| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 52968904 by Alex Schroeder | 1 | 2017-10-23 06:20:53 UTC | aharvey | The phone number should be in the format +61 2 9XXX XXX. |
| 2 | 2017-10-23 07:41:16 UTC | Alex Schroeder | Thanks, fixed. | |
| 53027370 by Daryl Radivojevic | 1 | 2017-10-23 06:18:26 UTC | aharvey | It says at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Roundabouts that roundabouts should be mapped out as circular ways. But I don't have an opinion on this and certainly as a node is better than not at all. |
| 53028123 by techsolvers | 1 | 2017-10-23 06:13:32 UTC | aharvey | If you know the post office is here did you wanted to deleted the one at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3146751111 ? The other one lists a copyrighted source, so happy to delete it over yours. |
| 2 | 2017-10-23 06:41:44 UTC | techsolvers | Good point, I hadn't considered that the old entry would still be there. I've deleted it. | |
| 53141650 by wanderlustig | 1 | 2017-10-22 11:28:28 UTC | nevw | Should levers be written with an upper case L or is it a peculiar name that begins with a lower case l? |
| 2 | 2017-10-22 21:25:44 UTC | wanderlustig | I thought the notes added to those features made it clear that Ievers (presumably pronounced "EYE-vers") is correct. Please modify the notes accordingly If you can devise some more effective way of communicating this. | |
| 3 | 2017-10-23 02:47:32 UTC | nevw | Yes, these comments make it clear that it is a peculiar name that begins with a lower case l. | |
| 4 | 2017-10-23 02:54:12 UTC | nevw | Correction.... it begins with an I (an upper case 'eye') and not a lower case l ('ell'). | |
| 5 | 2017-10-23 05:30:59 UTC | aharvey | PS you could also add https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name:etymology | |
| 21929178 by Charles Murray | 1 | 2017-10-20 07:31:16 UTC | aharvey | Hey, just a tip. Since these residential lots share borders in reality, the ways should share nodes so there are no gaps in between.PS. the building=house tag is for the building footprint, which is why these were changed to landuse=residential. |
| 52863402 by woodpeck_repair | 1 | 2017-10-20 00:56:48 UTC | aharvey | What's the policy on SEO edits, I encounter them almost every day and not really sure what to do. The ones I encounter it's a new OSM account for each "customer" and they never use the correct format for opening_hours or accepted payments etc. |
| 2 | 2017-10-20 05:55:55 UTC | woodpeck | There's no written policy but first and foremost the rule is "no advertising", i.e. anything with a "description" tag that tells us how the excellent lawyer has been helping their clients for a decade should be deleted on sight. Another frequent problem is bad or missing tags, or... | |
| 28621836 by bartholemeu | 1 | 2017-10-20 00:47:56 UTC | aharvey | Is it really named "indistinct track"? Better to use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:trail_visibility so it get's the right classification. |
| 53066927 by Scuba Dooba | 1 | 2017-10-20 00:34:28 UTC | aharvey | Hi, welcome to OSM!I'd suggest you take a look at these tags. They are much more widely accepted (about 5000 places tagged that way already in OSM) and mean people interested in fishing and scuba will be able to find this place as it will show up in their searches etc.https://wiki.openstreet... |
| 53029195 by zatuim | 1 | 2017-10-19 22:45:29 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,Relation \t7660949 - highway=pedestrian .... with one member as an inner ... is wrong!I think the area is a tree area .. and should be simply tagged on the way 533296035 as natural=wood and landcover=trees. The relation 7660949 can be deleted. The relation 7660948 highway=pedestrian .... |
| 2 | 2017-10-20 00:28:00 UTC | aharvey | PS. maybe also try editing in JOSM, personally I find it easier to deal with relations compared with the iD editor. | |
| 3 | 2017-10-22 10:14:16 UTC | zatuim | OK, I tried the changes you suggested. Not sure if it's what you wanted exact to how you said.I have tried JOSM, but find it a bit too complex, that's why I used iD. | |
| 4 | 2017-10-22 21:31:14 UTC | Warin61 | Some comments;The tag "area=yes" is not required.The Relation: 7670619 has one member Way: 533296035 as "inner". But an inner of what??? Water Park Wet 'n' Wild Gold Coast? Retail Movie World? Village Boundary Oxenford? County Boundary Gold Coast City? State Boundary Que... | |
| 52921848 by logic99 | 1 | 2017-10-14 13:19:40 UTC | nevw | You are welcome to map the driveways. If at a later stage you add footways you would have a node at each driveway they cross or add the sidewalk tag to the streets.http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sidewalk |
| 2 | 2017-10-15 06:19:44 UTC | aharvey | If they lead to a private property I've marked them access=private when I've mapped, although strictly only past the front fence is private. | |
| 13600970 by cleary | 1 | 2017-10-14 02:37:22 UTC | aharvey | With relation 2521345 any reason why you've used except=psv? From the signage it should be except=bus? |
| 2 | 2017-10-14 02:37:53 UTC | aharvey | https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-33.771155303278704&lng=151.08031233063525&z=17&username%5B%5D=aharvey&signs=true&pKey=tV6yavMPhO16GMGJxU_DLA&focus=photo&menu=false&x=0.8206062351231989&y=0.13901422932967647&zoom=3 | |
| 3 | 2017-10-14 06:06:11 UTC | cleary | I think I was wrong, confusing "bus" with "psv". Also it appears hours have been changed since restriction was first added. I would be pleased if you could correct the information. Thanks for your conscientious observation of this error. | |
| 4 | 2017-10-15 03:00:08 UTC | aharvey | no problem. done in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52944761 | |
| 52845601 by Daryl Radivojevic | 1 | 2017-10-12 21:19:08 UTC | Warin61 | No.Part, and only part, of these streets are used as the boundaries of Parramatta and Westmead councils. So they have to be, at least, in 2 bits. Use the LPI Base Map to view this information - the pail dotted lines. |
| 2 | 2017-10-13 22:16:47 UTC | aharvey | @Daryl Radivokevic Unfortuantly the iD editor doesn't warn you when your changes affect a relation, so just try to watch out for how changes will affect relations too. When you go to save your changes in iD it will list what's changed and if it lists relations that you didn't intend to change you ca... | |
| 46395396 by BrettM6000 | 1 | 2017-10-07 07:01:55 UTC | aharvey | I don |
| 2 | 2017-10-07 07:02:59 UTC | aharvey | I don't understand https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7010986, no u-turn from and to the same way? What's the purpose of this? | |
| 3 | 2017-10-11 15:05:25 UTC | BrettM6000 | Hi. I'm not sure what you mean. Are you asking about the "No U Turn" on Warringah Rd at Bangalla Pl, or the "No U Turn" on Bangalla Pl at Warringah Rd? | |
| 4 | 2017-10-12 01:17:49 UTC | aharvey | Sorry that's a bad example since I re-purposed your relation.See any of thesehttps://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7010985https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7010988https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7010989No uturn restrictions from and to the same way. | |
| 5 | 2017-10-12 01:18:58 UTC | aharvey | https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=xdaqerG1L6OL7HdYMRWNlg&lat=-33.76296111111111&lng=151.2066666666667&z=17&x=0.9393914297523406&y=0.48555368688611367&zoom=0 | |
| 6 | 2017-10-12 04:30:38 UTC | BrettM6000 | If you look at 7010988 for example, I think I just put it in for completeness when I was doing other things. It just means that you can't drive west on Bangala Pl and perform a U Turn on Warringah Rd and go back to Bangala Pl. I think it is correct but I guess you are just saying that it is redundan... | |
| 7 | 2017-10-12 07:25:46 UTC | aharvey | Hmm I feel it's redundant as it's no different to most other intersections in OSM right? I don't think it makes sense to have a no-u-turn relation on every single intersection unless signposted. | |
| 3764493 by MCH | 1 | 2017-10-08 09:21:20 UTC | aharvey | I tried but couldn't find the track you added from Erskine Creek to the parking lot at the top of Nepean Lookout Firetrail. I checked both ends with no success. It could be well overgrown by now. I'm tempted to remove, do you have any advice? |
| 2 | 2017-10-08 11:01:07 UTC | MCH | Haven't been there for a long time, although I rode past two weeks ago. It was a popular tack down to the creek from memory and was easy to find. I wouldn't remove any track unless you can be 100% sure it's just not active. Call the NPWS ranger Tina and she will let you. | |
| 3 | 2017-10-08 11:05:00 UTC | MCH | http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/things-to-do/walking-tracks/jack-evans-walking-track | |
| 4 | 2017-10-08 11:07:28 UTC | aharvey | Sorry I should have been more clear. It's specifically this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530994011. | |
| 5 | 2017-10-08 11:18:58 UTC | MCH | Sure, I remember walling along the creek with a group of other locals that had been there before, the track was vague and may have over grown. The last section was added by you? Just remove what you think is best. The section of track out to the Dam was closed off many years back, so the area has ch... | |
| 6 | 2017-10-08 11:38:31 UTC | aharvey | The whole section was added by you https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/49230851. I split the way so I could add a different trail_visibility to the section along the creek (which is vague and overgrown, but there is still a path, hence trail_visibility=horrible) to the part that seemingly goes ... | |
| 37988470 by Majormax | 1 | 2017-10-08 10:49:12 UTC | aharvey | hi! Thanks for adding this.The name key should only be used for a name, not a description or classification of what the feature is, so I've removed "Billabong". See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_thingsIn OSM water=pond is more fo... |
| 21508800 by matthewcossey | 1 | 2017-10-07 07:07:54 UTC | aharvey | Any reason why https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/271972464 is bicycle=designated? I couldn't find any signage or markings indicating that. |
| 52614520 by Wilson Yung | 1 | 2017-10-05 13:14:30 UTC | aharvey | Isn't https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/77083928/history landuse=grass?Could you explain the motives behind deleting https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1515434/history#map=16/-33.9956/151.1453 ? Thanks. |
| 2 | 2017-10-05 22:05:15 UTC | Wilson Yung | ah...I think it's an accident..what I was trying to do is remove the duplicate "cook Park" name at -34.004397, 151.129002, as there is a "cook park" near by at -33.995383, 151.145602. | |
| 3 | 2017-10-05 23:48:29 UTC | aharvey | The whole area is referred to as "Cook Park" all the way from up near Kyeemagh down to at least Sandringham.The south part near Captain Cook Bridge I think is un-signposted so simply landuse=grass. If you've confirmed it's not part of Cook Park, then simply removing http://www.openstre... | |
| 4 | 2017-10-06 01:42:05 UTC | Wilson Yung | Yes that;s my intention. I'll leave you to it as you have surveyed there. :) | |
| 5 | 2017-10-06 02:37:10 UTC | aharvey | I've reverted this changeset. In the iD or JOSM editor, if you change the background imagery to LPI Base Map you'll see the part near Captain Cook Bridge is labelled Cook Park. This lines up with what I saw in out of copyright historical maps of the area. It's just there is no signage... so I don't ... | |
| 52639569 by Wilson Yung | 1 | 2017-10-05 13:08:11 UTC | aharvey | Hi,Could you please explain the reasoning behind deleting this? Checking out this place on Mapillary https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/7CZ003bc8rnH_H8kADqiEg it looks like there is something there. Given the part was only added a month ago, it seems like it's trying to map the facility which is t... |
| 2 | 2017-10-05 22:17:00 UTC | Wilson Yung | Judging from the size and imagery, I wouldn't say it is a park. But I agree with you that the facility should be mapped. What I did here was only delete the park point and polygon. | |
| 3 | 2017-10-05 23:07:01 UTC | aharvey | Thanks. The OSM Wiki says for leisure=park "A park is an area of open space provided for recreational use, usually designed and in semi-natural state with grassy areas, trees and bushes. Parks are often but not always municipal."This is an area of open space for recreational (Refreshme... | |
| 4 | 2017-10-05 23:19:00 UTC | Wilson Yung | I am actually going to walk pass by that area today...so I'll have a closer look and see.thanks for pulling up the definition of park. | |
| 5 | 2017-10-05 23:41:13 UTC | aharvey | Perfect. Would be interested to see if it has a name sign posted, since it was mapped out with a name originally. | |
| 6 | 2017-10-06 01:30:39 UTC | Wilson Yung | It's a tiny pocket park, with wooden deck.I haven't seen any signpost, however saw a picnic table/chair and bike rack on site. | |
| 7 | 2017-10-06 01:47:21 UTC | Wilson Yung | I don't know how to revert changes in the browser, could you revert that change and I could add the facilities on it? | |
| 8 | 2017-10-06 02:34:15 UTC | aharvey | Done. I've removed the node, left the area. Marked it as surface=paving_stones. I know it's not all paving_stones, but it might be a good way to say mostly it is? I'd already added the bicycle_parking at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5149716266. But please do add any further details from your s... | |
| 52613241 by Maradona11 | 1 | 2017-10-05 13:36:15 UTC | aharvey | Hey mate,I think it's better to not snap things like parks, parking etc to the road, and instead try to mark out the exact extent which doesn't normally extend out until the road center line.If for cartographic reasons that effect is desired it's better to do that as a post processing step o... |
| 2 | 2017-10-06 00:40:25 UTC | Maradona11 | hi mate,yeah I attend to agree with that we should be marking out exact extent of a feature in most cases. However, I find better to snap non-routeable objects (exlude buildings) to the road centre line as it is much more visual appealing when looking at map tiles generated from osm data from m... | |
| 3 | 2017-10-06 01:20:02 UTC | aharvey | Check out:https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/17501/when-mapping-polygons-surrounded-by-streets-should-they-share-nodes-or-be-traced-separatelyAnd http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Areas_and_Ways_Sharing_Nodes "...when the way is a highway, it usu... | |
| 52668690 by Wilson Yung | 1 | 2017-10-05 23:16:22 UTC | Wilson Yung | summary should be : delete duplicate police station, add point as MDAA. However I am not sure which key/tag MDAA should use. |
| 2 | 2017-10-05 23:58:34 UTC | aharvey | is it an office where people work from? How about https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aoffice%3DassociationIf it provides services out of that location https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social_facility with social_facility:for=disabled ?I'd use the full name in the name tag, and s... | |
| 50316514 by mbethke | 1 | 2017-10-05 22:57:13 UTC | aharvey | I noticed the cafe you added http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4972926520 was already mapped in OSM http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4331958057I've deleted your one and kept the one which was there first, just updating the position slightly to where you had it. |
| 52611206 by Wilson Yung | 1 | 2017-10-05 13:30:33 UTC | aharvey | This node somehow got caught up with the road. Instead of deleting the tags I've restored it's position and detached it from the way in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52654782If you've surved that there is no library then that's fine, but I guess you're just deleting it since it was inc... |
| 2 | 2017-10-05 21:50:14 UTC | Wilson Yung | I saw two byron bay library, one at -28.642389, 153.610847(the one I deleted),the other at -28.643286, 153.615522( which is the real byron bay library location) | |
| 3 | 2017-10-05 22:52:42 UTC | aharvey | Got it, I was confused as the changeset comment was "hotel name change".It would be awesome if you mentioned this in the changeset comment, something like "removing duplicate library already existing at http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4621800012". Thanks! | |
| 4 | 2017-10-05 22:58:23 UTC | Wilson Yung | I will make sure changes are reflected in the summary....especially when I move from one location to the other... | |
| 52643239 by Wilson Yung | 1 | 2017-10-05 13:03:28 UTC | aharvey | Hi there, did you really mean to delete this beach? |
| 2 | 2017-10-05 21:42:49 UTC | Wilson Yung | there's another silica beach nearby in the south west at silica cove(-35.077967, 150.776625). I should just get rid of the name, rather than the polygon itself. | |
| 3 | 2017-10-05 22:48:34 UTC | aharvey | That's right, the beach is still there, so if you only want to remove the name, just delete the name tag.I reverted your changeset since the beach is still there, but you can go in and just fix the name. | |
| 4 | 2017-10-05 22:50:49 UTC | aharvey | PS. it's great that you're using changeset comments, they are super helpful for others to understand intentions and what you're trying to do. I can see here you've used the same comment as last changeset, I know it's easy to make that mistake, I have too, so keep in mind of that next time. Cheers. | |
| 5 | 2017-10-05 22:59:44 UTC | Wilson Yung | Done...Thanks:) | |
| 52665809 by swanilli | 1 | 2017-10-05 22:05:26 UTC | aharvey | I can see where you're coming from, and honestly I'm not sure what we should have in OSM here, but the path from Burning Palms to Figure of Eight Pool was marked as trail_visibility=no which means pathless so no evident trail on the ground. This passage is very well used by people so I'd argue it's ... |
| 2 | 2017-10-05 22:07:52 UTC | aharvey | On the otherhand there are no markings on the ground, and it might be better to add tags to the rock to indicate it's passable so routers can choose to go over the rock. | |
| 52614618 by Miles Gough | 1 | 2017-10-04 12:01:46 UTC | aharvey | Hi Miles,Thanks for contributing to OSM. However it appears you've used a copyrighted source of data here which we don't have a license to use. Could you please post back any details I'm missing? |
| 2 | 2017-10-21 12:36:20 UTC | SomeoneElse_Revert | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53127025 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some names copied from http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/business-industry/heavy-vehicles/maps/restricted-access-vehicles-map/map/ | |
| 52498186 by Aushiker | 1 | 2017-09-30 23:02:39 UTC | tonyf1 | Hi. I think bicycles=no means that it is not possible to take a bicycle on the ferry. https://www.rottnestexpress.com.au/luggage says that subject to dimensions they can for $15. The issue that you want to address is with the routing software and not the map. |
| 2 | 2017-10-01 01:44:40 UTC | Aushiker | Thanks for the explanation. I and others have taken the issue with the routing software developer so hopefully we can resolve it from their end. | |
| 3 | 2017-10-02 20:20:04 UTC | aharvey | Mind if I ask which routing software you're having the issue with? | |
| 4 | 2017-10-03 00:27:20 UTC | Aushiker | Sure. It is Wahoo Fitness "Take me anywhere" feature which is part of their Android app for the Wahoo Elemnt [and Bolt] bicycle computer/GPS. | |
| 5 | 2017-10-09 05:06:42 UTC | tonyf1 | I removed bicycle=no in Changeset #52747057. I hope you are OK with that. | |
| 6 | 2017-10-10 05:03:11 UTC | Aushiker | No worries. Thanks for fixing. | |
| 46189278 by Pierce | 1 | 2017-09-26 17:33:40 UTC | mavl | Hello. The copyrighted data are deleted. |
| 2 | 2017-09-26 20:04:03 UTC | Pierce | What copyrighted data? | |
| 3 | 2017-09-27 03:56:08 UTC | mavl | Probably, the address data. The changeset tag is imagery_used=...aerial.maps.api.here.com... So this source is incompatible. | |
| 4 | 2017-09-28 08:03:01 UTC | aharvey | here.com as a custom imagery source? Surely that's a big no-no? | |
| 5 | 2017-09-28 09:54:05 UTC | Pierce | I honestly didn't think I added it as a custom imagery source. Is there any editor that has here.com? JOSM, merkaartor, potlatch? I'm not trying to excuse the revert, I'm just curious how it came about. It's a shame that all that work has been reverted though. | |
| 6 | 2017-09-28 10:40:15 UTC | mavl | > Is there any editor that has here.com? JOSM, merkaartor, potlatch? I think that no because "here" is in general blacklist. [http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/capabilities] | |
| 7 | 2017-09-28 12:18:37 UTC | aharvey | The buildings were done in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42406779 which used Bing so they are fine, and the squaring is imagery agnostic. It's just the street addresses mavi reverted. @Pierce could you confirm where the addresses came from? | |
| 52402165 by dbaupp | 1 | 2017-09-28 07:46:27 UTC | aharvey | Similar to https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/18260888 I've added some extra tags to your SLSC's. |
| 2 | 2017-09-29 00:47:36 UTC | dbaupp | Oh, awesome, didn't realise they existed! | |
| 52224412 by Seosdy | 1 | 2017-09-21 09:04:36 UTC | nevw | As you are SEO experts, I thought for this and future business listings you may wish to know...I noticed a mi-spelt tag...Openig hours \t8:30am to 5:30pm...also hours format is not correct for OSMsee http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours#ExamplesThe correct format for phone ... |
| 2 | 2017-09-22 06:23:25 UTC | Harald Hartmann | And SEO descriptions are unwanted, too! I could be, that someone could revert this entry. | |
| 3 | 2017-09-28 07:19:08 UTC | aharvey | This place probably got a 3rd party SEO company to do their SEO. The same place that's been going crazy adding incorrectly formatted opening_hours, phone and payment method tags... | |
| 52315947 by TheSwavu | 1 | 2017-09-28 07:04:20 UTC | aharvey | I'm +1 for this, if these recurrent SEO operators still can't get the tagging syntax right and don't bother replying to changeset comments then by all means remove tags which are invalid and create a mess in OSM.I wish these operators would use the same username rather than creating a new user f... |
| 11479325 by efAston | 1 | 2017-09-27 07:50:41 UTC | aharvey | I know it's been 5 years but in line with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice I have a few issues with this.1. "Unmarked Suggested Bike Route" if it's unmarked on the ground and only a suggested route according to the website you linked to, then it doesn't belong in OSM.\... |
| 2 | 2017-09-27 08:51:48 UTC | efAston | These suggested bike routes are useless anyway, they're actually worth avoiding (the NSW RTA hates cyclists and just wants them out of the way, they don't care whether the road is actually suitable for riding or not).The problem with mapping cycle routes in NSW is that a lot of the cycle routes ... | |
| 3 | 2017-09-27 23:21:49 UTC | aharvey | I concur, it's better for bicycle routing engines using OSM to favour actual infrastructure over routes because the presence of a route says nothing about the infrastructure present or it's suitability. That said, route actually marked still should have some weight since they can be easier to follow... | |
| 52295484 by aharvey | 1 | 2017-09-24 10:16:53 UTC | Harald Hartmann | 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 07:50:02 UTC | 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 "10 t... | |
| 42929417 by Warin61 | 1 | 2017-09-24 11:08:54 UTC | aharvey | I strongly disagree with this edit.A feature tagged as source=survey should take precedence over the LPI Base Map and where they differ the ground survey should be what is in OSM.Take https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222408585/history as a concrete example, it was carefully mapped out via s... |
| 2 | 2017-09-24 21:57:46 UTC | Warin61 | Looking at Bunyan Lookout Trail (222408586) (using LPI Imagery) which I also changed from path to track I can clearly see 2 wheel tracks - thus it is clearly a trail, not a path. The Lost World Trail (222408585) is harder to see with the imagery .. it may be wide enough for a vehicle .. but is ... | |
| 3 | 2017-09-25 00:19:09 UTC | aharvey | I've gone ahead and fixed this up in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52341567 based on my survey of the area yesterday.Only part of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222408586 is track, the other part is path.Even if these were tracks used by vehicles or planned as such, the current ... | |
| 52172709 by aharvey | 1 | 2017-09-20 15:05:06 UTC | Harald Hartmann | 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 22:55:32 UTC | 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 wiki ar... | |
| 43069942 by MapAnalyser465 | 1 | 2017-09-20 03:18:43 UTC | aharvey | Not sure what happened this changeset took the oneway=yes off the Mona Vale Road Onramp/Offramp. I've fixed it up. |
| 52131502 by QuirijnGB | 1 | 2017-09-19 00:11:12 UTC | aharvey | Hi, welcome to OSM.Do you know the current state? Is it a construction site, or is the new building already up?In addition to removing the old hotel, you could add either landuse=construction, or add the new building=apartments https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building |
| 2 | 2017-09-19 00:17:27 UTC | aharvey | Building is still there as of 1 month ago https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/al9kliHbcLhGZJrx9WW4Pg so I assume you mean the building changed from an apartment hotel to regular apartments? | |
| 3 | 2017-09-19 00:28:23 UTC | QuirijnGB | Correct. Its the same building. | |
| 52135309 by pergolassydneyauthority | 1 | 2017-09-19 00:06:07 UTC | aharvey | Hi, welcome to OSM.I think it's appropriate to add office=it, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office.Also the format for the phone number is described at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone#Usage it needs the +61 country code. |
| 2 | 2017-09-19 02:42:54 UTC | CloCkWeRX | It's better to trace the individual building outline, not the entire block of land.I'm going to wager that it would be very difficult to or even impossible to confirm this via survey as a web design office, I tend to prefer to leave this kind of detail off the map | |
| 52145286 by GSquared1 | 1 | 2017-09-19 00:04:12 UTC | aharvey | Hi, welcome to OSM.I think it's appropriate to add office=it, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office.Also the format for the phone number is described at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone#Usage it needs the +61 country code. |
| 36751787 by AlexOnTheBus | 1 | 2017-09-17 23:11:37 UTC | aharvey | Hi, you've added the network=Sydney Transport. What does this mean? I've never heard of Sydney Transport as an entity."Sydney Trains is the operator of rail services across the metropolitan Sydney area, bounded by Berowra, Emu Plains, Macarthur and Waterfall." [https://www.transport.ns... |
| 42929612 by ChopStiR | 1 | 2017-09-17 10:59:04 UTC | aharvey | Hi, it looks like you added sport=climbing to https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/632214477. When I visited here, it looks like it only offered abseiling, not climbing, can you confirm?https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Dclimbing only describes climbing not abseiling so unless there... |
| 11854021 by Spindoc Bob | 1 | 2017-09-17 10:27:03 UTC | aharvey | HI, I couldn't find this track https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/166821499 at all, no evidence on the ground of the track, do you think I can remove it? |
| 52032407 by mueschel | 1 | 2017-09-14 14:26:31 UTC | aharvey | Hi!The way you edited has 3 lanes only the left most is psv only, the rightmost two are normal.https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/1kH6wZEDjyV1ixlAPXtXDAI've changed the tags over to use lanes:psv=designated|yes|yes, per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes#Description but still no... |
| 2 | 2017-09-14 19:56:49 UTC | mueschel | Ah ok, this I couldn't see when reading the tags. The correct tagging is:vehicle:lanes = no | | psv:lanes = designated | |'lanes:psv' can only be used to mark that there is a psv lane, but doesn't tell anything about where it is. | |
| 3 | 2017-09-15 01:25:57 UTC | aharvey | Sorry you're right, thanks for that!https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes:psv is only for marking out how many psv lanes exist, not where they are.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes#Lanes_reserved_for_specific_vehicles describes marking out where those psv lanes are.I'... | |
| 51899959 by aaronsta | 1 | 2017-09-11 22:29:38 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,Relation 7560478 - for your aerial imagery reference... ? 1) What aerial reference? Copyright free? Or specific permission given? 2) You could keep these off the data base by storing them locally as a JOSM layer ...3) They generate error indication on OSM inspector ... thus my atten... |
| 2 | 2017-09-12 00:08:24 UTC | aharvey | Agree with Warin61 here, a feature in OSM should represent something physically on the ground (I know this isn't always the case, but generally should apply). So if something exists, like the roundabout, map that, but if nothing exists on the ground, that's not suitable for OSM.I'd suggest use ... | |
| 3 | 2017-09-12 05:01:01 UTC | aaronsta | Hi Warin61 and aharvey, this changeset is in response to a message from OSM user hadry. Below is a copy of correspondence between myself and OSM user hadry: Hi Hadry, Thanks for your message, yes these were tagged for the renderer, as barrier=fence makes a clearly visible straight line on Mapnik. ... | |
| 4 | 2017-09-12 05:09:10 UTC | aaronsta | Following up from this, originally these were created as the roundabouts themselves formed good starting points, but are way to inaccurate to align the images. It was not put in a local dataset as the images were rectified outside JOSM, where wms tiles were supported but any vector data (such as osm... | |
| 5 | 2017-09-12 05:13:15 UTC | aaronsta | It may be appropriate to remove these lines, as I am yet to complete mapping the area and may need to use them again it could be useful to retain. The lines now have no tagged attributes aside from the note=* | |
| 6 | 2017-09-12 05:20:31 UTC | aharvey | The issue is you're using OSM to save data really only useful/specific to you. As you can imagine if everyone started using OSM to tag their personal bookmarks it would clutter the database and make editing real map data more difficult.So I'd like to see these deleted as they don't correspond to... | |
| 7 | 2017-09-13 14:47:12 UTC | aaronsta | Thanks for your message aharvey.The nodes have now been removed.https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52009366Uploading it to the live server remained the only efficient way to rectify the images which I am aware of. As I required a free and open wms tile service, which included relatively u... | |
| 51830079 by FrancisPollack | 1 | 2017-09-12 00:12:55 UTC | aharvey | Hi, welcome to OSM!In case you didn't realise you've saved your changes in the live OSM database.In this case, the park is already mapped out so I've removed the empty way you created. |
| 51934110 by Bookster | 1 | 2017-09-11 23:58:40 UTC | aharvey | You should only use one name in the name key.You could use the alt_name key for an alternate name.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name |
| 48933069 by CloCkWeRX | 1 | 2017-09-02 11:37:38 UTC | aharvey | I don't understand why https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/495578455 was added back in, did they temporarily reopen this northbound section, it seems very strange to me that they would.I deleted the northbound road in https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/46239272 6 months ago but it's been added b... |
| 2 | 2017-09-07 05:56:51 UTC | CloCkWeRX | No probs, it was just a quick survey on my part from a moving taxi; plus referring to LPI imagery after. If you've looked at it more recently happy to roll with that. | |
| 3 | 2017-09-07 07:00:18 UTC | aharvey | Thanks for replying. I looked at it both just recently and about a year ago. Things change and imagery get's outdated. I know how easy it is to think it represents reality but it's not always the case. | |
| 4 | 2017-09-11 03:49:25 UTC | aharvey | Compare current https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/apyjQMjz2YwFit5wxfJBJA (was like that at least for the last 6 months) to historic https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/t_JhcTNCOkLpAevDZnB2JQ | |
| 37197038 by TheSwavu | 1 | 2017-09-08 03:47:18 UTC | aharvey | I know the ABS SUA includes the Blue Mountians, but I don't consider the Blue Mountains part of Sydney, so Emu Plains would be in Sydney but Lapstone not.ABS Boundaries aren't administrative boundaries, rather just ABS's view for statistical reporting.It's hard since you can't survey this on... |
| 51597115 by Verdy_p | 1 | 2017-09-07 08:02:18 UTC | aharvey | I wouldn't exactly call it solved, as turning a road which has no physical separation between the directions into a dual way road creates issues which weren't there when mapped with a single way. But I guess now we have the stop mapped. +1In OSM we almost need a way on the road centre line repre... |
| 2 | 2017-09-07 08:06:27 UTC | aharvey | PS. I fixed up some of the turn:lane tags in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51802074 | |
| 3 | 2017-09-07 08:06:50 UTC | Verdy_p | I'd like to know what are the "issues created" that this does not solve, given that there is effectively a separation (and separators are themselves mapped, notably the traffic islands). | |
| 4 | 2017-09-07 08:07:06 UTC | Verdy_p | Emergency situations may as well take any ways in forbidden directions, could use footways, enter private areas and even pass through unpaved areas (gardens...) | |
| 5 | 2017-09-07 11:29:53 UTC | aharvey | Sorry if I sounded negative, I really do appreciate you taking the time to work through this.Two issues are:1. You can turn across a solid white line (which is what's separating these two lanes to the south west of the intersection) to enter or leave a property. Mapped as a single way a router... | |
| 6 | 2017-09-07 13:42:01 UTC | Verdy_p | Point 1 is false. You can't cross the solid line evenwhen exiting a private property. The one way must still be respected and you'll have to go to the next crossing where this will be possible.Point 2 is not relevant at all. The center line is not better than measuring on the center of any lane,... | |
| 7 | 2017-09-07 22:27:27 UTC | aharvey | 1. Not in this jurisdiction. http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/safety-rules/road-rules/road-markings.html "Drivers are permitted to cross a single dividing line enter or leave a road".2. I'm not talking about measuring distance for a route, this is irrespective of navigation. It's purely... | |
| 51363480 by pangenib | 1 | 2017-09-04 22:39:38 UTC | aharvey | Could you please explain why this was changed from bicycle=designated to bicycle=yes?Could you please let me know what you mean my "Sourced from RMS"? I haven't heard back from you about this yet. |
| 51705715 by aharvey | 1 | 2017-09-04 03:37:20 UTC | samuelrussell | 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 comp... |
| 2 | 2017-09-04 05:22:17 UTC | 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 a sha... | |
| 3 | 2017-09-04 05:30:04 UTC | 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 05:45:41 UTC | samuelrussell | 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 05:46:52 UTC | samuelrussell | 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 06:16:06 UTC | 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 bicycle:lane:legal=y... | |
| 7 | 2017-09-04 06:21:33 UTC | samuelrussell | 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 road rul... | |
| 8 | 2017-09-04 06:36:00 UTC | 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, but ther... | |
| 25784700 by samuelrussell | 1 | 2017-09-04 02:41:24 UTC | aharvey | I've changed some of these you tagged as shared_lone back to a cycle lane in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51705715. It's marked out as a cycle lane not a shared lane on the road so should be tagged as such.I've added the cycleway:lane=doorzone tag which might help you distinguish door... |
| 13311607 by ploppy | 1 | 2017-09-04 02:25:31 UTC | aharvey | I've changed cycleway=lane to cycleway=shoulder in some places which I surveyed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51705625.Given there are no markings on the road (signs, paint on the road) indicating a cycle lane, I think the shoulder tag is more appropriate.https://taginfo.openstr... |
| 38281210 by samuelrussell | 1 | 2017-09-04 01:54:24 UTC | aharvey | It seems this changeset added a lot of maxspeed to nodes, which seems redundant when on the way. It makes editing later a lot harder too. |
| 2 | 2017-09-04 05:57:15 UTC | samuelrussell | Thanks for alerting me to my error. I have an offline editor at home and can correct this for nodes. | |
| 51362927 by pangenib | 1 | 2017-08-29 12:34:41 UTC | aharvey | Hi @pangenib. Welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing.Could you please clarify what you mean by "Sourced from RMS"?You might want to check out https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright#Proprietary_data. We can't use copyrighted data without a license in OSM, so that rules ou... |
| 51503811 by nevw | 1 | 2017-08-29 12:24:55 UTC | aharvey | even if it translated, it's common in OSM not to add translations but only name:<lg> if the feature is known by that foreign language name. Although I'm not strongly one way or the other. |
| 2 | 2017-08-29 12:55:41 UTC | nevw | Yes, I agree.This one was a bit unusual and... name=Manly Wharf\twas changed to name=Manly Wharf 玛丽海滩So normally I would correct to... name=Manly Wharf\t and addname:zh=玛丽海滩But though it may be correct, Google translated to "Mary Beach" so I just left it as...... | |
| 51320987 by Chris Dowty | 1 | 2017-08-29 12:20:53 UTC | aharvey | Hi, Welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing.In the case of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/399938817/history the addr:street tag is reserved for the street address. This roof doesn't have an address so it shouldn't have an addr:street tag. |
| 51402319 by Jacky Leav | 1 | 2017-08-29 12:18:12 UTC | aharvey | Hi, Thanks for contributing to OSM!.You can read up on names at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:name&uselang=en-AU.name= should be the name the sign says, if it also has a name in another language you can add this with something like name:zh |
| 51125674 by xdiamondx | 1 | 2017-08-15 23:30:18 UTC | Warin61 | It is WRONG.The admin boundary comes the NSW Government LPI. If you want to change the coast line then change that .. not the admin boundary!!!! |
| 2 | 2017-08-15 23:39:12 UTC | xdiamondx | I looked up the "OSM Example" for Harbors - http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/53.3889/-6.0644 Howth port and it comes with the administrative boundary attached to the coastline.Do you want me to change it back? | |
| 3 | 2017-08-15 23:52:30 UTC | xdiamondx | @Warin61 I fixed the boundary. Sorry for the problem | |
| 4 | 2017-08-16 00:00:16 UTC | Warin61 | ThanksThe Admin boundary would be correct. It could be the high tide mark .. in a certain year? Would have to read the legal papers to see. I am against having the admin boundaries use physical features - leads to this kind of problem. Where the coast line is ... could well be different from t... | |
| 5 | 2017-08-16 00:43:35 UTC | xdiamondx | Here's the local government area map - http://www.coffsharbour.nsw.gov.au/coffs-and-council/running-council/PublishingImages/Coffs_LGA_Localities-Map1.jpgIf you zoom in you can see coffs harbour and it goes north from the breakwater - not following the coastline. | |
| 6 | 2017-08-29 12:13:00 UTC | aharvey | I think we need to have a bit more of a discussion on this. If people want the LPI Admin Boundaries they can go to LPI and get it. The LPI boundaries aren't the official legal definition of these boundaries, they are just the LPIs representation.I think we should do what makes sense for OSM and ... | |
| 7 | 2017-08-29 23:31:27 UTC | Warin61 | Coastlines and rivers change over time. And so too do some roads. I'd think a legal boundary that uses a feature will specify a date? Or maybe the date is taken from when the document was made? By separating an admin boundary from other things in OSM it allows these other things to be altered by m... | |
| 51099175 by Nhadaya | 1 | 2017-08-15 23:45:27 UTC | Warin61 | How did you come to tag these as "landuse=residential" ?They are buildings! Tag them building=house in these cases. |
| 2 | 2017-08-29 12:06:27 UTC | aharvey | @Warin61, this is just my opionion here but this is @Nhadaya's first edit to OSM and I feel your comment could have been worded in a slightly more welcoming way.@Nhadaya welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing, you can check out the beginners guide at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Begin... | |
| 3 | 2017-08-29 23:22:04 UTC | Warin61 | Did not mean to put you off Nhadaya. But this is the second instance I found of this kind of thing occurring .. so I would like to know how you came to tag them as landuse=residential. That may help avoid further confusion? | |
| 50925532 by harry313 | 1 | 2017-08-07 19:03:42 UTC | harry313 | Unit 8/44 - 46 Ewos Pde, Cronulla, NSW 2230 Phone: (02) 8599 4570Website: http://www.plumbersutherlandshire.com.au/Keywords: Plumber, Plumbers, Plumbing, Gas Fitter, Emergency Plumber, Blocked Drains, Hot Water Repairs, Drain Cleaning, Pipe Relining, Sutherland Shire |
| 2 | 2017-08-29 11:47:07 UTC | aharvey | You could use craft=plumber so people know this is the workspace or office of a plumber. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3DplumberOther information like contact number, website, address can be added directly to the feature, like you've done for the name. | |
| 50874990 by nm7s9 | 1 | 2017-08-06 06:28:27 UTC | TheSwavu | Hi, I've notice you've misspelt Mirri.See:http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/di/2016-29/current/pdf/2016-29.pdf |
| 2 | 2017-08-12 14:08:14 UTC | nm7s9 | Hi, When I surveyed this area the street signs (plural) said "Mibri Close".However when I saw that I was altering what you had tagged, I checked "LPI NSW" ACTMAPI and ACT disallowable instruements and they both said "Mirri" and the latter document elaborated tha... | |
| 3 | 2017-08-29 11:44:06 UTC | aharvey | It was accepted practice in OSM to map what's one the ground https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground. So if the street sign says Mibri Close and the legislation says Mirri Close, then we map name=Mibri Close, and put Mirri Close in one of the alt names and not th... | |
| 4 | 2017-08-29 20:53:01 UTC | TheSwavu | This is Canberra. Good practice is to put in the correct name and report the spelling error to:https://www.accesscanberra.act.gov.au/app/forms/fixmystreet;-) | |
| 5 | 2017-08-30 02:58:16 UTC | nm7s9 | While surveying Canberra and parts of NSW, I came accross numerous cases where the street signs on opposite ends of a street had different spellings. How should I tag this case, and no, I'm not going to split the street in half and tag them differently :-)I also found one case (since corrected) ... | |
| 6 | 2017-08-30 03:02:37 UTC | nm7s9 | PS - on my report I couldn't pinpoint the issues on their maps precisely, because they use Google maps and are badly out of date. (Doesn't even have the new suburb). | |
| 50742881 by swanilli | 1 | 2017-08-02 05:45:33 UTC | aharvey | Thanks for fixing up the geometry.I'm not sure about https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/384742094. The name tag isn't meant to contain access descriptions like "(closed)". What is there on the ground that actually indicates that this track is closed? What does closed even ... |
| 2 | 2017-08-29 11:36:09 UTC | aharvey | Hi @swanilli, I'd like to remove the description (closed) from the name. I'd even be okay with no name on this way since I've never seen a sign pointing out this path with a name. | |
| 51218681 by pangenib | 1 | 2017-08-18 00:11:25 UTC | TheSwavu | Hi, bicycle tags are for access. So bicycle=yes means you can ride on this road.Infrastructure is indicated with the cycleway tag. So cycleway=shoulder means you can ride on the shoulder of the road.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cyclewayThanks. |
| 2 | 2017-08-29 11:10:04 UTC | aharvey | "Sourced From RMS" Also keep in mind you can't copy information from other maps. It's better to add information from a ground survey. | |
| 45416176 by Tomwalters96 | 1 | 2017-07-15 06:40:02 UTC | aharvey | Could you please explain what this is? If you want to tag a backyard swimming pool, use leisure=swimming_pool, access=private. |
| 41867680 by Netto54 | 1 | 2017-07-11 09:39:15 UTC | aharvey | I've changed https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4380628789/history to use club=sport rather than shop=sport |
| 2 | 2017-07-11 09:39:36 UTC | aharvey | What's https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4380573190 ? | |
| 3 | 2017-07-12 03:14:21 UTC | CloCkWeRX | I think its better tagged as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dfitness_station | |
| 4 | 2017-07-12 03:14:55 UTC | CloCkWeRX | SOme detail on it - http://www.haveyoursaywilloughby.com.au/gore-hill-exercise-equipment | |
| 5 | 2017-07-12 03:44:15 UTC | aharvey | I'll do a ground survey to confirm its a fitness station. I thought they might be adding some kind of fitness club which is run there. | |
| 49978114 by Smiles Dental Care | 1 | 2017-07-02 07:55:53 UTC | nevw | The node you have mapped is not located on Commerce Lane as stated in the address and there is no business called Engage Online in the Lane. There is no place on the OSM for business that do not have a physical location. |
| 2 | 2017-07-08 00:09:45 UTC | aharvey | I don't think it's a coincidence that their PO box number matches the number used for the Street Address "Postal Address: Po Box 52, Glenbrook, NSW 2773" especially given there is no 52 Commerce Lane. Looks like SEO spam. So +1 to remove. | |
| 3 | 2017-07-09 11:28:26 UTC | nevw | Deleted this edit as no evidence of this actually existing on the ground, appears to have only online presence and no response from mapper. | |
| 46913942 by aharvey | 1 | 2017-07-05 07:56:36 UTC | TheSwavu | Is this:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/480950313a thing? Or a slip of the mouse? |
| 2 | 2017-07-05 23:28:40 UTC | 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. | |
| 49760363 by ElliotLombard | 1 | 2017-06-23 06:09:03 UTC | saikabhi | Hi,Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Are you sure about the location of Graham Reserve? It looks like a residential area on the map to me. Can you please review?ThanksAbhishek |
| 2 | 2017-06-23 07:55:50 UTC | aharvey | It looks good to me from the LPI Imagery (it's the area in between the dual carriage way of Palace Street.Though I'd tag it as leisure=park instead, as leisure=nature_reserve is "A protected area of importance for wildlife, flora, fauna or features of geological or other special interest.&q... | |
| 3 | 2017-06-23 07:58:54 UTC | aharvey | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=nature_reservehttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=park | |
| 41606327 by Warin61 | 1 | 2017-06-23 03:54:43 UTC | aharvey | Looks like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6393754 already existed before, we should keep that way and just update the geometry. Or at the very least delete the old way when adding one with geometry not snapped to the road. |
| 2 | 2017-06-23 04:51:37 UTC | Warin61 | Thanks for finding that. Fixed. What was I thinking back then? | |
| 3 | 2017-06-23 07:50:55 UTC | aharvey | also for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/45646092https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/438360193I think it's better to tag a multiuse pitch as sport=netball;basketball than having two overlapping ways, after all there is only one pitch, it just happens to serve two different sports. | |
| 4 | 2017-06-23 08:32:36 UTC | Warin61 | Netball and basketball have slight different sizes of court. And where they share a surface they have different line colours too. The line colours can be tagged correctly if they are separate ways ... but not if they are ; separated sports. I have done one where there are tennis, netball and bas... | |
| 6404798 by aharvey | 1 | 2017-06-21 23:24:13 UTC | Warin61 | 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 07:44:15 UTC | 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 have tags ... | |
| 43110299 by aharvey | 1 | 2017-06-20 23:08:45 UTC | Warin61 | 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 changed th... |
| 2 | 2017-06-21 01:35:54 UTC | 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. | |
| 49058574 by chris_o | 1 | 2017-05-30 06:39:13 UTC | tonyf1 | Hi. You have deleted some features. It looks suspicious but I am not familiar with Sydney so its hard to know. Can you please give information on why these features were deleted. Thanks. |
| 2 | 2017-06-16 12:18:48 UTC | aharvey | Removing http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9922132/history was probably good since it's also mapped https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499234807.But without justification for removing all those POIs and no response here in 17 days, I'm going to revert this. If there features really aren't there an... | |
| 3 | 2017-06-18 23:38:34 UTC | chris_o | Hi guys, very sorry for the lack of response. I was not aware that removing nodes would affect map for everyone - as I thought it would just change my "instance" of the map.I initially removed the nodes as I was trying to make a "clean" looking map for a project I was working... | |
| 4 | 2017-06-19 00:20:53 UTC | aharvey | That's okay, at least now you know. I've already fixed up the deletions. | |
| 49289356 by Visible Noise | 1 | 2017-06-05 23:14:12 UTC | aharvey | It looks like you've deleted some things like the building and bunkers which I suspect are still present on th ground and hence shouldn't be deleted, eg http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/211410476/history and http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2214182659/historyI would suggest abandoned:building=b... |
| 2 | 2017-06-16 12:47:44 UTC | aharvey | I've gone ahead and restored the deleted features from this changeset. If you have done a ground survey and know the current use/state of the building please update it's tags. | |
| 12191575 by samuelrussell | 1 | 2017-06-16 12:04:33 UTC | aharvey | I'm not sure about UNSW as a neighbourhood, UNSW is a university area and it's already tagged as a university. So I'm tempted to remove https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1822379544 |
| 49261124 by volpecurtains | 1 | 2017-06-05 23:29:07 UTC | aharvey | I wonder if this was entered by the business or by a 3rd party SEO business. Either way please these on how to tag accepted payments and opening hours:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:paymenthttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hoursas the way you've entered them isn't ... |
| 2 | 2017-06-06 05:36:42 UTC | CloCkWeRX | I tweaked the tagging | |
| 48758677 by Rudy355 | 1 | 2017-05-21 12:52:34 UTC | aharvey | I see you changed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/491089771 from highway=construction to residential. Based on your source tag, it doesn't look like a ground survey, did you?Unless you did a ground survey I think you should leave it as I tagged it. |
| 48077563 by Spookylad | 1 | 2017-04-24 08:37:45 UTC | tonyf1 | Hi. You appear to be mapping the underground stormwater drainage system. Maybe they would be best tagged as man_made=pipeline rather than waterway=drain considering that they are underground. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Ddrain |
| 2 | 2017-05-11 07:05:40 UTC | tonyf1 | Hi, you quote Source: Hurstville City Council Drain Map. Is this your source for all these drains? Is its licence compatible with OSM? | |
| 3 | 2017-05-11 11:16:37 UTC | aharvey | @Spookylad, it doesn't seem the license of your source is compatible. Unless you can point us to further details about the license, could you please revert these changes and instead add data from ground survey or other sources which can be used in OSM. | |
| 4 | 2017-05-12 06:48:25 UTC | Spookylad | Sorry I didn't have much time to review and finish the details. I removed the non park drainways, and I will continue to map Empress Park correctly. The drainways from the park are a mixture of Tunneled and underground/hidden. How do I go about tagging each of those aspects appropriately? I can take... | |
| 5 | 2017-05-13 00:08:30 UTC | tonyf1 | Thanks for your reply. You should delete anything that is not compatible with OSM's licence conditions. Reading the wiki, I don't think that drain or culvert are the right tag. man_made=pipeline location=underground substance=water seems the best fit but I haven't seen what's on the ground.\... | |
| 36061199 by Rudy355 | 1 | 2017-05-07 01:27:29 UTC | aharvey | It seems you added a bunch of duplicates here? eg. you added https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/386754319 but it already exists at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/199009076.Could you fix these up by deleting your copy in favour of the existing. If you want to make improvements then you can edit ... |
| 47860192 by N Fischer | 1 | 2017-04-18 23:13:24 UTC | aharvey | I see you've moved some features away from being imagery aligned to being aligned to the topo map.Honestly I'm not sure which is more correct here, but some part of my GPS trace seem to line up with the imagery more than the topo map.I compared my GPS trace of the area https://www.openstreet... |
| 2 | 2017-04-18 23:13:50 UTC | aharvey | Your change also caused a self intersection with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/475592320 | |
| 46997002 by aharvey | 1 | 2017-04-18 22:04:11 UTC | Warin61 | Way 475592320 crosses over itself. So it does not render well ... OSM inspector calls it a 'self intersection'. |
| 2 | 2017-04-18 22:46:38 UTC | 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. | |
| 47852994 by erikgagajackson | 1 | 2017-04-18 02:12:24 UTC | aharvey | The LPI Base Map has a name for this one, is it signposted on the ground? |
| 2 | 2017-04-18 10:24:24 UTC | erikgagajackson | yes there is it is "Merrylands Memorial Park", signpost can be seen if you are walking past on Windsor Rd | |
| 3 | 2017-04-18 22:39:04 UTC | aharvey | Thanks, please feel free to add the name to this part then if you've confirmed it on the ground. | |
| 47852917 by erikgagajackson | 1 | 2017-04-18 02:11:08 UTC | aharvey | The LPI Base Map has this named "Charles Mance Reserve", is it signposted as "Memorial"? |
| 2 | 2017-04-18 10:26:56 UTC | erikgagajackson | Yes the signpost says "Charles Mace Reserve, Centenary Memorial" https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.8384856,150.9898651,3a,75y,203.88h,78.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Ur_dY_21VQYulm5yD9i-A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 | |
| 3 | 2017-04-18 22:38:09 UTC | aharvey | Okay, but you can't copy from Google Maps or Google Street View.Feel free to add the name from ground survey or from the LPI Base Map (different background map option in the iD editor) | |
| 4 | 2017-04-19 08:50:17 UTC | erikgagajackson | sorry about that. i actually live next to this i have seen it at ground level i will edit the name | |
| 47858919 by Rose212 | 1 | 2017-04-18 02:06:31 UTC | aharvey | The running track and the roads should only share nodes where they cross. Given we have high resolution imagery here could you retrace this with a more accurate location and avoid having it run down the middle of the road? (assuming the track I can see in the imagery is what you're mapping)The l... |
| 47634880 by DeanoSydney | 1 | 2017-04-11 03:27:39 UTC | aharvey | Thanks for adding this, I've unglued the building from the roads, created entrance nodes to mark out exactly where the entrances are and what they are for. Please note that 24hrs isn't a supported value for opening_hours, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/opening_hours. Is it "24/7"?... |
| 47635423 by DeanoSydney | 1 | 2017-04-11 03:16:11 UTC | aharvey | Hi,Thanks for adding this.A pointer for next time, a building generally shouldn't share nodes with the street it faces, as roads are center lines and buildings are for the footprint of the building only.I've fixed this up in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47644250 |
| 43146930 by LUWANG999999 | 1 | 2017-04-07 09:12:51 UTC | aharvey | What were you trying to do with the parking lot here?It looks like a multi story parking lot but I don't understand what your tags mean. highway=path but foot=no? parking=underground but no amenity=parking? service=spur? All combined on the same way?What are you trying to map here? |
| 38280899 by samuelrussell | 1 | 2016-06-14 04:23:12 UTC | Leon K | The source:maxspeed applies to the ways but putting it on every node is overkill. |
| 2 | 2016-06-14 21:13:11 UTC | samuelrussell | I agree, I firmly remember discovering my error after upload and chasing down nodes with source:maxspeed applied to them to correct. | |
| 3 | 2017-04-06 12:01:15 UTC | aharvey | You've also added maxspeed=40 to pedestrian footways which have no maxspeed signs from ground survey. I've fixed up one of them. | |
| 40289524 by mason746 | 1 | 2017-04-03 07:58:38 UTC | aharvey | Hey there, this track is present. I physically surveyed it. If something exists on the ground then it's fair game to be in OSM. Regardless of if it's dangerous or not. You can read up on two of the tags which I'd already included on this track https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale#Values... |
| 47138016 by jptolosa87 | 1 | 2017-03-27 09:06:52 UTC | aharvey | These bays have been changed between natural=water and natural=bay many times in their history, unfortuantly most renderers don't yet support natural=bay areas. Even the wiki notes that "they should not be rendered in solid color indicating water themselves".What's the harm in leaving ... |
| 2 | 2017-03-27 10:32:31 UTC | aharvey | Let's discuss over at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-March/031856.html.In the meantime I've reverted this change. You'll see in the history that I tagged this as natural=bay a few years ago and think this is the best way to tag, unfortunately it's a big area and the curre... | |
| 3 | 2017-03-27 18:57:16 UTC | jptolosa87 | You're wrong, all renders support natural=bay. This is the approved tag by the community for mapping a bay area. Here you can see an example of a successful rendering: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/nOQObviously, to obtain a correct render, the polygon should be inside a water polygon or in the ocean.... | |
| 4 | 2017-03-28 12:52:27 UTC | aharvey | Thank you, I can see that makes sense, the bay area should either be within the ocean or some other waterbody like a lake, river, etc. So the blue water rendering would come from the waterbody or ocean and the natural=bay area is there to label the area.I disagree with tagging the insides here a... | |
| 5 | 2017-03-28 20:37:56 UTC | jptolosa87 | According the description of natural=coastline it should be placed exactly in the mean high water spring i.e. IMO more or less here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-33.9765/151.0237Is better to solve the "conflict" consulting the different sources about this topic.Check the conc... | |
| 6 | 2017-03-28 20:43:16 UTC | jptolosa87 | Furthermore, note that in the description of natural=bay you can read the next text: "The edge of a bay towards land should coincide with the coastline" in the section 'how to map'. | |
| 7 | 2017-03-28 20:55:14 UTC | jptolosa87 | But technically the wiki doesn't prohibit the usage of waterway=riverbank into the sea. Then, if the sources doesn't convince you, we can use both tagging: natural=coastline & waterway=riverbank + tidal=yes | |
| 8 | 2017-03-29 11:49:17 UTC | aharvey | This is going to be an uphill battle , so I'm going to pivot and look into using something like coastline=pelagic from wikipedia "A pelagic coast refers to a coast which fronts the open ocean, as opposed to a more sheltered coast in a gulf or bay." on the oceanic coastline because I need s... | |
| 9 | 2017-03-29 20:02:06 UTC | jptolosa87 | Definition of the natural=coastline is independent of locally established divisions. boundary=* tag supplies the second purpose. Your point view is incompatible with the OSM basic principle "Map what's on the ground". | |
| 10 | 2017-03-30 12:19:47 UTC | aharvey | Exactly, I'm trying to ensure the natural=coastline tag and other tags are reflecting the natural environment on the ground based on my ground surveys of the area.As I mentioned on the tagging thread for me, based on on the ground surveys and local knowledge Botany Bay (http://www.openstreetmap.... | |
| 11 | 2017-03-30 18:41:19 UTC | jptolosa87 | Of course, is interesting to differentiate the type of a coastline. Unfortunately there are no a tag for this purpose yet. The tag natural=coastline is only used to mark mean high water spring and it doesn't capable to differentiate the type of seawater. We can create a new tag based on your ground ... | |
| 41206957 by Warin61 | 1 | 2017-03-24 06:43:28 UTC | aharvey | How did you check for duplicates?eg. you added https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4333395907/ but it already existed as https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6396344I've been seeing a lot of duplicated features from your Base Map imports. |
| 2 | 2017-03-24 08:24:39 UTC | Warin61 | I checked for duplicate nodes .. not certain that I did check ways (too long ago to recall) .. and probably not relations. This change set 3/8/16 so 'my' node would have been that date .. relationship dated 9/7/16 so ~ a month previous. Humm I did a recheck some time ago on duplicates .. but aga... | |
| 3 | 2017-03-24 08:50:30 UTC | Warin61 | Humm scanning ... found 1 add the day before by you .. from Imagery .. deleted mine and add the name from the base map. Another is displaced by 200 metres .. I'll do some more looking tomorrow (and think about the displacement). | |
| 4 | 2017-03-25 00:15:36 UTC | Warin61 | Ok .. found 7 that I have deleted. About half of those are mine. Did not answer your question of how I checked for duplicates .. I think at that time I was using the OSM cycle map .. that appeared to have the best rendering of camp sites ... but it may have been slow to render new data .. thus I m... | |
| 5 | 2017-03-25 06:46:49 UTC | Warin61 | Over 187 camp sites manually scanned. 78 deletions .. not all camp sites but most of them. Not all 'mine'. 230 objects modified .. some 'camp_sites' to pitches as the camp site is already tagged .. again not all mine. | |
| 6 | 2017-03-27 01:20:46 UTC | aharvey | > So these duplicates you have noted ... were they only campsites? Or anything else? I keep finding issues across all your LPI Base Map imports.eg. I just deleted http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4380404863 since it was already mapped as http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/691125312>... | |
| 7 | 2017-03-27 02:03:09 UTC | Warin61 | I have looked back at my lookout files (I did not bother with check my old campsite files .. but I'd not think I was consistent from one feature type to another .. hopefully improving all the time) .. and cannot find a duplicate for tuckers lookout ... so the checking was done. Did something else go... | |
| 8 | 2017-03-27 02:12:50 UTC | Warin61 | Looking back at my old files for lookouts ... each node carries a tag "fixme=check for duplictes and web links" .. and each node was manually checked against the osm map background for the duplicate.. then those were uploaded to OSM having deleted each fixme tag as they were done. However... | |
| 9 | 2017-03-27 03:25:12 UTC | aharvey | The existing node has been there for the past 4 years http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/691125312/historyNext time it would be great if you could post on the mailing list your intention to do an import and we can check the process to make sure things like this aren't missed.Another one I jus... | |
| 10 | 2017-03-27 05:25:45 UTC | Warin61 | Arr .. I see now.What you are deleting are displaced things. My experience with LPI data suggest in many instances it is better than the data in OSM despite the mappers attribution of 'source=survey' or 'source=gps'. How do I know that ? In the instances of roads i have used the Strava heat ma... | |
| 11 | 2017-03-27 07:50:21 UTC | aharvey | Not all data is equal. Different types of features like roads vs lookouts could dramatically vary in accuracy, even within the same feature types, the accuracy in the LPI Base Map can and does vary.Since we don't know the where each feature in the LPI Base Map came from, I don't think it should ... | |
| 43937704 by swanilli | 1 | 2017-03-23 10:59:51 UTC | aharvey | For https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/455660812 is it really named "Unmarked track"? There is a tag for unmarked tracks, trail_visibility=no. |
| 30207586 by swanilli | 1 | 2017-03-19 23:46:50 UTC | aharvey | When you named Pindar Pool, you cited a copyrighted source, I think it's best to use survey or local_knowledge souces. |
| 46799476 by Papas_Chris | 1 | 2017-03-14 22:39:34 UTC | aharvey | You'll need to add some tags to this to say what is is, check out https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:healthcare |
| 2 | 2017-03-14 22:43:01 UTC | aharvey | The LPI Base Map says "The Hills Shire Council" is here, is that what's there now? | |
| 46799325 by Papas_Chris | 1 | 2017-03-14 13:07:47 UTC | aharvey | Hi, what information are you trying to add? Do you need any help? |
| 46737409 by phenomenon9999 | 1 | 2017-03-14 13:02:53 UTC | aharvey | like your other changesets, don't add a name unless there is a proper name. Also you can just use access=private, and remove all the mode specific keys. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access |
| 2 | 2017-03-14 13:03:47 UTC | aharvey | Also part of the driveway way overlaps the road, which should be fixed. And is it really oneway? | |
| 46737178 by phenomenon9999 | 1 | 2017-03-14 12:59:41 UTC | aharvey | the amenity=bench already describes this as a bench, so save the name tag only when the bench has a special name. |
| 46737159 by phenomenon9999 | 1 | 2017-03-14 12:58:23 UTC | aharvey | Is this really a grit_bin or is it https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dwaste_basket ?Also since there is no name, just leave it out per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only |
| 46207193 by Erin Evans | 1 | 2017-02-27 00:26:34 UTC | aharvey | You've only connected these two new roads here to the footpath, was that intentional? They aren't connected to Captain Cook Drive? |
| 2 | 2017-02-27 00:35:28 UTC | Erin Evans | Not intentional at all. First time using open street map, so still figuring out how to use it. I've now connected the rods to Captain Cook Drive. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-27 01:01:22 UTC | aharvey | No worries and thanks for your edits here, very much appreciated and welcome.The way you've mapped it now, it means you can turn left but not right into Dune Walk. And you can turn both left and right into Foreshore Boulevard from Captain Cook Drive.Dune Walk is very close to that existing s... | |
| 4 | 2017-02-27 01:21:19 UTC | Erin Evans | Yes that's correct - left only into Dune Walk, but you can turn left and right from Foreshore Boulevard. I've had to add two sets of lights for both directions of road, even though there is only one set of lights due to cutting through the medium strip.The service road you're referring to - is t... | |
| 5 | 2017-02-27 01:35:37 UTC | Erin Evans | I believe I've just managed to amend the parking aisle to extend beyond Dune Walk as is now in real life. I've also removed traffic lights at the park's entry, as well as removed the cycleway through the centre. | |
| 6 | 2017-02-27 02:07:11 UTC | aharvey | > Yes that's correct - left only into Dune Walk, but you can turn left and right from Foreshore Boulevard.Good.> I've had to add two sets of lights for both directions of road, even though there is only one set of lights due to cutting through the medium strip.That's okay, this is ... | |
| 41531576 by Donovan Meuwsen | 1 | 2017-02-26 09:18:32 UTC | aharvey | Really? |
| 2 | 2017-02-26 21:56:46 UTC | TheSwavu | Must've been the least interesting visit to Sydney if this was the highlight.Has this moved recently? I always remember it being in a building you could enter from Hickson Road. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-27 00:02:33 UTC | aharvey | I'm not sure of the exact location, I might have misplaced it when I originally added it. | |
| 46362967 by lufyx | 1 | 2017-02-24 23:17:48 UTC | aharvey | What's that untagged area you added? What are you trying to map here? |
| 2 | 2017-02-28 05:57:43 UTC | nammala | Removed the untagged ways aharvey. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-28 05:59:00 UTC | nammala | Hi lufyx,Welcome and thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap (OSM). OSM is the real map of the world . Please do add data which is on the ground .Let me know if you need anything regarding mapping.Regards,nammala | |
| 15352688 by dbaupp | 1 | 2017-02-21 04:24:20 UTC | aharvey | It looks like you created this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209792992You've mapped it as a shared cycleway, however nothing on the ground indicates it can be used by cyclists. It looks like a normal footway.I was going to change it over, but wanted to ask you first if you had any th... |
| 2 | 2017-02-22 06:58:17 UTC | dbaupp | I suspect it may've been accidental; duplicating the tags on the real cycleway on the other side of the oval. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-22 08:07:12 UTC | aharvey | I'll change it back to footway since nothing on the ground indicates it's a cycleway. | |
| 31404526 by dhx1 | 1 | 2017-02-21 00:52:59 UTC | aharvey | What was your source for the location of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3539619525 ?There is a waterfall which looks like this https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32986671125/in/datetaken-public/, which I've mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4693266583 confirmed the locati... |
| 2 | 2017-02-21 22:24:49 UTC | dhx1 | My source was the NSW government map: http://maps.six.nsw.gov.au/ which shows the falls as being further upstream. I haven't been there in person though as you have, and don't have GPS tracks, so cannot confirm the map is correct. Have you been along the section further upstream of Clover Falls (i.e... | |
| 3 | 2017-02-22 05:47:56 UTC | aharvey | Thanks for that.I've uploaded my GPS track at https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aharvey/traces/2358807. I didn't go further upstream of what I think is Clover Falls, so I wouldn't know.Looking online, it seems what I went to is the same falls others label as Clover Falls, given I have the G... | |
| 46121780 by Tim Zhang | 1 | 2017-02-16 22:25:16 UTC | aharvey | I don't think the water=fountain tag applies here, if its just a drinking fountain https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddrinking_water.Also the name tag shouldn't include a description https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only. "Drinking fountain" is ... |
| 46125296 by dpepsilon | 1 | 2017-02-16 22:20:58 UTC | aharvey | I made some improvements to this in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46149906See the coworking_space tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcoworking_space |
| 46033795 by xlbelx | 1 | 2017-02-14 23:19:53 UTC | aharvey | I reverted this https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46092581 as I'm pretty sure this is a fictional park. |
| 46067558 by Took Consulting | 1 | 2017-02-14 23:04:02 UTC | aharvey | You might want to add the club=sport tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:club%3Dsport to indicate that this feature is a sporting club. |
| 2 | 2017-02-14 23:05:17 UTC | aharvey | along with the sport=rugby_union or rugby_league tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sport | |
| 45996110 by Andrew Pikot | 1 | 2017-02-12 23:23:39 UTC | aharvey | This looks like a residential home, is it really a cosmetics shop named "home"? |
| 2 | 2017-02-13 03:17:12 UTC | CloCkWeRX | Could have meant http://www.revivebeautyclinic.com.au/ (presumably at the shopping centre up the road); or maybe https://www.facebook.com/maryannesbeautypadstow/ ... but that's in a different spot. | |
| 45735387 by Henrik PS | 1 | 2017-02-10 01:11:03 UTC | aharvey | Hi was https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/117338675/history demolished?Or is the building still there? |
| 2 | 2017-02-10 01:50:51 UTC | TheSwavu | Apparently it's gone bye-bye:http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/sydney-imax-cinema-at-darling-harbour-to-be-demolished-20160824-gqzs83.html | |
| 45764495 by CrsOne | 1 | 2017-02-06 23:42:57 UTC | aharvey | I see you've added the footpath here as highway=pedestrian. Check out the wiki at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpedestrian which describes that tag as "Roads mainly / exclusively for pedestrians".These look like the sidewalk which is tagged as per https://wiki.opens... |
| 45765153 by CrsOne | 1 | 2017-02-03 21:58:11 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,Some comments;1) No name ... so the change set description is wrong.. Possibly 'Add building" ? 2) Building is not 'square' as in the corners are not square... in ID select the object (the building) and press the 'S' key .. see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ID/Shortcuts#Modifyin... |
| 2 | 2017-02-06 23:36:05 UTC | aharvey | PS. If you're adding multiple buildings at the same time you can add them all then hit Save at the end so you only have one changeset adding a whole block of buildings. | |
| 45745708 by Sensocool | 1 | 2017-02-06 23:28:08 UTC | aharvey | I can't see this footway on the imagery you've used. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/471477415Could you comment back here to let us know your source? |
| 2 | 2017-02-07 00:55:30 UTC | nevw | I deleted it. Missed this one when cleaning up the area previously. | |
| 45576209 by Jake1966 | 1 | 2017-01-27 22:55:24 UTC | aharvey | Hi,The convention is to use Title Case rather than ALL CAPS. |
| 45551093 by Routeburn | 1 | 2017-01-27 21:27:09 UTC | Warin61 | Welcome to OSM.As well as the LPI Imagery there is the LPI Base Map .. that gives you the boundaries for the park - you can use that base map data to make the park into an area .. it looks much better on the map. |
| 2 | 2017-01-27 22:53:18 UTC | aharvey | Sorry, I only just saw this note after changing it to an area. | |
| 45453465 by bladepup | 1 | 2017-01-25 10:37:50 UTC | aharvey | Hi,In regards to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/468549230/history check up on the wiki for the building key https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building.The building key is for the outline the each building. An area like this should be tagged landuse=residential.Since there are a ... |
| 41790141 by Warin61 | 1 | 2017-01-15 00:10:40 UTC | aharvey | A lot of the nodes you've added here are duplicates of things already mapped. Eg The Star casino is already mapped as a tourism=attraction at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/16597926Wet N Wild Sydney at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/314946608Potentially others too. Why did you create the... |
| 2 | 2017-01-15 00:25:10 UTC | Warin61 | Would have checked these for duplicates at the time of entry ... will recheck on the two you are concerned with for speed. | |
| 3 | 2017-01-15 00:43:26 UTC | Warin61 | Ok - Way: The Star (16597926) Had no tourist=attraction when I added node 43749057538 ... so not a 'duplicate' at the time? When you added tourist=attraction to this way ... that was the duplication .. delete the node? I am not certain that the whole building is a tourist attraction. Way 31494... | |
| 4 | 2017-01-15 06:54:57 UTC | Warin61 | Quite usefull. I have reviewed the western and northern ones. Some are resorts - better tagged tourism=resort. A few are similar - used web search to resolve names and function. Some are duplicates. I have added some details to some - websites, opening hours, a few made into ways with boundaries. So... | |
| 5 | 2017-01-15 23:58:24 UTC | aharvey | >Ok - Way: The Star (16597926) Had no tourist=attraction when I added node 43749057538 ... so not a 'duplicate' at the time? When you added tourist=attraction to this way ... that was the duplication .. delete the node? I am not certain that the whole building is a tourist attraction. Sorry... | |
| 6 | 2017-01-16 00:05:48 UTC | Warin61 | One hand washes the other. I need some clear time to do the rest of these. Possibly this afternoon.As I said, I think I only checked them for duplication of tourism=attraction and not other things and that has lead to this problem. Still learning. | |
| 7 | 2017-01-19 02:49:46 UTC | Warin61 | That took longer than I thought! Some deletions, many changes. I have taken some to be tourism=resort for example. Others I have expanded to be ways. Many have added website links. Anyway .. all reviewed now, | |
| 43751940 by Honeey | 1 | 2017-01-15 00:05:18 UTC | aharvey | are you sure there is a bus stop here? |
| 43753002 by Honeey | 1 | 2017-01-15 00:03:00 UTC | aharvey | I've reverted this changeset, there is no bus stop here in the middle of central station. |
| 37303132 by Warin61 | 1 | 2017-01-07 10:01:21 UTC | aharvey | Regarding https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/398656117 the signage on the ground indicates the southern extent of the NP extends further. Do you think it's okay to update it to match the on the ground data? Also I suspect the boundary for the rest is simply mean high water mark, so can it be joined t... |
| 2 | 2017-01-07 21:10:01 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,No problem extending to the south for ground truth. Possibly the LPI data is out of date here?On the waterline... looks like the LPI boundary is the low water mark ... I'd leave that alone unless you have some evidence otherwise? It would make some sense for the low water mark boundary as a p... | |
| 3 | 2017-01-08 02:32:16 UTC | TheSwavu | I put the suburb boundary in before we had access to the LPI data and I was using best guess as to what the ABS boundaries were on the ground, hence using the coastline.Interestingly the NPWS boundary isn't consistent with the cadastre around the coastline, which is a bit odd because the propert... | |
| 4 | 2017-01-08 04:19:33 UTC | Warin61 | Looking at the 'water boundary' you can compare the LPI Base Map to the LPI or bing Imagery and see that the water level is above where this boundary lies... so I would assume that this boundary is low water mark. I think 'coastline' is taken at high water mark? Looking at the NSW NP website for... | |
| 5 | 2017-01-08 04:49:38 UTC | aharvey | >As to the southern boundary it is currently correctly aligned with the cadastre so unless you happen to have found the survey pegs I'd say that's the best available information.There is a NPWS sign 70m from the currently mapped boundary. I suspect they just put the sign up outside the NP. I ... | |
| 6 | 2017-01-08 06:18:37 UTC | Warin61 | The LPI is where surveyors go to get the legal boundaries! LPI base map has those boundaries... look at your own property to see it. I know it is good for me and at least some of my relatives (where I have checked). Snapping things together is ok .. if they deserve to go together! I have had to ... | |
| 7 | 2017-01-09 00:34:06 UTC | aharvey | >The LPI is where surveyors go to get the legal boundaries! LPI base map has those boundariesI believe that except for newer LandXML submissions a surveyor will use the distance/bearing measurements on the plan, not the digital cadastre, as the digital cadastre you see in the LPI Base Map has... | |
| 8 | 2017-01-09 00:59:22 UTC | Warin61 | Fruther reading on [1} "The database is constantly maintained or updated on a daily basis from registered plans (including E-Plan), registration of land transactions in NSW and changes in administrative boundaries as gazetted. The data is up-to-date to within 10 working days from when a plan is... | |
| 9 | 2017-01-09 00:59:40 UTC | TheSwavu | 1. After typing in my comment the other day I was pondering why the boundaries are that way at Barrenjoey and I've realised that the boundary follows the low tide mark. (Also means that the lighthouse reserve must of had a combination of high/low tide boundaries). 2. I'd also previously looked u... | |
| 10 | 2017-01-09 01:22:45 UTC | TheSwavu | Depends on what you mean by the basemap. The meta data is for the underlying data so if you extract the data rather than tracing then it's up-to-date to within 10 days. I don't know how often the tiles that get served for the visual map are re-rendered so it may take some time for it to show up on ... | |
| 44900971 by Martini097 | 1 | 2017-01-08 03:09:25 UTC | aharvey | Is it appropriate to use http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:land_area here? |
| 2 | 2017-01-08 04:02:25 UTC | Martini097 | It could be. I was primarily trying to revert a seemingly arbitrary change to type=multipolygon that was causing an issue in a renderer | |
| 3 | 2017-01-08 05:14:46 UTC | aharvey | Sorry I thought you created the relation, I couldn't look at the full history as https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4095122 has an application error. Given it's up to version 198 I'm not surprised. | |
| 4 | 2017-01-08 05:36:40 UTC | Martini097 | Yeah, that was my struggle as well. I couldn't view the history or any changes related to it, and the only relevant page i could find was on boundaries. I see/have no issue with you changing the tags to fit relation:land_area as it does seem to fit better | |
| 44750097 by MW369 | 1 | 2017-01-08 02:36:11 UTC | aharvey | Is the St in "Warne St Park" an abbreviation for street? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29 |
| 2 | 2017-01-08 11:31:18 UTC | MW369 | Yep, fixed. Thanks! | |
| 44951625 by Maya Wallis | 1 | 2017-01-08 02:30:30 UTC | aharvey | If this is a shopfront you might want to add shop=copyshop https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcopyshop to it. |
| 43883541 by giotec | 1 | 2016-11-23 04:18:01 UTC | aharvey | Hi there, club and sport a different tags, I've fixed this up see http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4395466707/history |
| 39058536 by Maradona11 | 1 | 2016-11-10 11:23:24 UTC | aharvey | I don't believe leisure=park is appropriate for http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415194166. I think it should simply be landuse=residential. |
| 16163505 by dbaupp | 1 | 2016-11-08 07:27:30 UTC | aharvey | Where did you find the name "Ferndale Park Loop"? I can't find any signs with that name, I can find signs with "Ferndale Walk Track". If I don't hear back I might swap it over to map what's on the ground. |
| 2 | 2016-11-08 17:18:17 UTC | dbaupp | I don't remember; I guess it may've changed in the three years since I mapped this. | |
| 25744404 by aharvey | 1 | 2016-11-04 01:00:41 UTC | CloCkWeRX | Do you know if the bridge (see http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/771693) is actually there still? |
| 2 | 2016-11-04 03:46:09 UTC | 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 | |
| 38993006 by BalancingBean | 1 | 2016-11-04 03:40:54 UTC | aharvey | I noticed that you added highway=path for this https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/305534455. What was your source for this? I know first hand that it's a pipeline not a path. |
| 42472417 by EJ_ | 1 | 2016-10-07 05:41:14 UTC | aharvey | Howdy, you've added http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/444590126#map=19/-33.79729/151.18136 but this already existed in http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3993157057#map=19/-33.79742/151.18127 |
| 42490776 by EJ_ | 1 | 2016-10-07 05:38:41 UTC | aharvey | Howdy, it looks like you've added http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/444721625 but this already existed here http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3993157061. Could you fix this up, ideally retaining the original node for the history? Also is it correct to use indoor=room, since customers can't walk into ... |
| 2 | 2016-10-07 05:40:16 UTC | aharvey | You also have mapped out two McDonalds, but there is only one there. | |
| 42493275 by EJ_ | 1 | 2016-10-07 05:35:51 UTC | aharvey | Howdy, any reason why the post office is mapped out as two features? AFAIK there is only a single post office here as one big room. |
| 39695761 by Swain Destinations | 1 | 2016-08-28 00:08:35 UTC | aharvey | Hi I've reverted this change because The Sydney Opera House is already mapped in OSM here http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4960757 |
| 41406029 by vincentwang | 1 | 2016-08-28 00:06:10 UTC | aharvey | I see another user has reverted this change, which I agree with.The reasons are that you added a new feature for the Sydney Opera House but it is already mapped in http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4960757And for the other viewpoint, it's name is not Watsons Bay, and the name tag is reserved ... |
| 39799159 by Lake Leung | 1 | 2016-08-21 23:06:05 UTC | aharvey | I'm going to delete this as the Royal Botanic Gardens are already mapped in the relation -> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3744999If you wish to add the name:zh, add it to the existing relation. |
| 41000354 by CitymapperHQ | 1 | 2016-07-25 00:58:04 UTC | aharvey | Hi there, it looks like the road was already there from Railway Pde to Colebome Av, so I removed a node at the end to avoid the doubled up road way. I also added bridge and steps tags to the footway. |
| 40034706 by moreton | 1 | 2016-07-11 05:44:05 UTC | aharvey | www.openstreetmap.org/way/425078113 looks to be overlapping residential properties. What's your source for this wetland? Perhaps this should just be added to the conservation parks/wetlands reserve ways there? |
| 2 | 2016-07-11 06:21:04 UTC | TheSwavu | And why did you add noname=yes to all of the admin_level=10 relations? And why did you delete the place tags? | |
| 3 | 2016-07-11 08:32:24 UTC | moreton | Re sources for wetlands, swamps etc. As noted in the uploads, I have used 3 sources: (i) survey = visits to these areas in person to confirm mapped data; (ii) LPI map imagery; (iii) GA hydrology datasets (via geofabric). The mapped wetlands are mostly equivalent to GA hydrology datasets. The GA lice... | |
| 4 | 2016-07-11 09:35:43 UTC | TheSwavu | So a few points then:1. You are doing an import without following the import guidelines:http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines2. Have you got explicit permission to use the GA dataset? 3. Combining place with admin_level=10 is not unusual:http://taginfo.openstreetma... | |
| 39793586 by Lake Leung | 1 | 2016-07-08 10:15:19 UTC | aharvey | Jintang Hai Fresh Restaurant ? Is this a hotel or restaurant, because you tagged it as a hotel. |
| 40195330 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-07-06 00:28:39 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40512164 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40195315 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-07-06 00:27:53 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40512163 where the changeset comment is: |
| 2 | 2016-07-17 10:04:01 UTC | SomeoneElse | In the process of the Landgate add and remove one of the roundabouts is now a bit deformed:http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/361673628/historyCould someone who's local patch it up so that it reflects reality? | |
| 40195333 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-07-06 00:27:36 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40512166 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40171955 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-07-06 00:27:28 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40512168 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40195392 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-07-06 00:27:12 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40512157 where the changeset comment is: |
| 2 | 2016-07-17 09:52:59 UTC | SomeoneElse | I'm guessing that this wasn't actually part of the Landgate import and that the changeset comment was leftover by mistake?Currently Arthur Street (and Lord Street to the northwest) are a bit odd as they are secondary and primary roads that terminate rather than link up in any way.I've never been... | |
| 3 | 2016-07-18 04:35:59 UTC | aaronsta | Hi there, yes I do think that is what happened Ill do a quick edit now and have a proper look at it later | |
| 40201791 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 11:11:40 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274990 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40201348 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 07:56:17 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274991 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40203743 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 05:56:00 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274988 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40200912 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 05:40:32 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274996 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40202908 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 05:36:06 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274981 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40197601 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 05:32:12 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275233 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40199230 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 05:08:00 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275080 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40206373 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 05:05:19 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274410 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40197428 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 04:48:39 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275291 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40205378 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 04:45:08 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274717 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40202803 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 04:29:06 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274969 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40203488 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 04:20:40 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274978 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40205790 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-22 21:09:37 UTC | TheSwavu | What was the point of this changeset? All you've done is deleted all of the source=nearmap tags. How do you know that these weren't from nearmap? What is source=aaronsta supposed to mean? |
| 2 | 2016-06-25 04:10:47 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274548 where the changeset comment is: | |
| 40198017 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 04:09:39 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275222 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40199712 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:59:12 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275025 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204199 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:57:09 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274985 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40206035 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:47:11 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274549 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204886 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:47:09 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274721 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40199609 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:36:18 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275027 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204680 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:28:18 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274907 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40203578 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-22 18:20:53 UTC | SomeoneElse | Hello,Could you explain what "MINOR: FIX SOURCES" means? This is a changeset with a large area, and it'd be nice to know what had changed without having to refer to third-party tools.Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | 2016-06-23 00:10:19 UTC | GinaroZ | Had a look at the history of some nodes/ways and it seems like this changeset has removed "source=nearmap" from them | |
| 3 | 2016-06-24 01:41:40 UTC | TheSwavu | Yeap this is one of many bulk edits this user has done where they have deleted source=nearmap for no apparent reason. | |
| 4 | 2016-06-25 03:25:01 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274965 where the changeset comment is: | |
| 40199773 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:24:14 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275024 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40200684 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:24:07 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40275003 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40206195 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:22:32 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274545 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40203352 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:20:29 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274992 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40203635 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:18:49 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274963 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204783 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:15:28 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274720 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204617 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:14:07 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274910 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204341 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:12:50 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274919 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204561 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:11:12 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274913 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40204500 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 03:10:18 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274914 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40206754 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 02:50:05 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274398 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40205189 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 02:43:28 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274718 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40205709 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-22 21:10:10 UTC | TheSwavu | What was the point of this changeset? |
| 2 | 2016-06-25 02:42:07 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40274543 where the changeset comment is: | |
| 40207001 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-25 01:58:21 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40266451 where the changeset comment is: |
| 40207793 by aaronsta | 1 | 2016-06-24 06:56:26 UTC | pnorman | Hello,you seem to be doing a mechanical edit of some kind. In OSM mechanical edits need to be documented and you need to consult with the community first. Was this done here? |
| 2 | 2016-06-24 07:49:46 UTC | Warin61 | In this changeset, looks to be removing the source=nearmap tag ... in bulk. WHY? | |
| 3 | 2016-06-24 16:47:02 UTC | aharvey | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40258772 where the changeset comment is: | |
| 39834539 by Lake Leung | 1 | 2016-06-19 00:02:05 UTC | aharvey | I've moved this translation to the "Prince Henry Cliff Walk" way as that, the walk isn't where this POI was placed (that's the Underfalls Walk) |
| 38453189 by samuelrussell | 1 | 2016-05-21 04:50:19 UTC | aharvey | You tagged this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/409276633 as a library, but it's not. I've fixed it up now, this is a restaurant and the library is round the corner. The LPI Base Map is wrong here. |
| 38610902 by aharvey | 1 | 2016-04-16 07:08:31 UTC | samuelrussell | Kudos! Do these sites have relationships? Could those relationships be mapped? |
| 2 | 2016-04-16 07:20:09 UTC | 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't make th... | |
| 34204428 by aharvey | 1 | 2015-10-01 01:45:34 UTC | riblit | 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 05:34:38 UTC | 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 and man... | |
| 27663231 by riblit | 1 | 2015-09-23 12:21:59 UTC | aharvey | It seems leisure=nature_reserve was changed to leisure=park in this changeset. This isn't appropriate for the Heathcote National Park as it's not consistant with the usage of leisure=park at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark (See also the note at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wik... |
| 108027 by Spindoc Bob | 1 | 2015-09-01 10:49:48 UTC | aharvey | I'm removing http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/316587786 because I'm fairly certain there is no picnic_site at the exact location of the node, and there is a better positioned picnic_site nearby which is probably what this node was meant to map. |
| 2 | 2017-05-20 09:08:55 UTC | Warin61 | tagged created_by=www.campsaustraliawide.com they have a copyright message on their web site ... do you have permission to use their data?? Node: Gunnedah South RA (316587591) is far off the highway .. and well away from anything like a campsite .. deleted. | |
| 19839073 by swanilli | 1 | 2015-08-06 08:10:17 UTC | aharvey | I would like to revert this (ie. remove name=cliff) because they aren't named "cliff", and it's causing issues for downstream data users expecting the name in the name tag. |
| 2 | 2015-08-17 09:05:48 UTC | SomeoneElse | There's a discussion of what should go in the name tag at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only . I don't believe that "cliff" makes sense here. | |
| 3 | 2015-08-17 09:36:19 UTC | aharvey | I've gone ahead and reverted this changeset (which only added the name=cliff tags) in changeset 33385884 | |
| 4 | 2015-08-17 09:41:15 UTC | swanilli | Two points:1. I have stood there. It is definitely a cliff. It definitely makes sense to me.2. There seems to be a lamentable tendency of some people to mistake Wiki guidelines as Gospel or some other divine authority. They are not. They are just what the name says, guidelines. The issue is what... | |
| 5 | 2015-08-17 09:59:53 UTC | aharvey | Hi Swanilli,1. I'm not disagreeing about there being cliffs here, hence the natural=cliff tags still remain.2. Regarding my comment about downstream data users, I can only quote my personal example which is [1]. I'm extracting names of features and using these in the walk description, and no... | |
| 14291716 by MikeAus | 1 | 2015-08-06 08:15:13 UTC | aharvey | Hi Mike,What does the 50m mean at Eagles Nest Lookout? It's too low for altitude... |
| 2 | 2015-08-06 08:32:44 UTC | MikeAus | When I visited there 2 years ago, the only signpost at the turnoff had written in it "Lookout - 50m" (i.e. 50 metres). - has this changed ? | |
| 3 | 2015-08-06 09:30:00 UTC | aharvey | I'm not sure if it's changed.What you describe seems to indicate that the lookout is 50m from the sign, which is informative, rather than forming part of the name. The name tag should just contain the actual name, ie. "Eagles Nest Lookout".What do you think? | |
| 4 | 2015-08-06 12:14:35 UTC | MikeAus | If I need to direct someone to this lookout in an emergency, it's no good saying "Take the turnoff to Eagles Nest Lookout". But if I say "take the turnoff Lookout 50m", they will know they are at the correct turnoff. | |
| 5 | 2015-08-08 08:07:03 UTC | aharvey | Perhaps http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign would be better suited then, it allows you to capture the information about the "Lookout 50m" better. You could also put in the description tag of the lookout a note about the "Lookout - 50m" sign.The reason... | |
| 6 | 2015-08-08 11:36:22 UTC | MikeAus | The need of the Emergency Services I work with, is for OSM to enable quick, error-free navigation to an incident. If the sign says "Lookout 50m", then that's what needs to appear on the map. | |
| 30443147 by inas | 1 | 2015-07-20 09:42:32 UTC | aharvey | Hey did you mean to remove the highway=tertiary or the lcn=yes? Because your comment indicates the latter but you actually did the former. |
| 2 | 2015-07-20 09:51:09 UTC | inas | Oops. Yes. Looks like you've fixed it up? | |
| 3 | 2015-07-20 10:01:24 UTC | aharvey | Nope, I haven't fixed it. I did pass a footway through the street, so I did make an edit after you, but didn't touch the tags. Are you right to correct? | |
| 4 | 2015-07-20 11:29:28 UTC | inas | yep. done. | |
| 29465055 by eddie the eagle | 1 | 2015-05-03 08:15:03 UTC | aharvey | Does the road still physically exist? Would it be better to tag it as access=no and place a barrier= node? |
| 30325785 by NathanaelB | 1 | 2015-04-23 00:13:28 UTC | aharvey | Just a question, when you said your source was Topo? What specifically was this source? |
| 2 | 2015-04-23 00:23:24 UTC | NathanaelB | NSW Government topographic map which I referred to to draw my poly. | |
| 3 | 2015-04-23 00:26:54 UTC | aharvey | Aren't the NSW Government Topo Maps Copyright All Rights Reserved? I know the paper ones I have are and it appears the online ones at http://maps.six.nsw.gov.au/arcgis/rest/services/sixmaps/LPITopoMap/MapServer are too.Were you able to get these under a license compatible with deriving informati... | |
| 4 | 2015-04-23 00:42:41 UTC | NathanaelB | I drew the poly and referred to paper map for some of the boundaries for less than 10% of the nodes plus my own on-the-ground survey and GPX data and reused the estuary shorelines and coastline nodes for the rest. Don't think that constitutes breaching copyright. | |
| 16855609 by Tim Cooper | 1 | 2015-04-18 05:20:15 UTC | aharvey | In this changeset you've added the name "Platform 2&3" to the railway landuse area covering the whole station. What were you intending to do here? Can you fix this? |
| 29372749 by Wiggaville | 1 | 2015-04-18 05:15:15 UTC | aharvey | It looks like this changset deleted the intersection http://osmhv.openstreetmap.de/changeset.jsp?id=29372749 so I've reverted it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/30300449What were you trying to do in this changeset? Remove the cycleway=share_busway from Elizabeth Street? |
| 14080990 by sincoz | 1 | 2015-03-29 22:46:17 UTC | aharvey | Could you please explain the reasoning for adding these? Is it for a specific router?There are some issues with these, for example the one you added at Heathcote station is wrong because there is no path running along the way you added. |
| 28970592 by swanilli | 1 | 2015-03-23 23:04:51 UTC | aharvey | Regarding way 302242009 [http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/302242009] the name tag is used to tag the names of things [http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Name] not provide a description or access restrictions, please use that tag instead [http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description] |
| 2 | 2015-03-23 23:21:16 UTC | nildes14 | In my view this is a safety issue and safety must come before all other concerns. Please read the name and consider what it means! Tagging it description= relegates it to invisibility in all normal OSM rendering. Removing the caution is a moral not stylistic decision. Until OSM has a visible tag... | |
| 3 | 2015-03-23 23:30:06 UTC | aharvey | According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things it is good practice not to abuse the name tag in this way, and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_for_the_renderer The default OSM rendering is not the only user of OSM dat... | |
| 11057695 by swanilli | 1 | 2015-03-23 23:13:15 UTC | aharvey | Why is this named footbridge? Is there actually a sign labelling it? It seems to me like foot=yes + bridge=yes + highway=path is enough to indicated it is a footbridge. |
| 20026268 by Roaming-Oz | 1 | 2015-03-23 23:09:20 UTC | aharvey | Regarding way http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/256790444 the name tag is reserved for just the name, ie. Dunns Leap Track. The extra information although on the sign isn't part of the way's name so shouldn't be in the tag value. This information can go in a description tag, however, it is best to ta... |
| 22494667 by dexgps | 1 | 2015-03-12 05:40:21 UTC | aharvey | When you tried to remove the turn restrictions forhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2766091http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3746660it appears you just removed the tags from the relation, leaving a relation with no tags but still containing the members. To remove the turn restricti... |
| 18447856 by nadeem41 | 1 | 2015-03-12 03:47:03 UTC | aharvey | In this changeset you changed a pipeline to a road. I won't revert it because you made another change at the same time, but I will fix this mistake. |
| 15217104 by Zhent | 1 | 2015-02-15 21:45:40 UTC | aharvey | For way 866109501, I wouldn't class it is trail_visibility=bad (Path sometimes invisible, route partly pathless), as I found markers frequently along the trail, which sometimes had to be searched for which according to the wiki is trail_visibility=good (Next marker always visible, but sometimes has ... |
| 2 | 2015-02-15 21:47:03 UTC | aharvey | Oops that's way 86610951 | |
| 27079948 by swanilli | 1 | 2015-01-19 09:41:24 UTC | aharvey | Why is http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/314796230 named Pond? I couldn't find any sign or otherwise on the ground to support this. Shouldn't it just be water=pond without a name tag? |
| 2 | 2015-01-19 20:58:45 UTC | swanilli | It was definitely there on 17 Nov 14. It is mentioned in Wildwalks track notes and visible in Google maps (zoom in here: -33.491738, 151.225933). Maybe it had dried up when you visited.Let's face it, it's a small pond. I gave it the generic name "Pond" so it would be more visible. Now ch... | |
| 3 | 2015-01-20 08:53:02 UTC | aharvey | I meant I couldn't find a sign that named the it "Pond", I agree that the water does exist, it's just the name is wrong. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Name specifically the example of "closed pub (due for demolition): do not describe the object in lieu of a name."I w... | |
| 4 | 2015-01-27 09:55:59 UTC | aharvey | I've updated this based on the name tag being just a description already provided by water=pond. | |
| 21676316 by Warin61 | 1 | 2014-11-07 23:22:39 UTC | aharvey | Hi,When you split the Lane Cove River into two multipolygons... they are still the same river, just with a weir in it, shouldn't it all be part of the single multipolygon? |