| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 57098186 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2018-03-12 07:05:53 UTC | bdiscoe | Actually, this is NHD in Minnesota, just across the border (and sharing an edge with) the Canvec in Ontario, hence the mixup. |
| 56884508 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2018-03-05 00:01:35 UTC | ikiya | The range you are editing is wide in Japan. The OSM community in Japan is paying attention to your editing.Please give a message to the Japanese community about the edits.(talk-ja)We can not understand the meaning of your editing comments.>Japan, Shikoku, tidy coastline to 60cm>sou... |
| 2 | 2018-03-05 05:04:46 UTC | bdiscoe | Hi Ikiya. I'm glad to hear that local mappers are paying attention! That is very good.I can further explain the edits here in English, and you can forward them to the talk-ja mailing list? I do this kind of standard OSM cleanup for dozens of countries around the world and there is nothing Jap... | |
| 3 | 2018-03-05 12:01:08 UTC | nyampire | Thanks! I made a rough translation and posted to talk-ja. | |
| 4 | 2018-03-05 15:09:17 UTC | ikiya | Hi bdiscoe, thanks for the reply. nyampire posted a description to talk-ja. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ja/2018-March/010009.html | |
| 55814162 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2018-01-27 21:14:59 UTC | bdiscoe | Partly used DigitalGlobe standard. |
| 55812230 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2018-01-27 19:54:21 UTC | bdiscoe | I actually used mostly 'DigitalGlobe Standard' for this changeset, because it was much more recent than Bing imagery, which doesn't even show MEX 24 built here. |
| 54744966 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2018-01-13 17:46:50 UTC | PlaneMad | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/54744966 |
| 54949478 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2018-01-13 17:46:15 UTC | PlaneMad | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/54949478 |
| 54799681 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-12-21 06:15:35 UTC | Vladimír Domes | I think there is access=private missing on added swimming pool. |
| 2 | 2017-12-21 06:30:22 UTC | bdiscoe | Thanks. It can be hard to tell sometimes, but please feel welcome to add access=private to any pools you like. | |
| 48630877 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-11-22 05:01:28 UTC | HubMiner | Hi, please take a look at this note: http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/675095 |
| 53516268 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-11-05 11:17:35 UTC | Nakaner | Hi bdiscoe,I am currently investigating your deletion of more than 14,000 of nodes without giving a proper reason and therefore ask you to pause your edits for at least 24 hours. Thank you.Best regardsMichael |
| 2 | 2017-11-05 15:58:19 UTC | Nakaner | Hi bdiscoe,could you please explain why you deleted more than 10,000 nodes in this changeset? Your changeset comment lacks any explanation why you did this and without any explanation it looks like vandalism.Please add better changeset comments to further changesets like this and split them ... | |
| 3 | 2017-11-05 16:54:07 UTC | bdiscoe | Hi Michael, this is import cleanup. These type of changes have been discussed more than once on the mailing lists, and there are diary posts like https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bdiscoe/diary/37473 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bdiscoe/diary/37421 which clarify the matter. I am happy to... | |
| 4 | 2017-11-05 16:56:57 UTC | bdiscoe | For what it's worth, there are several more million bad nodes here. It is going to take a lot of 10,000 edit changesets to clean up the mess. Alternately, we could convince users (like 'huaraz' who did this part of the Canvec import) to clean up the data before importing it. | |
| 5 | 2017-11-05 17:05:32 UTC | Nakaner | Hi bdiscoe,appending "simplified way geometries, threshold 80 cm" to changeset comment would reduce the need to ask you.If the piece of the Canvec import was uploaded only a few months ago, I would ask the original uploader to fix his mess on his own. Someone who uploads data as pa... | |
| 6 | 2017-11-05 17:17:15 UTC | bdiscoe | Michael, I completely agree. Unfortunately, it's a big planet, and by the time my code discovers an issue, the importer is generally no longer paying close attention. In this case, this data was uploaded by 'huaraz' more than a year ago, in changesets such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changese... | |
| 7 | 2017-11-05 17:29:26 UTC | bdiscoe | For what it's worth, the reason I write "clean up" instead of "simplify" in the changeset comments is because I'm doing more than just running simplify; I also use the JOSM validator to find and fix other issues, including broken topology, overlapping ways, places where the impor... | |
| 8 | 2017-11-05 17:34:30 UTC | Nakaner | Hi bdiscoe,as I wrote above, if the import is more than a few months ago, I would not ask the user who uploaded it if the import itself is well-accepted. Because asking someone to fix his errors is only effective it the user is still active and can remember that he imported the data.However,... | |
| 9 | 2017-11-13 10:18:35 UTC | Nakaner | Hi bdiscoe,I just commented on a changeset by ScottNelson who is importing overnoded waterways, overlapping/duplicated water areas, overlapping landuse and broken multipolygons using Potlatch 2. You can follow the discussion on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/53705786My request to ad... | |
| 52813481 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-10-11 19:49:24 UTC | stevea | bdiscoe: Please redact this farmland removal polygon, or at least redact your changeset and update the polygon so it is landuse=residential.If you read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Santa_Cruz_County,_California#Landuse (paragraph six) you'll see that the County does zone every single hec... |
| 2 | 2017-10-12 04:27:53 UTC | bdiscoe | Hi Steve, since you expressed concern, I took another look at this area in detail. It is a total mess. The so-labeled "farmland" was not just wood and residential, but also some meadow (redundant overlap), and adjacent to existing natural=wood which is, in turn, actually residential in pa... | |
| 3 | 2017-10-12 04:29:28 UTC | bdiscoe | As for "removing it without replacing it with anything better", if you have a large area marked "D" which is actually A, B, C, then removing the wrong "D" IS actually better, because it is actually less wrong. | |
| 4 | 2017-10-12 04:49:52 UTC | stevea | I don't think there is anything terribly wrong with meadow overlapping with other landuse, and nobody has said so in Santa Cruz County, where we have been doing this for at least 8 years. Look at Wilder Ranch State Park, what many have called "visually pleasing" (meadow overlapping with l... | |
| 5 | 2017-10-12 04:52:08 UTC | bdiscoe | I have now spend some time in the Happy Valley area to expand the natural=wood relation down from the hills to fill in where there is actually wood, which is most of the area left blank by the "farmland" removal. I also validated the relations to solve overlaps and degeneracies. | |
| 6 | 2017-10-12 04:56:33 UTC | stevea | Well, thanks for that; I'm watching. It's possible we posted Comments so temporally close together that we crossed each other, but I do await answers to my questions. Thank you in advance. SteveA | |
| 7 | 2017-10-12 05:02:19 UTC | stevea | However, if you "expand the wood" (e.g. as it appears you have from the east side of Happy Valley Road to its west side), you truly break many landuse semantics as published by our County GIS: landuse=forest really is timberland, natural=wood originated from "special_use" polygo... | |
| 8 | 2017-10-12 05:34:55 UTC | bdiscoe | "you can use Bing (and a guess and a prayer) to better define landuse than does our County GIS department?"If the County is marking forest as non-forest, and non-forest as forest - which they clearly are here - then absolutely. Detail based on aerial is based on detail that is just wr... | |
| 9 | 2017-10-12 05:35:26 UTC | bdiscoe | (...is better than...) | |
| 10 | 2017-10-12 05:38:47 UTC | bdiscoe | Also, somebody foolishly imported fields like "Shape_area" which will be wrong the moment that somebody comes along to fix the polygons. What on earth is the point of that? Surely nobody expects general OSM users to update the useless "Shape_area" when the move the nodes into a... | |
| 11 | 2017-10-12 05:49:20 UTC | bdiscoe | Yes, I have read the "County Page". As for "nobody has said so in Santa Cruz County, where we have been doing this for at least 8 years", if nobody has pointed out that this data is mostly wrong, then it's only because nobody has looked, which is highly believable since there ap... | |
| 12 | 2017-10-12 05:51:20 UTC | bdiscoe | My recommendation:1. Either remove all the bad landuse, or use a JOSM filter to hide it for step 2.2. Align the roads and fix the road topology!3. Only then, you can gradually start to add landuse, carefully, bit by bit, checking and correctly each batch before upload. | |
| 13 | 2017-10-12 18:49:09 UTC | stevea | bdiscoe: Your hostile and hyperbolic comments that "there appear to be no actual data here, ONLY IMPORTS" and "largely fictional" are unwelcome, untrue and show you to be a histrionic exaggerator. I have been mapping this county (lovingly, carefully, with my GPS, notebook and t... | |
| 14 | 2017-10-12 18:57:00 UTC | stevea | Regarding "fix the road topology," you will see (if you look, try http://product.itoworld.com/map/162?lon=-121.91947&lat=37.02996&zoom=12&fullscreen=true) that NOBODY has fixed more TIGER misalignments in this county besides me. By that Ito map, it is one of the most "blu... | |
| 15 | 2017-10-12 19:00:48 UTC | stevea | The answer to who "foolishly" imported the SHAPE... attributes is nmixter. He has been hugely admonished for a very sloppy import here, and I have literally spent YEARS cleaning it up. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the >3000 polygons he imported was visually and personally redacted in JOSM by m... | |
| 16 | 2017-10-13 01:48:09 UTC | stevea | I wait no longer to do what I have known to be the right thing to do since this dispute began: I'm redacting bdiscoe's polygon removal edits.Sadly, and I have never done this with any other OSM member with whom I have "friended," I also remove him as my friend in this project. His ar... | |
| 17 | 2017-10-16 21:04:33 UTC | stevea | In the spirit of "pour calming oil over troubled waters," I offer that this dispute largely resulted from tangles among the complex issues of landuse and landcover. They are misunderstood, confusing and fraught with ambiguities. There are a plurality of tagging strategies and histories, ... | |
| 18 | 2017-10-22 06:12:52 UTC | bdiscoe | So, just to wrap this changeset discussion; it spun out of control to attempt discussion of a lot of things besides its subject, the changes herein. In cases where the local preference is for some unusual interpretation of OSM's tags, it's advisable to just leave it as-is. There is enough to fix i... | |
| 19 | 2017-10-22 16:59:07 UTC | stevea | In this controlled discussion (on my part), the changes herein WERE indeed the subject: it appears not listening to them nor parsing their consequences is one of the blithely scattered activities of bdiscoe as he attempts to keep his scores high on the leaderboard while he preys on other under-mapp... | |
| 52811016 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-10-11 06:38:02 UTC | velmyshanovnyi | Hi, your OVER-cleaning - in some places strongly broke the accuracy (((https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/60.8407/-164.9465 |
| 2 | 2017-10-11 06:56:40 UTC | bdiscoe | Hi, I ran simplify with a 90cm threshold. That is very conservative for a remote, wild area of mud and tundra. As for accuracy, I ran the JOSM validator and fixed many of the issues you left, with multipolygon ways intersecting each other, overlapping ways, and many other problems. It is fixed now... | |
| 3 | 2017-10-14 22:40:34 UTC | velmyshanovnyi | thnx )"That is very conservative for a remote, wild area of mud and tundra" (c)+100 carma ))) | |
| 48578492 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-09-25 17:55:49 UTC | HubMiner | Hi, I wanted to link this route 37 to something official, but didn't see anything online except this https://www.adventurecycling.org/default/assets/File/USBRS/USBR37IllinoisMap.pdfDo you have any other references? |
| 2 | 2017-09-25 20:55:45 UTC | bdiscoe | Sorry i have no information on that highway. My own changes here are only on boundaries and waterways. | |
| 3 | 2017-09-27 20:24:29 UTC | HubMiner | Thanks! | |
| 49549101 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 18:04:15 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 2 | 2017-06-18 18:34:03 UTC | SomeoneElse | Hi Marek,Can you please explain what were the actual problems caused by this changeset and the others on which you have similarly commented?Also, you may find that that using emotive language such as "stop destroying" is less effective at communicating what you want to get across than ... | |
| 3 | 2017-06-22 13:04:49 UTC | imagico | I would like to add that what bdiscoe did here was not in any way destroying a detailed map. He removed nodes which had a very little influence on the overall geometry because they were almost exactly in the middle between the next and the previous node. See http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?change... | |
| 4 | 2017-06-22 16:25:02 UTC | SomeoneElse | For info, see also https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1385 . | |
| 5 | 2017-06-23 05:46:26 UTC | bdiscoe | For what it's worth, I wrote OSM messages to marek kleciak explaining these edits, and even described the detailed steps he can do in JOSM to do the cleanup himself. | |
| 6 | 2017-06-23 07:16:50 UTC | marek kleciak | We are in touch with bdiscoe now. I wrote him about reasons for this mapping. We have opportunity to make an very exactly example for nepali authorities and show the results during SOTM Asia 2017. All old, too less forest areas should be removed/modified. I hope for help of you all: The goal would b... | |
| 7 | 2017-06-23 07:41:17 UTC | imagico | Who is 'we' here?Keep in mind that planning and organizing of mapping activities and development of mapping conventions should be public.Although there is not yet a formal policy on organized mapping activities it is good practice to document such activities and reference this in changeset c... | |
| 8 | 2017-06-23 07:50:00 UTC | marek kleciak | We, is Kathmandu Living Maps. As you probably know from german forum I do a lot for Nepal and try to inform communities in Germany and Poland about recent situation there.What you wrote about mapping activities is a part of old OSM communication problem, but you´re absolutely right, I should... | |
| 9 | 2017-06-26 05:49:54 UTC | marek kleciak | Hi everybody, KLL wil post information about this Project in the Wiki Project Nepal. Meanwhile I analyzed approach described by bdiscoe. Using generalization factor of 1.0 m we change the areas of smaller Farmlands in forests by up to 5%. I suggest the generalization factor of. 0.3m which make chan... | |
| 10 | 2017-06-26 15:32:38 UTC | SomeoneElse | @marek - having nodes closer together doesn't make for a map that matches reality better; it just makes it more difficult to edit. If you've got some specific examples perhaps write it up as a diary entry? | |
| 11 | 2017-06-26 16:14:53 UTC | marek kleciak | Absolutely. This matter needs an proposal and discusion of the community. | |
| 12 | 2017-06-28 03:50:12 UTC | bdiscoe | Marek the starting point of your analysis is incorrect. It assumes that the existing, hyper-noded wood areas are precisely correct with no uncertainty or error bars. Consider the factors involved - imprecise criteria, human variability, seasonality, poor resolution, loose rectification, etc. it is... | |
| 13 | 2017-06-28 04:39:19 UTC | marek kleciak | Ben wrote: imprecise criteria, human variability, seasonality, poor resolution, loose rectification.We have Premium Digital Globe images from last year for whole Nepal. Factors like human variability or seasonality are general for all OSM maps. Only activation of the community AND in this case l... | |
| 49828585 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-26 07:34:38 UTC | marek kleciak | Thank you Ben! I made some experiments with generalization of areas. Surface of small areas generalized with 1.0 m is up to 5% less. The areas may be used for calculation of productivity of farmers and possibly targeted training for them. I tried 0.3 m, this is great. The problem I sometimes had is ... |
| 49788059 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-24 16:44:02 UTC | marek kleciak | Great Ben, thank you! |
| 49761857 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-23 08:22:41 UTC | marek kleciak | Thanks Ben! |
| 49549696 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 19:48:34 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49548516 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 19:47:33 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49550054 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 19:42:20 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49550181 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 19:39:32 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49550642 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 19:38:49 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49549577 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 18:04:01 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49547570 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 18:03:50 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49547953 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 18:03:31 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49548176 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 18:03:06 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49548292 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 18:02:54 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49548597 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 18:02:35 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 49550437 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-06-18 17:54:49 UTC | marek kleciak | Stop destroying detailed map using generalization tools. In developing countries like Nepal eactly map can save human life. Please first ask, then act. |
| 47241744 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-03-30 11:09:53 UTC | de vries | Hi bdiscoe,I need to ask you to be more careful with edits like these. In this changeset you seem to have targeted BAG buildings for mass simplification. The methods and software used for importing and actualization of the BAG data has been discussed in great length. So doing mechanical edits to t... |
| 2 | 2017-04-20 15:27:35 UTC | bdiscoe | Hi, if you take a close look, you will see that no "details" were removed. As part of other cleanup (maproullette farm->farmland), I've been run the JOSM validator on some of the nearby buildings and landuse, and tidying up the results. The BAG buildings have numerous issues (including... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-20 15:45:32 UTC | bdiscoe | For what it's worth, I recognize unlike other mass imports I'd had to clean up (Canvec, NHD, Tiger...) this data is much better in precision as well as accuracy. That's why i use thresholds not of 70-110 cm as with NHD, but as little as 6 cm for BAG, guaranteeing that cleanup stays within the accur... | |
| 4 | 2017-04-27 21:36:15 UTC | bdiscoe | For an example of BAG problems, see buildings like http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/277899879 which has a "sliver" which is 18cm wide and 3m long; it is clearly a mechanical error. I have manually fixed hundreds of these problems. | |
| 5 | 2017-04-28 20:32:31 UTC | Commodoortje | Hi bdiscoe,Thank you for fixing the JOSM validation errors on BAG import here.The person who did the BAG import is responsable for fixing duplicated nodes/crossing buildings/building inside building self-intersecting ways etc... | |
| 6 | 2017-05-01 15:23:38 UTC | de vries | You had me at "I am an expert at what I'm doing". But if you want an example: compare this two images:http://pix.toile-libre.org/?img=1493650984.pnghttp://pix.toile-libre.org/?img=1493651063.pngThe imagery resolution is 7,5 cm so your simplification is nowhere within the accuracy of ... | |
| 7 | 2017-05-01 15:51:38 UTC | Commodoortje | Het lijkt erop dat bdiscoe in JOSM de functie "Simplify Way" gebruikt.Wat deze tool doet: de contouren ontdoen van onnodige nodes.https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Action/SimplifyWay.Ik ben het met de vries eens dat dit niet structureel op gebouwen mag plaatsvinden. Dan wordt... | |
| 25782573 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2017-01-18 17:27:29 UTC | SomeoneElse | Hi, http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/305813112/history used to extend from http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3104967991 but was deleted in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44453803 . Does that make sense to you? An attempt to communicate with the author of that changeset didn't get anywher... |
| 35344538 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2016-07-12 16:29:39 UTC | maxerickson | There was some kind of selection error in this changeset that moved quite a few nodes that were connected to powerlines. For example, a node that I've just fixed:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/169943625And a shot of the spot:http://imgur.com/y8tx6AAI noticed the same effect with ... |
| 36188521 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2016-05-25 21:54:29 UTC | Sunfishtommy | A lot of these relations seem to be piled up on top of one another. I just found two natural=wood relations that were duplicated on top of one another |
| 36809695 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2016-02-13 22:04:39 UTC | maraf24 | Do you know the difference between source and source:building?The former is ambiguous. This is the tag you should remove, not source:building. |
| 35543670 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2015-11-24 22:02:17 UTC | gileri | Thank you, this looks like a good thing to do !May I ask how did you do it with JOSM ? |
| 2 | 2015-11-25 07:15:19 UTC | bdiscoe | In the preferences, under "advanced", there is a setting called "simplify-way.max-error". It is important to set this to a low number appropriate for the specific geometry; in the case of a very clear lake like this, sub-meter precision can be maintained, hence a value of 0.4 | |
| 3 | 2015-11-25 16:22:13 UTC | gileri | Thank you ! | |
| 34831985 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2015-10-24 15:52:53 UTC | bdiscoe | Testing ability to put emojis in chageset comments: 👍🏻👍🏼👍🏽👍🏾👍🏿😊😄😊 |
| 2 | 2015-10-24 15:54:42 UTC | bdiscoe | 👍 | |
| 30528688 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2015-04-27 18:50:03 UTC | trigpoint | HiI have spotted that you have edited the River Severn in Shropshire.The river forms parts of Montford/Ford parish boundaries and in moving the river flow you have moved the boundaries so that they no longer follow the official lines.I am not sure what source you used to determine the main flo... |
| 2 | 2015-05-01 16:48:35 UTC | bdiscoe | Hi tngpoint, mostly this changeset was fixing the riverbanks and adding the islands. The centerline moved only very slightly; it had a few places where it did not appear to correspond to the river flow. I did the best I could using the aerial, but if you have better local knowledge, please feel fre... | |
| 3 | 2015-05-01 16:52:47 UTC | bdiscoe | Also, I notice that it isn't quite consistent; in some places the parish boundaries share a way with the river, in other places they use two separate ways; perhaps someone determined that on that stretch the "official" boundary differed significantly enough from the river. Some boundaries... | |
| 4 | 2015-05-01 19:30:41 UTC | SomeoneElse | I've always wondered (where boundaries follow rivers) exactly how those boundaries are defined, given that rivers move? In this case is there a text description that says something like "follows the centreline of the river from blah to blah", or is it defined in terms of exact coordinates... | |
| 5 | 2015-05-25 02:01:45 UTC | bdiscoe | @SomeoneElse, it depends :) In some places the legal boundary is defined as the river, in other places the river was surveyed and that description of the course defined as legal boundary. It takes local knowledge to know the difference in different parts of the world. | |
| 6 | 2015-05-25 11:40:22 UTC | trigpoint | The boundaries are taken from the latest OS Boundaryline, so can be assumed to indicate the official boundaries.I part way through a project to add the Shropshire parish boundaries, some sections of the Severn have yet to be joined to the parish boundaries.I am not sure how "the main flow&q... | |
| 30944854 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2015-05-09 20:42:32 UTC | maraf24 | Is this tag removal and transformation discussed with polish community? |
| 2 | 2015-05-25 02:04:55 UTC | bdiscoe | Hi maraf24, I believe I only removed a few tags, which were uncontroversially incorrect or extraneous. If there is a page that describes the Wroclaw building import, please direct me to it. | |
| 31027498 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2015-05-12 11:26:51 UTC | maraf24 | With over 30000 deleted nodes this is certainly a mechanical edit.http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct |
| 2 | 2015-05-22 06:44:57 UTC | bdiscoe | I reviewed it personally. There is decimation to remove noise and redundancy, but I also go over what remains manually to compare it to the aerial; many of these wetlands are no longer here and are adjusted accordingly. | |
| 30029458 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2015-04-07 05:59:30 UTC | 51114u9 | Thanks for contributing in Bolivia. We don't have many local contributors and what you did helps a lot :)You say "desert", no is "altiplano" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altiplano ;-) |
| 25632324 by bdiscoe | 1 | 2014-11-29 02:48:19 UTC | bdhurkett | Hi, although you presumably fixed several other errors, you did a bit of damage to a local bus route relation (V2 of http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4053781/history) with this changeset. It's nothing that can't be fixed, but you might want to keep an eye on that kind of thing in future. |