Baloo Uriza have been discussed with 163 replies of this OpenStreetMap ContributorBaloo Uriza have been discussed with 163 replies of this OpenStreetMap Contributor| Changeset | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 178199091 by Baloo Uriza @ 2026-02-06 17:48 ~ 2 months ago | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | NEOK Ground Truth ♦8 | I can confirm onsite signs match this name. I have extended this label in changeset 178334485. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178199091 |
| 178333048 by Baloo Uriza @ 2026-02-09 22:47 ~ 2 months ago | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | NEOK Ground Truth ♦8 | Thank you. I had this mislabeled. I have fixed the other culvert that I had labeled this way in changeset 178334656. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178333048 |
| 168143395 by Baloo Uriza @ 2025-06-26 14:38 ~ 9 months ago | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | Hello!You usedlanduse=educationalon https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/773895453/historyHave you maybe meantlanduse=education?I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).Or have you ... |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | Baloo Uriza | Yup, that was a typo. Got it. | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | thanks! Both for fix and for mapping this one and in general! | |
| 176843164 by Baloo Uriza @ 2026-01-05 02:33 ~ 3 months ago | 1 | ~ 3 months ago | VLD319 ♦8 | Hi Baloo_Uriza,It appears that the tag for name=South Denver Avenue West was removed from W15049115, W80378527, and W263275340 in this changeset. Looking at the history I see that you just updated the name for this road in a previous changeset and this removal may have been unintentional. Would ... |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | Baloo Uriza | Yeah, that was definitely unintentional and I'm not entirely sure how I pulled that off. | |
| 168975089 by Baloo Uriza @ 2025-07-15 16:46 ~ 9 months ago | 1 | ~ 3 months ago | QuiLe ♦49 | Hi, I'm working on adding addr tags around SH 78, and it seems there is no Name tag for specific sections, particularly for Sachse, Texas. The issue I'm running into is that all the address tags for businesses and buildings now have outdated or incorrect names since the street name was rem... |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | Baloo Uriza | That's a problem with the validator. References are not street names and don't go in the name tag. You can safely tell your validator of choice to ignore it if the address is right, just doesn't match the name of the street, it's a common and known shortcoming with most validat... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 months ago | democat ♦26 | Isn't SH 78 signed on the ground as the street name though? | |
| 4 | ~ 3 months ago | democat ♦26 | at least in Sachse it is | |
| 5 | ~ 3 months ago | QuiLe ♦49 | Yes in Sachse it’s signed as SH 78 or HWY 78. Expanded then it should be State Highway 78 or Highway 78 | |
| 6 | ~ 3 months ago | Baloo Uriza | No, incorrect, that's what noname=yes is for. The name is only the name, never the highway number. | |
| 7 | ~ 3 months ago | Baloo Uriza | The name tag is actually really well documented in the wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only | |
| 8 | ~ 3 months ago | QuiLe ♦49 | I see that now. Would it still be appropriate to at least use short_name to list the name as listed on a street sign? | |
| 9 | ~ 3 months ago | Baloo Uriza | I wouldn't think so, because it's still not an name of the way, but even on the route route relation, that'd still not be a name. | |
| 176008996 by Baloo Uriza @ 2025-12-16 14:40 ~ 4 months ago | 1 | ~ 3 months ago | santoshipanwar_lyft ♦4 | Hi Baloo Uriza,My name is Santoshi, and I’m a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft.Thank you very much for your insight and feedback. Regarding the edits, I added the roads based on the available evidence. After adding them, a warning appeared stating that “Bus route MetroLink Tulsa looks ... |
| 156531223 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-09-12 14:24 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | dannmer ♦32 | Has the bridge construction been completed? The Strava heat map shows activiity but that could just mean that the bridge was open to pedestrian/bike traffic during construction |
| 5100894 by Baloo Uriza @ 2010-06-28 20:08 ~ 15 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/60950229/history has maxheight = 4.4704 that was added in this editthis value is unexpectedly long and detailed - is it really correct? |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | Baloo Uriza | These were metric conversions because at the time I didn't know the correct notation for legacy units typically posted instead of meters here. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | Baloo Uriza | Also 15 years ago...wow, that would have been one of my earliest Oklahoma edits... | |
| 175410009 by Baloo Uriza @ 2025-12-02 16:20 ~ 4 months ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | VLD192 ♦10 | Hello,I am reaching out regarding some edits made in this changeset. While I understand the name tag updates, the removal of the crossing data seems to be a regression. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1088318384/history, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1136328446/history, and https://www... |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | Baloo Uriza | the changesets being reverted were primarily about stripping sidewalks of their street names. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | Baloo Uriza | Reverting those changesets was done to restore names incorrectly stripped from cycleways and sidewalks. | |
| 112815029 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-10-22 01:34 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 months ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9191940138/history has maxspeed = variable that was added in this editCan maxspeed:variable be used instead? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed:variable (feel free to retag it by yourself if it seems like a good idea to you) |
| 2 | ~ 8 months ago | Baloo Uriza | Looks like it's already being used. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 months ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | I meant "instead" as opposed to "in addition to", in other words can maxspeed=variable be removed | |
| 4 | ~ 6 months ago | Baloo Uriza | Sure, especially since the proper conditional speed is already on the following segment eastbound. | |
| 5 | ~ 5 months ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | edited | |
| 157266311 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-09-29 18:16 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 6 months ago | _dsm ♦6 | Hi, Baloo Uriza,I noticed that you changed the street name from South Memorial Drive to South Memorial Drive East in this changeset: https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/478913669I've tried to check available sources (e.g. street-level imagery like Bing Maps), but couldn’t confirm... |
| 2 | ~ 6 months ago | Baloo Uriza | With the exception of only about 3 or 4 streets, all streets in Tulsa start and end with a cardinal direction. The county's official map includes this information, and there's several signs that include both the lead and trailing direction (though there is no consistent signage in Tulsa, ... | |
| 3 | ~ 6 months ago | Baloo Uriza | You can confirm this information yourself by contacting the Indian Nations Council of Governments and requesting the address database. | |
| 4 | ~ 6 months ago | _dsm ♦6 | Thanks for your respond! | |
| 170689765 by Baloo Uriza @ 2025-08-19 19:49 ~ 8 months ago | 1 | ~ 8 months ago | Lejun ♦513 | Is there a reason for you to make so much multipolygons?BTW someone else uploaded the buildings right before you, some of them are duplicated. |
| 136001119 by Baloo Uriza @ 2023-05-12 05:14 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 months ago | bbmiller ♦105 | Hi! You marked V Street as under construction in this changeset, with an expected open date in 2023. Seems like it's probably open now, but since I'm not local I'm not sure. I figured you might know, though? |
| 2 | ~ 8 months ago | Baloo Uriza | Hi there! Thanks for pointing that out. 156 is indeed open through there now (and this is why I try to use opening dates when I tag construction when possible).Was a bit confused, apparently TIGER imported the V Street name. I made it match the segments north and south since that seems far mo... | |
| 158991590 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-11-11 02:44 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022142242/history has shop = buildings that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)shop=buildings ? Is someone selling real estate (build houses)? Ready-to-build wooden houses on your property? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Literally drive up with a trailer and take home a shed or tiny house. A surprisingly common business in the region. | |
| 3 | ~ 10 months ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | maybe shop=mobile_house would work? or are these mobile only once, you can drive them to your area but after that these are not movable?shop=tiny_house_or_shed ? A bit silly but clearly distinguishes it from selling real estate or building materialsmaybe there is a better tag for that? | |
| 4 | ~ 10 months ago | Baloo Uriza | I'm open for suggestions, I'm just shallow on them after getting shot down on shop=buildings | |
| 163209458 by Baloo Uriza @ 2025-03-04 16:34 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | TheNightRider ♦57 | I noticed you added capacity:disabled=1 but left the wheelchair:description=1 stallShould the wheelchair:description=1 stall be removed? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Yes, that's correct, I intended to remove that wheelchair description. | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | TheNightRider ♦57 | Thanks, and thanks for removing it!BTW, OSM tagging is getting a bit complex, but I like reading the docs. Would you say the OSM documentation is up to date? Does it generally keep up to date or go in spurts where it gets out of date then gets updated? | |
| 4 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Kinda sorta. Helps to look around the wiki and the map a bit to figure out what's going on. The lanes page is outright wrong and some people puppyguarding the wiki keep trying to insist bike lanes and permanently closed lanes aren't "lanes", so you have to take what you're... | |
| 5 | ~ 1 year ago | TheNightRider ♦57 | Heh heh, well, anything done by humans is imperfect, but we try. | |
| 6 | ~ 1 year ago | TheNightRider ♦57 | The tagging scheme you recommended (amenity=construction + construction=charging_station) worked while another editor's suggestion didn't (construction:amenity=charging_station). So, thanks again! I've made the change to all stations I've mapped, and I'm pleased to see t... | |
| 7 | ~ 1 year ago | TheNightRider ♦57 | Now just have to wait for those tiles to get re-rendered. :) | |
| 163209721 by Baloo Uriza @ 2025-03-04 16:39 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | TheNightRider ♦57 | This amenity is not under construction ( start_date: 2023-10-27). Maybe the comment was meant for another changeset? |
| 107104891 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-06-28 18:35 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | dannmer ♦32 | There are sidewalks named as South Harvard Avenue East that are adjacent to the road and a sidewalk which are mapped as North Harvard Avenue East. I believe that the problem begins at East Admiral Place and extends north. |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Yeah, you're right. I forgot to swap the tag as I drew north and you are correct at the location of the split. | |
| 160403467 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-12-19 17:10 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | vtrtsxlegend ♦23 | Hi Baloo Uriza, thank you for making us aware of placement tags. We will make sure to take them into account in future edits to prevent similar situations that caused you reverting the 14 changesets |
| 157320638 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-10-01 04:03 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | ArgyleZombie ♦7 | It's good that you added houses and addresses, but I disagree with the addition of street direction suffixes in this changeset and others of your recent changesets. For example, you've changed "South Yorktown Avenue" to "South Yorktown Avenue East," a name which is... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Kinda-sorta. I see both as valid.I'm local on North Yorktown myself, and have done a lot of field service work, with INCOG supplying me with the address database to conflate (open government data). The signage is highly inconsistant. In Kendall Whittier, there's signs claming the s... | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Also to stay consistent with OKC, Portland and other "directional" cities, I'm wondering if we could stay consistent on using name=* being the official name, and use loc_name=* for what locals call it and official_name=* for official but awkward names? When I first moved here I was o... | |
| 4 | ~ 1 year ago | ArgyleZombie ♦7 | I get what you're saying about trying to be consistent; and multiple sources aren't consistent with each other. I go by original neighborhood plat maps, street signs, and I spot-check one or two addresses with the USPS. Usually at least the USPS agrees with the street signs, which also a... | |
| 5 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Searching the USPS also isn't really an argument here because their database is proprietary so apologies for me completely ignoring a source we can't use at all.Only other person who's edited as much locally as I have is NE2 but he's the first person banned for life from OSM ... | |
| 6 | ~ 1 year ago | ArgyleZombie ♦7 | I still strongly disagree with what you're doing with the direction suffixes, and I am continuing the conversation on the community forum:https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/road-names-being-changed-to-official-names-only-used-in-government-databases/122517 | |
| 158725056 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-11-04 04:23 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | CjMalone ♦248 | Bad form to use OSM to promote the climate emergency. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158725056 |
| 158255754 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-10-23 14:09 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | jmilton2 ♦1 | Thanks for updating. |
| 152649902 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-06-13 20:46 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | wireguy ♦564 | Baloo, it's not a boardwalk, but it's part of 17603094, a maritime relation? seems odd |
| 5239083 by Baloo Uriza @ 2010-07-17 03:41 ~ 15 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Allison P ♦1,146 | How do you deem minor roads like those around https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/14951155 as tertiary? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | Baloo Uriza | Might have overclassified some of those a notch and don't see a problem with those being listed as unclassified. County roads tend to be tertiaries generally but Osage County is a strange duck. | |
| 153015060 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-06-22 04:36 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Sajeevini sivajothy ♦119 | Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work, and it looks good.#OMGuru#OSMCha --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153015060 |
| 152948214 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-06-20 14:15 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | MyoKyawKyaw ♦124 | Thanks for your contribution. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152948214 |
| 152947400 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-06-20 13:56 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | MyoKyawKyaw ♦124 | Thanks for update contribution. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152947400 |
| 150814049 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-05-02 22:37 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Aarogya Pandey ♦266 | Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150814049 |
| 147314267 by Baloo Uriza @ 2024-02-11 02:58 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,769 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1112158681/history has shop = house that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)shop=house ? Are they selling houses? Products for furnishing house? Something else? ( shop=prefabricated_house for say prefabricated houses being sold there? ) |
| 136436440 by Baloo Uriza @ 2023-05-23 03:36 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | lipuma ♦179 | Hi Baloo Uriza, in this changeset you added the `lewis bus route' relation which contains this tag: `sS=81st Street South'. Is this correct? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Whoops, fixed it. Pretty sure I got interrupted and didn't realize I changed something. | |
| 123831824 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-07-20 05:02 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ZeLonewolf ♦576 | This changeset added expressway=yes to a county boundary (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1822195). I assume that's a goof :-D |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Fixed. | |
| 134885369 by Baloo Uriza @ 2023-04-14 04:52 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ElliottPlack ♦937 | Hi, I see you've made this a trunk, but it doesn't meet the trunk criteria as laid out in the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance wiki guidance. I surveyed (walking and biking) along most of the route and it operates like a primary str... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I've driven it myself and it feels a lot like an expressway to me, given the seamless flow from controlled access to limited access and back with no transition along the way, with only a couple blocks in the middle rather fitting a potential lower classification, but that seemed inconsistent wi... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Adam Franco ♦170 | As described in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance , `highway=trunk` is not to be used for indicating enhanced "expressway"-type construction, but rather the regional connectivity importance of a road. If this does have mostly "expre... | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | Joseph R P ♦424 | Hello, trunk roads that are stubs and lack a connection to another motorway or trunk route at its terminus or those that are bypassed by highways that are better for long-distance traveling (such as I 40) are better fit with highway=primary and expressway=yes. The segment of OKC Boulevard between I ... | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I don't think this is a surface street or a freeway, though. It's somewhere between the two. They literally bulldozed I 40 and replaced it with... a proto-freeway instead of something remotely sensible. | |
| 6 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Also if everybody could assume good faith and dial back the hostility, that would be great and in-line with the CoC. | |
| 7 | ~ 3 years ago | Joseph R P ♦424 | I, and I'm sure everyone else, am not trying to be as hostile and I apologize if it's coming off that way. It can simply get tedious to have to explain over-and-over what has been happening for the past 2 or so years regarding the OSM trunk network in the US just to be ignored or have the ... | |
| 8 | ~ 3 years ago | ElliottPlack ♦937 | I did not detect any hostility here. I think we're all able to reach a rational conclusion. The western side meets motorway standards which is the only highway classification that is strictly based on roadway characteristics (full access control). The east side is a surface street with 6 lanes,... | |
| 9 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | So, the thing is, I think most mappers are quite used to there being a level between motorway and trunk for all the weird expressway (and superstroad) type things like this, given that highway=trunk historically has meant expressway=yes in the US. I also think the sample size of who was consulted w... | |
| 10 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | So, what exactly are we calling an expressway wearing a stroad tube top that barely covers three blocks now, if not this? | |
| 11 | ~ 3 years ago | Joseph R P ♦424 | An expressway would be any non-motorway road (or section of road) that has motorway characteristics, such as; a dual-carriageway, high-speed highway with a mix of grade separations and signalized intersections, driveways, etc. (like US 75 from Tulsa to Bartlesville);a freeway that is undivid... | |
| 12 | ~ 3 years ago | Joseph R P ♦424 | I think OKC Boulevard should be tagged as a motorway at the western section, and primary for the rest of the route with expressway=yes at the non-surface street sections. | |
| 13 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I don't think any part of it is a motorway anymore (again, expressways have ramps, too), but I do think all but the middle 3 stroad blocks are an expressway. It's basically Salem Parkway except unlike Salem Parkway, it never actually steps down into fitting its surroundings and integratin... | |
| 14 | ~ 3 years ago | Adam Franco ♦170 | The move away from expressway==trunk toward splitting those meanings into a separate expressway=yes and highway=* meaning connectivity-importance involved 17 participants on almost 70 messages on the [talk-us] mailing list beginning in May 2021 followed by more than 50 participants writing over 4,00... | |
| 60713812 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-07-14 14:47 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ElliottPlack ♦937 | Hi Baloo, any idea about the purpose of this ghost ramp? No issues with this edit, I'm just curious. I was thinking it could have been a peel off exit from 35/40 but then they just use the cloverleaf. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | No idea myself but if I had to guess, I would guess it connected to Lottie Avenue, since they're pointed at each other. | |
| 51524311 by Baloo Uriza @ 2017-08-28 23:33 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Mapiate ♦35 | Hi Baloo Uriza, I know this changeset was from several years ago but was wondering if you might remember it? I suspect that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/14850674 is a Service Road and not a Residential Road. It looks like an old TIGER import but in imagery appears to be the entrance/exit to a p... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I have no idea which object you're referencing. | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Mapiate ♦35 | In the history, 7th Street had a speed limit added for 35mph on way 14850674. I was reaching out just in case you have local knowledge that is more current than aerial imagery. If you don't recall the changeset, then no worries. I'll continue to look for other sources. | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Oh, inside the city the default county speed limit could probably get popped off, along with its source tagging. | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | Mapiate ♦35 | Thanks for sharing your insight! | |
| 89363968 by Baloo Uriza @ 2020-08-13 15:09 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | CurlingMan13 ♦2,090 | A user went through and deleted a lot of these roadways in this changeset and others in:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133145661I tried reverting, but the revert site had an issue. Not sure why. Maybe you can help sort it out. I'm reporting user to DWG as well. |
| 121794446 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-06-01 06:11 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | CurlingMan13 ♦2,090 | :OLooks like you dragged a node and a note finally caught it.Node: 147775677I've resolved it. |
| 129385110 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-11-25 23:05 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ZeLonewolf ♦576 | FYI, Tulsa city boundary is reporting errors in JOSM.https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/184985Not sure what changeset caused it. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Fully aware of that, it's also an extremely long and twisted boundary to try to sort out and it's been mostly broken since import. | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | ZeLonewolf ♦576 | In theory fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/129760445 | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Maybe for continuity but not for conflation! At some point someone's gonna have to get some proper legal descriptions for a lot of the boundaries around metro Tulsa and conflate them properly. Biggest hassle is working out where the line is on the property edges along the street and where the... | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | ZeLonewolf ♦576 | I'll let you sort the exact location of the boundary lines. In the meantime, at least I've got an intact geometry for data processing ;) | |
| 127977518 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-10-24 02:07 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ZeLonewolf ♦576 | Hello,The Tulsa boundary relation is currently reporting 3 errors in the JOSM validator. I'd attempt to fix it but I'm pretty sure you have a better handle on this one. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Which Tulsa (city or county)?I would expect both are pretty bad right now, and I've been trying to get it sorted but boundaries in Oklahoma are quite complex. I've been untangling boundaries as I map other things in the area because it's really the only way to not go insane at th... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | ZeLonewolf ♦576 | The issue I ran into was with the city:https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/184985I have not looked at the county boundary. | |
| 51523937 by Baloo Uriza @ 2017-08-28 22:55 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Allison P ♦1,146 | Am I really meant to believe that random suburban roads in the middle of towns have an unposted speed limit of 45? Not something lower imposed by the town? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Inside an incorporated city, it's probably safe to remove the default speed limit, though as the code is written, that would be the case if the town doesn't have something lower within the county.Is there a specific town you have in mind? | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Allison P ♦1,146 | Sure, try Heavener.But this bulk edit also adds speed limits to crappy TIGER roads, like private driveways, forest tracks, and even just nonsense. Based on that I can't imagine the real roads' speed limit will be much better. | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Looked up Heavener's municipal code (which actually had a pretty decent description of their local speed limits) and updated based off that and a better understanding of who controls which roads than I had 5 years ago. Not my highest quality work, I had about 20 minutes over breakfast before l... | |
| 126843395 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-09-30 23:16 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | sbelemey ♦52 | Hello, Baloo Uriza! I noticed that you have added many roads primary and trunks which intersect actual roads and causing issues in OSM roads connectivity, as I can see the edit were done by JOSM, did you plan to do such edits? And what is the ground truth for them?best regards,sbelemey |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | US 81 is mostly what I was working on in this changeset, this particular one getting details around Enid (lanes in particular) updated.Might I ask why this is drawing hostility now after I've been working on lanes for basically a decade at this point? | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | sbelemey ♦52 | Hello!Thanks for your answer. I’m sorry if it looks like hostility, but I just really don’t found any source for this road, and it also does not connect to other roads, that’s why I just were worried that maybe it wasn’t planned mapping. best regards,sbelemey | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | boopington ♦66 | is this supposed to be some testing? | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | MikeN ♦357 | It looks like US 81 was duplicated, for example this stop sign is in the middle of Lake Ellsworth. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10065537792 | |
| 6 | ~ 3 years ago | boopington ♦66 | yea im starting to wonder if he hasn't noticed it. | |
| 7 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | You're right, I didn't see it until you pointed out the Lake Ellsworth giveaway. I'm fairly certain this goof was limited to just the pasted version, but I'm doublechecking. | |
| 8 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | OK, looks like it was a clean copy and transform missing the relation, so this *should* be fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/128060909My confusion was definitely the buried lede, copying US 81 to the southwest was definitely not my intention. | |
| 9 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Anyrate, sorry for the goof, thanks for the catch. | |
| 122235574 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-06-11 05:56 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | wireguy ♦564 | Baloo, multipolygon is not closed error on Bixby. Tulsa is missing a role for one of the members. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Oof, OK, I'll try to track down what happened. Super not a fan of Oklahoma's annexation rules that make for extraordinarily fiddly work. I'm trying to get it cleaned up around my area since it's *baaad* and not something that most people can do without having some idea how boun... | |
| 116278161 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-01-18 02:57 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | SherbetS ♦155 | Hello Baloo Uriza,on this object, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9427084064you used the tag man_made=communications_tower when in reality the object is actually man_made=mast + tower:type=communicationI understand this is likely due to the confusing nature of the JOSM plugin, but ple... |
| 115821920 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-01-06 05:59 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | SherbetS ♦155 | Hey Baloo,Please don't use the tag man_made=communications tower for communications objects; in the united states, the vast majority are instead man_made=mast + tower:type=communication. |
| 117130462 by Baloo Uriza @ 2022-02-07 18:10 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Trevor_1 ♦274 | Hi, is there a reason why you took the time to split all these segments and write "fix me" on all of these, but you didn't take the time to actually check the lanes yourself? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | iD sucks for lane tagging still and I knew where I wanted to split it later when mapping from JOSM. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | Trevor_1 ♦274 | It might be easier if you didn't split the road at every single intersection. What's the purpose of that? | |
| 115037598 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-12-17 06:47 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | ZeLonewolf ♦576 | Hi, it would be helpful if you could put more meaningful comments in your changesets.See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments |
| 59354213 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-05-29 01:33 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | txemt ♦79 | Why is this split into two segments for a very short length? What is the purpose of splitting this? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | There's a substantial physical barrier separating the two sides going under the railroad. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | txemt ♦79 | A physical barrier of what.....15'? How is that substantial? | |
| 112007345 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-10-02 16:17 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | txemt ♦79 | Why is this segment a primary? What happened to continuation of the road it's attached to? |
| 112006387 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-10-02 15:52 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Carnildo ♦908 | You've tagged a power line as a primary road here. I've undone it, but please be more careful in the future. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Thanks, mybad. | |
| 110486092 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-08-31 03:10 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 ♦222 | Hello. I noticed that you removed the landuse=residental tag from a bunch of areas. You probably should have left them. Since it's if they co-exist with the place tag. Something can be both a residential area and a neighborhood. So, I'd appreciate it if you re-added landuse=residential to ... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Problem is there's a lot in the middle that isn't actually residential. Landuses should be congruent with the actual landuse, not entire districts. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 ♦222 | From what I can tell at least Military Park is all residential. So is West End with the exception of a church in the middle. Which isn't an issue. The only neighborhood that might have that problem is May-Penn, but in that case you can pretty easily just map a residential area inside the neighb... | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | landuse=* is lot-level tagging, not district level. A named landuse=residential area should be an apartment complex or a gated subdivision at most. Otherwise you definitely have a lot of space that definitely should be landuse=highway in the middle at every publicly owned street.Large landuse ... | |
| 5 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Suggested iterative improvement would be to make sure these polygons actually fit the actual neighborhood boundaries (they're close but obviously not fully inclusive), and then tag groups of lots congruent to the boundaries with landuse=*. Outside of very limited edge cases, if your landuse=* ... | |
| 6 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | That said, landuse=highway and government land use outside of prisons and military bases doesn't currently have a good tagging, so AFAICT the best practice for landuse tagging on public commons is to not tag it at all. | |
| 7 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 ♦222 | "landuse=* is lot-level tagging, not district level."Wrong. According to the Wiki "The landuse tag is mostly used for larger areas and not at parcel granularity." In the meantime, a neighborhood isn't really a "district" and it's perfectly fine to tag the... | |
| 8 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 ♦222 | Also, "AFAICT the best practice for landuse tagging on public commons is to not tag it at all."Cool that you have that opinion. Don't map landuse tagging where you that's the case. I could really care less. The problem is that you removed landuse=residential tags from areas o... | |
| 9 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | No, they're not mutually exclusive but given the neighborhoods where it did get retagged, landuse=anything isn't an appropriate value ever for those polygons. Literally zero of them are purely residential landuse. | |
| 10 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | landuse=residential is only appropriate for areas where homes and apartments are. It's not appropriate where public roads are, for example. | |
| 11 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 ♦222 | "Literally zero of them are purely residential landuse."The ones I pointed out are. The fact that there's a church in the middle of one of them doesn't suddenly make it not residential landuse. Same for things like parks. You can map a church yard or a park inside a residenti... | |
| 12 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | OK Karen. Calm down. landuse=residential is absolutely incorrect in this case and landuse=residential should be smaller areas that actually fit the land use. | |
| 13 | ~ 4 years ago | Adamant1 ♦222 | Yeah sure, I'm the one that needs to calm down. Yet your the one making up things and throwing around racist, sexist, insults instead of just saying how landuse=residential is incorrect. Right... | |
| 679776 by Baloo Uriza @ 2009-02-25 23:13 ~ 17 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | orthocircular ♦123 | I know it's a looooong time ago but do you have any objection to me removing names/descriptions from drive-thrus and driveways? It "looks" like there are roads named stuff like Dairy Queen Drive-thru and Capitol Market (Road) but they're really just slightly overzealous naming. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Knock yourself out! I was pretty new when i was active in this area and that sounds totally fair. | |
| 105181620 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-05-23 19:14 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | ianlopez1115 ♦372 | Appreciate the revert. Will use more recent imagery to mark the location of bus stops. |
| 104688698 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-05-14 13:52 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | ElliottPlack ♦937 | Hey there! Nice work adding the construction values—I overlooked that. I wanted to point out that the access tags are not redundant for roads that are closed or under construction. The standard prefix for a “closed road” sets the access to no in order to supersede all other access ... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Baloo Uriza | highway=construction implies access=no. I usually don't (and generally don't consider it best practice) to retag access=no, as highway=construction, as it's generally tagged and consumed already, already overrides as not being accessible. This also makes reversibility easier, since ... | |
| 102763330 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-04-12 02:28 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | SherbetS ♦155 | Hello,Please use the tag man_made=mast + tower:type=communication for communication masts next time. |
| 102590620 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-04-08 21:19 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Torrwin ♦1 | This isn't a school, it's a church with a large open sports pitch used by several different leagues |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Nice catch, I thought it was a school based on top down profile and position relative to a strip-park with a MUP, which tends to be the prime nonmotorized connection to schools. | |
| 101744221 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-03-25 20:42 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | allkrupa ♦4 | Hi,Thank you for reviewing and correcting the edit, Apologies for the wrong addition of road segment, will ensure not to repeat such errors. Looking forward to learn more from you. regards,allkrupa. |
| 98004357 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-01-23 04:53 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | stromo ♦13 | Hi Baloo,why have you deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8810770/history without comment? Was it a mistake?Best wishes |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | The railroad hasn't existed in a long time. There also is no passenger rail service there, which is what route=railway is for. | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Additionally if the idea was to tag operator=*, then name and Midland Valley is also wrong. Not sure what, if any, that branch has, and the operator is definitely Tulsa Sapulpa Union Railroad | |
| 100523355 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-03-06 07:02 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | YTaulai_lyft ♦2 | Hello Baloo Uriza,My name is Yuliya and I am a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft.While mapping in Orange county, CA, I noticed that you changed some tags for the ways, such as “lanes=*”, “turn:lanes=*”, “bicycle:lanes=*” at several ways (https://www.openstreetm... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | There's four lanes. The bicycle lane counts as a lane. The whole idea that a lane doesn't count just because of modal access is both preposterous and doesn't agree with other types of reserved lane tagging, does it? The wiki seems extremely wrong here. just logically working it out... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | In the case of shared lane, that's clearly visible where the lane line changes to a broken line. In California, this indicates that the lane is shared with other traffic for that length. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | YTaulai_lyft ♦2 | Hello Baloo Uriza,Thanks a lot for your answer and clarifying your point of view. Probably the misunderstanding arises from the diversity of views on those tags in the OSM community (e. g. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html). We’re trying to take note of... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | No problem. Sorry to suck you into this rabbit hole. I'm hoping things move in a more consistent direction in general vis-a-vis reserved lanes in general. I don't understand the resistance to this generally given that how Fairview got retagged including the bicycle lanes is consistent w... | |
| 87106048 by Baloo Uriza @ 2020-06-24 22:35 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Rogier Willems ♦2 | Why are you autofixing stuff which has been mapped this way on purpose like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415101816/history ? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | service=spur has been deprecated in favor of usage=branch | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | clay_c ♦521 | Where was the discussion on this deprecation? As a rail mapper that is news to me.IMO, the segment of railway in question should certainly be `service=spur` or `usage=industrial` at best. It is not a main track of a branch line. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Sure, usage=industrial works for me.I believe this was discussed on the OSM tagging and the OpenRailwayMap mailing lists back in the late '10s. | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | clay_c ♦521 | Well, `service=spur` remains in wide use and there is no indication on the wiki that it has been deprecated. It strikes me as odd that such a heavily used tag with a generally clear definition would be deprecated all of a sudden.Could you find the discussion and link it here? | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | The wiki is pretty unreliable anymore, a lot of wiki types like to be prescriptionist rather than descriptionist and that kind of pikes over everything.I'm not going to go archive diving right now, I have work to do. You're welcome to do so. Or change the tag back. I'm honestly... | |
| 99856148 by Baloo Uriza @ 2021-02-23 21:37 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | willkmis ♦209 | I don't think this change is correct. Based on the surrounding streets, all WWI battles, this street is almost certainly "Marne" as it was before, not "Marine". |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I will defer to your superior knowledge of military history on this one, I've restored the original spelling. | |
| 87776466 by Baloo Uriza @ 2020-07-09 16:58 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦611 | Thank you for taking care of this update. It’s very timely considering today’s Supreme Court ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma. https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/4113 was unfortunate timing, but at least we’ll have something to show upfront to people who are now i... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | It was actually already there before but under the boundary=protected_area protect_class=24 scheme, which it was suggested that I update. I literally woke up to that ruling this morning. I suspect Oklahoma is now much smaller with three exclaves (the Pawnee triangle near Tulsa, the southwest corne... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Minh Nguyen ♦611 | If I understand correctly, Oklahoma’s border can remain at its current size and overlap the reservation boundaries, the same way that Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah include areas that are formally part of the Navajo Nation and Hopi Reservation. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | phidauex ♦194 | True, the reservation areas, while not subject to the criminal laws of Oklahoma, are still "in" Oklahoma from a boundaries perspective, which is similar to the other major reservations. The legal details are somewhat beyond me (and probably most people other than legal specialists), but th... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Glassman ♦5,828 | Google finally added the Cherokee Nation - and got credit. Where is ours? https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/23/us/cherokee-nation-reservation-google-maps-trnd/index.html | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Right? Depressing. | |
| 90215737 by Baloo Uriza @ 2020-09-01 02:02 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | tguen ♦116 | Why did you change the name tag on several sections of Highway 213 to addr:street? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | tguen ♦116 | You also removed the names from the route relations. Your changeset message is not helpful. What exactly were you doing here? | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | names are not refs and don't qualify for the name tag.https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/63501/highway-naming-conventionshttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | In this case I was working on making sure OR 213 had a complete, contiguous relation. | |
| 89887974 by Baloo Uriza @ 2020-08-25 04:45 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | I agree with your edits changing this highway from trunk to primary BUT I definitely disagree on your changing motorway to trunk. There are long stretches of highway that are completely access controlled - that is a motorway. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Generally speaking where I downgraded it, I did so because it doesn't qualify as a motorway, because of intervening or terminating at-grade intersections, or it was an iffy call and it's better to go with the lower value to avoid level creep on edge cases.Could you be more specific? | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | A few miles east of Pratt KS (just west of the 70th Avenue overpass) it becomes a motorway, which continues to the east until just west of 120th Avenue (where it should be trunk going east from there). It becomes a motorway again at the point where it becomes dual carriageway just west of the Northe... | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | OK, so we are talking about the Cannonball Stageline. Motorways don't have intersections. The section you're referring to has 2 at-grade intersections and 1 interchange at Cunningham. I think we can agree where it goes to single carriageway on the west end is definitely a primary.Fr... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | I think there's some confusion in the communication between us. If you don't mind, I'd like to edit it the way that I would do it and see what you think. I think you'll find that it makes perfect sense. But we'll see. Is that okay with you? | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Sure, let's see if we can come to a compromise on this.My biggest concerns is that going too high tends to give more credit to a road that it effectively operates as. We're in a big, barely connected part of the world after all. | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | As I was preparing to do this, I noticed something odd which I would like to double check. Take a look at this and then start whatever editor you use and look at the various aerial photography. I would like to call either KS DOT or Pratt County to see what they say about this intersection.https:... | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Good catch, I believe the bing imagery to be accurate based on my last drive through the Cannonball Stageline. I believe what we're seeing with the bridge may have been previously assumed based on the temporary diversion and gapped earthworks that may have been present shortly after the curren... | |
| 9 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | I will take care of it. It does look, however, like some grading was done to accommodate a future overpass. Maybe they ran out of money? | |
| 10 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | That'd be about right for KDOT, no? Seems 50, 54 and 400 seem to have been renovated with aspirations of bigger plans later, particularly at major interchanges. Which is a big contributor towards me really wanting to err on the lower side of the edge cases. | |
| 11 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Like, they're aware that it's not there yet, but they're futureproofing themselves a little to buy what they got a couple extra decades. | |
| 12 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | I have finished making edits to 54/400 between Pratt and Wichita. I did quite a bit more than what I said I would do, as I always like to make improvements along the way, especially adding details of interchanges; I also deleted a few false intersections | |
| 13 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Sure, what's the changeset number? | |
| 14 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | changeset 90043845 | |
| 15 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I think they'll eventually finish it as a freeway but this feels a lot too mixed to not call it an expressway and just tag as trunk still. Once everything's grade-seperated between Garden Plain and Maize Road, I'd be comfortable calling it a motorway to Northeast 40th Street, and som... | |
| 16 | ~ 5 years ago | Your Village Maps ♦91 | So you didn’t think my edits made sense? They make perfect sense to me. Do you understand my reasoning? Not a big deal though. Do you live in Kansas? I’ve been through Kansas many times, mainly on I-70 and in the KC metro area. | |
| 17 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | You're talking about the ones just west of Wichita in 90043845, right? I saw those, they make coherent sense, I just think motorway isn't the right level for something with intersections, and jumping back and forth for short distances takes away from clarity instead of improving it.I ... | |
| 68237572 by Baloo Uriza @ 2019-03-17 19:45 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Glassman ♦5,828 | Shouldn't the tribal lands be tagged as boundary=aboriginal_lands? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Seems like we've been going back and forth on this for about a decade but looks like aboriginal_lands is more or less winning out. Changed it. | |
| 63523085 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-10-15 01:11 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Joseph E ♦137 | Why is this a highway=trunk?It connects to highway=secondary roads at both ends and in the middle, and it is a state highway.This suggests it should be a highway=secondary or perhaps highway=primary.Or should OK 33 be generally upgraded to highway=trunk? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | highway=trunk is for surface expressways (ie, freeways that are not grade seperated) and single-carriageway freeways (one road, no intersections). | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Joseph E ♦137 | That's a local use of this tag. Internationally it is more common that highway=trunk represents "A trunk road, trunk highway, or strategic road is a major road, usually connecting two or more cities, ports, airports and other places, which is the recommended route for long-distance and fre... | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Yeah, nationally, in the US, trunk is expressway. It's really hard to argue that 33 is more than a secondary on either end of this expressway, or that this isn't an expressway. | |
| 85318677 by Baloo Uriza @ 2020-05-16 22:25 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | compdude ♦173 | How is this an expressway? Anyone driving on this road south from 164th would be like "this looks like a freeway to me." (Note that I'm not the one who tagged this as a motorway; I just tagged the ramps as motorway link to match everything else)If we applied your rule of "fre... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I, and the FHWA, disagree that freeways can terminate at an at-grade intersection. The turnpike is the last major junction the expressway starts.Really the only difference between an expressway and a freeway is if there's an at-grade crossing as an integral part of the experience. The dif... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | North of Kilpatrick, Lake Hefner Parkwa should be an expressway thanks to the at-grade intersections. Where OK 74 goes down to a single roadway with at grade intersections, it should be a primary at the absolute highest and a secondary at lowest. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Trunk and Motorway are special cases, where trunks are analogous to expressways, where there can be a mix of ramps and surface intersections, and motorways are freeways, where they're grade separated in all but the most exceptional circumstances.Analogous situations would be WA 500 between ... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | compdude ♦173 | >I, and the FHWA, disagree that freeways can terminate at an at-grade intersection.Really? I'd love to see a link from FHWA's website.Also, if that's true, than how come 3dis are a thing? There are many freeways around the US that terminate at at-grade intersections. Exampl... | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | compdude ♦173 | Also, why are you so bent out of shape over this freeway being tagged as motorway when US 77 just east of here is tagged as motorway even though the freeway section extending north of the Kilpatrick Turnpike is shorter than that of Lake Hefner Pkwy? | |
| 7 | ~ 5 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Broadway Extension also steps down to a trunk before turning into a street at Comfort Drive. Little dodgy if it steps down at Kilpatrick or Memorial. Portland/Lake Hefner's more of a four-way boulevard to 164th last I drove it, but aware that they're planning on giving it the surface expr... | |
| 8 | ~ 5 years ago | compdude ♦173 | Still don't understand the inconsistency here. How about we just be more consistent and tag any road that's divided and has 2 consecutive interchanges (Lake Hefner Parkway has 7 1/2 from the northern end of the freeway and the I-44 interchange)?You know, like standard practice. :) | |
| 69546422 by Baloo Uriza @ 2019-04-25 02:28 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | mapman44 ♦527 | Osmose is indicating a number of segments of I-84 in this changeset as being on layer 1 (like a bridge) although they are at ground level. Is there a reason for this? Also history shows them as being Version 1 edits. Were original segments deleted and re-drawn, thus losing the history of the origina... |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | It wasn't deleted and redrawn, it may have crept in from a join and retag since I'm not usually looking for or expecting layer=1, 0 or -1 in places where the layer=* tag isn't necessary because the implicit values for bridge=yes, tunnel=yes or an absence of both are sufficient. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | mapman44 ♦527 | OK, but why are they version 1 objects? | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Splits? Splitting a way leaves one way with the history and creates a new way. There's multiple changes in lane count, speed limit, advised speed, and more that would have necessitated splits. | |
| 5 | ~ 6 years ago | mapman44 ♦527 | No these edits are on I-84 that has had dual carriageways for years before your edits. | |
| 6 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | yes, I understand that. I'm starting to wonder if you know what splitting a way is? It takes one way, and creates two ways, so you can have different tags on different sections of road to describe what's going on... | |
| 7 | ~ 6 years ago | mapman44 ♦527 | I definitely know what a split is and what it involves, and that simply doesn't explain the edits I'm looking at. I'm not going to pursue this conversation any further. I'll just fix the errors and move on. | |
| 8 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | OK, apparently we're not on the same page here. Is it just the layer=* tags that are wrong or is there something else? | |
| 77468862 by Baloo Uriza @ 2019-11-23 21:01 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | Allison P ♦1,146 | Baca County is tagged as highway=primary, surely this is a mistake?Allison Pelton |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Yup, fortunately a nonroutable error at least. Not sure how I managed to pull that one off without noticing. | |
| 51525469 by Baloo Uriza @ 2017-08-29 01:58 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | dekatherm Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Not sure how I managed that, but thanks for the catch. | |
| 73397796 by Baloo Uriza @ 2019-08-16 03:54 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | edathy Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | No, I forgot to change the comment on that. I was working on Cherokee Yard. | |
| 72326576 by Baloo Uriza @ 2019-07-17 00:33 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | taylorkspencer ♦4 | Yes, this looks good. I can understand why you might not want such a short stretch of freeway, such as the US 70 Bypass around Durant marked as motorway, but the longer stretch of freeway on US 69/US 75 between US 70 Bypass and OK-22 is marked accordingly between those interchanges. |
| 71062762 by Baloo Uriza @ 2019-06-09 04:17 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | b-jazz ♦845 | FYI, this changeset didn't actually do anything (it's empty), because the node was already gone when the bot came around to examine and delete it. |
| 69438569 by Baloo Uriza @ 2019-04-22 02:42 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | Carnildo ♦908 | Is there a reason why you removed the speed limits from the westbound side of I-84 here? |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I intended to get more up to date speed limits from OpenStreetCam, but fell asleep. | |
| 65032402 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-11-30 05:10 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | us89 ♦3 | "undiscussed smash-tagging?" I don't think so.I read through those talk-us pages. From reading through that thread and the comments on Duke87's changeset (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/64919426), it seems there has been a significant amount of discussion, and th... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Take it to the mailing list, the comments in the changeset are counter to the majority where these things are discussed. | |
| 63815728 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-10-24 02:57 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Baloo Uriza | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 63851371 where the changeset comment is: I was wrong, oanac2 got it right, resurvey is needed at this toll plaza. |
| 51524798 by Baloo Uriza @ 2017-08-29 00:41 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | US Woods Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Yup, welcome to Oklahoma. Just because that's the speed limit doesn't mean that speed is realistically achievable. | |
| 62600602 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-09-15 04:35 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | danuta_telenav ♦21 | 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 | ~ 7 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 | |
| 60592928 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-07-11 01:11 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Darkskynet ♦2 | Sorry you had to go behind me and clean up a bit. I will pay better attention to the route relation in the future. |
| 60131525 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-06-24 23:04 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | You an extra o. |
| 59413922 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-05-31 01:54 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | hoream_telenav ♦14 | Hi Paul, according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link, in US slip road/ramps shouldn't have name... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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. | |
| 57990274 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-04-11 03:09 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 57990388 where the changeset comment is: Reverting my own terribly vetted changeset. |
| 57437158 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-03-22 20:43 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | mueschel ♦7,041 | Hi,something went wrong with the name tag here, could you check that?https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/238362209Jan |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Nice catch. Fixed! | |
| 57298836 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-03-18 19:06 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | hofoen ♦60 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 everyth... | |
| 57229235 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-03-16 02:33 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | hofoen ♦60 | Why did you revert my changeset? I have not removed a single tag. There is no "less specific tagging". |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Social-protected-area | |
| 56479481 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-02-19 04:25 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 Cree... |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | That's the name of the route, not the name of the road. | |
| 3 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | But, the name of the ROUTE is not what is in question here, it's the name of the ROAD. | |
| 7 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | You're projecting, as usual, in order to reject reality. | |
| 55367616 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-01-12 01:14 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | "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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | "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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Duke87 ♦4 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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". Loc... | |
| 10 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 ... | |
| 13 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | ToeBee ♦183 | 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... | |
| 16 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 pres... | |
| 17 | ~ 8 years ago | cl94 ♦2 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | rickmastfan67 ♦234 | 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 y... | |
| 20 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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 t... | |
| 21 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Your assertion is correct for the relation above, not the road subject to this changeset. | |
| 23 | ~ 8 years ago | Duke87 ♦4 | 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 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | 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;... | |
| 25 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | 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... | |
| 55609938 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-01-20 18:18 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Constable ♦1,294 | hi, watch out, this chapel has a unusual denomination tag valuehttps://www.openstreetmap.org/way/553791995I guess you were thinking about source=foursquare and denomination=?thanks |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | It's a denomination. https://www.foursquare.org | |
| 3 | ~ 8 years ago | Constable ♦1,294 | wow, my fault then, I didn't know that, sorry | |
| 4 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I legit don't know much of anything about the denomination, there's just enough foursquare churches to make them a visible presence across America (and for some reason, somewhat more common here in the Big Empty) but not so common as to make them that well known. | |
| 55397514 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-01-13 03:19 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | This is not the correct name of this road. |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | This is inaccurate. There is no signage on the westbound segment of "Liberty Parkway" and there is a single ground mounted sign on the eastbound segment while there are multiple overhead signs in both directions for "Creek Turnpike." The primary name of the roadway should be ... | |
| 3 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | Additionally, "Liberty Memorial Parkway" as opposed to "Liberty Parkway" is without dispute an incorrect name. There is neither signage supporting the "Memorial" nor any official designation. | |
| 4 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | There is signage westbound. It's at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4884335483I'll agree that Liberty Parkway is the name of this section of road, and Creek Turnpike is the name of the route, but ignoring the Liberty Parkway name and calling it just Creek Turnpike is factually inco... | |
| 5 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | Fair enough, though it is clear based on both number of signs and the way ODOT/OTA have treated this road that "Creek Turnpike" should be the primary name with "Liberty Parkway" serving as the alternate name.Liberty Parkway is not a useful designation for navigation and from si... | |
| 6 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I think an accurate characterization of the situation is that highways and routes get renamed regularly by legislative and executive fiat, and OklaDOT tends to ignore the naming in favor of the local nicknames.I think you have a strong argument for changing alt_name to loc_name as Creek Turnpike... | |
| 7 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | Isn't loc_name typically used for things that are not commonly signed and are only known by locals? In this case, "Creek Turnpike" is signed on dozens of signs (whereas Liberty Parkway is only signed on a couple), and is known as such in official forward-facing documents and by subseq... | |
| 8 | ~ 8 years ago | Duke87 ♦4 | Based on the various evidence all parties have provided, name=Creek Turnpike and alt_name=Liberty Parkway seems most appropriate to me. "Creek Turnpike" is not a local nickname, it is what all of the primary guide signage says. "Liberty Parkway" only appears on one or two small r... | |
| 9 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | reg_name would work, too. Creek Turnpike isn't a name anyone other than locals and road geeks are going to recognize for this strip based on available signage.However, keep in mind that people are looking for reassurance after an interchange. Entering from a midpoint, yeah, nobody really ... | |
| 10 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | While I appreciate that at two ends of the highway there is a "Liberty Parkway" sign, I find the argument that people can use those two signs for navigation to be somewhat befuddling. All of the approaches to this segment of road read "Creek Turnpike" - think about it like a ... | |
| 11 | ~ 8 years ago | Duke87 ♦4 | ...but to even get to that point of seeing the sign that says "Liberty Parkway" you will have passed under overhead guide signage that says "Creek Turnpike", such as this one: https://www.flickr.com/photos/watuzi/16990876093/in/dateposted-public/If I am a driver unfamiliar wi... | |
| 12 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | The confirmation signs say Liberty Parkway. The approach signs list destinations, which IIRC, are tagged at the major ramps, though not the minor ones, since the intervening ramps are inconsistently signed. There is no name signage at any ramp in Broken Arrow, just generically "Turnpike East/... | |
| 13 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | As for the guide sign for "Creek Turnpike" as a destination, that would be a good value for "destinaton:street=*" on the ramp it's referring to, as these are often the last signs to be updated. That way a data consumer aware of these tags could say something like "In 2... | |
| 14 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Just like, using the above example, you were supposed to get off at Elm, without being aware of destination tagging, you'd get "In 250 meters, turn slightly right." With destination tagging, if it's tagged with destionation:street=Elm Place, then you'd get "In 250 mete... | |
| 15 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | The data is intentionally flexible to be able to deal with situations exactly as messy as this. | |
| 16 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | It's also intentionally flexible to deal with localisms, like calling this loop as "Creek Turnpike" even when it's officially not known as that, but frequently colloquially known as that to a very high degree. Or to internationalize, like Mission Street being renderable as Yughe... | |
| 17 | ~ 8 years ago | US Highway 266 ♦5 | But is IS officially known as "Creek Turnpike". We've provided plenty of evidence. What more do you want? What would convince you? | |
| 18 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | The road is officially known as Liberty Memorial Parkway, it's signed as Liberty Parkway, and the route is Creek Turnpike and Oklahoma Highway 364. The only conceivable argument I'm seeing here is for those that don't understand what relations are and that data consumers can and do a... | |
| 19 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Which isn't meant to be condescending to participants in this thread, so much as the ire expressed is most properly directed to developers of software that uses OSM data and is not conforming to use the assumptions you're using for your use case in particular. | |
| 20 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | However, it's a safe default to use Liberty Parkway due to it's signposted status, locals will already be familiar with the situation and be aware even if the data consumer is not, and non-locals will typically be entering just before the confirmation signage. For someone unfamiliar with ... | |
| 21 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | A similar situation would be in Hood River County. FS 44 is most highly known as Dufur Valley Road, but most people know it as Camp Baldwin Highway. | |
| 22 | ~ 8 years ago | baveggies9999 ♦3 | I see this more as a situation like US 6 nationwide, where you have an official designation of "Grand Army of the Republic Highway," and in many states the route itself has occasional signs to that effect. OSM does not designate that route as "Grand Army of the Republic Highway&qu... | |
| 23 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | You're describing a similar situation where the route and the roads that make up the route have different names; it wouldn't surprise me if the relation for US 6 has that name, and if it's signposted and there's documentation backing it up, then yes, I would support updating the ... | |
| 55280307 by Baloo Uriza @ 2018-01-09 02:18 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 55280389 where the changeset comment is: |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I goofed up, it's still detoured. | |
| 52740352 by Baloo Uriza @ 2017-10-08 19:42 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52742064 where the changeset comment is: |
| 52526015 by Baloo Uriza @ 2017-10-01 03:20 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Harald Hartmann ♦837 | Hello Paul Johnson. Athttp://www.openstreetmap.org/way/52525012you have tagged the misspelled`bicycle:laens:forward=designated` and`bicycle:lanes:forward=designated`, right? |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Well, not intentionally. Whoops! | |
| 44571745 by Baloo Uriza @ 2016-12-21 18:49 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | yurasi ♦87 | Hi Paul Johnson.Thank you for contributing to OSM. I noticed that you've added turn lanes that aren't visible on Bing satellite imagery (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/307091446). ¿Are you updating those turn lanes based on any special source? |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | This is that way overlaid over Bing. http://i.imgur.com/YBZSVno.pngI'm not sure what you're talking about. The lanes are precisely accurate including turn values. | |
| 45722855 by Baloo Uriza @ 2017-02-01 17:57 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | ToeBee ♦183 | This node seems like it might be legit although it is missing a primary tag. http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4635971401/history |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Seems pretty unlikely, node was on a private residence. | |
| 3 | ~ 9 years ago | ToeBee ♦183 | The address on their website matches this block: http://www.decksbylazopro.com/It is probably a home business. | |
| 4 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Hmm, odd... not sure where Delaware Boulevard is, since the lat/long puts it on Delaware Ave. I've got my car with me tonight so I'll swing by after work and confirm for sure. | |
| 43447524 by Baloo Uriza @ 2016-11-06 18:23 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | scruss ♦78 | nice work, Paul! |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Thanks! | |
| 1958636 by Baloo Uriza @ 2009-07-27 19:52 ~ 16 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | Peter Dobratz ♦113 | Can you elaborate on where the name "Minnesota Freeway" comes from? |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Minnesota Freeway comes from Oregon DOT, after Minnesota Avenue. | |
| 3 | ~ 9 years ago | Peter Dobratz ♦113 | The reason I ask is that an anonymous user posted a note last year saying that the "Minnesota Freeway" name was wrong. There were a few users that agreed, but not action was taken to change the data prior to closing the note.I'm poking around on the ODOT site to see if I can find... | |
| 4 | ~ 9 years ago | Peter Dobratz ♦113 | The ODOT "Moving Ahead" newsletter from September 2006 contains a trivia question (page 6):"Which portion of the interstate was once known as Minnesota Freeway?"http://www.odotmovingahead.com/2006/09/I can't find the official answers to these trivia questions, bu... | |
| 5 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Probably worth keeping as the name=* for now until we know when it stopped being called that, if ever. | |
| 6 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | And maybe harass OreDOT for their insufficient signage, a statewide problem. | |
| 7 | ~ 9 years ago | pdxrider ♦39 | Traffic reporters and people around here aren't calling it the Minnesota Freeway anymore, just I-5. Worth tossing it into old_name. Minnesota Freeway isn't signed anywhere along that stretch. I could only see that name used in historical records. I have an answer with more detail in the OS... | |
| 8 | ~ 9 years ago | Peter Dobratz ♦113 | I'll write up a wiki page with the rationale behind the tagging. | |
| 9 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | That's a pretty recent thing on that then, Roadgeek; I remember KPOJ and KEX would refer to it by name for brevity's sake as recently as 2012 when I was last in the area. | |
| 27302135 by Baloo Uriza @ 2014-12-06 23:30 ~ 11 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | ediyes ♦110 | Hi there!I've found your edits where you add turn lanes but does not match with satellite images, maybe it is a local knowledge. but also the number of lanes does not match with turn:lanes |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Which intersection, please? I'd be happy to make a closer look. | |
| 3 | ~ 9 years ago | ediyes ♦110 | Hi!!For example this street https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/83637103 | |
| 4 | ~ 9 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Probably some dumbass mistake introduced before the turn lane editing tools got good. I'm about to go over all of the turnpikes pretty closely since 240 are too much in flux to narrow it down at the moment. | |
| 8421895 by Baloo Uriza @ 2011-06-13 05:12 ~ 14 years ago | 1 | ~ 10 years ago | Peter Dobratz ♦113 | I'm thinking we don't want to trace the outline of a boat as a building in OSM. Especially not a boat that still travels along the river and is not permanently at this location. I'd say put it in OSM if it was permanently parked here, but that's not the case.http://www.oreg... |
| 2 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Fair enough. I thought the ship was permanently moored, given I haven't seen evidence that it moves at the time I marked it out. | |
| 3 | ~ 10 years ago | Peter Dobratz ♦113 | I walked by here and I'm trying to figure out the nest way to map this. There is a barge close to the riverbank that stays permanently in place and supports the footbridge and may provide ancillary storage for the museum. Then there's the riverboat, which contains the museum. This is a ... | |
| 26813194 by Baloo Uriza @ 2014-11-16 01:41 ~ 11 years ago | 1 | ~ 10 years ago | jaakkoh ♦16 | Hi,Does this stop (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/177164158) in this changeset marked on the note of the intersection imply that it's an "4=all way" stop?I haven't bumped into such way of tagging before -- but it could make sense..Cheers, -J |
| 2 | ~ 10 years ago | jaakkoh ♦16 | Oh, forgot to mention. You have an open note about the stop next to the intersection. Pls close that if it's no longer valid. | |
| 3 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Yes, if it's on the intersection, it applies to all directions entering the intersection. | |
| 4 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I'll get to that note at some point, I'm a bit behind on catching up on those. | |
| 5 | ~ 10 years ago | jaakkoh ♦16 | Ah, ok for the all way stop. That makes sense -- even though I can see how it also causes a good(?) chunk of possible if not likely mistakes by less advanced mappers...Yea, the backlog of notes is painfully easy to accumulate. .. And of course it's more of a filtering problem than anything ... | |
| 32215967 by Baloo Uriza @ 2015-06-25 23:26 ~ 10 years ago | 1 | ~ 10 years ago | unsungNovelty ♦52 | Hi, This whole area seems to be tagged with 'highway=road`. The changeset says this road will be demolished and reconstructed, but is this the latest update for this area?Kindly reply. |
| 2 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | This is intentional, as it's my understanding that highway=road is for roads short in the tooth. This is currently the latest on this, I am proactively monitoring the situation in the Crossroads area. | |
| 35923778 by Baloo Uriza @ 2015-12-13 11:00 ~ 10 years ago | 1 | ~ 10 years ago | GerdP ♦2,829 | Hi Paul,you have used highway=motorway_junctioninstead of highway=motorway_linkfor two ways. I've corrected this,but it seems that it was intended?My changeset:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35939546 |
| 2 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | No, I had a braino. Thanks for the fix. | |
| 3 | ~ 10 years ago | GerdP ♦2,829 | Great word: braino ;-) | |
| 33053301 by Baloo Uriza @ 2015-08-02 17:57 ~ 10 years ago | 1 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | I live just down the road from the stretch you marked trunk between Gladstone and Rapid River there. I agree that it looks an awful lot like trunk, and it even has a special speed limit set by the state (65 instead of 55), but it's really just horribly overbuilt and isn't functionally any ... |
| 2 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Expressways and freeways are kind of special cases in US tagging, getting Trunk and Motorway respectively. | |
| 3 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | The stretch you have marked trunk is not limited access. It's not connected to much, but it isn't limited access. | |
| 4 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | It appears to be limited access. It's not _controlled_ access, but it is limited access. | |
| 5 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | There's a stop light at the southern end and another at the divergence of M 35 and no stretch longer than about 3 miles without a crossing.The only road that wasn't connected to it when it was built was 26th road (by Masonville). I guess the minor streets in Gladstone also aren't ... | |
| 6 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | It appears to have been deliberately disconnected from most of the grid in gladstone to limit access, and I'm not seeing any (mapped) driveways connecting to it. Looks pretty consistent with most semi-rural expressways in the midwest after looking at the aerials and looks to be consistent with... | |
| 7 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | I always thought that expressway was for roads with grade separation at (especially major) intersections. In this case, the major intersections are stop lights. | |
| 8 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | That's a freeway. Expressways are pretty much anything that fills in the gap between a freeway and the surface classifications. Examples of expressways would things that would otherwise be a freeway but are only single carriageway (no center divider, but controlled access), or aren't ful... | |
| 9 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/glossary/glossary_listing.cfm?TitleStart=E ? | |
| 10 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | That's the first I've seen any planning documents suggest a definition other than what's seen at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited-access_road#United_States, which cites http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/HTM/2003r1/part1/part1a.htm as the definition for "expressway" as "a d... | |
| 11 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | "partial control of access" is not exactly specific. A stop sign would pretty much meet that definition. | |
| 12 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Fully controlled access generally means a complete lack of driveways and at-grade intersections, with access limited only to entry and exit ramps. Partially controlled means there may be some driveways and intersections, but they're relatively sparse, and some may be controlled access junctions... | |
| 13 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Or similar situations where it's single carrageway but all the junctions are ramps. | |
| 14 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | Right. In this case 100% of the intersections are at grade. The stuff at http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33053301#map=17/45.85630/-87.02232 is not really ramp like, there are stop lights, and there are railroad crossings.There aren't a whole lot of intersections in the longer stretch... | |
| 15 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Whether or not the road is overbuilt as an expressway is immaterial to the fact that it's an expressway, though. | |
| 16 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | It is not an expressway. That is is overbuilt makes it look like one in the aerial imagery. | |
| 17 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | It still appears to meet the definition of an expressway. | |
| 18 | ~ 10 years ago | maxerickson ♦234 | Well, we are at an impasse. I think I'll change it back to primary and if you still think it is trunk after you have driven it a few times you can change it back. | |
| 19 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | I recommend keeping it at trunk and finding another party familiar with the difference who is in the area. Based on everything you've described, it still sounds like a trunk. | |
| 34953949 by Baloo Uriza @ 2015-10-29 17:06 ~ 10 years ago | 1 | ~ 10 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Correct comment for changeset would be "Update on I 35/OK 9 at Norman" |
| 29640559 by Baloo Uriza @ 2015-03-21 17:54 ~ 11 years ago | 1 | ~ 11 years ago | Grant Humphries ♦11 | Hi Paul,I've added the streets that run over the Tilikum Crossing back in as separate features from this rail lines as I could not find documentation of a firm convention either way for this and having them separated is critical to what we do at TriMet. Do you have any issues with this?\... |
| 2 | ~ 11 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Where the way is one lane wide and the rails are congruent with the way, it shouldn't be a problem to have the tags for both to share a single way. I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the routes in the TriMet system as they lay at the moment. | |
| 26831777 by Baloo Uriza @ 2014-11-16 21:34 ~ 11 years ago | 1 | ~ 11 years ago | Bryce C Nesbitt ♦159 | Is this really two distinct bicycle repair stations at PDX? They are quite close at 53 meters apart as mapped. Do you know the brand= or the opening_hours=? |
| 2 | ~ 11 years ago | Baloo Uriza | Yes, the volume of cyclists arriving or departing at PDX is relatively large for most cities, as nobody drives a car, there's too much motor traffic, and there's nonstop flights to Amsterdam. I imagine legal weed in Oregons probably going to slow that a bit. One is outside between a smok... | |
| 3 | ~ 11 years ago | Bryce C Nesbitt ♦159 | Do you know the brand? Dero and Bike FixStation are common. | |
| 4 | ~ 11 years ago | Baloo Uriza | No idea. Given that they kind of looked like something the city sign shop would improvise, and they're painted the same DOT pale green as the overpasses and the (city improvised, but now world famous) Portland staple racks. |