| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 57057243 by tychoanomaly | 1 | 2018-03-10 22:08:04 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi tychoanomaly and welcome onboard OSM!You changed the landing zone 1 and 2 from landingpad to runway. What is the rationale? Those features are not runways and the aeroway=landingpad tag had been approved for this kind of feature (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Dspaceport... |
| 2 | 2018-03-10 22:52:20 UTC | tychoanomaly | Hi LeTopographeFou,My rationale was so that if set to runway then they are visible in the standard map layer. If they're set to 'aeroway' they're invisible. I don't really understand the point in having an invisible map feature!A runway is a patch of ground prepared for aircraft to land on, ... | |
| 3 | 2018-03-11 14:11:17 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Ok, then you are ignoring two things.First we shall not map for the renderer. OSM is there to build a database, not to display maps (even if I would like it to change). The map displayed in the website is a thirdparty among many others which can easily be modified in order to render launchpads, ... | |
| 4 | 2018-03-11 14:17:47 UTC | LeTopographeFou | I opened a request to render aeroway=landingpad: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/3112 | |
| 52305855 by km2bp | 1 | 2017-10-25 10:03:11 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi km2bp, I was recently in St Peter's basilica (Vatican) and where not able to localize the amenities you've mapped there (drinking point, post box...). Do you remind at which level they were ? Assuming level=0 is the basilica, -1 the pope's tombs and -2 the necropole |
| 2 | 2017-11-17 14:24:50 UTC | km2bp | This is located on the roof. You can go there while visiting the Vatican museum https://youtu.be/-mIMaM8iB1c?t=6m59s | |
| 3 | 2017-11-20 20:28:20 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Ok, thank you! I've seen you put layer=3 but I replaced to level=3 which is more suitable to indicate floor levels (whereas layer is only for rendering purposes) | |
| 48876694 by Tr4sK | 1 | 2017-08-26 08:14:27 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Bonjour, la rue des Barres et la rue du Grenier sur l'Eau sont pavées et non pas goudronnées. Est-ce donc volontairement qu'elles aient été marquées comme goudronnées ? J'ai fait la correction mais j'ignore du coup si les autres rues sont bien taggées... |
| 2 | 2017-08-26 09:16:58 UTC | Tr4sK | Merci pour la correction. Il m’arrive d’avoir le clique rapide. | |
| 47952755 by althio | 1 | 2017-07-07 18:45:12 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Bonjour, je vois que les passages piétons et chemins piétons ont été indiqués comme rue piétonnes (highway=pedestrian). Je trouve personnellement highway=footway plus approprié, le wiki tendant à confirmer cela. Je ne parle pas des terres plein... |
| 2 | 2017-07-11 08:20:10 UTC | althio | J'ai déjà eu une discussion à ce sujet (en privé) avec un autre contributeur. On peut discuter ici sur un changeset, mais aussi basculer sur le forum si cela t'intéresse. http://forum.openstreetmap.fr/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=5614 Voici ma lecture des pag... | |
| 42881021 by emem | 1 | 2017-03-11 00:37:52 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi, you used access=permissive but according to the wiki access=private would better fit as soon as the airport is not open to general traffic. What do you think? |
| 2 | 2017-03-20 10:12:36 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Modified to access=private in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47007664 | |
| 20621797 by Jepau | 1 | 2017-02-12 12:04:26 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Bonjour, je comprend que l'emprunte soit bien des immeubles (d'où le correctif), mais les immeubles sont-ils complétement des boutiques ? Tous les étages ? Il me parait plus juste de conserver les bâtiments actuels (mais remplacer building=retail par building=yes) et mettr... |
| 2 | 2017-02-12 18:16:17 UTC | Jepau | Bonsoir, votre proposition fait sens. Je m'étais simplement attaché a faire réapparaître les bâtiments qui avaient disparu de la carte. Vous avez très probablement raison sur le fait que les commerces sont au rdc et non pas sur la hauteurs des immeubles. Je vo... | |
| 3 | 2017-02-12 21:54:55 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Ok merci, cf. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46031362 | |
| 44244894 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2016-12-20 00:16:57 UTC | SomeoneElse | Hello, You've merged together various "estate_agents", "estate_agency" etc. in here. I can see the logic in this, except that you've ignored the main tag of "shop" or "office" and made them all "office". I've certainly used both "shop" ... |
| 2 | 2017-02-06 23:37:00 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi SomeoneElse,Yes I see your point and I've followed a little bit the comments about shop vs office for this kind of business. What do you propose? I'm afraid that I will not be able to make the difference between those two as I'm not from England and can't check by myself. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-07 00:17:47 UTC | SomeoneElse | > What do you propose?I'd change the ones that were shop previously (like http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/351521115/history ) back to shop, and if any of them had other tags that were changed into "office" at the same time, I'd change those back too. | |
| 4 | 2017-02-10 18:41:43 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Done, all previously tagged shops have been redefined as shop. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45980978 | |
| 45869506 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2017-02-06 23:30:19 UTC | LeTopographeFou | See also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/LeTopographeFou#.23004_-_TyposThinking afterwards, this edit may have been too agressive... I hope it will not be perceived this way. |
| 2 | 2017-02-09 21:00:45 UTC | SomeoneElse | I wouldn't say "aggressive", but I would say "irrelevant" - anything that parses mph speed limits is going to parse "30mph".Also, this change is making the tidying up of some earlier problem edits much, much harder. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-09 23:21:52 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Yes I agree with your second sentence to better answer your first point: "30 mph" is different from "30mph" exactly because parsing (and regular expressions) can't save everyone, everywhere and everytime. This is why this is relevant at the end. Having a consistent data set helps... | |
| 4 | 2017-02-12 14:15:12 UTC | SK53 | The idea that by editing tags to some kind of common format will somehow make it easier for data consumers is a pernicious fallacy. Any use of a speed limit with or without "mph" in the tag will require some form of parsing, error detection and data wrangling. For instance the 11th com... | |
| 45958705 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2017-02-09 22:08:43 UTC | LeTopographeFou | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/LeTopographeFou#.23006_-_Choose_of_a_wrong_tag |
| 44033095 by Meersbrook | 1 | 2017-02-08 19:47:38 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi, way 456578120 has no tag. Can you please fix this issue? |
| 2 | 2017-02-08 19:53:23 UTC | Meersbrook | I used the polygon to create a shape. Some of the vertices have assigned roles. | |
| 3 | 2017-02-09 12:23:39 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Ok but then the "shape" shall have tags, otherwise it means nothing. I assume you draw it from an existing real feature, so I'm sure there is a way to tag it, even with a note or fixme only. I don't want to delete it but I know there are bots/people which may delete it, so the best is prob... | |
| 4 | 2017-02-09 12:57:25 UTC | Meersbrook | You can delete it, it's nothing that can't be redrawn if necessary. | |
| 42808712 by davbra98 | 1 | 2017-02-08 00:03:05 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi, actually you put maxspeed="source:maxspeed=DE:zone30" instead of source:maxspeed="DE:zone30". Can you please fix the issue? |
| 2 | 2017-02-08 00:04:23 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Moreover I wonder if maxspeed="DE:zone30" should not be the right tag to put instead of source:maxspeed | |
| 45474443 by Artus92 | 1 | 2017-02-07 23:18:03 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi Artus92 and welcome to OSM!It looks like you've created two empty areas (468728257 and 468728256). I assume this is an error. Can you please explain the purpose? I can delete them for you if you are not yet confident with the tools. |
| 44244656 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2016-12-08 13:04:09 UTC | SomeoneElse | What were the usage statistics on "shop=candle" and "shop=candles" before you changed e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4401825186/history ? |
| 2 | 2016-12-08 13:10:46 UTC | SomeoneElse | You might also want to double-check the spelling of the "Yankie" in here too, or check with the original mapper. | |
| 3 | 2016-12-08 19:39:32 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi, since only "candles" is documented on the wiki and was mostly used, I pick this one to consolidate the use of this type of shop. A bit of math: there was 37 shop=candle vs 102 shop=candles. Reguarding "Yankie" I decided to focus this type of mass edit to the bare minimum, i.e... | |
| 4 | 2016-12-09 17:39:27 UTC | SomeoneElse | Thanks for that. I'll have to add "candles" to https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua . | |
| 43414496 by Claumires | 1 | 2016-11-05 09:38:07 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi @Claumires, is it normal that this changeset has deleted lot of ways and buildings I've drawn in this area ? I don't see any interest to remove them. |
| 186743 by PerroVerd | 1 | 2016-10-02 21:50:08 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi,Most (if not all) of those gas stations have opening_hours=Sa-Su 24/7 which means that:1. the gas stations is opened only on Saturday and Sunday (which looks strange nowadays)2. There is a conflict because "24/7" means that it is open 24 hours a day 7 days a week (and not only o... |
| 38932583 by ADJOGBLE Emmanuel | 1 | 2016-10-02 10:20:54 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Bonjour,Concernant les lampadaires, il y a deux soucis :1. Mauvais formatage des horaires, il faut mettre 18:00-05:30 pour que tous les outils puissent reconnaitre cette valeur2. Mauvais tag, il faut utiliser lit au lieu de opening_hoursCe qui donne donc lit=18:00-05:30.Pouvez-vous s... |
| 38933151 by ADJOGBLE Emmanuel | 1 | 2016-10-02 10:19:53 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Bonjour,Concernant les lampadaires, il y a deux soucis :1. Mauvais formatage des horaires, il faut mettre 18:00-05:30 pour que tous les outils puissent reconnaitre cette valeur2. Mauvais tag, il faut utiliser lit au lieu de opening_hoursCe qui donne donc lit=18:00-05:30.Pouvez-vous s... |
| 34479372 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2015-10-06 22:35:28 UTC | aseerel4c26 | Hi LeTopographeFou, could you please comment on the relation of your changeset with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct ? |
| 2 | 2015-10-07 09:21:20 UTC | gormo | ...especially on "Document and discuss your plans". Where is the documentation? Was there a discussion? | |
| 3 | 2015-10-07 23:52:38 UTC | aseerel4c26 | umm, there are much more similar changesets by LeTopographeFou. Where is the discussion for those changes? | |
| 4 | 2015-10-07 23:53:42 UTC | aseerel4c26 | ... I've wrote a notification mail. | |
| 5 | 2015-10-07 23:54:26 UTC | aseerel4c26 | ... and the DWG is aware too | |
| 6 | 2015-10-08 22:58:14 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Thanks for your care aseerel4c26. Because the type=broad_leaved has been declared as deprecated on the Wiki, on TagInfo, and in JOSM (where I've had more than once warnings on this fact), I did not feel the need to open any discussion with the community neither to create any page to document a fact ... | |
| 7 | 2016-07-30 22:13:22 UTC | fkv | The automated edits code of conduct does not depend on whether a tag is "deprecated". So-called deprecated tags are not necessarily wrong. First of all, many deprecations are done by single users who edit the wiki without prior discussion. Even if a formal proposal has been accepted by vot... | |
| 8 | 2016-08-01 17:31:06 UTC | SomeoneElse | @fkv When I looked at the changes in here back in October last year I didn't see any evidence of data loss (though I only looked at a sample of the 5341 nodes). Whilst a change like type=broad_leafed => leaf_type=broadleaved should have been discussed beforehand, in case someone was aware of a... | |
| 9 | 2016-08-01 18:43:39 UTC | fkv | Just take the first few nodes in this changeset as examples. They are located on Plaza de la Ciudad de la Habana, where there are palms and other trees. The non-palms were changed from type=broad_leafed (old spelling variant, but that's another issue) to leaf_type=broadleaved, losing the information... | |
| 10 | 2016-08-01 19:23:15 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi, this changeset was made a long time ago and I thought it has been reverted (with some others of the same type and of the same period). I'm going to ask for a revert by mail if it is still feasible. | |
| 11 | 2016-08-01 20:39:36 UTC | SomeoneElse | @fkv thanks; I wasn't aware of the use of "type" as meaning "not a palm tree".@LeTopographeFou thanks; I've got the message requesting a revert. Before doing it I'll ask around to see if there's any better way to indicate "not a palm tree". As I understand it (fro... | |
| 12 | 2016-08-02 00:16:16 UTC | fkv | I was asking for a revert, but it might be better to restore the type=* tags while keeping the leaf_type=* tags. It does not hurt to have both.You could use taxon=* to mark palms, but there is no single taxon that includes all non-palm broad-leaved trees. Eudicots would be missing magnoliids, Aust... | |
| 13 | 2016-08-02 11:56:00 UTC | SK53 | I tend to agree with @fkv on all issues: 1) large scale updates often have unpredictable side effects; 2) originally we distinguished between conifers/dicots aka broad-leaved and palms (and possibly one or two others) using a range of tags wood/type etc. Ultimately these have been replaced by leaf_t... | |
| 14 | 2016-08-02 14:24:48 UTC | SomeoneElse | OK, done: See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41192016 . | |
| 15 | 2016-08-03 18:32:07 UTC | LeTopographeFou | @SomeoneElse: Thank you! | |
| 35653117 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2015-11-30 19:53:26 UTC | trigpoint | HiAre you sure that when you surveyed http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2030692588/history it was a speed limit sign? A truvello is normally a speed camera, but you would have noticed that along with the only 80kph speed limit sign in the UK?I am sure this was a mistake, because making an undisc... |
| 2 | 2015-11-30 20:01:11 UTC | chillly | This is an undiscussed mass edit.Please revert it now. | |
| 3 | 2015-11-30 22:09:49 UTC | SomeoneElse | This changeset has been reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35675358 .LeTopographeFou, please do not make further mass edits like this. As you have found out from the comments that other mappers have made on your most recent changes, it's very easy for you to misunderstand what ... | |
| 4 | 2015-12-03 22:13:19 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Hi, Thank you for the revert SomeoneElse. No excuse for my defense, I have bitten off more than I can chew whithout understanding that by fixing tags I was introducing errors in some of them.Reguarding the node Trigpoint pointed out, after an OSM/Bing/Google Maps survey it appears that this node i... | |
| 5 | 2015-12-03 22:52:08 UTC | SomeoneElse | Of course; we can't use Bing Maps or Google Maps for copyright reasons :)However, in this case I can confirm that the speed limit on the A45 (at least the other side of Ryton on Dunsmore a couple of years ago) was indeed 50 mph. However maxspeed=80 (in km/h) is of course the same as "mapspee... | |
| 34414132 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2015-10-21 12:28:19 UTC | SomeoneElse | What role should https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/239796445 have within https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1074897 ? Is it an inner, or something else entirely? |
| 2 | 2015-10-27 12:40:28 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Don't know, This changeset is only about replacing deprecated properties. This relation already existed before. You should ask directly in the page of this way/relation. | |
| 34428457 by LeTopographeFou | 1 | 2015-10-05 17:21:04 UTC | didier2020 | c'est plutot UnQuality Assurance on trees :nodes with tag leaf_type=broadleavedcomme celui-la : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2640855577 |
| 2 | 2015-10-07 21:00:09 UTC | SomeoneElse | @LeTopographeFou - are you going to correct the errors that you've introduced in this changeset (as identified by didier2020 ) or do you need help doing so? Please also do reply to the changeset discussion on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34479372 .Best Regards,Andy Townsend (SomeoneE... | |
| 3 | 2015-10-08 23:24:53 UTC | LeTopographeFou | I don't understand what didier2020 expects from me and where I have introduced any error. I only understand that I should have commented better m'y changeset. | |
| 4 | 2015-10-09 11:38:13 UTC | didier2020 | en regardant l'historique ce node:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2640855577/historyon voit que tag leaft_type=boradleveled a été ajouté dans ce changeset, alors que seul le way aurait du être modifié. | |
| 5 | 2015-10-27 12:37:01 UTC | LeTopographeFou | Ok, thank you for the fix | |