.jpg){kind=small}
AlaskaDave have been discussed with 90 replies of this contributorAlaskaDave have been discussed with 90 replies of this contributor| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 124661563 by AlaskaDave @ 2022-08-09 00:18 | 1 | 2025-02-22 11:46 | amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️🌈 ♦363 | In this changeset, way 1084947854 is tagged as `waterway=rapids`. However is that right? The wiki says a a rapid should be drawn across the river, like weir¹. I noticed this item because it causes the McKenzie River to be split on WaterwayMap.org². The source of this WWM change is this co... |
| 2 | 2025-02-24 05:25 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I believe the tagging is correct as is but feel free to replace the line of rapids I've drawn as a way with a node if you wish.Splits in ways are very common in OSM. We do it for highways all the time, for example, whenever the speed limit changes. Dealing with such splits is a render... | |
| 3 | 2025-02-25 14:47 | amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️🌈 ♦363 | I know about needing to split ways (I wrote a post-processing tool to put them back together `osm-lump-ways`) 😉What do you think about the wiki's description of rapids, compared to your use? Which of you are correct? 🙂🙂 | |
| 4 | 2025-02-25 15:30 | AlaskaDave | I think you should change the way it's mapped. When I did this, I was under the impression that a tagging a segment of the waterway was a legitimate way to map rapids. It looks like the tagging you suggest is correct, or more correct. I may have taken my guidance from an older Wiki article, I r... | |
| 5 | 2025-02-25 15:34 | AlaskaDave | Another thought is that in this case, and I don't recall the specifics of my decision, when a rapids has a measurable length, say 100m or whatever, then drawing a weir across the river isn't a very accurate way to represent it. My intention was possibly to somehow model these rapids that w... | |
| 6 | 2025-02-25 19:34 | quincylvania ♦53 | Hi all, avid canoe mapper here. I'm the one that updated the wiki page to discourage `waterway=rapids` as a centerline. My recommended tagging is to treat rapids as an attribute of a river and use `waterway=river` + `rapids=yes`. There are few reasons for this, but basically there are a lot of ... | |
| 7 | 2025-02-25 23:58 | AlaskaDave | Thanks for the clarification quincylvania. I was feeling embarrassed that I had misunderstood the Wiki. My memory wasn't clear enough to recall how I made the decision to tag a segment of the river with waterway=rapids but now I understand. Interestingly, the McKenzie River relation includes th... | |
| 8 | 2025-02-27 13:52 | quincylvania ♦53 | Yep, that's my preferred approach. Though personally I would put `name=McKenzie River` and `rapids:name=Eagle Rock Rapids` on the river line. Then I would also map the rapids separately as a node with `waterway=rapids` or an area with `water=rapids`, and `name=Eagle Rock Rapids`. This conveys t... | |
| 9 | 2025-02-28 09:14 | AlaskaDave | @quincylvaniaI updated my river tagging preset to use your scheme with rapids:name. I use the same scenario for named bridges with a bridge:name tag. Many OSM mappers change the name of the highway to the name of the bridge in such cases but that is obviously incorrect. The same logic applies here... | |
| 28393645 by AlaskaDave @ 2015-01-25 12:03 | 1 | 2025-02-18 03:43 | julcnx ♦404 | Hi Dave, This is an old topic, but I wanted to check—do you typically use *maxspeed* for actual legal limits or practical considerations? I've noticed some mappers applying *maxspeed* heavily for practical reasons, but this should either go under *maxspeed:practical* or be removed al... |
| 2 | 2025-02-18 09:28 | AlaskaDave | I only tag a maxspeed if I see one posted. However, ten years ago I might have tagged a few familiar roads that had no posted speed limit with a maxspeed I thought was reasonable.Hard to recall now some of the tagging habits I had when I was just starting out. Sometimes I see an object I tagged ... | |
| 3 | 2025-02-18 10:33 | julcnx ♦404 | Cool. You're not alone, and I haven’t been mapping as long as you :D There’s always something new to learn and ways to improve, and OSM is great for that. | |
| 148769869 by AlaskaDave @ 2024-03-17 12:31 | 1 | 2024-03-17 12:32 | AlaskaDave | Actually, it was the Mae Taeng River I aligned |
| 147312260 by AlaskaDave @ 2024-02-11 00:04 | 1 | 2024-02-11 21:40 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | There's no need for changes in Alaska and Vietnam to be in the same changeset.🫤 Please split them by geographic region. That makes things much easier to review. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147312260 |
| 2 | 2024-02-12 02:15 | AlaskaDave | I am in Thailand during the winter but I've been doing a lot of mapping in Alaska. I went away for the afternoon, made some mappable observations locally and merely forgot that the changeset was still open in Alaska when I added the new data to OSM. | |
| 3 | 2024-02-12 05:26 | keithonearth ♦314 | Wow! That's a pretty funny mistake! | |
| 4 | 2024-02-12 12:00 | AlaskaDave | I have nade something like 16,000 edits in the 12 years since I started mapping with OSM and this is the first time I've ever gotten comments about the SIZE of a changeset.I had no idea people would be so concerned about such things, or that people actually monitor changeset characteristics... | |
| 5 | 2024-02-13 00:59 | AlaskaDave | In further response to the concerns about the size of my changesets. I carefully used new layers when moving to another area of interest today (2024-02-13) yet the bounding box of my changeset remained overly large, extending from Alaska to Sloan NY.I just now discovered the reason for this, I ... | |
| 6 | 2024-02-13 08:12 | silversurfer83 ♦3,391 | Hey Dave :)the communications part of the OSM community is a topic of debate among the users active on the forum (community.openstreetmap.org) or some of the more active chat groups. There it has been noted that users can go around for years without ever interacting with another user.There a... | |
| 7 | 2024-02-13 12:35 | AlaskaDave | I appreciate your feedback, silversurfer. I must say, I felt a bit as though I was being scolded for my oversight.The thing with the saved session shocked me because I had just told the commenters that I would be more careful next time and then, I accidentally did it again.I use like 6 diffe... | |
| 8 | 2024-02-14 22:53 | Xvtn ♦468 | Well put, Silversurfer. To add a little bit, I think the main reason people comment on huge changesets is because if you go to your area on osm.org and click history, depending on the activity in the area, many or even all of those changesets can be accidental world-spanning bounding boxes like this... | |
| 9 | 2024-02-14 23:32 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | Xvtn, I don't use OSM website. I use OsmCha and whodidit RSS feeds with fillets to monitor NYC. Such huge bboxes are a part of how OSM works.If your know a tool that allows me to review changesets that ONLY affect my area of interest, do share them. | |
| 10 | 2024-02-15 00:01 | Xvtn ♦468 | In OSMcha you can filter limit the maximum bbox size. When reviewing my local area, I have it capped at 20x the size of my area of interest. | |
| 11 | 2024-02-15 00:06 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | That's not an acceptable solution. Just because a bbox is big it doesn't mean it has no changes in my area of interest. | |
| 147389303 by AlaskaDave @ 2024-02-13 00:44 | 1 | 2024-02-13 00:54 | AlaskaDave | I have received some messages about the size of my changesets. I carefully used new layers when moving to another area of interest today yet the bounding box of my changeset remained overly large, extending from Alaska to Sloan NY.I just discovered the reason for this, I had saved my session to ... |
| 147288913 by AlaskaDave @ 2024-02-10 11:30 | 1 | 2024-02-10 21:08 | KasperSFranz ♦62 | This does not seem correct - are you sure about this edit? e.g. node 11607633162 |
| 2 | 2024-02-11 00:04 | AlaskaDave | Well, the center of the town might be a little further north but, yes, it is the correct name according to the Thai Topos I have. Also, there are some sois there that I recorded yesterday that have the names Ban Tha Pong Soi 3 and Ban Tha PongSoi 10. In addition, Wat Pha Tong and Wat Pha Tong Schoo... | |
| 3 | 2024-02-11 00:09 | AlaskaDave | Sorry for the typos in my earlier comment. I'm not Thai and I mixed up parts of those names, LOL. When I typed Ban Pha Tong, it should have been Ban Tha Pong, Wat Tha Pong and Wat Tha Pong School. | |
| 4 | 2024-02-11 08:12 | KasperSFranz ♦62 | Oh okay, can you make sure your changeset is in a specific region, this changeset is very big :) | |
| 5 | 2024-02-11 09:06 | AlaskaDave | Yes, I did that earlier today. I simply forgot to close the one I'd been working on in Alaska before adding my Thailand updates. | |
| 28372566 by AlaskaDave @ 2015-01-24 13:39 | 1 | 2024-01-26 12:43 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Hello! Sorry for bothering about an ancient edit. But is PFM:garmin_type=0x6406 meaning anything at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3307572851/history ?Can you remove this tag or replace by more clear one? It looks like debris from GPS trace import, handling similar tags o... |
| 2 | 2024-01-26 12:44 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Or is it safe to assume that none of this tags were intentionally added by you, even if node history starts from your edit? | |
| 3 | 2024-01-26 13:00 | AlaskaDave | Correct. None of those tags were added by me. Unfortunately, the tag history doesn't go back far enough to indicate the original mapper.There might be a way to determine the originator but if there is, I am not aware of it. | |
| 35430500 by AlaskaDave @ 2015-11-19 10:02 | 1 | 2024-01-25 11:44 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Hello!Sorry for bothering about an ancient edit.But is PFM:garmin_type=0x6406 meaning anything at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3844298045/history ?Can you remove this tag or replace by more clear one? It looks like debris from GPS trace import, handling similar tags on this objec... |
| 2 | 2024-01-25 23:23 | AlaskaDave | This was not my tagging. There is, or was, a Thailand-based mapper who created these tags years ago. I also inquired about them and he (I can't recall his name) asked that I leave them in place. IIRC, they were to help him render some object(s) using the mkgmap program. Feel free to remove ... | |
| 3 | 2024-01-26 09:27 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Removed this tag from this specific node then. | |
| 145664020 by AlaskaDave @ 2023-12-29 14:29 | 1 | 2024-01-02 13:56 | julcnx ♦404 | Hi AlaskaDave, happy new year, and hope all is well. I observed that you adjusted some of the lane tags from 2 to 1. However, I've noticed that even though certain streets lack lane markings, they appear wide enough for two cars to pass. Therefore, it might be appropriate to consider lanes=2 +... |
| 2 | 2024-01-02 14:09 | AlaskaDave | I typically change the lanes tagging only if I've seen the roads myself. Thailand has very narrow sois and in this neighborhood, that's the case. If two cars must slow down before meeting on a road, I tag that road as lanes=1 even if there is a dividing line (as is often the case).It&#... | |
| 3 | 2024-01-10 08:34 | julcnx ♦404 | Hey Dave, just wanted to give you a heads up about that road I was mentioning (30477989).https://www.google.com/maps/@18.8122254,99.0074324,3a,75y,257.97h,78.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTuELMz8w-dcBZvfOXIHRMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu(Also available on Mapillary)It's a 4-meter-wide roa... | |
| 4 | 2024-01-10 09:47 | AlaskaDave | I believe that particular road is a borderline case. It might allow two cars to pass if they drive slowly and cautiously, but if a car and a small truck were to attempt that, one would have to come to a complete stop. In this case, your suggested tagging seems fine. Easier perhaps and less controver... | |
| 5 | 2024-01-15 04:28 | julcnx ♦404 | Hello Dave, appreciate the photo. I've noticed roads with lanes shorter than 4 meters too! In such instances, I suggest that borderline cases skip the lanes tag and opt for specifying the width instead. I've sought clarification on the forum, but uncertain if I'll receive a response:\... | |
| 18368815 by AlaskaDave @ 2013-10-15 13:32 | 1 | 2023-06-30 05:32 | julcnx ♦404 | Hey Dave, I hope you're enjoying your time in Alaska. I recently came across some old tags you added: "surface_condition=rough_less_than_40kph". I assume these were added a while ago when the road conditions were poor. Do you think it's safe to remove them now? |
| 2 | 2023-06-30 14:38 | AlaskaDave | Hi Jiulien,Yes, please feel free to update those highways. I haven't checked back on any of my now out-of-date tagging. Lately, I'm not doing as much mapping as I once did so I don't come across these old tags very often. | |
| 127407121 by AlaskaDave @ 2022-10-12 10:48 | 1 | 2023-06-22 01:12 | Johnny Carlsen ♦94 | I was wondering why 1317 has been so deserted for almost a year now, and then I found that it was made into a one-way street about 8 months ago.Though it is great for reducing traffic on the road as nobody from the city will be routed out this way, I think we might want to fix that.There hav... |
| 2 | 2023-06-22 02:40 | AlaskaDave | Oops.I must have screwed something up when I was adding the second side of the carriageway.Hopefully, you were able to fix it Johnny. | |
| 3 | 2023-06-22 06:46 | Johnny Carlsen ♦94 | I assumed you began the process of splitting the road into two as it has become divided, but probably was distracted before you got to finish it.I think I've got it right now, but if you see any mistakes of my own, feel free to fix it :) | |
| 96097047 by AlaskaDave @ 2020-12-19 04:14 | 1 | 2023-02-19 11:22 | Russ McD ♦223 | Dave - just noticed your "name" for the service road (Im assuming its your edit). I'm really curious as to why you would do that. Seems to go against the grain that you use a description of where it appears on a map. East/West might be more appropriate, as left or right is confus... |
| 2 | 2023-02-19 14:02 | AlaskaDave | Russ,If you're asking me, I say yes.There's a note tag on the way, and in it I say that the name came from a physical sign (which happens to be at located at the junction of 121 and Huay Keaw Road). I recall that sign and it's a fairly small government-issue sign that isn'... | |
| 3 | 2023-02-20 00:46 | Russ McD ♦223 | Your comment noted, and if I was talking about Hwy 121, I would not have even raised the issue.However this change set refers to way 29417099, which is a minor road I come along most days when coming back from the market to my condo, and have never seen a physical road sign there.And with regard... | |
| 4 | 2023-02-20 02:23 | AlaskaDave | My apologies,That way was not meant to have any name at all. My mistake. I must've tagged it by accident when I was adding the other actual old_name:en on the way intersecting with Huay Keaw Road. I removed it. | |
| 130938947 by AlaskaDave @ 2023-01-06 09:30 | 1 | 2023-01-06 22:25 | rivermont ♦221 | That's a big wall |
| 2 | 2023-01-10 19:01 | Austrianton ♦45 | Maybe try keeping future change-sets to a smaller area | |
| 3 | 2023-01-10 23:08 | AlaskaDave | Relax. It was a mistake. I map in the U.S. as well as Thailand and I merely forgot to download data to a new layer. | |
| 116145572 by AlaskaDave @ 2022-01-14 12:18 | 1 | 2022-12-21 07:35 | Dary Raihanah IRM-ED ♦28 | Hi AlaskaDavethank you for your mapping contribution.I found a footway that you mapped (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1021105789) crosses the water body (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1021332786). Is the area around there a wetland? I 'm not sure how to fix it so the... |
| 2 | 2022-12-22 02:54 | AlaskaDave | The footway is on a bridge and crosses wetlands and open water. It might better be drawn if I worked to separate the boundary of the Thale Luang Non-Hunting Area from the shoreline of Thale Luang. I did not do that because it was too much work at the time.In addition, the Thale Luang expands and... | |
| 3 | 2022-12-22 03:07 | Dary Raihanah IRM-ED ♦28 | Thank you so much for the information you have provided, it's really helpful. So, I think it's okay if I add bridge=yes & layer=1 on the footway because the footway is on a bridge. Or maybe you have another suggestions? | |
| 4 | 2022-12-22 03:29 | AlaskaDave | The footway in question is already on a bridge with layer=1. Also, note that while I was the original mapper, user:Bernhard Hiller has worked on it since. He extended the footway and perhaps moved a couple of nodes.At any rate, I adjusted the water boundary slightly but it will still probabl... | |
| 5 | 2022-12-22 04:07 | Dary Raihanah IRM-ED ♦28 | I have discussed with Ficky IRM-RV and we agreed to add a bridge tag based on the information you provided. Your information is really helpful because it's from your latest ground survey. Thank you so much for the information I got from this discussion. Happy mapping! | |
| 6 | 2022-12-22 04:45 | AlaskaDave | Okay. Thanks. | |
| 128868844 by AlaskaDave @ 2022-11-14 01:50 | 1 | 2022-12-20 02:00 | Rizki IRM-ED ♦129 | Hi AlaskaDave. Your edit looks awesome, but I suggest you to improve water body (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1112814045) due crossing with highway. If you have any other suggestion, please let me know (https://maproulette.org/challenge/30161/task/143788669). Thank you. |
| 2 | 2022-12-20 08:05 | AlaskaDave | I just did this as a one-off. I don't usually map in Bangkok but when I last looked, there are many of these wide canals that are represented by lines only. I added the multipolygon but didn't worry too much about the bridges. I'm only doing armchair mapping so I didn't add any n... | |
| 3 | 2022-12-21 01:02 | Rizki IRM-ED ♦129 | Hi AlaskaDave. Thank you for the response, the information you provide is very helpful. Happy mapping! | |
| 88565224 by AlaskaDave @ 2020-07-27 12:21 | 1 | 2022-12-16 01:29 | Anisa IRM-ED ♦83 | hi, AlaskaDave. hope you have a great day.I found the water body (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/426282311) crossing with the highway. the highway id 964880577 and id 965496992, is there a bridge or embankment?would you mind fixing this issue (https://maproulette.org/challenge/30161/t... |
| 2 | 2022-12-16 01:57 | AlaskaDave | I only added a name to this water body. It was drawn originally from Mapbox satellite imagery by Tom Layo. I don't know if there is an embankment or not, nor do I know that the highway exists.I did realign the shoreline using Maxar-Premium but that's all I can do from here (in my armc... | |
| 3 | 2022-12-16 07:16 | Anisa IRM-ED ♦83 | sorry for miss-addressing the original author for that waterbody and thank you for telling me quickly | |
| 4 | 2022-12-16 10:18 | AlaskaDave | No problem. | |
| 41747884 by AlaskaDave @ 2016-08-28 04:40 | 1 | 2022-05-03 16:57 | b-jazz ♦655 | I don't know Pre's Trail details, but the segment at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/439441902 doesn't seem to be part of the chipped bark jogging path. So just checking in to see if you know more. thx. |
| 2 | 2022-05-04 04:02 | AlaskaDave | Funny coincidence: I just noticed some other trail segments tagged with name=Pre's Trail that I'm sure are incorrect. I just haven't had time to fix them. My guess is that the name got propagated onto those segments by accident. I'll bicycle over to Alton Baker Park at some p... | |
| 114549246 by AlaskaDave @ 2021-12-04 09:58 | 1 | 2022-01-10 11:53 | Russ McD ♦223 | Dave - is the 1102 really all one way here ? I know its a narrowish road, but I have not been down of late. Doesn't make sense if they changed this bit ! |
| 2 | 2022-01-10 12:26 | AlaskaDave | I don't recall changing it but if I did it was probably unintentional. However, there is a lot of construction going on at the intersection of the 114 and the Superhighway so maybe those "minor edits" I did were bad. I haven't directly edited the 1102 for a long while.Let me ... | |
| 3 | 2022-01-10 13:12 | Russ McD ♦223 | No worries...I'll check out that new overpass when I'm passing next, but doubt if its finished yet. | |
| 4 | 2022-01-11 00:58 | AlaskaDave | I removed the oneway. I recall (faintly) that the last section of road was closed or oneway due to the heavy construction last time I was there about a month ago but at this point, I'm not sure | |
| 114515582 by AlaskaDave @ 2021-12-03 09:47 | 1 | 2021-12-04 19:32 | Lee Carré ♦665 | If this counts as an automated edit, please cite the proposal. |
| 2 | 2021-12-04 23:21 | AlaskaDave | It was a minor edit and not automated. I looked at each of about 10-12 shops and removed the amenity=supermarket tag if present and added shop=supermarket instead. Some of the objects had both tags. In those cases, I simply deleted the deprecated tag. | |
| 3 | 2021-12-05 03:24 | Lee Carré ♦665 | 👍 | |
| 83015842 by AlaskaDave @ 2020-04-03 07:33 | 1 | 2021-09-05 14:58 | julcnx ♦404 | Hello Dave, I hope you are well.FYI, I have removed junction=yes on nodes that do not share other properties as described in the documentation https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3DyesBest, Julien |
| 2 | 2021-09-06 14:32 | AlaskaDave | Hello Julien,I don't have a problem with that. Dave | |
| 39980609 by AlaskaDave @ 2016-06-12 22:05 | 1 | 2021-08-22 17:24 | gpserror ♦221 | Hi, I know this changeset is quite a while ago, and you may not remember what's out here, but was looking at the overlap of Willow St and Hemlock Ave going north-south. Do you happen to know which is correct as both appear to be different than TIGER2020? |
| 2 | 2021-08-22 18:42 | AlaskaDave | It looks as though all I did was add surface=gravel. I somehow missed the name issue you mentioned as well as the duplicate ways. DOH!I do not know the correct name because I haven't been there but I would use the Tiger 2020 info if I were looking at it now.Thanks for the note. Feel fre... | |
| 3 | 2021-08-22 18:53 | AlaskaDave | On second look, it appears I did incorrectly extend Hemlock Avenue.I edited it to remove my error and added the Tiger 2020 name. | |
| 4 | 2021-08-22 21:49 | gpserror ♦221 | Cool, thanks for the fix! | |
| 106425857 by AlaskaDave @ 2021-06-15 22:24 | 1 | 2021-06-16 17:29 | Hans Thompson ♦107 | It hurts me to see the name change from Sears Mall to Midtown Mall but it is what it is. |
| 2 | 2021-06-16 17:45 | AlaskaDave | Indeed. I forgot to include the tag,old_name=Sears Mall. Feel free to add it yourself if you wish, Hans. | |
| 106426273 by AlaskaDave @ 2021-06-15 22:46 | 1 | 2021-06-16 17:27 | Hans Thompson ♦107 | nice one. |
| 94107852 by AlaskaDave @ 2020-11-14 14:16 | 1 | 2021-05-07 05:47 | Elyana IRM-ED ♦65 | Hi, AlaskaDave.I've modified this wood area and water body multi-polygon (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/75136323) based on Maxar Premium Imagery due to warning crossing highways. Thank you! |
| 2 | 2021-05-07 15:32 | AlaskaDave | No problem. | |
| 34344407 by AlaskaDave @ 2015-09-30 11:03 | 1 | 2021-05-07 02:11 | Talitha IRM-ED ♦57 | Hi, Alaska Dave. I deleted this building (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/372968773) based on Maxar Premium Imagery. Thank you |
| 2 | 2021-05-07 02:35 | AlaskaDave | No problem. Things change quickly in Thailand. I added this building five years ago and used imagery that was not as good as what is available now. Please feel free to update anything I added that long ago | |
| 18248154 by AlaskaDave @ 2013-10-08 14:16 | 1 | 2021-05-07 01:01 | Irma IRM-ED ♦127 | Hello AlaskaDave, please check coordinate 18.8055836, 99.642232It looks like there are buildings on the road, so you can add the tag: bridge = yes |
| 2 | 2021-05-07 01:02 | Irma IRM-ED ♦127 | Hello AlaskaDave, please check coordinate 18.8055836, 99.642232It looks like there are buildings on the road, so you can add the tag: layer=1 | |
| 3 | 2021-05-07 02:07 | AlaskaDave | I looked at that location but can see no buildings.Can you help me understand your comment better? | |
| 93702172 by AlaskaDave @ 2020-11-07 10:34 | 1 | 2020-11-09 18:38 | user_5359 ♦19,375 | Hello! You added a bigger number of unknown tags in this change set. ATTRIBUTE=Natural.Great Lake Or Lake Or PondCLASS=SHORELINEDATA_SOURC=MEXTRACT_TE=SEXT_METH=SFEATURE=18.0FEATURE_ID=1103334.0HOR_ACC=7.6RESOLUTION=0.0SOURCE_ID=GC11170SRC_DATE=20140907Please explain the sour... |
| 2 | 2020-11-09 23:01 | AlaskaDave | Yes, sorry, I forgot to remove those extraneous tags. I'm importing new coastline for St Lawrence Island piece by piece using the source mentioned in my comment. I usually strip those tags off before uploading. I merely forgot to do it for this particular lake. | |
| 3 | 2020-11-09 23:15 | AlaskaDave | I removed them. Thanks for the reminder. | |
| 91253112 by AlaskaDave @ 2020-09-21 23:45 | 1 | 2020-09-22 18:33 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hiplease check this import. Many of the ways have a large amount of foreign tags that don't look like they should be in OSM.Thanks! |
| 2 | 2020-09-22 22:58 | AlaskaDave | Yes, I know. I strip those tags before uploading. Did I forget to do this for a section of coastline? Can you provide an OSM ID for a section that still has the foreign tags?Thank you. | |
| 3 | 2020-09-23 16:22 | mueschel ♦6,567 | There are 16 ways with the tags:http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Yjy | |
| 4 | 2020-09-23 23:46 | AlaskaDave | Thank you. I removed the extra tags. I must have forgotten to do it earlier.I'm curious to know how you happened to notice these tags? There are so few people mapping in Alaska it always amazes me to get a comment on one of my changesets.Thanks again. | |
| 5 | 2020-09-24 07:13 | mueschel ♦6,567 | I have to disappoint you, but I'm not mapping in Alaska specifically. There's a script running that looks for new keys in the database:http://osm.mueschelsoft.de/taginfo/newkeys.htm | |
| 6 | 2020-09-24 12:03 | AlaskaDave | I'm not disappointed. I was curious to know how you noticed my "New tags" in Alaska seeing as most of your OSM mapping work is elsewhere.You have answered that question and satisfied my curiosity.Thanks for sharing the information. | |
| 7 | 2020-09-24 12:09 | AlaskaDave | Actually, while your script is interesting, I'm not sure I would want to look at it every day and see all the strange keys people create. The flexibility offered by the OSM platform encourages users to invent any old tag they like. It must drive you crazy sometimes. | |
| 51878541 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-09-09 12:32 | 1 | 2020-04-19 19:28 | HubMiner ♦271 | Hi AlaskaDave, what was the argument for deleting https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8996056/history#map=15/61.0828/-146.3000 ?Related: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/242131 |
| 2 | 2020-04-19 22:57 | AlaskaDave | Well, I don't recall. I did drive through that area and made a ton of edits. It's possible I didn't see any track or "footway": when I was there. As you know, Tiger tracks are scattered all over Alaska and are sometimes positioned in terrain where its possible to see that it... | |
| 3 | 2020-04-21 21:00 | HubMiner ♦271 | Sounds fair, stay safe! | |
| 78249081 by AlaskaDave @ 2019-12-11 08:45 | 1 | 2019-12-12 01:45 | Wichaya Pokasuwanna ♦1 | Hello, do you know why all the forest are gone? (from green to white)Relation 4470418, v173 |
| 2 | 2019-12-12 05:17 | AlaskaDave | Hi,When I look at that multipolygon relation inside JOSM, everything looks fine. But I was working in that area yesterday so if something is strange, I might have caused it.I will look at it later and let you know what I can find out. | |
| 3 | 2019-12-12 05:20 | AlaskaDave | I think I see the problem. I did change the wood multipolygon boundaries slightly but the OSM imagery hasn't kept up with those changes.If you zoom in, the forest will reappear. After a time, it will appear at all zoom levels. | |
| 4 | 2019-12-12 05:43 | Wichaya Pokasuwanna ♦1 | Thanks for the explanation. The forest in relation 4470418 starts reappearing. The other area at Maehongson, some forest also gone too. I look at some wood boundaries and I don't see any problem. No idea what causing it. | |
| 5 | 2019-12-12 06:16 | AlaskaDave | No problem. The slow rendering of OSM throws me off too. Whatis the relation ID of the wood in MHS?These relations are so big and complicated that it's very easy to mess one up. The folks that did the first big multipolygon included the entire mountainous region becaue they assumed it was... | |
| 6 | 2019-12-12 06:39 | Wichaya Pokasuwanna ♦1 | In MHS 1599039 v626. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1599039 | |
| 7 | 2019-12-12 13:13 | AlaskaDave | I didn't see anything wrong - perhaps it's another rendering problem. That entire area is a mess. Many inner areas (unwooded) span two multipolygon relations. Ugly! | |
| 75919230 by AlaskaDave @ 2019-10-19 04:21 | 1 | 2019-10-19 08:50 | xogalla ♦10 | Hi Dave,why do you think Wikidata would be more accurate? There has just been another guy over there and selected a position.Kind regards |
| 2 | 2019-10-19 09:09 | AlaskaDave | I don't know who is right. My experience with my other goto source, the Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, was compiled in 198 and their coordinates are sometimes significantly off. If you have a better alternative, go ahead and correct the position. I did not see "another guy" or ... | |
| 3 | 2019-10-19 09:10 | AlaskaDave | **compiled in 1968** | |
| 4 | 2019-10-19 09:57 | xogalla ♦10 | The coordinates come from GNIS: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q49061249&type=revision&diff=750973192&oldid=728807716 | |
| 5 | 2019-10-19 11:21 | AlaskaDave | That's exactly where I placed it. So what's the point of your reply? Am I missing something you're trying to tell me? | |
| 68617319 by AlaskaDave @ 2019-03-28 09:04 | 1 | 2019-03-29 00:41 | AlaskaDave | The changeset comment should be merely DigitalGlobe-Premium. The "2019-03-28 survey part" is an unintended carryover from the previous changeset. |
| 68359896 by AlaskaDave @ 2019-03-21 03:39 | 1 | 2019-03-21 07:09 | Minh Nguyen ♦565 | This changeset moved node 6338689283 from the corner of High and Jefferson to a location along the edge of the neighborhood as it replaced the node with a place=neighbourhood area. This change is problematic for two reasons: the geographic centroid of this area is not the commonly acknowledged cente... |
| 2 | 2019-03-21 09:19 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I took the positional source from a link in the Wikipedia article cited and did not check for copyright status, thinking if it was in Wikipedia it was okay to use. I agree that it cannot be used as such given the copyright issue you raise. However, rather than revert the changeset. let me redra... | |
| 3 | 2019-03-21 09:21 | AlaskaDave | By the way, the reason I have an interest in this area is because it's my hometown. I lived on High St near Herman and attended PS 39 for the first 10 years of my life. | |
| 4 | 2019-03-21 09:30 | Minh Nguyen ♦565 | Awesome, I’m glad there are local eyes on this part of the map, especially given the online attention that https://onezero.medium.com/how-googles-bad-data-wiped-a-neighborhood-off-the-map-80c4c13f1c2b brought this neighborhood.My edits were only ever intended to be a starting point for fur... | |
| 5 | 2019-03-21 09:50 | AlaskaDave | Haha - that very article is the reason I decided to revise the map. I left Buffalo many years ago and live in Alaska and Thailand now so I'm not a "local" in any sense of the word but I do have a continuing interest in the Buffalo area.Your idea of a boundary relation is a good on... | |
| 6 | 2019-03-25 17:44 | Giblet ♦23 | Just an FYI, the city of Buffalo has a new-ish open data program. They have a public domain file of all the neighborhoods in the city. I'm thinking this could address some of the ambiguity around boundaries. Later this week, I should have some time to bring all the neighborhoods in from the... | |
| 7 | 2019-03-26 01:00 | AlaskaDave | That's good to know, Giblet. The boundary of the Fruit Belt is nearly the same as the one I drew however because its western boundary extends to Main Street it includes the controversial Medical Center "neighborhood" mentioned in the article. I wonder if that neighborhood has any ... | |
| 57163777 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-03-14 02:35 | 1 | 2019-03-08 13:22 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | What is the meaning of waterway=source tag at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2990624687 ? |
| 2 | 2019-03-08 16:32 | AlaskaDave | It is the beginning of the named river, its "source", according to the Dictionary of Alaska Place Names. This is the beginning of the waterway with name=Fortymile River. | |
| 3 | 2019-03-11 13:32 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Is it useful needed to tag waterway=source node? Is it not enough to tag name on waterway ways? | |
| 4 | 2019-03-11 22:56 | AlaskaDave | I think it is, especially when the beginning of a river is not obvious from the available maps.These nodes don't take up a lot of space and IMO offer useful information to anyone curious about a named river's starting position. | |
| 65067558 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-12-01 08:52 | 1 | 2018-12-01 18:54 | US Woods Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | 2018-12-02 00:16 | AlaskaDave | I agree that those PGS coastlines are an abomination and I usually delete the source tag but I am doing so many modifications lately I sometimes forget.Feel free to remove it if you come across a coastline that has been aligned by me or anybody else. | |
| 64027881 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-10-30 23:50 | 1 | 2018-10-31 07:04 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi!You removed most tags from the way describing the pipeline:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/253952219https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8987867 |
| 2 | 2018-10-31 08:45 | AlaskaDave | Hi Gerd,Yes, I removed the ones that duplicated the tags on the relation, except for the location=underground, which changes frequently. I'm under the impression that the only tags that should be found on ways are ones that cannot be placed inside the relation.I've done a lot of work o... | |
| 3 | 2018-10-31 08:53 | GerdP ♦2,751 | I think that is wrong.The wiki says that the relation should be tagged with the same tags as the way but It doesn't say that the tags should be removed from the ways. | |
| 4 | 2018-10-31 11:51 | AlaskaDave | Let me ask in the tagging list. I'm learning a lot about relations there but this question hasn't come up yet. | |
| 5 | 2018-10-31 12:05 | AlaskaDave | In taking another look, I see that I removed the man_made=pipeline tag from the way but did not add it to the relation. My bad. I just added it to the relation. Would this solve the issue for you?I cannot find the part in the Wiki you're referring to. Could you point me to it? | |
| 6 | 2018-10-31 12:19 | GerdP ♦2,751 | I still think that you should have the tags on the way, I don't know if we need the relation at all. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aroute%3Dpipeline | |
| 7 | 2018-10-31 13:24 | AlaskaDave | I think a relation is definitely needed. I doubt it could be feasibly mapped (and maintained) any other format. This thing is 1300 km long, has countless bridges and many sections that are underground or overground — something changes every few miles, and that requires breaking those ways so t... | |
| 8 | 2018-11-05 13:06 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi Dave,I think the discussion shows that you shold re-add the tags to the ways here. | |
| 9 | 2018-11-06 03:40 | AlaskaDave | I don't agree. Yuu quoted the Wiki earlier when you stated that the ways should have the same tags as the relation but I found a different place in the Wiki where it agrees with my contention that ways should only have tags when the characteristic or attributes of the way differ from one anothe... | |
| 10 | 2018-11-06 04:23 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Please post a link to that other wiki entry. To make that clear: I personally don't prefer to have all the tags repeated on every way, I just think that this is the way how the community does it and therefore it should be done that way. I am sure that it is possible to add rules to mkgmap s... | |
| 11 | 2018-11-06 09:02 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Reg. Iditarod Trail: If you want to remove the name tags from the ways I say that is good. These ways probably have no name, they are just part of a route.I did something like that, see this discussion:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/13576057 | |
| 12 | 2018-11-06 11:34 | AlaskaDave | Actually, if a way has a name in the Iditarod Trail route, it's a named road and as such the name would stay on that piece only. Also, those ways might be a track, path, or service road, and have surface=gravel, ground, or ice as well. I repeat, those characteristics belong on the ways and def... | |
| 13 | 2018-11-06 11:52 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi Dave,I think each type of relation has its own rules. You cannot simply transfer the rules for multipolygons. Example: In mp rels the order of the members doesn't matter, in hiking relations it is important. In mp rels also the roles do not really matter because consumere programs don'... | |
| 14 | 2018-11-06 13:37 | AlaskaDave | Gerd,I am not establishing a NEW tagging system for pipelines, I'm merely trying tag it the way that's most meaningful and most correct. The Wiki is quite clear about it, IMO. The concepts apply to ALL relations, not just pipelines. How it looks has nothing to do with it. Nor does sortin... | |
| 15 | 2018-11-06 16:02 | GerdP ♦2,751 | I've only read the comments in the thread after you mentioned the TAP. I think nobody agreed with you in those comments. See e.g. http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/How-to-tag-named-group-of-named-water-areas-tp5923692p5926559.htmlI've just loaded all relations with route=pipeline. They ha... | |
| 16 | 2018-11-07 00:07 | AlaskaDave | Gerd,I'm not saying remove way tags from ALL pipelines! We're talking about one pipeline, the TAPS. In the TAPS there is only one substance=oil, and it is carried in a single man_made=pipeline. In this case, those tags belong in the relation and not on the way. I doesn't hurt to hav... | |
| 64028502 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-10-31 00:38 | 1 | 2018-10-31 05:06 | AlaskaDave | The boundary of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge generally follows the west bank of the Canning River. I used the riverbank as the boundary in order to reduce redundancy because I believe the small discrepancies observed are not critically important in OSM. |
| 63260374 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-10-06 15:59 | 1 | 2018-10-07 01:09 | AlaskaDave | Another source is Surface Waters of the Seward Peninsula, Smith & Brooks, 1913 |
| 62486996 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-09-11 12:28 | 1 | 2018-09-16 10:35 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hi,the key 'smv' is new... What does it mean?Thanks, Jan |
| 2 | 2018-09-16 13:25 | AlaskaDave | Hi Jan,Discussions of the tagging list are ongoing about how to tag slow vehicle turnouts. One suggestion was "smv" for slow moving vehicle". I think we've decided to use "slow_vehicle" as the tag. I will update this object once the decision is final. The thread is he... | |
| 3 | 2018-09-16 13:29 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Alright,maybe this also falls into the category of a wide, paved shoulder? In some places they are built for exactly this purpose. | |
| 61415316 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-08-06 20:48 | 1 | 2018-09-16 02:08 | Your Village Maps ♦90 | Hi, Alaska Dave. I suppose you could call me Colorado Dave. :) I am questioning this one-way cycle path along NE-bound AK 1. I can find no evidence that there is a separate path along the highway, and certainly not one-way. I see that bicycles are allowed on the shoulders, including AK-3, as... |
| 2 | 2018-09-16 07:54 | AlaskaDave | Hi,All I did was remove the name=Glenn Highway from the cycleway, it was plainly not correct. The original mapper was Jason Rowland and his edits had to do with making the path visible in an app he favors., See Changeset: 61136373Added cycle route along AK-1 to allow use of Kamoot. Kamoot does... | |
| 58346486 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-04-23 17:33 | 1 | 2018-09-02 18:56 | b-jazz ♦655 | Hello again AlaskaDave,I'm guessing that the entire area of 582980867 isn't a giant amenity=waste_basket and that you accidentally tagged a waste basket when you meant to tag the area with a name. |
| 2 | 2018-09-02 19:48 | AlaskaDave | I cannot find any amenity=waste_basket tags in Eugene that are not a simple node. Can you be more specific? In the future, please feel free to correct any obvious errors, like this one, if you encounter them. | |
| 3 | 2018-09-03 05:07 | freebeer ♦1,598 | I do not see that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/582980867has any tagging apart from a name and description, which imply at the above, but i do not know what needs to be added so that whatever it is gets rendered. | |
| 4 | 2018-09-03 07:48 | AlaskaDave | I found the area you're referring to at last but even though it appears that I did the tagging, I believe the history function is not working properly because I did not add that object originally. I know that because I would NEVER add that type of obviously created name and description on those... | |
| 5 | 2018-09-03 07:53 | AlaskaDave | It's actually worse than what you described - there is no amenity tag on either the area or the receptacles. I decided to simply leave it alone because I have no ground survey data to determine what that area actually is.As for the history, maybe I moved the area slightly to better align it a... | |
| 51100813 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-08-14 07:17 | 1 | 2018-07-15 16:59 | 30303020 ♦59 | Hey AlaskaDave,please have a look at this node you edited https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/65910093 and check the tagging.Thx and happy mapping30303020 |
| 2 | 2018-07-15 19:42 | AlaskaDave | Fixed it. The tag was meant for the food shop nearby. Thx. | |
| 57075852 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-03-11 09:11 | 1 | 2018-03-13 08:45 | highflyer74 ♦2,447 | Hi Dave!Can you check https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/568646627 please? There are still some non-OSM tags on it.Greetings from across the pond! |
| 2 | 2018-03-13 14:02 | AlaskaDave | Got it, extra tags removed. Thanks! | |
| 57071996 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-03-11 02:34 | 1 | 2018-03-12 12:04 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hi,could you please check the rivers? It looks like they overlap with previously mapped rivers. And I guess these tags shouldn't have been uploaded:AGENCY = FWS MANAGING_E = FWS RIVERCATEG = Federally Administered RIVER_ID = 40 SHAPE_LEN = 5.50073159877 STATE = Alaska WEBL... |
| 2 | 2018-03-12 14:23 | AlaskaDave | Thank you for the note. I forgot to clean up the original tags and left some extra tags on one section. I removed those. But I don't see any "overlap" with previously mapped rivers. Can you explain more fully what you mean? | |
| 3 | 2018-03-12 14:37 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Looking more closely, it's just a glitch of the rendering server - when I checked both the new and the old (coarse) river way were shown simultaneously. The database is clean though. | |
| 55399627 by AlaskaDave @ 2018-01-13 07:07 | 1 | 2018-01-13 07:13 | AlaskaDave | Somehow, portions of 1211 including this one, got renamed Den Ha (1211). Mapper did not give source. I renamed it to what it was previously, Sunwichai Road, which is a translation of the Thai name tag. |
| 2 | 2018-01-13 07:45 | AlaskaDave | I checked Google, and it gives Den Ha Dong Mada Road as the name. Thai street names are notoriously hard to map properly because signs bearing the name are rare. Many times the name is just a best guess and might be based on one road sign many km distant. | |
| 52319563 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-09-24 04:18 | 1 | 2017-10-23 15:13 | imagico ♦70 | Hello Dave,i would advise against trying to map features where you have nothing even close to verifiable position data for.The location of node 5125769091 is a highly unlikely position for an islet or even a gravel bar based on the sea ice movement in the area - ice would not be able to move... |
| 2 | 2017-10-23 23:58 | AlaskaDave | Ordinarily, I would agree with you. I came across Shea's description through a newspaper article I read that mentioned Stray Dog West. When I searched for it on OSM, nothing came up and I wanted to at least put a findable entry into Nominatum. The uncertainty of the position is why I added the ... | |
| 3 | 2017-10-24 08:29 | imagico ♦70 | This is just my assessment of the situation - i won't insist on changing anything here. But i am pretty sure the position is wrong, not wrong by a few hundred meters but wrong by likely many kilometers - either much closer to the shore or much further to the east (that is the problem with seco... | |
| 51995833 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-09-13 07:50 | 1 | 2017-09-14 15:18 | Harald Hartmann ♦827 | Hello AlaskaDave. At http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4423273617 you have tagged `l=0`. Sould it be `level`? #newkey |
| 2 | 2017-09-14 22:23 | AlaskaDave | Definitely. It was purely accidental. Working with OSMAnd on a phone can be tricky for a person with big fingers. I'm at a loss to explain just how it happened but I'll fix it pronto. | |
| 51898529 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-09-10 06:39 | 1 | 2017-09-13 05:43 | AlaskaDave | Source should be ESRI World |
| 38311736 by AlaskaDave @ 2016-04-05 08:50 | 1 | 2017-08-23 13:06 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi!I found 3 ways with hihway=fof , one created in this CS, all created by you. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/407895354What does it mean?Just a typo for footway? |
| 2 | 2017-08-23 14:44 | AlaskaDave | Sorry, It is a typo, caused by JOSM "remembering" a bad value. I cannot locate any place in JOSM that contains the text "fof" that I used by mistake over a year ago but JOSM insert it sometimes still. It's supposed to be "footway". | |
| 3 | 2017-08-23 14:50 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Maybe search for key=properties.recent-tagsin your preferences.xml and check if you find "fof" | |
| 4 | 2017-08-23 15:05 | AlaskaDave | Tried that already. It's not there. This is an annoying issue but one I cani' seem to rid myself of. | |
| 5 | 2017-08-24 05:24 | GerdP ♦2,751 | OK. Strange. Please check also https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9001118Can't see much on sat images and the way crosses a river. | |
| 6 | 2017-08-24 12:20 | AlaskaDave | I changed that one to highway=path - it is much more visible on the new DigitalGlobe imagery. I have no way to tell what the "trail" actually looks like and because of its remoteness I never will, so that's only a guess. I'll work on it again and check the stream crossings when I... | |
| 47800046 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-04-15 00:33 | 1 | 2017-04-22 02:02 | TheOutpost ♦26 | Hi Dave, the rendering in OSM around these islands looks very odd. You know what's up? |
| 2 | 2017-04-22 10:14 | AlaskaDave | It's a rendering issue of some sort. I added Shuyak Island State Park using rough boundaries back in January. Coastllnes seem to be invisible with the current tagging using leisure=park although I can see them fine in my custom maps.Just now I altered the tagging a bit to use boundary=protect... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-25 19:42 | AlaskaDave | I have spent the morning fixing errors in multipolygons and guess what? I redrew a portion of the coastline of Shuyak Island when I fixed up the Perevalnie Islands but forgot to add that new section to the coastline multipolygon. Rendering looks right now. | |
| 4 | 2017-05-01 20:17 | TheOutpost ♦26 | Hmm, still looks odd, though I wonder if the tiles are stale. Looks ok at certain zooms. | |
| 5 | 2017-05-02 01:33 | AlaskaDave | It's most likely some sort of caching or currency problem with the OSM server. I'm sure it will render okay eventually. | |
| 45152994 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-01-14 03:44 | 1 | 2017-04-22 02:03 | TheOutpost ♦26 | Hi Dave,After putting in the state park with an area covering the islands and a lot of water, the islands don't render right. Is this an official boundary of the state park? |
| 47936694 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-04-19 12:12 | 1 | 2017-04-19 14:01 | AlaskaDave | 2017-04-19 The original CanVec imports used many individual nodes labeled name=Kaskawulsh Glacier and natural=glacier. I removed those and added the name to several existing natural=glacier multipolygons. Recently reported changes in this glacier mean its present outline is not the same as shown.on ... |
| 47058312 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-03-22 05:14 | 1 | 2017-03-22 05:44 | Taniaak ♦2 | In case you're searching for some online networking apparatuses to help make your procedure run all the more easily, then look at this article offers numerous proposals 16 Social Media Tools The Experts Swear By.see more http://www.latestdatabase.com/ |
| 46519875 by AlaskaDave @ 2017-03-02 11:41 | 1 | 2017-03-07 03:10 | muralito ♦2,019 | Hi AlaskaDave:Some tags of the elements you added doesn't have any meaning in OSM. It's probably an import that you did it unadvertedly, and could be improved to be more useful. |
| 2 | 2017-03-07 04:53 | AlaskaDave | Yep, you're right. I used a list from the USFWS website and didn't bother to clean up the old tagging. It's on my todo list. | |
| 3 | 2017-03-07 05:22 | AlaskaDave | Done. | |
| 42930943 by AlaskaDave @ 2016-10-16 07:56 | 1 | 2016-10-16 10:55 | AlaskaDave | This changeset actually included many edits to the streets in Dillingham. Reworked and relocated, simplified horrible existing Tiger data. This is a work in progress. I saved it but forgot to change the comment to reflect what was done. |
| 33363018 by AlaskaDave @ 2015-08-16 05:43 | 1 | 2015-10-31 11:11 | GerdP ♦2,751 | please review way 365943695:the tag highway=junction is rarely used.Consider using nodes with highway=motorway_junction, seehttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction |
| 2 | 2015-10-31 12:40 | AlaskaDave | No problem. I was looking for a way to record the name of this historical junction and came up with highway=junction, admittedly a bad idea. The two ways no longer cross - consequently there is no longer a junction - 1317 now crosses 11 on bridges. I'll just leave its name on the area and remov... | |
| 3 | 2015-10-31 12:45 | GerdP ♦2,751 | okay, thanks | |
| 26248111 by AlaskaDave @ 2014-10-22 05:00 | 1 | 2015-01-31 03:20 | stephankn ♦321 | regarding mini hydro: I think the main reservoir is a bit upstream. It it a pump storage plant? so maybe the empty reservoir is the lower basin? |
| 2 | 2015-01-31 06:00 | AlaskaDave | I don't know. I merely moved an existing reservoir to where I thought it might be when more water is present. I think the reservoir you tagged is probably the actual location.I think the original reservoir should be deleted. By the way, are you sure the name is spelled Meatian? I think it i... | |
| 3 | 2015-01-31 08:34 | stephankn ♦321 | It is a wrong spelling on their sign. I put in both spellings and removed the riverbank. | |
| 4 | 2015-01-31 09:07 | AlaskaDave | Sounds good. | |
| 27389799 by AlaskaDave @ 2014-12-11 02:04 | 1 | 2014-12-11 03:06 | AlaskaDave | This comment is from the one I saved previously. It should read: Adding some POIs in my neighborhood of Chang Phuak. source=Bing, survey, GPS |