Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12017-04-21 14:32:59 UTCtrigpoint Hi, please can you point me to where this mechanical edit was discussed?
You seem to have mechanically armchaired layer=1 onto bridges with no survey, if you had you would have seen that the bridge should be at layer=0 and maybe whatever is below them needs a later=-1 where it is below ground level...
22017-04-22 07:51:54 UTCwongataa All bridges need a layer tag of 1 or higher. This is detailed in the OSM wiki on the bridge page. It doesn't matter if the bridge is a simple plank or not. It is above ground level.

In that mapillary link the bridge needs a layer tag as it crosses a river/canal. The layer is to show where a f...
32017-04-22 08:38:35 UTCSomeoneElse Firstly - please take the wiki with a bucketload of salt :)
Secondly - layer=0 doesn't imply ground level - layer tags are relative, so "All bridges need a layer tag of 1 or higher" is simply wrong.
Also, although it is possible to infer relative level from imagery and other sources, i...
42017-04-29 17:50:29 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48258464 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some mechanical changes to layers. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1325 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=133272
12017-04-29 17:50:29 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48258464 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some mechanical changes to layers. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1325 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=133272
12017-04-29 17:50:29 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48258464 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some mechanical changes to layers. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1325 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=133272
12017-04-29 17:50:28 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48258464 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some mechanical changes to layers. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1325 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=133272
12017-04-29 17:50:28 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48258464 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some mechanical changes to layers. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1325 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=133272
12017-04-29 17:50:27 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 48258464 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some mechanical changes to layers. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1325 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=133272
12017-04-21 15:01:31 UTCSomeoneElse Can you explain what you mean by "invalid layer tag"?
Layer tags are relative, so "layer=-1" or "layer=-100" isn't any more valid or invalid than "layer=0" or an implied layer=0, if all crossing features have positive layer tags.
What problem are you trying ...
22017-04-22 07:45:23 UTCwongataa I should have put some more detail in. These layer tags were not used in conjunction with any other tags such as bridge or tunnel. The features in question could also be clearly seen at surface level on the satellite imagery and were tagged as layer -1. The layer tags were applied in error as the...
32017-04-22 08:43:38 UTCSomeoneElse Again, to be clear, _layer tags are relative_. Layer 0 does _not_ imply ground level.
Again, what _actual problem_ are you trying to solve?
42017-04-22 16:30:10 UTCtrigpoint There are more changes here than your stated incorrect layer.
You have also changed oneway=-1 to oneway=yes on way 204098940 thus reversing the direction of travel for that section
12016-10-13 18:57:04 UTCSomeoneElse Just checking - are you sure there are three separate roads here? It's a long time since I've been here but isn't http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/380100541 just a right-turn lane to the pub? I know you didn't map it originally but presumably you've been there recently, hence the question.
Cheers...
22016-10-14 12:08:52 UTCwongataa The way marked secondary link is the turn lane. I didn't modify any of the ways themselves, I just changed the highway type on the turn lane from secondary to secondary link as I thought marking turn lanes as link types is recommended in the wiki.
32016-10-15 21:53:18 UTCSomeoneElse Ah OK - I was hoping you'd been there recently and could confirm that there really are 3 parallel roads here (or not).
12016-06-30 11:25:06 UTCSomeoneElse Hello,
The changeset comment here is "Add missing road name" but that doesn't seem to match the changes made to e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/140781387/history or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30662057/history . Would it be possible to explain what changess you've made and w...
22016-06-30 16:33:56 UTCwongataa The changes were adding missing road names and refs.

I also spotted some roundabouts that did not have roundabout tags.

The source was looking for obvious errors on the map such as a road having a name/ref but the roundabout flares at the end of it missing that information.

Way History: 140...
32016-06-30 16:52:21 UTCSomeoneElse Thanks for that. Re the "tertiary vs tertiary_link" thing, you might want to have a chat with the mapper who added them as tertiary links in the first place - I've never been bothered one way or the other and tend to just add them as tertiary, but some people do seem to change "terti...
9 changeset(s) created by wongataa have been discussed with a total of 19 comment(s)