| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 166232214 by Maradona11 @ 2025-05-14 03:02 | 1 | 2025-05-14 03:37 | aharvey ♦1,694 | PS. I've updated the documentation around community car parks and bicycle parking at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Transportation#%22Park_&_Ride%22_Commuter_Car_Parks if I've missed anything please feel free to fix or let me know. |
| 163226901 by Maradona11 @ 2025-03-05 03:30 | 1 | 2025-03-05 23:46 | aharvey ♦1,694 | I tweaked a few tags https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/1364663766In particular access=yes since it's open for all, but also added fee:conditional for conditions for free parking.Also added https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:park%20ride |
| 124505564 by Maradona11 @ 2022-08-05 05:46 | 1 | 2024-08-07 00:53 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | I have remove some of the bicycle=designated as there is no on the ground indication. Possibly a gov map may make the claim but that may not have been implemented... |
| 152976985 by Maradona11 @ 2024-06-21 06:23 | 1 | 2024-06-21 07:05 | tastrax ♦1,144 | Hand of God? "Mapping golf features" would have been a better changeset comment :-) |
| 151082214 by Maradona11 @ 2024-05-09 04:19 | 1 | 2024-05-09 07:26 | histrio ♦18 | Hi Maradona11, your changeset affects two distant areas (south of Australia and Italy). Please consider splitting such edits into separate changesets to keep changes clear and focused. This will help maintain data accuracy. Thanks! |
| 2 | 2024-05-09 08:02 | fortera_au ♦1,063 | I've removed the small untagged way added in Australia in this edit. | |
| 148322990 by Maradona11 @ 2024-03-07 04:52 | 1 | 2024-03-18 07:11 | TheSwavu ♦544 | Hi, If you are going to remove a turn restriction then please delete the relation, don't just break the existing one.Thank you. |
| 140611145 by Maradona11 @ 2023-08-30 23:49 | 1 | 2023-08-31 03:14 | pza ♦86 | FYI, I fixed this up a bit in 140614181 as it was flagged due to missing relationship roles. Also updated the lane markings which were changed yesterday. |
| 2 | 2023-08-31 03:55 | Maradona11 | awesome. Thank you! :) | |
| 137351797 by Maradona11 @ 2023-06-15 04:07 | 1 | 2023-08-16 02:50 | Stephen Males ♦10 | Hi Maradona11,I have noticed that you have marked this path as being a shared path. However, the path is very narrow - 1 metre or less, has no Shared Path markings or signage, and goes through an area with lots of pedestrian movement. Can I ask how you determined that this path is a "Shared U... |
| 2 | 2023-08-18 02:37 | Maradona11 | Hi Stephen, I based it on the TfNSW Bicycle Network dataset which is available on https://opendata.transport.nsw.gov.au/dataset/infrastructure-cycleway-data.If you feel like this is not a share path then happy for you to remove.Cheers,M | |
| 133109349 by Maradona11 @ 2023-02-28 01:24 | 1 | 2023-03-01 22:44 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | This has broken train route relations... only the 'up' routes.. Sydney XPTNorth West Xplorer 244Hunter Line from SconeHunter Line from DungogThe 'down' routes look good. All the above fixed. |
| 2 | 2023-03-19 22:20 | Maradona11 | Sorry. Thank you Warin61. | |
| 129723882 by Maradona11 @ 2022-12-05 03:29 | 1 | 2022-12-06 03:21 | kurisubrooks ♦54 | Hi Maradona11,Thanks for your changes to Central Station. They're greatly appreciated.I've been working on fixing up Central the past few weeks so I hope you've found the changes satisfactory.With your changes however I did want to point out one thing, that being the escalat... |
| 76323057 by Maradona11 @ 2019-10-29 04:16 | 1 | 2019-10-29 12:42 | aharvey ♦1,694 | For https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/173170861 where you've added footway=no what was the intention there?To say that pedestrians aren't allowed here you can use foot=no (but it's implied already because of access=no), or to say there is not footpath parallel to thi... |
| 2 | 2019-10-29 12:43 | aharvey ♦1,694 | PS. I did already had platforms roughly mapped as lines (not as accurate as your data though), it's better practice to reuse those existing ways when improving them rather than deleting them and starting afresh. I know it's not always possible though, but if possible it's better. | |
| 3 | 2019-10-29 22:40 | Maradona11 | I wasnt sure what was best to do here. I will try to reuse as much in the future. | |
| 4 | 2022-11-24 00:28 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Hi,An overlooked something, I think. The platform Way: 739706579 still has the tag "construction"="steps"Umm Would that not be finished by now? And why is the entire platform tagged as steps??? | |
| 5 | 2022-11-29 01:26 | Maradona11 | Hi I have removed the construction tag and yes shouldnt have been tagged for the whole platform. thanks for pointing out. | |
| 128618735 by Maradona11 @ 2022-11-08 01:10 | 1 | 2022-11-09 09:57 | habi ♦1,839 | CiaoIn this changeset you've introduced a bunch of `building;levels`, which I've just now corrected to `building:levels` (without semicolon).Happy mapping,habi |
| 2 | 2022-11-09 09:57 | habi ♦1,839 | PS: I'm here because of http://osm.mueschelsoft.de/taginfo/newkeys.htm | |
| 113926674 by Maradona11 @ 2021-11-18 05:08 | 1 | 2022-10-11 06:26 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | HiBuilding levels should be integer numbers not 'elevator'. There are at least 20 of these, I've only looked along the Richmond line .. I expect more of them with a complete search. ... I'll simply delete the lot? |
| 114679833 by Maradona11 @ 2021-12-07 23:16 | 1 | 2022-07-28 12:13 | tastrax ♦1,144 | Hi Folks - I noticed some sections of pathway are listed with surface=yes - this is not a normal surface tag. Any chance you check the details? |
| 2 | 2022-07-28 21:56 | Maradona11 | Hi, thank you for spotting that. [thumbs up]. | |
| 121221851 by Maradona11 @ 2022-05-20 04:19 | 1 | 2022-07-14 09:41 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Hi,Way: 1061949919 does not appear to have any main tags. It does have a tag that I cannot understand .. building:levels+elevator, this appears to be only used by 'TfNSW Connected Journeys Data Team'. Would you or mapsamillion78 or some other member of your team kindly respond to t... |
| 121691571 by Maradona11 @ 2022-05-30 05:38 | 1 | 2022-07-06 00:19 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Hi,Following your changes the Relation: Bankstown Line (9775430) a train route now has a gap See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=151.05959&lat=-33.90863&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=ptv2_routes_valid%2Cptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_erro... |
| 2 | 2022-07-06 00:21 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Note: I made some changes to the Canberra/Sydney route .. and am now fixing up the problems that created ... mutter mutter... | |
| 3 | 2022-07-10 07:03 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Apologies .. this was my error, now fixed. My changes made gaps in quite a few train routes unfortunately. Taken me this long to fix them ..all the PTv2 ones at lest. | |
| 114642816 by Maradona11 @ 2021-12-07 05:02 | 1 | 2021-12-08 05:32 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Hi,You have buildings within buildings.. that is an error. Possibly one of the 'buildings' is a building:part=*? I have 'fixed' duplicated nodes using JOSM Validator tools - automatic. |
| 2 | 2021-12-08 21:26 | Maradona11 | thanks for pointing that out.I go with current tags (building:levels) from now on. | |
| 114383268 by Maradona11 @ 2021-11-30 02:34 | 1 | 2021-11-30 23:25 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Building:part should not encompass the whole of the building outline... Way: 1007515114. |
| 107612266 by Maradona11 @ 2021-07-08 07:36 | 1 | 2021-07-08 13:13 | JoeG ♦34 | I don't think this change is appropriate, sorry.The name of the cafe actually does use the accents, see e.g. on their website: https://thecrepecafe.com/I suppose you could add an additional name:en if you would like. |
| 2 | 2021-07-08 23:28 | Maradona11 | 100% - I have reverted back to official name. | |
| 3 | 2021-07-09 08:09 | JoeG ♦34 | Thanks! | |
| 87761558 by Maradona11 @ 2020-07-09 11:05 | 1 | 2020-07-10 05:07 | aharvey ♦1,694 | ps https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_date is only for future dates, now that it's open it should be https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date per the wiki. |
| 61246264 by Maradona11 @ 2018-08-01 02:05 | 1 | 2020-03-29 01:10 | aharvey ♦1,694 | I know this is a year old, but per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:level the level tag is used to mark levels of a building, not as a generic layer sorting (that's layer=) or to indicate over/under ground (that's location=).Regardless it looks like in this changeset you've... |
| 2 | 2020-03-29 01:15 | aharvey ♦1,694 | reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/82767731 | |
| 81299823 by Maradona11 @ 2020-02-21 04:33 | 1 | 2020-03-07 07:33 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Hi,Way 775161958 tagged highway=footway with construction=yes is not how OSM does that ... it is highway=construction with construction=footway. Fixed this one. |
| 81703749 by Maradona11 @ 2020-03-03 01:54 | 1 | 2020-03-03 02:51 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Is your only source NSW LPI Imagery? One month ago this area was changed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80055995 due to re-development and construction to remove the turns. |
| 2 | 2020-03-03 04:31 | Maradona11 | I did rely on LPI imagery only!. Oversight not looking at last changeset. I have reverted my changes. thank you for letting us know. | |
| 78442602 by Maradona11 @ 2019-12-16 00:31 | 1 | 2019-12-16 01:45 | aharvey ♦1,694 | That's a different kind of gate, you've used https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway=lock_gateYou could instead use:barrier=gatethen say which modes of transport can and can't use it so typicallyfoot=yesbicycle=yesmotor_vehicle=no (or motor_vehicle=private)I... |
| 2 | 2019-12-16 01:46 | aharvey ♦1,694 | aren't locked, in which case it just means you need to out of the car to open it, but can still pass though. | |
| 76778728 by Maradona11 @ 2019-11-07 21:59 | 1 | 2019-11-07 23:39 | aharvey ♦1,694 | The level tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:level is something most commonly used for indoor mapping to say which floor of a building something is on.Per the wiki "For typical street and freeway crossings with bridges, layer=* should be used instead." |
| 76617579 by Maradona11 @ 2019-11-04 23:53 | 1 | 2019-11-05 01:33 | aharvey ♦1,694 | highway=pedestrian https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=pedestrian " is a road or an area mainly or exclusively for pedestrians in which some vehicle traffic may be authorized (e.g. emergency, taxi, delivery, ...)". Pitt Street Mall is a good example since it's mostly for p... |
| 2 | 2019-11-05 01:37 | aharvey ♦1,694 | also I noticed you've deleted https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/702219833 it might have changed recently, so maybe you can confirm but there did used to be a service road here for one of the driveways to exit out onto Bathurst street you can see the arrow on the road at https://ww... | |
| 3 | 2019-11-05 04:03 | Maradona11 | I was thinking of using footway but thought tagging it as pedestrian street should be more correct. I will change it to highway=footway as reading the wiki again it makes more sense to use. Regarding driveways on George St I will go and double check particular Georges south onto Bathurst St. I d... | |
| 4 | 2019-11-05 04:13 | aharvey ♦1,694 | No worries, based on that photo it looks like the service road is no longer there so all good. | |
| 76323672 by Maradona11 @ 2019-10-29 04:47 | 1 | 2019-10-29 12:40 | aharvey ♦1,694 | ps to tag a service road as in construction you either need to do construction:highway=service OR highway=construction + construction=service. You've missed the highway=construction here, and in a few other places. I've fixed it now. |
| 2 | 2019-10-29 22:19 | Maradona11 | I always have been confused on how to tag construction correctly. Hope I will get it one day! thank you for rectifying. | |
| 76131938 by Maradona11 @ 2019-10-24 04:37 | 1 | 2019-10-24 05:51 | aharvey ♦1,694 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/738103276I think you meant "public_transport" not "public_tra" ;-)same for the second one you've added. |
| 2 | 2019-10-24 21:06 | Maradona11 | thank you. now fixed:) | |
| 71770973 by Maradona11 @ 2019-07-01 04:49 | 1 | 2019-07-04 06:25 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Hi,When you change highway=proposed to something else the proposed=* tag should be removed. Other wise it is confusing, is it still proposed, or is it finished??? |
| 2 | 2019-07-04 23:10 | Maradona11 | Hi,me bad. I have fixed this now. thank you as always for pointing out my mistakes.. | |
| 68246836 by Maradona11 @ 2019-03-18 05:06 | 1 | 2019-04-09 01:13 | aharvey ♦1,694 | FYI I deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/677568453 since it was already mapped by https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/646291757 |
| 63627661 by Maradona11 @ 2018-10-17 23:17 | 1 | 2019-03-18 08:02 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Hi,Problems... I'll use Castle Hill Station as an example.At the moment there are 5 Castle Hill Stations.. there should only be one. I'd chose one of the nodes at this stage and leave that as the station. Then it should be tagged railway=construction, construction=station. The 3 bu... |
| 2 | 2019-03-19 02:00 | Maradona11 | Hi,Thank you for pointing that out. I have removed the names for the station buildings and added the construction tags as suggested.I already have added ways for the stations boundaries but we applied wrong tagging, which I have now fixed. Should we leave the node or remove it?Thanks agai... | |
| 3 | 2019-03-19 02:58 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Remove the node - it is a duplication of the way... I came across them using https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=147.21387&lat=-31.88315&zoom=6It is one of the quality tools for OSM. It is not free of its own errors... but it does a fair job. Do note the date when it ... | |
| 63667478 by Maradona11 @ 2018-10-19 05:41 | 1 | 2019-03-09 01:47 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | The LPI Base map shows a different alignment.It is not possible to use a GPS for the underground track. I suggest that the track be aligned to the LPI Base Map data. |
| 62750126 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-20 05:11 | 1 | 2018-09-20 10:33 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Same comment re https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3DsidewalkPS. this is probably considered mapping for the router as the pedestrian area is already mapped out, however since many routers have trouble routing over areas I can see how it's useful to also map it out as a way. |
| 2 | 2018-09-20 23:02 | Maradona11 | looking at this again, I also think these two pedestrian areas should not be joined together as they are on two different levels and not possible to walk between. thoughts? | |
| 3 | 2018-09-21 00:50 | aharvey ♦1,694 | I'm not 100% sure but it *might* make sense to use barrier=retaining_wall https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dretaining_wall on a shared way between the adjoining pedestrian areas, or perhaps using a different level or layer tag is enough to know they are on different levels. | |
| 62749228 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-20 04:10 | 1 | 2018-09-20 10:30 | aharvey ♦1,694 | See the wiki on the sidewalk tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dsidewalk sidewalks go along side a road, if not then it's it's not a footway. |
| 2 | 2018-09-20 23:07 | Maradona11 | confused, what do you suggest tagging it? | |
| 3 | 2018-09-21 00:45 | aharvey ♦1,694 | I've fixed it up now, it's just highway=footway I think this was made more confusing due to https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2018-September/012072.html the outcome of that is to change the ID preset translation back to the american term "sidewalk". | |
| 62471851 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-11 02:14 | 1 | 2018-09-11 14:10 | aharvey ♦1,694 | nit picking on this, but the sydney harbour tunnel shouldn't share a node with the ferry route since they aren't connected, see https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/62471851 |
| 2 | 2018-09-12 03:52 | Maradona11 | reverted. | |
| 62359717 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-07 02:43 | 1 | 2018-09-07 04:19 | aharvey ♦1,694 | same issue here wrt bus=designated on nodes |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 12:36 | Maradona11 | Changeset reverted | |
| 62358025 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-06 23:54 | 1 | 2018-09-07 04:03 | aharvey ♦1,694 | what does no=service here mean? |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 12:34 | Maradona11 | Changeset reverted | |
| 62358264 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-07 00:19 | 1 | 2018-09-07 04:00 | aharvey ♦1,694 | same issue here wrt bus=designated on nodes. |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 12:34 | Maradona11 | Changset reverted | |
| 62358301 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-07 00:22 | 1 | 2018-09-07 03:52 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Could you hold off the mass change please? Manually changes are prefered as it's all too easy to make mistakes with mass changes. eg. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/719962298 |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 04:16 | aharvey ♦1,694 | See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport#Buses according to docs, bus=yes means that this public transport stop is a bus stop. It's not an access tag. | |
| 3 | 2018-09-07 12:33 | Maradona11 | Changeset reverted | |
| 62358945 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-07 01:23 | 1 | 2018-09-07 03:40 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Re. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/369623933 are you sure the whole road isn't called Mons Road, with the T-way route going on that road? What do the signs on the ground say? |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 12:32 | Maradona11 | Change set reverted | |
| 62359347 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-07 02:09 | 1 | 2018-09-07 03:36 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Is https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/26315574 really bus=designated? |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 03:37 | aharvey ♦1,694 | PS. psv=yes is not needed on residential roads, public service vehicles are already assumed to be allow to drive on residential roads. | |
| 3 | 2018-09-07 12:31 | Maradona11 | Changset reverted | |
| 62359437 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-07 02:17 | 1 | 2018-09-07 03:35 | aharvey ♦1,694 | You've (probably accidentally) added bus=designated to all the nodes on these ways, plus in your other changesets too I think. The the tags on the ways are sufficient. This can happen if you use select all in JOSM (not a good idea), best to manually select each to avoid accidentally tagging the... |
| 2 | 2018-09-07 06:17 | Maradona11 | Can I revert to prior my changes today? and yes I will take your advice and do it on individual segment basis from now on. | |
| 3 | 2018-09-07 06:36 | aharvey ♦1,694 | That's probably the easiest and safest way forward (as opposed to trying to do another mass edit), then you can go through and reapply the bus=designated to the T-way road segments (and not the nodes).The reverter plugin for JOSM works well, it will probably tell you there's a conflict... | |
| 4 | 2018-09-07 12:28 | Maradona11 | I have reverted all my changes made today regarding bus=designated ways and Nodes!I used josm reverter which worked well.I will be manually tagging the roads from now on.Thank you for your feedback and advice. | |
| 62239966 by Maradona11 @ 2018-09-03 08:45 | 1 | 2018-09-03 12:43 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Do you know who can actually use T-Ways, the signage I've seen just says "No Entry, Authorised T-Way Vehicles Excepted".psv includes Taxis (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access) are you sure Taxis are allowed to use the T-Way? |
| 2 | 2018-09-03 23:09 | Maradona11 | You are correct. Tway should not been tagged psv=yes as Taxis are not allowed.Im finding many of the tways tagged incorrectly and inconsistantly in and around Sydney. What would be your recommendation tagging the Sydney Tways? No access, Bus=yes ?? | |
| 3 | 2018-09-04 00:21 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Thanks for confirming that. I've reverted this change, as it was correct before, access=no (as generally no one can access it) and then say who can, in this case busses acting in a public service vehicle, since it's designated and not just permitted for busses we should use bus=designated ... | |
| 62157986 by Maradona11 @ 2018-08-31 02:24 | 1 | 2018-08-31 02:40 | WoodWoseWulf ♦1,163 | Okay, I'll bite... what do you mean by "hand of god" in every one of your change sets? It sometimes makes it difficult to track what you are doing, haha. |
| 2 | 2018-08-31 10:15 | nevw ♦1,974 | You will see the ‘hand of god’ reference in this article https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_MaradonaI quite like the term being used in the comments and see as appropriate to his username as long as it also has a brief description of the changeset changes. | |
| 3 | 2018-09-03 03:52 | Maradona11 | Yes I should be more clearer in describing what I have changed and the source that Im using. I will try to improve on this in with my future edits.My apologies. | |
| 61701663 by Maradona11 @ 2018-08-16 03:11 | 1 | 2018-08-20 09:16 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Not a great change set comment. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 56369635 by Maradona11 @ 2018-02-15 00:58 | 1 | 2018-08-17 00:36 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Looking at the history of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219863544/history highway=pedestrian "is a road or an area mainly or exclusively for pedestrians in which some vehicle traffic may be authorized (e.g. emergency, taxi, delivery, ...)" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highwa... |
| 61536735 by Maradona11 @ 2018-08-10 12:58 | 1 | 2018-08-11 04:40 | Warin61 ♦2,663 | Breaks relation of Sydney Harbor. Removes the end of wharf 5 Circular Quay ... Reverted. |
| 46860623 by Maradona11 @ 2017-03-15 07:13 | 1 | 2018-05-06 02:21 | aharvey ♦1,694 | I removed the node you added for Redfern inhttps://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/58719569 and place it on a new area way around the whole station. It's good practice to only have one railway=station for Redfern as there is only one station here. See the wiki for railway=station for further de... |
| 46913865 by Maradona11 @ 2017-03-16 23:57 | 1 | 2018-04-16 09:26 | aharvey ♦1,694 | why was railway=station removed? I don't see any other railway=station for Central that existed at the time. https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xW0Someone since created https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5124591624 but I'm tempted to delete that and put it on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way... |
| 52613241 by Maradona11 @ 2017-10-04 03:48 | 1 | 2017-10-05 13:36 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Hey mate,I think it's better to not snap things like parks, parking etc to the road, and instead try to mark out the exact extent which doesn't normally extend out until the road center line.If for cartographic reasons that effect is desired it's better to do that as a post pr... |
| 2 | 2017-10-06 00:40 | Maradona11 | hi mate,yeah I attend to agree with that we should be marking out exact extent of a feature in most cases. However, I find better to snap non-routeable objects (exlude buildings) to the road centre line as it is much more visual appealing when looking at map tiles generated from osm data from m... | |
| 3 | 2017-10-06 01:20 | aharvey ♦1,694 | Check out:https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/17501/when-mapping-polygons-surrounded-by-streets-should-they-share-nodes-or-be-traced-separatelyAnd http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Areas_and_Ways_Sharing_Nodes "...when the way is a highway, it usu... | |
| 46860568 by Maradona11 @ 2017-03-15 07:09 | 1 | 2017-03-16 08:45 | jinalfoflia ♦63 | Hi Maradona11,The information that you added as node in this changeset (Macdonaltown) seems to be already mapped (checkout the building nearby). Ideally we should avoid adding redundant information to OSM. It'll be great if you can resolve this by adding the missing information to that buil... |
| 39058536 by Maradona11 @ 2016-05-03 05:47 | 1 | 2016-11-10 11:23 | aharvey ♦1,694 | I don't believe leisure=park is appropriate for http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415194166. I think it should simply be landuse=residential. |
| 43394458 by Maradona11 @ 2016-11-04 04:09 | 1 | 2016-11-04 07:57 | glglgl ♦274 | Splitting the changes in Australia and the one change in Iceland into two changesets would have made those changesets quite small, compared to this one. |
| 43349299 by Maradona11 @ 2016-11-02 11:51 | 1 | 2016-11-03 07:54 | glglgl ♦274 | It would be better to group the changes by region and not to put everything into one huge changeset. See how the changeset now unnecessarily includes nearly all Africa, Europe and Asia. |
| 2 | 2016-11-03 21:05 | Maradona11 | Correct. I will take that on board. Thanks:) |