Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12017-11-22 02:39:26 UTCaaronsta Hi herriotto,
This changeset has been reverted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/53989819

Please make sure to verify your edits, you should not be using outdated third party information to do editing. ESRI imagery is more outdated than MapBox imagery for this location. You should not be ...
22017-11-22 19:16:52 UTCherriotto Hi Aaronsta,
Thanks for the feedback. I left my earlier comment before seeing your explanation. In terms of looking at the most up todate tile set for an area, is there somewhere to check the age of the tile assets? I right click on the tile for info, but am not finding any dates to verify earliest...
32017-11-23 10:58:30 UTCaaronsta Hi Herriotto :)
FIrst off, sorry if I came off a bit too harsh previously! It is fantastic to have someone editing in this area!

It is a bit hard to work out imagery dates, as you could have one date for an image in one area, and several kms away it could have been taken on a different day.

L...
42017-12-04 22:25:02 UTCjharpster Hi Aaron, Thanks for all the detail. Question about the road hierarchy. How closely do you model the OSM roads to the 'official' hierarchy as defined by the government in WA?
52017-12-07 16:52:42 UTCaaronsta Generally it should be an exact match.

Urban Areas:
primary distributor = trunk or motorway (motorway is a controlled access road (i.e only slip-roads to enter and exit the road, no houses, driveways or traffic signals))
distributor A = primary
distributor B = secondary
local distributor = te...
12017-11-21 13:32:00 UTCaaronsta Hi stampyfanclub :)

Thanks for your edit,
just a reminder to check how to classify roads in the wiki. Currently this road is not a motorway, not in practical terms, official terms, or by OSM standards. Until there is control-of-access on the road it cannot be a motorway.

Cheers,
aaronsta
12017-10-31 15:59:29 UTCaaronsta Hey rund :)
Cheers for your edit.
Regarding your edit, and just in my opinion, it is not productive to reclassify roads to unclassifed. although I can understand your motive behind it. Sometimes it can take years for an area to be looked at again by another mapper, and in that time the map will be...
12017-10-07 15:27:13 UTCaaronsta Hi Warin61,
Thanks for your edits on this relation. I was unaware that the type=site relation tag existed.

Regards,
Aaron
12017-10-02 21:29:28 UTCWarin61 Hi,
The changes to
Alfred Cove Marine Park
Alfred Cove Nature Reserve
Milyn Nature Reserve
Pelican Point Nature reserve

conflict with the relation 7619687 Swan Estuary Marin Park by having shared tags.
Humm ... are these part of the Swan Estuary Marin Park? If so then possibly s site rela...
22017-10-03 15:49:54 UTCaaronsta Hi Warin61,
Cheers for your feedback :)
Each individual area has its own individual name, and together these six areas form the Swan Estuary Marine Park.
I tried having a look earlier for a common and approved way tag, but found none. Maybe you know of one and can update the tagging accordingly.\...
32017-10-04 21:32:44 UTCWarin61 Umm I have applied the site relation ... see how that goes?
12017-09-29 17:01:15 UTCaaronsta Hi shinjiman, thanks for your edit :) Just following up and letting you know that when you edit to check that you remove redundant tags if possible. This is harder on the ID (web based) editor. This is just as the tag construction=service was still on these ways and should have been deleted. Cheers ...
12017-09-11 22:29:38 UTCWarin61 Hi,
Relation 7560478 - for your aerial imagery reference... ?

1) What aerial reference? Copyright free? Or specific permission given?

2) You could keep these off the data base by storing them locally as a JOSM layer ...

3) They generate error indication on OSM inspector ... thus my atten...
22017-09-12 00:08:24 UTCaharvey Agree with Warin61 here, a feature in OSM should represent something physically on the ground (I know this isn't always the case, but generally should apply). So if something exists, like the roundabout, map that, but if nothing exists on the ground, that's not suitable for OSM.

I'd suggest use ...
32017-09-12 05:01:01 UTCaaronsta Hi Warin61 and aharvey, this changeset is in response to a message from OSM user hadry. Below is a copy of correspondence between myself and OSM user hadry: Hi Hadry, Thanks for your message, yes these were tagged for the renderer, as barrier=fence makes a clearly visible straight line on Mapnik. ...
42017-09-12 05:09:10 UTCaaronsta Following up from this, originally these were created as the roundabouts themselves formed good starting points, but are way to inaccurate to align the images. It was not put in a local dataset as the images were rectified outside JOSM, where wms tiles were supported but any vector data (such as osm...
52017-09-12 05:13:15 UTCaaronsta It may be appropriate to remove these lines, as I am yet to complete mapping the area and may need to use them again it could be useful to retain. The lines now have no tagged attributes aside from the note=*
62017-09-12 05:20:31 UTCaharvey The issue is you're using OSM to save data really only useful/specific to you. As you can imagine if everyone started using OSM to tag their personal bookmarks it would clutter the database and make editing real map data more difficult.

So I'd like to see these deleted as they don't correspond to...
72017-09-13 14:47:12 UTCaaronsta Thanks for your message aharvey.
The nodes have now been removed.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52009366
Uploading it to the live server remained the only efficient way to rectify the images which I am aware of. As I required a free and open wms tile service, which included relatively u...
12017-08-30 18:40:36 UTCtrigpoint Hi. This edit appears to be mechanical, did you follow the guidelines at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct, where was the discussion.

The reason I ask is that I can se you did not check the changes you were making as
ways 385848816 & 385848826 are now tagged...
22017-08-31 04:00:16 UTCaaronsta Hi trigpoint,
Each way was tagged by hand. This is not an automated edit as described by the link your provided, although the use of an editing program (automation) increased the speed of the process. To verify the validity of the intersection, each change made in the edit including tagging was don...
32017-08-31 04:00:56 UTCaaronsta Correction to previous: your > you
12017-07-17 06:27:52 UTCaaronsta Some changes have been made to this changeset (#50341042). Please note the meanings and how to use the following tags before any future edits using these keys: motorway; motorway_link; trunk; and trunk_link. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway Also ensure that relations are n...
12016-06-09 16:52:38 UTCediyes Hi,

These streets are overlapping, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4849536/history and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4823965/history
exactly here https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2958125691/history

What did you do?
22017-01-27 12:20:05 UTCaaronsta Note: there were some significant issues with this edit, it seems the editor moved some ways
12016-08-17 08:26:18 UTCaaronsta Hi russj79,
I just wanted to make a note with a few of your edits in Caversham, these edits occurred about 2 years ago! So it has taken this long for them to be picked up!

When tagging roundabouts don't use highway=turning_circle this is only for certain cul-de-sacs. Use junction=roundabout inst...
12016-08-02 06:00:13 UTCaaronsta Changeset reverted in full as it constitutes vandalism
12016-07-28 12:13:47 UTCaaronsta Road previously classed as trunk as it was deemed a "dual-carriageway". While this road section is a dual carriageway this is not a classification of Main Roads (MRWA) Beyond Safety Bay Rd and Kwinana Freeway intersection the road is no longer a road with Control of Access. If the logic of...
12016-07-06 00:27:12 UTCaharvey This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40512157 where the changeset comment is:
22016-07-17 09:52:59 UTCSomeoneElse I'm guessing that this wasn't actually part of the Landgate import and that the changeset comment was leftover by mistake?
Currently Arthur Street (and Lord Street to the northwest) are a bit odd as they are secondary and primary roads that terminate rather than link up in any way.
I've never been...
32016-07-18 04:35:59 UTCaaronsta Hi there, yes I do think that is what happened Ill do a quick edit now and have a proper look at it later
12016-07-12 20:16:22 UTCmueschel Hi,
I found 243438 nodes created by you that have no tags and are not part of any way or relation. Can these nodes be deleted?
Jan
22016-07-12 21:54:16 UTCSomeoneElse @mueschel The Data Working Group's aware of this changeset and the need to remove the data that it introduced. Unfortunately the technicalities of doing so aren't quite so straightforward (an normal API download fails) so we're investigating the options.
Best Regards
Andy (DWG)
32016-07-13 00:03:40 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40701240 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed WA unconnected node import
42016-07-13 03:14:44 UTCSomeoneElse_Revert This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 40701250 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed WA unconnected node import
52016-07-13 03:58:27 UTCaaronsta Hi there, This data added by this sequence of changesets was removed in the changesets:
40292745
40293650
40293839

All nodes, ways and relations and their tags were attempted to be removed in these changesets. Unfortunatley as I am now aware some nodes failed to be deleted in full. I did exper...
62016-07-13 08:37:47 UTCSomeoneElse @aaronsta Thanks for the info. We probably ought to try and warn people not to create changesets "so big that you can't download them afterwards" (and somewhere in the wiki we may do already, but I'm not aware of it).
Do you have a full list of what you consider "these changesets&qu...
72016-07-14 02:56:45 UTCaaronsta Hi SomeoneElse, with regards to the edits I have done relating to this data.
All of these edits did not constitute of anything other than the data that was later removed by the three changesets I listed above.
The data was added with:
40051763
40051946
40052185
40052416
40052639
40052929
40...
82016-07-14 03:03:04 UTCaaronsta Another person has been working hard to try and remove these changesets, if the most recent changeset does not match one of those three above then it may have been their changeset which created the untagged nodes. If the tags can be restored through a revert of smaller changesets then the nodes can ...
92016-07-14 03:06:40 UTCaaronsta Unfortunatley I cannot work out a way to remove nodes without tags as it will also bring up ways without tags and relation nodes and ways without tags. But you seem to know what you are doing SomeoneElse, please let me know if I can help.
102016-07-14 08:30:32 UTCSomeoneElse Thanks aaronsta - I'll compare that list to what I previously had to make sure that I don't revert something that I shouldn't.
12016-06-12 06:06:56 UTCCloCkWeRX Is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/401616172 still under construction?
22016-06-12 06:22:05 UTCaaronsta Contruction is still in progress for landscaping. All traffic movements are now open. It was completed in late March 2016 when this changeset went live. http://gatewaywa.com.au/news/latest-news/filter&archive=true?start=30
12016-03-16 08:56:57 UTCaaronsta Hi there, although this changeset is old, a note on using highway=give_way and highway=stop tags. These generally should only be applied to nodes of traversable ways (I.e a node on a highway=residential) just prior to the intersection node, and not to isolated nodes as it thus serves no practical pu...
12016-03-14 16:21:01 UTCaaronsta Hello, thank you for your edit.
Please ensure when you apply tags like barrier=gate you also apply a barrier=gate node at the centre as barrier=gate is often a useless tag when applied to a way.

Also note the map scale as your barrier=gate was grossly oversized (approx 40m wide before update)
S...
22016-03-14 16:28:49 UTCaaronsta A further note that using barrier=gate on ways is discouraged, and using it on nodes is strongly preferred
32016-03-14 16:31:54 UTCaaronsta (editors like JOSM mark such features as validation errors)
42016-03-14 16:50:15 UTCaaronsta (Sorry for so many comments but you should consult the wiki for further information, it may be found at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dgate) Thanks :)
52016-03-15 00:55:40 UTCgohikinghk_blogspot Hello, thanks for your comments and fixing that I learn a lots :)
12016-03-04 12:45:03 UTCaaronsta Hi Robbie, this is a friendly note on editing in OpenStreetMap.
This edit you completed three months ago left redundant tags and deleted important ways(!) As a result you made this intersection not able to be navigable. Only now three months later am I correcting this edit (by chance) some edits do...
12015-11-12 08:51:28 UTCGerdP please review my change:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35256292
OK for you?
22015-11-24 16:11:09 UTCaaronsta Hello :) Just a friendly note that best practice for highway=construction tagging is to not overwrite the prexisting value, and instead have highway=construction and construction=* where the construction tag is the highway value.
12015-11-12 11:32:03 UTCaaronsta Changeset Redacted
Abusive/Spam Changeset
12015-09-13 10:42:05 UTCaaronsta Changeset partially reverted. Incorrect road classification. Check classification before edit.
12015-08-22 10:45:23 UTCaaronsta Hi epicsauce :)
There appears to be a link at
http://gatewaywa.com.au/assets/Publications/Factsheets/FACTSHEET-4-Tonkin-Dunreath.pdf
In the visualisation it appears to be covered by a red material. In aerial photographs this appears to be under construction. But it probably wouldn't be used by re...
12015-08-21 17:39:35 UTCaaronsta Hi epicsauce,

Thanks for your edit :)

When editing be mindful of the tags on the object, in particular, to correct any fixme=* tags and in this case to remove any redundant tags, notably highway=construction before changing the road (highway=* tag). Unless someone reviews the road, which quite...
22015-08-21 17:39:42 UTCaaronsta Further to this to be-aware of the correct tagging (i.e when to use motorway, and when instead to use motorway_link), and when to merge road ways, and road classes. Nonetheless your edit is very much appreciated and contributes to the a great map
32015-08-21 17:42:05 UTCaaronsta Changeset reverted
42015-08-22 04:50:46 UTCepicsauce Thanks for the heads up, will follow your direction on this next time.
12015-08-16 12:29:43 UTCaaronsta Hi epicsauce,

Thanks for your edit :)

When editing be mindful of the tags on the object, in particular, to correct any fixme=* tags and in this case to remove any redundant tags, notably highway=construction before changing the road (highway=* tag). Unless someone reviews the road, which quite...
22015-08-16 12:32:07 UTCaaronsta Further to this to be-aware of the correct tagging (i.e when to use motorway, and when instead to use motorway_link), and when to merge road ways, and road classes. Nonetheless your edit is very much appreciated and contributes to the a great map
12015-07-22 08:46:46 UTCaaronsta Hi there :)
The key disused:*=* is discouraged, not rendered in Mapnik, nor supported widely.
Rather the key access=* should be applied, the feature deleted, or highway class (highway=*) altered (or a combination of these).

Thanks for editing, your contributions in Perth are great :)
22015-07-22 08:47:51 UTCaaronsta (Sorry - correction the key disused:*=* for highway or similar features with the exclusion of railways.)
32015-07-22 15:17:31 UTCsb9576 The traffic signals were gone yesterday, so I was going to delete them.

I read http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused as saying that disused=yes is deprecated, but that the use of the lifecycle prefix (such as disused:) is suggested instead. It’s all short term anyway; once construc...
12015-02-03 02:31:13 UTCpnorman It looks like you've changed the link roads connecting to the motorway to secondary links. Normally these would be highway=motorway_link. You can read more at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link
22015-02-03 04:28:33 UTCaaronsta Hi pnorman :)

I appreciate your comment and was wanting to test the rendering of residential_link and link road capping. This changeset has been redacted @ https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28581542
12015-01-18 20:59:08 UTCSomeoneElse Sutton in Ashfield bus station:
Not sure if was there before, but http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1075730#map=19/53.12623/-1.26436 now shows a gap to the north of the roundabout
22015-01-19 11:17:01 UTCaaronsta Noted and corrected @ https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28250039

Thanks :)
32015-01-19 11:20:04 UTCSomeoneElse Thanks. What about the other relations?
42015-01-19 11:27:24 UTCaaronsta Hi SomeoneElse, I'm not familiar with the area (And by chance spotted this roundabout, used iD and the make circular option on a few different roundabouts in the area). What other relations do you mean?

There appears to be issues with:
(540564) http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2416702#map=1...
52015-01-19 11:35:28 UTCaaronsta I tried having a look at the transport operators website but their maps are crude. The trouble is I don't know if the bus is one way or if it terminates or is a loop etc.
62015-01-20 00:13:52 UTCSomeoneElse The way that I add bus routes is by catching the bus and recording GPS traces.

The 3C runs from Sutton to Nottingham, so as http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2416702#map=18/53.12587/-1.26377 suggests it's just missing the other flare along Manor Street. Buses from Nottingham collect passenge...
12015-01-18 15:54:05 UTCaaronsta Changeset Redacted due to overlapping ways altering display of water not rendered in some mapping applications and thus hiding any data it lies over. Please use changeset comments field.
12015-01-03 15:31:20 UTCaaronsta Edit reverted. This is a friendly request that if you chose to edit in the future you consider the integrity of the map data. Make a website, use Facebook friends or other means to spread your website, not abusing community driven map content :)
aaronsta has contributed to 30 changeset discussions(s) with a total of 74 comment(s)