aharvey have been discussed with 67 replies of this contributoraharvey have been discussed with 67 replies of this contributor| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 163107858 by aharvey @ 2025-03-02 02:31 | 1 | 2025-04-28 05:33 | ArchangelEkim ♦13 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1363948676/historyThis is only used for utility poles there is no way for pedestrians to walk down. Can be confirmed by street imagery. |
| 2 | 2025-04-28 08:10 | aharvey | Thanks, I've re-added it as not:highway=path to prevent it being re-added by future mappers as such.You can't really tell from the Mapillary or Bing Streetside image we can use. We can't use Google Street View for mapping due to licensing. | |
| 162995671 by aharvey @ 2025-02-27 03:19 | 1 | 2025-04-28 06:18 | ArchangelEkim ♦13 | The building that is now completed on the north-east corner of mona vale and killeaton st is an aged care residence. https://www.thompsonhealthcare.com.au/our-homes/st-ives-house/ |
| 163353772 by aharvey @ 2025-03-08 08:28 | 1 | 2025-03-10 13:19 | scott_mobile16 ♦2 | Looks great |
| 161364559 by aharvey @ 2025-01-15 02:11 | 1 | 2025-01-19 22:01 | Maradona11 ♦44 | Is this new location replacing the George St (temp) location? and do we have it confirmed that its open for 2025 terms? |
| 2 | 2025-01-19 22:27 | aharvey | I added this based on the new school name appearing in the Geographic Names Register, but I realise the name can be approved well before the construction even starts and the location data isn't always accurate, so I added this one a bit too much in haste.Looking into it more, it looks like ... | |
| 3 | 2025-01-19 22:37 | Maradona11 ♦44 | no problem. its hard to keep up with the school grounds in the Sydney West growth areas. Gledswood Hills HS for example is temporarily within Gregory Hills PS school grounds! year 7 only | |
| 4 | 2025-01-19 22:50 | aharvey | Yeah I did that one together with this one, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161365383 I hope I got it right. | |
| 161408810 by aharvey @ 2025-01-16 08:55 | 1 | 2025-01-16 08:56 | aharvey | While it seems the tagging could be improved, it's also clear that in some shape or form the ways can exist in OSM, so reverting to bring the ways back. Further work needed to determine the best way to tag these. |
| 161044820 by aharvey @ 2025-01-06 05:42 | 1 | 2025-01-06 05:42 | aharvey | please let me know if this is wrong, I couldn't find much detail on the wiki |
| 159768708 by aharvey @ 2024-11-30 10:25 | 1 | 2024-12-10 01:36 | RedAuburn ♦221 | Hi! there was a bit of confusion about the razed buildings along Cowan Road due to imagery being out of date (resolved now) - is the area now a brownfield? If so, explicit mapping would help avoid confusion :) |
| 2 | 2024-12-10 02:28 | aharvey | good suggestion, I've mapped the area as brownfield, but this is from some drone imagery from August 2024. I'm not sure if construction has started yet. | |
| 159596533 by aharvey @ 2024-11-26 02:47 | 1 | 2024-11-26 03:15 | Pam's Store Tilba Tilba ♦1 | Pam's Store Tilba Tilba |
| 157279602 by aharvey @ 2024-09-30 05:31 | 1 | 2024-10-01 00:31 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,Would it not be 'better' (what ever that means) to join between the natural features to form a closed relation??? At the moment this relation throws errors .. |
| 2 | 2024-10-01 05:33 | aharvey | Yeah absolutely. I was going to do that, but as a first draft found it easier to just sketch out the rough location first. Improvements welcome. | |
| 3 | 2024-10-01 09:51 | TheSwavu ♦544 | Hi, I've looked at the GNB description. It seems to be a little vague about where the southern boundary.What do you think about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1319834762 as a candidate? | |
| 155537275 by aharvey @ 2024-08-21 04:52 | 1 | 2024-08-26 09:23 | ❤️🔥 ♦364 | hey, if not construction, how would you tag this? https://0x0.st/XtHN.jpg |
| 2 | 2024-08-26 22:13 | aharvey | hmm admittedly I made this change based on the towers being complete, which I was thinking shouldn't be marked as construction if complete. Based on your photo I think we should at least convert https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1068760239 back to construction landuse. Do you think that works? | |
| 3 | 2024-08-26 22:15 | aharvey | Just looking on their website> Residences One – Construction complete, ready to move in > Residences Two – Construction to be completed September 2024 > Watermans Residences – Construction to be completed December 2024 | |
| 4 | 2024-08-28 10:44 | ❤️🔥 ♦364 | sounds good, thanks for updating it | |
| 154833811 by aharvey @ 2024-08-05 01:24 | 1 | 2024-08-06 08:08 | samuelrussell ♦50 | This is a great edit demonstrating how openstreetmap is successful, and how editors can work together for the map. Thank you aharvey. |
| 154727924 by aharvey @ 2024-08-02 09:56 | 1 | 2024-08-03 09:03 | samuelrussell ♦50 | How does this edit control for State controlled roads and non-LGA controlled roads in the LGA that are marked by OSM as residential? |
| 2 | 2024-08-03 09:22 | aharvey | It doesn't. It tries to make some assumptions that mostly residential roads are controlled by the LGA and will mostly be 40km/hr. However we know that might not always be true so best to always explicitly tag maxspeed on each way.As I understand it, these tags for setting the default aren&#... | |
| 3 | 2024-08-03 10:21 | samuelrussell ♦50 | I get concerned about inherited properties where our typology and the external authorities typologies don't match. My concern doesn't mean that it is improper. A better match would be road-type residential && controller CoS for example if we're going to work inheritance regu... | |
| 4 | 2024-08-03 22:36 | aharvey | What about if we did something like this?def:operator=City of Sydney&highway=residential;maxspeed=40 | |
| 5 | 2024-08-04 05:57 | samuelrussell ♦50 | If we are able to do something like that, it would clear my concerns entirely: any failed inheritance would be from a lack of the way controller being adequately specified. (CoS on Parking for example tries desperately to remind people that it doesn't control a variety of streets) | |
| 6 | 2024-08-05 01:17 | aharvey | That syntax does conform to the proposal at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Defaults so I'll change it. | |
| 35164162 by aharvey @ 2015-11-08 07:52 | 1 | 2024-02-05 17:36 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2283042065/history has access:bicycle that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)Would using bicycle access tag (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle ) be fitting at least equally well? |
| 2 | 2024-02-06 10:19 | aharvey | Yes, I have no idea why I did it that way, fix now. Thanks for flagging. | |
| 144266252 by aharvey @ 2023-11-20 23:41 | 1 | 2023-11-21 06:25 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Thanks for fixes, happy to see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Mateusz_Konieczny/unusual_shop_values/Australia being useful! |
| 110373681 by aharvey @ 2021-08-28 10:00 | 1 | 2023-09-16 05:11 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,The DCS base map divides 'Mowbray Road' into 'Mowbray Road West' and 'Mowbray Road', the addresses along the road agree with the west naming. Ok to sufix the name with West as appropriate? |
| 2 | 2023-09-18 02:53 | aharvey | It probably is officially West, but all the street signage I can see doesn't mention West, so if following on the ground signage we would omit it. So I'm not sure... | |
| 3 | 2023-09-18 08:23 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | The building numbers support it all being one road - no duplications that I can see on a casual look. Humm ... I think alt_name may have to do. If the road signage gets changed ??? I used to drive along here some moons ago to get to and from work, only knew it as Mowbray Rd. . | |
| 19206974 by aharvey @ 2013-12-01 10:06 | 1 | 2023-04-04 22:49 | TheSwavu ♦544 | See https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3618657 |
| 51024844 by aharvey @ 2017-08-11 08:19 | 1 | 2023-03-12 02:04 | just_another_mapper ♦15 | Cheers for tagging the toilets, I was out on a ride yesterday and was busting to go, searched for toilets in OSM and these were nearby. Nice toilets too |
| 2 | 2023-03-24 13:41 | aharvey | glad to hear | |
| 134048467 by aharvey @ 2023-03-24 05:06 | 1 | 2023-03-24 05:14 | ITBeyond-Michelle ♦5 | def cannot get vehicles into this track |
| 2 | 2023-03-24 13:23 | aharvey | hmm https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=315960919940097&focus=photo shows a gate designed for vehicles, the track itself is wide enough for it, and certainly looks like it was designed for it. | |
| 55596215 by aharvey @ 2018-01-20 07:25 | 1 | 2022-10-09 20:26 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | You added some man_made=drinking fountainI am writing to you as I also tried using this tag, discovered some problems with it (and other drinking water point tagging), and want to improve situation. I started from recommending to not use this tag as it has some problems and is a trap (partially ... |
| 46387901 by aharvey @ 2017-02-25 09:08 | 1 | 2022-09-27 01:11 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,I have changed some boundaries of adjacent parks to what I think is more correct DCS Base Map boundaries.. approximately. Ones of concern are Way: Princes Park (203021850) and Way: Norford Park (186995446). See what you think ... |
| 118490226 by aharvey @ 2022-03-15 00:08 | 1 | 2022-03-15 10:42 | jakecopp ♦43 | Thanks! |
| 73369693 by aharvey @ 2019-08-15 04:21 | 1 | 2022-01-20 06:41 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,I have reduced this area so as to include Kogarah Fire Station. Not certain if the hospital area should not be further reduced ... child care ??? and aged care = nursing home ??? |
| 81855703 by aharvey @ 2020-03-06 07:16 | 1 | 2021-12-15 15:15 | evo_evz ♦20 | Re: fixme. I could not see any signposts with the name of this way from Sunbeam Ave in the north to Garrigarrang in the south |
| 109541997 by aharvey @ 2021-08-12 01:28 | 1 | 2021-09-19 07:16 | ivanbranco ♦2,697 | Hi aharvey,what's the meaning of disguised=yes to this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/972413605 ? |
| 2 | 2021-09-19 09:16 | aharvey | There were a bunch of pot plants and other material put there so it was not obvious there was a path here, probably the nearby resident placed these here to disguise the legally accessible path. If you didn't know there was a path (and didn't see the sign) you'd think you were walking... | |
| 108392041 by aharvey @ 2021-07-22 02:24 | 1 | 2021-07-22 02:24 | aharvey | comment should have been https://maproulette.org/challenge/20137/task/101563718 |
| 86614584 by aharvey @ 2020-06-14 04:55 | 1 | 2021-05-16 06:20 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,In what way is Fairyland Pleasure Grounds historic? Old yes, but historic? Humm wikipedia has some stuff on it. How much of it is left? Possibly better in OHM as it is deteriorating. I have reset this to name=Fairyland Pleasure Grounds, historic=park .. some ~200 uses. |
| 102291994 by aharvey @ 2021-04-05 01:27 | 1 | 2021-04-06 21:54 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Ug. The multipolygon relation shares outer segments .. so that is an error. I have deleted the relation and combined th eouter ways into one way. So now the single building is one way - truly singular. |
| 2 | 2021-04-07 04:25 | aharvey | Thanks, that's what I intended. | |
| 96629214 by aharvey @ 2020-12-29 23:38 | 1 | 2021-01-01 07:25 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,Some more thoughts on this valley stuff. Possibly leave the natural=valley alone as the base of the valley and add a new feature for the valley area/extent/? That would them fit in with making the new feature a simple area without a center bit that I don't think gets used elsewhere i... |
| 2 | 2021-01-07 10:09 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | An alternative is to use a site relation - that does not confine to a simple area. | |
| 96593948 by aharvey @ 2020-12-29 10:49 | 1 | 2020-12-30 07:30 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,According to the wiki natural=valley should be a simple way along the valley floor ... not a closed area of the valley peaks with the valley floor... This does throw errors on OSM Inspector. |
| 2 | 2020-12-30 07:39 | aharvey | Yep and I disagree with natural=valley only being a single way along the valley floor. This changeset and others are experimenting with alternative and improved ways of mapping valleys with the goal to eventually do a proposal to change the wiki. We need some mapped this way to see what works and wh... | |
| 3 | 2020-12-30 22:28 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Good luck. I walked the Gross just before the fires, would like to go back but the eastern access points are still closed. | |
| 59908585 by aharvey @ 2018-06-17 07:23 | 1 | 2020-12-30 08:07 | user_5359 ♦19,375 | Hello! Please have look on https://www.osm.org/way/598466362/history:highway=serviceservice=onewayinstead of service=oneway I aspected a key oneway=yes? |
| 2 | 2020-12-30 08:50 | aharvey | Yes thanks that was a mistake, fixed it now. Thanks. | |
| 96575299 by aharvey @ 2020-12-29 05:53 | 1 | 2020-12-29 06:51 | radiotrefoil ♦109 | Yeah I think leaving as single nodes rather than ways would be much easier unless someone is prepared to trace catchment areas (which in turn are difficult to define). One example is that the Jamison Valley (way 889441951) and Kedumba Valley (not included in your edit) are part of the same larger va... |
| 2 | 2020-12-29 07:52 | Joseph E ♦137 | This is an excellent example of why mapping valleys as rough areas is not verfiable to be true or false. Take a look: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/889441949#map=12/-34.7340/150.5808&layers=C - is this mapping the floor of the valley, or the top of the hills on each side, or somewhere midway... | |
| 3 | 2020-12-29 07:58 | radiotrefoil ♦109 | On further inspection, GNB has provided fairly rigid descriptions of valley bounds (example for way 889441951 is https://proposals.gnb.nsw.gov.au/public/geonames/d8218040-81e9-4828-aff8-e0db1d2797ad) -generally bounded by easily identifiable features such as escarpments and ridges, a lot of which a... | |
| 4 | 2020-12-29 08:13 | Joseph E ♦137 | OpenStreetMap is not like Wikipedia, where “facts” are based on things that have been published by authorities, and “original research” is a no-no. We map what actually exists in the real world, and “original research” by surveying locations in person is our gold ... | |
| 5 | 2020-12-29 08:37 | radiotrefoil ♦109 | Whilst the GNB descriptions aren't the best, it is unlikely that there will be on-ground indicators to where a valley starts and stops (I say this as a local who went down into the Jamison and Kedumba valleys 2 weeks ago). Agree that we can do better than an arbitrary straight line between The ... | |
| 6 | 2020-12-29 09:06 | aharvey | RE point v area if one really don't have any clue on the bounds then agreed best to map as a point (eg. Hunter Valley I'd only be guessing for an area as I don't have enough local knowledge), it's just than where possible an area conveys much more information, about size and roug... | |
| 7 | 2020-12-29 09:17 | aharvey | > We map what actually exists in the real world, and “original research” by surveying locations in person is our gold standard.While I 100% agree with this and frequently argue for this approach. If community standard and expectations change, then this might not always hold true a... | |
| 8 | 2020-12-29 10:01 | radiotrefoil ♦109 | Here's the relation for Jamison Valley I've come up with. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12107413 | |
| 9 | 2020-12-30 05:43 | Joseph E ♦137 | Re: Marine Parks. Like protected areas on land, these are legal entities which only exist because a government says that they do (though on land there might be some signs at main roads entering the area), so it is somewhat reasonable to resort to government documents or databases to map them. This m... | |
| 10 | 2020-12-30 06:28 | aharvey | I understand that, but I still think there is no harm and a lot of benefit to OSM containing our best effort of mapping the extent of these valleys based on both local knowledge and government sources.Do you have any specific concerns about the Jamison Valley after it was refined in https://www.... | |
| 94741782 by aharvey @ 2020-11-25 03:17 | 1 | 2020-11-25 03:47 | aharvey | For context this change was made due to a Data Working Group request about closed tracks appearing on the map, |
| 93505120 by aharvey @ 2020-11-03 22:14 | 1 | 2020-11-06 03:14 | ortho_is_hot ♦252 | Whoops, thanks for fixing that |
| 92291666 by aharvey @ 2020-10-11 04:39 | 1 | 2020-10-11 10:06 | ortho_is_hot ♦252 | I'm happy to be corrected but iirc the gaps in the cycleway have a no bicycles sign (https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/Bxx3KlNCnPhQox2pDQA59Q). Although I wouldn't be surprised if that was just during construction to improve safety for workers. If there is no explicit signage in the other d... |
| 2 | 2020-10-11 10:55 | aharvey | The bottom no bicycles sign is no longer there, only the top two, I have Mapillary captured, but won't get a chance to upload it for maybe a week. | |
| 3 | 2020-10-11 11:01 | ortho_is_hot ♦252 | No worries just wanted to confirm, updated imagery will be very useful | |
| 91117224 by aharvey @ 2020-09-18 14:10 | 1 | 2020-09-18 15:05 | ortho_is_hot ♦252 | Hi, is 'designated' meant to be 'destination'? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/91117224 |
| 2 | 2020-09-18 23:04 | aharvey | Oops, good catch. | |
| 90860679 by aharvey @ 2020-09-14 10:49 | 1 | 2020-09-14 10:54 | aharvey | justification here is that https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:board:title is documented and in-use and probably better than "name" when applied to information boards.Similar to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_sign#As_part_of_a_way adding signpost node to the way to... |
| 89728771 by aharvey @ 2020-08-21 07:23 | 1 | 2020-08-21 22:20 | pza ♦86 | This makes me wonder if I got this right: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/833738570 |
| 2 | 2020-08-22 00:59 | aharvey | going by the photo at https://www.sydneywater.com.au/SW/water-the-environment/what-we-re-doing/Heritage-search/heritage-detail/index.htm?heritageid=4570350 I'd still say that's a chimney, it's much larger than these smaller metal masts I mapped here.however I'd still add:... | |
| 89444357 by aharvey @ 2020-08-15 12:25 | 1 | 2020-08-17 10:36 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hi,keys like 'symbol:character' don't exist yet.I guess you're looking for 'symbol' and 'osmc:symbol'. Could you check that? |
| 2 | 2020-08-17 11:12 | aharvey | yeah I just made that tag up now as a way to try tag a character that matches the route symbol.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:symbol is a good one to use but since it's just a human readable description, it's not exactly the same as providing the exact character.osmc:symbol is... | |
| 3 | 2020-08-17 11:21 | mueschel ♦6,567 | You could use osmc:symbol and add the symbol as the text on the sign.Waymarkedtrails uses a font without this symbol:https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/api/symbols?osmc:symbol=white%3Awhite%3Awhite%3A%F0%9F%91%A3%3AyellowUnfortunately the symbol itself doesn't support color:http://osm... | |
| 4 | 2020-08-17 12:11 | aharvey | But https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:osmc:symbol doesn't allow me to only specify the text and text colour. There is no way colour or background colour.I'm not so interested in any particular downstream support right now, I just want to enter the data as correctly as possible fo... | |
| 5 | 2020-08-17 12:14 | aharvey | actually I can just leave that empty eg https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/api/symbols?osmc:symbol=%3A%3A%3A%E2%89%88%3Alightblue for the two creeks track here | |
| 89005958 by aharvey @ 2020-08-06 01:42 | 1 | 2020-08-06 01:52 | aharvey | see reasoning at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89004660 |
| 88438585 by aharvey @ 2020-07-24 06:20 | 1 | 2020-07-24 08:56 | ortho_is_hot ♦252 | Funnily enough, I've been meaning to remove that for a while. I'll go ahead add shoulder=no and cycleway=no to some of the missing sections so that routers get a better idea of the situation |
| 88232216 by aharvey @ 2020-07-20 08:24 | 1 | 2020-07-20 09:36 | ortho_is_hot ♦252 | The cabinet pictured in the Mapillary image doesn't exist any more; I think that section of Alfred Street is just a shared zone so no crossing. Possibly they've moved the cabinet, or it may be gone, not 100% sure. |
| 2 | 2020-07-20 09:36 | ortho_is_hot ♦252 | Whoops just noticed the fixme; I'll verify next time I'm around there | |
| 3 | 2020-07-20 10:37 | aharvey | I could still see the traffic lights at https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=mF63TVvIODK5s81GCEBfBg&lat=-33.86163055555556&lng=151.2105472222222&z=17&x=0.6745173514626654&y=0.5276029931131762&zoom=0.024237851712115975 but that imagery is old and they could be i... | |
| 85140014 by aharvey @ 2020-05-13 10:50 | 1 | 2020-05-13 11:22 | Vincent de Souza ♦7 | Hi just letting you know that the roads that are currently one direction are two way, the corrected section in one direction towards the railway and the road leading from Telopea Street onto the western side of Milray Avenue is One way. I hope this makes sense. |
| 2 | 2020-05-13 11:53 | aharvey | Sorry I don't follow, but if something is wrong, please help fix it directly. | |
| 57565792 by aharvey @ 2018-03-27 12:19 | 1 | 2020-03-10 06:30 | b0ssi ♦19 | Out of curiosity - how come that nodes like Nellies Glen (the valley marker) do not show up on the map as a label? |
| 2 | 2020-03-10 07:12 | aharvey | Depends which map you're looking at :-P They show up on my OSM based bushwalking map https://www.beyondtracks.com/map/#16.25/-33.708933/150.289163The default OSM map style doesn't render them yet discussion about that is at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/788 | |
| 3 | 2020-03-11 05:02 | b0ssi ♦19 | Yes, it's up to the renderer. Good to know there's awareness around it, as those kind of features are hard (impossible) to find by browsing a map, from the user's POV. Your beyondtracks.com looks very interesting, I'll definitely take a closer, thanks! | |
| 75920959 by aharvey @ 2019-10-19 06:29 | 1 | 2020-03-06 21:20 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,Way 724653634 - Manly Warringah War Memorial Park is also know as 'Manly Dam' - see https://www.northernbeaches.nsw.gov.au/things-to-do/parks-and-trails/parks/manly-dam. Possibly taking the LPI Base Map park extents and the OSM golf area out would give the closest boundary for this ... |
| 81797813 by aharvey @ 2020-03-05 02:02 | 1 | 2020-03-05 12:52 | Asha12 ♦3 | Thank you for giving valuable suggestion/feedback. I'll pay closer attention to these things.Regards,Asha12 |
| 78443444 by aharvey @ 2019-12-16 01:35 | 1 | 2019-12-16 08:47 | aharvey | duration and interval tags here are very approximate |
| 78426398 by aharvey @ 2019-12-15 10:42 | 1 | 2019-12-15 14:20 | aharvey | comment should read L2, L3 and L1 not T. |
| 77600944 by aharvey @ 2019-11-27 01:01 | 1 | 2019-11-27 01:11 | hoskerism ♦1 | Why did you revert this? The 'Australian Meat Emporium' node was in the wrong place. It's at 29 - 31 O'Riordan St. |
| 2 | 2019-11-27 01:24 | aharvey | https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/2390154110because you'd replaced it with the Homemaker Center mall which is already mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/554571579If the butcher is in the wrong location, then best to drag the node to the correct location. | |
| 3 | 2019-11-27 02:03 | hoskerism ♦1 | OK thanks. I have now dragged the node to the correct location. | |
| 4 | 2019-11-27 02:07 | aharvey | Thanks! | |
| 47168937 by aharvey @ 2017-03-26 07:42 | 1 | 2019-11-09 12:56 | Harry Wood ♦101 | I saw you're the main mapper of the tag leisure=rope_swing . Check out this discussion: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dplayground#Rope_Swing |
| 2 | 2019-11-11 08:42 | aharvey | Thanks! | |
| 61071168 by aharvey @ 2018-07-26 00:21 | 1 | 2019-09-01 03:26 | jakecopp ♦43 | Hi, do you know what the way without tags 556923706 is? Am I okay to remove it?I noticed some other nearby lines without tags and asked Warin61 about them here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60858740#map=15/-33.9223/151.2489 |
| 2 | 2019-09-01 09:00 | aharvey | No idea, I think it's okay to delete. | |
| 40558431 by aharvey @ 2016-07-08 00:00 | 1 | 2019-07-13 13:14 | SomeoneElse ♦13,368 | Just for info, someone's added a new bar here as https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6512253586 - is that the new name for the one that you added?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | 2019-07-14 00:25 | aharvey | Yeah you're right, thank for spotting. I just fixed it. | |
| 71952763 by aharvey @ 2019-07-06 07:29 | 1 | 2019-07-12 13:57 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Please watch out for the correct spelling of keys. There is no such thing as "entymology". The correct term is "name:etymology". |
| 2 | 2019-07-12 22:04 | aharvey | Good catch, I see you've fixed it already, thank you. | |
| 68945516 by aharvey @ 2019-04-06 07:44 | 1 | 2019-04-16 01:48 | aharvey | I accidentally circled the track here, but I've since fixed it up. |
| 68609720 by aharvey @ 2019-03-28 02:56 | 1 | 2019-03-30 11:26 | David Dean ♦40 | Armidale Secondary College is currently at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172412504 (I haven't updated it as such yet, because I wanted to check on the ground), while the main campus indicated here is under construction. Please don't revert the landuse=construction again without checkin... |
| 2 | 2019-03-30 11:28 | David Dean ♦40 | (construction isn't expect to finish until end 2020) | |
| 3 | 2019-03-31 07:49 | aharvey | Hey David, I'm so sorry about messing up here. You're right I should have checked with you first, via a changeset comment, since you set it to construction. | |
| 64553832 by aharvey @ 2018-11-16 06:13 | 1 | 2019-03-28 01:17 | pangenib ♦6 | Rowland Hassall School has moved to 18B Parkham St, Chester Hill. |
| 2 | 2019-03-28 02:33 | aharvey | ok I've copied across the rest of the tags and deleted the old school | |
| 68528202 by aharvey @ 2019-03-26 00:51 | 1 | 2019-03-26 23:46 | ConsEbt ♦27 | See here for discussion https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-March/012494.html |
| 68319371 by aharvey @ 2019-03-20 05:18 | 1 | 2019-03-20 06:30 | dhx1 ♦6 | Thanks, looks reasonable. The point I added was sourced from a Geoscience Australia dataset on data.gov.au and this is not necessarily the most accurate data at times. |
| 51289769 by aharvey @ 2017-08-21 03:43 | 1 | 2019-03-16 01:05 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,I am slowly going through the OSMimspector tagging errors.. so these ways that have no features come up517137770 name=Macmasters Beach to Maitland Bay ReturnSecond PointBombi Point81 TrailCaves BeachThey all look to be correctly entered already... so I think these should be dele... |
| 2 | 2019-03-17 08:31 | aharvey | Sorry I've accidentally uploaded local data, not intended to be uploaded. I've cleaned that up now. Thanks for letting me know! | |
| 64835919 by aharvey @ 2018-11-24 02:44 | 1 | 2019-03-15 02:41 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Ok .. you got me .. What is Way: 648316059??? :) |
| 2 | 2019-03-15 05:53 | aharvey | Some kind of pipeline, but I wasn't sure so I left it untagged. I've now added the tag, but still needs a survey. | |
| 3 | 2019-03-15 08:43 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | It is a good puzzle! Appears to be a square box over ground that then descends under ground ... I don't think it is a single pipeline. But I cannot say what it is. | |
| 4 | 2019-03-15 09:00 | aharvey | It's a sewer conduit, either SWSOOS 1 or SWSOOS 2. | |
| 51397613 by aharvey @ 2017-08-24 07:44 | 1 | 2019-03-10 04:32 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,The towers throw errors in OSM inspector - no physical key. The problem is the relation ... thought a site relation would be better .. looked that up and that then suggested a simple way around the outside .. and the best thing for that I think is landuse=commercial .. with the name, website an... |
| 2 | 2019-03-10 11:32 | aharvey | ok, seems fine. Thanks for posting the details here. | |
| 49812681 by aharvey @ 2017-06-25 12:03 | 1 | 2019-03-05 04:03 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | OSM guide is one feature one entry in OSM.. So I have taken Node: Mount Piddington (400898104) and removed from itthe roof - now a new waythe picnic site .. a new nodepeak - new now with ele from LPI topo |
| 2 | 2019-03-05 06:44 | aharvey | Normally I would agree, but in this case they are all the one feature on the ground.https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/35558842005The survey mark is at the peak which is part of the picnic table and roof... all one feature on the ground so all one object in OSM.This is noted in ... | |
| 3 | 2019-03-05 23:39 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | The roof is better mapped as a rectangle, it is the truth as the roof is not a single point, and it will then render. The picnic site is an area, if that table is in use I would simply use the lookout area. So I have no problem separating it from that single node.Then the contentious issue -... | |
| 51251925 by aharvey @ 2017-08-19 09:57 | 1 | 2019-03-02 01:31 | aharvey | > Dear aharvey, > > While I was doing fixing logical Osmose issues, I found an error “suspicious tag combination – highway=footway together with bicycle=designated” (coordinate: -33.9640122, 151.1553117, wayID: 516799329).> > As I understood based on wiki OSM... |
| 2 | 2019-03-02 01:33 | aharvey | in response to ^, this path on the ground is highway=footway as it's primarily for pedestrians, however signage indicates that bicycles are designated, hence why I've used highway=footway + footway=cycleway. | |
| 3 | 2019-03-02 01:34 | aharvey | * I mean highway=footway, bicycle=designated | |
| 4 | 2019-03-02 01:35 | aharvey | https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-33.96372222222223&lng=151.15543611111116&z=17&pKey=lhRimvFZxJNXRBF6l5snMw&focus=photo&x=0.449782564727345&y=0.5131537845591562&zoom=1.2966360856269112 | |
| 5 | 2019-03-04 09:18 | AndjelaS ♦17 | Dear aharvey,First of all, thank you for your time and for replying to my message. I have made deep research for you by using overpass-turbo queries. I have came out with following results:highway=footway and bicycle=designated 773highway=footway and bicycle=yes 20293highway=footway an... | |
| 6 | 2019-03-05 06:50 | aharvey | "Even it is not accordance to OSM guideline" could you point to where you formed that view? My understanding from the wiki documentation is that highway=footway + bicycle=designated is the correct tagging for this way, because the path is "(explicit) sign saying something like bicycle... | |
| 7 | 2019-03-05 09:10 | AndjelaS ♦17 | Dear aharvey,Thank you for your reply.https://prnt.sc/mtfff0https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=footway – “ Where a pathway is designated for pedestrians but is also allowed for bicycles you can use hi... | |
| 7680901 by aharvey @ 2011-03-26 22:40 | 1 | 2019-01-29 05:05 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi, I have;Deleted tag natural=wood from the National Park relation.Added new relation for the tree area - so it does not follow the NP boundary, has holes for non tree areas. It is fairly coarse, but better than using the NP boundary. |
| 2 | 2019-01-31 01:41 | aharvey | Thank you! | |
| 3 | 2019-01-31 03:53 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | It take a while :(It is a little better, but needs more. Too hot to do Coats Track now. | |
| 43917484 by aharvey @ 2016-11-24 10:46 | 1 | 2019-01-01 08:33 | garethdenyer ♦3 | Although there is a way of navigating this section of the creek, there is not a formal track. It is misleading to have this marked. |
| 2 | 2019-01-01 08:49 | aharvey | Hey Gareth, When I walked this 2 years ago there was a path along side the creek, but pretty overgrown so I made sure it was mapped as highway=path + trail_visibility=horrible (so people know only walk here if you're comfortable navigating in the bush where the path is easily lost with no guide... | |
| 3 | 2019-01-02 09:45 | garethdenyer ♦3 | HI Andrew... Thanks for pointing out that you'd classified the state of the path as horrid... I didn't spot that, and you are right. I must admit that I haven't done the track recently, although about 10 years ago a group of us used to do it regularly and really tidied it up so tha... | |
| 61002339 by aharvey @ 2018-07-24 00:41 | 1 | 2018-12-24 03:56 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,You marked the school grounds as 'construction' . cannot really construct the school grounds .. I think it would be the building that is under going construction? |
| 2 | 2018-12-24 05:45 | aharvey | It's more to indicate the lifecycle of the school, that there are building a new school (technically a campus of an existing school, but it's still school area "under construction" https://www.schoolinfrastructure.nsw.gov.au/projects/c/cammeraygal-high-school-senior-campus.html... | |
| 52085952 by aharvey @ 2017-09-16 04:22 | 1 | 2018-12-11 16:54 | magrej ♦24 | Dear aharvey,Please double check if you are allowed to put the source tag on a node. I received warnings in JOSM for eight nodes which contain the source:geometry tag.Thanks in advance!magrej |
| 2 | 2018-12-20 00:09 | aharvey | I disagree with the JOSM warnings for source:geometry on a node. I'm using it to document the source for geometry of the point, in the same ways as is done for the geometry of a way. I think using different tags like source:geometry source:location just based on node vs way adds unnecessary com... | |
| 40274985 by aharvey @ 2016-06-25 03:18 | 1 | 2018-11-09 19:26 | herriotto ♦47 | According to Vicmap.Transport the segment of the Wangaratta Road for a short segment just north of here, -36.3981476, 146.2786652, is called Glenrowan Road. I added as Alt_name=* |
| 58719644 by aharvey @ 2018-05-06 02:27 | 1 | 2018-05-06 02:28 | aharvey | This reverts https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46913865 which as far as I can see, didn't move the railway=station anywhere and merges in the newer node which was added post-removal https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5124591624 |
| 30029747 by aharvey @ 2015-04-07 01:25 | 1 | 2018-01-30 14:40 | MarkusHD ♦176 | Access of way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/250087113 has been changed here, foot=no makes it impossible to route to the Top Station because a little segment here is affected: https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=-36.49295&mlon=148.28998#map=17/-36.49295/148.28998Was this really intended? |
| 2 | 2018-01-30 22:28 | aharvey | Whoops. I added foot=no because there are signs saying that track is for bicycles only, no walkers. However you're right about that short segment. Unless anyone else has better knowledge I'm happer for you to change that small section to allow walkers. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-01 00:46 | MarkusHD ♦176 | I'm away from home for some time and using Vespucci is too complicated for me for non simple tasks, so I leave it to you :) I didn't walk this route anyway, so I don't have surveyed it myself, only tried routing this alternative track. | |
| 4 | 2018-02-13 11:27 | MarkusHD ♦176 | I got quite comfortable with Vespucci and have just changed it, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/56321245 | |
| 40258772 by aharvey @ 2016-06-24 12:23 | 1 | 2017-11-03 12:39 | evo_evz ♦20 | Hi Andrew, I'm new to editing but I wanted to delete this small part of Willarong Rd between the two Kingsways you seem to have created. The reason is because you cannot drive straight through Willarong Rd from North to South. Or would it be better to leave this small part of Willarong Rd there... |
| 2 | 2017-11-03 21:39 | aharvey | If you check the history of the way you're talking about at https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/151022092 you can see it was actually created by inas. No worries though.Looking at the imagery, it doesn't look like there is a physical barrier and as you point out you can still make... | |
| 3 | 2017-11-03 22:52 | evo_evz ♦20 | Thanks Andrew. I'm making some changes and had a few questions. First can you tell me how I modify a changeset comment? I made an error in the comment only and wanted to fix that first. It's changeset 53491460. Supposed to say, Left turn only, not Right turn only. Thanks. | |
| 4 | 2017-11-03 23:03 | aharvey | You can't modify a changeset comment after you've saved it, but you can add a changeset comment like we are doing here. The changeset comment is helpful for others to understand what and why you changed something. | |
| 53393819 by aharvey @ 2017-10-31 12:12 | 1 | 2017-10-31 12:15 | aharvey | The road and cycle/foot path are physically seperated on the single bridge. I've changed the access tags for each to reflect. (ie. no foot or bicycle on the road way, only on the cycle/foot way).Changed psv to bus as it's only busses allowed, not taxis (psv includes taxi).The acces... |
| 52295484 by aharvey @ 2017-09-23 06:34 | 1 | 2017-09-24 10:16 | Harald Hartmann ♦827 | Hello aharvey. At http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/10042473 you have tagged `bus:maxweight` instead of the more common `maxweight:...`. Please have a look at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=maxweight |
| 2 | 2017-09-25 07:50 | aharvey | Thanks! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweight didn't explain how to tag mode specific maxweights, but looking at taginfo maxweight:mode is much more common than mode:maxweight so I've swaped it over.Still not sure if maxweight=10 + maxweight:bus=no is the correct way to tag ... | |
| 52172709 by aharvey @ 2017-09-19 11:12 | 1 | 2017-09-20 15:05 | Harald Hartmann ♦827 | Hello aharvey. You have add a lot new fitness_station subkeys. Had you looked on https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fitness_station#values before? Have you documented this new subkeys in the wiki? ;-) #newkey |
| 2 | 2017-09-20 22:55 | aharvey | Are you referring to the style "fitness_station:horizontal_bar=yes", I'm discussing this at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dfitness_station#How_to_tag.2Fmap_types_of_equipment.3F and more input would be appreciated.The problem is I read and understand the wi... | |
| 51705715 by aharvey @ 2017-09-04 02:39 | 1 | 2017-09-04 03:37 | samuelrussell ♦50 | Except they're not marked cycle laneshttp://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/rr2014104/s153.html>4) A "bicycle lane" is a marked lane, or the part of a marked lane:>(a) beginning at a bicycle lane sign applying to the lane, or a road marking... |
| 2 | 2017-09-04 05:22 | aharvey | There is a solid while painted line separating the traffic from the bike lane and a dotted white painted line separating the bike lane from the curb side parallel parking. These bike lanes have a painted white bike inside the lane which designates them as a bicycle lane. The bike lane can't be ... | |
| 3 | 2017-09-04 05:30 | aharvey | If you'd like to be able to distinguish narrow cycle lanes from wide ones please use the cycleway:lane:width tag as described at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway#Supplementary_details | |
| 4 | 2017-09-04 05:45 | samuelrussell ♦50 | Can you add this to the wiki? We can use cycleway:lane:bicycle=designated & bicycle:no for legal bicycle lanes, and cycleway:lane:bicycle=yes & bicycle=yes for marked cycle shoulders to represent the legal restrictions that vary between marked shoulders and by the law cycle lanes. | |
| 5 | 2017-09-04 05:46 | samuelrussell ♦50 | I wish I had the mapping time to go back and measure the widths :) But I'll keep it in mind and find a "meter" rod somewhere on my body for future mapping. | |
| 6 | 2017-09-04 06:16 | aharvey | Sorry I'm not sure what part you feel should be added to the wiki?You're saying that this isn't a legal (in NSW) cycle lane because it lacks the word "LANE" painted in white next to the white bicycle symbol painted in the bicycle lane? Maybe you want something like bicyc... | |
| 7 | 2017-09-04 06:21 | samuelrussell ♦50 | bicycle:yes means a legal reason to be able to ridebicycle:designated means a specific legal designationAll lanes are packed:yes. Bus lanes are pav:designated. It matters because you can't legally climb Williams street to park in cbd in lanes 1-2 but are required to use the Australian roa... | |
| 8 | 2017-09-04 06:36 | aharvey | Hmm I always read http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access as designated meaning it's set aside for that purpose. So a path with has a sign saying pedestrians and bicycles can use it would be foot=designated, bicycle=designated. access=yes I understood as you're allowed to use the way... | |
| 46913942 by aharvey @ 2017-03-17 00:05 | 1 | 2017-07-05 07:56 | TheSwavu ♦544 | Is this:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/480950313a thing? Or a slip of the mouse? |
| 2 | 2017-07-05 23:28 | aharvey | There is something visible in the imagery, but I don't know exactly what it is. Probably how they get the toboggans back up. | |
| 6404798 by aharvey @ 2010-11-19 06:50 | 1 | 2017-06-21 23:24 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Multipolygons don't do shared ways on outers.. So these might be best as simple separate ways. Doing this generates a warning - overlapping railways. I think that is ok - platforms do share segments. |
| 2 | 2017-06-23 07:44 | aharvey | I'm okay with them being separate ways.Physically the whole area is one platform, but logically (in terms of the network and naming) each side is a different platform.So for simplicity, I'm happy with these being separate ways, without the relation with a shared border that way we ... | |
| 43110299 by aharvey @ 2016-10-23 21:59 | 1 | 2017-06-20 23:08 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Hi,Multipolygon relation 6664382 - the Westfield building. Multiplygons don't like shared segments, I think this would be better as a key building:part. The landuse declaration would be better as the larger area of Chatswood - on the basis of one feature one element in OSM.So I have chang... |
| 2 | 2017-06-21 01:35 | aharvey | This looks okay. I'm happy to have landuse=retail a little wider, but I favour keeping landuse polygons no larger than 1 block to avoid overlapping roads etc. | |
| 46997002 by aharvey @ 2017-03-19 23:57 | 1 | 2017-04-18 22:04 | Warin61 ♦2,664 | Way 475592320 crosses over itself. So it does not render well ... OSM inspector calls it a 'self intersection'. |
| 2 | 2017-04-18 22:46 | aharvey | Thanks for noting this, it looks like it's happened as a result of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47860192 I'll move the discussion over there. | |
| 44994053 by aharvey @ 2017-01-08 05:56 | 1 | 2017-01-08 08:20 | TheSwavu ♦544 | Hey! Someone found a use for my good-ol friend Mainland Australia. |
| 25744404 by aharvey @ 2014-09-29 11:27 | 1 | 2016-11-04 01:00 | CloCkWeRX ♦343 | Do you know if the bridge (see http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/771693) is actually there still? |
| 2 | 2016-11-04 03:46 | aharvey | The bride is there but it's a pipeline not a footbridge. I've fixed this up via https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43394284.Not sure why it was marked as a path in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/38993006 | |
| 40266451 by aharvey @ 2016-06-24 16:47 | 1 | 2016-06-25 02:35 | Ewen Hill ♦407 | Thanks for doing that. |
| 38610902 by aharvey @ 2016-04-16 03:54 | 1 | 2016-04-16 07:08 | samuelrussell ♦50 | Kudos! Do these sites have relationships? Could those relationships be mapped? |
| 2 | 2016-04-16 07:20 | aharvey | They don't have relationships, they are all independent. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Darchaeological_site lists other kinds of sites but not middens so I've used site_type=shell_midden for these. I would say they names should be moved to the description key, but I didn... | |
| 34204428 by aharvey @ 2015-09-23 12:19 | 1 | 2015-10-01 01:45 | riblit ♦2 | I would suggest that leisure=nature_reserve is incorrect as a Nature Reserve and a National Park are different gazetted entities with separate use restrictions. |
| 2 | 2015-10-01 05:34 | aharvey | I'm tempted to agree with you. I think that boundary=national_park is sufficient. However at mostly in Australia I would have thought that National Park implies "protected area of importance for ildlife, flora, fauna or features of geological or other special interest, which is reserved an... |