| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 59616093 by cleary | 1 | 2018-06-06 23:33:12 UTC | Warin61 | HI,These tags already exist in the relation - they are duplication and I have removed the tags... but The relation is not closed.. as these 2 ways do not form an area Ways: 594644996 and 594644996.. perhaps they should be removed from the relation untill this can be resolved? Put tags on them ... |
| 2 | 2018-06-06 23:59:07 UTC | cleary | I am still working on this relation. It is rather complex and I am doing it slowly and trying to doublecheck it. I should be finshed in a two or three days. Perhaps you might check again in a few days to be sure I have it right. | |
| 3 | 2018-06-07 00:16:02 UTC | Warin61 | Good Luck with it.. | |
| 49184664 by cleary | 1 | 2018-05-28 16:05:22 UTC | CloCkWeRX | Which is the correct peak? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4958235368 |
| 2 | 2018-05-28 23:37:01 UTC | cleary | Sorry but I don't recall the circumstances of that edit and I don't know where the second node for Philcox Hill originated. However another mapper appears already to have deleted the duplicate node. I think it is now OK. | |
| 58101353 by cleary | 1 | 2018-04-16 21:29:10 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,This is not closed. I'm not getting into that CAPAD thing so I leave it to you. |
| 57585688 by cleary | 1 | 2018-03-28 06:27:56 UTC | Gppes | Hi, could you please clarify your intentions according to this changeset? Greetings from Austria! |
| 2 | 2018-03-28 06:54:39 UTC | cleary | The uploaded ways did not upload correctly and multiple orphan nodes are being removed. Will be uploaded again later in smaller groups of ways. | |
| 57554119 by cleary | 1 | 2018-03-27 10:59:00 UTC | Gppes | Hi, your are creating a reasonable number of "coastline errors", they have quite an impact on rendering wide areas of the map!Have a look here:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=coastline#How_to_enter_the_dataGreetings from Austria, Gppes |
| 2 | 2018-03-27 11:00:52 UTC | Gppes | Another question, are you sure, that this "island" should be mapped? way id: 573387988, it probably contradicts the wiki (link above). | |
| 3 | 2018-03-28 04:22:54 UTC | cleary | I have been attempting to add the Recherche Archipelago Nature Reserve to the map. OSM has been given permission to include this information from official data. The archipelago consists of more than one hundred islands and I have been adding them in groups. I am aware of some errors in mapping the n... | |
| 4 | 2018-03-28 05:43:07 UTC | Gppes | Hi, thanks for your reply. I was referring to the single island with the way id: 573387988 this single island (only this specific case) was completely covered by water and contradicts this section in the wiki:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=coastline#Where_is_the_coastline.3FIt... | |
| 44150354 by cleary | 1 | 2018-01-19 05:21:17 UTC | ToeBee | Do you happen to remember details about this changeset? You mapped several barrier=gate objects like this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4537155778 Someone from that area contacted the Data Working Group complaining that their Garmin was refusing to route through these gates. This person s... |
| 2 | 2018-01-19 07:37:28 UTC | cleary | There was definitely a gate when I went through there in approx December 2016. There were also quite a few gates on Joulnie Road and Sanpah Road and the northern section of Border Downs Road. It is not unusual to have gates on public roads in remote areas. Often local councils will construct cattle ... | |
| 3 | 2018-01-19 20:02:54 UTC | ToeBee | So here's a neat trick. See this route: https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car&route=-30.935%2C141.256%3B-30.916%2C141.249Then switch from "Car (OSRM)" to "Car (GraphHopper)". Obviously different routing algorithms handle gates differently. And I also fi... | |
| 4 | 2018-01-20 04:57:31 UTC | cleary | I have now added access=yes tags to gates on public roads in this area (at least to those with which I am familiar). | |
| 5 | 2018-01-22 03:39:07 UTC | TheSwavu | I'd be more worried about the kind of person that would be driving around this part of NSW following a route provided by their GPS rather than knowing where they are going. | |
| 52945671 by cleary | 1 | 2017-10-18 12:53:32 UTC | mueschel | Hi,what do you mean by 'cycles' here? Bicycle or motorcycle?http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/532650535#map=16/-37.8383/145.6264Cheers, Jan |
| 2 | 2017-10-18 23:39:26 UTC | cleary | I have changed tag to "bicycle" - was my error. Thanks for noticing and bringing it to my attention. | |
| 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 | |
| 48837029 by cleary | 1 | 2017-09-26 03:03:31 UTC | CloCkWeRX | https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4865716957 and many of the others on this way seem to be duplicated nodes nowhttps://www.keepright.at/report_map.php?schema=50&error=103611445 |
| 2 | 2017-09-26 08:33:08 UTC | cleary | The way is actually the administrative boundary and is not necessarily that of the river. Another user added the "river" tag to the administrative boundary (which is an approximation) instead of mapping the actual river. I will contact the mapper and ask about mapping the river separately,... | |
| 16545520 by cleary | 1 | 2017-04-03 02:23:10 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,The LPI Base Map has West Tipla Rd as tertiary ... and the East Tipla Rd as secondary .. any objections to changing this? Note .. have to add East Tipla Rd to OSM! ... |
| 2 | 2017-04-03 04:14:41 UTC | cleary | I think it is probably outdated information in LPI map. I haven't driven all the way on the west road but the east road is very average in standard. Central Darling Shire Council rates the west side as a main road (MR) for which it would get State funding (therefore possibly a secondary in OSM) and... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-03 04:17:32 UTC | Warin61 | P.S A relevant doc http://www.centraldarling.nsw.gov.au/about-the-shire/road-condition-report.aspxNote the 'road description' not road name. | |
| 4 | 2017-04-03 04:25:27 UTC | Warin61 | Ha crossing info ... both on to the same view though. | |
| 28155091 by cleary | 1 | 2017-03-29 02:01:33 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,You have way 322193363 tagged as a private track .. the LPI base map shows this as a tertiary road ... several other roads are shown out here on the LPI Base map too. I'll put those in. Arr came to your way 259154081 - tagged as driveway private yet LPI shows it as tertiary. Similar for way 3... |
| 2 | 2017-03-29 04:11:24 UTC | cleary | I have driven on many roads in far west there but not that one, nor the roads to Cymbric Vale and WIlandra. From the Barrier Highway, those roads look like private roads and I think they had gates or cattle grids and there were definitely no signs to suggest public roads. I traced the tracks from Bi... | |
| 3 | 2017-03-29 04:15:44 UTC | cleary | Further comment. I remember driving on Waterbag Road and I recall that the track to Cymbric Vale was just a track, didn't look anything like Waterbag Road (which I think was graded and reasonable gravel suface,) and there was no sign to indicate public access was permitted to Cymbric Vale. | |
| 46776851 by cleary | 1 | 2017-03-23 23:13:35 UTC | Warin61 | Hi,By making a new node and moving the boundary by 0.2 m the OSM inspector error is removed .. very little effect in the real world. It dose create a 'gap' of 0.2 metres. .. cheating I know. |
| 46889500 by cleary | 1 | 2017-03-16 11:10:35 UTC | CloCkWeRX | Ah nice, we did some work to add names, but not so much work to find the ones that were slightly off from data.sa.gov.au info |
| 2 | 2017-03-17 04:50:48 UTC | cleary | Thanks for the feedback. | |
| 44528330 by cleary | 1 | 2016-12-20 00:38:55 UTC | TheSwavu | Err... by definition unincorporated areas don't need a admin_level=6 boundary. |
| 2 | 2016-12-20 09:30:31 UTC | cleary | Hello Swavu. The Pastoral Unincorporated Area of South Australia is a designated area with boundaries published in the South Australian government Local Government Areas dataset. It is administered differently (it has a "designated authority" rather than a council. But then the metropolita... | |
| 3 | 2016-12-20 10:27:50 UTC | TheSwavu | That may all be true, but this area is not administrated under the Local Government Act so therefore it's not a council and not admin_level 6. | |
| 4 | 2016-12-20 22:46:08 UTC | tastrax | Given the admin levels are "proposed" in the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative) what level do you suggest TheSwavu? From my understanding of Australia level 6 is the most appropriate. | |
| 5 | 2016-12-21 00:41:00 UTC | TheSwavu | No level as it not a thing that you need to map. The unincorporated areas of South Australia are the bits inside the admin_level 4 boundary but not inside an admin_level 6 boundary. | |
| 37033067 by cleary | 1 | 2016-11-27 05:46:05 UTC | Warin61 | Way 354530546 appears to be a private plantation, Removed relation referring to this single relation and added tags landuse=forest, note=possibly a private plantation possibly Nanagrve Station. |
| 29464053 by cleary | 1 | 2016-10-17 04:20:46 UTC | Warin61 | Tucklan ... while the council and post office may not regard it as a hamlet, I'd not think of it as a neighborhood either. I think in OSM terms .. hamlet. |
| 39365285 by cleary | 1 | 2016-06-29 13:23:18 UTC | gormo | Hi,there already is a boundary for the national park, see http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/56117565 . Please respect existing data while importing, and please tag any new information onto the existing OSM features. And please use established OSM tags, and don't just dump some external data onto ... |
| 2 | 2016-07-01 00:48:41 UTC | cleary | I'm sorry for any error. I have been checking administrative boundaries in South Australia and adding relations for those boundaries. In many instances, national park boundaries coincide with administrative boundaries and, where no relation previously existed, I have also created relations for the n... | |
| 40220219 by cleary | 1 | 2016-06-28 08:10:23 UTC | R0bst3r | Hi cleary,looks like your coastline is not finished: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5213733 is separated from http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5213756. Was it intended?Maybe "is_in:national park" can be changed to "is_in:national_park"?Cheers, R0bst3r |
| 2 | 2016-06-28 23:06:54 UTC | cleary | Thanks for this advice. Much appreciated. Now correct, I hope. | |
| 16109568 by cleary | 1 | 2016-05-11 00:50:21 UTC | Warin61 | Hi, moved Node: Hillston Post Office (2302362776) to corner - as per LPI Base Map and Austpost website address. Imagery has this as a burnt out shell.. added fixme for survey confirmation (and address information. . |
| 36909562 by cleary | 1 | 2016-02-01 12:19:02 UTC | R0bst3r | manmade changed to man_made=silo. Also building=yes added. |
| 36771617 by cleary | 1 | 2016-01-24 18:04:30 UTC | Jedrzej Pelka | Hello, you broke the boundary relations of Corrong (5740913) and One Tree (5740798). If you're currently improving boundaries in this area, please be so kind and fix it. |