| Changeset | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 54741065 by EdLoach @ 2017-12-18 20:04 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 11 days ago | Fgjgdrou ♦16 | Hi, I know this was many years ago, do you know why Elveden had it tagged as a living street, as we normally only tag it if a specific sign is present? I appreciate that this is a different environment so exceptions may apply.Thank you! |
| 2 | ~ 10 days ago | EdLoach | I don't remember the details of this change, but highway=living_street has been used on many ways that don't necessarily have signs in the UK, usually a street designed with the interests of pedestrians and cyclists, as per the wikipedia definition linked from near the top of the OSM wiki ... | |
| 129298081 by EdLoach @ 2022-11-23 21:23 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 19 days ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,766 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/77383331/historyI see that you have changed namehas it started being used again? is building=vacant accurate there? |
| 2 | ~ 19 days ago | EdLoach | I think it is still vacant. It has outline planning permission to be converted to flats https://idox.tendringdc.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=SJWDWXQB0RE00and what looks to be an old outstanding application for redevelopment https://idox.tendringdc.g... | |
| 150346802 by EdLoach @ 2024-04-22 13:16 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | rskedgell ♦1,817 | Would it be worth adding the seamark tagging for wrecks?https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seamarks/Wrecks |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | EdLoach | Firstly, it looks like I forgot the note URL in the changeset comment https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4207472I could add seamark:type=wreck and even wreck:type=lighter (based on reading various linked documents in the note) and probably even wreck:visible_at_low_tide=yes, but can't really ... | |
| 10473529 by EdLoach @ 2012-01-23 09:34 ~ 14 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,741 | I know that https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1602070477 was 11 years ago (!), but I wonder if it is actually what is now https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/372776872 ?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | EdLoach | Using JOSM to identify the relevant GPS trace I then tracked down a photo, and a duplicate seems likely. As might this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1602070540/history | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | EdLoach | So I've removed them. But there is still stuff needs fixing in the area - the footpath definitely didn't involve wading in a river. | |
| 4 | ~ 2 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,741 | Great, thanks! | |
| 56063953 by EdLoach @ 2018-02-04 18:58 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,741 | Hello,Is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/296216290/history perhaps missing a main tag?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | EdLoach | Perhaps :) | |
| 466964 by EdLoach @ 2009-02-15 09:25 ~ 17 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | marczoutendijk ♦3,055 | Hi Ed,checking for tagging errors I found the tagging for breakwater to be incorrect according to current day tagging:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/345537889https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3DbreakwaterGiven that you did this 13 years ago, I assume that the rules at that... |
| 102565399 by EdLoach @ 2021-04-08 12:40 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,741 | Just for info, there was a node-drag introduced by Micron here too; I've fixed that. See http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=97005948 . |
| 91785522 by EdLoach @ 2020-09-30 19:18 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | Found it (from the days before changesets, so this might not be numerically my lowest numbered changeset, but this is what I remember doing first, days before my GPS device arrived). https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161389 |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | Found an earlier one. These were in the days when I hadn't realised you had to update the name on every section of road separately. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131741 (also changes to the default map layer only got re-rendered weekly) | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | My lowest numbered changeset was about four months later https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/9129 by which time I'd done lots of GPS tracing and mapping of Clacton. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | I should have checked https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?EdLoach first as that finds my first changeset 131741 as above much quicker than I did | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | I've just realised I've probably increased my discussed changeset count on the hdyc page by talking to myself here. | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | jambamkin ♦82 | Just bumped into this self comment stream of consciousness, really enjoyed it, thanks for all your contribution all this time. | |
| 88421271 by EdLoach @ 2020-07-23 19:05 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | ACarlotti ♦158 | I suggest mentioning buses in your changeset comments (e.g. "Update bus route 45a"), so that other people know what you're editing without looking at the contents of the changeset. (I thought it might be building numbers at first). |
| 85790082 by EdLoach @ 2020-05-26 20:09 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Wynndale ♦59 | Are you sure they have gone permanently? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | No, but if they return I will re-add them. I try and check every Tuesday evening (or Wednesday) after the weekly opendata release. | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | I should probably add that the National Express file in the opendata seems to update on Saturday rather than Tuesday, so with me only checking weekly there may be a short delay (as there was with the removal). | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | EdLoach | 816 is back this week, but with different route variants to before the deletion. | |
| 65264818 by EdLoach @ 2018-12-07 11:04 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | robert ♦234 | Think you managed to remove the name "Peacehaven" in this edit, breaking a match: https://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/map?osl_id=579509Deliberate? |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | EdLoach | Yes. I don't think it was ever the name of the service road, despite me adding it originally. It was the name of the building that was demolished and replaced by what is now Cooper Lodge (which has a Pole Barn Lane address). | |
| 58193043 by EdLoach @ 2018-04-18 08:29 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | ndm ♦889 | Was there clear external signage when you surveyed this? |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | EdLoach | I'm not sure why you are asking me - I just made the edit for the company that are based there as they only seemed to be able to leave a note. You should be asking them as the people who "did the survey". | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | ndm ♦889 | A number of "spam" notes have been added to Bristol in the past. I would expect even if arm chair mapping it would be advisable to check mapilliary or other open sources -- otherwise you can't determine whether the "office" occupies the whole building, or is simply a mai... | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | EdLoach | You have a point, but perfect can be the enemy of the good. We've gone from knowing of no businesses in the building to having one mapped. If it turns out there are more then we can add them later. Don't forget from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disclaimer "The maps are an itera... | |
| 3675848 by EdLoach @ 2010-01-21 16:11 ~ 16 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | SK53 ♦869 | You might want to review if all these peaks are really peaks sometime :-) |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | EdLoach | Switching to cycle map layer (for contours) it looks like many are, and some are slightly off. Source originally was one of these layers: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti/VectorAndMapData#Public_Domain_CIA_Maps | |
| 3 | ~ 9 years ago | EdLoach | Quite a few are slightly off, even | |
| 42405283 by EdLoach @ 2016-09-24 13:39 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | Aleks-Berlin ♦488 | please do not use empty keys, like ""="text".I fixed 2 buildings from this changeset. thanks, Alexander |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | EdLoach | I'll blame the new version of Vespucci. Thanks for letting me know - I'll watch out for it happening in future. | |
| 35587736 by EdLoach @ 2015-11-26 10:04 ~ 10 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | GinaroZ ♦1,307 | Hi, noticed you added http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/198726298/ as shop=bistro - should this not be amenity=restaurant instead? |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | EdLoach | Quite possibly. One of my earlier attempts at editing using Vespucci and it looks like I amended from shop=alcohol to shop=bistro to worry about later (then forgot). I've changed it to a restaurant until I'm next out that way to check whether café might be more suitable. | |
| 8824834 by EdLoach @ 2011-07-25 10:38 ~ 14 years ago | 1 | ~ 11 years ago | chippy ♦8 | thanks! |