rivermont have been discussed with 27 replies of this contributorrivermont have been discussed with 27 replies of this contributor| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100923299 by rivermont @ 2021-03-12 17:32 | 1 | 2024-10-18 02:10 | rhythmicbalancer ♦5 | Hi, what's the source for IUCN value (protect_class=6) on Hoosier NF? I'm working on some adjacent areas, but the data I've found lists "Other Conservation Area" rather than giving an IUCN classification (1-6 or I-VI). Can't find a source for the infobox on Wikipedia ... |
| 2 | 2024-11-08 14:51 | rivermont | IUCN class 6 is just my best estimate for how the land is protected. If Hoosier NF has an officially listed classification I couldn't find it when this change was made. | |
| 157693886 by rivermont @ 2024-10-10 00:35 | 1 | 2024-10-25 23:53 | Spaghetti Monster🍝 ♦2,069 | The provided imagery has cloud cover over the bridge. Is there another source? |
| 2 | 2024-10-25 23:58 | Spaghetti Monster🍝 ♦2,069 | referring https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/916887309 specifically | |
| 3 | 2024-10-26 00:14 | rivermont | Those bridges were tagged destroyed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157376316, I only updated them to match other damage tagging. | |
| 157985909 by rivermont @ 2024-10-16 22:49 | 1 | 2024-10-16 22:50 | rivermont | **Globe landcover |
| 138782310 by rivermont @ 2023-07-20 20:01 | 1 | 2024-07-05 14:20 | JustSomeMapper ♦4 | thanks for adding all of this forest to the map! |
| 137493814 by rivermont @ 2023-06-18 21:40 | 1 | 2023-06-26 23:17 | Joseph R P ♦356 | Hello, 'west' and 'east' shouldn't be added to ref=*, as this would imply that there is a spur route of US 64 designated as 'US 64 West/East'. If this is for navigational system purposes, the cardinal direction a highway is signed as can be added to the highway ram... |
| 130960830 by rivermont @ 2023-01-06 19:57 | 1 | 2023-01-07 00:16 | InsertUser ♦446 | Hello again. I know in an ideal situation we remove objects from OSM once they no longer exist but please note that many of the buildings made uninhabitable by Dorian are visible as ruins on site and they are also highly visible on some of the aerial imagery. For recently damaged items would you... |
| 2 | 2023-01-07 00:34 | rivermont | Yeah definitely; I usually use lifecycles for disaster areas but just didn't here haha. I figured they were just abandoned construction. I suppose it's probably especially prudent to use them in hurricane-prone areas where it will be a problem again in a few months ... | |
| 3 | 2023-01-07 00:54 | InsertUser ♦446 | There are quite a few bits of abandoned construction around these parts too, but they occasionally find themselves "un-abandoned" and finished when funds become available so it's a bit tricky to figure out what to keep. | |
| 61795889 by rivermont @ 2018-08-19 15:03 | 1 | 2022-04-15 09:13 | Allison P ♦1,136 | I doubt https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/618036746 is really called "Private Residence". I know it's labeled as such on the map, but it strikes me as more descriptive. |
| 114501217 by rivermont @ 2021-12-02 22:54 | 1 | 2021-12-02 22:56 | rivermont | Offsets used: Bing (-1.71, 5.6), Maxar (-2.08, 8.19) |
| 113541616 by rivermont @ 2021-11-08 22:38 | 1 | 2021-11-30 09:36 | ottwiz ♦385 | I hope you will fix the forest boundary because the w:1000645713 isn't accurate, it overlaps into houses and such |
| 2 | 2021-11-30 13:02 | rivermont | It is a work in progress, like some other areas of landcover | |
| 3 | 2021-11-30 15:54 | ottwiz ♦385 | Ah, it makes sense | |
| 73723176 by rivermont @ 2019-08-25 17:44 | 1 | 2021-08-11 22:26 | ElliottPlack ♦926 | Hi Will, I was doing some crosswalk analysis and came across the non-standard crossing=controlled tag here. I assume that was just an error (meant to be uncontrolled?) I updated it to `marked`. Cheers |
| 109485609 by rivermont @ 2021-08-10 21:58 | 1 | 2021-08-11 10:43 | MikeN ♦354 | What was incorrect about the woods that had to be removed? They were not an import but handcrafted in the old world tradition. |
| 2 | 2021-08-11 12:37 | rivermont | They hardly mapped onto reality at all. They cut out large portions of other woods, covered large areas of non-woods, and were only really handcrafted along two powerline cuts.I would leave it if someone was actively improving it but it would be hard to work with it since it was connected strangel... | |
| 3 | 2021-08-11 14:06 | MikeN ♦354 | Thanks for redrawing this! I'm OK with deleting as part of an improvement project. After looking at the old wood boundary, it probably did need to be drawn with more detail. | |
| 105743600 by rivermont @ 2021-06-02 22:36 | 1 | 2021-07-02 16:29 | DoctorSpeck ♦53 | I am reverting this changeset as the concerns that led to this reversion have been addressed in comment on changeset: www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103117490 |
| 84227430 by rivermont @ 2020-04-28 01:35 | 1 | 2021-02-14 18:42 | Sonny Rollins ♦2 | Hi rivermont,does the buried power line really go through the billboards? |
| 2 | 2021-02-14 19:36 | rivermont | They're minor_line, not high voltage, and they provide power to the billboards so they must somehow. If you want to map it more correctly by mapping individual underground connection wires or something feel free | |
| 98667826 by rivermont @ 2021-02-03 21:44 | 1 | 2021-02-03 22:44 | ottwiz ♦385 | Oh yes, by the way it's not a problem if you cleanup after me, I appreciate it if it's made better. Maybe it causes a little bit of hassle. Btw, check out your dms in Slack. |
| 98140221 by rivermont @ 2021-01-25 18:58 | 1 | 2021-01-25 19:00 | rivermont | scuffed changeset comment |
| 90465843 by rivermont @ 2020-09-05 22:45 | 1 | 2020-09-05 22:46 | rivermont | *Language name without default name |
| 89873518 by rivermont @ 2020-08-24 18:41 | 1 | 2020-08-26 19:53 | industrial survey ♦1 | Dear rivermont,do you know which date the imagery you've mapped after reflects?Kind regards |
| 2 | 2020-08-26 20:32 | rivermont | It appears to be from May 29 2020, according to https://discover.digitalglobe.com, though that may not be the exact date the image was taken. | |
| 3 | 2020-08-28 04:04 | rivermont | It looks like the capture date for this area is actually 2017, and for the westernmost four islands of Adam's Bridge it is sometime before 2016. | |
| 89824935 by rivermont @ 2020-08-24 00:55 | 1 | 2020-08-25 02:59 | b-jazz ♦669 | Hey there rivermont,Can you take a look at my diff (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89883891#map=16/33.9102/-78.3776) which untangles some crazy waterways. I'm not sure what it is supposed to look like, but your recent fix did something weird. I'm not sure what you're trying... |
| 2 | 2020-08-27 15:01 | rivermont | Hey b-jazz,I couldn't find me in the PeWU history of the streams, so I think what happened is that I moved the coastline and a stream wasn't downloaded. Thanks for the fix, it looks good now. Another mapper removed a couple of them. Will | |
| 89769540 by rivermont @ 2020-08-22 03:52 | 1 | 2020-08-22 04:02 | rivermont | huge bounding box is because I touched the Intracoastal Waterway I guess? |
| 87253932 by rivermont @ 2020-06-28 15:47 | 1 | 2020-06-28 15:48 | rivermont | Lots of deletion presumably because people are moving into the towns. |
| 86798745 by rivermont @ 2020-06-18 03:43 | 1 | 2020-06-18 03:43 | rivermont | *ADDING WATER |
| 86246523 by rivermont @ 2020-06-05 13:08 | 1 | 2020-06-05 13:10 | rivermont | *Incorrect changeset description, should be "update new residential construction" or something. |
| 86089619 by rivermont @ 2020-06-02 16:39 | 1 | 2020-06-02 16:39 | rivermont | *Also some NHD cleanup. |
| 83167055 by rivermont @ 2020-04-06 22:25 | 1 | 2020-04-07 15:52 | jumbanho ♦148 | Clap clap! |
| 79196432 by rivermont @ 2020-01-04 18:28 | 1 | 2020-01-05 15:13 | Alhamdulillah ♦34 | Are you importing Microsoft building footprints? |
| 2 | 2020-01-05 19:42 | rivermont | No I traced these by hand. Microsoft building imports are done in the RapiD editor and must be labeled as imports. The dataset is also not available for outside the U.S. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Microsoft_Building_Footprint_Data | |
| 78939002 by rivermont @ 2019-12-27 19:10 | 1 | 2019-12-28 02:25 | rivermont | Added a lot more than a hairdresser; dunno why that's the comment. |
| 78074104 by rivermont @ 2019-12-06 22:26 | 1 | 2019-12-06 22:27 | rivermont | ... the directional prefixes are also not present in TIGER 2017, 2018, or 2019. |
| 75917236 by rivermont @ 2019-10-19 00:55 | 1 | 2019-10-19 01:37 | phidauex ♦194 | Hi, please stop what you are doing - you are creating some very malformed relations and breaking a lot of things with your edits!You should not be adding all the objects in a location into a "boundary" relation - that relation is for the actual boundary line only. The relations you are... |
| 2 | 2019-10-19 18:45 | phidauex ♦194 | Apologies, this comment was intended for the original creator of these relations, I see you are trying to fix them! Sorry for the false alarm. | |
| 75917710 by rivermont @ 2019-10-19 01:38 | 1 | 2019-10-19 01:39 | rivermont | *source=aerial_imagery |
| 75795977 by rivermont @ 2019-10-16 17:46 | 1 | 2019-10-16 18:56 | skquinn ♦804 | Great work! |
| 74697408 by rivermont @ 2019-09-19 22:34 | 1 | 2019-09-20 00:38 | rivermont | See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74675678 |
| 74697370 by rivermont @ 2019-09-19 22:32 | 1 | 2019-09-20 00:38 | rivermont | See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74674989 |
| 74603889 by rivermont @ 2019-09-18 03:22 | 1 | 2019-09-18 23:33 | jmapb ♦405 | Hi rivermont, thanks for adding this building -- you're fast! I've added the height and building ID tags from the NYC dept of buildings, and standardized the address tags. Addresses in NYC generally lack city, state, and country, and instead simply have housenumber, street, and postcod... |
| 74321896 by rivermont @ 2019-09-10 17:00 | 1 | 2019-09-10 23:59 | rivermont | This should not have included the change of n5451499824; that was intended to be separate.Will have to be more careful using Osmose for editing... |
| 74186040 by rivermont @ 2019-09-06 16:58 | 1 | 2019-09-07 18:19 | edathy Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | 2019-09-08 00:58 | rivermont | Thanks for the heads up. 👍 | |
| 73939876 by rivermont @ 2019-08-30 23:38 | 1 | 2019-08-31 03:56 | rivermont | wrong hashtags |
| 73941733 by rivermont @ 2019-08-31 03:48 | 1 | 2019-08-31 03:55 | rivermont | wrong hashtags |
| 72323078 by rivermont @ 2019-07-16 20:55 | 1 | 2019-08-22 22:01 | ThatOneDoge ♦1 | I noticed the name and remembered you from Slack. How'd you find this? Is this edit just changing Care_Credit to care_credit? |
| 2 | 2019-08-23 01:51 | rivermont | A while ago I went through the `payments=` tag (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=payments) and was changing them all to the correct `payment:*=` tag so they could actually be used by consumers. (In hindsight it was probably on large enough scale that I should have announced it somewhere, ... | |
| 72976271 by rivermont @ 2019-08-03 19:41 | 1 | 2019-08-04 02:32 | Glassman ♦5,247 | Do you know what kind of curb, raised, lowered, or flush is at Monroe Street and Gardner Road? |
| 2 | 2019-08-04 03:11 | rivermont | According to Bing Streetside from 2015, they're lowered without tactile marking. I've updated them as such and hopefully that's correct. | |
| 3 | 2019-08-04 05:14 | Glassman ♦5,247 | Thanks - I'm trying to get all of Skagit County into AccessMap.io - right now only Mount Vernon is included. | |
| 71456941 by rivermont @ 2019-06-20 18:30 | 1 | 2019-08-02 18:04 | vogelfreier ♦91 | Hello rivermont, for me as a German I do not quite understand this Tiger data system. I thought that with tiger: zip_left = ... and tiger: zip_right = ... how many "households" are present along the streets is shown encrypted.Why do you then delete in editing https://www.openstreetmap.or... |
| 2 | 2019-08-02 21:37 | rivermont | Hi vogelfreier,The TIGER data was imported years ago to complete the road network in the United States. The `tiger:zip_left` and `tiger:zip_right` tags provide the zip code (`addr:postcode`) for the corresponding side of the street. They're usually accurate and can be used for determining the... | |
| 72909957 by rivermont @ 2019-08-01 18:01 | 1 | 2019-08-02 07:32 | woodpeck ♦2,432 | Dear rivermont, please refrain from making mechanical corrections/edits like you did here unless you have discussed them with the community first, explaining what algorithm/rule you intend to apply exactly. Edits like this run the danger of putting your "last edited" mark on objects that m... |
| 2 | 2019-08-02 19:39 | rivermont | Thanks Frederick for the explanation. I'll go over all aspects of the POIs when I edit in the future. | |
| 72834685 by rivermont @ 2019-07-31 02:11 | 1 | 2019-07-31 03:47 | DP24PH ♦418 | Note from DEARPAUL24 from the Philippines: You have fixed the incorrect tag, but the scope of the edit may involve multiple countries. Hopefully, you will separate the edits in one country - one changeset at a time. It may bother other editors on some countries where stringent editing rules are appl... |
| 72196487 by rivermont @ 2019-07-12 20:05 | 1 | 2019-07-13 06:53 | user_5359 ♦19,440 | Hello, Please notice your correction has an error: the correct writing of payment:checks is payment:cheque (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:payment#Cheques)! |
| 2 | 2019-07-13 15:56 | rivermont | Thanks for noticing. I see there are also some incorrect instances of payment:cheques and payment:check in the database. I'll fix all of them soon. | |
| 71039543 by rivermont @ 2019-06-07 22:08 | 1 | 2019-06-10 14:40 | mueschel ♦6,576 | Hi,you added several "contact:phone:ZZZ" and "opening_hours:ZZZ" tags here. These tags are not understood by any software I know of - you have to add individual nodes for them to be usable on maps and other applications.CheersJan |
| 70368629 by rivermont @ 2019-05-17 18:09 | 1 | 2019-05-17 18:14 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,666 | Thanks! |
| 67036688 by rivermont @ 2019-02-08 20:54 | 1 | 2019-02-09 13:47 | mueschel ♦6,576 | Hi,the tag "nema_label" is not used in any other place. What does it mean?ThanksJan |
| 2 | 2019-02-09 17:38 | rivermont | Hi Jan,I am using it describe the NEMA wattage label on the street lights. The label describes the type of lamp used (color of label) and the wattage (number-coded). I am using `nema_label` as nothing exists but it is useful information and it didn't seem right to put it in a note or descript... | |
| 3 | 2019-02-09 18:50 | mueschel ♦6,576 | I'd suggest to use a tag along the lines of the already existing tags for lamps, see these from Taginfo:https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=lamp_Maybe you can find something similar that fits into this scheme? | |
| 66620015 by rivermont @ 2019-01-25 04:14 | 1 | 2019-01-30 12:05 | mueschel ♦6,576 | Hi,on this node you put 4 man_made tags:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6235272161This is unfortunately not how tagging in OSM works. Tags can't be extended with a '_1' suffix in almost all cases, as this will just be ignored by software. Please add individual nodes for each ... |
| 2 | 2019-01-31 18:58 | rivermont | Hi Jan,I wasn't sure how to tag this as they are all part of the same object and are connected. I've seen both `man_made=tag1;tag2;tag3` and `man_made=tag1 + man_made=tag2 + man_made=tag3`, but haven't found documentation on which method to use. Multiple different nodes on the same ... | |
| 3 | 2019-01-31 19:00 | mueschel ♦6,576 | Hi,';' separated values should only be used on minor, descriptive tags. But not on the main physical tags (highway, shop, man_made...)Having multiple nodes is not perfect, but there is no better solution, that is also understood by e.g. POI maps. | |
| 66289766 by rivermont @ 2019-01-14 04:17 | 1 | 2019-01-15 13:00 | datamongers ♦55 | That row of building=shed on Einos loop are rental cabins. And the building in front of them is the High Country Tavern. |
| 2 | 2019-01-15 13:18 | rivermont | Great, thanks!Added in changeset #66331735 | |
| 63204851 by rivermont @ 2018-10-04 17:55 | 1 | 2018-12-26 10:36 | SK53 ♦864 | You changed the intended meaning of the tags on at least one object. name_1 is largely a deprecated tag largely created in handling TIGER data. However it's meaning is clear: it an alternate name CONCURRENT with the base name tag. The disused1:name etc use ordinals after the disused to distingu... |
| 64332825 by rivermont @ 2018-11-09 17:30 | 1 | 2018-11-16 20:10 | LeifRasmussen ♦88 | Nice! |
| 64366816 by rivermont @ 2018-11-11 04:55 | 1 | 2018-11-12 00:34 | LeifRasmussen ♦88 | oneway=no can be useful in rare instances, just so that you know. StreetComplete finds likely oneway roads without oneway=* and asks "is this road oneway?". Removing oneway=no could possibly, in those rare instances, make StreetComplete ask the same question again. Not really an issue, ... |
| 64278431 by rivermont @ 2018-11-08 01:33 | 1 | 2018-11-08 03:03 | Baloo Uriza ♦2,121 | Might want to preserve the desktination as destination=* tags on the first way of the ramps. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/64278431 |
| 2 | 2018-11-08 03:06 | rivermont | 👍 Added.https://.osm.org/changeset/64279505 | |
| 64277392 by rivermont @ 2018-11-07 23:56 | 1 | 2018-11-07 23:57 | rivermont | 25 minutes |
| 64276950 by rivermont @ 2018-11-07 23:24 | 1 | 2018-11-07 23:24 | rivermont | 23 minutes |
| 64274102 by rivermont @ 2018-11-07 21:11 | 1 | 2018-11-07 21:19 | rivermont | 21 minutes |
| 64273270 by rivermont @ 2018-11-07 20:35 | 1 | 2018-11-07 21:19 | rivermont | 30 minutes |
| 63916602 by rivermont @ 2018-10-26 23:03 | 1 | 2018-11-06 14:43 | mueschel ♦6,576 | Hi,could you check this node? It somehow got two lamp tags each:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5599568581 |
| 2 | 2018-11-06 14:50 | rivermont | Hi mueschel,The node is a power pole with two different street lights attached, with different types, mounts, and facing different directions.Is this the correct tagging? I couldn't find a better namespacing schema that properly identified which was which, so I did this.Is there a more sy... | |
| 3 | 2018-11-07 11:49 | mueschel ♦6,576 | That's complicated:- I don't know any application that accepts tags with :1 along with the normal tags- in general we have the rule "1 object in reality = 1 object in the map"You could make it two nodes, right on top of each other - this violates the 1:1 rule above, but... | |
| 63201923 by rivermont @ 2018-10-04 16:29 | 1 | 2018-10-08 18:07 | SomeoneElse ♦13,398 | Hello,Just for info a new mapper (with doodles as a first edit) drew this "river". Looking at the imagery, it appears to be half-way up a cliff face. Did you perhaps not check it when you changed the tags?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | 2018-10-08 18:13 | rivermont | I found this changeset after looking the user's history after seeing a discussion in OSMUS Slack about the previous changeset. The way seemed in line with a depression from aerial imagery so I assumed they added valid info. It seems the river has been removed now though. | |
| 3 | 2018-10-08 18:35 | SomeoneElse ♦13,398 | Yes - I removed it because, based on looking at the imagery it was half-way up a slope (which you can also see by looking at the contours on the cycle map - https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/10.96130/-12.63470&layers=C ). | |
| 61775015 by rivermont @ 2018-08-18 16:41 | 1 | 2018-08-19 11:01 | mueschel ♦6,576 | Hi,are these poles for telephone lines? The tag "telephone=pole" is already used 930 times.Jan |
| 59883587 by rivermont @ 2018-06-15 20:42 | 1 | 2018-06-15 20:43 | rivermont | Intended title: Resolved note 1421974. |
| 59863761 by rivermont @ 2018-06-15 03:32 | 1 | 2018-06-15 03:36 | rivermont | Intended title: Consolidate residential property parcels from Fresno County GIS import into large residential landuse. |
| 59863609 by rivermont @ 2018-06-15 03:08 | 1 | 2018-06-15 03:20 | rivermont | Intended title: Consolidate residential property parcels from Fresno County GIS import into large residential landuse. |
| 59863555 by rivermont @ 2018-06-15 02:59 | 1 | 2018-06-15 03:20 | rivermont | Intended title: Consolidate residential property parcels from Fresno County GIS import into large residential landuse. |
| 59818961 by rivermont @ 2018-06-13 18:15 | 1 | 2018-06-13 20:08 | jumbanho ♦148 | Note that Mapbox Satellite has a bit of an offset in its imagery. The NC State Orthos are nearly always dead on.I moved this building to match NC Ortho |
| 2 | 2018-06-13 20:48 | rivermont | Awesome, thanks! I think I drew around the roof and didn't adjust for the offset from the actual base. | |
| 59574218 by rivermont @ 2018-06-05 16:12 | 1 | 2018-06-06 11:15 | mueschel ♦6,576 | Hi,could you check these parks? They are overlapping with other parks that are already mapped.Jan |
| 58561104 by rivermont @ 2018-04-30 16:58 | 1 | 2018-04-30 18:37 | SK53 ♦864 | In general I would support the wiki's advice on this re-tagging: "This tag is a refinement of power=station and power=sub_station and aims to replace these tags even though they are, at present, much more frequently used. Do not try to automatically change these tags. " (https://wiki.... |
| 2 | 2018-04-30 19:00 | rivermont | @SK53 I am on mobile atm and do not have the link the the challenge, but each edit was manually reviewed using satellite imagery. I'll try to find the challenge once I am back at my computer. | |
| 3 | 2018-04-30 22:09 | rivermont | Here is the link to the challenge: http://maproulette.org/ui/metrics/2821 | |
| 4 | 2018-05-02 09:58 | SK53 ♦864 | Many thanks. I can get in touch with the person who set-up the challenge instead of hassling you! Happy mapping. | |
| 58250168 by rivermont @ 2018-04-20 03:31 | 1 | 2018-04-20 05:12 | user_5359 ♦19,440 | Welcome to OSM! Please notice: the minimum keys for an address is addr:street and addr:housenumber! Can you add the value for the house number, please? |
| 2 | 2018-04-20 13:41 | rivermont | @user_5359 on which building(s)? | |
| 3 | 2018-04-20 13:43 | user_5359 ♦19,440 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/304111204https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/304111863 | |
| 4 | 2018-04-20 13:44 | rivermont | Ah, much thanks! |