brianboru have been discussed with 92 replies of this contributorbrianboru have been discussed with 92 replies of this contributor| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 76410664 by brianboru @ 2019-10-30 18:39 | 1 | 2025-03-22 07:50 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,660 | I have a small question about this ancient edit and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6932726277/historywhat you think nowadays about shop=white_goods and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dappliance ?Would it be fine to retag this object to shop=appliance or is shop=white_goods... |
| 58072056 by brianboru @ 2018-04-13 18:07 | 1 | 2024-11-11 21:07 | Dadge ♦1 | Correct spelling of Eyemore is Eymore |
| 160889 by brianboru @ 2009-04-04 09:50 | 1 | 2024-08-17 00:16 | marc__marc ♦1,265 | Hello,https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/367527567if you travel there, can you please take a picture of the "brown_box" ?Regards,Marc |
| 147104439 by brianboru @ 2024-02-05 18:18 | 1 | 2024-07-24 13:39 | VictorIE ♦911 | Hi,Some double-mapped streams around here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1211041240 |
| 45687075 by brianboru @ 2017-01-31 14:40 | 1 | 2024-07-07 20:29 | Lumikeiju ♦102 | The elements added in this changeset have been re-tagged in Changeset: 153677717 to follow more-current tagging conventions. |
| 17753019 by brianboru @ 2013-09-09 16:33 | 1 | 2024-06-28 16:22 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hello,I know that this was ages ago, but I wonder if https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/203151909 is the same feature as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/247737318 ?(I'm mentioning this at both changesets - I have no familiarity with this area at all; a DWG correspondent thought that the pa... |
| 122949864 by brianboru @ 2022-06-28 10:20 | 1 | 2024-05-01 12:32 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,660 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9852977856/history has so = 774516 that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)What you intended to express by using this unusual key? Is this tag needed? Or maybe can it be expressed in a more typical way that would be easier to understand? |
| 2 | 2024-05-03 15:30 | brianboru | finger trouble: just delete thanks | |
| 3 | 2024-05-04 18:16 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,660 | done! | |
| 136987898 by brianboru @ 2023-06-05 20:06 | 1 | 2023-08-30 16:06 | Casey_boy ♦83 | Hi, It looks like you created two untagged ways in this changeset:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1179840550 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1179840551Presumably this was by mistake and these should be deleted? |
| 2 | 2023-09-29 13:21 | Casey_boy ♦83 | Removed in: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141912494 | |
| 134602228 by brianboru @ 2023-04-07 07:29 | 1 | 2023-07-25 23:23 | VictorIE ♦911 | Hi,https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1160380047There are about 58 buildings across Westmeath with the typo building=agriculrural I'll see if I can get to them tomorrow. :) |
| 2 | 2023-07-26 09:57 | brianboru | thanks a lot for spotting these Victor | |
| 52411510 by brianboru @ 2017-09-27 11:45 | 1 | 2023-07-20 01:51 | Falsernet ♦151 | Why have you removed the tag when according to the wiki it was tagged correctly? (See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=services?uselang=en-GB) |
| 106712134 by brianboru @ 2021-06-21 11:29 | 1 | 2023-07-12 07:37 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hello,I'm guessing that "St George Parish Boundy Marker" https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8852728927 might actually be "... Boundary ..."?Best Regards,Andy |
| 134726968 by brianboru @ 2023-04-10 12:12 | 1 | 2023-04-11 10:17 | user_5359 ♦19,410 | Hello! Please have look on http://www.osm.org/way/1161076384, http://www.osm.org/way/1161076385. What is the mean of the tag laan = for? |
| 2 | 2023-04-12 06:27 | brianboru | finger trouble! corrected thanks | |
| 129394058 by brianboru @ 2022-11-26 09:14 | 1 | 2023-03-02 00:29 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hehe - I've no idea what https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1117324034 is, but I bet it's not a glacier! |
| 102568637 by brianboru @ 2021-04-08 13:32 | 1 | 2022-10-01 12:45 | ivanbranco ♦2,700 | Hi brianboru,https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8606798649I suppose the memorial=* tag was meant to be inscription=* but I just want to be sure. Can you confirm it? |
| 2 | 2022-10-02 13:54 | brianboru | It's so long ago since I surveyed this all I can say I probably copied what was written on the accompanying plaque and at that inscription wasn't even a tag then. If you think it needs improving please go ahead | |
| 124635259 by brianboru @ 2022-08-08 11:29 | 1 | 2022-09-10 23:49 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hello,Is protect_class=2 correct for https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10609122 ? Normally that's used for National Parks, I think: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:protect%20class=2?uselang=en-GB .Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | 2022-09-12 12:15 | brianboru | Oops! I've amended to 4 | |
| 3 | 2022-09-12 12:28 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Thanks - I was wondering what the "new national park" on https://map.atownsend.org.uk was! | |
| 123814367 by brianboru @ 2022-07-19 15:54 | 1 | 2022-08-07 12:43 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,could you check this node? I guess you wanted to add a 'ref' there:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9897833343 |
| 2 | 2022-08-08 11:34 | brianboru | Thanks. Fixed | |
| 70086212 by brianboru @ 2019-05-09 18:57 | 1 | 2022-06-15 07:42 | lyctkel ♦335 | Hi brianboru,currently I'm investigating some rarely used building=* tags.In the process I found https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/128823995 wich uses building=towerblock.This tag is only used here.From my point of view building=apartments would fit better.See https://wiki.openstreetm... |
| 2 | 2022-06-28 11:07 | brianboru | Feel free to amend | |
| 3 | 2022-06-28 20:31 | lyctkel ♦335 | Thanks brianboru, I changed it.Regards,lyctkel | |
| 120036077 by brianboru @ 2022-04-22 08:15 | 1 | 2022-04-24 09:34 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,could you check which sockets are available at the two charging stations you added? Both of these keys are not used in other places: socket:AC~ socket:CCS |
| 2 | 2022-04-25 09:47 | brianboru | Those are exactly the labels on each socket at the charging station. I'm not an expert so I couldn't match these to any of the prescribed tags. | |
| 3 | 2022-04-25 10:08 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Could you take picture when you pass by the next time?"CCS" is a standard defining at least 2 different connectors. In the UK it's most likely a type2_combo. But I have no clue what an "AC" might be. | |
| 4 | 2022-04-25 16:34 | brianboru | I took a photo when I surveyed it. How do I get that to you? | |
| 113808003 by brianboru @ 2021-11-15 14:26 | 1 | 2022-03-23 14:58 | Jez Nicholson ♦71 | Hi Brian, I'm being picky, but aren't they building=detached_house, semidetached_house, or houses? building=residential is a bit non-specific.Hope you are doing well, Jez. |
| 118567841 by brianboru @ 2022-03-16 21:06 | 1 | 2022-03-17 13:57 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Please stop attaching physical objects to non-physical boundaries. You're reducing the quality of the OSM database. |
| 118326879 by brianboru @ 2022-03-10 14:43 | 1 | 2022-03-12 02:18 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Please refrain from attaching objects to non physical boundaries.Instead of entropically splitting polygons into unnecessarily complicated & confusing multi-polygons, just map simple, easy closed polygons. It would save you so much time. |
| 117077629 by brianboru @ 2022-02-06 12:41 | 1 | 2022-02-07 08:01 | BCNorwich ♦4,856 | Hi, Just wanted to let you know you've an untagged line Way: 1028632454. Probably a stream. Further it doesn't join the next section of stream to the west, and it crosses three highways with no ford, culvert or bridge.Regards Bernard. |
| 2 | 2022-02-10 11:20 | brianboru | Thanks fixed | |
| 116876304 by brianboru @ 2022-02-01 16:44 | 1 | 2022-02-02 10:13 | user_5359 ♦19,410 | Hello! Please have look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/106358603/history. What is the meaning of the tag 11 = Honeypot House? |
| 2 | 2022-02-06 10:25 | brianboru | It's gibberish. Thanks for spotting. Now corrected | |
| 115024652 by brianboru @ 2021-12-16 20:48 | 1 | 2022-01-30 13:13 | trigpoint ♦2,373 | Again I do not believe this is a foodbank.c/o in the address suggests this is an admin contact.locations,geojson does seem to be rather more sane than foodbanks.geojson and suggests that the foodbank is at the Salvation Army. But again is just a postcode centoid, not an actual location and i... |
| 2 | 2022-01-31 12:48 | brianboru | Thnks for correcting | |
| 115159337 by brianboru @ 2021-12-20 10:35 | 1 | 2022-01-29 20:43 | trigpoint ♦2,373 | Hi BrianThe location of the foodbank looks to be quite a way out.What source did you use as based on the address I would not have put it here.Cheers Phil |
| 2 | 2022-01-30 02:18 | trigpoint ♦2,373 | It appears that this location is the postcode centoid of the postcode given on the website, however the website is very clearly wrong giving totally the wrong postcode.I have moved the location of the POI to a more sensible location and have removed to erroneous | |
| 3 | 2022-01-31 12:46 | brianboru | Hi PhilI've corrected most of them when editing but this is getting outide my area. For source see source tagRegards Bran | |
| 114968311 by brianboru @ 2021-12-15 15:02 | 1 | 2022-01-30 13:05 | trigpoint ♦2,373 | Hi, I am fairly certain this is not the location of a foodbank or if this is actually 157. It appears to simply be a postcode centoid.Cheers Phil |
| 115096621 by brianboru @ 2021-12-18 13:37 | 1 | 2021-12-19 14:16 | iccaldwell ♦24 | You have the wrong location. It was already mapped https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2421196465 |
| 114755993 by brianboru @ 2021-12-09 18:55 | 1 | 2021-12-11 18:03 | confusedbuffalo ♦333 | Hi, I was fixing some postcodes and spotted that you'd accidentally set the place tag to "<different>" on a few objects, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86254063/historyThere may be more, I haven't checked, and not sure if you want to set it to something else.Tha... |
| 2 | 2021-12-12 13:39 | brianboru | Thanks for the heads up and for acting as quality assurance. Finger trouble again! | |
| 111263392 by brianboru @ 2021-09-15 21:43 | 1 | 2021-11-18 00:31 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | Hi, I think it would be better if the parts of the roundabout were not tagged as a roundabout until the roundabout is complete.Cheers,Mike |
| 2 | 2021-11-18 20:28 | brianboru | Hi Mike - my edit didn't touch that tag - better to take it up with the actual editor. I'm actually indifferent about the issueRegardsBrian | |
| 72006883 by brianboru @ 2019-07-08 10:31 | 1 | 2021-10-19 18:45 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hello,I'm guessing that the "sidewalk=lift_gate" tag on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6596090433/history might have been a bit of finger trouble?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | 2021-10-21 11:59 | brianboru | brainfart of epic proportion! | |
| 111145509 by brianboru @ 2021-09-13 13:15 | 1 | 2021-09-14 19:21 | confusedbuffalo ♦333 | Similarly here, I think B3 6JS should be B43 6JS and B3 6LG should be B43 6LG |
| 2 | 2021-09-15 07:44 | brianboru | oops1 mre finger touble now fixed | |
| 111146059 by brianboru @ 2021-09-13 13:27 | 1 | 2021-09-14 19:18 | confusedbuffalo ♦333 | Hi, what's your source for the postcodes here?The ones that you've added as B3 6DT I think should be B43 6DT and likewise B3 6DX to B43 6DX |
| 2 | 2021-09-15 07:39 | brianboru | oops! finger touble - now fixed | |
| 103839130 by brianboru @ 2021-04-29 11:02 | 1 | 2021-08-29 20:33 | SK53 ♦864 | Hi Brian,Harbury Spoil Bank is not heath: it's one of the best examples of calcareous grassland in the county. Lots of plants & insects associated with that habitat: Welted Thistle, Cotton Thistle, Wild Carrot, Autumn Gentian (IIRC). Suspect it's mentioned in David Brown's &qu... |
| 2 | 2021-08-30 14:07 | brianboru | Hi JerryIf you feel that is most appropriate then go ahead and change it. Your knowledge is superior to mineRegardsBrian | |
| 3 | 2021-08-30 21:25 | SK53 ♦864 | Hi Brian,Will do, probably didnt map a landuse or similar when I last visited (4 years & 1 day ago) largely because I dont feel we have a consistent set of tags. However natural=grassland is certainly closer to reality than heath. I can probably add a Phase 1 habitat class too, but NVC undou... | |
| 109521655 by brianboru @ 2021-08-11 14:26 | 1 | 2021-08-12 08:21 | Colin Smale ♦319 | Hi Brian, please be aware that some of your work around the river Corve appears to have been removed by a new mapper in changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/109539763Not sure what's going on here exactly....Regards, Colin |
| 2 | 2021-08-12 14:54 | brianboru | Thanks Colin I'll take a look | |
| 109042511 by brianboru @ 2021-08-02 16:11 | 1 | 2021-08-03 10:36 | DaveF ♦1,566 | please don't remove valid area tags from platforms. |
| 105815624 by brianboru @ 2021-06-04 06:17 | 1 | 2021-06-14 19:22 | Nordpfeil ♦83 | Hallo brianboru, I have seen that you mapped 59 felled trees using the new tag "natural:felled=tree", which was never used before. Maybe no renderer will honor your effort. May I suggest to consider "natural=tree_stump" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree_st... |
| 2 | 2021-06-15 14:34 | brianboru | Thanks for the suggestion but my tag was chosen precisely so that there were would be no render and also serve to deter anyone else from recovering the trees from outdated aerial imagery Tree stump not appropriate - not visible in the piles of wood/branches left after felling | |
| 102999836 by brianboru @ 2021-04-15 14:00 | 1 | 2021-05-08 12:33 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | Hi, in this change you have presumable inadvertently set a number of ways with highway="path as it was before COVID". can you please review?Thanks,Mike |
| 2 | 2021-05-10 19:02 | brianboru | No need I did this deliberately to save myself work in case the situation reverses if BCC decide to remove the popup cycle lane in the road which currently makes this shared cycle/footpath redundant and I have to reinstate itRegardsBrian | |
| 3 | 2021-05-10 19:31 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | Could you change the tagging from highway= to old_highway= or similar, as the current tagging throws up errors because of an invalid value for highway? | |
| 4 | 2021-05-10 19:43 | brianboru | No problems. Will do | |
| 4357649 by brianboru @ 2010-04-07 18:53 | 1 | 2021-04-21 23:53 | marc__marc ♦1,265 | Hello,https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/687745992why not putting the ref of the pipeline "Leg T-M4" on the pipeline itselft ?Regards,Marc |
| 2 | 2021-04-22 07:41 | brianboru | Because I don't have sufficient knowledge of pipeline topography to know where a section ref starts and finishes | |
| 101501616 by brianboru @ 2021-03-22 11:47 | 1 | 2021-03-27 11:39 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi, this node got some numbers as tags, are these supposed to be in route_ref? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/502414740 |
| 2 | 2021-03-27 15:39 | brianboru | Thanks I have no idea what I was doing here - finger trouble I guess. Fixed | |
| 100002631 by brianboru @ 2021-02-25 20:32 | 1 | 2021-02-26 11:53 | marc__marc ♦1,265 | Hello,when sending, could you please give an exchange attribute and about the source? it helps other contributors when they want to know for example the freshness of the information used (survey or sat imagery: it is not the same thing in terms of date or reliability of interpretation)Regards,... |
| 2 | 2021-02-28 15:16 | brianboru | I don't understand: What is an "exchange attribute"?All my edits here are tagged with a source | |
| 3 | 2021-02-28 15:34 | marc__marc ♦1,265 | oups sorry, a changeset source tag :)for example with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/571458086it is impossible to know when you survey this way for the last time.the last modification gives the impression that you saw it 3 day ago (source=survey on the object)but if we look in detail, t... | |
| 99193800 by brianboru @ 2021-02-12 19:45 | 1 | 2021-02-24 21:41 | landfahrer ♦8 | please change the landuse tag from relation 12308597 |
| 2 | 2021-02-25 15:17 | brianboru | Thanks -fixed | |
| 80572505 by brianboru @ 2020-02-05 07:27 | 1 | 2021-02-15 19:48 | CjMalone ♦233 | Did you mean to remove highway=bus_stop from n562703488 in this? I don't know if you were removing the bus stop because no longer exists or moving to PTv2. |
| 98626314 by brianboru @ 2021-02-03 07:26 | 1 | 2021-02-04 09:06 | DaveF ♦1,566 | HiWhen splitting a station from a way & it's close to a join in that way, could you unstitch the way so the existing station node can be move whilst retaining its history which many find a useful asset in OSM. Ta |
| 98421714 by brianboru @ 2021-01-30 16:51 | 1 | 2021-01-31 10:06 | user_5359 ♦19,410 | Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/node/8378649306: I assume a copy&paste error |
| 2 | 2021-01-31 15:41 | brianboru | Indeed! Finger trouble.Thanx for the QA | |
| 91062066 by brianboru @ 2020-09-17 17:27 | 1 | 2021-01-11 16:30 | jambamkin ♦81 | Hello brianboru, looks like you added node/7917747904 in the middle of an alloment, is this correct? Certainly posible but I thought it unlikely enough to check with you. |
| 2 | 2021-01-11 17:18 | brianboru | Thanks for spotting the error- I've moved it to a correct location | |
| 92712508 by brianboru @ 2020-10-19 13:29 | 1 | 2020-11-14 12:38 | smb1001 ♦36 | Can you give a bit more info on why you deleted St Michael's church on Gresham Road? (Opened 2014, very much still there) |
| 2 | 2020-11-15 12:57 | brianboru | Certainly- both bing and maxar imagery show residential housing in the location. I've tidied up the area by adding bdgs and hopefully I've identified the church correctly, The Co-op looks a bit off however - could you position it correctly? | |
| 90420770 by brianboru @ 2020-09-04 14:27 | 1 | 2020-09-05 07:36 | user_5359 ♦19,410 | Hello! Please check the way http://www.osm.org/way/844308864 again: What is the meaning of the tag Bourton=Huse? |
| 2 | 2020-09-07 07:54 | brianboru | It's a typo for the name and has been corrected by another user retaining the typo | |
| 89287258 by brianboru @ 2020-08-12 07:37 | 1 | 2020-08-13 15:56 | DaveF ♦1,566 | HiI assume this is meant to be something other than a station?https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7805862411#map=19/52.35844/-1.87426 |
| 87208299 by brianboru @ 2020-06-26 18:28 | 1 | 2020-06-27 13:21 | DaveF ♦1,566 | HiThere are now two Cannock railway stations |
| 36428797 by brianboru @ 2016-01-07 16:54 | 1 | 2020-03-22 11:32 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,I found this school with 2 strange tags:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/307503939ADDRESS_3 \t= ATHERSTONEESTAB = 2032Could you have a look and fix this? |
| 2 | 2020-03-23 13:20 | brianboru | Thanks. Fixed. These tags are from the UK Government edubase database | |
| 81782066 by brianboru @ 2020-03-04 15:26 | 1 | 2020-03-05 17:06 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | Hi Brian, in this change way 10024892 has been changed to highway=abandoned. However, it has Ward End Cycle Route running along it. Can you please review whether this is now a cycleway or whether the cycle route now takes an alternative route?Thanks,Mike |
| 2 | 2020-03-05 18:39 | brianboru | Thanks for this Mike I will investigate | |
| 3 | 2020-03-06 16:22 | brianboru | There's another cycle route that used thisas well . Interestingly the construction tag has been there for some months. I've added a sensible placeholder diversion until I can confirm the official diversion. A survey shows no official signage | |
| 81542888 by brianboru @ 2020-02-27 10:09 | 1 | 2020-02-27 22:45 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Hi BrianThere should only be one ref:crs per station & it should be on the railway=station node.It's best to position that node away from the station building to allow its name & other facilities to render & display. |
| 2 | 2020-02-28 12:27 | brianboru | Hi DaveNot an easy station to map. I used ref:crs everywhere a public transport route relation or journey planner or network schematic might want to use it, which is on each line that passes through with a stopI placed the node on the building because putting it at some arbitrary point away fr... | |
| 3 | 2020-02-28 14:04 | DaveF ♦1,566 | HiI think railway=stop + the relevant NapTAN stop position code is what should be added.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN#NaPTANThe correct term is tagging *incorrectly* to suit the renderer. Positioning nodes so valid data can display isn't incorrect.See village place names as... | |
| 4 | 2020-02-28 14:08 | DaveF ♦1,566 | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer | |
| 5 | 2020-03-02 09:57 | brianboru | Hi DaveAlways better to refer to the wiki with a full quote: "The basic good practice principle is that you avoid using incorrect tags, or otherwise skewing the data you enter, to make things show up in a specific way on the map rendering." | |
| 6 | 2020-03-02 11:20 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Adding superfluous ref:crs tags "skews the data" . In this instance - for the router. | |
| 7 | 2020-03-04 10:34 | brianboru | Hi Dave Not at all, just represents the specific complexity of this station and the general complexity of public transport mappingRegardsBrian | |
| 8 | 2020-03-04 12:54 | DaveF ♦1,566 | HiIt becomes "complex" if tags are duplicated in irrelevant locations.You added a stop area relation. Therefore any routing software will be able to find the ref:crs on the station node.Adding duplicating data only leads to confusion & errors.One station = one station code.... | |
| 81691675 by brianboru @ 2020-03-02 17:34 | 1 | 2020-03-02 19:43 | trigpoint ♦2,373 | Hi BrianMapping farmland as large multipolygons makes future detail mapping of farmland, such as tagging as arable, pasture or meadow, or adding boundaries much harder for other mappers.This subject was discussed on talk-gb last December and the consensus was that farmland is better mapped as ... |
| 2 | 2020-03-04 10:32 | brianboru | Hi PhilHappy to help you in overcoming any difficulties with multipolygons in Herefordshire as and when you want to map individual fieldsRegardsBrian | |
| 81402815 by brianboru @ 2020-02-24 11:20 | 1 | 2020-02-24 18:25 | DaveF ♦1,566 | HiA building=train_station should be mapped separately from railway=station tag as they may have different names (Carto renders them differently), & separated by a large distance. (See central London Underground) . There may be multiple train station buildings per railway station. |
| 79807058 by brianboru @ 2020-01-20 16:29 | 1 | 2020-01-21 18:09 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,could you check this POI, something went wrong with the name tag:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/126029211Thanks! |
| 2 | 2020-01-22 08:39 | brianboru | Thanks - fixed! | |
| 78386517 by brianboru @ 2019-12-13 17:19 | 1 | 2020-01-02 13:20 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | HI Brian, in this change a number of ways have had access=no added, thereby denying pedestrian access. If they are public highways with bus only signs then pedestrian access should not be prohibited, and vehicle=no or motor_vehicle=no is a better tag. Can you please review?Cheers,Mike |
| 2 | 2020-01-02 14:27 | brianboru | Sure thing I'll take a look shortly access restrictions always confuse the hell out of me | |
| 3 | 2020-01-02 19:29 | brianboru | access=no is correct where indicated because although some of the roads are complete they are currently dead ends with temporary signage denying access. I'm there again on Tues next week will checkon current progress | |
| 4 | 2020-01-03 00:26 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | I came across this because way 421642407, 22323305, 755271061 and 4041104 have access=no, but have bicycle=yes and various other types of transport with yes values - these override access=no, so need to be deleted/changed if all access is prohibited. | |
| 76282951 by brianboru @ 2019-10-28 05:52 | 1 | 2019-11-19 19:25 | Richard ♦220 | Wow - just spotted this incredibly detailed bit of mapping. Hats off! |
| 2 | 2019-11-21 10:31 | brianboru | Thanks Richard - not often I get compliments! More changes to come here - the planning application shows another 2 basins and a restauarnt | |
| 74411871 by brianboru @ 2019-09-12 23:20 | 1 | 2019-11-16 16:04 | mcld ♦68 | Hi - I'm checking through some solar farms. Thanks for mapping lots, by the way! For this one at Southend, REPD says the capacity of this one is 2.5 MW. Do you know where you got the number of 3 MW from, please?Online news also says 2.5 MW: https://www.emexlondon.com/london-southend-airport... |
| 2 | 2019-11-19 21:19 | brianboru | Oops! Fixed | |
| 76705028 by brianboru @ 2019-11-06 14:01 | 1 | 2019-11-13 14:09 | rkumreo ♦31 | Hi,Thanks for adding valuable data to the map. There is recent deletion of segment performed by you but as per our delivery partner GPS traces and Latest Private Earthwatch Imagery there is a road visible. Can you re-verify your edit in the changeset (76705028) and let us know if there is a rece... |
| 2 | 2019-11-14 13:21 | brianboru | Oops! Thanks for spotting this major error - I've corrected it. | |
| 60769854 by brianboru @ 2018-07-16 16:09 | 1 | 2019-11-08 14:39 | SK53 ♦864 | Laura Ashley looks to be shop=clothes given they are advertising a post there with "fashion & apparel" as the business area. Also location would suggest furniture/wallpaper a bit far fetched. |
| 2 | 2019-11-08 18:28 | brianboru | Jerry Thanks for being courteous in raising this changesetNot thanks for being discourteous in using the pejorative term "far-fetched"Laura Ashley are long- famous for their designs in fabric for furnishings, curtains and wallpapers. You might like to check their website and see the va... | |
| 3 | 2019-11-09 17:48 | SK53 ♦864 | Hi Brian,Hmm, not trying to get you to suck eggs. Currently it's mapped as not mapped as a shop at all which is what drew my attention to it (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158005243). So was trying to be helpful in getting it a bit more precise.I know their proposition very well: I ... | |
| 46869679 by brianboru @ 2017-03-15 13:52 | 1 | 2019-09-28 12:23 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,could you check this node, the Naptan keys are not adapted correctly:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4736199519Jan |
| 74277363 by brianboru @ 2019-09-09 18:29 | 1 | 2019-09-11 07:30 | BCNorwich ♦4,856 | Hi, I removed the self intersection on this way, created a multipolygon and tagged the inner. |
| 2 | 2019-09-11 17:50 | brianboru | Oops! Thanks for cleaning up - I try not too leave too many issues | |
| 33067950 by brianboru @ 2015-08-03 12:06 | 1 | 2019-08-10 13:46 | DaveF ♦1,566 | HiShould this sculpture have a NapTan code? |
| 2 | 2019-08-12 10:18 | brianboru | This was supplied by TfWM ( then Centro) and all the Interchange sculptures in the West Midlandss have one | |
| 3 | 2019-08-12 10:25 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Good Lord, how ridiculous | |
| 4 | 2019-08-12 10:35 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Do you have a link to a list? | |
| 68766413 by brianboru @ 2019-04-01 19:03 | 1 | 2019-06-02 12:00 | robert ♦234 | Oops - did you remove the highway= tag from "Sterndale Road" in this changeset? https://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/map?osl_id=710987 |
| 2 | 2019-06-03 06:27 | brianboru | Thanks for spotting this - now fixed. | |
| 46370139 by brianboru @ 2017-02-24 15:05 | 1 | 2019-05-31 13:09 | SK53 ♦864 | I presume Robin Hood Otors should be Robin Hood Motors (pointed out on IRC) |
| 2 | 2019-06-03 06:23 | brianboru | Feel free to correct obvious typos like this - no need to contact me via changeset comments | |
| 61056811 by brianboru @ 2018-07-25 13:20 | 1 | 2019-05-20 12:19 | ForstEK ♦213 | Hi, brianboru! You mark many objects with tag "man_made=pipeline_marker", this is not an error according principle "any tag you like" but in wiki scheme more frequently (30078 over 415) used tag "pipeline=marker". Do you mean you should retag them according approved sch... |
| 2 | 2019-05-20 12:20 | ForstEK ♦213 | https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/JaS | |
| 3 | 2019-05-23 21:05 | brianboru | I think this was from years ago before pipeline=marker. I usually use the new format now as it appears in JOSM as a preset. If you feel strongly about this feel free to change them - it's way down on my mapping priorities | |
| 67104475 by brianboru @ 2019-02-11 15:53 | 1 | 2019-02-11 16:11 | SK53 ♦864 | Some oneway tags missing I think on the ones you've added. Presumably a more recent version of OpenRoads than I had to hand. |
| 2 | 2019-02-11 16:26 | brianboru | thanks - fixed | |
| 61255913 by brianboru @ 2018-08-01 09:18 | 1 | 2018-11-28 19:08 | TheSolarGuy Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | 2018-11-29 12:28 | brianboru | Should it be BOC Industrial Gases rather than the full name? | |
| 38321186 by brianboru @ 2016-04-05 15:25 | 1 | 2018-10-16 14:33 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi! If I got that right Bing is quite up to date here and it shows some roads and many new buildings in this area. I don't think this road is in status construction, rather razed:highway=residential. |
| 2 | 2018-10-16 14:38 | GerdP ♦2,751 | There is also a highway=demolished next to it. I think this tag is unclear, it might be missunderstood as something like "bad surface". Please try to find a proper lifecycle prefix for this and other roads with this tag created / modifed by you. | |
| 61882376 by brianboru @ 2018-08-22 10:00 | 1 | 2018-09-29 08:53 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi! The tag highway="former footway" is only used here. Why don't you use one of the common life cycle prefixes here?https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix |
| 2 | 2018-10-01 10:35 | brianboru | HiDidn't know they existed. Done now. | |
| 3 | 2018-10-02 04:53 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hmm, disused:highway=removed is still unusual. I think the idea of those prefixes is that you use the standard highway values. So, if the removed way was a highway=footway, the new value would be removed:highway=footway. | |
| 59988320 by brianboru @ 2018-06-19 19:19 | 1 | 2018-09-09 20:04 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Hi Brian.Is there a valid reason you split lots of riverbanks into relation members? It makes it so much more difficult to edit. Can you not just draw a simple polygon for your landuse=farmland additions? Please note that tag shouldn't be used for whole swathes of land, but individual fi... |
| 2 | 2018-09-10 13:55 | brianboru | Hi DaveSorry you find it more difficult to edit these as relations. I'd be interested to learn from you how it is more difficult. Maybe it's a good thing as it discourages the inexperienced from fiddling. Anyway they're pretty stable entities and shouldn't need too much edit... | |
| 3 | 2018-09-15 22:44 | DaveF ♦1,566 | Entropy - more items = more maintenance. The "inexperienced" often mistake MP's & add tags to their ways, creating errors in rendering. I'm struggling to see how drawing & tagging one single polygon way is less work than mapping lots of individual ways, splitting an e... | |
| 62509212 by brianboru @ 2018-09-12 06:18 | 1 | 2018-09-13 13:42 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | HI, on way 30955837 you have set access=no. This means there is no pedestrian access, which seems unlikely to me. Did you intend motor_vehicle=no? Can you please review?Thanks,Mike |
| 2 | 2018-09-14 08:59 | brianboru | Thanks Mike - access restriction for all classes now explicitly tagged. I've also added a note to all roads affected stating the likely length of closure and the reasonBrian | |
| 10713143 by brianboru @ 2012-02-17 17:15 | 1 | 2018-07-28 15:19 | SK53 ♦864 | Hi Brian,No idea if relation type=bridge is at all meaningful these days (does anything consume it?), but also the ways in the relation making up the viaduct into Moor Street dont join up).Jerry |
| 2 | 2018-07-30 09:50 | brianboru | Thanks for the tip Jerry. Moor Street viaduct fixed - I've joined the across member ways to the outline member | |
| 3 | 2018-07-30 10:31 | SK53 ♦864 | I'm still not sure about type=bridge, must send an email to the tagging list | |
| 4 | 2018-07-30 11:55 | brianboru | it's what comes up in JOSM presets | |
| 58576517 by brianboru @ 2018-05-01 07:09 | 1 | 2018-05-03 12:16 | Robert Whittaker ♦274 | Given the tagging of the amenity=post_office in this changeset, do you know if the building opposite at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86882593 (currently tagged as a Post Office) is now no longer a Post Office? |
| 2 | 2018-05-03 12:42 | brianboru | The post Office on the N side between the cafe and Nisa Local is the current post ofice (surveyed), I forgot to delete the old Post Office next to the theatre | |
| 27756392 by brianboru @ 2014-12-28 16:02 | 1 | 2018-04-23 12:00 | VictorIE ♦911 | I think this https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4434330 should be "Castle Farm" the problem arising from the edge of a map being cropped and the "C" being missing from the 1:25k background map. |
| 2 | 2018-04-24 08:18 | brianboru | Thanks for spotting this error. Please go ahead and correct it ( and any others like this you come across - no need to go through changeset comments for my edits - I'm not precious about them) | |
| 57525644 by brianboru @ 2018-03-26 07:53 | 1 | 2018-03-27 21:48 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,could you check the tagging of this node:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/267741447Jan |
| 2 | 2018-03-28 06:37 | brianboru | Thanks Jan. How did I manage to enter that gibberish on the post box! Now corrected. Good to know someone's doing QABrian | |
| 54592247 by brianboru @ 2017-12-13 10:48 | 1 | 2017-12-15 09:45 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi!Please watch out for typo highway=residentiaal(double a)I found it as building=residentiaal and highway=residentiaalProbably caused by a bug in JOSM 13170 which sometimes forgets the presets and forces the user to type the complete tag value. |
| 2 | 2017-12-15 14:32 | brianboru | Thanks for the warning. I was wondering why JOSM was behaving like that | |
| 53736833 by brianboru @ 2017-11-13 11:00 | 1 | 2017-12-13 09:56 | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | Hi, way 540167452 has access=block which I don't understand. Did you intend block to be in the surface tag? Or do you mean it is blocked (in which case access=no would make it clearer)?Thanks,Mike |
| 2 | 2017-12-14 11:05 | brianboru | MikeI'm not sure what I meant and I can't even remember if this footway is open or not so I just deleted the tagRegardsBrian | |
| 7985291 by brianboru @ 2011-04-27 13:52 | 1 | 2017-11-26 16:24 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Mind if I change https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1262117773 etc. to "information=route_marker" and then add them to the Heart of England Way relation?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | 2017-11-27 08:53 | brianboru | No problem. Go ahead | |
| 4357487 by brianboru @ 2010-04-07 18:36 | 1 | 2017-11-18 19:04 | Hb- ♦290 | This change affects the two pipelines w54630411 and w54630411 which have now the tag substance=fuels set. This tagging is unique in the database. I'm going to change it to substance=hydrocarbons. |
| 53170042 by brianboru @ 2017-10-23 07:30 | 1 | 2017-11-13 15:19 | EdLoach ♦171 | Hi Brian, Did you change the old Railway Drive back to unclassified because construction traffic can use it as well as bicycles? I notice you've added a note on one section that it is closed. http://www.wolverhampton.gov.uk/article/10481/Road-to-reopen-to-further-improve-new-access-to-railway-s... |
| 2 | 2017-11-14 16:24 | brianboru | Hi EdThere were no access restrictions on the road which is why I changed it back. There was a "Road Closed" sign which you could easily drive around for access so I thought it best to leave it as unclassified until the position clarifies itslelf ( there's also access to the Briti... | |
| 52221600 by brianboru @ 2017-09-20 19:28 | 1 | 2017-09-22 05:41 | Harald Hartmann ♦827 | Hello brianboru. With this changeset you have introduced some new (and so far unkown and undocumented) keys at some toilets: `automatic_public_convenience` and `radar_key_needed`. For the second one could it be also a http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:centralkey ? #newkey |
| 2 | 2017-09-22 15:54 | brianboru | Hi Thanks for your input, This is the data supplied by the local authority, which I retagged according to the wiki except for these two tags which the wiki didn't address- - hence the new tags. The key attribute I note is only a proposed key and radar is a better known term AFAIK than nks in th... | |
| 46469368 by brianboru @ 2017-02-28 14:38 | 1 | 2017-08-30 09:11 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi!I've noticed that you used the unusual tag highway=footway_closed here. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/371904747Please seehttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefixfor better tagging. |
| 50828573 by brianboru @ 2017-08-04 07:32 | 1 | 2017-08-11 22:01 | Math1985 ♦114 | Great work! |
| 50920302 by brianboru @ 2017-08-07 14:58 | 1 | 2017-08-08 10:28 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,these 32 buildings have the tag "B30 2DH=B30" which looks like a mistake. Could you check that?Cheers, Jan |
| 2 | 2017-08-08 14:17 | brianboru | Thanks Jan - what happened here I don't know! Corrected now | |
| 49456331 by brianboru @ 2017-06-12 04:57 | 1 | 2017-06-12 07:57 | Math1985 ♦114 | Thanks! |
| 46860931 by brianboru @ 2017-03-15 07:31 | 1 | 2017-04-02 14:17 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,I noticed some issues with this (huge) import of ~20000 trees.- The nodes have several tags which are not defined in the wiki, such asage,constituency, form, plot_number, site_name, usrn, ward- I didn't find a discussion on this import. Was it announced on the mailing list?- the &#... |
| 2 | 2017-04-27 14:01 | brianboru | This is now documented for discussion at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Birmingham_City_Council_trees_data following talk-gb converstions and is paused until issues are resolved | |
| 44111054 by brianboru @ 2016-12-02 10:43 | 1 | 2017-04-27 09:04 | Robert Whittaker ♦274 | Are you sure the postcode of "B92 7AW" on http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4533741026 is correct? According to Code-Point Open, that postcode is located over 3km away from this node. |
| 2 | 2017-04-27 12:25 | brianboru | Thanks Robert - probably caused by cut n paste.Now corrected | |
| 46849184 by brianboru @ 2017-03-14 18:27 | 1 | 2017-03-14 18:37 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hi Brian,You're still not using a separate import account, you're using a #gibberish changeset discussion comment and you're importing duplicates of existing data rather than conflating (e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4734765468 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/414947... |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:39 | brianboru | I don't believe these are duplicate nodes but bus stops on opposite sides of the road, so conflation not appropriate. Duplicates are being reviewed manually to check which position is accurate I'm using my own account only to do a manual post-import review and cleanup of nodes. Not as n... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-19 23:27 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Thanks Brian.Just one question - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/wmca doesn't seem to be a valid account?Best Regards,Andy | |
| 4 | 2017-04-20 12:25 | brianboru | Sorry Andy - so used to abbreviating it. The username is West Midlands Combined Authority. This also came through on email this timme!Brian | |
| 5 | 2017-04-20 13:26 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Thanks Brian - and yay for email appearing! | |
| 46897632 by brianboru @ 2017-03-16 12:58 | 1 | 2017-03-17 12:11 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,could you check this node http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4303618075The tag ref`... = grid_bin doesn't look right.Cheers, Jan |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:42 | brianboru | Finger trouble! Thanks - corrected | |
| 46833897 by brianboru @ 2017-03-14 08:57 | 1 | 2017-03-14 18:30 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hi Brian,Could you please address the questions raised on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46819034 before continuing to import this data?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:16 | brianboru | Being addressed as requested. Import paused | |
| 46081403 by brianboru @ 2017-02-14 15:10 | 1 | 2017-02-24 14:04 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Is the WMCA really "admin level 6"? I thought that it just an attempt to obtain some "City Region" government money, and didn't have any of the administrative powers (beyond running the buses) that e.g. Birmingham City Council did? |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:15 | brianboru | I did muse over this one. There is an elected mayor and powers over economic regeneration. From WMCA's website:Combined authorities are legal bodies with powers of decision making granted by parliament. They are a new way for local authorities to work together on key strategic functions tha... | |
| 31943416 by brianboru @ 2015-06-13 13:17 | 1 | 2017-01-07 12:16 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Oops - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2694560369 is "building=shop=*signs"?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:09 | brianboru | finger trouble again. Node deleted, name added to building, with shop=yes | |
| 44213687 by brianboru @ 2016-12-06 16:22 | 1 | 2016-12-08 11:32 | mueschel ♦6,574 | Hi,could you check some of your bus stops? There are many foreign tags like on this node: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4149470376Jan |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:06 | brianboru | Node deleted and replaced with standard naptan tags | |
| 7733473 by brianboru @ 2011-04-01 09:01 | 1 | 2016-09-04 22:35 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | ... and another one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/106746591 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/106746580 are "building=uy". Any ideas? |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:01 | brianboru | finger trouble corrected to yes | |
| 8737362 by brianboru @ 2011-07-16 08:03 | 1 | 2016-09-04 22:14 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Another one - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/121882501 is "building=iy" - any ideas about that? |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 09:00 | brianboru | finger trouble again -should have been yes, but I've updtaed it to retail | |
| 12594712 by brianboru @ 2012-08-03 07:52 | 1 | 2016-09-04 22:08 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hi Brian,https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/174268930 is "building=r#" - any idea what was meant there?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 08:57 | brianboru | finger trouble - now corrected to residential | |
| 39535291 by brianboru @ 2016-05-24 14:44 | 1 | 2016-05-25 14:09 | highflyer74 ♦2,447 | Hello there!Can you check https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/956111131? I think there was some fingertrouble involved here...All the best from across the Channel! |
| 2 | 2017-04-17 08:55 | brianboru | thanks! removed | |
| 46819034 by brianboru @ 2017-03-13 17:27 | 1 | 2017-03-13 18:16 | chillly ♦819 | This is an import, right? Where's the unique userid? Where's the wiki import page? Where's the Imports mailing list discussion? |
| 2 | 2017-03-13 22:54 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hi Brian,It looks like things may have got a bit ahead of themselves here. The only list discussion that I can see for this is at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb-westmidlands/2017-March/002127.html , and that's not really a discussion as much as you saying "I'd l... | |
| 3 | 2017-03-19 15:15 | pigsonthewing ♦10 | Other issues are already being discussed elsewhere, but "Betula sp" (strictly, with italicised "Betula" and period in "sp.") is the correct taxonomic designation for a specimen of the genus Betula, whose exact species is not known.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speci... | |
| 4 | 2017-03-19 17:17 | SK53 ♦864 | @pigsonthewing: there is also a widely used genus tag, which is particularly appropriate for trees not identified to species (and generally useful because of the vagaries of the taxonomy of various street trees). | |
| 45223802 by brianboru @ 2017-01-16 19:14 | 1 | 2017-01-16 19:52 | Math1985 ♦114 | Great to see you active again (and resolving my notes :)) Brian! |
| 43742197 by brianboru @ 2016-11-17 20:04 | 1 | 2016-11-18 21:54 | Math1985 ♦114 | Thanks a lot! |
| 40812693 by brianboru @ 2016-07-18 07:55 | 1 | 2016-07-24 21:21 | Aleks-Berlin ♦482 | I removed your 4=2 (key=value). I think it is a typo. |
| 26345906 by brianboru @ 2014-10-26 17:38 | 1 | 2016-07-03 17:01 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Looks like a barrier tag and a name tag got confused on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/188089050 . Should there be a space in the name? |
| 2 | 2016-07-04 07:42 | brianboru | Thanks Andy - corrected | |
| 18890998 by brianboru @ 2013-11-14 10:21 | 1 | 2016-07-03 16:57 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hi Brian,http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246113785 seems a bit odd - looks like a barrier tag and a name tag got confused?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | 2016-07-04 07:42 | brianboru | Thanks Andy - corrected | |
| 25031335 by brianboru @ 2014-08-26 15:49 | 1 | 2016-07-03 16:30 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hi Brian,Is "Bethel Church" on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300285453 a name or a denomination (or something else)?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | 2016-07-04 07:41 | brianboru | Thanks Andy - corrected | |
| 31521042 by brianboru @ 2015-05-28 05:45 | 1 | 2016-01-26 09:31 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Hi Brian,I noticed that you changed some roads from highway=redeveloped to highway=demolished, which is BTW also not well documented. What about this remaining last one?https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/349398867 |
| 31749108 by brianboru @ 2015-06-05 15:44 | 1 | 2015-12-20 21:47 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Hi - while importing stuff into a rendering database, I noticed that http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/351677973 has layer=17 on it. That's obviously not invalid, but may not have been what was intended :) |
| 2 | 2015-12-28 12:55 | brianboru | Correctd to layer 1 | |
| 16411129 by brianboru @ 2013-06-03 18:54 | 1 | 2015-12-24 16:53 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | If it's been shut for 2 years and counting perhaps "disused:amenity=pub" might be better than "amenity=pub" for http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/224272727/history ? |
| 35015175 by brianboru @ 2015-11-01 15:58 | 1 | 2015-11-21 17:00 | pmailkeey Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | 2015-11-22 11:01 | brianboru | Yes: it doesn't exist. | |
| 3 | 2015-11-22 11:40 | brianboru | If you want to be respected as a member of this community, please be courteous enough to wait for a reply to a changeset comment before reverting. I've deleted this path again, having surveyed the area this morning to confirm there is no path here | |
| 4 | 2015-11-22 12:53 | pmailkeey Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 5 | 2015-11-22 13:13 | brianboru | There is no path here | |
| 6 | 2015-11-22 13:22 | pmailkeey Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 7 | 2015-11-22 14:30 | brianboru | You might well have done. But when? Currently the northern end has a 7 ft high padlocked security gate with vicious spikes on it which leads into a builders storage area filled with security fencing panels with a fence behind it. The southern end has a padlocked gate followed by a highway maintenanc... | |
| 8 | 2015-11-22 14:35 | pmailkeey Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 9 | 2015-11-22 14:42 | pmailkeey Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 10 | 2015-11-23 09:06 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | @pmailkeey - the discussion above makes it clear that currently no path exists. You re-added it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35521480 , I've deleted it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35525671 . Please don't add it back until you've actually surveyed it your... | |
| 12144257 by brianboru @ 2012-07-07 21:15 | 1 | 2015-11-14 20:58 | GerdP ♦2,751 | please review:I assume surface=b stands for beton?way 170511971,way 170511974,way 170511973,way 170511978,way 170511977,way 23136293 |
| 2 | 2015-11-16 19:53 | brianboru | I have no idea - I must have a had brainfart when editing this. Just delete the tag | |
| 3 | 2015-11-16 20:05 | GerdP ♦2,751 | :-)done | |
| 34548911 by brianboru @ 2015-10-10 13:08 | 1 | 2015-11-01 19:40 | GerdP ♦2,751 | please explain:what does the word CUS inhighway="bus_stop CUS"mean ?https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2612760560 |
| 2 | 2015-11-06 18:54 | brianboru | This is a notation by NapTAN- the national database for bus stops which denotes it is a CUStomary stop i.e there is no physical bus stop present but the local drivers and passengers know that the bus stops there on request. We don't tag these as bus stops | |
| 3 | 2015-11-08 17:20 | GerdP ♦2,751 | Thanks for the information. I understand now that this is a very special case. I changed the tag to highway=bus_stop a few days ago, now I am unsure what to do.I guess the best would be to remove the highway=bus_stop tag and only keep the node? | |
| 4 | 2015-11-08 17:31 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | My recollection was that we went with "physically_present=no" as per http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/502390265 for verified customary stops. Certainly many came in from NaPTAN without highway=bus_stop on them (though my recollection was that the west mids NaPTAN import was slightly earl... | |
| 5 | 2015-11-08 19:02 | GerdP ♦2,751 | okay, this tag is used quite often together with bus_stop, so I think I'll just add it to those two bus_stops. | |
| 6 | 2015-11-09 07:39 | brianboru | Please don't unless you've surveyed the site and found a physical bus stop pole. The West Midands imported the Naptan data WITHOUT the bus stop tag so that we could survey the naptan data. We found naptan data is often wildly inaccurate. Locally we don't tag CUS with a bus stop tag. ... | |
| 7 | 2015-11-09 07:49 | GerdP ♦2,751 | okay, now I am really lost.My understanding is that physically_present=nosays I will not find a physical bus stop pole. I understood your first comment so that the bus stops thereif one gives a sign to the driver.Did I get that wrong? | |
| 8 | 2015-11-09 08:43 | brianboru | You are correct. But please respect West Midlands community practice which is we don't tag CUS stops with highway=bus stop unless we've surveyed and found the CUS stop has been upgraded with a pole which can be surveyed. Physically present=no was a very early attempt at quality assurancec ... | |
| 9 | 2015-11-09 09:17 | SomeoneElse ♦13,390 | Just to clarify, the example I gave earlier http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/502390265 was a _verified_ customary stop (I caught a bus from there). Different areas' NaPTAN data have been of very different quality - some areas have found stop positions to be reasonably accurate (at the time of... | |
| 10 | 2015-11-09 09:30 | GerdP ♦2,751 | okay, so I'll revert all my changes and leave highway="bus_stop CUS" untouched in the future until one finds a better way to tag thatelement ? | |
| 11 | 2015-11-09 14:32 | GerdP ♦2,751 | done | |
| 21328663 by brianboru @ 2014-03-26 17:17 | 1 | 2015-10-30 09:19 | GerdP ♦2,751 | please explain:highway=redeveloped is only used here.It seems the more often used highway=dismantled matches as well ? |
| 29881063 by brianboru @ 2015-03-31 16:13 | 1 | 2015-10-27 08:40 | GerdP ♦2,751 | please review:I've changed highway=pre-existing prior to redevelopment to highway=dismantledMaybe map the area that is rebuiltas landuse=construction ? |
| 2 | 2015-10-27 12:24 | brianboru | OK by me. I've also changed the spur at the end of the road in question | |
| 3 | 2015-10-27 12:54 | GerdP ♦2,751 | okay, thanks for the feedback |