| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53267533 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-10-27 13:27:17 UTC | yzal | I am looking at bing maps and the road is not there. So how do you know the footway and road are connected? Whats the real source of your edit? |
| 2 | 2017-10-27 16:30:07 UTC | ratrun | The node was such close to the footway that OSMI (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing) detected an error. Now I set "noexit=yes" with "fixme=check". | |
| 3 | 2017-10-30 07:22:43 UTC | kayle | My fault, bad tagging. :(Road is not connected to footwayhttps://www.mapillary.com/map/im/iIv2VH3kajpL4Yy0Oa8lEw | |
| 52245930 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-09-25 18:36:18 UTC | joost schouppe | Hi Ratrun,This was a wrong correction. It wasn't mapped properly, but I was pretty sure there was no through traffic allowed. Your change allows quite strange routing options. There was a note on this bit of road, to mark it for surveying (846771). |
| 2 | 2017-09-27 15:57:29 UTC | ratrun | Thanks for the correction. I didn't notice the note, it was not visible in the data and also not from bing images. | |
| 3 | 2017-09-27 16:40:43 UTC | joost schouppe | Thanks for the reply!You might consider switching on notes in your editor. Also, in Brussels and Flanders "AGIV Flanders most recent aerial imagery" is much better, in terms of age and resolution. A bit of a pity that JOSM doesn't seem to have an indication of "best available" ... | |
| 51621510 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-08-31 22:39:09 UTC | MrKooken | I don't understand what you have fixed. |
| 2 | 2017-09-01 13:22:59 UTC | ratrun | See the changeset, it is very small. One node was overlapping, duplicated and not connected to "Kotkampplein".The best method I know to look at the details is to try to revert the change in JOSM. You can use the validator and the problem will show up. | |
| 45164172 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-08-27 08:44:49 UTC | GerdP | Hi!please check typo highway=tre on some ways. Not sure if you meant residential or track. Seehttp://overpass-turbo.eu/s/rhf |
| 2 | 2017-08-28 16:50:30 UTC | ratrun | Thank you -> Fixed. | |
| 44121121 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-08-23 12:46:11 UTC | GerdP | Hi!Please review typo highway=drt on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/418702547 |
| 2 | 2017-08-23 15:43:55 UTC | ratrun | Hi. Thank you. Fixed. | |
| 34908323 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-06-28 07:13:33 UTC | Sanniu | http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/374692783 - is it roundabout? |
| 2 | 2017-06-28 15:42:46 UTC | ratrun | Yes, it looks like a roundabout. I changed it now. | |
| 48538337 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-05-10 14:46:02 UTC | Jørn-osm | Bing is to old to use here, so I have changed it back.https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/48563977 |
| 47480284 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-04-27 11:25:51 UTC | emvee | Hi ratrun,Please be careful fixing osmi problem without knowing the exact local situation. The Tibullushof is not connected to the footpad, actually there is a fence in between.Just corrected it this changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/48191451Greetings,Martin. |
| 47878304 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-04-20 05:44:55 UTC | MiroJanosik | Ahoj, myslim ze nie je spravne ze cely chodnik 486560828 ma oznacenie ako 'crossing', asi si to chcel dat iba na mensi usek chodnika. |
| 2 | 2017-04-21 15:05:49 UTC | ratrun | Sorry, I do not understand your language. Please write in German or English. | |
| 3 | 2017-04-21 18:13:59 UTC | MiroJanosik | Hello, I think that it is not correct that whole sidewalk 486560828 is marked as crossing. As written at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway=crossing?uselang=en-US - it should be a path lying on the road that is connecting two sidewalks. | |
| 4 | 2017-04-21 18:15:22 UTC | MiroJanosik | But never mind that - I will fix it right away, now. | |
| 5 | 2017-04-21 18:20:27 UTC | MiroJanosik | Ok, changed. | |
| 6 | 2017-04-22 12:21:13 UTC | ratrun | Thank you. Anyhow it was not me who added the crossing tag. All these sidewalks are mapped badly as they are missing the shared crossing points with the roads on the crossing. It means that they are mostly useless for foot routing. From my perspective it would be bettter to add sidewalk tags to the ... | |
| 7 | 2017-04-22 23:30:43 UTC | MiroJanosik | I agree, but missing crossing points are probably valid in this situation, as they look like a small streets with low traffic, so there are no pedestrian crossing symbols. | |
| 46113871 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-04-05 01:34:15 UTC | alesarrett | Hi, I've seen your fix and I'd like to understand what you've modified and why. I see from the description that this is related to "osmi routing view fixes" so I'd like to understand how to improve my mapping if this is not helping some routing functionalities. Thank you in advance. |
| 2 | 2017-04-05 15:36:13 UTC | ratrun | Please see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing. There everything should be explained. | |
| 3 | 2017-04-05 18:04:16 UTC | alesarrett | Thank you for sharing this. | |
| 46744815 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-03-10 20:50:49 UTC | aufachse | Hallo ratrun,du hast in diesem changeset etwas 'gefixt'. Als Quelle gibst du bing an. Auf bing maps ist die Verlängerung der Magister-Dorn-Straße noch nicht zu sehen, auch nicht eine Verbindung mit dem Feldweg. Bitte um Angabe der Quelle, die diese Änderung rechtfertigt. Ansonsten ... |
| 2 | 2017-03-16 19:19:41 UTC | aufachse | Hallo ratrun,nachdem keine Reaktion von dir kam, habe ich den ursprünglichen Zustand wieder hergestellt. | |
| 3 | 2017-03-17 20:15:07 UTC | aufachse | Hallo ratrun,Schade daß du nicht reagierst hast und wieder 'fixt'. Mein erster Kommentar ist nachwievor gültig. Wir können hier nun ein Spielchen spielen oder wie vernünftige Menschen das Problem lösen. Dazu bedarf es allerdings gegenseitiger Kommunikation. Du hast also n... | |
| 4 | 2017-03-18 09:48:36 UTC | ratrun | Bei OSMI handelt es sich um den OSM Inspector http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing. In der Routing View werden nicht verbundene nahe nebeinanderliegende "highway" Knoten angemeckert. Für diese Knoten ändere ich unter Berücksichtung von Bing und vers... | |
| 5 | 2017-03-19 09:04:57 UTC | aufachse | Hallo ratrun,Schön daß du Qualitätsmanagement betreibst. Leider ist das mit dem 'erraten' so eine Sache. In diesem Fall ist auf 'bing' nämlich noch garnichts zu sehen. Bitte verwende beim Korrigieren aktuelle Quellen (hier Bayern 80cm). Habe mich aufgrund deines links näh... | |
| 46817798 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-03-13 18:11:19 UTC | Zbigniew_Czernik | What is a matter of this change? |
| 2 | 2017-03-14 15:58:18 UTC | ratrun | See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing for an explaination of OSMI routing view. | |
| 3 | 2017-03-14 16:09:22 UTC | Zbigniew_Czernik | What was wrong with this way? | |
| 4 | 2017-03-14 16:30:52 UTC | ratrun | There was an unconnected node. | |
| 45723230 by ratrun | 1 | 2017-02-01 18:22:23 UTC | wwweg | Vielen Dank fürs Korrigieren. |
| 44431982 by ratrun | 1 | 2016-12-24 09:02:09 UTC | rainerU | Il ne faut trop se fier aux images Bing : il y a un muret qui sépare la Rue du Conflent de la voie de service. |
| 44065558 by ratrun | 1 | 2016-11-30 17:38:53 UTC | Hjart | Please note that Bing is outdated here and that official danish imagery (currently from this spring) should be used instead |
| 2 | 2016-11-30 17:40:37 UTC | Hjart | When mapping in Denmark you can select this imagery in the imagery menu. | |
| 3 | 2016-11-30 17:42:02 UTC | Hjart | Also note that I had shortened this to its actual length a few minutes ago. | |
| 33009372 by ratrun | 1 | 2016-11-24 17:22:44 UTC | sennewald63 | Hallo ratrun, du hast an der L204 zwischen Lustenau - Autobahnanschluß Dornbirn-Süd mit deinem pauschalen Edit ein motorroad=yes gesetzt, obwohl diese Straße zumindest von Lustenau aus nicht als Autostraße ausgewiesen ist.Ein highway=trunk kennzeichnet nur die baulich getre... |
| 2 | 2016-11-25 06:08:05 UTC | ratrun | Bitte lies dir die Diskussion unter http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22299654 dazu durch. | |
| 3 | 2016-11-25 10:14:30 UTC | sennewald63 | Das hatte ich mir schon angesehen, du hast ja in deinem Kommentar darauf verwießen. Das ist aber keine Diskussion, sonder eine Dialog zwischen dir und fkv . Solche großflächigen Änderungen gehören ins Forum und die Mailingliste.Ein highway=trunk ist auch in Österrei... | |
| 4 | 2016-11-26 08:24:43 UTC | ratrun | Das ganze hat eine Historie. Die dazu Disukussion wurde hier geführt. Siehe http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Austria/Schnellstraßen, dort ist "festgelegt", dass in Österreich "trunk" für eine Autostrasse mit baulicher Trennung verwendet wird. Ic... | |
| 5 | 2016-11-26 09:35:42 UTC | sennewald63 | Das ist ja auch für Schnellstraßen richtig, passt aber nicht für den Streckenabschnitt der L204 zwischen Lustenau - Autobahnanschluß Dornbirn-Süd .Da ist eine Landesstraße (ehemalige Bundesstraßr) als "trunk" gemappt und du hast sie zur Autostra&szl... | |
| 6 | 2016-11-26 10:12:40 UTC | sennewald63 | So, noch mal 5 Minuten nachgedacht und im Wiki bei highway=trunk gelesen. Die L204 zwischen Lustenau - Autobahnanschluß Dornbirn-Süd ist eigentlich gar keine "trunk" da die zweite Eigeschaft - Kreuzungsfreiheit besteht. Da gibt es 2 Kreuzungen auf gleichem Niveau, also ehr kein ... | |
| 7 | 2016-11-26 16:15:39 UTC | ratrun | Genau das hatte ich mit meinen Antworten gemeint. Die "note" könntes Du auch weglassen nach meinem Geschmack. | |
| 8 | 2016-11-27 14:46:51 UTC | zimba | Ich bin fuer das "highway=trunk" an dieser Strasse (das "motorroad" halte ich aber auch fuer falsch). Abgesehen von 1,2 Bauern die die Kreuzungen verwenden um an ihre Felder zu kommen, verwendet man diese Strasse nur um von Lustenau Richtung Autobahn zu kommen. Hier wird nicht im... | |
| 41564672 by ratrun | 1 | 2016-09-25 14:55:12 UTC | aceman444 | Hi, what is this change doing? Does it mean also pedestrians on the footway can't ho through that fence that is now a node on the footway? |
| 2 | 2016-09-25 17:18:58 UTC | ratrun | As I do not know the location, I cannot answer. But you are right, probably it would have been better to leave the node disconnected and add a "noexit=yes". But from my understanding usually a barrier is usually tagged in case that the way continues beyond. | |
| 3 | 2016-09-25 20:34:32 UTC | aceman444 | It's not great to edit places you do not know and change the meaning. The pedestrians going on the footway along Eotvosova do not need to cross any fence. Only the ones coming from Sturova have to. So you have now completely blocked passage along the footway as I think by default nothing can pass a ... | |
| 39197407 by ratrun | 1 | 2016-05-12 12:08:44 UTC | vmalep | Is there a way to put this orad back. It does exist and was correctly designed. |
| 2 | 2016-05-12 16:52:59 UTC | ratrun | I'm sorry, I cannot guess which way you are talking about. There were multiple geometrical problems in the data. The most prominent was way 261675844, which was obviously acciditially moved to an incorrect location such that it overlapped with other existing data. | |
| 3 | 2016-05-12 17:58:22 UTC | ratrun | In a private message I got the folllowing information "I just realized you have deleted the road between Manono and Mpiana and wonder why."-> Now I see what you mean. I'm sorry for that, this happened by accident and I didn't notice. It seems that you already did restore it. So ther... | |
| 4 | 2016-05-13 06:20:49 UTC | vmalep | Hi Ratrun,Thanks for responding. I did recreate the road, but quickly while for the one you deleted by mistake, I had spent time putting it on the right place, etc. More importantly, I noticed that there are more road missing (that can be found tracing the history of Manono town.I am still n... | |
| 37191819 by ratrun | 1 | 2016-02-13 20:44:04 UTC | Meillo | thx |
| 36665847 by ratrun | 1 | 2016-01-19 07:42:31 UTC | Superadlen | merci |
| 35731213 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-12-23 18:16:32 UTC | alphensebezorger | No direct traffic is possible from Wilhelminastraat 24D to Sint Maartenstraat 6A. There is a barrier which even pedestrians can not pass without some climbing. |
| 2 | 2015-12-23 20:25:10 UTC | ratrun | Thank you. I tagged the information you gave here. | |
| 35670332 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-12-02 13:29:47 UTC | brunesto | Thanks for fixing it!,Please I would like to know: do you use an automatic script or a website to detect when a road is non routable?Bruno |
| 2 | 2015-12-02 17:17:04 UTC | ratrun | I'm using OSMI.OSMI is the Open Streetmap Inspector. This is the view I'm using most of the times:http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=12.61778&lat=49.40295&zoom=6&overlays=unconnected_major1,unconnected_major2,unconnected_major5,duplicate_waysDocumentation can be... | |
| 3 | 2015-12-02 18:08:21 UTC | brunesto | Thanks! | |
| 34953605 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-10-31 12:58:09 UTC | Papa Schlumpf | Da besteht keine Verbindung |
| 2 | 2015-10-31 16:36:27 UTC | ratrun | Falls wirklich keine Verbindung besteht, dann setzt bitte ein noexit=yes auf den östlichen Endknoten. Laut Bing Lufbild sollte aber zumindest eine Verbindung mit dem Fussweg bestehen. Wenn der östliche Ausgang für Taxis gesperrt ist, dann sollte wohl das westliche Ende verbunden wer... | |
| 3 | 2015-10-31 16:52:17 UTC | Papa Schlumpf | Es ist absolut schlechter Stil, Bing als Vorlage zu benutzen! Was vor Ort ist, ist wichtig. Also: selber hingehen und anschauen und nicht einfach planlos ändern und behaupten. | |
| 34694233 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-10-18 09:14:14 UTC | species | Warum wurden an https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1244503896/historyhighway=traffic_signals entfernt?Iirc ist genau an der Stelle die Haltelinie für die Ampel... |
| 2 | 2015-10-18 13:06:26 UTC | ratrun | Weil der 2.5 Meter entfernte Eintrag auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1115213365 für die selbe Ampel reicht. | |
| 3 | 2015-10-18 13:52:55 UTC | species | Leider nein - hier gehts um die penalty-Zeiten fürs Auto-Routing.OSRM zB. ignoriert highway=crossing, crossing=traffic_signals.Aus gutem Grund, Beispiel:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17322899#map=19/48.17779/16.37917&layers=DWenn man hier in Ost-West-Richtung fährt, hat ... | |
| 4 | 2015-10-18 14:26:20 UTC | ratrun | Als Contributor von graphhopper kann ich Deinen Einwand mit jetzigen Erklärung nun verstehen, aber das doppelte Tagging kann nicht die Lösung sein - hier handelt es sich doch eindeutig um Tagging für den Router. | |
| 5 | 2015-10-18 14:48:19 UTC | species | Dein Verständnis freut mich!Aber warum ist doppelt getaggt schlecht?highway=traffic_signals ist ja für die Haltelinie der Autos da, highway=crossing, crossing=traffic_signals dafür, dass der Fußgängerüberweg ampelgeregelt ist.„Wir taggen nicht für die ... | |
| 6 | 2015-10-18 15:10:45 UTC | ratrun | Sorry und danke, ich habe erst jetzt mein Missverständnis bemerkt. Ich habe mich irritieren lassen durch die ähnlichen Ampel Icons von JOSM. Aber eigentlich sind es die Icons für highway=traffic_signals und crossing=traffic_signals eh leicht unterschiedlich. Ich habe es revertiert je... | |
| 7 | 2015-10-18 15:11:34 UTC | species | Danke! :-) | |
| 34618614 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-10-13 20:06:56 UTC | d3mol3k | Czemu dopiąłeś uliczkę do chodnika? |
| 2 | 2015-10-14 15:34:58 UTC | ratrun | I'm sorry I only understand German or English. | |
| 34391428 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-10-02 17:59:39 UTC | flohoff | Hi,ich verstehe diesen Changeset nicht so ganz. Du schreibst das das aus dem OSMI Routing View kommt. Du entfernst hier aber eine Ampel.Kriege ich gerade nicht zusammen!??!Flo |
| 2 | 2015-10-02 18:23:16 UTC | ratrun | Weil sie doppelt war auf zwei unverbundenen Knoten | |
| 33498586 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-09-26 16:01:02 UTC | SomeoneElse | I think that something's gone a bit wrong with the tagging of http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/120317629/history . Currently it has "yes=no". I'm guessing that perhaps that should be "oneway=no" or some other access mode = "no"? |
| 2 | 2015-09-27 14:04:47 UTC | ratrun | Thans for informing me. I fixed it. It would be interesting to know how that happended, because I'm 100% sure that I didn't tag this intentionally. I tried to figure out what could have happend using JOSM, but I couldn't. I know that it must be related with the JOSM feature that you only nee... | |
| 33510847 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-08-23 12:21:51 UTC | abdeldjalil | Why delete primary road exist ????!!!!! |
| 2 | 2015-08-23 13:47:38 UTC | ratrun | If I understood the question right you are asking why I deleted the primary road. The answer is because it was duplicated. There is one primary left (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/313924829).But the data is still a mess in this area. See the overlapping ways 313959913 and 313924829. Th... | |
| 22299654 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-07-24 19:29:38 UTC | fkv | Die Änderung gehört meiner Meinung nach rückgängig gemacht. Erstens ist sie ein unerlaubter Massenedit (siehe automated edits policy), und zweitens gilt der Grundsatz "we map what we see". Ein Fahrverbot gehört gemappt, wo es angeschrieben ist. Alle Implikationen g... |
| 2 | 2015-07-25 10:38:55 UTC | ratrun | Geht es noch ein bisschen unfreundlicher?Diese Änderung ist ein Jahr alt und hat bisher niemanden gestört. Ich habe nur konsequent durchgezogen, was großteils allerdings lückenhaft bereits eingetragen war.Länderspezifisch abhängige Regeln unterstützen noch... | |
| 3 | 2015-07-25 17:23:35 UTC | fkv | Die Änderung hat deshalb niemanden gestört, weil sie keiner bemerkt hat. Wenn du sie, wie es Pflicht gewesen wäre, vorher in der Mailingliste diskutiert hättest, dann hätte es Gegenstimmen gegeben, zumindest von mir.Da du den ganzen Tag nur Routingfixes machst, nehme ich a... | |
| 4 | 2015-07-27 17:25:00 UTC | ratrun | Das tag motorroad=yes kannte ich bisher nicht. Es wäre tatsächlich besser geeignet gewesen. Teilweise ist es mittlerweile schon entsprechend angepasst worden.Eine länderspezifisches Routing Logik in einem der Router löst das Problem nicht. Man müsste das in allen implement... | |
| 5 | 2015-07-27 19:04:47 UTC | fkv | Eine länderspezifische Logik ist sowieso nötig, weil die gesetzlichen Regelungen je nach Land unterschiedlich sind. Konkret heißt das, dass die Tabellen von http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions und http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for... | |
| 6 | 2015-07-30 18:59:39 UTC | ratrun | Ja. Ich werde es in ein paar Tagen ansehen. | |
| 7 | 2015-07-31 15:23:02 UTC | ratrun | Nach etwas Spielerei mit der Overpass API und der JOSM Filterfunktion habe ich die vorgeschlagene Änderung hochgeladen im Changeset 33009172. Ich habe dabei so wie damals highway=trunk und highway=trunk_link berücksichtigt. | |
| 31289505 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-05-21 12:19:09 UTC | SomeoneElse_Revert | Hi, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/346189094/history was added as part of a changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/31276346 that duplicated significant amounts of data in Malaga, and was reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/31340378 following a request made on the help si... |
| 30911923 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-05-08 21:24:00 UTC | jozo | Are you sure? |
| 2 | 2015-05-09 13:49:32 UTC | ratrun | No I'm not sure, therefore I added fixme=yes. On Bing it looks as Linnankatu continues to an underground parking. If you have lokal knowledge please check node 429907226, if this can be marked as noextit=yes in case that may guess with the underground parking is not valid. It is unlikely that the wa... | |
| 3 | 2015-05-09 14:09:51 UTC | jozo | barrier=retaining_wall and noextit=yes added | |
| 4 | 2015-05-09 14:39:47 UTC | ratrun | Thank you! | |
| 29831336 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-03-30 05:43:41 UTC | species | Bitte building=entrance nicht mehr verwenden, ist deprecated.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dentrance |
| 29760165 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-03-27 14:18:36 UTC | Intemelio | Hi, I'm #Intemelio from Italy.I look that you have made a little modification on the street "Via Palestro". Maybe I've done some drawing mistakes? |
| 2 | 2015-03-27 16:45:28 UTC | ratrun | Hello Intemelio,For routing applications it is important that nodes at crossings are identical and not just close to each other. Therefore I'm repairing mapping errors detected by the Open Streetmap Inspector based on Bing or other satellite images, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki... | |
| 3 | 2015-03-27 17:15:03 UTC | Intemelio | Hello ratrun,thanks for your reply and for your advice.I began to map the streets and squares of my small town, but it's not so easy. I am a newbie, I read some of the documentation of OpenStreetMap, and I hope to do better in the future.with regard,Intemelio | |
| 28799534 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-02-13 16:41:21 UTC | zool | You're contributing some changesets with a lot of deletions to tagged ways, and they stretch right across Europe. There's too much going on in each changeset to easily explore the consequences, so it would be good to have a clear description of what you are changing and why, rather than the repeated... |
| 2 | 2015-02-13 18:56:36 UTC | ratrun | Yes. OSMI is exactly the tool for which you provided the documentation link above.The wiki already explains what I'm doing and also includes an answer to your question about deletions in the changes-sets. This is what the wiki says about deletion. It is located in the "What you can do with ... | |
| 3 | 2015-02-13 19:26:05 UTC | tyr_asd | Why don't you simply save each individual OSMI fix in an individual changeset? | |
| 4 | 2015-02-15 08:41:24 UTC | ratrun | I don't do this because it spams the displayed amount of changset if one fixes bugs in small areas with many problems. This is the usual case. Every single upload would generate a small changeset, all containing the same comment. My experience is that it is good to perform multiple uploads and not j... | |
| 5 | 2015-02-15 09:25:22 UTC | SomeoneElse | Actually, it would be better if each small change didn't "all contain the same comment". For example, rather than simply "osmi routing view fixes" the one that replaced http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/304192905/history with http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2971905214 could say... | |
| 6 | 2015-02-15 09:40:23 UTC | ratrun | This is impractial. Connecting two nodes is a matter of 1 second, writing the comments would take at least 40 seconds. If you are working on such granuarity, then congratulations from me, but I won't do that. | |
| 7 | 2015-02-15 10:00:39 UTC | SomeoneElse | OpenStreetMap is a community - together we benefit from all the work that all other mappers have done. If a new mapper doesn't know that they're "doing it wrong" simply because no-one has been bothered to tell them, then they'll continue to do so, because they don't know any better, and t... | |
| 28823119 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-02-13 17:08:17 UTC | tyr_asd | Thank you for fixing so many routing data issues! But, can you please try to generate less continent-spanning changesets in the future? That would be great. |
| 2 | 2015-02-13 19:01:29 UTC | ratrun | I slowly increased my action radius and obviously went too far, as I nearly synchrounously got a similar comment for changesethttp://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28799534Please look up my answer there. | |
| 28425194 by ratrun | 1 | 2015-01-31 12:56:25 UTC | BeKri | What are you doing ?Is sehr a special problem to delete a komplett part of a street athttp://www.openstreetmap.org/way/89979654/history#map=17/48.21507/11.46298 ???be so kind to fix it. |
| 2 | 2015-01-31 14:19:55 UTC | ratrun | Hello,thanks that you noticed this. I have an idea how and why this happened: I believe that it was triggered by concurrent fixing the change triggered by user nickel715 in version 6 and OSMI fixing done by user "kartler175" uploaded with version 7 at 26.1 at 19:06 and my my OSMI... | |