Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12017-06-01 20:38:12 UTCGlassman Can you tell me what was wrong with the farmland multipolygon?
22017-06-02 03:46:23 UTCemem Clifford,
the farmland was drawn with two closed ways that had a number of common segments in between them and were combined in a multipolygon. The OSM area checker flagged these, as such polygons are not rendered at all in some software (mostly openGL based ones).
12017-05-26 09:44:24 UTCCarnildo On straight segments of ways, it's generally considered good practice to leave nodes at periodic intervals. Because of the way the OSM API works, if you download a region containing a way, but that way has no nodes in the area, the way isn't visible.
22017-05-26 15:17:15 UTCemem I simplified the boundary to 33ft (which is grated, relatively coarse, but the staircases were 31ft on average, possibly resulting from 10m/pixel bitmaps) which took out about 90% of the nodes.
The average spacing between nodes is now about 300ft, comparable to node spacing of roads and other featu...
32017-05-28 19:08:54 UTCCarnildo It looks like you're taking out far more nodes than you intend. For example, way 409571420 went from 72 nodes relatively evenly spaced over three miles, to just eight nodes, with a maximum gap between nodes of 2.25 miles.
12017-05-19 21:54:29 UTCCarnildo It's not clear what happened, but it looks like this edit may have broken the banks of the Spokane River.
22017-05-20 02:01:45 UTCemem I just checked the updated slippy map tiles and they look fine. Also re-downloaded the data, which looks fine is JOSM, too. Plus I'm still the last editor of these traces, the changelog suggest no inintended edits done in that changeset to the river (just moved 3 nodes of it).
I do see when zooming...
32017-05-20 02:28:28 UTCemem I tagged the mapnik tiles within this changeset dirty and most of them re-renderd now. I see no issue with the Spokane river. Can you confirm ?
42017-05-20 03:56:47 UTCCarnildo Looks good in both JOSM and the website map.
12017-05-19 21:24:36 UTCCarnildo Why did you delete a section of the Little Pend Oreille NWR boundary? According to the official map (https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Little_Pend_Oreille/map.html), that's an inholding in the refuge, presumably consisting of privately-owned land.
12017-03-11 00:37:52 UTCLeTopographeFou 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?
22017-03-20 10:12:36 UTCLeTopographeFou Modified to access=private in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47007664
12015-05-28 05:16:45 UTCsrividya_c Hey, does these footway trail exist now? Imagery doesn't show any path there.
6 changeset(s) created by emem have been discussed with a total of 13 comment(s)