29414275
by Skippern
@ 2015-03-11 20:46
12015-03-12 08:17malcolmh Category=8? How did this happen? Is is related to the preset ticket?
22015-03-12 11:23Skippern
♦280
Ouch, didn't see that, must be from the preset as well, just as the colouring I mentioned on github
29363719
by Pptje
@ 2015-03-09 14:21
12015-03-09 20:14malcolmh How can buoys be survey points?
27587816
by malcolmh
@ 2014-12-20 13:19
12014-12-21 13:10SomeoneElse
♦13,390
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2075957897 seems to have a duplicate "seamark:name" and "name". Is there any reason for this? Are there any situations in which a "seamark:name" for something would actually be different to the "name" (as, for example, a bri...
22014-12-21 15:19malcolmh The value of the tag “seamark:name” is the name of the object as known to sailors (i.e. as it appears on other nautical charts) This is often different to the local vernacular name, which will be the value of the “name” tag. Having the two types of name tag guards against edi...