.jpg){kind=small}
AlaskaDave participated in the following changeset discussionsAlaskaDave participated in the following changeset discussions| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 142277467 by gadget @ 2023-10-07 17:05 | 1 | 2025-05-20 12:52 | AlaskaDave | Hi gadjet,Yesterday I noticed that my GPS was telling my to turn at "49" while driving north on I 90 near Buffalo. I've never before seen notation for an exit on my GPS. It should be telling me to turn to reach NY 78, Depew Lockport, or something similar.When i tried to unders... |
| 2 | 2025-05-21 05:33 | gadget ♦2 | One key take away is that OSM edits need to be made that reflect all aspects of a way or node, and not how any particular application needs/renders the data.This issue is something you should take up with the Map tool. They need to be more tolerant of unexpected tags.I did not change the nam... | |
| 3 | 2025-05-21 12:14 | AlaskaDave | Hello again and thanks for your replyI'm quite aware of your point about not mapping for the renderer. The "Map tool" I'm using is a Garmin-compatible map I created myself and I've never before seen it exhibit this behavior nor have I ever seen this tagging scenario. I c... | |
| 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. | |
| 31411596 by Russ McD @ 2015-05-24 05:08 | 1 | 2025-02-07 04:08 | AlaskaDave | Hi Russ,I'm editing stuff in the Doi Ang Khang Project area (I was just there a few days ago) and came across the Lao Ting Hotel you added back in 2015. AFAIK all the resorts and guest houses in the neighborhood have been closed for a number of years (by King #10 I'm told). Google Maps... |
| 2 | 2025-02-07 05:22 | Russ McD ♦223 | Yes, absolutely. There must be hundreds of old edits I have added in the past that are now closed/changed, and only get updated if I pass.Feel free to change any of my stuff - I know you are one of the responsible ones.Cheers. | |
| 3 | 2025-02-07 09:31 | AlaskaDave | Okay, I deleted it. Thanks Russ. | |
| 157884613 by julcnx @ 2024-10-14 15:52 | 1 | 2025-02-05 06:34 | AlaskaDave | Hi Julien,You created an untagged way near the Chok Chai Elephant Camp. Is it a track you traveled on? It has no ID. The coords of a point near its start follows:19.1910203, 98.8969731I wanted to ask before deleting it.Cheers,Dave |
| 2 | 2025-02-05 07:36 | julcnx ♦404 | Hi Dave, feel free to remove. Those ways that are clearly visible from imagery but were added without local knowledge, I tag them now as highway=road. Cheers, For more info: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/improvements-in-thailand-reducing-the-risks-of-armchair-mapping/123857 | |
| 3 | 2025-02-05 13:53 | AlaskaDave | This way has no tags at all. It runs through a wooded area where satellite imagery shows no road. I'll remove it. | |
| 125986430 by Martin868 @ 2022-09-09 15:36 | 1 | 2024-04-01 03:38 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I noticed that you changed the surface of the Denali Hwy west of Tangle Lakes from "paved" to "unpaved"I drove that road in 2021 (and several times before that) and I updated the tagging that section to paved because the pavement had been extended to about mile 60 f... |
| 2 | 2024-04-01 11:06 | Martin868 ♦61 | It must be a mistake on my part, it is a while back I don;t recall exactly. Is it easy for you to put paved back ? Otherwise I will do my best to figure where pavement end | |
| 3 | 2024-04-01 12:07 | AlaskaDave | Unfortunately, it is not easy. I used a GPS and camera images correlated with my trace when I drove the Denali Hwy back in 2021. I did not save those images. All I can recall is that the recent new pavement extended approximately 60 miles from Paxton almost to the Susitna River bridge.I might be... | |
| 4 | 2024-04-05 10:07 | AlaskaDave | Hello again,I checked my journals and came up with 60 miles west of Paxson as the extent of the pavement. So as I checked along the highway, I discovered a 60-mile milepost that I had conveniently added when I was there in 2021I changed the surface of all the highway segments from Tangle Lak... | |
| 5 | 2024-04-05 21:39 | Martin868 ♦61 | Thank you very much for correcting my mistake. | |
| 117469089 by julcnx @ 2022-02-16 10:09 | 1 | 2024-03-20 00:03 | AlaskaDave | Hi Julien.Today I came across this boundary you mapped or adjusted and I have a couple of questions. In the Wiki, it states that there is no admin level 6 in Thailand. This boundary between Mae Taeng and Chiang Dao, both being districts (amphoes), would seem to fit into the admin_level 6 categor... |
| 2 | 2024-03-20 00:05 | AlaskaDave | Sorry, the second sentence above should read: "In the Wiki, it states that there is no admin level 5 in Thailand." | |
| 3 | 2024-03-20 01:24 | julcnx ♦404 | Hey Dave,Thanks for reaching out!Just to give you some background, I added those partial boundary edges a while back with limited knowledge at the time. They're handy for detecting paths, like fire breaks, forestry tracks, or walking paths, since they often align with those features.R... | |
| 4 | 2024-03-20 06:42 | AlaskaDave | The Thai Topo I mentioned is available as an imagery layer in JOSM. I have been using the OpenTopoMap layer for some time but the Thai Topo layer has details the other doesn't have, for example, boundaries. However, they must be hand-traced from the imagery, just as you would need to do if it w... | |
| 5 | 2024-03-20 08:24 | julcnx ♦404 | Good idea, let's follow up there. I would like to get more info about the Thai Topo source in JOSM as I don't seem to have access to it.I will provide more info on how the GISTDA daata could be accessed as an external layer. | |
| 6 | 2024-03-27 08:17 | julcnx ♦404 | @AlaskaDave I have fixed the incorrect admin_level on these boundaries, and added a note for further work. I will complete these boundaries once I figure out what dataset we can use legally. Cheers, Julien | |
| 7 | 2024-03-28 05:42 | AlaskaDave | Okay, thanks, Julien! | |
| 148769869 by AlaskaDave @ 2024-03-17 12:31 | 1 | 2024-03-17 12:32 | AlaskaDave | Actually, it was the Mae Taeng River I aligned |
| 140615529 by GrabTH_Napittha @ 2023-08-31 04:26 | 1 | 2024-03-05 00:04 | AlaskaDave | Hello,Where did you get the name "Chamadevi Road" for route 1015 in Lamphun?I cannot verify that as the name and I'm doing a lot of mapping in that area and would like to use your sources if they are valid.Sorry if this translation is bad:สวัสดีครั... |
| 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. | |
| 88698394 by ppjj Imports+NHD @ 2020-07-29 20:48 | 1 | 2024-02-05 01:39 | AlaskaDave | I was surprised and, to be brutally honest, a little bit dismayed to see this import in Alaska. It's good to have a source of data to fill in empty regions in the vast area occupied by Alaska but the NHD rendering of rivers drives me crazy. Thousands of little segments, most unnamed, some compr... |
| 122291757 by Yorkshire Mapper @ 2022-06-12 17:35 | 1 | 2024-02-02 10:13 | AlaskaDave | Hello,Did you change the Chilkat River from a water=river to a waterway=ditch? (By the way the river is incorrectly named — it's actually Jarvis Creek.) But I cannot imagine that the waterway you tagged is actually a "ditch".Can you clarify your reason for tagging it tha... |
| 2 | 2024-02-02 11:55 | Yorkshire Mapper ♦2 | This change was part of cleaning up unclosed polygons. It was over a year ago so I don't remember this specific change, but I can only imagine that I inadvertently joined it to another waterway that was tagged as a ditch. I do not believe I intended to change the type or name.I'm trave... | |
| 3 | 2024-02-02 15:05 | AlaskaDave | Okay, thank you.It seems obvious to me that there is not a ditch to carry a large stream in a remote region in Alaska so I'll assume it is simply an error. I will fix it. Thanks for your rapid reply. | |
| 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. | |
| 124339012 by Nithinat S @ 2022-08-01 10:53 | 1 | 2022-08-01 14:28 | julcnx ♦404 | hi nitinatsangsit, I believe you made those edits based on the DRR data. Unfortunately, some drawings are wrong, and segments like 478967119, 327173183, 202506151 in Samoeng are actually offroad tracks/paths unsuitable for normal cars. Maybe it was the agency's initial plan to go this way and n... |
| 2 | 2022-08-01 15:19 | Nithinat S ♦50 | Sorry for the issue with Highway 1396 in Samoeng. That road is weird since it is a national highway with a section that is inaccessible by motor car, which is a rare case. The problem is that I simply want to bring the national highway into compliance with the guidelines, and I assume that the mappe... | |
| 3 | 2022-08-01 16:04 | julcnx ♦404 | I was actually thinking that we should maybe have one rule to downgrade tertiary sections that are mostly unpaved/4wd only. There are quite a few especially near/inside national parks including e.g. Pai to Muang Noi. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.... | |
| 4 | 2022-08-01 16:18 | Nithinat S ♦50 | For general unpaved road, I think tertiary is acceptable (but not secondary), but for 4wd-only road, maybe not higher than unclassified? or track only? | |
| 5 | 2022-08-30 12:54 | AlaskaDave | Hello,It seems you removed the ref tag from the road that goes to the Hmong village on Doi Suthep. My tag source:ref clearly says that the ref appears on signs along the way.Is there some reason you removed the ref tag?I will add the ref tag again today. | |
| 6 | 2022-08-30 14:10 | Nithinat S ♦50 | According to the DOH Roadnet, the 1004 ends at KM.19+527. (This can be verified by the milestone on ground.) The DRR database also indicated that this section is not under the DOH, but I'm not sure whether it is under the Chiang Mai PAO or the Suthep Subdistrict Municipality. By the way, this s... | |
| 7 | 2022-08-30 22:56 | AlaskaDave | It's not the 1004 I'm talking about but the smaller road that heads north to Ban Khun Chang Khian. It has id:54460506 and the ref, marked by a couple of signs, is ชม.4038.I was just up there yesterday and can verify that the route ref signs are still present. | |
| 8 | 2022-08-31 03:43 | Nithinat S ♦50 | Sorry for my mistake. I believe that road never was a DRR's "ชม.4038", but rather the Chiang Mai PAO's "อบจ.ชม.4038", which is the old style of the PAO's ref. This route, 7.157km from Ban Khun Chang Khian to Ban Doi Pui, is now completely registered a... | |
| 9 | 2022-08-31 03:44 | Nithinat S ♦50 | * old_ref=* | |
| 10 | 2022-08-31 07:18 | AlaskaDave | I did see a couple of milestones on the section of road just past the campground having ref=ชม.ถ1-0035.I assumed they applied only to that short section and not the whole way.Can I assume that highway classification applies to the entire stretch of highway from the traffic circle atBan... | |
| 11 | 2022-08-31 07:19 | AlaskaDave | Ban Bhubing?This section was also once tagged as 1004, right? | |
| 12 | 2022-08-31 09:01 | Nithinat S ♦50 | The whole distance from Ban Bhubing to Ban Khun Chang Khian is around 8km, slightly longer than the documented 7.157km. I believe that is a measurement error and agree that ชม.ถ1-0035 should be applied to the full length.Yes, a short section from Ban Bhubing to the junction to Ban Doi Pui ... | |
| 13 | 2022-08-31 10:26 | AlaskaDave | Okay, thanks for the information. I added the ref tag to the sections of the old ชม.4038, and split that road at the coords you provided. | |
| 14 | 2024-01-25 13:07 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Hello!Sorry for bothering about an ancient edit.But is PFM:garmin_type=0xf00 meaning anything at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9924479676/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 object... | |
| 15 | 2024-01-25 13:19 | Nithinat S ♦50 | I'm not sure because this is most likely a legacy tag that was copied or edited from another object. I do not object to removing this tag. | |
| 16 | 2024-01-25 23:29 | AlaskaDave | It is indeed a legacy tag but was placed there by a Thailand-based mapper to help him compile Garmin-compat maps with the mkgmap program.It's long past time to remove them.I also inquired about them and he asked me to please leave them in place, and I did. | |
| 17 | 2024-01-26 09:25 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | > I also inquired about them and he asked me to please leave them in place, and I did. Do you remember their username?> It is indeed a legacy tag but was placed there by a Thailand-based mapper to help him compile Garmin-compat maps with the mkgmap program.> It's long past ... | |
| 18 | 2024-01-26 09:27 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,632 | Oh, I see in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35430500 that you do not remember their name | |
| 19 | 2024-01-26 11:58 | AlaskaDave | Hi again Mateusz,I checked all my OSM messages going back to 2012 and did not find anything about those tags or the mapper's identity.I might have contacted him via a changeset comment but it was so long ago that I gave up searching.IMO, you should go ahead remove those weird tags whe... | |
| 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:\... | |
| 112024918 by Konmuang @ 2021-10-03 08:55 | 1 | 2023-12-14 02:31 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I've been working in the area covered by this changeset and I see many errors. You have described a huge area as landuse=orchard when in fact, it is a mixture of scrub, and aquaculture landuses. Not only that but you failed to create multipolygons to allow for the many ponds (aquacu... |
| 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 :) | |
| 121938813 by julcnx @ 2022-06-04 13:16 | 1 | 2023-03-30 10:05 | AlaskaDave | Hi Julien,I was in Doi Inthanon park this morning driving around on the back roads. There is a hamlet that you named Ban Khun Ya (18.4389123, 98.5248006). I believe that hamlet is actually further southwest on that highway. I base that decision on a road sign I photographed that said the town wa... |
| 2 | 2023-03-30 14:37 | julcnx ♦404 | Hey Dave,Usually, I add source:name=sign when I see a sign at the entrance/exit of a village, but to be honest, I don't really remember this location and didn't upload any ground truth photos to Mapillary at the time (which I do now every time). So, it's quite possible that what y... | |
| 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. | |
| 80504252 by sammuell_imports @ 2020-02-04 02:10 | 1 | 2023-01-06 02:52 | AlaskaDave | Hi,There is a large way ( id:769510142) with about 1700 nodes that is untagged. Did you forget to tag it? Ordinarily, I would have removed it immediately but seeing as it's such a large addition, thought I'd better contact you first.Cheers,Dave |
| 130543412 by iqyax @ 2022-12-27 07:41 | 1 | 2022-12-28 01:04 | AlaskaDave | Congrats igwax, you beat me to it by 17 hours! I read the ADN article last night and had looked forward to entering it into OSM but when I looked at it this morning, the Northernmost Glacier was already there.I changed your tag "inscription" to "description" because there is ... |
| 2 | 2022-12-28 03:21 | iqyax ♦1 | Brilliant minds think alike! | |
| 3 | 2022-12-28 05:25 | AlaskaDave | I reckon so! | |
| 4 | 2022-12-28 05:29 | iqyax ♦1 | Now, the challenge is, can you add it to any other maps..? Google Maps..? | |
| 5 | 2022-12-28 07:39 | AlaskaDave | I don't add anything to Google Maps since I started mapping for OSM. Never fear, they will get that data if they want it. | |
| 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. | |
| 112267868 by julcnx @ 2021-10-08 14:47 | 1 | 2022-10-15 07:38 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I was working in the area of this changeset and saw that you had added a surface tag to a way that's currently tagged as a track.way id:320167785The track tag was applied long ago and I don't think it's correct. Many old tracks have been widened and are in continual use... |
| 2 | 2022-10-15 12:27 | julcnx ♦404 | Hi Dave. Thanks for reaching out. If I recall it correctly, it was a 1-lane canal dirt track. I would normally leave it as a track because there seemed to be no residence along and while it can be used as a shortcut, it does not seem to be used as thru-traffic like nearby paved unclassified. Situa... | |
| 3 | 2022-10-15 13:57 | AlaskaDave | I don't have a need to change that tagging and it's not worth the drive out there to see it.Looking at the fairly clear delineation of it in the imagery, it appears to be more than a track. I define a track as a way through that is visible but not a real "road", something you... | |
| 4 | 2022-10-15 13:59 | AlaskaDave | I reckon this can wait. It's no biggie either way. | |
| 5 | 2022-10-16 03:08 | julcnx ♦404 | Hi Dave. As per the latest Thailand wiki minor road revision I worked on with Nat and others last year, highway classification would be tagged based on their purposes/importance, and not solely based on their surface, or smoothness tag (although those extra tags can help decide).e.g. highway... | |
| 6 | 2022-10-17 00:56 | AlaskaDave | Hi Julien,As I said earlier, I don't have a favored outcome for this particular highway but as for the revised scheme, I can't agree with this:"e.g. highway=track is used agricultural/forestry purposes, and it’s perfectly acceptable to have some paved"Huh? Paved?\... | |
| 7 | 2022-10-17 15:03 | julcnx ♦404 | tracktype=grade1 is reserved for paved tracks only and is commonly used so it’s perfectly acceptable to have a paved highway=track since we tag roads based on their function, not their surface. I believe you may have missed the updates on the wiki, or they may not be good or clear enough, ... | |
| 28729475 by Stephen_Co_Antrim @ 2015-02-09 14:58 | 1 | 2022-09-28 23:28 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I came across s island in the Clea Lakes that is possibly a crannog which also has the name=Crannog. Is "Crannog" an actual name that can be found on a map?Or did you mean it as a description rather than a name?Thank you |
| 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... | |
| 56124868 by Bernhard Hiller @ 2018-02-06 18:17 | 1 | 2022-01-12 04:18 | AlaskaDave | Hi Bernhard,I'm visiting the Krung Ching waterfall area and the position where you placed it is wrong. I hiked part of the way to it this morning but did not reach the falls. We turned back because it was much farther than we expected. So, I removed the name tag from your waterfall node... |
| 2 | 2022-01-12 13:14 | Bernhard Hiller ♦26 | Sorry for inconvenience. I do not remember details. Is a GPS track available from that time? As I have no computer here, I cannot check currently. By the way, I am in ban thung Yao, Trang province now. Enjoy your holidays in the south! | |
| 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 | |
| 105720474 by Parisa155461 @ 2021-06-02 12:02 | 1 | 2021-12-29 09:13 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I came across this connector road and I cannot understand why it is part of three turn restrictions. If I look at it on Streetview, it appears to be a simple one-way slip ramp from the left lane of 340 to the Frontage Road. As I see it, none of the turn restrictions are necessary. It&#... |
| 2 | 2021-12-29 09:16 | AlaskaDave | There are other issues as well. You have some nodes with name=road striping, for example, and name=street side ???What are these? | |
| 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 | 👍 | |
| 63950766 by gede0n @ 2018-10-28 13:44 | 1 | 2021-11-28 09:24 | AlaskaDave | Hi,Thanks for your work in Khao Yai NP a few years ago. I have some questions about it.You "adjusted" a trail in this changeset, left a "fixme" on a nearby trail, "Trail no. 9" saying that it was inaccurate and should be removed but you didn't remove it yo... |
| 2 | 2021-11-29 00:58 | gede0n ♦2 | Hello!IIRC, the mapped Trail no.9 was off by so much that I thought there's a slight chance I may have hiked another trail, and trail 9 access was hidden.Looking at Strava Heat Map now though, it looks like Trail no.9 is incorrect and the trail I mapped is the right one. It also shows an un... | |
| 3 | 2021-11-29 08:43 | AlaskaDave | Okay, thank you for the info. I intend to delete the old trail and add the name:en=Trail 9 to your adjusted one. You also tagged a node on that same way with tourism=attraction and name=Trail no.3 Start.Can I assume that node is actually the start of Trail no 9? If so I would think it would be g... | |
| 4 | 2021-11-29 09:01 | AlaskaDave | On second look, it was not you that added the Start and End points of Trail No 3. I think those are both incorrect but I'll check further before deleting them.Thanks again for your help and cooperation. | |
| 66981695 by efessler @ 2019-02-07 02:34 | 1 | 2021-11-06 23:05 | AlaskaDave | Hi,First off, let me thank you for the huge effort you've put into OSM in the Eugene area. When I first visited Eugene as an OSM mapper about 6-7 years ago, it was a mess. You've clarified and enhanced the entire area.There is one thing I would ask, however. When you are adding far... |
| 110395778 by wdcrawford @ 2021-08-28 22:33 | 1 | 2021-09-06 09:55 | mueschel ♦6,567 | Hisomething went wrong here.Many of the ways have foreign tags like "cat" or "fid" or "adminstrative = 50". They are also missing the required admin_level tag. |
| 2 | 2021-09-15 23:13 | AlaskaDave | I just noticed the same strange tags. If wdcrawford doesn't respond soon, I'd suggest deleting those lines. | |
| 3 | 2021-10-12 00:37 | DUGA ♦548 | What is this you added here? Please respond as soon as possible.https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/977437649/history#map=16/40.6239/-84.2568 | |
| 4 | 2021-10-12 16:17 | AlaskaDave | I think one of us can safely delete these strange lines. user:wdcrawford hasn't responded and what we're left with doesn't make sense without some more tags. | |
| 79584271 by Turvey_697_GEOG281 @ 2020-01-14 22:18 | 1 | 2021-09-20 23:21 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I came across a node you added called Franklin Perch tagged with natural=cliff in Eugene near the Spliff Cliff. I cannot find any reference to it on the Internet. Perhaps it's a local name for this place?If it's not officially named Franklin Perch I'd suggest changing the &... |
| 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. | |
| 96832357 by Adam Schneider @ 2021-01-03 02:10 | 1 | 2021-05-21 18:47 | AlaskaDave | Hi Adam,There seem to be two separate, almost identical relations for the Yaquina Bay State Recreation Site (id:11,911,719 and id:11,911,720).I'm not sure you created them but might you know what's going on?Thanks,Dave |
| 2 | 2021-05-21 21:50 | Adam Schneider ♦56 | Weird. The relations were indeed identical, and both were unnamed and completely unnecessary. I just deleted them. | |
| 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? | |
| 102013986 by efessler @ 2021-03-31 00:40 | 1 | 2021-04-25 13:56 | AlaskaDave | You forgot to add the tagboundary=administrative to this object.I added it yesterday, |
| 66757592 by efessler @ 2019-01-30 03:34 | 1 | 2021-04-25 03:12 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I've been working in the area of Fern Ridge Lake and have come across many of your edits from a couple of years ago. There are many landuse=farmlands areas and natural=wetland that are attached to highways and other things. This is a practice that I would discourage. The natural=wood or ... |
| 56180939 by Xavibi @ 2018-02-08 12:15 | 1 | 2021-02-07 06:45 | AlaskaDave | You added this viewpoint but I don't see any way to access it. No roads or tracks. It is located in dense forest. How would a tourist get there?Can you explain your reasoning for placing this? Also, The name you tagged is certainly not correct — it is a description and does not be... |
| 75352797 by Sean Noble @ 2019-10-06 23:12 | 1 | 2020-12-25 11:21 | Ze0zohk1 ♦286 | Hey Sean Noble,you tagged this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/732214733 with surface=dirt/sand. What does this mean? Does it mean dirt and sand (and if, shouldn't dirt;sand be used or is "/" convention in US?)? Cheers |
| 2 | 2020-12-26 07:01 | AlaskaDave | Adding a clarification:The slash character is never used in the value side of a tag. If the road is mixed sand and dirt, then it might better be tagged surface=dirt or surface=unpaved.If you were tagging a restaurant that serves pizza and hamburgers it might have cuisine=pizza;burger. Note the... | |
| 3 | 2020-12-26 09:16 | Ze0zohk1 ♦286 | Hey AlaskaDave,thanks for replying. I know, but that is the reasons I am asking. I was wondering, why there are so many uses (compared to other combinations) on taginfo. And I was thinking about if there is more to it... | |
| 4 | 2020-12-26 12:53 | AlaskaDave | @Ze0zohk1The reason Taginfo contains so many values is because there is no restriction or controls on how a mapper decides to tag an object. To make matters worse, some editor programs don't dismiss or call attention to a value that includes a slash character.OSM practically encourages ma... | |
| 5 | 2020-12-26 20:39 | Ze0zohk1 ♦286 | @AlaskaDave: I know all of this. I am just curious what Sean Noble meant with this value. Imagine that there were a special material denoted "sand/dirt" which is not equal to "sand;dirt". Maybe sounds silly, but as I mentioned above, the value "sand/dirt" is pretty popu... | |
| 93338112 by Aruno @ 2020-10-31 13:25 | 1 | 2020-11-01 14:55 | stephankn ♦321 | Please check maps.me presets and their meaning in OpenStreetMap (reference in wiki). For example, you added a "wilderness_hut" node 8068823789 and tagged it "cottage in rice farm". As a cottage is a small house where people typically live, this looks wrong. I checked different so... |
| 2 | 2020-12-26 12:18 | AlaskaDave | @stephanknThis person does not respond to questions about his mapping. I've been deleting these "wilderness_huts" as I encounter them. | |
| 78290342 by Itthiwat New @ 2019-12-12 03:22 | 1 | 2020-11-23 10:07 | mCloud00 ♦19 | How do you determine the access restriction for the way in this changeset? because I think this is residential road and should be open for public route? |
| 2 | 2020-12-26 12:14 | AlaskaDave | 2020-12-26 I removed the access restriction and changed surface tag to concrete | |
| 96359245 by Allison P @ 2020-12-24 05:15 | 1 | 2020-12-24 19:58 | PerplexingPenguins ♦55 | I think going with the signage would be better here as that's what's "on the ground" |
| 2 | 2020-12-26 07:09 | AlaskaDave | I agree with PerplexingPenguins but if there is a different name being used by the assessor's office then add that name using the tagofficial_name=East Redwood Court.This way, people using the map to find this road will be looking for the version on the road sign "on the ground"... | |
| 3 | 2021-01-27 16:37 | Allison P ♦1,136 | I contacted the county highway district and they said the corrected sign should go up in the next couple of weeks. | |
| 95421158 by lake3kfe9w3 @ 2020-12-07 12:20 | 1 | 2020-12-07 17:16 | Glassman ♦5,222 | These are likely logging roads and not highway=unclassified. Tagging them as unclassified might lead people to attempt to drive them in cars built for city roads. AI help find objects but it still requires us humans to make the determination if they belong in OSM.Please revert this changeset. ... |
| 2 | 2020-12-26 04:24 | AlaskaDave | The classification of highways is actually a bit tricky. If one uses highway=track for these roads, that implies a road that is not constructed for carrying vehicles except for farm tractors and the like. Most logging roads that I've seen might be better classed as highway=service with tags to ... | |
| 3 | 2020-12-26 20:20 | Glassman ♦5,222 | Thanks for the clarification. For some background. This changeset was from AI identified roads with little human investigation of what was being added resulting in a complete revert of this and many more similar edits by the mapper. In this area local mappers seem to basically agree that unclass... | |
| 64325657 by kellerk @ 2018-11-09 13:46 | 1 | 2020-11-30 00:15 | AlaskaDave | Hi Kurt,I was mapping in this area and noticed this footway you added a couple of years ago. It would be really helpful to other hikers if you could add more information about the trail. For example, surface, visibility, width, degree of difficulty, etc.This extra stuff is not required obvious... |
| 2 | 2020-11-30 11:48 | kellerk ♦5 | The foot path starts as a motobike track and gets smallerand smaller. I put some warning in the comment to the key section, bypassing a cliff. | |
| 92281403 by OpMen @ 2020-10-10 16:54 | 1 | 2020-11-27 13:02 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I noticed you added a waterfall in the middle of a wooded area near Doi Inthanon. You didn't give a source other than Bing and I cannot see anything in that area at all. I'm curious as to why you added it. Were you perhaps hiking in that area and saw a waterfall?Thanks,Dave |
| 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. | |
| 66457240 by M'Topp Ekkaraj @ 2019-01-19 16:11 | 1 | 2020-10-23 12:08 | AlaskaDave | These are NOT wilderness huts. Please read the Wiki for a definition of wilderness hots.I deleted them. |
| 2 | 2021-08-27 11:10 | SomeoneElse_Revert ♦70,576 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 110335556 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some historic MAPS.ME personal markers in Thailand. | |
| 75542896 by esperanz @ 2019-10-11 05:29 | 1 | 2020-10-23 11:56 | AlaskaDave | Hi,You added a park with name=memorial brick in this changeset but I cannot see any names near it or any signs saying that this is a park.Can you give me your source of information for this park?Thank you. |
| 77188198 by Russ McD @ 2019-11-17 13:08 | 1 | 2020-10-06 09:18 | AlaskaDave | Hi Russ,I was surprised to see you had lowered the Chiang Mai-Lamphun Road to tertiary class and removed the ref=106.I'm not familiar with the DOH Roadnet database but there is a sign for 106 as you exit Mahidon Road to go south to Saraphi.Even if the route designation doesn't co... |
| 2 | 2020-10-06 13:16 | Russ McD ♦223 | Yes, I know it probably a bone of contention, but it seemed to make to sense, rather than end it at the bridge in CM. Are the signs you saw actually that of the road, or just directing you to it. The DOH database includes the mile marker positions, so it seemed to make sense to just start the labe... | |
| 3 | 2020-10-07 00:49 | AlaskaDave | You know how it is with Thailand ref signs. One can never be sure if they are saying "R106 is that-a-way" or the next right IS R106. At best these highways are poorly marked compared to our home countries. Regardless, I still think that highway should be a primary all the way from Mahi... | |
| 4 | 2020-10-07 08:18 | Russ McD ♦223 | I think a waste of time, but be my guest. | |
| 5 | 2020-10-07 09:14 | AlaskaDave | Well, if talking about it is a waste of time, would you mind if I reclassify that road to primary then?It is weird to see the classification of a highway change at a node where the highway is identical on both sides (same pavement, width, traffic, etc.) just because a database, esp,. a Thai databa... | |
| 6 | 2020-10-07 09:52 | Russ McD ♦223 | Id mind because I dont think its right... I don't mind if you want to discuss on the Forum. A primary highway has physical characteristics which as the roads become more obstructed as they enter a city, surely the tagging has to change at some point.... the "official" mile zero seems... | |
| 7 | 2020-10-16 14:18 | AlaskaDave | Russ, I've been busy with other projects and this is the first chance I've had to continue our discussion.As for your statement about roads becoming obstructed and (because of that) surely the tagging has to change, I disagree. The road's class is not determined only by physical c... | |
| 8 | 2020-10-17 11:49 | Russ McD ♦223 | We won't agree on this one ..... I don't arbitrarily change roads, and 2019 street imagery confirms that MM167 is the last freshly painted marker heading North on the 106. This also happens to fall on the CM-Lamphun boundary, and coincides with the database, (even if the DB shows the wr... | |
| 73775319 by TheConductor @ 2019-08-27 03:00 | 1 | 2020-10-13 08:30 | AlaskaDave | Hello,When you added Unalaska Lake in this edit session, you accidentally deleted a portion of the boundary relation for the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. I know this session happened a year ago but I'm curious if you can recall seeing any error message during the upload.I add... |
| 2 | 2020-10-14 01:08 | TheConductor ♦39 | Hello,My apologies. When I did this, I was still very new to OSM and editing in ID with no concept of boundary relations. I don't remember seeing an error message during the upload. I imagine there probably was one but I most likely didn't know what it was. | |
| 3 | 2020-10-14 14:29 | AlaskaDave | Thanks for the reply.I fixed it already. It wasn't as bad as I thought at first glance. The error messages one gets when using JOSM aren't always super helpful either. I don't like iD at all and I imagine it could only be worse in that regard.I sometimes look back at my older ... | |
| 70004239 by Werewombat @ 2019-05-08 02:36 | 1 | 2020-10-13 08:59 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I was aligning coastlines for some islands close to Nuka Island and saw two islands that you had included in the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. The shapefile I have been using for the refuge does not include those particular islands (Way id: 688530271 and Way id:21674829). The h... |
| 77298058 by Elijah Filip @ 2019-11-20 02:43 | 1 | 2020-10-01 08:24 | AlaskaDave | You added some areas and modified some incorrect landuse=residential areas in this changeset but did not say what these areas actually are. The descriptions and sources you used mean nothing to me or other experienced OSM mappers.And what do the descriptions mean? What do they refer to? There ar... |
| 2 | 2020-10-02 04:01 | Elijah Filip ♦2 | Apologies AlaskaDave - these changesets refer to malaria foci used by the Bureau of Vector Borne Diseases in Thailand in their malaria elimination program. The description tag is a 10-digit code for identifying sub-national boundaries in Thailand's administrative hierarchy. The source tags were... | |
| 3 | 2020-10-03 22:50 | AlaskaDave | Thanks for your reply. I asked for opinions about these "foci" on the Thailand OSM subforum but so far nobody has expressed their views. Read the thread here: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=70754My feeling is that if you could correlate your areas with officially re... | |
| 4 | 2020-10-04 04:39 | Paul_012 ♦112 | Let's wait a bit for further input. These appear to be village whose names aren't otherwise mapped, and it would be beneficial to retain the information in some format. | |
| 5 | 2020-10-06 07:40 | Elijah Filip ♦2 | Thanks AlaskaDave and Paul_012 for your replies and the link to the forum where this is being discussed. No worries about the tone, completely understandable given that this seems to be a relatively widespread issue in OSM and the fact that this project clearly doesn't conform to OSM standards.... | |
| 6 | 2020-10-07 00:33 | AlaskaDave | Thanks so much for this helpful response. Please feel free to share our communications with the sponsors of your project. I can only hope it leads to a reduction of the use of the OSM database for this sort of project record keeping.I added your response to the thread on the OSM Thailand Forum a... | |
| 7 | 2020-10-08 01:24 | Elijah Filip ♦2 | Hi Dave, Thanks, I have shared this changeset and the thread. We do have a list of the areas. The easiest way to pull them out is using Overpass to query on the source and description tags across all of Thailand: area["name:en"="Thailand"] ->.a;way["source&q... | |
| 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. | |
| 61029092 by Nicole Smoot @ 2018-07-24 15:58 | 1 | 2020-08-10 00:25 | AlaskaDave | Hi Nicole,Today I came across these two glaciers that you added as tourism=attraction a couple of years ago. I cannot find any source for the names you used. If these are names known locally and are not official names, I think the tagging should reflect that in a loc_name=Bomber Glacier for exam... |
| 2 | 2020-09-23 02:42 | Nicole Smoot ♦1 | Hey Dave, Every map I’ve ever looked at or owned has the glaciers named as Bomber and Penny Royal, so I’m certain they’re the actual names. | |
| 3 | 2020-09-23 12:31 | AlaskaDave | Thanks for the reply.I did find a reference to the Penny Royal Glacier in geonames.com but the only references I found to the Bomber Glacier is in several news stories about why it's named Bomber. Did you see the wreck while you were there? It would be nice to add its coordinates to OSM as ... | |
| 88054790 by Vedrfolnir @ 2020-07-16 00:59 | 1 | 2020-09-18 08:56 | AlaskaDave | You have added a very nice coastline in this changeset to replace the original PGS coastline. I want to do this for a great many other islands in Alaska. However, I cannot find the exact URL to obtain these coastlines. Can you be more specific about the source URL you have provided?Thank you |
| 2 | 2020-09-19 17:06 | Vedrfolnir ♦4 | Hello. The data I am using is NOAA's electronic navigational chart (ENC) data. Its the same data that shows on like a garmin chart plotter for example. You can download shapefiles using this website: https://encdirect.noaa.gov/Instructions on using the website can be found here: https://enc... | |
| 3 | 2020-09-19 23:49 | AlaskaDave | Thank you very much.I might never have found the data viewer on my own.I have downloaded some shapefiles to experiment with, however so far, all the extracts I've tested are very inaccurate. Better then the old PGS coastlines but still in need of major aligning before use. I cannot seem... | |
| 90476951 by Shaun00005 @ 2020-09-06 11:21 | 1 | 2020-09-08 13:52 | AlaskaDave | The building you added should be orthogonalized, that is, its corners made to meet at 90 deg angles. Right-click on a building outline in the iD Editor and select the "Square" setting from the flyout menu. |
| 90438627 by ccaputo @ 2020-09-05 04:22 | 1 | 2020-09-07 00:24 | AlaskaDave | This is a real mess. There are buildings placed on top of existing buildings, there are multiple buildings drawn as if they were a single building. Terrible. Why did you draw your buildings right on top of the existing ones? I see that you have done this dozens of times in this same area. What were ... |
| 2 | 2020-09-07 01:39 | ccaputo ♦5 | I never draw building on top of other already drawn. Also the system would not allow it, flagging an error. One time I only slightly overlapped, because buildings are very close, and the system flagged it. So I'm not sure why this issue happened. Before shouting to someone which is trying to he... | |
| 3 | 2020-09-07 02:07 | ccaputo ♦5 | btw, I'm not sure who is this พิชัย บุญทัน. How do you assess this is my colleague? | |
| 4 | 2020-09-07 02:56 | ccaputo ♦5 | Regarding Bing imagery, this is the one suggested to be used, so I don't understand your comment about it, and you are not suggesting a solution. | |
| 5 | 2020-09-07 04:52 | AlaskaDave | Sorry to be so direct but I have really never seen such poor technique. The buildings were present for a year before you added yours. It is inexplicable how you could have done what you did. And then, even if the buildings were somehow invisible to you, your "buildings" sometimes included ... | |
| 6 | 2020-09-07 05:05 | ccaputo ♦5 | It's ok, I understand your frustration since you have to correct others. I apologize if I did wrong, and surely will put more attention. However, I'm still wondering how come I can add a building if same building is already mapped. On top of being very sure the area was unmapped, the syste... | |
| 7 | 2020-09-07 05:13 | ccaputo ♦5 | oh weird, I googled this name พิชัย บุญทัน and I found a similar one (พิชัย ใชยบุญทัน) brings to my linkedin profile. It must be some kind of auto-translation to Thai of my name?!? I never created a Thai profile, I don't even know the language, ... | |
| 8 | 2020-09-07 08:57 | AlaskaDave | According to my Thai wife, those two names are probably the same man using two different forms of his name. Can't be sure.I agree with you that something is wrong with a system — I have never been able to add a building over the top of another one. One way that could happen is if you ... | |
| 9 | 2020-09-07 09:42 | ccaputo ♦5 | Hi, yes I'm using this tasking manager https://tasks.hotosm.org/ | |
| 10 | 2020-09-07 09:48 | ccaputo ♦5 | No, I'm not getting paid. Our Company supports charity activities, and we all try our best to contribute. Unfortunately, with the COVID situation, most activities on the field in Singapore are not practical because of the social distancing we still have to adhere to. This mapping activities is ... | |
| 11 | 2020-09-07 09:57 | ccaputo ♦5 | I know that one time, the system was hanging once I saved the task. At the end it did not save any of the mapping I've done. So I've to redo again. Now I suspect somehow it indeed saved 2 times, maybe it kept the saving job in the background. That is the only explanation I have. With this ... | |
| 12 | 2020-09-07 10:46 | AlaskaDave | Okay, Carlo. Thanks for the information. I suggested JOSM because of its power but unless you want to become a regular contributor it might not be worth the time it takes to learn how to use it. No problem about the extra work. I'm glad you want to contribute time to worthwhile projects and... | |
| 90511860 by SixSenses @ 2020-09-07 07:25 | 1 | 2020-09-07 10:15 | AlaskaDave | You requested a review of this work. It looks like the junction of 294 and ศก.5089 has some serious problems. One segment of 294 (way id:844947605) has 16 redundant U-turn restrictions.The rest of the junction looks okay but if I were being asked to fix it,my first step would be to delete al... |
| 90511249 by SixSenses @ 2020-09-07 07:15 | 1 | 2020-09-07 10:09 | AlaskaDave | You requested a review of this work. It looks like the junction of 294 and ศก.5089 has some serious problems. One segment of 294 (way id:844947605) has 16 redundant U-turn restrictions.The rest of the junction looks okay but if I were being asked to fix it,my first step would be to delete a... |
| 2 | 2020-09-07 10:14 | AlaskaDave | You requested a review of this changeset. Actually my original comment belongs on a different changeset. I didn't see anything wrong with the oneway situation here so I'll give you a "pass" on that.Dave | |
| 90481805 by ccaputo @ 2020-09-06 14:10 | 1 | 2020-09-07 09:35 | AlaskaDave | These buildings are okay but are not drawn very well IMO. I commented on another of your recent changesets (90482117) and made some suggestions there. Dave |
| 90482117 by ccaputo @ 2020-09-06 14:19 | 1 | 2020-09-07 09:30 | AlaskaDave | Hi again,There are no duplicate buildings in this changeset but the accuracy of your building outlines is still pretty poor. You're using the iD Editor and it has built-in tools to make a building square, rotate it, move it, etc. After selecting the outline you right-click to open a special... |
| 2 | 2020-09-07 09:39 | ccaputo ♦5 | OK thanks, this advice of making the buildings really squarish was not given during training, but I already find out the option to square the corners, will use it. I will also give a try to JOSM next time.Carlo | |
| 90438416 by ccaputo @ 2020-09-05 04:07 | 1 | 2020-09-07 05:48 | AlaskaDave | You requested a review of this changeset. I already removed many duplicate buildings while I was reviewing another of your changesets (#90438627) so I won't repeat my comments here. |
| 2 | 2020-09-07 06:00 | ccaputo ♦5 | It's ok, again sorry for the issues. | |
| 90482346 by ccaputo @ 2020-09-06 14:26 | 1 | 2020-09-07 05:42 | AlaskaDave | You requested a review of this changeset. Everything you added looks good. |
| 2 | 2020-09-07 06:01 | ccaputo ♦5 | at least this one :-) thank you! | |
| 90299862 by mCloud00 @ 2020-09-02 11:11 | 1 | 2020-09-07 05:34 | AlaskaDave | At your request, I reviewed this addition. It looks fine as is but because we're mapping in Thailand the English description you added really should be tagged as description:en. Assuming you are a Thai, you might consider adding a description in Thai language.Also, according to English cust... |
| 90341962 by mCloud00 @ 2020-09-03 06:59 | 1 | 2020-09-07 05:22 | AlaskaDave | Ive reviewed most of this changeset and the data you added/edited looks good. It's of much higher quality than your previous mapping. You're making progress. I still see buildings included in natural=wood areas, same for orchards. Maybe you could spend a little more time to outline them m... |
| 90444871 by porchebkk @ 2020-09-05 08:43 | 1 | 2020-09-06 15:30 | AlaskaDave | Does the name of this restaurant appear in all capital letters on its sign or menus? If so, your work is perfect. The name in OSM should look just the way it would if you were there in person. |
| 2 | 2020-09-07 00:00 | AlaskaDave | Also, it is good practice to tell OSM how you obtained the information. Something like "source=2020-09-07 survey" or "personal_knowledge" would work. I assume that much of the info you provided looks as though it came from the restaurant's FB page. You could say that to clar... | |
| 66456723 by M'Topp Ekkaraj @ 2019-01-19 15:48 | 1 | 2020-08-28 00:30 | AlaskaDave | Hello,You have added many wilderness_huts in this area. I think you are using that tag incorrectly. A wilderness_hut is located in wild country, usually accessible only on foot, is free and has sleeping facilities and sometimes even a fireplace or stove. Please read the description in the Wiki. ... |
| 2 | 2021-08-27 11:10 | SomeoneElse_Revert ♦70,576 | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 110335556 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some historic MAPS.ME personal markers in Thailand. | |
| 65332189 by katpatuka @ 2018-12-10 05:36 | 1 | 2020-08-22 23:48 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I noted that you enhanced the tagging for this usually dry lake in China but I'm wondering why you tagged it with layer=-1Can you tell me more about that tagging choice?Cheers,Dave |
| 2 | 2020-08-23 07:39 | katpatuka ♦194 | There also exists relation 9396582 as 'heath' which partly overlays the dry lake - I guess I'd chosen to add layer=-1 to let the heath render above the lake. I've never been there therefore I cannot tell anything about the on-ground reality ;) | |
| 3 | 2020-08-23 11:54 | AlaskaDave | Thanks for the feedback.I suspected that was your reason but I don't know if it's a valid one. Ideally, rendering issues shouldn't influence our tagging choices and yet, in this case, the layer tag may be appropriate. It's an interesting situation. I'm not going to c... | |
| 4 | 2020-08-23 13:23 | katpatuka ♦194 | It seemingly has no influence anyway as one sees on the standard layer where it gets mixed; the humanitarian layer shows water over heath ;) | |
| 89209992 by mCloud00 @ 2020-08-10 17:13 | 1 | 2020-08-13 00:08 | AlaskaDave | Your mapping of this wetland is sloppy and inaccurate. You have included bare fields and what appear to be wooded areas in the wetland that you then further tag as wetland=swamp.Have you visited the wetland personally? Do you know for a fact that the trees in your "swamp" are actually in w... |
| 82908586 by mCloud00 @ 2020-04-01 07:56 | 1 | 2020-08-06 21:42 | AlaskaDave | I mentioned this before but you haven't corrected your errors in either Wat Pak Mueang or nearby Wat Sri Moonrueang. The objects inside the walls that you tagged as buildings are actually better tagged as man_made=tower with tower:type=stupa.Even if you disagree with that, these structures ... |
| 2 | 2020-08-07 05:41 | mCloud00 ♦19 | Thanks | |
| 3 | 2020-08-07 06:15 | AlaskaDave | So, will you make the edits? Did you understand the difference between levels and layers? | |
| 4 | 2020-08-07 15:48 | mCloud00 ♦19 | yes | |
| 86911790 by mCloud02 @ 2020-06-20 13:47 | 1 | 2020-07-19 15:21 | AlaskaDave | Did you accidentally reverse the direction of flow of this canal? id:695049611Please do not edit it again!Are you also mCloud00? |
| 82869642 by mCloud00 @ 2020-03-31 11:47 | 1 | 2020-07-14 06:49 | AlaskaDave | There is an object you tagged as a building in this changeset that is actually a tower, a stupa. (the building level=0 has the OSM id:786188922). There were several errors in your tagging of this object. 1) It's not really a multilevel building as you tagged it but a man_made=tower having tower... |
| 87547987 by mCloud00 @ 2020-07-05 07:19 | 1 | 2020-07-14 04:57 | AlaskaDave | This highway is not a service alley. I would have tagged it that way if it was. Please do not retag any of my work.I have tried to reason with you and even offered to help you understand what you're doing wrong and you have not responded. If you do not stop messing up my work, I will contac... |
| 2 | 2020-07-15 05:47 | mCloud00 ♦19 | alright | |
| 44714555 by TheOutpost @ 2016-12-27 19:57 | 1 | 2020-07-13 23:36 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I came across an Alaska State Park today, the Jack Bay State Marine Park included in this changeset, and wondered if you obtained permission to use the State of Alaska's copyrighted material. I have wanted to use Alaska park data for a long time but was always stopped by the anticipated ... |
| 38102016 by exe @ 2016-03-27 15:45 | 1 | 2020-06-19 00:56 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I do a lot of mapping in Alaska and am very interested in this proposed bridge. Unfortunately, the URL you provided in this Changeset comment doesn't exist at this time. Do you happen to have an updated link or source of information?Thanks,Dave |
| 2 | 2020-07-13 21:16 | exe ♦4 | Hi Dave,so you can find stuff out there if you google for "Tanana River Bridge" and "Northern Rail Extension":https://www.kiewit.com/projects/transportation/rail/northern-rail-extension/https://fm.kuac.org/post/tanana-river-bridge-nearly-done-state-officials-can-t-predict... | |
| 3 | 2020-07-13 22:58 | AlaskaDave | Yes, it does. It appears the project is stalled for lack of funds. I don't expect that to change any time soon, especially now that Covid has paralyzed the economies of both the state and the country.Thanks,Dave | |
| 83761851 by mCloud00 @ 2020-04-19 06:18 | 1 | 2020-06-15 23:55 | AlaskaDave | Hello,The areas you have tagged as "gardens" are mapped very poorly and improperly. PLEASE READ the Wiki definition of leisure=garden before continuing what you're doing.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3DgardenYou have not answered my previous Changeset comment... |
| 2 | 2020-06-20 13:27 | mCloud00 ♦19 | OKi will fix my problemI can speak English and understand Englishbut i can't upload my fix now because i have beeb blocked | |
| 3 | 2020-06-20 13:27 | mCloud00 ♦19 | I live there and i use it as garden but i will fix it | |
| 4 | 2020-06-20 14:05 | mCloud00 ♦19 | ok | |
| 5 | 2020-06-20 23:21 | AlaskaDave | I removed some of your gardens because they are not gardens and some of your natural=wood areas because they include other features like houses.More needs to be done in this changeset but I'm not going to do anything else until you have a chance to correct these areas yourself.I noticed... | |
| 77639786 by mCloud00 @ 2019-11-27 14:49 | 1 | 2020-05-24 07:49 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I see you have added ford=yes to some places where waterways cross highways in my neighborhood. The way you used that tag is incorrect. A "ford" is a place where a vehicle crosses *through* a waterway, not over it. In other words, there is no bridge or culvert. The wheels will get ... |
| 2 | 2020-06-20 13:33 | mCloud00 ♦19 | ok | |
| 3 | 2020-06-20 14:04 | mCloud00 ♦19 | ok | |
| 4 | 2020-06-20 22:51 | AlaskaDave | You did not remove the remaining ford=yes nodes as you agreed. I did it for you.In another comment you said that you live in this area. So do I. Would you be interested in meeting with me to discuss OSM mapping? I think we and the OSM community could benefit from getting together to talk about ... | |
| 84853426 by gzeroN @ 2020-05-07 21:08 | 1 | 2020-06-09 05:09 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I am using the riverbed object for rivers in Alaska that occupy large areas in the spring but later run in much smaller channels. These channels I tag with waterway=riverbank.I'm curious about this object:Vikedalselva (id:685121386)The way you're using waterway=riverbed here... |
| 77063616 by lionandoil @ 2019-11-14 09:56 | 1 | 2020-06-04 09:43 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I'm mapping some streams and trails on Doi Suthep and noticed that you tagged the Pilgrim's Path as highway=steps for its entire length. I haven't walked this trail but it seems strange that it would be entirely steps. I saw some steps at a point where it crosses 1004 and the ... |
| 2 | 2020-06-05 06:16 | lionandoil ♦3 | Hi Dave,yes I walked this trail myself, if you check the contour lines on that part of the trail you will see that it is extremely steep, so the soil along the entire trail has (more or less naturally) been worked into 'steps' such as here: https://static5.depositphotos.com/1035350/468/i... | |
| 3 | 2020-06-05 08:22 | AlaskaDave | Okay, thanks for your clarification. I am going to add a "note" tag with the intention of explaining that the trail has been surveyed and is mostly steps. I have no problem with the way you tagged it but wanted to be sure it wasn't a tagging error.I dislike highway=path for hiking t... | |
| 81780178 by mCloud00 @ 2020-03-04 14:30 | 1 | 2020-05-24 08:03 | AlaskaDave | Hi,In this changeset you deleted the tags from a highway that was added in 2010 and left it as an untagged way containing 272 nodes. This should have produced an error message when you uploaded it.I added the tags back but would you please check your work on this changeset to better understa... |
| 2 | 2020-05-24 08:07 | AlaskaDave | Actually, it appears that the way id:82189093 mentioned above might actually be a canal or stream. Perhaps it was incorrectly tagged as a highway and you removed those tags but forgot to retag the way? | |
| 3 | 2020-06-20 13:30 | mCloud00 ♦19 | yes | |
| 68050442 by Ionia01 @ 2019-03-12 07:01 | 1 | 2020-05-24 07:32 | AlaskaDave | Hello,I see you have added ford=yes to some places where waterways cross highways in my neighborhood. The wa you used that tag is incorrect. A "ford" is a place where a vehicle crosses through a waterway, not over it. In other words, there is no bridge or culvert. The wheels will get wet... |
| 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! | |
| 75717561 by Russ McD @ 2019-10-15 11:57 | 1 | 2020-02-12 00:21 | AlaskaDave | Hi Russ,I was just at Pha Chor (Mae Wang NP) yesterday and added some newly marked route refs. My question is about a section of highway old ref ชม. 5104 that you updated a few months ago to ชม.3065.I believe ชม.3065 continues straight into the Pha Chor tourist site. There is a ... |
| 2 | 2020-02-12 00:50 | AlaskaDave | Actually, I was getting ahead of myself a bit. I believe ชม. 3065 continues at least to the park entrance road and perhaps beyond however I did not see any ref markers on that section. The Pha Chor access road and its continuation past Parking Lot #3 is now a paved loop and returns to the park e... | |
| 3 | 2020-02-14 12:49 | Russ McD ♦223 | Dave, I took the road ref 4070 from the DRR roadnet database, and assumed it truncated the 3065 at 18.36867 98.9052.The 3065 is not on the database so may be due for downgrading. The problem we have is not knowing whether the database is more up to date than the signs on the ground ! I have not... | |
| 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! | |
| 71756618 by mapman44 @ 2019-06-30 13:34 | 1 | 2019-07-29 04:52 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I can't find any reference to the cycleway in downtown Eugene you tagged with name=Corvallis Eugene Expressway.Can you help me out?Thanks,Dave |
| 2 | 2019-07-29 05:28 | mapman44 ♦526 | I was editing other objects in the area and I have no idea where that name came from. I know my name is on the way but it originated from someone else. Sorry. | |
| 3 | 2019-07-29 15:04 | AlaskaDave | OK. Thanks. The full history of that way must have gotten reset somehow. | |
| 4 | 2019-07-29 17:43 | freebeer ♦1,598 | if you follow the start/end nodes of the way that got split, eventually you will reach the original with 29 revisions and 686 pages in my lynx browser found at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/665480754/history . six months ago. | |
| 5 | 2019-11-07 17:52 | b-jazz ♦655 | This way really ought to be deleted. It doesn't match what is on the ground (no separate physical path exists) and it is causing lots of validation errors. It violates one of the first tenets of mapping: map what is on the ground.If there is truly a cycleway that needs to be represented, it... | |
| 6 | 2019-11-07 18:35 | mapman44 ♦526 | No objection from me. Go for it. | |
| 7 | 2019-11-08 00:11 | AlaskaDave | Please feel free to go ahead. | |
| 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? | |
| 73233574 by mCloud00 @ 2019-08-11 05:54 | 1 | 2019-09-12 08:56 | AlaskaDave | Hello,Many of the edits and additions you made in this changeset are questionable. You have added many nodes as fords over canals and rivers. I am quite familiar with this area and do not think those fords exist. Just because a stream or canal crosses a highway and there is no bridge on the map ... |
| 2 | 2020-06-20 13:35 | mCloud00 ♦19 | yes, it is my fault, sorry | |
| 3 | 2020-06-20 14:04 | mCloud00 ♦19 | OK | |
| 18308388 by Johnny Carlsen @ 2013-10-12 04:51 | 1 | 2019-09-10 23:35 | AlaskaDave | Hi Johnny.I'm back in Thailand and came across several untagged ways. I'm sure they were inner areas for the large residential area multipolygon you worked on years ago. It now seems that the big multipolygon has disappeared. Is that true? |
| 2 | 2019-09-11 06:02 | Johnny Carlsen ♦94 | Over time people deleted more and more of the residential multipolygon I created. It became very difficult to maintain, so I have given up. I am now trying with many much smaller residential landuse areas instead. You are welcome to delete old fragments you come across. | |
| 3 | 2019-09-12 00:48 | AlaskaDave | I'm sorry that happened. I know it was a ton of work to get that thing done in the first place. I've with it myself on a number of occasions, and quite possibly screwed it up myself.I'll delete those stray bits of ways I found yesterday. | |
| 4 | 2019-09-12 00:49 | AlaskaDave | I meant to say, I've struggled with it on a number of occasions.Cheers,Dave | |
| 5 | 2019-09-12 05:46 | Johnny Carlsen ♦94 | No worries, it was a nightmare to work with. It probably makes more sense to work on smaller parts anyway. | |
| 70305818 by Aruno @ 2019-05-16 07:16 | 1 | 2019-09-09 10:18 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I am working in the area of Ban Phra Phutthabat Si Roi and have a few questions to ask about the edits in this changeset. You have tagged several buildings as "wilderness_hut" and then added some name:en tags that are not translations of the Thai names you provided. Foe example, you t... |
| 72492313 by efessler @ 2019-07-21 20:57 | 1 | 2019-07-29 01:28 | AlaskaDave | Hi,Can you explain your reasoning for changing several cycleways in Eugene to highway=path? It seems you and user:shanerh are both doing this. It seems obvious to me that cycleway fits their intended use much better than the more generic "path". I've changed them back to cyclewa... |
| 66970381 by Shanerh @ 2019-02-06 17:06 | 1 | 2019-07-28 05:29 | AlaskaDave | Hi,Could you explain why you changed the highway classification of the West Bank Trail in Eugene from cycleway to path?Thanks,Dave |
| 54084256 by iqyax @ 2017-11-25 23:46 | 1 | 2019-05-16 17:29 | AlaskaDave | Hi,First of all, thank you for adding many WWII sites to the Alaska OSM map. However, you have tagged an area near Dutch Harbor with some tags I don't think are correct. I'm referring to the "Summer's Bay Canon Battery. " You tagged it landuse=military, which may be ... |
| 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. |
| 10534607 by pnorman_mechanical @ 2012-01-29 20:52 | 1 | 2019-03-26 14:11 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I do a lot of work aligning the terrible PGS coastline of Alaska. It's slow difficult work and the number of hours required to properly edit all of Alaska's coastline is daunting. Today, while working in the Glacier Bay area, I came across this changeset of yours that quotes Geobase a... |
| 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. | |
| 46170038 by Jordan Tilley @ 2017-02-17 16:45 | 1 | 2019-03-11 07:41 | AlaskaDave | Hi Jordan,There are two guest houses with this same name that you created. Can you please check to determine which one is in the correct position and delete the erroneous one?Dave |
| 66465201 by mzanaboni @ 2019-01-19 22:53 | 1 | 2019-01-27 10:31 | Bernhard Hiller ♦26 | Way 664724221 is not a building, it is a pond! Please be more careful! |
| 2 | 2019-01-27 11:14 | AlaskaDave | Also, the area enclsded by way id:664723893 is visible on DigitalGlobe-Standard and is not a building or a pond. Please check your edits in the area. | |
| 3 | 2019-01-27 11:54 | AlaskaDave | Also, check way id:664723894; it's not a building. Possibly a pond. | |
| 47983777 by lokejul @ 2017-04-20 20:18 | 1 | 2019-01-13 00:15 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I was adding a shop in downtown Anchorage today and came across this area that you tagged leisure=common. That tag is on the way, however, that way is also part of a relation that is tagged with highway=pedestrian.IMO, highway=pedestrian (with area=yes) would be the more correct tagging schem... |
| 2 | 2019-01-13 04:07 | lokejul ♦24 | Hi,Much time has passed since I was in Anchorage, so I cannot remember the reason for leisure=common instead of other tags.Your comment is well taken about the tags that could bear improvement for those particular features.However, using highway=pedestrian with area=yes for https://www.... | |
| 3 | 2019-01-13 05:21 | AlaskaDave | Well, the place you tagged is actually a paved area where people can walk. There are small garden beds inside it but they are purely ornamental. It's the outer way tag I disagree with. Actually, I am familiar with the Boston Common. I lived in Boston for 10 years back in the 70s. The name i... | |
| 64325908 by kellerk @ 2018-11-09 13:56 | 1 | 2019-01-03 12:27 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I noticed you added a way as highway=footway in this changeset. I doubt it meets the definition as defined in the Wiki, "For designated footpaths; i.e., mainly/exclusively for pedestrians". I'm betting it's a narrow path used by motorcycles. Have you visited the footway pers... |
| 2 | 2019-01-03 13:02 | kellerk ♦5 | Hi DaveI did those paths several times going up and down in a single day. Parts of this path involve some climbing next to a 100-200meter cliff. I doubt you going to do that with a motorbike on your back. Unfortunately the rangers (or soldiers?) have covered the upper trailhead with barbwire. St... | |
| 3 | 2019-01-03 13:07 | kellerk ♦5 | The north most part of the trail is though passable with a motorbike but as it is getting steeper it is only possible by foot. | |
| 4 | 2019-01-03 13:41 | AlaskaDave | Wow, my hat's off to you Kurt. I can't imaging climbing that SOB at my age. I still think highway=path might be better suited because of the whole idea of footway being designated, that is, legally restricted, for pedestrian traffic. I'm retagging the footways I added on the Iditarod ... | |
| 65459049 by b-jazz @ 2018-12-14 01:27 | 1 | 2018-12-14 08:55 | AlaskaDave | bjazz,I'm working in that area and have been replacing coastlines. I just had to quit a session because of too many conflicts to deal with, it appears that they were your edits.Let me now when you're through so I can patch things up. |
| 2 | 2018-12-14 18:37 | b-jazz ♦655 | Oh man. I'm really sorry about that. My change was trivial and can be reverted if that makes it easier for you to to resolve the conflicts.I'll make sure I wait several days before editing any of your work in the area again. | |
| 3 | 2018-12-14 23:23 | AlaskaDave | No problem. Sorry I took such a stern tone yesterday. I'm used to being the only mapper working in these remote areas. If the Conflict Dialog was more informative and straightforward to use it would make it so much easier to resolve them. I had to quit my session and then come back to clean up ... | |
| 60058577 by dpwroads @ 2018-06-21 23:10 | 1 | 2018-12-14 13:40 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I noticed you removed the man_made=pier tag from a pier in Dutch Harbor. You saved it as natural=coastline, with access=private and surface=wood but removed the man_made=pier tag so it makes no sense now.Can you take a look? It is way id:21477171Thanks,Dave |
| 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. | |
| 44826274 by Glassman @ 2017-01-01 16:58 | 1 | 2018-11-30 12:30 | AlaskaDave | Hi again Clifford,I am working on adding the giant Alaska Maritime NWR and came across your work where yu added Unimak Island as part of the Izembek NWR. Indeed, the shapefile you gave me a while ago for Izemebek does include Unimak Island. However, my shapefile for the Alaska Maritime NWR include... |
| 2 | 2018-11-30 19:29 | Glassman ♦5,222 | Dave - the name was there when I added the NWR. It looks like it should be named Umnak Island. I'm happy to fix - if you can confirm that is the name you have. | |
| 3 | 2018-12-01 01:26 | AlaskaDave | It's not the name of the island I'm asking about. It's the name of the refuge.My shapefile for the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge is a perfect copy of your boundary for the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge on Unimak Island. Which is correct, Izembek or Alaska Maritime? | |
| 4 | 2018-12-01 02:59 | Glassman ♦5,222 | My shapefile has Unimak Island shown as Izembek NWR Complex, org name Alaska Maritime Wildlife Refuge. The two areas NE of Unimak Island show an org name of Izembek National Wildlife Refuge. I think we could change Unimak Island to Alaska Maritime... Do you want me to make the change? And were you i... | |
| 5 | 2018-12-01 03:13 | AlaskaDave | Thanks Cliff.I think Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge is the correct name. I can change it easily as I'm mapping in that area already. My town Homer, got some heavy shaking but no major damage. I didn't feel a thing because since I retired I've been living in Thailand duri... | |
| 57905259 by Russ McD @ 2018-04-08 05:42 | 1 | 2018-11-22 03:17 | AlaskaDave | Hi Russ,I was working in the area, made a few edits but when uploading, JOSM complained about the old-style tag you used:highway=ford. I removed that and substituted ford=yes. But is this place actually a tourism attraction?Also, the highways in that area are tagged as tracks but another us... |
| 47997766 by cdohrman @ 2017-04-21 09:57 | 1 | 2018-11-22 03:01 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I noticed this changeset comment on this way id:260723849, and another that connects to it. But the surface is still tagged as unpaved.I'm convinced these are not tracks but either unclassified or residential ways but knowing what the surface is would be helpful.Can you check on that? |
| 2 | 2018-11-22 03:04 | AlaskaDave | The other way is id:260723853. Your comment on this changeset is "just drove this road and can confirmed it is concreate paved" | |
| 47162278 by hecktor @ 2017-03-25 20:44 | 1 | 2018-11-19 09:30 | AlaskaDave | Hector:I'm confused about the boundary for the Aniakchak National Preserve. You added several boundary ways that look wrong to me, way:482748961, way:276151571, way:276151567. I think the boundary follows the coastline rather than the way you mapped it.Can you comment on that? |
| 2 | 2018-11-19 17:53 | hecktor ♦29 | Hi AlaskaDave,I do not exactly remeber about those changes, I just know that I was fixing tags at some multipoligons. If I ckeck this area right now I see a lot of confusing things: the coastline was new mapped after my changes. And the mapping is done verry roughly, and t does not fit to any back... | |
| 3 | 2018-11-20 02:47 | AlaskaDave | Okay, thanks. I'm going to replace what's there with the data from the US National Park Service that I have. I'll fix up the coastline while I'm at it. | |
| 41228047 by matt heby @ 2016-08-04 01:49 | 1 | 2018-11-19 07:21 | AlaskaDave | Hi Matt,I'm trying to complete the work started by NJSkunk in Denali NP. Now, I see that you changed portions of the Park Road to highway=service.I'm thinking that while in some sense the entire highway is a service road, it is also an important highway and perhaps should be tagged acc... |
| 62363028 by iqyax @ 2018-09-07 05:52 | 1 | 2018-11-13 10:27 | AlaskaDave | Hi,How did you decide to divide this wetland and tag way:332678202 as a beach_resort?I'm not intimately familiar with the Anchorage shoreline but that AFAIK the area is muddy and nobody uses it as a resort. Unless something major has changed. |
| 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... | |
| 29241572 by tkhauser @ 2015-03-04 11:09 | 1 | 2018-10-28 16:42 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi!I just noticed that this pipeline https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/253952219 has underground=yes .I see long stretches which are not underground, so I wonder how to find the place where it is really underground? |
| 2 | 2018-10-28 22:56 | tkhauser ♦1 | Hi, when I check around the middle section I only see a road and no pipeline, so it must be underground, right? | |
| 3 | 2018-10-29 06:55 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi. sorry, I forgot to add the information where I saw this stretch of the pipeline:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/65852866My understanding is that the way should be split, but it is also often far away from the position shown in the sat images.I think the above ground section starts at ht... | |
| 4 | 2018-10-30 06:28 | tkhauser ♦1 | Yes, maybe it needs to be split, go ahead! | |
| 5 | 2018-10-30 07:34 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Regarding the position of the pipeline:I assume that it always parallels the service road that is visible in the places that I mentioned? | |
| 6 | 2018-10-31 04:56 | AlaskaDave | As far as I know, that is the case. There is a gravel surfaced service road that parallels the entire TAP. Also, I believe the correct tag for pipelines when underground is location=underground or if above ground location=overground | |
| 7 | 2018-10-31 07:06 | GerdP ♦2,751 | @AlaskaDave: Thanks for the info. I see that you started to edit this, so I will not do anything else here. | |
| 8 | 2018-10-31 08:50 | AlaskaDave | Actually, I only responded to this because I was browsing recent changesets in the U.S and when I saw the TAP mentioned added some of my personal knowledge. The only editing I did was to remove redundant tags from the pipeline way, tags that are more properly placed on the relation itself. | |
| 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. |
| 60809789 by VLD018 @ 2018-07-17 18:23 | 1 | 2018-10-22 01:16 | AlaskaDave | Questions:Why did you not continue way:608707568 or way:60870730 to their obvious intersection with 2050?Also, way:608707338 just stops when there are many more streets south of where you ended it. It would have been nice to see a connection made to those residential streets, which after you q... |
| 60809140 by VLD018 @ 2018-07-17 17:55 | 1 | 2018-10-22 01:05 | AlaskaDave | Some questions, I'm curious as towhy did you not continue way:608703080 to its obvious intersection with way:458940712?Why did you not continue way:608703018 to its obvious intersection with way:53830086?Why did you not connect these two sections of what is obviously the same residentia... |
| 52611095 by velmyshanovnyi @ 2017-10-03 23:57 | 1 | 2018-10-12 10:27 | AlaskaDave | Hi,You have tagged a feature (id=529818369) using 1493 nodes as natural=water but much of it it appears to be wetland. The DigitalGlobe-Premium imagery you used clearly shows this. I'm confused. |
| 52704304 by velmyshanovnyi @ 2017-10-07 10:36 | 1 | 2018-10-12 07:02 | AlaskaDave | I'm mapping in the area of Fox, Alaska, and have come across some of your work. Thanks for your effort in Alaska but I am curious about how you draw your lakes and streams. It seems to me that many objects you've drawn use far too many points. A small pond with a 3 mile long shoreline cont... |
| 63216789 by sebastic @ 2018-10-05 04:56 | 1 | 2018-10-08 00:45 | AlaskaDave | Hi,What did you change to fix this multipolygon? There is an ongoing discussion about tagging groups of lakes in the Tagging list right now. I thought these "Twin Claderas" might be a similar example but noticed that you had edited it just after I mapped them. I cannot tell from the hist... |
| 2 | 2018-10-08 05:18 | sebastic ♦105 | The old-style multipolygon (with only type=multipolygon tag) with the two members on the left (one outer and one inner) was removed, the correctly tagged multipolygon was updated to also include the inner from the other multipolygon, because it also includes its outer. | |
| 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 |
| 50296946 by SkiingMapman🎿⛷🇨🇱 @ 2017-07-15 01:59 | 1 | 2018-09-24 22:52 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I assume you added this tourism=attraction node and that it refers to the Krakauer story about McCandless but you gave no indication of the source of your information. Could you put that information in a note perhaps?I also assume that the "FCTS #142" you included in the name is t... |
| 61934371 by sinspawn @ 2018-08-23 21:50 | 1 | 2018-09-20 10:14 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I'm interested in why you created a dual carriageway for the Richardson Hwy in Delta Junction. IIRC, it is not divided; the lanes are only separated by yellow lines.AlaskaDave |
| 2 | 2018-09-20 15:46 | sinspawn ♦1 | Hi Dave,Thanks for the inquiry. I would like to preface my answer with that I am new to OSM and I am happy make adjustments if I have erred.I changed the highway because it is a 5 lane road and it didn't seem like a single line did it justice. When I find the time, I am trying to ... | |
| 3 | 2018-09-21 00:24 | AlaskaDave | First off, let me welcome you to OSM. We desperately need more OSMers in Alaska and I was happy to notice some other stuff you have mapped. Hetting back to the question at hand:There is some precedent for tagging the way you chose to do it but generally, if a highway doesn't have a divider,... | |
| 4 | 2018-09-23 02:24 | AlaskaDave | Hi again,After reviewing the newest imagery, I do not see any section having 5 lanes in Delta Junction. There are short sections of dual carriageway on both Alaska & Rich Hwys where they meet south of the main run through town but those are very short, and are legitimately tagged the way they ... | |
| 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. | |
| 50322539 by OklaNHD @ 2017-07-16 10:31 | 1 | 2018-01-17 05:20 | AlaskaDave | You added a 1500 node boundary for Emdendorf AFB in Alaska but failed to remove the pre-existing 100 node boundary that was added in 2013.I have two questions: Was that merely an oversight? And, is a 1500 node boundary really necessary to delineate this AFB?It certainly seems to me that man... |
| 2 | 2018-01-17 06:45 | AlaskaDave | After doing some more checking, I learned that the smaller, older boundary multipolygon is incomplete. A large section is missing. If you have no objection, I will delete it and simplify the boundary you added last year. | |
| 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. | |
| 38669450 by timdine @ 2016-04-18 14:48 | 1 | 2017-11-29 23:48 | AlaskaDave | Hi timdine,I am looking at some structures (a radio tower at 70.4914528, -148.6994692 for example) you placed on an "island" in the Beaufort Sea near Prudhoe Bay. However, none of the imagery I used shows any island or any structures. Can you tell me where your data for this place came... |
| 2 | 2018-01-02 15:08 | timdine ♦4 | I've gone through the imagery sources I would have used to make this (I believe it was bing) and it looks like they've painted over the area with the expectation that it is just water. The location you're looking at on the map is Northstar Island. A description of it can be found at... | |
| 3 | 2018-01-03 03:32 | AlaskaDave | Thank you,I checked the Wikipedia article and, assuming it has the correct coordinates, I added a name tag and some others to the invisible island. Those coords, by the way, were slightly displaced from the island but I left it located where you had it.Also changed the name of the heliport to ... | |
| 36797930 by lamacchiacosta @ 2016-01-25 14:51 | 1 | 2017-12-22 02:54 | AlaskaDave | Hi,You used an existing wood multipolygon as the boundary for the Tham Patham National Park. Can you tell my where you obtained the boundary information? I want to alter the wood multipolygon but do not want to affect the boundary if it is accurate.Thanks,Dave |
| 2 | 2017-12-22 09:47 | lamacchiacosta ♦8 | Hi,I cannot remember, I went there a couple of years ago, so probalby I did the amendment because I was there. If in the meantime that changed, please feel free to adjust it.Thanks. | |
| 53222228 by VLD008 @ 2017-10-24 23:12 | 1 | 2017-11-11 10:20 | AlaskaDave | You added a service road and bridge id:535046356 in Lamphun province. I recently drove through that area and there is no bridge, only a small service road. There is construction nearby but from my recall, no reason for a bridge there. |
| 2 | 2017-11-16 20:59 | VLD008 ♦1 | Dear AlaskaDave,Thank you for your comment! I completely agree that a bridge tag is not appropriate here. Thank you for informing me, I made the change.Best,Pablo | |
| 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... | |
| 47049836 by Will Lentz @ 2017-03-21 20:05 | 1 | 2017-09-17 01:38 | AlaskaDave | Hi Will,Can I ask why this old section of Richarson Hwy is tagged as a track? According to the Wiki, a track tag is for "Roads for mostly agricultural or forestry uses." The latest imagery from both ESRI and DigitalGlobe suggests that there is still good pavement on this stretch so I wou... |
| 2 | 2017-09-17 15:01 | Will Lentz ♦1 | Dave,The river was destined to take this section of the highway and the ADOT rebuilt the road to the new track. The old section of road is still there, you could pull up there and park but it is no longer the main through way. I drove this section twice this summer and the OSM navigation wor... | |
| 3 | 2017-09-17 22:47 | AlaskaDave | Hmmm. This situation presents an interesting problem. The old highway is, IMO, not really a track because, after all, it is paved. Yet one certainly doesn't want to be routed onto it. You've hit upon a way to achieve that result but I wonder if OSM mappers shouldn't develop a better... | |
| 4 | 2017-09-18 00:02 | AlaskaDave | The tagging list has.asked the following questions: Can one still use the old section? Is it easily accessible from the new highway?One person suggested using a tag proposed:highway =no that I've never sen before but which means the highway is destined for removal. Some routing algorithms p... | |
| 5 | 2017-09-18 04:11 | AlaskaDave | I just learned through the tagging group that the newest imagery available from DigitalGlobe not only shows the new road but also strongly suggests that some of the old pavement is reverting to a track, as you indicated. It also appears the bridge over the small stream at the southern end is no long... | |
| 6 | 2017-09-24 17:24 | erkinalp ♦9 | You should tag it as highway=road instead of highway=track. | |
| 7 | 2017-09-24 23:30 | AlaskaDave | @erkinalp, I'm not sure that would be strictly correct either. But, in any case, the better imagery resolved this particular issue. I'll be visiting the area next summer and I'll do bit of field work then. | |
| 36310904 by AKLAB @ 2016-01-02 04:16 | 1 | 2017-09-20 09:36 | AlaskaDave | Hi,You accidentally duplicated a power line and its poles here. I don't have time to fix - can you do it? |
| 2 | 2017-09-20 09:50 | AlaskaDave | I separated the two lines here to help you:64.19396, -149.30145 | |
| 49966410 by dufekin @ 2017-07-01 14:36 | 1 | 2017-09-16 13:01 | AlaskaDave | Why did you reduce the classification of the Richardson Hwy from primary to secondary? It is clearly an important road and it was primary originally. |
| 30707593 by Johnny Carlsen @ 2015-05-02 00:37 | 1 | 2017-09-16 00:25 | AlaskaDave | Johnny, the sign you used to set maxspeed here is actually a weight limit. In your Mapillary photo the 21 ตัน means 21 tons. |
| 2 | 2017-09-16 00:29 | AlaskaDave | I had always wondered what those signs meant, so you're not alone in misinterpreting them. | |
| 3 | 2017-09-16 03:08 | Johnny Carlsen ♦94 | The signs double as a speed limit for clueless foreigners :) | |
| 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 |
| 49958258 by dufekin @ 2017-07-01 05:18 | 1 | 2017-08-27 22:46 | AlaskaDave | What is your reasoning to change the class of this section of the Parks Highway from trunk to primary? Nothing has changed on the physical highway where your change occurs. The classification has been changed once before you did it.What's going on?Cheers,Dave |
| 2 | 2017-08-27 22:50 | AlaskaDave | According to the Wiki, the Parks Hwy certainly meets the conditions needed to class it as highway=trunk. | |
| 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... | |
| 44324341 by Howpper @ 2016-12-11 14:46 | 1 | 2017-07-09 04:54 | AlaskaDave | Can you tell me why you decided to raise the classification of the Seward Highway to "trunk"?Even though that highway is a major artery in Alaska, it does not really meet the Wiki definition of a trunk road.Regards,AlaskaDave |
| 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. | |
| 45283674 by Ranger444 @ 2017-01-18 22:02 | 1 | 2017-04-20 11:46 | AlaskaDave | Hi,I placed the new Tumbleweed Express marijuana shop on the old car wash building in Parachute just now. I based my positioning on an article in today's Wash. Post. I see you have two other places on the same street named Tumbleweed, tagged with hop=herbalist. Are both of those businesses st... |
| 2 | 2017-04-20 19:25 | Ranger444 ♦36 | The larger building is the main Tumbleweed location. The drive-through 'express' is also operated by tumbleweed and the buildings are separate. I am sure the larger Tumbleweed location is in the correct spot. I guessed on the location of the drive-through. I'm not sure which article y... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-21 12:52 | AlaskaDave | I chose the building based a photo in the article and a quick look at Google Streetview to confirm that its shape is the same - a high drive-through bay and a 1-story section that contains the office so I'm confident it's correct.As for tagging shop=herbalist, yes, I think that's mi... | |
| 4 | 2017-04-24 14:33 | Ranger444 ♦36 | Turns out you were right on location. I drove by this weekend.I do think shop=cannabis would be a better tag but it hasn't been approved yet. The definition of herbalist matches up with a rec shop. Herbs used for medicine. Thats whats sold there and thats why people buy it. Hopefully we can... | |
| 5 | 2017-04-24 17:37 | AlaskaDave | The OSM approval process leaves a lot to be desired. I ran a similar discussion through the tagging list and could not resolve the issue. Besides, even if "approved" by the requisite number of mappers, it still isn't "official" in any way. Consequently, I'm not wait... | |
| 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 ... |
| 24155563 by iqyax @ 2014-07-15 07:55 | 1 | 2017-04-15 17:03 | AlaskaDave | You forgot to finish tagging this object leaving only a rectangle with area=yes. I removed rectangle and inserted a highway=footway and bridge tags. |
| 24214725 by iqyax @ 2014-07-18 07:05 | 1 | 2017-04-15 16:58 | AlaskaDave | You forgot to finish tagging this object leaving only a rectangle with area=yes. I removed rectangle and inserted a bridge in the highway. |
| 42777397 by Spanholz @ 2016-10-10 13:27 | 1 | 2017-03-28 08:47 | AlaskaDave | I can not find any references to the Dr Suess House at this location. Can you tell me how you located this place?All the items I found in a Google search seem to be near Willow, on the north side of Willow Creek |
| 2 | 2017-03-28 09:12 | Spanholz ♦398 | I got the rough location from somebody on reddit who was there. But I have looked at the area and found the real house a bit south of it. Already changed it to correct location. Thanks for correcting me. :) | |
| 3 | 2017-03-28 09:30 | AlaskaDave | Yes, I found it too. But we're both trying to correct it at the same time LOLit's here:62.03923364985006, -150.08611523313525Can you hold off for a moment to let me upload my changes and we'll see if there's any disagreement. | |
| 4 | 2017-03-28 10:08 | AlaskaDave | Okay, we did it!Keep on mapping! | |
| 46540518 by stephankn @ 2017-03-03 06:45 | 1 | 2017-03-26 09:35 | AlaskaDave | Every time I drive along here I wonder if the name of the road after passing Doi Saket should actually be Chiang Mai-Chiang Rai? As you know, road names in Thailand are poorly marked and I think I was the one who originally added the names to this highway. Not sure how I arrived at the naming anyway... |
| 2 | 2017-03-26 10:58 | stephankn ♦321 | I didn't add the name, but just turn lanes to give a nice example on how it can be modeled. Regarding the name: Hard to tell whether it is official. If I had to guess I would say it is not the official name, but colloquial name. Sort of "loc_name". The highway 118 (which would be ... | |
| 3 | 2017-03-26 11:55 | AlaskaDave | I agree it's a local name but I like it anyway. I don't want to get rid of it. My question really was, would you object if I changed the name of the section north of Doi Saket to Chiang Mai-Chiang Rai Road? Once it passes Doi Saket, that seems to be a more appropriate name. | |
| 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. |
| 31699927 by sandhill @ 2015-06-03 18:37 | 1 | 2016-06-29 19:14 | AlaskaDave | Hi sandhill,I'm wondering why you chose to use the name:en tag for what appears to be an alt_name. It seems to me this section of the East Coast Greenway should be part of a route and the two names tagged as name=Black Creek Greenway while East Coast Greenway should perhaps be the network or ... |
| 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 |
| 27170191 by jedsada101 @ 2014-12-02 01:33 | 1 | 2014-12-10 06:42 | stephankn ♦321 | A major change like this could have deserved a changeset description. Especially when it is done by a user who did not edit anything before.Based on the physical road characteristics as visible from aerial imagery and the road also being part of the AH network the upgrade itself seems reasonable... |
| 2 | 2014-12-10 08:10 | AlaskaDave | I agree with the previous comment. I am aware that highway 101 is being upgraded and perhaps deserves the reclassification but there is more to it than that. Reclassifying the links, making sure bridges also get the changed ref number and classification is part of the process. Such "loose ends&... |