| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 63598661 by stadiaarcadia | 1 | 2018-10-18 01:06:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Did fab lab tulsa move? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63598661 |
| 63611242 by Daniel Barrett | 1 | 2018-10-18 00:11:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | maxspeed:type=US:urban is 100% useless, it's just not a thing. |
| 63597025 by 1T-money | 1 | 2018-10-17 19:42:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | landuse areas should be limited to actual landuse, not entire neighborhoods or areas. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63597025 |
| 63444523 by codeauthoritytulsa | 1 | 2018-10-16 03:07:42 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 63561108 where the changeset comment is: Remove SEO spam. |
| 63423636 by Wyverns | 1 | 2018-10-16 03:05:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please be sure to update source:maxspeed as appropriate, if you can map the speed limit signposts, that also greatly helps, since Grant County does have a default 45 MPH speed limit. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63423636 ... |
| 63414893 by stockleypsychologist | 1 | 2018-10-16 03:04:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 63561057 where the changeset comment is: Remove SEO spam. |
| 51524798 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-10-15 15:39:28 UTC | US Woods | 45 mph on tracks like these https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/14908570 ? |
| 2 | 2018-10-15 16:05:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | Yup, welcome to Oklahoma. Just because that's the speed limit doesn't mean that speed is realistically achievable. | |
| 63474810 by 1T-money | 1 | 2018-10-15 02:18:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | service=driveway or service=alley? I think you meant alley. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63474810 |
| 63496243 by 1T-money | 1 | 2018-10-15 01:08:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please don't downgrade expressways off of trunk, that's what trunks are in the US. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63496243 |
| 63394781 by 1T-money | 1 | 2018-10-11 03:30:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | If possible, use sidewalk=* as a placeholder for mapping a new way as highway=footway, footway=sidewalk along the centerline of the sidewalk later. This greatly helps pedestrians, and is indispensable to blind users. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha... |
| 63285730 by 1T-money | 1 | 2018-10-09 00:50:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | Probably would change name=County Road 9 to ref=CR 9, but otherwise looks good. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63285730 |
| 63288147 by 1T-money | 1 | 2018-10-09 00:22:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please keep in mind the default for state highways is secondary unless it's plain that it's operating as a more major road. Bog standard rural two lane state highways are definitely secondary. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.ma... |
| 63249797 by aromasofasia | 1 | 2018-10-06 20:47:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | Opening hours is wrong. No abbreviations should appear in addr:street. Payments is wrong. Go look at the wiki. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63249797 |
| 63078619 by dollface74128 | 1 | 2018-10-04 02:45:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 63179380 where the changeset comment is: Backing out of a particularly low quality edit. Looks like lines were doubled up and left untagged relative to what's visible and odd geometry relative to what's on the ground. |
| 63097365 by iandees | 1 | 2018-10-04 02:32:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Whoa, someone's really into frozen custard! --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63097365 |
| 2 | 2018-10-04 02:32:58 UTC | iandees | Yes I am!! It's so yummy. | |
| 63155350 by andreis_telenav | 1 | 2018-10-04 02:25:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | I used to live in this neighborhood, can confirm that this is South 85th East Avenue. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63155350 |
| 63162695 by PCSO | 1 | 2018-10-04 02:24:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | addr:street=South Gordon Cooper Drive and addr:housenumber=1902 seems way more likely. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63162695 |
| 63168092 by g14classified | 1 | 2018-10-04 02:17:06 UTC | Paul Johnson | A little more attention to geometry and connectivity is appreciated. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63168092 |
| 63173582 by jnbtcr | 1 | 2018-10-04 02:08:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like that it ended up getting dragged and joined to the Holiday Inn somehow. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63173582 |
| 2 | 2018-10-04 02:08:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like that it ended up getting dragged and joined to the Holiday Inn somehow. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63173582 | |
| 46039796 by roadgeek99 | 1 | 2018-10-01 00:03:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | Encouraged but not required? Uuh, dude... seriously? ORS 814.400 Vehicle Code Applicable To Bicycles, and ORS 811.320 Failure to Drive on Right of Divided Highway.On the Oregon side, yeah, both cycleways on the Interstate Bridge are one way.On the Washington end: RCW 46.61.100, Keep right... |
| 63063260 by Iowa Kid | 1 | 2018-09-30 18:43:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | I think you meant destination:street=, not destination:ref --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63063260 |
| 62890968 by mhenson | 1 | 2018-09-27 01:59:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | Probably would have gone with ref instead of name. Not sure what 10W=11 means, though. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62890968 |
| 2 | 2018-09-27 02:26:06 UTC | mhenson | I corrected incorrect tags in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62962773 The OSM wiki page did not specify a ref or a name for a pitch. There are sign posts located on each field indicating the number or letter. Name seamed to be the most logical tag.I read the ref wiki and can not log... | |
| 3 | 2018-09-27 02:27:54 UTC | Paul Johnson | Kinda going with "the name is only the name", and unnamed, just numbered fields don't quite feel like a "name" situation for me. | |
| 4 | 2018-09-28 01:17:19 UTC | mhenson | 1) thank you for looking at everyone's additions to OSM. Including mine!2) I have thought about this more. I really think this is a gray area. While playing soccer, every calls the fields by the number, like the number is a name. 3) At the same time, I think about a city's fire hydrants or stree... | |
| 5 | 2018-09-29 20:59:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem, someone's gotta do it to help keep Oklahoma improving and have some semblence of both human and machine readability.In terms of ref versus name... I think most people not invested in which specific field would probably just describe it's location relative to a landmark, much as is th... | |
| 6 | 2018-09-29 21:02:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Or, heck, way more common example... say you're heading trough Fowler or Pershing on the main highway through. Neither of those have names, but people will typically call them "highway 62" or "highway 11" given that their refs are US 62 and OK 11 respectively. | |
| 62993031 by mstone1027 | 1 | 2018-09-28 00:52:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | lanes=* should be marked lanes only. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62993031 |
| 62993062 by mstone1027 | 1 | 2018-09-28 00:50:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | Use "Northwest" instead of "NW", please. Computers struggle to find the correct expansion but reliably can make the correct abbreviation on the fly. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62993062 |
| 62809487 by Dulahey | 1 | 2018-09-27 02:36:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | Landuse should be congruent with actual landuse, not crossing roads but closer to a cadastre as much as practical; neighborhoods can be organized as place=neighborhood --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62809487 |
| 62874944 by andreis_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-27 02:24:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62962888 where the changeset comment is: Oklahoma (including in this spot) definitely does have named links. |
| 62875053 by andreis_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-27 02:23:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62962881 where the changeset comment is: Oklahoma (including in this spot) definitely does have named links. |
| 62878359 by andreis_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-27 02:18:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62962819 where the changeset comment is: Oklahoma (including in this spot) definitely does have named links. |
| 62878400 by andreis_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-27 02:16:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62962793 where the changeset comment is: Oklahoma (including in this spot) definitely does have named links. |
| 62890402 by OKWXGirl | 1 | 2018-09-27 02:00:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Areas do not connect to road centerlines. Areas should be congruent to the actual edge of the areas. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62890402 |
| 2 | 2018-09-27 14:37:25 UTC | OKWXGirl | Roger that. Thanks. | |
| 62895653 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-09-27 01:57:55 UTC | Paul Johnson | Multiuse paths should be highway=path, not highway=footway. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62895653 |
| 62912377 by andreis_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-27 01:42:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62962441 where the changeset comment is: Oklahoma (including in this spot) definitely does have named links. |
| 62946678 by andreis_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-27 01:25:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62962271 where the changeset comment is: Not sure why Telenav seems to keep changing obvious links to something other than link... |
| 62581412 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:30:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600556 where the changeset comment is: This link has a name. |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:58:02 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul! Thank you for your feedback! If you think it is a link, according to the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , it should not have names.That's why I deleted name, because it does not even appear on Tiger 2017 or OSC. Best regards, Danut! --- ... | |
| 3 | 2018-09-23 22:34:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | In all of these cases (there's over a dozen according to gmail, so I'm addressing them all in this case), they do appear on local signage and in the state laws. Oklahoma has a lot of named links. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha... | |
| 4 | 2018-09-24 05:12:02 UTC | danuta_telenav | Heloo!I understand. If you have local information you can modify it.Have a nice day! --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62581412 | |
| 62834971 by DigiMonk | 1 | 2018-09-23 05:16:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not sure a porkchop really qualified as highway=pedestrian... --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62834971 |
| 62839677 by trisha@tu | 1 | 2018-09-23 05:15:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | Parking areas must only include actual parking area, not adjacent, non-parking buildings. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62839677 |
| 62769077 by Brandify Tran | 1 | 2018-09-21 02:18:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like this was oddly geocoded in Oklahoma, might want to go back and take a closer look. These nodes appear to be in the middle of streets instead of the correct locations. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/change... |
| 62772094 by GloriaSR | 1 | 2018-09-21 02:00:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | What was the source for these photos? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62772094 |
| 2 | 2018-09-21 02:16:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | I made further refinements from OpenStreetCam. Be sure to update or remove source:maxspeed=* if it no longer matches what you update maxspeed=* to. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62772094 | |
| 62600602 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-09-17 11:03:27 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!If you think it is a link, according to the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , it should not have names.Best regards, Danut --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/626... |
| 2 | 2018-09-18 00:38:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | I don't honestly believe that the current edit of the wiki for link is particularly reflective of all real world situations. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62600602 | |
| 62566969 by omes_planner | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:50:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Check the wiki for opening_hours=* --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62566969 |
| 62567315 by TheSolarGuy | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:50:19 UTC | Paul Johnson | North Carolina?? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62567315 |
| 2 | 2018-09-15 15:33:23 UTC | TheSolarGuy | Is the correct title of the changeset before: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62567165--Despite it's unlikely, I insist that JOSM messed this up when continuing my upload after hitting an edit conflict.--In reality I have changed railway lines to service=spur and mapped some power li... | |
| 62578009 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:40:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Probably should have been moved from name= to destination:street= --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578009 |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 10:40:49 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!According to wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination) we add information only if we have singpost.Unfortunately, we do not have OSC or Mapillary on that side of the road, so we can not confirm if we really can move the name to destiantio... | |
| 62578194 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:39:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please stop downgrading links between carriageways. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578194 |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 10:51:05 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!If you think it is a link, according to the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , it should not have names.If you think it's a link, it can stay that way. I would say it is service because it is conect on the road with the service tag ... | |
| 62578228 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:39:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Could probably be tagged as destination:street=Southwest 5th Street --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578228 |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 10:56:07 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul! Thank you for your feedback! According to wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination) we add information only we have singpost .We have found OSC image, but we do not have a sign that gives us information.If you have local information , feel free to make the change. Best ... | |
| 62578643 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:36:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600602 where the changeset comment is: This is the foot of a named street. |
| 62578777 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:35:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | This should probably be junction:ref=122A --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578777 |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:12:27 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!As far as I can see, the ref information appears on node 298562648. According to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/junction_details, junction ref is at the stage of the proposal.Best regards, Danut --- ... | |
| 3 | 2018-09-17 11:50:33 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!As far as I can see, the ref information appears on node 298562648 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578777 | |
| 62578811 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:35:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | This should probably have been junction:ref=122A --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578811 |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:15:07 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!As far as I can see, the ref information appears on node 298552804.Best regards, Danut --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578811 | |
| 62578961 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:35:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600593 where the changeset comment is: This is the foot of a named street. |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:17:18 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!BesT regards, Danut! --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62578961 | |
| 62580552 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:34:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600589 where the changeset comment is: This is part of a freeway interchange ramp. |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:22:03 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!I understand what you said, but according to the wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , links do not have names.Best regards, Danut! --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osm... | |
| 62580674 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:33:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600580 where the changeset comment is: This is the foot of a named street. |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:33:08 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!In my opinion I think road 426365395 is secondary. If it is, it is justified to have name. If not, according to wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link must not have name.Best regards, Danut! --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMC... | |
| 62581285 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:31:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600568 where the changeset comment is: This is the foot of a named street. |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:42:07 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul! Thank you for your feedback! If you think it is a link, according to the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , it should not have names. If you think it does, the name can be kept.Best regards, Danut! --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA ... | |
| 62581374 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:31:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600564 where the changeset comment is: This link has a name. |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 11:55:55 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul!Thank you for your feedback!If you think it is a link, according to the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , it should not have names.That's why I deleted name, because it does not even appear on Tiger 2017 or OSC. Best regards, Danut! --- ... | |
| 62581480 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:29:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600552 where the changeset comment is: This is just a U-turn ramp |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 12:00:27 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul! Thank you for your feedback! If you think it is a link, according to the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , it should not have names.That's why I deleted name, because it does not even appear on Tiger 2017 or OSC. Best regards, Danut! --- ... | |
| 62581750 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:28:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62600545 where the changeset comment is: This link has a name. |
| 2 | 2018-09-17 12:01:15 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello Paul! Thank you for your feedback! If you think it is a link, according to the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) , it should not have names.That's why I deleted name, because it does not even appear on Tiger 2017 or OSC. Best regards, Danut! --- ... | |
| 62589342 by OKM Music | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:27:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | St., S., and Ave., are not a words, use Saint, South and Avenue instead. Machines can't expand abbreviations, but they can easily create them on the fly if desired. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62589342 |
| 62599128 by faroutwest | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:13:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | Just change the driveway to these tags instead:highway=serviceservice=drivewayaccess=private --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62599128 |
| 62599880 by RMSM | 1 | 2018-09-15 04:13:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | website=* needs to be a proper URL, phone=* needs to be a proper phone number (in this case, add 1- in front of what you have and you nailed it).Probably a good idea to add shop=cosmetics as well. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/chan... |
| 62448015 by zamzamgrillok | 1 | 2018-09-13 04:15:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62539404 where the changeset comment is: Remove SEO spam |
| 62534322 by GloriaSR | 1 | 2018-09-13 03:42:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | For the 55 area you have tagged, is it a yellow 55 sign or a white 55 sign? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62534322 |
| 62285320 by Mike - Oklahoma County Assessor | 1 | 2018-09-10 02:43:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please use "Road", not "Rd". --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62285320 |
| 62331937 by amirspersianrugs | 1 | 2018-09-07 01:48:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is nowhere near how you tag addresses, payment information or hours of operation. Go back and read the wiki or stop creating bad edits across multiple accounts. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/6233193... |
| 62340889 by bogdanp_telenav | 1 | 2018-09-07 01:42:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | These ways are just in an apartment complex, and not named. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62340889 |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 01:42:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | These ways are just in an apartment complex, and not named. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62340889 | |
| 3 | 2018-09-07 01:43:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 62359099 where the changeset comment is: Restoring noname=yes as verified on the ground. | |
| 4 | 2018-09-07 06:26:19 UTC | bogdanp_telenav | Hi. I took the names from tiger data 2017. Thanks for your feedback and your corrections. | |
| 62073034 by cetallman | 1 | 2018-08-29 03:05:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm not seeing any real reason these should have been upgraded, lettered state highways in Missouri are Missouri's state tertiary highways behind the numbered state highways (secondary) and US highways (primary). --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapb... |
| 2 | 2018-08-29 14:57:49 UTC | cetallman | Hi Paul,I questioned the same thing in my head before making these changes, but decided to follow the OSM standard for these roads vs, the state of Missouri standard. (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=secondary) I was thinking this way all roads regardless of there jurisdiction w... | |
| 3 | 2018-08-30 01:00:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Well, I would avoid using Google Streetview as it's not license compatible with our editing.If it's a particularly large road, I might consider bumping up to secondary or primary, but for a lot of these rural roads, tertiary is ample.There is a tendency to have priority creep on the highway ... | |
| 61931157 by Alecs01 | 1 | 2018-08-29 03:33:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Seems like you removed this stadium's detail with a lower detailed version, mind moving back to what you had before you changed it, then collect the three grandstands as a relation for the stadium? --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmch... |
| 2 | 2018-08-29 03:34:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | Whoops, got it backwards, it was the other guy who messed it up. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61931157 | |
| 61941478 by stadiaarcadia | 1 | 2018-08-24 07:12:27 UTC | Alecs01 | This is a duplication: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5853039355 please delete it |
| 2 | 2018-08-24 08:34:48 UTC | stadiaarcadia | I removed it. | |
| 3 | 2018-08-29 03:31:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Seems like you removed this stadium's detail with a lower detailed version, mind moving back to what you had before you changed it, then collect the three grandstands as a relation for the stadium? --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmch... | |
| 61996347 by 1T-money | 1 | 2018-08-29 03:22:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like you're off on alignment a little bit, and even flattened out a couple pre-existing buildings to basic squares that aren't square. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61996347 |
| 2 | 2018-08-29 04:41:15 UTC | 1T-money | My bad, the imagery was blurry. | |
| 62043905 by stadiaarcadia | 1 | 2018-08-29 03:19:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | Geometry could use a little work but otherwise not bad. A steady hand and switching to JOSM may help. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62043905 |
| 62051401 by Damon Basler | 1 | 2018-08-29 03:17:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | leisure=park is the correct tag for a park, not landuse=recreation_ground. Also, the geometry you have for Acme Brick Park is probably way wrong since it looks like you included a big water treatment plant as well. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSM... |
| 2 | 2018-08-29 14:37:29 UTC | Damon Basler | I never changed any of the geometry on Acme Brick park. There is no water treatment plant in that park. It has a play ground, walking track, pond, train for children to ride and lots of open areas for recreational use. None of the edits I made were geometry based they were all adding recreational la... | |
| 62056168 by MJAnderson | 1 | 2018-08-29 03:14:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please avoid abbreviations (Nowata Road, not Nowata Rd). --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62056168 |
| 62072211 by cetallman | 1 | 2018-08-29 03:05:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | Off a random sample, I'm not seeing any real reason these should have been upgraded, lettered state highways in Missouri are Missouri's state tertiary highways behind the numbered state highways (secondary) and US highways (primary). --- Published using OSMCha... |
| 62083112 by Nomathwords | 1 | 2018-08-29 01:56:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please keep landuse edges against the actual landuse, don't extend them out into the streets. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62083112 |
| 61905540 by sunwukong4 | 1 | 2018-08-23 02:10:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not bad! A little more careful attention to the geometries is greatly appreciated. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61905540 |
| 61746725 by OSM Map Contributor | 1 | 2018-08-21 01:54:19 UTC | Paul Johnson | No abbreviations in street names, please. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61746725 |
| 61758157 by llllllllllllllllllllllllllll | 1 | 2018-08-21 01:52:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'd be more inclined to tag park paths as paths instead of footways, which generally are smaller and less suitable for bicycles. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61758157 |
| 61764272 by stadiaarcadia | 1 | 2018-08-21 01:38:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | Why did you break this into three different HA Chapman Stadiums instead of making a relation or checking for an existing one and keeping the grandstand tag? --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61764272 ... |
| 2 | 2018-08-23 19:15:23 UTC | Alecs01 | Fixed | |
| 61807096 by OSM Map Contributor | 1 | 2018-08-21 01:04:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | addr:unit is a good place to put the suite number. Putting it in addr:housenumber breaks things. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61807096 |
| 61484400 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:40:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not quite, prominent fenceline visible on Mapbox data, updated it to that. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61484400 |
| 61484421 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:39:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like you made this shed about four times larger than it appears in the aerials, and crossing a path. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61484421 |
| 61484462 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:32:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Nice catch, though a little more careful aim on the geometry and adding a culvert's about my only suggestion. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61484462 |
| 61484502 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:25:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61484923 where the changeset comment is: Doesn't appear to be a stream here, there's a house in the way for one. |
| 61484520 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:24:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | building=house works; careful attention to geometry is greatly appreciated. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61484520 |
| 61484550 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:23:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not bad, better to use operator to name the school district than just name. Prominent fencelines visible on imagery does provide a strong hint to the accurate geometry. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61484550 |
| 61484726 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:20:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61484858 where the changeset comment is: The Osage Cougar has not moved, I just passed it yesterday. |
| 61454690 by marthaleena | 1 | 2018-08-09 02:16:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | Which imagery were you using? I'm not spotting a curb here on Mapbox, but I'm not precluding the possibility. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61454690 |
| 60974747 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-27 00:43:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | There's clearly two way traffic on these ways. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60974747 |
| 2 | 2018-08-08 07:00:22 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello! When I put the oneway tag I relied on the fact that at the intersection with West Britton Road, on the road appear "Only" in that direction.Do you have local information showing that the road is oneway?Best regards,Danut --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA ... | |
| 3 | 2018-08-08 07:27:21 UTC | danuta_telenav | I have updated my previous message: Hello! I added the oneway tag based on the fact that at the intersection with West Britton Road, on the road (Mapbox Satellite) appears "Only" in that direction. Do you have local information showing that is a two way street?Best regards,Danut ... | |
| 4 | 2018-08-09 00:20:14 UTC | freebeer | if you look a bit further along the road, you will see another arrow pointing the opposite direction for the other lane. | |
| 5 | 2018-08-09 02:00:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Freebeer got it. The lane opposite the direction danuta tagged it oneway is narrower. motor_vehicle:oneway=yes could be tagged, but lane access and turn restriction tagging more or less makes that redundant at this point. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published u... | |
| 61483812 by KrK007 | 1 | 2018-08-09 01:13:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not a bad start, a little more care on the geometry and you've got a very strong start on mapping. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61483812 |
| 61413651 by jirilebl | 1 | 2018-08-08 02:49:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | JOSM can help. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61413651 |
| 61367366 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 02:36:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | Decentish geometry here (better than attaching to the highway by a long shot). No abbreviations in names, please. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61367366 |
| 61450453 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 02:18:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | I get that there's a lot of ponds around but I don't see one here. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61450453 |
| 61418960 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 02:08:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | That's not a track, that's a drain. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61418960 |
| 61419015 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 02:05:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not sure if all of these are Euchee Creek or unnamed feeders. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61419015 |
| 2 | 2018-08-08 02:07:10 UTC | Elleemenoh | That one I double checked with the forestry overlay. | |
| 61419099 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 02:01:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Waterways point downstream, not upstream. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61419099 |
| 61419157 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 01:59:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | Landuses should go to the edge of the landuse and not attach to highways. This is considerably easier in JOSM than id. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61419157 |
| 61441719 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 01:12:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | Driveways can be more accurately mapped as highway=service, service=driveway, surface=whatever-the-surface-is. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61441719 |
| 2 | 2018-08-08 01:15:23 UTC | Elleemenoh | Hi, Paul. This is a correct change. It isn't a driveway. It is a road that services multiple houses, but is not maintained by the county. (There's a marked sign.) Thanks! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61... | |
| 3 | 2018-08-08 01:55:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Just noticed this...I'm very familiar with this hill and these roads and tracks, 101st and 193rd is unequivocablly not a primary. | |
| 4 | 2018-08-08 01:56:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | Likewise, driveways are not highway=residential, they're highway=service. | |
| 5 | 2018-08-08 01:57:29 UTC | Elleemenoh | 101st being marked is an error. 193rd is one of the top ten most traveled roads in the county (aside from inside Sapulpa limits) according to the current assessor. | |
| 6 | 2018-08-08 01:58:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | As well travelled as it is, it's also not particularly built for it. We're mapping for characteristic, not VMT. | |
| 61441904 by Elleemenoh | 1 | 2018-08-08 00:28:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this a pond or a swimming pool? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61441904 |
| 2 | 2018-08-08 01:01:18 UTC | Elleemenoh | That is a pond. Lots of small ones here in Creek County. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61441904 | |
| 61308840 by flierfy | 1 | 2018-08-03 02:37:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not quite sure how a five lane road works out as secondary? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61308840 |
| 2 | 2018-08-03 16:53:12 UTC | flierfy | The class of a road is not determined by its width but its significance. Primary means in this case a state-wide importance which these suburban collector roads certainly don't have. And if they were significant enough to justify primary then the whole road would need to be marked primary and not ju... | |
| 3 | 2018-08-04 03:10:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Importance to the state usually warrants a minimum of secondary, but major urban arterials can also be primary. Generally speaking, cities in Oklahoma (especially the ones that fall into the top 2% largest cities in America by population) are very reliable in giving the highest significance roads a... | |
| 61246497 by Heavy02 | 1 | 2018-08-02 03:15:55 UTC | Paul Johnson | Probably no name on these in reality; it's perfectly acceptable for an unnamed road to have no name tag, but I'd probably change the name tag to description in this case. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only --- Published using OSMC... |
| 2 | 2018-08-02 15:48:43 UTC | Heavy02 | Paul,Thank you for the suggestion, I appreciate your feedback and have been trying to learn how to better use the capabilities in OSM. I'm now personally visiting any locations prior to updating them to ensure I don't mess up the project, I know that we have neighborhoods in this area that are not... | |
| 3 | 2018-08-03 00:15:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem. If you can use JOSM, that opens up a lot more imagery versus using the id installation on the main website. You can play around until you find one that has the clearest and most up to date view of your area, but you may have to justify it to line up if it's off quite a bit. Taking a l... | |
| 61270712 by zelstel | 1 | 2018-08-02 03:21:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for the fixup! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61270712 |
| 61126316 by Heavy02 | 1 | 2018-07-30 23:31:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm not seeing these features on OpenStreetCam or any of the recently available aerial imagery. got a source?Also, highway=path is probably what you're looking for, not footway. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61126316 ... |
| 2 | 2018-07-31 01:45:53 UTC | Heavy02 | Google Maps shows the walking/biking path on the left side of the road on both the 'lake' and 'reservoir' which are separate loops joined in the middle. However walking/biking it almost every day is what got me to add it as it is not a residential street but a 15 mph park area with walking/biking w... | |
| 3 | 2018-07-31 02:40:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | Google Maps is not an acceptable source at all. That's copyright infringement and if that was your source, we should probably revert that change.maxspeed=* should be reserved for the official speed limit. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: h... | |
| 4 | 2018-07-31 18:11:52 UTC | Heavy02 | Sir,The source data was an 'on foot/bicycle' survey by myself personally as outlined in the OpenStreetMaps TOS and as such does not fall under copyright material. It appeared that you were unable to find imagery on OSM that allowed you to 'verify' that update, I apologize for pointing you to Googl... | |
| 5 | 2018-08-01 01:43:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Alright, sorry for the misunderstanding and thanks for updating the speed limits. | |
| 61174169 by Heavy02 | 1 | 2018-07-31 00:18:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | The Farm Bureau's a nonprofit organization, like the Automobile Association of America. Being somewhat familiar with Farm Bureau, this is very likely to be an insurance office. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changes... |
| 2 | 2018-07-31 01:51:51 UTC | Heavy02 | Stopped by and said hi, you are correct they are an insurance office. Map now reflects this, thanks! --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61174169 | |
| 61183486 by ashleyannmathew | 1 | 2018-07-31 00:08:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | What was the point in splitting the loop? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61183486 |
| 2 | 2018-07-31 09:16:21 UTC | ashleyannmathew | Hi Paul,Thanks for the query. I am working on a team that fixes all road connectivity and topology errors in the US that were detected by our internal tools. I split it as a part of fixing Unconnected Highway errors which detects all the highways that were not connected to other highways. This par... | |
| 61173165 by Heavy02 | 1 | 2018-07-30 23:59:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | Are these streets actually signed as 15 and 20 MPH? Seems unusual for Oklahoma. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61173165 |
| 2 | 2018-07-31 01:49:47 UTC | Heavy02 | Paul, you are correct. The residential areas are 25 mph areas IAW OK state law, outside of a few posted 20 mph areas. They have been updated to reflect that. The alleys are posted as 15 mph areas IAW local Altus ordinances.Thank you for the feedback --- Pu... | |
| 61134655 by Nomathwords | 1 | 2018-07-30 23:33:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | Areas should go up to the edge of the area, not the centerline of the adjacent roads. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61134655 |
| 61125376 by zelstel | 1 | 2018-07-30 23:28:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | access=no or access=private? Private means there's permission that can be granted, no means nobody can use it. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61125376 |
| 2 | 2018-08-01 17:03:53 UTC | zelstel | I'll correct that. Thanks. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61125376 | |
| 61125273 by zelstel | 1 | 2018-07-30 23:27:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | access=no or access=private? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61125273 |
| 61092559 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-29 21:13:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Neighborhoods as areas is highly preferable to neighborhoods as points. Points tend to only be used where the edges are not readily visible. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61092559 |
| 2 | 2018-07-29 21:20:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61174430 where the changeset comment is: Areas are preferable to nodes to describe areas. | |
| 61109613 by mihaii_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-29 20:53:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | Keeping the turning loops as loops is preferable to simple nodes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61109613 |
| 2 | 2018-07-30 05:27:38 UTC | mihaii_telenav | Hi Paul,Indeed I've modified some of the loops to turning_loops when I've edited road names in residential areas. If you consider keeping the loops as loops instead of turning_loops, and find areas where I've changed them, please feel free to modify them back.Thanks,Mihai | |
| 61058868 by DelaneyWilliams | 1 | 2018-07-29 20:24:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is still a proposed motorway, it hasn't been built yet. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61058868 |
| 61062921 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-29 20:19:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Bad source, not license compatible. OSM data is usable in products for resale, and *does* get sold by Rand McNally, Mapbox, etc. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61062921 |
| 61066491 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-29 20:19:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Bad source, not license compatible. OSM data is usable in products for resale, and *does* get sold by Rand McNally, Mapbox, etc. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61066491 |
| 61029977 by Hotel On March | 1 | 2018-07-28 17:44:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | Have you considered directing your efforts in a productive endeavor? Intentionally introducing inaccurate data wastes your time and ours. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61029977 |
| 61014159 by danuta_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-27 01:54:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is currently under construction still; might check with OklaDOT before changing. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61014159 |
| 2 | 2018-08-08 07:02:26 UTC | danuta_telenav | Hello! In the satellite image of MapBox, the road appear like is not in construction --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61014159 | |
| 60829412 by nammala | 1 | 2018-07-22 17:46:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm curious what's with splits like this? Didn't seem particularly necessary. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60829412 |
| 2 | 2018-07-23 03:57:59 UTC | nammala | Hi Paul, While I am working on fixing Connectivity linters in US I came across this issue where this was caught by self intersecting highways as the way is attached to itself , so I have fixed it by splitting the ways .Regards,nammala | |
| 3 | 2018-07-23 04:03:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | In general that would be best to split off the tail if it's a true self-intersecting way. A loop is not a self-intersecting way. | |
| 4 | 2018-07-23 13:45:59 UTC | nammala | Ya I have done it with respect to best practices of mapping. Will keep that mind in next time and do the editing. | |
| 60875825 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-22 18:08:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is the A |
| 60875737 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-22 18:06:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | I like it, that's a good way to handle a uniquely-Oklahoma thing. Though I'd have gone with cbd_oil instead of CBD_Oil to match the lowercase preference for values. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/6087573... |
| 60785431 by marthaleena | 1 | 2018-07-21 17:23:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | Careful, this messed up the maxheight tagging through here. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60785431 |
| 60781140 by wordenlawfirm | 1 | 2018-07-20 01:20:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam#SEO_SpamOSM is an inappropriate place for ad copy. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60781140 |
| 60778963 by StackKorora | 1 | 2018-07-20 01:12:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Don't forget OSM uses metric units by default, to specify mph, you must add "mph", ie, maxspeed=70 mph --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60778963 |
| 2 | 2018-07-20 01:36:19 UTC | StackKorora | Thanks. Overlooked these. Good catch. Fixed. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60778963 | |
| 60776012 by Razster | 1 | 2018-07-20 01:07:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Good tags, bad geometry. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60776012 |
| 60775931 by Razster | 1 | 2018-07-20 01:04:19 UTC | Paul Johnson | Should have been service, not residential, by the looks of it. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60775931 |
| 60775511 by obubison1 | 1 | 2018-07-20 01:00:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | Geometry counts... --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60775511 |
| 60771838 by Happy Hobo | 1 | 2018-07-20 00:50:03 UTC | Paul Johnson | Phone number is missing the 1 but otherwise looking good. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60771838 |
| 60770931 by DelaneyWilliams | 1 | 2018-07-20 00:48:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Be sure to connect the road to the sidewalk as an intersection. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60770931 |
| 60770659 by andy51edge | 1 | 2018-07-20 00:09:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | Might doublecheck your lanes there, I noticed your ramp change wasn't reflected in the turn lanes. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60770659 |
| 60744268 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-16 02:48:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is that map copyrighted? If so, you'll need permission from the copyright holder in order to use it as a source.Observing the name on the building yourself still fair game, though! --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60744268\... |
| 2 | 2018-07-16 03:22:58 UTC | Jacob Morrison | Just looked and there is no evidence to suggest it is. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60744268 | |
| 60743252 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-16 02:08:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Descriptions are NOT names. Please review https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_rendererPlease also consider engaging in changeset comments when you're asked... |
| 2 | 2018-07-16 02:23:36 UTC | Jacob Morrison | Field House is literally the name of the building. It's not just a description. It's listed on the official campus map as such. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj6gKz6x6LcAhUFW60KHeKBDpUQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fapps.se.edu%... | |
| 3 | 2018-07-16 02:35:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | Well, I stand corrected, please accept my apologies.While we're on the subject of names, I see across the street, there's one enigmatically named OSBDC. What's this stand for? | |
| 4 | 2018-07-16 02:38:33 UTC | Jacob Morrison | Oklahoma Small Business Development Center. I'll change it myself. | |
| 5 | 2018-07-16 02:40:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Awesome, thanks. | |
| 60720607 by Alex Crawford | 1 | 2018-07-15 05:08:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is that speed limit posted on the driveway? Is the driveway open to the general public to access this location without having to call ahead every time? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60720607 |
| 2 | 2018-07-16 00:42:11 UTC | Alex Crawford | Yes that is the posted speed limit, and since it is a business, there is public access only during business hours. The gate is closed after hours --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60720607 | |
| 3 | 2018-07-16 02:39:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Do you know what the hours are for that or where the gate is? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60720607 | |
| 60743497 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-16 02:11:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | JOSM and the building tools plugin will help you up your precision on tracing buildings. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60743497 |
| 2 | 2018-07-16 02:33:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | shop=mall can also apply to areas tagged landuse=retail, not a bad combo for the property lines of a strip mall. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60743497 | |
| 60740839 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 23:25:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_rendererIs "Southeastern Campus Recycling" really the name, or did you add the name tag just to make it render a label? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60740839\... |
| 2 | 2018-07-15 23:28:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is "Shuler Loop Trailhead" really the name of the walkway, or is it supposed to be just a specific trailhead? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60740839 | |
| 60740721 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 23:13:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | "Home Bleachers and Press Box" is not a name, it's a description. Don't use the name tag for this. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60740721 |
| 60740605 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 23:12:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this really named, or was a name tag added just to make it render a label? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60740605 |
| 60740594 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 23:11:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | Does this name apply to the stadium or just the field? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60740594 |
| 60715727 by Happy Hobo | 1 | 2018-07-15 05:05:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | I think you meant to create notes instead of tourism attractions. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60715727 |
| 2 | 2018-07-15 11:05:52 UTC | Happy Hobo | You are correct. Unfortunately,this app “maps.me” does not support doing so. I have to pick something from it’s menu to be corrected later. | |
| 3 | 2018-07-15 11:06:49 UTC | Happy Hobo | I’m looking for a better app. I think I have one, though it has other issues. | |
| 4 | 2018-07-15 15:19:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | I've been pretty happy with Osmand, myself. | |
| 60722706 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 05:19:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | Edges of the residential area should be congruent with the landuse, I moved the edges to the visible fenceline and edge of University Boulevard's right of way. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60722706 |
| 60722587 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 05:15:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | Precision counts on geometry. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60722587 |
| 60722549 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 05:12:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Responding to your changeset comment: This is a problem with Snapchat's map, NOT the map data. File a bug report with Snapchat, don't inaccurately tag. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60722549 ... |
| 60720874 by Alex Crawford | 1 | 2018-07-15 05:10:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this 10 MPH speed limit posted? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60720874 |
| 2 | 2018-07-16 00:43:06 UTC | Alex Crawford | Yes --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60720874 | |
| 60704309 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 04:03:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | these named landuse=residential housing developments would be better tagged as place=neighborhood instead. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60704309 |
| 60703764 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:58:54 UTC | Paul Johnson | landuse should only contain the land used, not intervening streets or unrelated areas. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60703764 |
| 60703727 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:58:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not all of these appear to be university type buildings, some are definitely residential or retail... --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60703727 |
| 60703392 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:54:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | ways need to connect at a node to be routable, and oneway=yes should be added when the way is one-way. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60703392 |
| 60702947 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:27:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | Pretty close, though name=. is almost certainly not accurate. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60702947 |
| 60702668 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:25:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | That's a little better, but close attention to precision is very useful in tight spaces like universities. I've refined the building geometry on campus. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60702668 |
| 60699859 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:18:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not a bad start; I refined this into a relation to avoid including parts that aren't part of the university grounds. It's best to avoid tying areas to roadway centerlines, however. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60699859 ... |
| 60699773 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:17:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like this could have been changed to highway=service with the name tag removed. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60699773 |
| 60699571 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:12:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | Try sport=tennis, leisure=pitch instead. Name should be just the name, not a description. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60699571 |
| 60699507 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:11:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | Names should not contain abbreviations. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60699507 |
| 60699495 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-15 03:10:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | name=* by itself usually isn't a useful bit unless you're going back later to unify the named node with an area and move the name tag to the area. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60699495 |
| 60699169 by Jacob Morrison | 1 | 2018-07-14 15:38:54 UTC | Paul Johnson | Adding this to the tags of the area of the field would have labelled it. I've merged this with that area. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60699169 |
| 60677296 by teodorab_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-14 15:31:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | Missed expanding S to South, and the bus route relation shouldn't have been added to one side. I fixed it. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60677296 |
| 2 | 2018-07-17 11:40:43 UTC | teodorab_telenav | Thank you --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60677296 | |
| 60672913 by joepmerrittOKla | 1 | 2018-07-14 15:17:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:payment --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60672913 |
| 60645599 by teodorab_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-13 03:25:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Transitions should start at the gore tip, not before or after, on ramps. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60645599 |
| 2 | 2018-07-13 08:04:48 UTC | teodorab_telenav | Hello Paul, Can you be more specific? | |
| 3 | 2018-07-14 14:49:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | For example, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/placement#Motorway_exit and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/placement#Motorway_exit_2 | |
| 4 | 2018-07-17 12:59:02 UTC | teodorab_telenav | Hello Paul,Thank you for the informations. | |
| 60594408 by Alex Crawford | 1 | 2018-07-12 03:23:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | the name field is not for declaring access. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60594408 |
| 2 | 2018-07-14 04:35:59 UTC | Alex Crawford | Yeah, that isn't the best place to declare access. But the places I labeled as private driveways aren't even roads, they are only driveways and really shouldn't be on the map --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets... | |
| 3 | 2018-07-14 14:05:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | Driveways do belong on the map, and there's even a way to tag private driveways.highway=serviceservice=drivewayaccess=private | |
| 60656321 by lonnyll | 1 | 2018-07-13 04:12:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | There we go, I changed it to service, since it's a driveway. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60656321 |
| 60646924 by teodorab_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-13 03:42:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Most likely correct but for the wrong reason. This is in Tulsa County, Oregon; not Ada County, Idaho. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60646924 |
| 2 | 2018-07-13 07:43:15 UTC | teodorab_telenav | Hello Paul,I reversed the changes.Best regards, Teodora | |
| 60644076 by teodorab_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-13 03:24:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | Might want to use dd-MON-yyyy (ie, 4 SEP 2018) when specifying dates to avoid confusion. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60644076 |
| 60567271 by teodorab_telenav | 1 | 2018-07-11 01:22:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Why would this not be one-way? Granted, debatable if stubs count as highway=construction but not sure oneway=no comes from at all. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60567271 |
| 2 | 2018-07-12 08:22:29 UTC | teodorab_telenav | Hello Paul,Acording to the sattelite imagery, that segment of road it isn't anymore under construction. For me, there is no logical explanation that the segment to be one way, because is a cul-de-sac way, so it should be both-way.Best regards,Teodora | |
| 3 | 2018-07-13 03:14:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Right, but it is a stub that isn't intended to be bidirectional, it's intended to be used for future addition to this way. It's not two-way. | |
| 4 | 2018-07-13 08:32:11 UTC | teodorab_telenav | Right, i undestand your point of view. But according with the current situation ( until the stub will be usable) i thing that is is not oneway. My argument is that the oneway can not start from a node that doesn't connect yet with another node/way. When the link will be finished, than we could app... | |
| 60559571 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-07-11 01:18:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | Adding sidewalks as separate footways is preferable. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60559571 |
| 2 | 2018-07-11 01:55:14 UTC | DACameron | I thought so at first too, but then got disillusioned by some separate ways that I added and didn't like how they would have affected pedestrian routing. I did more research and became convinced by the arguments that tagging the roadway is better. There doesn't seem to be any consensus on this top... | |
| 3 | 2018-07-12 04:28:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Blind navigation, for one. Tagging the way as sidewalk might work for situations like a cycleway where the sidewalk is part of the same pavement and not separated by a curb or grass or what have you. Tagging the sidewalk separately is better when there's an obstacle like a curb in the way between ... | |
| 4 | 2018-07-12 04:30:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | Basically, more detail is better than less detail, more information is better than simplified information. I might speed through and just tag sidewalk=whatever on the main way as a rough cut, if I fancy doing some detail mapping on something, I might then search for sidewalk=* !highway=footway to g... | |
| 5 | 2018-07-12 04:31:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | Also potentially a safety boon for AR games like Pokemon, since I understand there's some in-game elements that spawn based on the presence of sidewalks, having a separate way for the sidewalks will tend to have these spawn farther from the right-of-way centerline and closer to the actual pedestrian... | |
| 60632376 by Gmclean48 | 1 | 2018-07-12 03:52:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Beautiful contribution, and nicely tagged. Especially if the ref=* numbers line up to the number visible on the hydrants! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60632376 |
| 60631295 by lonnyll | 1 | 2018-07-12 03:50:55 UTC | Paul Johnson | Questionable removal since it's definitely there; I'd have split the way, tagged the private section as access=private and updated the other tags on the new private way as necessary. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60631295 ... |
| 2 | 2018-07-12 17:40:51 UTC | lonnyll | Thanks for the information. I added the section back in with private tag. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60631295 | |
| 60594597 by Darkskynet | 1 | 2018-07-12 03:31:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | WOW you're a fast learn! Nice job! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60594597 |
| 60594432 by Alex Crawford | 1 | 2018-07-12 03:28:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | Where are you getting these maxspeeds from? I don't think private homes typically post speed limits. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60594432 |
| 60560680 by Darkskynet | 1 | 2018-07-11 01:21:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK start to building mapping; a tighter attention to detail is appreciated on geometry. This may be substantially easier to achieve in JOSM than id. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60560680 |
| 2 | 2018-07-11 01:35:50 UTC | Darkskynet | Okay, thanks. I will get JOSM and use that for my building edits for now on. | |
| 60558471 by Gmclean48 | 1 | 2018-07-11 01:16:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Be sure to check for source:maxspeed=* and remove/update as necessary if you change maxspeed=*. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60558471 |
| 60555224 by Darkskynet | 1 | 2018-07-11 01:09:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Be sure to be mindful of route relations when editing ways with road, bicycle, bus, etc routes on them. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60555224 |
| 60516113 by wxman80 | 1 | 2018-07-08 20:50:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Well, a cemetery. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60516113 |
| 2 | 2018-07-08 21:42:55 UTC | wxman80 | Apologies for the newbie mistake - I didn't realized it used my comment from a previous mark-up that was a baseball field (this one is a cemetery). --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60516113 | |
| 60481374 by PopeBruce | 1 | 2018-07-07 21:17:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is two orthagonally rectangualar buildings, not one single building. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60481374 |
| 2 | 2018-07-07 21:18:03 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60481374 | |
| 60481275 by PopeBruce | 1 | 2018-07-07 21:17:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | A tighter level of attention to geometry would be appreciated. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60481275 |
| 60389485 by MatchesMalone06 | 1 | 2018-07-07 17:08:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not a bad start. Geometry could use some help. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60389485 |
| 60376453 by Dennis Dugger | 1 | 2018-07-03 16:40:37 UTC | user_5359 | Welcome to OSM! Please have of short look on the newest version of your entry. You used same very unusually key to notice the address and miss also to key for the shop definition. |
| 2 | 2018-07-07 16:59:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | Close enough to get someone else to fix it up for you on the tagging. Feel free to take a look at the tagging now for the correct tagging. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60376453 | |
| 60359774 by ChassidysMommy | 1 | 2018-07-03 02:52:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | Don't forget to add intersection nodes where highways (including footways) cross. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60359774 |
| 60294200 by Magick93 | 1 | 2018-07-02 03:33:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Missed expanding the abbreviation for East. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60294200 |
| 2 | 2018-07-02 05:11:14 UTC | Magick93 | Thank you Paul I was suspecting I should had done it --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60294200 | |
| 59948539 by SProvost | 1 | 2018-06-22 00:08:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | Doesn't look bad, but lanes shouldn't be used on laneless streets. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59948539 |
| 2 | 2018-06-26 14:04:20 UTC | SProvost | Thanks for your feedback Paul. It's actually the first time I create new features in OSM, I normally only edit existing ones. So all constructive feedback is welcome. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59948539 | |
| 3 | 2018-06-30 14:57:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | At least in the US and Canada, there's an understanding that the only time lanes=* should be tagged on a street with no painted lanes is where the lines are missing due to lack of maintenance. These streets, lanes=2 isn't appropriate because there's no lanes nor evidence that lanes were ever painte... | |
| 4 | 2018-06-30 16:14:02 UTC | bhousel | It's totally ok to add lanes tags to laneless streets. | |
| 5 | 2018-06-30 18:06:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | That really seems a lot like just making stuff up at that point, bhousel. | |
| 6 | 2018-07-01 10:37:30 UTC | MikeN | I also don't know of a convention in the US and Canada where it is incorrect to add lanes to stripeless roads. | |
| 7 | 2018-07-01 11:49:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | How is it not geofiction to do so? | |
| 8 | 2018-07-01 18:27:52 UTC | MikeN | It explicitly models the road as 2 traffic flows where normal size vehicles pass each other, as well as differentiating from 1 lane roads where one vehicle would need to back up to an opening to pass. | |
| 9 | 2018-07-01 18:42:55 UTC | Paul Johnson | Except on streets like this, that's not really reliably possible when someone's parked on one or both sides of the street unless you're on something singletrack. You make a strong argument for tagging width=* after measuring it, though. | |
| 60056945 by Andrew Matheny | 1 | 2018-06-24 23:36:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | There seems to be a trend in your changesets in unnecessarily upgrading highway=* tags where it's not warranted. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60056945 |
| 2 | 2018-06-25 14:07:51 UTC | Andrew Matheny | Generally speaking, arterials in urban/suburban areas receive a highway=secondary while collectors get a highway=tertiary. Even though they're laid out in a grid pattern and some only have two lanes, it seems pretty intuitive that these are arterial roadways from a functional classification standpoi... | |
| 3 | 2018-06-30 14:55:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | While I understand the COG's ideas are a bit aspirational, these tend to be pretty minor roads. You updated 88th Street to tertiary, for example, and I'm not even sure where the COG is getting that idea considering the only thing that really seperates it from any other side street in the neighborho... | |
| 4 | 2018-07-05 14:31:44 UTC | Andrew Matheny | Fair enough. If you think the tertiary tags are more warranted, I'm not going to pretend to know someone who lives in the area :) | |
| 60235541 by phidauex | 1 | 2018-06-29 01:47:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not sure these streets inside the apartment complex are actually named. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60235541 |
| 2 | 2018-06-29 02:01:37 UTC | phidauex | Checked against streetside imagery and you are right, don't seem to be any signs. TIGER is further off in Tulsa than I'm used to, will pay closer attention. | |
| 3 | 2018-06-29 04:06:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Yeah, it's nowhere near as far off as Portland, Oregon was, though. My god when I was the only serious editor there, that was like, "Why did we ever import this?" bad. | |
| 60264742 by Joshuajon | 1 | 2018-06-29 04:01:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | names are not descriptions. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60264742 |
| 60212866 by marthaleena | 1 | 2018-06-29 03:39:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not sure that was really an improvement in geometry. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60212866 |
| 2 | 2018-06-29 07:39:16 UTC | marthaleena | Thanks for highlighting .I was working on fixing the crossing highway on the opposite segment, I simplified geometry by merging them.I changed the geometry and straightened it now. | |
| 60211840 by marthaleena | 1 | 2018-06-29 03:22:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | Connecting a sidewalk with a landuse isn't ideal. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60211840 |
| 2 | 2018-06-29 08:26:36 UTC | marthaleena | Thanks for highlighting.I did this by mistake ,removed the connected highway nodes with landuse now and will be careful. | |
| 60235572 by phidauex | 1 | 2018-06-29 01:40:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | I used to live in this RV park, again, not an intentionally bad edit, but this defintiely has no name. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60235572 |
| 2 | 2018-06-29 01:53:00 UTC | phidauex | Got it, sorry for the bad import | |
| 60235749 by phidauex | 1 | 2018-06-29 01:37:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not an intentionally bad edit, just part of Lincoln Avenue. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60235749 |
| 60205755 by freebeer | 1 | 2018-06-28 03:56:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm glad someone rolled this back, probably would have been a bit suspect if I had. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60205755 |
| 60133523 by fredgolzar | 1 | 2018-06-25 04:01:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | You're probably boned, since the internet doesn't forget and public records entities like your local government are likely to re-add the address to the map anyway.But what is clear is randomly editing OpenStreetMap is not the way to accomplish your goal, and degrades the map for everyone. ... |
| 2 | 2018-06-27 08:07:44 UTC | freebeer | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 60205755 where the changeset comment is: restore imported Los Angeles USofA buidings and drinking water located in bella Italia that were deleted for no reason or on false grounds. | |
| 60128403 by tecsun | 1 | 2018-06-24 23:04:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | Don't abbreviate in name=*, so instead of SW, use Southwest. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60128403 |
| 60128121 by Rugrats Angelica | 1 | 2018-06-24 23:03:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Where in the world did you ever get the idea Guymon changed its name? --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60128121 |
| 60110535 by 25or6to4 | 1 | 2018-06-24 03:56:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Found the split in the curve to the new name. Also found the extension. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60110535 |
| 60078668 by Andrew Matheny | 1 | 2018-06-23 16:02:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | Elwood's not really major enough to warrant an upgrade. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60078668 |
| 60033920 by mihaii_telenav | 1 | 2018-06-22 01:16:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK 11 actually does traverse the link. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60033920 |
| 2 | 2018-06-22 06:47:05 UTC | mihaii_telenav | Hi Paul,Thanks for your input, and also thanks for adding it back on the link.Might have been a mistake from my side. Usually links don't have ref info on them. As long as they're in a road relation they should be ok.Mihai | |
| 60019889 by dnoel1 | 1 | 2018-06-22 01:02:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | height=0 implies a two-dimensional object, probably not what was intended. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60019889 |
| 60019777 by dnoel1 | 1 | 2018-06-22 01:01:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks OK, but adding name=Test and removing building=yes doesn't look so good. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60019777 |
| 60006202 by FlashFood | 1 | 2018-06-22 01:00:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | William Charles Martin Park? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60006202 |
| 2 | 2018-06-22 03:46:20 UTC | FlashFood | I honestly don't know if that's what it is, I haven't lived in Tecumseh very long and wasn't familiar with the park. Feel free to change if you can find something showing it is. I just went off what I could find --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbo... | |
| 59874377 by istvanv_telenav | 1 | 2018-06-17 17:33:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is still closed and under construction. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59874377 |
| 2 | 2018-06-18 06:37:01 UTC | istvanv_telenav | Based on sat images and mapillary street view it doesn't look like it is in contruction, and that was the source of my edit, thanks for doing the updates --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59874377 ... | |
| 59874124 by dubsadsfa | 1 | 2018-06-17 17:23:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Wow, that was some sloppy geometry. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59874124 |
| 59854736 by DelaneyWilliams | 1 | 2018-06-15 03:29:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | Close, but don't bind closed area edges to the road centerlines |
| 59842222 by RoadGeek_MD99 | 1 | 2018-06-15 03:27:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not sure how much interest you have in Oklahoma County, but I'm working on https://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/11 right now. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59842222 |
| 59796231 by Iowa Kid | 1 | 2018-06-13 23:37:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | The correct format for phone tags would be phone= 1-xxx-yyy-zzz, not (xxx) yyy-zzzz --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59796231 |
| 59791171 by DelaneyWilliams | 1 | 2018-06-13 00:10:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | Kind of an OK start, but landuse should be for the full lot, not individual buildings (building=residential works for residential buildings). --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59791171 |
| 59779952 by Iowa Kid | 1 | 2018-06-12 23:52:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | 1-918-258-7878 would be the correct format for phone tags. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59779952 |
| 59754704 by flippmoke | 1 | 2018-06-12 03:09:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | Description covered it, no need to tag a name if it doesn't have a name. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59754704 |
| 59654504 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-06-09 17:23:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | This was split intentionally for the turn lane tagging. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59654504 |
| 2 | 2018-06-09 19:21:30 UTC | DACameron | I don't understand. I saw that the ways were tagged differently and I thought that I made sure not to merge them and destroy that info. What did I do wrong? There was a whole ~50' section of road missing for some reason. --- Published using OSMCha: https://... | |
| 3 | 2018-06-09 20:57:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Merging the segments completely smashed all the three segments tags together. Wondering if we found a weird edge case problem in id. | |
| 4 | 2018-06-10 02:55:30 UTC | DACameron | That's strange. I thought I made certain NOT to merge them. I don't know what went wrong. I know you don't seem to mind, but I'm sorry you had to fix it. To be honest, I've been avoiding making changes to streets because I'm afraid of messing them up. There's a mile section of road by my house ... | |
| 5 | 2018-06-10 13:34:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | JOSM makes changes a bit more clear, and if you're not sure what you just did, you can always bring up the undo/redo queue and step backwards and forwards. Also a lot more paint styles available to help visualize what your edit is about to do | |
| 59675844 by flippmoke | 1 | 2018-06-09 17:30:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | Go to the Census, Wikipedia isn't a valid source for OpenStreetMap, they're not license compatible. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59675844 |
| 2 | 2018-06-09 17:43:42 UTC | flippmoke | The Oklahoma City population is off as well, are we counting suburbs for these major city populations. Even when we compare to census they are off... --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59675844 | |
| 3 | 2018-06-09 20:35:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Understandable. Not having a population listed at all may be preferable until we can get a public domain or government source just so we don't run into licensing issues with Wikipedia. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com... | |
| 59675113 by flippmoke | 1 | 2018-06-09 17:27:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Getting pretty good with the geometry! If you're looking to move up to an editor that handles the kinds of edits you're doing a little easier, you might take a look at JOSM. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59675113 ... |
| 59663132 by wordenlawfirm | 1 | 2018-06-09 17:25:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is an inappropriate place to post ad copy. OpenStreetMap is not your personal spam site. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59663132 |
| 59599199 by maxerickson | 1 | 2018-06-06 23:13:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | This may be a duplicate of Oklahoma Surgical Hospital. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59599199 |
| 2 | 2018-06-07 00:42:32 UTC | maxerickson | They both occupy the building. OSH is larger, PSH is pretty small, barely a hospital, but they are separate specialty hospitals. | |
| 59586763 by dinkydonuts | 1 | 2018-06-06 23:06:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | This entire thing is Kohl's? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59586763 |
| 2 | 2018-06-06 23:12:43 UTC | dinkydonuts | Thanks for pointing out the mistake. I'll adjust it. | |
| 59546874 by cocoaKokoro | 1 | 2018-06-04 21:40:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | What's your source for this data, and what's the copyright? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59546874 |
| 2 | 2018-06-04 22:13:24 UTC | cocoaKokoro | Source for Twisters cuisine type is Wikipedia and publically available sources about that restaurant chain. And for Sopapilla’s I used publically available data, for example the cuisine type is repeated in interviews with their head chef, their official website, and on their official name &ldq... | |
| 59532014 by oanac2_telenav | 1 | 2018-06-04 21:37:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | Nice catch. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59532014 |
| 59527602 by oanac2_telenav | 1 | 2018-06-04 21:32:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | This even had a source:name on it. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59527602 |
| 59509345 by maxerickson | 1 | 2018-06-04 21:18:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | Nice catch. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59509345 |
| 59498118 by maxerickson | 1 | 2018-06-03 05:58:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | This could probably be a city instead of a town given that's what the state considers it. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59498118 |
| 2 | 2018-06-03 20:46:56 UTC | maxerickson | Like I said last time, if you make everything a place=city then the place= value is useless as a rendering hint, because they are all the same. Clinton doesn't have similar prominence to Tulsa or Oklahoma City. | |
| 3 | 2018-06-03 22:10:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Oklahoma also has the concept of towns as a seperate incorporated entity. Maybe OKC and Tulsa need something higher than city. | |
| 4 | 2018-06-03 23:18:59 UTC | maxerickson | Another possibility is to not try to directly map the type of incorporation into the place= value. It could be one consideration when setting the placde= value or tracked in a separate tag or just ignored entirely.I think the border_type tag on administrative boundaries generally tracks the styl... | |
| 59450444 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-06-02 02:58:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | This could also be leisure=campsite or leisure=caravan_site --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59450444 |
| 2 | 2018-06-02 02:58:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | This could also be leisure=campsite or leisure=caravan_site --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59450444 | |
| 3 | 2018-06-03 15:15:57 UTC | DACameron | Ok. It was a little ambiguous. Edmond's information about it sometimes calls it Scissortail Park. Scissortail Campground seems to be more common though, and that's what the signs along the road say. I need to correct the spelling anyway, so I'll update the tag. | |
| 59426552 by hoream_telenav | 1 | 2018-06-01 03:13:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | There is no median on the block between the bike path ramp and Riverside Parkway. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59426552 |
| 59423193 by oanac2_telenav | 1 | 2018-06-01 03:00:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is the very foot of Janeway Avenue. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59423193 |
| 59422744 by hoream_telenav | 1 | 2018-06-01 02:50:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | The comma is part of the name. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59422744 |
| 59413990 by Eephuchah | 1 | 2018-05-31 02:10:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | Opening hours could use some work, best to map as a building with a node if the interior boundaries can't be determined. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59413990 |
| 2 | 2018-05-31 02:12:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | opening_hours tag also needed some work. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59413990 | |
| 3 | 2018-05-31 02:33:08 UTC | Eephuchah | The restaurant occupies the corner of that building, hence the name Rincon. Are you suggesting that I outline the whole building and then add a node at the corner?With regard to the opening hours, what do you mean by "work" exactly? To me the hours are self-explanatory: Sun - Thur: 11a... | |
| 4 | 2018-05-31 03:30:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Basically yes. Nodes are great when the approximate center is known but not the outline. Opening hours was close, but can be tricky. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hoursI updated both with a better way of handling the situation, so that's live there now if you take a look. | |
| 5 | 2018-05-31 23:07:38 UTC | Eephuchah | Thank you for your guidance and corrections. I looked at the wiki on opening hours and see the need for machine-readable consistency across the database. I now understand why nodes are better: buildings have greater longevity than the businesses that occupy them. This was a good learning exercise fo... | |
| 6 | 2018-05-31 23:15:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Well, nodes aren't always better. If the entire closed way (area) applies to the amenity or shop or whatever, then tagging the closed way is better than tagging a node. Malls make this a tricky edge case for both. | |
| 59413922 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-05-31 13:23:44 UTC | hoream_telenav | Hi Paul, according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link, in US slip road/ramps shouldn't have name... |
| 2 | 2018-05-31 17:42:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | While it's more common for links to not have names, there are situations where links and ramps do have names. It's not an always situation. | |
| 59409428 by BillCash | 1 | 2018-05-31 02:07:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | No need to add a node when you're mapping it as an area. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59409428 |
| 2 | 2018-05-31 02:07:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | No need to add a node when you're mapping it as an area. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59409428 | |
| 3 | 2018-05-31 02:07:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | No need to add a node when you're mapping it as an area. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59409428 | |
| 4 | 2018-05-31 02:07:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | No need to add a node when you're mapping it as an area. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59409428 | |
| 5 | 2018-05-31 02:07:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | No need to add a node when you're mapping it as an area. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59409428 | |
| 59378852 by Zack232 | 1 | 2018-05-30 01:25:19 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this park on both in the middle and on part of the outside of the traffic circle? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59378852 |
| 2 | 2018-05-31 04:52:18 UTC | Zack232 | I edited it slighty, accidentally had a building included. The grassy area has gardens in spring with benches, and then there is a plaza off the south road with a fountain. The center area has a plaque that reads Centennial Park at Cordell square, so I believe the whole thing is included. The plaza ... | |
| 59355325 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-30 01:20:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Any idea what E.C. stands for? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59355325 |
| 2 | 2018-05-30 01:20:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Any idea what E.C. stands for? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59355325 | |
| 3 | 2018-05-30 03:59:52 UTC | DACameron | No. In the little bit of history that I was able to track down, the man for which the park is named was consistently referred to as E.C. | |
| 59268710 by hoream_telenav | 1 | 2018-05-28 05:15:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | C'mon, man, look at what's going on before retagging. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59268710 |
| 2 | 2018-05-29 05:28:22 UTC | hoream_telenav | hey Paul, if the geometry is drawn like it is now, I think that part should be one way; otherwise geometry should be changed | |
| 3 | 2018-05-30 00:08:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | If you look at virtually any aerial imagery, you'll notice there's a median grouping the eastbound left turn lane with the westbound lanes here. | |
| 59326503 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-28 07:09:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this officially a park? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59326503 |
| 2 | 2018-05-28 14:59:24 UTC | DACameron | This area is maintained by OKC Parks & Rec. and is listed on the website that I cited. I wouldn't have tagged it as one otherwise. How would you have tagged it? | |
| 3 | 2018-05-28 17:24:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | I think you got it right, just seemed like an unusual park. | |
| 59266376 by hoream_telenav | 1 | 2018-05-28 04:32:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | This was renamed to MLK years and years ago. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59266376 |
| 59114377 by DymplzRN | 1 | 2018-05-20 17:30:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | Doesn't look like there's a street anywhere near here, and your node has no tags. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59114377 |
| 59112646 by sfontravel | 1 | 2018-05-20 00:08:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | footway or path? --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59112646 |
| 2 | 2018-05-20 02:09:22 UTC | sfontravel | Good point! I went back and checked, a sign says bicycles stay on paths, so it is a path. Thanks for that question | |
| 3 | 2018-05-20 02:23:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem. Finer point of British English influence on mapping in the US.footway - Trails and sidewalks intended primarily or only for foot travel, usually too narrow for two bikes to pass each other. Assumes bicycles are not allowed. Add bicycle=yes if bicycles are allowed.path - Multiu... | |
| 4 | 2018-05-20 02:56:01 UTC | sfontravel | Well, guess then I should live up to some German precision. Changed it. Something I have to hand over into the hands of someone using a more sophisticated editor than iD is to convert the footpaths inside the "boot" to flowerbeds. There's actually no paths. | |
| 5 | 2018-05-20 04:45:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK. I take it you're not local to the area? For some reason I got into my head that you might have been a new mapper. | |
| 59066264 by Lucidit918 | 1 | 2018-05-19 23:18:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please consider reviewing https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59066264 |
| 55451528 by yaswap | 1 | 2018-05-19 03:00:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Just noticed this, that was an inaccurate edit, the road just opened today.https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OKDOT/bulletins/1f10dd9It should have remained as construction until it opened. |
| 59035960 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-18 01:38:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | Any idea what L.D. stands for? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59035960 |
| 2 | 2018-05-30 04:15:48 UTC | DACameron | It most likely refers to a Lester Daniel Lacy. The one news article that I can find about the donation of the park's land is behind a paywall. Every reference that I can find commonly calls him L.D. It is also possible that the park is named for his son, L.D. Jr., though it seems he commonly went... | |
| 59035768 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-18 01:38:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Any idea what E. W. stands for in this case? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59035768 |
| 2 | 2018-05-30 04:18:46 UTC | DACameron | According to a news article from 1985 that I found, the park was named for Ezel Willie Perry. | |
| 58999012 by WiggleBee | 1 | 2018-05-16 00:48:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | traffic_signals=signal isn't a useful tag. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58999012 |
| 58970703 by 3DEZR | 1 | 2018-05-16 00:40:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | Use "Drive" instead of "Dr" please. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58970703 |
| 58970524 by 3DEZR | 1 | 2018-05-16 00:39:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | Use "Road" instead of "Rd" please. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58970524 |
| 58969351 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-16 00:25:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | The crosswalks could use a little work, since they shouldn't connect in the middle of the intersection but the way you're supposed to traverse the intersection. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58969351 |
| 2 | 2018-05-16 00:30:58 UTC | DACameron | Right. Good point. I wasn't thinking last night since I've made proper crosswalks before. I've seen elsewhere that people have connected sidewalks to the centers of intersections before and I guess that's what I was imitating for some unknown reason. I'll fix them this evening. | |
| 58968877 by sar_OK | 1 | 2018-05-16 00:24:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like you left the note still on it. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58968877 |
| 58938493 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-15 00:27:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | opening_hours=05:00-22:00 works for the hours. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58938493 |
| 2 | 2018-05-15 01:57:10 UTC | DACameron | Oh. I should have guessed that there was a tag for that. Thank you. | |
| 3 | 2018-05-15 02:01:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem. JOSM has a really solid, but basic, editor for it, and for more advanced tagging (or generating for iD), there's http://openingh.openstreetmap.de/evaluation_tool/?EXP=&lat=35.4431555&lon=-97.3440731&mode=2 and another handy tool for generating opening_hours at http://projets... | |
| 58914789 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-13 03:54:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | These might be good to update as administrative areas replacing the landuse tagging as well (I know you weren't the one who tagged them as landuse) --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58914789 |
| 2 | 2018-05-13 04:05:13 UTC | DACameron | Are you referring to tagging them as HOAs? I know at least one of them is, probably two. I'm not certain about the others, but I could look them up. | |
| 3 | 2018-05-13 17:14:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dneighbourhood | |
| 4 | 2018-05-15 02:40:44 UTC | DACameron | Ah, I understand. Thank you. | |
| 58907111 by moepower | 1 | 2018-05-12 19:14:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | Was able to get better alignment with the Digital Globe Premium Imagery. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58907111 |
| 58777230 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-09 00:19:03 UTC | Paul Johnson | Whoops that was probably me. I take it you got better knowledge of that spot? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58777230 |
| 2 | 2018-05-09 00:55:22 UTC | DACameron | Yeah. I live there. I went and checked to make sure because I couldn't remember a path through. | |
| 3 | 2018-05-09 02:01:42 UTC | Paul Johnson | Well, mybad. The bollards at the end of the way approaching from the south looked like the setup for a bike cut through. Nice catch! | |
| 58794862 by omip | 1 | 2018-05-09 00:21:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 58803843 where the changeset comment is: Removing apparent experimental edit. |
| 2 | 2018-05-09 00:27:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hi there!Thanks for your interest in OpenStreetMap. If you're interested in helping improve the map, feel free to ask for help. If you're looking to just draw on a map, OpenGeoFiction may be a more appropriate venue. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published us... | |
| 57255675 by omip | 1 | 2018-03-17 04:29:00 UTC | user_5359 | Welcome to OSM! I didn't see any crossing on different aerial images. |
| 2 | 2018-05-09 00:26:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 58803893 where the changeset comment is: Removing apparent experimental edit. | |
| 58721121 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 18:46:37 UTC | Paul Johnson | The park path looks good now, but the sidewalk would qualify as a footway. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58721121 |
| 2 | 2018-05-07 03:37:49 UTC | DACameron | @Paul JohnsonPlease explain why. I'm new and don't understand the finer points of applying the tags. I looked up the ordinance and in Oklahoma City bicycles are allowed on sidewalks except in business districts. | |
| 3 | 2018-05-07 03:43:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Sure, basically, if it only allows foot traffic or designed only for foot traffic, it's highway=footway (add bicycle=yes if bicycles are allowed). If it's designed as a multiuse path, it's highway=path. If it's a cycleway (biggest way to tell that this is the case is if it has signage and/or pavem... | |
| 4 | 2018-05-07 03:46:10 UTC | DACameron | Ok, thank you. | |
| 5 | 2018-05-07 03:46:47 UTC | DACameron | I may have to revert one or two other changes that I made last night in that case. | |
| 6 | 2018-05-07 03:50:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | I don't think a full revert is necessary in a lot of cases. Parks tend to be paths, but I think most people would lean towards connections to picnic spots and playgrounds to be footways (but not sidewalks; those are the footway next to a vehicular way like a street or cycleway). | |
| 7 | 2018-05-07 03:54:37 UTC | DACameron | Ok. I know that I made a couple of sidewalks next to streets into paths. They were in parks, but adjacent to the street. | |
| 58734853 by mhenson | 1 | 2018-05-07 00:40:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | I changed this over to shop=charity, which seems to be a better fit for thrift shops. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58734853 |
| 2 | 2018-05-07 22:55:39 UTC | mhenson | Thank you! | |
| 58698729 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 05:27:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | footways or paths? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58698729 |
| 58698171 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 05:27:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | footways or paths? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58698171 |
| 58666415 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 05:10:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | Footways or paths? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58666415 |
| 58666069 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 05:09:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | footways or paths? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58666069 |
| 58664989 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 05:06:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | footway or path? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58664989 |
| 58658431 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:57:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | footway or path? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58658431 |
| 58649582 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:52:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Footway or path? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58649582 |
| 58647873 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:50:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | footway or path? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58647873 |
| 58647220 by Richard | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:45:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK 51 is secondary through here (it's not a US highway). --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58647220 |
| 58634404 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:24:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | footway or path? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58634404 |
| 58633689 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:23:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | footway or path? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58633689 |
| 58632555 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:20:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Missed intersections here and I'm not convinced the ways internal to the parks aren't paths, not footways. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58632555 |
| 58631907 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-06 04:18:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | paths are not (exclusively) footways, but footways do preclude non-foot travel (ie, by bicycle) by design. Void of any on the ground restrictions, these appear to be paths, not footways. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.c... |
| 2 | 2018-05-06 04:18:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | paths are not (exclusively) footways, but footways do preclude non-foot travel (ie, by bicycle) by design. Void of any on the ground restrictions, these appear to be paths, not footways. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.c... | |
| 56397970 by OKWXGirl | 1 | 2018-05-04 01:26:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please attach land use areas only to the outline of the area, not the road centerlines. |
| 58572760 by Shmallory0 | 1 | 2018-05-02 00:59:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | website=* should be a full URL --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58572760 |
| 58566137 by DACameron | 1 | 2018-05-02 00:56:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like that might be more like highway=path if bikes aren't banned. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58566137 |
| 58557610 by hanger110 | 1 | 2018-05-02 00:22:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for catching this speed limit, be sure to check and update/remove source:maxspeed=* if it no longer applies. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58557610 |
| 58531211 by TylerMaps | 1 | 2018-04-29 20:37:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like you deleted the area for Vinita High School? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58531211 |
| 2 | 2018-04-30 06:48:26 UTC | freebeer | This changeset was to remove all traces of =school in order to lure Pokémon.The other areas have been altered from building=school to area=yes, then to building=yes, so a trivial changeset revert will fail to restore v1 of everythiing, else I would do it.Pokémon edits and deleting... | |
| 3 | 2018-05-01 00:48:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 58572089 where the changeset comment is: Revert pokemon vandalism | |
| 58535713 by Pmtroutok | 1 | 2018-04-29 20:48:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | I removed some tags irrelevant for a waterway, but I'm not able to see anything like a stream here. If it's just a ditch where water usually follows, waterway=drain makes more sense. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58535713 ... |
| 2 | 2018-04-30 02:44:12 UTC | Pmtroutok | Awesome thanks for your help | |
| 3 | 2018-04-30 03:25:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem. | |
| 58541293 by Pmtroutok | 1 | 2018-04-30 03:21:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | Might doublecheck your geometry on the track, doesn't seem to line up with what is visible on aerial. Also, name=* isn't for descriptions.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/c... |
| 58535153 by Pmtroutok | 1 | 2018-04-29 20:45:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not bad, but the name should only be the name, not a description (I removed name=Pond). Is your driveway open to the public? That's what access=yes means. Did you mean access=private or access=permissive? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.co... |
| 2 | 2018-04-30 02:46:12 UTC | Pmtroutok | Yeah it’s open to public | |
| 58516996 by maxerickson | 1 | 2018-04-29 06:12:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | There's no place in Oklahoma that is 3600 meters in elevation. Smithfarm certainly isn't. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58516996 |
| 2 | 2018-04-29 20:19:57 UTC | maxerickson | I just didn't delete the existing tag. Feel free to go ahead and fix it. | |
| 3 | 2018-04-29 20:32:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | Aaah, OK. | |
| 58512696 by maxerickson | 1 | 2018-04-29 06:06:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | This definitely is a city, it's the only city in Johnston County. Village would be for a much smaller place than this. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58512696 |
| 2 | 2018-04-29 20:25:45 UTC | maxerickson | Just considering population, place=city (in the US) probably starts somewhere around 40,000.A county seat with a smaller population can be a town.There's basically 3 labeling hints, village,town,city. If a population of 3238 is place=city then they won't really ever convey any information, ... | |
| 3 | 2018-04-29 20:32:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | Generally speaking, Oklahoma's been keeping to the state incorporation type to make the town versus city distinction, with village being larger unincorporated places, and hamlets being basically a named crossroads. | |
| 58508199 by dorkmo | 1 | 2018-04-29 05:44:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like a small city street, not a living street. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58508199 |
| 58507397 by dorkmo | 1 | 2018-04-29 05:38:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like this skewed east as well compared to available traces, imagery and the rest of the map. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58507397 |
| 58507375 by dorkmo | 1 | 2018-04-29 05:36:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like two parking lots that was mapped as a single one. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58507375 |
| 58507342 by dorkmo | 1 | 2018-04-29 05:35:54 UTC | Paul Johnson | Parking lot, or just the foot of a street? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58507342 |
| 58507309 by dorkmo | 1 | 2018-04-29 05:34:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | Accidental drag? Looks like the original position slightly west was correct. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58507309 |
| 58507248 by dorkmo | 1 | 2018-04-29 05:32:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this really one-way? Looks like there's markings for both directions between Olive and Broadway. Could you expand on this? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58507248 |
| 58489148 by JanetGeoMC | 1 | 2018-04-29 05:25:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like some houses were tagged landuse=residential instead of building=house. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58489148 |
| 58448401 by bigGREEZY | 1 | 2018-04-27 02:16:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this really the name of this park? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58448401 |
| 2 | 2018-04-27 11:34:33 UTC | bigGREEZY | Yes --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58448401 | |
| 3 | 2018-04-27 13:14:54 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is it not Leaning Elms Park? Looking at Claremore's website, that seems to be the only park on Muskogee Avenue. | |
| 4 | 2018-04-28 01:42:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looking around, the only place I can find that calls it "Park on Muskogee Ave" is Google. Please don't copy from Google, it puts OSM in a bad spot. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#Why_don.27t_you_just_use_Google_Maps.2Fwhoever_for_your_data.3F --- ... | |
| 5 | 2018-04-28 01:44:50 UTC | bigGREEZY | I changed it earlier today | |
| 6 | 2018-04-28 03:03:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks! | |
| 58488399 by JanetGeoMC | 1 | 2018-04-28 02:43:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | Much better. Precision can improve if you really want to get fiddly with it, but better than nothing at all. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58488399 |
| 58484312 by EmilyCorley | 1 | 2018-04-28 02:41:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | I changed this to a playground based on the name. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58484312 |
| 58483717 by EmilyCorley | 1 | 2018-04-28 02:35:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | This street does not connect to this powerline in an intersection. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58483717 |
| 58483576 by EmilyCorley | 1 | 2018-04-28 02:35:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for catching this neighborhood, I was able to line it up to the ESRI imagery available and get it properly connected to the rest of the map. Feel free to take a look now for a better example. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/change... |
| 2 | 2018-04-28 02:35:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for catching this neighborhood, I was able to line it up to the ESRI imagery available and get it properly connected to the rest of the map. Feel free to take a look now for a better example. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/change... | |
| 58479658 by bigGREEZY | 1 | 2018-04-28 02:06:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like a node forming an intersection got dragged many blocks from it's correct location. I fixed it (and updated the courthouse next to it). --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58479658 |
| 58465373 by Cheap Car Insurance Tulsa OK | 1 | 2018-04-27 19:18:47 UTC | user_5359 | Welcome to OSM! I must deleted you node, because you aren’t a church and the node isn’t well placed. Don’t use the geocoder from Google (Google don’t allow this), look on the aerial image and mark the right building! |
| 2 | 2018-04-28 01:50:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 58493259 where the changeset comment is: Spam removal. | |
| 58461822 by Shmallory0 | 1 | 2018-04-28 01:45:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please don't attach areas to the centerlines of waterways and roads, this makes it much more difficult to maintain the centerlines, the area itself, and doesn't accurately reflect the area. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58461... |
| 58010395 by Tsuroo | 1 | 2018-04-15 04:06:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | addr:housenumber should be just the number, ie, "36", and the phone number should be ITU e.123 format, ie, " 1-918-884-3550". In either case, this was also already mapped |
| 2 | 2018-04-27 17:43:49 UTC | Tsuroo | Interesting - You're very right that these already exist in OSM. I was editing this information on my Android phone with OsmAnd and even though I've updated the maps, it still does not show 36 Degrees North in the right spot and it labels the Tulsa Arts District as the Brady District. I'm unsure why... | |
| 3 | 2018-04-27 17:46:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Osmand updates its snapshots once a month, you might download the latest map. Updates are available hourly in Osmand if you get an Osmand Live subscription. | |
| 58459353 by Shmallory0 | 1 | 2018-04-27 02:21:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is that sidewalk really running all the way around that building, and the other into a wall? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459353 |
| 2 | 2018-04-27 02:35:49 UTC | Shmallory0 | There is a sidewalk all the way around the building. It is the Expo center where the county fair is held. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459353 | |
| 3 | 2018-04-27 02:50:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK. Might doublecheck the geometry, one of your new footways is in a wall. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459353 | |
| 4 | 2018-04-27 02:54:22 UTC | Shmallory0 | I will look to correct. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459353 | |
| 5 | 2018-04-27 02:55:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks! | |
| 58459627 by Shmallory0 | 1 | 2018-04-27 02:24:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | Was this sidewalk recently built? I'm not seeing any evidence of it on DigitalGlobe, Bing, or Esri imagery. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459627 |
| 2 | 2018-04-27 02:38:10 UTC | Shmallory0 | No sidewalk, I just see neighborhood people walking right on the side of the road all the time. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459627 | |
| 3 | 2018-04-27 02:51:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK, doesn't count as a footway, then. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459627 | |
| 4 | 2018-04-27 02:58:56 UTC | Shmallory0 | I'll just delete --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459627 | |
| 58459234 by Shmallory0 | 1 | 2018-04-27 02:20:06 UTC | Paul Johnson | Are all of these footways called Mallory Path? Seems a little unlikely. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459234 |
| 2 | 2018-04-27 02:37:04 UTC | Shmallory0 | This path is named after the owner of the property, we have the youth group from the church walk and fish and go on hikes. Just named all of it after the owner. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459234 ... | |
| 3 | 2018-04-27 02:51:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK, so perhaps not entirely terrible, but if they're not named, leave the name off. If they're not open to the public, access=private may be a good idea. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459234 ... | |
| 4 | 2018-04-27 02:58:40 UTC | Shmallory0 | Ok I will take the name off of it. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58459234 | |
| 58427557 by cjzomboy | 1 | 2018-04-27 02:10:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | Enough to tell what was going on, I've edited this spot again in an guess on what you were going for. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58427557 |
| 58416919 by whatfoxknows | 1 | 2018-04-27 01:26:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is that object with the odd geometry a park or a playground, by 177th and Silvehawk? While not impossible that it's also a park, it definitely looks like a playground, but in either case could use a little refinement on the shape. Is the pond at 178th and Silvehawk new? --- ... |
| 58416460 by whatfoxknows | 1 | 2018-04-27 01:24:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Same as previous changeset regarding footway vs path. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58416460 |
| 58412991 by whatfoxknows | 1 | 2018-04-27 01:23:54 UTC | Paul Johnson | Little hard to tell from aerial imagery and I'm not super familiar with the area, but highway=footway is something that implies it's either a sidewalk or has no bicycle access. If bicycles are allowed and it's not a sidewalk, it's probably a path. --- Publish... |
| 58412506 by whatfoxknows | 1 | 2018-04-27 01:21:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | Wow, swing and a hit there! Off to a good start! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58412506 |
| 58385494 by Caleb Philliber | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:41:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | This definitely looks like a concrete bridge on the aerial, and definitely not a footway. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58385494 |
| 2 | 2018-04-25 03:17:37 UTC | Caleb Philliber | What would you classify it as then, since it's for walkers and occasionally bikes only. | |
| 3 | 2018-04-27 00:56:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | That would be a path. | |
| 58384496 by Caleb Philliber | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:40:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | It looks like this actually is a track. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58384496 |
| 2 | 2018-04-25 03:19:32 UTC | Caleb Philliber | I could change it to path but it's for walkers and bikes only. | |
| 3 | 2018-04-27 00:56:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Right, a path would be most appropriate versus footway, which is geared only to pedestrians (or might be open to bikes but isn't designed to handle any real volume of bikes). | |
| 58387880 by JanetGeoMC | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:44:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | name=* should only be the name. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58387880 |
| 58386279 by Caleb Philliber | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:42:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | It doesn't look like any lanes are marked on Wireless Way, only ways with marked lanes get lanes tags. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58386279 |
| 58384525 by Caleb Philliber | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:41:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | I can see signage for cyclists in the shadows, this is definitely not a footway. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58384525 |
| 58384338 by Caleb Philliber | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:39:55 UTC | Paul Johnson | Dirt cycleways are rather not typical, but a dirt path would be more likely, with bicycle=* and foot=* tags as appropriate. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58384338 |
| 58384220 by Caleb Philliber | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:39:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is access=destination correct? That would make sense if "No through traffic" is posted. Also looks like it's correct to have it as a track on the one you changed to footway. Maybe highway=path, but looks like it's suitable for getting a truck down it to maintain the place. So motor_veh... |
| 58355845 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-04-25 01:31:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like the driveways along the northeast side of Fort Sill might need a closer look. I'm trying to untangle it now, but looks like you connected them to the Fort Sill boundary line instead of the road. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com... |
| 57925478 by DougPeterson | 1 | 2018-04-14 23:23:19 UTC | Paul Johnson | Might doublecheck the Bella Vista Bypass, I'm thinking that's probably more like a trunk (even the divided sections) east of it's last interchange with another motorway (if any). Connecting surface streets to motorways directly without a ramp is definitely incorrect. --- \... |
| 2 | 2018-04-15 19:40:14 UTC | DougPeterson | I left all the tagging alone. I just focused on correcting the geometry. The bypass itself was involved in a relation I did not want to deal with. | |
| 3 | 2018-04-16 00:50:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Oh no problem, didn't accuse you of otherwise. Just happened to notice the changeset because of whatever was done over towards Grove and Jay. | |
| 4 | 2018-04-16 10:45:30 UTC | DougPeterson | No problem as well. I also was not sure if and what to change the tagging on the roundabout to as there were a variety of highways going into it. | |
| 5 | 2018-04-16 23:45:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is there any disagreement on my assessment of Bella Vista? If not, I'll pick over it and make the change. | |
| 6 | 2018-04-19 23:09:01 UTC | DougPeterson | No problem here. | |
| 7 | 2018-04-22 00:12:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | Sounds good, I'm looking on DigitalGlobe Premium; is that still accurate imagery for the route? | |
| 8 | 2018-04-22 01:02:29 UTC | DougPeterson | All of the imagery seems to be about the same vintage, somewhat recent but not enough to have the completed rotary. I tended to prefer the alignment on Mapbox and Bing. | |
| 9 | 2018-04-22 01:40:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem, I'm working from DG Premium then, and aligning it to the GPS traces available. | |
| 10 | 2018-04-22 03:24:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | OK, uploading another changeset right now for Bella Vista Bypass. | |
| 58299316 by Doris Bain | 1 | 2018-04-21 22:32:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Crystal Beach Park is already mapped, plus keep in mind proper capitalization and spelling counts, as do putting the tags on the outline object. Please avoid attaching area outlines to road centerlines. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://... |
| 58217726 by MB-UrbanStrategies | 1 | 2018-04-20 03:25:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 58250093 where the changeset comment is: I'm reasonably certain I did not hallucinate seeing this school when I passed it earlier this week. |
| 58232454 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-20 03:22:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | When moving to ref, try CR N0830 instead of verbatim from name. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58232454 |
| 58232561 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-20 03:21:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | Diagonally across a field? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58232561 |
| 58217698 by MB-UrbanStrategies | 1 | 2018-04-20 03:12:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | While the address data may be good, it appears this data may be sourced from a georeferencer that may be using copyrighted data. Additionally, the other data in this appears to be meant for a personal map layer, not for the general consumption of the map. Please consider using Leaflet to project y... |
| 2 | 2018-04-20 03:13:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 58249963 where the changeset comment is: Reverting imported data. | |
| 58178633 by Daniel Jeffries | 1 | 2018-04-18 02:30:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Buildings with holes should be mapped as multipolygons. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58178633 |
| 57957554 by Dulahey | 1 | 2018-04-15 02:12:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | landuse=grass should be landcover=grass. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57957554 |
| 2 | 2018-04-17 02:09:47 UTC | Dulahey | Hmm, can you clarify more? From what I read on the wiki, landcover is not an approved thing yet (even though grass and wood are being used quite a bit) and from what I read on landuse=grass, these areas fit that exactly. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published us... | |
| 3 | 2018-04-17 02:12:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Well, the landuse would be more like highway, since it's a highway infield, but the land cover is grass. | |
| 4 | 2018-04-17 02:16:28 UTC | Dulahey | Oh. I agree there. I had only noticed the area around the detention basin west of the Walmart.As for the grass near highways, I struggled with that one. I agree it should be highway use, but looking at Wakefield, England, which was recommended to use as an example for newbies, they have mappe... | |
| 5 | 2018-04-17 03:34:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm not opposed to landuse=highway, and I'm on the fence about landuse versus landcover for grass. Though for forests, landuse versus landcover, while they may be congruent, can be very different things, for example, when the grove of trees is for forestry products, something that came up a lot whe... | |
| 58077110 by hobbesvsboyle | 1 | 2018-04-15 04:46:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Ideally, landuse matches the landuse, not a whole neighborhood, eg, not crossing roads. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58077110 |
| 2 | 2018-04-15 14:08:03 UTC | hobbesvsboyle | Isn't there a lot of disagreement about that? Anyway, i don't have strong feelings about it, so feel free to delete/improve. | |
| 3 | 2018-04-16 00:39:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | There was some, but it's more or less come down to big areas as a general starting point, but mapping for precision is better. talk-de had a pretty lengthy conversation about it that made it into osm-weekly this week as well. | |
| 4 | 2018-04-16 12:16:19 UTC | hobbesvsboyle | Okay, thanks. I don't map landuse that often and will do some more reading on the currently preferred ways before doing so again. | |
| 5 | 2018-04-16 23:47:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem. It doesn't have to be cadastre perfect (that's not exactly feasible given that often corner monuments end up in publicly inaccessible areas on the back sides of rows of abutting lots, if there's any at all) but what can be discerned from the aerial is often considered "good enough&... | |
| 58104372 by Polyglot | 1 | 2018-04-15 17:25:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for the heads up on this one. I'm checking this as I think the 118 got swapped out. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58104372 |
| 2 | 2018-04-15 17:35:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Are you very interested in mapping Transit in general? MTTA has a lot of really weird routes that dogleg and have variations that only run certain times of day with the same number, and I'm not 100% on how to deal with that. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Publishe... | |
| 3 | 2018-04-15 18:39:22 UTC | Polyglot | Are you using PT_Assistant already? For each variation in itinerary, you need to create a separate route relation. For 'telescopic' lines I'm only mapping the longer variations though. Does MTTA provide GTFS feeds that can be used in OpenStreetMap.org? | |
| 4 | 2018-04-16 00:48:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | I am using PT Assistant, but it's not really much help versus doing it by hand. MTTA's GTFS feed is, to put it __very__ politely, a hot mess, like Apple Maps bad. Stops inside office blocks, routes turning impossibly from surface streets directly onto freeways...if there's a way to screw up the da... | |
| 5 | 2018-04-16 05:21:50 UTC | Polyglot | Having GTFS feeds would help with determining what variations of the lines exist (to create the route relations). It wouldn't help for positioning the stops correctly, that's what we mappers can add to improve the data.I'm mentoring a GSoC project to convert/integrate GTFS to OSM. It would make it... | |
| 58119494 by jflint | 1 | 2018-04-16 00:43:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | Was the new alignment a short-term deal? I believe the curve you removed was a permanent change to the road. I'll try to survey this tomorrow. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58119494 |
| 2 | 2018-04-16 02:05:48 UTC | jflint | I thought that curve was permanent as well but I rode my bike past here last week and it was put back to its previous alignment now with a turn lane. | |
| 58072269 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-15 04:40:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not super familiar with rural route addresses, but is the city name part of the first line address? If not, addr:city would be a better place for that. Likewise, no need to put the city name in the name of a chain, ie, Love's. addr:city will disambiguate for data consumers that don't georeference... |
| 58066785 by Summit Ghimire | 1 | 2018-04-15 04:38:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for the assist on that, do you know where the ends of the 45 zone are, so I can get the missing bits? --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58066785 |
| 58037698 by mvexel | 1 | 2018-04-15 04:19:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Are we mapping unpaved roads as track again? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58037698 |
| 58014354 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-15 04:08:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Fixed 520 Pine, since the whole address was in the addr:street key. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/58014354 |
| 58008014 by Mike - Oklahoma County Assessor | 1 | 2018-04-15 03:59:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | Landuse areas don't get glued to streets, but to the actual edge of the landuse. Ideally, split into smaller areas than entire neighborhoods where the landuse changes, ie, due to a road crossing through, etc. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: h... |
| 57981660 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-15 03:19:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like addr:housename is indeed getting picked up. https://i.imgur.com/ktq88Q8.png --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57981660 |
| 57976724 by Polyglot | 1 | 2018-04-10 20:36:11 UTC | Carnildo | I sure hope you got this right, since there's no way a changeset this big can be properly reviewed. In particular, there's a good chance you've misattributed some things named after Martin Luther, the Protestant reformer, as being named after Martin Luther King Jr., the civil rights activist. (And... |
| 2 | 2018-04-15 03:11:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like there's multiple items in the Tulsa and Sapulpa areas (Two bridges, two streets and an expressway) that you missed. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57976724 | |
| 3 | 2018-04-16 06:54:53 UTC | Polyglot | Hi Paul,Could you add those name:etymology:wikidata tags on those objects. I tried to find them, but couldn't based on the name tag alone (and then I started to map public transport again :-) ) | |
| 57971941 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-15 03:02:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57971941 |
| 57957811 by Dulahey | 1 | 2018-04-15 02:17:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Did this ramp reopen? I might have missed that memo from OklaDOT. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57957811 |
| 2 | 2018-04-17 01:38:04 UTC | Dulahey | Yeah, it was only closed for a couple weeks, irc. I drive by it multiple times every day. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57957811 | |
| 57957538 by HumDum | 1 | 2018-04-15 02:11:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like you edited on two continents? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57957538 |
| 57948572 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-15 01:51:42 UTC | Paul Johnson | Some of these buildings have some geometry that's not congruent with what's available on recent aerial imagery. Might want to refine the shapes a bit. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57948572 |
| 57947997 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-15 01:32:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Phone numbers use ITU E.123 format. So, instead of (580) 555-1212, it would be 1-580-555-1212. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57947997 |
| 57923383 by Dulahey | 1 | 2018-04-14 03:35:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please avoid attaching areas to road centerlines |
| 2 | 2018-04-14 16:11:32 UTC | Dulahey | Thanks for the heads up. I know that rule, not sure what I was thinking when I did this area. | |
| 57990274 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-04-11 03:16:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57990388 where the changeset comment is: Reverting my own terribly vetted changeset. |
| 57843955 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-08 00:54:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is a rather peculiar way to map houses |
| 2 | 2018-04-08 01:19:05 UTC | elmachine | You talking about the alignment or something else ? | |
| 3 | 2018-04-08 17:29:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset had them as nodes rather than outlines. | |
| 57878090 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-08 03:29:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | addr:full or addr:postal might work better than name for the rural route box number. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57878090 |
| 57872601 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-08 03:15:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | US 54 is already the ref, and there is a proper name on this already. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57872601 |
| 57861827 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-08 01:45:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Where the state and the local jurisdictions have two names for the same road, please move the state name to the reg_name=* key. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57861827 |
| 57843682 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-08 00:53:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | The county road number can be moved to the ref tag when adding the name. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57843682 |
| 57843578 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-07 20:00:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | maxspeed:type=* is a little unusual in the US at this point, source:maxspeed=* has generally won out. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57843578 |
| 57819641 by DarkAtone | 1 | 2018-04-05 02:55:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | Your neighborhood spans two continents? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57819641 |
| 2 | 2018-04-05 05:15:03 UTC | Glassman | Usually we save edits in between geographical location, especially as Pauls say, when they span continents. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57819641 | |
| 57817107 by Madi12 | 1 | 2018-04-05 02:53:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Be sure to knock out source:maxspeed if you're changing to a more specific limit. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57817107 |
| 57785660 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-04-05 01:43:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this actually a park, or some kind of commons? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57785660 |
| 57782595 by elmachine | 1 | 2018-04-05 01:42:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | Might doublecheck those speed limits. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57782595 |
| 57754161 by UAN51 | 1 | 2018-04-03 01:03:40 UTC | Andrew Matheny | Hi there-Two things:First, could you explain why this section of the highway should be upgraded to highway=motorway when it only connects a trunk highway to a primary highway? In the US, highway=motorway tagging is (with few rare exceptions) typically reserved for either highways that are ... |
| 2 | 2018-04-03 01:27:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | I also agree this looks like a clear case of trunk. | |
| 3 | 2018-04-03 01:56:14 UTC | UAN51 | Hello Andrew,This section of MO 13 should be a motorway (aka freeway) because it has met the requirements to be a freeway. This section of MO 13 has no at-grade intersections (with the exceptions of the termini), has a median, and has a high speed limit. Freeways are not required to be part of the... | |
| 4 | 2018-04-03 02:06:02 UTC | Paul Johnson | Generally speaking, changeset comments are the best way to contact someone regarding a specific change, plus keeps the whole thing out in the light for others to pick up on.My concerns with this is that OpenStreetMap isn't the AASHTO, and with this transitioning cleanly into surface roadways on ... | |
| 5 | 2018-04-03 02:25:55 UTC | UAN51 | Even though OpenStreetMap is not the AASHTO, keep in mind that the government owns all of the roads and highways. A portion of our tax dollars go to building and maintaining all roads and highways in the USA. OpenStreetMap doesn't own these roads or highways. Walmart Drive is the endpoint of the fre... | |
| 6 | 2018-04-03 02:45:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | What AASHTO or MODOT consider it is not the determining factor for OpenStreetMap when it comes to the highway=* tag. Right now, I don't believe this is a clear enough case of motorway to justify the tag. Eliminate the intersection, slap on a continuously flowing interchange at MO 10 and don't drop... | |
| 7 | 2018-04-03 02:57:29 UTC | UAN51 | If AASHTO, FHWA, or MoDOT does not determine the highway=* tag of a stretch of a road or highway, then what does? OpenStreetMap Wiki says that motorways are Interstate, Freeway, or a divided highway with no at-grade intersections (Source --> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_Road... | |
| 8 | 2018-04-03 03:28:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | It has an at grade intersection, though. Walmart Avenue.Looking through the wiki, it appears that some pages have been gamed a bit away from where things have largely settled in regards to how trunk is typically used in the United States, and various pages aren't in agreement on this anymore. ... | |
| 9 | 2018-04-03 04:02:06 UTC | UAN51 | Walmart Drive is an endpoint of the freeway (as in that's where the freeway ends which I said already). The wiki page I linked you is part of an organization called WikiProject United States. They based their standards off of the US administration; so should all of users editing in the United States... | |
| 10 | 2018-04-03 11:55:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Sorry, intersections even at the end (and going to single carriageway also counts) still counts as an intersection and disqualifies it as a motorway. It wasn't vandalism to change it to trunk, and the government classification doesn't count. | |
| 11 | 2018-04-03 15:31:18 UTC | Andrew Matheny | Thanks for the detailed response.I certainly see the logic in your thought process for why this should be a motorway, but the problem with using AASHTO/FHWA/any other government or industry standards—or even government planning documents—is that their functional classification system... | |
| 12 | 2018-04-03 16:14:02 UTC | UAN51 | @Paul Johnson On a larger scale, I-35 ends at intersections and goes to a city street. I know that I-35 has connections with other Interstates and is an Interstate itself, but I'll let you think about this.@Andrew Matheny It's clear that there is a mix of opinions on how all roads are being tagg... | |
| 13 | 2018-04-04 01:37:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | I 35 probably should be a trunk north of the MN 194 interchange and south of Loop 20 as well. The segment between those two interchanges would be a motorway. MO 13 has no such major interchanges. It's pretty much the same character as long stretches of US 75 in Oklahoma. | |
| 14 | 2018-04-04 02:18:38 UTC | UAN51 | You've gone too far. Interstates are motorways with NO EXCEPTIONS. You've absolutely disregarded everything I've said up to this point which is unacceptable. I've made my points as clear as possible; I've backed it up with documentation while you haven't. Freeways can end at an intersection. Stop ma... | |
| 15 | 2018-04-04 13:50:53 UTC | maxerickson | I've upgraded the wiki:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_Road_Classification#Motorway | |
| 16 | 2018-04-04 14:13:40 UTC | UAN51 | maxerickson, your actoin raises three points/questions: 1.) Did you write that because two random people said that? Is this to directly attack me? 2.) Did you discuss with members of WikiProject United States before updating that wiki page? 3.) Because Andrew and Paul are mapping things that were pr... | |
| 17 | 2018-04-04 14:24:53 UTC | maxerickson | I wrote it because I believe it. It's not an attack on anybody. No, I didn't discuss it with anyone, but no one who wrote anything there previously bothered to discuss it with me either.It may seem absurd that I'm pointing at my unilateral change to the wiki as an argument to justify a particula... | |
| 18 | 2018-04-04 14:38:39 UTC | UAN51 | I suggest you discuss with the people of WikiProject United States (and perhaps other US mappers) with your propose change to the Wiki page. Changing the Wiki page without discussion will only make this situation worse because its unethical. This almost seems to be a dictatorship. Andrew and Paul di... | |
| 19 | 2018-04-04 14:49:49 UTC | maxerickson | Please look at the edit history of the page. There's no group of people behind it, it's mostly what one person said 9 years ago.The way I understand 'wiki', instead of discussing my proposed changes at length, I can just make them and then if there is too much disagreement they can be removed. T... | |
| 20 | 2018-04-04 15:17:24 UTC | UAN51 | Top of page says "Part of WikiProject United States" (most likely part of OSM US) if you can't read. What you edited does not represent the OSM community; that only represents three out of million editors. Discussion with other US mappers is the only way to resolve this. I also forgot to m... | |
| 21 | 2018-04-04 16:01:36 UTC | maxerickson | I think it is a poor use of the highway= tag to assign it based purely on physical features rather than using it to provide context. Short upgraded segments have better physical features but really are part of a lower priority road. Sometimes a road plays a role that it is underbuilt to perform; it ... | |
| 22 | 2018-04-04 16:14:53 UTC | iandees | Hi friends! Let's take this discussion out of the changeset comments and into a more public place. What do you think about posting a question to the talk-us mailing list? There are also several folks on the OSM US Slack that would be happy to talk through this. | |
| 23 | 2018-04-04 18:20:35 UTC | Jack the Ripper | I am looking forward to this conversation continuing somewhere, because I have several questions and comments to make. | |
| 24 | 2018-04-04 18:41:56 UTC | UAN51 | Anywhere that promotes more people to participate in the discussion and convenient would work. | |
| 37678382 by MatthewAndersonUS80 | 1 | 2018-04-03 02:36:06 UTC | Paul Johnson | With this ending on a surface route, I'd be more inclined to call this segment a "trunk", as it's really just a built up limited access part of Airport Road and less a proper freeway in it's own sense. Particularly with the lack of runout room before 59th Street. Kind of a similar situat... |
| 2 | 2018-04-03 02:40:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Or, for that matter, Portland International Airport's Airport Way. | |
| 57727443 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-04-03 01:49:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looking at Hillary Drive, I'm pretty sure Bing is not your source for this, could you reply to the comment and fill us in?Context suggests it's someone's driveway, not a street, so I'm curious where you're getting the speed limit from. oneway=reversible also seems likely incorrect, as this mean... |
| 2 | 2018-04-03 01:49:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | Also, lanes should be actual on the ground lanes marked out, which would be a pretty good trick for a gravel surface. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57727443 | |
| 57725012 by MCHC | 1 | 2018-04-03 01:35:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | Are the paths in the park actually open to bicycles? bicycle=yes would be a handy clarification. Removal of footway=sidewalk would also be a good idea where it's not actually a sidewalk. A little patience with the geometry goes a long way. --- Published usi... |
| 57722740 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-04-03 01:31:52 UTC | Paul Johnson | Overall decent, a little more patience on the geometry would make for a sharper edit. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57722740 |
| 57698201 by 918ting | 1 | 2018-03-31 20:29:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | I fixed it with the correct tags. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57698201 |
| 57651720 by kentense | 1 | 2018-03-31 02:01:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not bad for a first trace, but if you can upload a few more GPX traces using the GPX upload feature, that would help since I can't spot it on any current imagery and the existing way is a hot mess of overlapping ways, bad alignment and missing intersections. --- #REVIEWED_B... |
| 57575133 by Madi12 | 1 | 2018-03-31 00:07:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for the update! Be sure to check for source:maxspeed=* tags and update/remove that tag as applicable when updating speed limits. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57575133 |
| 57563584 by Elinorzag | 1 | 2018-03-30 03:54:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | Maybe this should be place=neighborhood instead of area=yes. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57563584 |
| 57460154 by TMann10 | 1 | 2018-03-26 03:04:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not bad, but please don't use abbreviations like "St" for "Street". --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57460154 |
| 57452603 by PaigeB | 1 | 2018-03-26 02:41:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | Changing building=apartments to landuse=residential would have been better than deleting the object entirely on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424810838 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57452603 |
| 57437158 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-03-24 16:21:44 UTC | mueschel | Hi,something went wrong with the name tag here, could you check that?https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/238362209Jan |
| 2 | 2018-03-24 17:21:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Nice catch. Fixed! | |
| 57425327 by andy51edge | 1 | 2018-03-22 16:16:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | This relation is super, super messy. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_CategoriesIt would be best to break out each route to its own relation. Portland, Oregon and Tulsa, Oklahoma have extensive examples. --- Published using... |
| 57348492 by Sreelalitha yerramshetty | 1 | 2018-03-21 00:38:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not sure a neighborhood tag really has a height to it. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57348492 |
| 2 | 2018-03-21 09:19:44 UTC | Sreelalitha yerramshetty | Yes you are right. | |
| 57298836 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-03-18 19:37:55 UTC | hofoen | Please stop reverting my correct mapping of boundaries as relations: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary . I did not remove any information. Mapping boundaries as relations is state-of-the-art, especially if adjacent boundaries share a common border. You can keep redundant tags on ... |
| 2 | 2018-03-19 03:58:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | Sorry about that, I can revert the revert on both if nothing else been done yet on those boundaries (most likely; they haven't seen much traffic); for some reason osmcha rather buried the lead that this was being turned into a relation and made it look like the way was being stripped of everything b... | |
| 57232318 by hofoen | 1 | 2018-03-18 19:08:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57298836 where the changeset comment is: Reverting bad removal of tagging on tribal area. |
| 57229235 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-03-16 06:31:40 UTC | hofoen | Why did you revert my changeset? I have not removed a single tag. There is no "less specific tagging". |
| 2 | 2018-03-17 15:26:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Social-protected-area | |
| 57217796 by z-yurets | 1 | 2018-03-16 02:36:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | Worst. Streak. Challenge. Ever. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57217796 |
| 2 | 2018-03-16 10:00:39 UTC | Zverik | Here's to many future improvements in OSMCha! | |
| 57216310 by hofoen | 1 | 2018-03-16 02:34:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57229235 where the changeset comment is: Changeset being reverted has far less specific tagging. |
| 57211856 by marty williams | 1 | 2018-03-16 02:27:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not terrible, but retagging these as highway=service, removing the maxspeed tags, add access=private and aligning the ways to the driveways would have been better. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57211856 |
| 57200390 by Happy Hobo | 1 | 2018-03-16 02:26:19 UTC | Paul Johnson | This looks like a warehouse. Could I get some more information? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57200390 |
| 2 | 2018-03-16 04:52:58 UTC | Happy Hobo | I believe I dropped the point inaccurately. Closer (but not exact) is 35°32′25.46″N 97°27′30.43″W and the name in Google is Church of the Harvest.http://harvestok.com/locations/oklahoma-city/ | |
| 57192914 by bfpeters | 1 | 2018-03-15 01:46:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | Not a bad first attempt, but here's some pointers:addr:street should be the full street name, no abbreviations.building=yes is only appropriate on buildings.description=* should only be a description when necessary, and never ad copy.phone=* should be international format.I fixed this ... |
| 57188009 by Mike - Oklahoma County Assessor | 1 | 2018-03-15 01:31:15 UTC | Paul Johnson | I did change NorthWest to Northwest, but otherwise looks good. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57188009 |
| 57167711 by FoxCleaners | 1 | 2018-03-14 14:11:40 UTC | user_5359 | Welcome to OSM! Note that in OSM description of the objects has the highest priority. Objects that have only one name, have little sense. As home page for the question "How do I describe you?" I recommend the web site http://wiki.openstreetmap.org. |
| 2 | 2018-03-15 01:04:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | I know this is a dry cleaner because I've been past it, but I'm not totally sure on the address (or whether it's the north or south storefront on this duplex). --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57167711 | |
| 57132814 by tatuminsurance | 1 | 2018-03-13 14:18:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | The database is not the place for advertising copy. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57132814 |
| 57126420 by PacMan1234 | 1 | 2018-03-12 23:28:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | name=* is optional and shouldn't be added if that's not the official name of the object, and is not the same as description=* oneway=reversible means that it's always one way, but the direction changes from time to time. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published usi... |
| 2 | 2018-03-12 23:29:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | highway=footway is not appropriate except for purpose built-for-walking paths not open to bicycles. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57126420 | |
| 57126021 by PacMan1234 | 1 | 2018-03-12 23:21:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | name=* should be the name, not the description, of the item you're tagging name=* on. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57126021 |
| 57125852 by PacMan1234 | 1 | 2018-03-12 23:20:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | highway=footway is for foot trails, not driveways. Try highway=service for driveways. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57125852 |
| 57125179 by PacMan1234 | 1 | 2018-03-12 23:20:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | Lot of objects with the same name that seems really unlikely. Footways look like they're probably actually highway=service. name=* should really be the name of the place, not a description. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapb... |
| 57118253 by ghostsail | 1 | 2018-03-12 18:11:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57119653 where the changeset comment is: Vandalism removal. |
| 57114096 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-03-12 18:09:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57119606 where the changeset comment is: Vandalism removal. |
| 57112265 by jflint | 1 | 2018-03-12 18:04:54 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is it actually no longer existing, or is it just permanently closed? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57112265 |
| 2 | 2018-03-12 21:20:23 UTC | jflint | I rode the other trails near this one last weekend and looked extensively for this trail and it does not exist. I talked to some of the park officials and they said it was permanently closed a couple years ago for the building of a Police Gun Range and the trail was reclaimed. So it no longer exists... | |
| 57050046 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-12 17:08:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | No need to add the operator to the name, especially when already listed in the operator tag. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57050046 |
| 57041604 by freeman roberts | 1 | 2018-03-11 16:21:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Mind lining this up with the correct edges of the park? This trapezoid crossing a fence seems really unlikely. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57041604 |
| 57041284 by freeman roberts | 1 | 2018-03-11 16:08:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57086237 where the changeset comment is: Geofiction removal. |
| 57030242 by srividya_c | 1 | 2018-03-10 03:31:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | That wasn't a typo, there's a comma after names and superlatives. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57030242 |
| 57004436 by jflint | 1 | 2018-03-09 04:25:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | Deleting the road is not the way to go about this, adding access=no would have been a smarter move if the road is still on the ground. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/57004436 |
| 2 | 2018-03-09 04:28:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57019608 where the changeset comment is: Retreiving deleted way for better tagging. | |
| 56990601 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-09 03:57:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please be careful about copying tags to new ways in the same street. Granted, this may be easier in JOSM than in ID. Otherwise, nice catch. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56990601 |
| 56989838 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-09 03:53:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | These could have been converted to highway=service more accurately. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56989838 |
| 56979870 by TMann10 | 1 | 2018-03-09 03:19:03 UTC | Paul Johnson | I think you meant ref= instead of name= --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56979870 |
| 56979461 by EdSS | 1 | 2018-03-09 03:12:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Rather than just moving the duplicate segment, it's best to create a multipolygon instead. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56979461 |
| 56971511 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-09 03:06:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks for visiting, safe travels! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56971511 |
| 56962284 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-09 03:01:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | You can square the corners in a turning circle type intersection, typically. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56962284 |
| 56960345 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-09 02:32:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | stop=minor is not necessary as the US doesn't have the concept of major and minor roads (a largely European concept). --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56960345 |
| 56959990 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-09 02:29:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Best not to round off turning circles on corners as you have done, for example, on both ends of Jeri Place, but instead tag the turning circles. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56959990 |
| 56947553 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-08 04:46:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | International format for phone=*, please. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone#Usage --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56947553 |
| 2 | 2018-03-08 18:33:28 UTC | Humus015 | Sorry, i never put +1 or +overseas, because while you are in, no need country code, and from my mobile (even in roaming) it works. | |
| 3 | 2018-03-08 20:03:44 UTC | freebeer | THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!How am I supposed to know what to dial?!?Should it be 9941-your number or 9949-your number? I'm very confused by borders!OSM is an international project, even if you are mapping locally. Maybe next week I'll make a footie tour of your country (wherever it is) and wan... | |
| 4 | 2018-03-09 01:03:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | Some data consumers (Cyanogenmod, and now LineageOS, for example) use OSM as a reverse lookup provider; having the complete phone number helps facilitate this. As well as, for whatever reason you might need, call overseas to a location. | |
| 5 | 2018-03-09 11:58:16 UTC | Humus015 | I just copying the number the from the restaurant receipt. | |
| 56956731 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 04:57:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | This looks like a convenience store from the aerial, the roof to the south looks like it's the fuel. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56956731 |
| 56942901 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-08 04:35:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | I understand the mistake when viewed from above, though Sonic is a chain of fast food drive-ins. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56942901 |
| 2 | 2018-03-08 18:01:08 UTC | Humus015 | Yes, but here is a petrol station... | |
| 56942703 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 04:20:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm going to have to disagree on this one pretty strongly, this one's large enough to have lane lines down it's length. Tertiary really seems like the better fit. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56942703... |
| 56926129 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 04:06:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | I can't make heads or tails out of what the turn restrictions are meant here |
| 56926067 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 04:02:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | The US doesn't have the concept of major/minor roads, so this stop sign is ambiguous. Did you mean this to say that 102nd has a stop sign and Council Road does not? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56926067 |
| 56925976 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 04:01:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | Don't forget to keep an eye out for source:maxspeed. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56925976 |
| 56925725 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 03:59:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like Devore might be a better fit for tertiary to Eastgate. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56925725 |
| 56925649 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 03:55:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is another example of what I would consider a tertiary instead of a lower level due to how the road is designed to operate. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56925649 |
| 56925175 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-08 03:33:42 UTC | Paul Johnson | This is a little bit of an iffy call, I'd argue for tertiary on it having little, if any, abutting frontage and largely existing to distribute traffic through the neighborhood. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56925175 ... |
| 56924851 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-07 04:37:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | name could probably be changed to operator on these tags and the name tag just left off if the subdivision name isn't known. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56924851 |
| 56924353 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-07 04:27:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hefner in this section seems more like a secondary than a primary. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56924353 |
| 56924315 by crayoxide | 1 | 2018-03-07 04:25:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Be sure to remove source:maxspeed when removing the default city speed limit. lanes should also include lanes:forward and lanes:backward when possible. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56924315 ... |
| 56920617 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-06 02:40:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | Isn't Panera more of a fast food place? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56920617 |
| 2 | 2018-03-06 04:02:46 UTC | Humus015 | With the options they have looks like more that that. Anyway are all point of view. | |
| 56808304 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-03 00:46:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | The D should have been moved to addr:unit=*, but I'm afraid I'm a little confused on how name:it=* comes into play on this particular gelateria. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56808304 |
| 2 | 2018-03-03 04:20:38 UTC | Humus015 | Tomorrow I will visit, but from the map looks like also the position is wrong outside the buiding area. Also the name is changed. I will update. | |
| 3 | 2018-03-03 04:23:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | It's been about a year since I mapped that while I was walking down from my office if the time to find some breakfast. Can't say Im a fan of Hurts Donut after that. | |
| 56808429 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-03 00:48:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | I fixed phone and addr:street on this to meet standard OSM conventions. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56808429 |
| 2 | 2018-03-03 04:22:25 UTC | Humus015 | ok. | |
| 56759999 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-02 03:45:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | This looks like a tractor dealership on Digital Globe Premium, which was taken sometime around this last December. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56759999 |
| 2 | 2018-03-02 03:59:05 UTC | Humus015 | Was placed with mobile, now in good position. I'm still around tulsa and need to finishing fix other things. | |
| 3 | 2018-03-02 04:26:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | Thanks! I merged it into the building you drew. | |
| 4 | 2018-03-02 04:26:47 UTC | Paul Johnson | Also, I hope I don't come across as a giant hardass going through the reviews! | |
| 56800395 by Sean SSPS | 1 | 2018-03-02 04:21:42 UTC | Paul Johnson | name=* should be the main name. oneway=yes doesn't quite make sense on the other way. I can get this fixed up, but can you clarify what was meant here so I have it clear? --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/5... |
| 56766940 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-02 03:51:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | No abbreviations in addresses. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56766940 |
| 56760404 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-03-02 03:48:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone#Usage --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56760404 |
| 2 | 2018-03-02 04:03:30 UTC | Humus015 | Building not still existing, and following subway already placed. | |
| 46884333 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-02-28 03:06:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | Reservoirs are not ponds. Names highly unlikely outside a theme park. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/46884333 |
| 45535214 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-02-28 02:51:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | pools are not lakes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/45535214 |
| 45535188 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-02-28 02:47:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | No evidence that these features exist. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/45535188 |
| 45535113 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-02-28 02:41:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | No evidence that a path ever existed along the roads appears to exist. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/45535113 |
| 45534326 by OkiePvp | 1 | 2018-02-28 02:39:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | Turning circle would be more appropriate than making a loop at the end of a way. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/45534326 |
| 56539662 by clay_c | 1 | 2018-02-21 18:20:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | I still have some concerns about this mass attempt at priority creep on the highway=* tag. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Secondary_taghttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Tertiary_highways |
| 2 | 2018-02-21 20:37:18 UTC | MikeN | I agree about concerns with mass priority creep. DOT / Government classifications do not directly translate to an OSM classification. Routers will still select a road when it best matches the travel itinerary and mode. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-21 22:56:10 UTC | clay_c | Alright, I'll put a pause to this change for a bit. I want to continue this discussion later, though right now I think I just need to take a break. Thanks for being patient. | |
| 4 | 2018-02-22 01:50:06 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem, thanks for being open on this. Last time there was someone who went a little too strict with the tagging, we ended up with the entire US highway system tagged trunk nationwide | |
| 5 | 2018-02-26 22:47:53 UTC | clay_c | Alright, I'm back and my head's clear. Thanks for giving me some time.I want to make sure we're on the same page with a few things. I'm avoiding being strict on tagging, and there's a few FM/RM roads I've tagged higher than secondary as well as state/US highways lower than primary. It's still co... | |
| 6 | 2018-02-27 01:51:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | RIght, generally a good idea to weight the local functionality with the classification to kind of rank it out. Like a major thoroughfare through a city (like, say, FM 2786 or CR 150 in Allen) might be underrated even as a secondary. But, say, FM 1885 or FM 920, northwest of Weatherford? Yeah, tha... | |
| 7 | 2018-02-27 01:56:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Also, yeah, I'd fully agree that Texas makes for especially odd classification owing to it's huge number of auxiliary routes, of various and often nebulous significance, such as, despite signage, there is only one Ranch Road (RM 1), and *all* of the rest are properly FMs, and while the FMs are gener... | |
| 56617866 by Humus015 | 1 | 2018-02-24 02:06:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | This looks more like a highway=turning_circle than a loop. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56617866 |
| 2 | 2018-02-24 12:30:33 UTC | Humus015 | Good day, is the end of the road where the trucks can reverse and turn back with appropriate space. I never seen an highway turning at 360 degrees. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-25 03:50:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | RIght, without an island, that's a turning circle. With an island, you mapped it correctly. Looking at the aerial photography (Bing and DigitalGlobe), it looks like a turning circle.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle | |
| 56616778 by thatchett | 1 | 2018-02-24 02:00:53 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm not 100% sure what the goal was here, but I did notice that a bridge got extended and lane tagging got merged when two ways were merged. Also please avoid oneway=-1 except as a last resort when the way (for whatever reason) has to be reversed as a dependency on something else (very rare). ... |
| 53591113 by adbrown | 1 | 2018-02-21 17:54:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | "Use highway=trunk for high performance or high importance roads that don't meet the requirement for motorway."Yeah, that actually looks like trunk is the correct tag for this segment, not primary. |
| 56508945 by clay_c | 1 | 2018-02-20 04:23:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Generally FM/RM roads would be tertiary. Maybe higher if it's a big multilane boulevard in a city or something like that. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56508945 |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 20:31:29 UTC | clay_c | Texas has rather high standards for maintaining FM/RM roads. Many of them connect up with regular state roads in OK and NM that are already tagged as secondary. I believe FM/RM roads should be secondary whenever they form a connective network of well-maintained roads in between state/US highways, wh... | |
| 3 | 2018-02-21 01:03:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | My concern would be parity with surrounding states. Typically speaking, state highways default to highway=secondary unless there's additional capacity, and highway=primary would be a US highway, and a highway=tertiary being pretty much anything with a centerline at lower levels or state auxiliary l... | |
| 4 | 2018-02-21 02:22:16 UTC | clay_c | State highways and US highways in Texas are often built to the same standards and are otherwise indistinguishable. Sometimes they may be widened, but that can happen anywhere regardless of whether it's a state highway or a US highway. I don't see a convincing case for why similarly-built highways in... | |
| 5 | 2018-02-21 02:40:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | > State highways and US highways in Texas are often built to the same standards and are otherwise indistinguishable.That's fairly typically the case everywhere.> I don't see a convincing case for why similarly-built highways in Texas should have different designations just based on the... | |
| 56479481 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-02-19 07:50:43 UTC | US Highway 266 | No, it isn't. The official name, as well as the name on the ground, is Creek Turnpike.This sign:https://www.flickr.com/photos/watuzi/17423431070/sizes/lplus this sign:https://www.flickr.com/photos/watuzi/4361297362/sizes/lprove that the signs on the ground refer to this road as the Creek Tur... |
| 2 | 2018-02-19 12:54:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | That's the name of the route, not the name of the road. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-19 12:55:49 UTC | Paul Johnson | If you can't deal with this change, I suggest committing it to opengeofiction or only using a snapshot from before the legislature renamed the road. | |
| 4 | 2018-02-20 03:33:59 UTC | US Highway 266 | I can go take a picture tomorrow if it will convince you. The signs in the photos that I posted are still the same except for the OK 364 shield in the one picture. | |
| 5 | 2018-02-20 04:17:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Sure, the wayfinding signs for the *ROUTE* say that, as a legacy of being one of the few routes in the state that have a name instead of a number, and one of an even smaller subset that have both. Most highways don't have wayfinding signs for the name of the ROAD here. | |
| 6 | 2018-02-20 04:17:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | But, the name of the ROUTE is not what is in question here, it's the name of the ROAD. | |
| 7 | 2018-02-20 05:16:35 UTC | US Highway 266 | The name of the road and the route are the same. You are bizarrely attempting to use twisted logic and semantics to justify your convoluted theory. I have provided plenty of evidence and I can provide more if need be. And all the evidence points that the official name of the road is "Creek Turn... | |
| 8 | 2018-02-20 12:53:55 UTC | Paul Johnson | You're projecting, as usual, in order to reject reality. | |
| 56504627 by clay_c | 1 | 2018-02-20 04:23:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like a lot of pretty clearcut secondaries got upgraded to primary here. Generally speaking, a two lane rural state highway would be a secondary (primary primary if it's a four lane undivided or a major street in a city), and auxiliary state highways would be a secondary or tertiary. ... |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 20:19:37 UTC | clay_c | Most of the "two lane rural state highways" in Texas have already been tagged as primary roads. It makes sense for them to be tagged as such, because they form a connective network of uniform, well-maintained, high-speed roads across the state. If you'd like to add lane numbers and speed l... | |
| 56503465 by Stephen214 | 1 | 2018-02-20 04:19:48 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm not quite sure why these tags were removed regarding the proposed ramps. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56503465 |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 05:18:33 UTC | Stephen214 | OSMCha shows dashed ramps on the streets/dark layer, but I'm not seeing anything like that in the current OSM database. | |
| 55367616 by Paul Johnson | 1 | 2018-01-13 01:51:43 UTC | baveggies9999 | This is not accurate. Please see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Ruleand http://www.pikepass.comhttp://www.odot.org/tcomm/agendas14/tc_agenda-20140310-r-special.pdfDespite your legislative link, the highway is clearly referred to in common practice as "Cr... |
| 2 | 2018-01-13 01:59:04 UTC | baveggies9999 | The "Liberty Memorial Parkway" designation is clearly an ancillary designation to "Creek Turnpike" and not the primary name of the roadway based on the PDF to which you linked. All signage still indicates "Creek Turnpike" and ODOT sources indicate that it and the Tu... | |
| 3 | 2018-01-13 03:09:50 UTC | US Highway 266 | I personally verified that this road is indeed signed as the "Creek Turnpike". There is a single sign that says "Liberty Parkway" which is clearly a tertiary or even quaternary honorific name for this road. Nowhere is the name "Liberty Memorial Parkway" listed as a name... | |
| 4 | 2018-01-13 03:14:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | "Liberty Parkway" appears on signage at either end of the route. Additionally, alt_name and the relation are named "Creek Turnpike". These names are both accurate. | |
| 5 | 2018-01-13 03:14:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | "Liberty Parkway" appears on signage at either end of the route. Additionally, alt_name and the relation are named "Creek Turnpike". These names are both accurate. | |
| 6 | 2018-01-13 03:18:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Liberty Memorial Parkway was the compromise name after this was brought to the Data Working Group last time, I'd consider Liberty Parkway to be more valid than Liberty Memorial Parkway. | |
| 7 | 2018-01-13 03:33:24 UTC | Duke87 | Is there an official DWG decision about this online anywhere? I concur with US 266 and baveggies - the road is quite clearly named "Creek Turnpike" on all major signage as well as in general practice. The name "Liberty Parkway" is on only one sign (that I am aware of) - this shou... | |
| 8 | 2018-01-13 03:39:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | There is signage westbound. It's at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4884335483 and at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4884339565 , plus the cited doc in the source notes also supports this. | |
| 9 | 2018-01-13 04:33:22 UTC | US Highway 266 | The official name of the road is "Creek Turnpike". "Liberty Parkway" is a tertiary name, a nickname if you will. It isn't the main name of the road. I've lived near the turnpike for over a decade and I've never heard anybody call it "Liberty Parkway". Locals always call... | |
| 10 | 2018-01-13 05:10:03 UTC | US Highway 266 | This picture which was taken by me on September 9, 2014 is of a guide sign on westbound US 64/northbound US 169/eastbound OK 364 which clearly shows the road as "Creek Turnpike". This is not the only sign to refer to it as such.https://www.flickr.com/photos/watuzi/17423431070/in/datepo... | |
| 11 | 2018-01-13 06:01:56 UTC | Paul Johnson | That picture is referencing route numbers and route names, not street level names. You find a similar situation in Oregon, for example, at Mission Street and Santiam Highway in the Salem area or OR 569 Randy Papé Beltline, previously known and alternately signed as The Beltline or Beltline R... | |
| 12 | 2018-01-13 06:05:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | That said, I don't envy any of us for dealing with Oklahoma's entirely insane inconsistency in dealing with highway names in general. However, ultimately, getting things named consistently at all levels is something that needs to be handled at the level of "stop (re-)electing people who are in... | |
| 13 | 2018-01-14 01:07:09 UTC | US Highway 266 | The official name of the road is "Creek Turnpike". Until you provide evidence otherwise, OSM should reflect this. Two signs and one PDF file do not prove the name of a road has changed. | |
| 14 | 2018-01-14 18:43:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm sorry you can't accept the ground truth as fact, and I'm done trying to point out the difference between a route and a road or how to read a relation. | |
| 15 | 2018-01-19 06:50:48 UTC | ToeBee | Paul, first of all, your original changeset comment is not really appropriate. The edit was not malicious. There is a legitimate difference of opinion on the subject. And to be honest I'm having a little trouble seeing it your way. As has been pointed out, every single sign directing drivers to this... | |
| 16 | 2018-01-20 16:11:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm still of the opinion between the legislation that renamed it, Creek Turnpike shields being removed in favor of OK 364 shields as they wear out, the signage at either end, this segment did, in fact, get renamed. Current destination:*=* tagging at the ramps indicates directional signage present a... | |
| 17 | 2018-01-21 04:11:44 UTC | cl94 | Since when are honorary names the official name of the highway? Should we change the name of the NY Thruway to "Jewish Veterans Memorial Highway" between Exits 10 and 15 because a couple of signs and a state declarations say it is called that? Of course not. | |
| 18 | 2018-01-21 04:12:40 UTC | US Highway 266 | I'm interpreting it like it is written and as it is on the ground. I don't know how you are interpreting it the way you are. It's quite a leap of logic to say the least. | |
| 19 | 2018-01-21 04:49:25 UTC | rickmastfan67 | Paul, I honestly wouldn't be calling out others as 'sockpuppet' accounts unless you have 100% proof. It's very unprofessional for 1 thing, and very rude at the minimum. If you want to say it in your head, that's one thing, but don't post in public saying that unless you can back it up with 100% pr... | |
| 20 | 2018-01-21 04:49:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Honorary names are typically on signage distinctive from the rest of the highway names. That's not the case here. Wasn't the case on OR 569, either. But, US 26 has a brown signed section over Sylvan Hill honorarily naming it after some soldier, and still signed as Sunset Highway. Not the case wi... | |
| 21 | 2018-01-21 04:54:14 UTC | US Highway 266 | There are NO big green signs with "Liberty Parkway" on them. None. There are several, however, with "Creek Turnpike" on them. If your theory were true, it would be prominently displayed on the overhead signs. As has been noted before, there are only two signs with "Liberty P... | |
| 22 | 2018-01-21 05:03:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | Your assertion is correct for the relation above, not the road subject to this changeset. | |
| 23 | 2018-02-20 03:22:41 UTC | Duke87 | Okay it's been a month and no further comments. I count six in favor of "Creek Turnpike" being the primary name and one in favor of "Liberty Parkway". Can we consider there to be a consensus to this effect at this point? | |
| 24 | 2018-02-20 04:16:06 UTC | Paul Johnson | I don't think so. Again, it's still signed as the road being Liberty Parkway and the route as Creek Turnpike.Timeline for how this was developed is this:* Highway was built as an unnumbered route, with Creek Turnpike route shields.* State renames this segment as Liberty Parkway; route nam... | |
| 25 | 2018-02-20 05:26:25 UTC | US Highway 266 | Paul, remember when you claimed that the portion of OK 364 east of the Muskogee Turnpike was "Liberty Parkway" and that there was a sign just south of I-44 identifying it as such? I proved you wrong and you removed it. Remember when you claimed the Creek Turnpike was "Liberty Memorial... | |
| 56506680 by ggibbons27 | 1 | 2018-02-20 01:57:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Did that farmer's field shrink or is it the industrial looking thing at the end of the road? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56506680 |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 05:33:52 UTC | user_5359 | Welcome to OSM! Please move your node from the street to main building! Is this a shop http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop or office http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office or a craft http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:craft ? | |
| 56480576 by Kuepy | 1 | 2018-02-20 01:39:59 UTC | Paul Johnson | Does 2 South SHerwood Avenue only apply to that building or all four in the complex? What's the name of the complex, since "Home" seems unlikely? What city is this? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56480576 ... |
| 56491320 by TreyElektron | 1 | 2018-02-20 01:27:50 UTC | Paul Johnson | Nicely done! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56491320 |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 02:02:16 UTC | TreyElektron | Thank you! --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56491320 | |
| 56491717 by tp_mcg | 1 | 2018-02-19 19:44:45 UTC | user_5359 | Welcome to OSM! The tag area=yes without any more information is useless. What do you want to achieve with your entry? |
| 2 | 2018-02-19 19:47:50 UTC | user_5359 | What is May-Grand Shoppes? Is this a shop http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop or office http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office or a craft http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:craft ? | |
| 3 | 2018-02-20 01:25:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | Got it from context, was a good start, but a swing and a miss. Take a look now. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56491717 | |
| 56483844 by US Highway 266 | 1 | 2018-02-19 13:01:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | You have reintroduced your vandalism, not reverted it. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56483844 |
| 56476449 by The Baums (Baumgardner Kids) | 1 | 2018-02-19 04:29:42 UTC | Paul Johnson | Name but no shop type? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56476449 |
| 56432109 by US Highway 266 | 1 | 2018-02-19 04:28:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 56479481 where the changeset comment is: Liberty Parkway is the official name of this segment. |
| 56477782 by IDK1132 | 1 | 2018-02-19 04:23:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 56479456 where the changeset comment is: Incredibly bad geometry and incorrect tagging for a pool. |
| 56477817 by IDK1132 | 1 | 2018-02-19 04:23:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 56479454 where the changeset comment is: Incredibly bad geometry and incorrect tagging for a pool. |
| 56477844 by IDK1132 | 1 | 2018-02-19 04:22:40 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is this really posted as no bicycle? If so, highway=footway would be more suitable. If not, removing bicycle=no would be appropriate. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56477844 |
| 56477858 by IDK1132 | 1 | 2018-02-19 04:21:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 56479418 where the changeset comment is: Reverting edit to a path that does not seem of likely geometry, nor does it appear on the latest (circa fall 2017) Mapbox aerial photography. |
| 56477873 by IDK1132 | 1 | 2018-02-19 04:20:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 56479392 where the changeset comment is: Reverting vandalism. |
| 56327143 by jharpster | 1 | 2018-02-15 01:02:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm trying to organize a county-by-county trip through the whole state on systematically cleaning up TIGER and filling in the blanks. http://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/139 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56327143 ... |
| 2 | 2018-02-15 01:02:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | I'm trying to organize a county-by-county trip through the whole state on systematically cleaning up TIGER and filling in the blanks. http://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/139 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56327143 ... | |
| 56321263 by biancah_telenav | 1 | 2018-02-15 00:46:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | A little bit of a shaky edit based on the available DG imagery |
| 56298045 by jmm7800 | 1 | 2018-02-13 01:56:03 UTC | Paul Johnson | Reeealy approximate geometry there... --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56298045 |
| 56148651 by Rajsamand Local Guide | 1 | 2018-02-08 01:37:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Please be mindful of the turn:lanes tags when updating an existing way. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56148651 |
| 2 | 2018-02-08 01:39:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | Is there even a median on the driveway or just an orange line? --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56148651 | |
| 56074428 by user_5359 | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:17:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56074428 |
| 2 | 2018-02-06 01:50:23 UTC | freebeer | Not quite, Paul.Georg removed the coloured road lettering, but it wasn't a complete revert -- the parking lake remained intact to be scribbled on again, and the removed parking aisles (lake isles?) weren't restored.That Guy then built on that a second time, but I suspect the DWG may get involve... | |
| 3 | 2018-02-06 01:52:03 UTC | freebeer | Sorry, nevermind, I should read everything first | |
| 4 | 2018-02-06 02:11:56 UTC | Paul Johnson | It happens, but yeah, this guy's DWG fodder if he keeps it up. | |
| 5 | 2018-02-06 02:22:56 UTC | freebeer | I see, you added the aisles anew as v1 by hand.I was worried I was imagining things, or that the summary below can be easily fooled, as apparently object histories can be fooled in this web interface by a Vespucci user.Sorry... | |
| 6 | 2018-02-06 14:46:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem. It was faster and easier to quickly redraw than work out a series of conflict resolution on a revert to restore those lines. | |
| 56067977 by Coyote6GraphX | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:24:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56067977 |
| 56068269 by Coyote6GraphX | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:24:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56068269 |
| 56068341 by Coyote6GraphX | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:23:25 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56068341 |
| 56068351 by Coyote6GraphX | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:22:29 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56068351 |
| 56071485 by DirtbagMadron | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:20:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56071485 |
| 56069511 by thatguy1 | 1 | 2018-02-05 05:37:52 UTC | user_5359 | Welcome to OSM! Please notice this is a production database not a playground or testing database. I delete your sexual obscenity. |
| 2 | 2018-02-06 01:18:07 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.o... | |
| 56075455 by thatguy1 | 1 | 2018-02-05 09:14:05 UTC | freebeer | Hallo that,Note that what you are doing is considered vandalism.OpenStreetMap is a serious project that sees wide usage, probably by the very agency whose car park you've chosen to desecrate. As such, with thousands or millions of data consumers relying on OSM to deliver factual and accurate da... |
| 2 | 2018-02-06 01:15:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.o... | |
| 3 | 2018-02-06 01:16:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 56102135 where the changeset comment is: Reverting obscene changeset. | |
| 56088615 by LemonsLimeTree | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:13:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56088615 |
| 56089671 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:12:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56089671 |
| 56095950 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:04:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56095950 |
| 56098553 by LemonsLimeTree | 1 | 2018-02-06 01:02:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56098553 |
| 55911643 by DirtbagMadron | 1 | 2018-01-31 01:44:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | For Way 393068195, abbreviations strongly discouraged in names. Additionally, for county roads like this, moving it to ref=CR E1410 would be better than name=E1410 Road. |
| 2 | 2018-01-31 01:44:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55911643 | |
| 3 | 2018-02-05 00:54:05 UTC | DirtbagMadron | Howdy! Regarding the county roads, I was wondering if I added a ref as you said, CR E1410, and then added in E1410 Road (which we use locally) as the name? | |
| 4 | 2018-02-05 04:13:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | I would advise against repeating the name when it's already the ref, for the same reason we use ref=OK 99 instead of name=State Highway 99. | |
| 5 | 2018-02-05 13:59:46 UTC | DirtbagMadron | Alrighty i’ll remember to do that then thanks! | |
| 56045520 by cgillett | 1 | 2018-02-04 07:18:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | Doublecheck that name. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only |
| 56040292 by cgillett | 1 | 2018-02-04 02:20:44 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56040292 |
| 56040472 by cgillett | 1 | 2018-02-04 02:20:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56040472 |
| 56040576 by cgillett | 1 | 2018-02-04 02:20:11 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56040576 |
| 56041283 by cgillett | 1 | 2018-02-04 01:56:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56041283 |
| 2 | 2018-02-04 01:56:35 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! My previous review of your changeset was wrong, so I'm changing its status to unreviewed on OSMCHA. Sorry for the error. Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56041283 | |
| 3 | 2018-02-04 01:56:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.o... | |
| 4 | 2018-02-04 01:59:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 56043802 where the changeset comment is: | |
| 56037359 by Tony Clark | 1 | 2018-02-03 20:44:06 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56037359 |
| 56005869 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:31:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56005869 |
| 56006148 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:30:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56006148 |
| 56005387 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:29:41 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56005387 |
| 56005366 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:29:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56005366 |
| 56001930 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:28:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56001930 |
| 56001702 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:28:27 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56001702 |
| 56001508 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:28:01 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56001508 |
| 56001189 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:27:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56001189 |
| 56000217 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:26:58 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56000217 |
| 55999528 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:26:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55999528 |
| 55998425 by LemonsLimeTree | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:26:08 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55998425 |
| 55998293 by LemonsLimeTree | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:25:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55998293 |
| 55997913 by LemonsLimeTree | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:25:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55997913 |
| 55996579 by PaigeB | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:25:16 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55996579 |
| 55996412 by PaigeB | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:24:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55996412 |
| 55996240 by PaigeB | 1 | 2018-02-03 17:23:34 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55996240 |
| 55979819 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:16:42 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55979819 |
| 55979436 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:16:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55979436 |
| 55977127 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:15:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55977127 |
| 55977386 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:15:10 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55977386 |
| 55974445 by EmSeeMAC | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:14:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55974445 |
| 55974299 by EmSeeMAC | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:12:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55974299 |
| 2 | 2018-02-02 04:14:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like there was a YMCA node already, I deleted the original since it looks like you got a better address and more complete information for it. | |
| 55974365 by EmSeeMAC | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:13:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55974365 |
| 55973899 by EmSeeMAC | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:11:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55973899 |
| 55973830 by EmSeeMAC | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:09:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55973830 |
| 55971873 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:08:03 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.o... |
| 2 | 2018-02-02 04:08:23 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like some parking aisle are overlapped on the adjacent streets. | |
| 55971702 by Xanthos | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:07:43 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55971702 |
| 55969167 by Coyote6GraphX | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:07:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55969167 |
| 55969066 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:07:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55969066 |
| 55968113 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:06:46 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55968113 |
| 55968053 by Rystic | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:06:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55968053 |
| 55967846 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:06:12 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55967846 |
| 55967789 by PaigeB | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:05:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55967789 |
| 55967608 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:05:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55967608 |
| 55967495 by PaigeB | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:05:18 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55967495 |
| 55967409 by Rystic | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:05:04 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55967409 |
| 55966047 by PaigeB | 1 | 2018-02-02 04:04:03 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55966047 |
| 55943068 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:21:45 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55943068 |
| 55944178 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:21:24 UTC | Paul Johnson | would be better to use landuse=residential on the areas actually used residentially, and place=neighborhood for entire neighborhoods. |
| 55945955 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:20:33 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55945955 |
| 55947319 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:19:09 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.o... |
| 2 | 2018-02-01 04:19:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | Would be better to fit the park outlines to the edge of the land actually used as part of the park, not the intervening streets. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-01 04:20:00 UTC | Paul Johnson | It appears a swimming center was also removed. | |
| 55947386 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:15:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55947386 |
| 55947443 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:15:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55947443 |
| 55947602 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:15:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55947602 |
| 55947795 by Fearkiller77 | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:14:38 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55947795 |
| 55947908 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:13:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55947908 |
| 2 | 2018-02-01 04:13:19 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! My previous review of your changeset was wrong, so I'm changing its status to unreviewed on OSMCHA. Sorry for the error. Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55947908 | |
| 55948426 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:09:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55948426 |
| 55948515 by erictheblue17 | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:08:39 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55948515 |
| 55952406 by Coyote6GraphX | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:07:31 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55952406 |
| 55952448 by Coyote6GraphX | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:07:14 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55952448 |
| 55938270 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:06:26 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55938270 |
| 55937467 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-02-01 04:05:32 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55937467 |
| 55916177 by Realj KC | 1 | 2018-01-31 04:28:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55916177 |
| 2 | 2018-01-31 05:50:56 UTC | freebeer | Hi Realj,I am afraid you are partly correct in your changeset description.You have moved the building to match a newer satellite image that is known not to be well aligned in many places.The original position was traced from aerial (aeroplane) overflights that are much better corrected.This ... | |
| 3 | 2018-01-31 06:08:57 UTC | Realj KC | @freebeer, I mapped it to match "bing aerial imagery". The other ones also look to be about the same. I also Checked with google maps, and it looks to be about correct. | |
| 4 | 2018-01-31 12:58:20 UTC | Paul Johnson | I know I marked it as good, but figured you had a reference other than "the imagery didn't line up". If everything is off, then try shifting the imagery so it lines up, having GPS traces turned on can help line up your imagery as well, since the GPS imagery layer is known good. | |
| 5 | 2018-01-31 16:42:44 UTC | mhenson | @Realj, I am happy to have another mapper in the Stillwater area. Cordell Hall was demolished last week... | |
| 55909055 by William McBroom | 1 | 2018-01-31 05:15:51 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55909055 |
| 55905188 by Rystic | 1 | 2018-01-31 05:15:30 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55905188 |
| 55914049 by Realj KC | 1 | 2018-01-31 05:15:22 UTC | Paul Johnson | Hello! I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great! Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap! #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55914049 |