| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 162356335 by Xvtn @ 2025-02-10 15:41 | 1 | 2025-02-15 20:43 | tcarlisle ♦18 | Hey, just a quick FYI. I'm aware that piste and highway features can share the same way, and they don’t necessarily need to be overlaid. In theory, the tags should be structured in a way that clearly distinguishes which tags belong to which feature when they share the same way. However, I... |
| 2 | 2025-02-16 04:34 | Xvtn | Howdy! Thanks so much for explaining that reasoning. My changes in this case were mostly done with enabling future edits in mind. Specifically, I find it easier to update tags and geometry when clicking on some feature selects one feature, if that makes sense. However I did notice that everything in... | |
| 3 | 2025-02-16 06:50 | tcarlisle ♦18 | I agree that it’s easier to make edits and changes when the geometry doesn’t overlap, and that’s probably why people often recombine the pistes when they see I’ve split them into separate ways. It’s likely a losing battle, but I think it’s worth trying to maintain... | |
| 4 | 2025-02-16 15:55 | Xvtn | Reverted! Thanks! | |
| 152005157 by Xvtn @ 2024-05-29 19:58 | 1 | 2024-05-29 19:58 | Xvtn | See comments at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152004946 |
| 152004946 by Xvtn @ 2024-05-29 19:52 | 1 | 2024-05-29 19:55 | Xvtn | Uh oh. Something's wrong here... What did I mess up? Looking into it. |
| 2 | 2024-05-29 19:57 | Xvtn | Oh, I accidentally reverted changeset 51040082 instead of 151040082. Sorry about the large bbox. | |
| 149275186 by Xvtn @ 2024-03-28 15:31 | 1 | 2024-03-30 19:15 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,597 | Thanks for cleanup! |
| 149180001 by Xvtn @ 2024-03-26 14:11 | 1 | 2024-03-28 23:59 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | I wouldn't even bother fixing this spam but just delete it. 👍 |
| 2 | 2024-03-29 00:30 | Xvtn | I've decided personally for now the ones that seem at least somewhat legitimate I'll fix (for now) but I've started removing many of them, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149275186 | |
| 3 | 2024-03-29 00:39 | MxxCon ♦3,359 | Your call log is exactly what I expected would happen - most won't know wtf I'm asking them about, others wouldn't talk to me or just hang up..The fact that this spam is always in the same format makes me think it's either some sort of SEO company doing this or some CMS has a p... | |
| 4 | 2024-03-29 01:15 | Xvtn | Yeah many are definitely being done by the same system or group. The thing that sucks is that AFAICT they are always on behalf of real businesses. If they were all misplaced or fake I'd have no problem just wiping them out en masse. But I just hate to straight up delete a node that's a rea... | |
| 149188580 by Xvtn @ 2024-03-26 17:35 | 1 | 2024-03-26 17:42 | Xvtn | Sorry, got a little carried away with this one! Haha |
| 148869371 by Xvtn @ 2024-03-19 16:13 | 1 | 2024-03-19 16:30 | Kevlarpeters ♦2 | This looks like a sidewalk to me. I don't think I'd want to use it but it looks raised from street level and it leads to other sidewalks. |
| 146083955 by Xvtn @ 2024-01-09 23:27 | 1 | 2024-01-28 19:17 | sbre ♦22 | Maybe don't remove ele=* when removing a natural=peak? |
| 2 | 2024-01-28 20:06 | Xvtn | That's a good point, I suppose even if something shouldn't be classified as a peak it doesn't really hurt to have the elev data still. I'll do that in the future!On a related note, I often wonder how much "topo" type data belongs in OSM. I've seen some mappers ... | |
| 3 | 2024-01-28 20:14 | sbre ♦22 | There has been some discussion lately on the community forum about natural=cliff, but alas without any satisfying conclusion. | |
| 4 | 2024-01-28 20:16 | Xvtn | Good to know. I'll check it out. | |
| 143659354 by Xvtn @ 2023-11-05 17:19 | 1 | 2023-11-05 17:20 | Xvtn | Argh. I can't get these right. This was meant to be uploaded using my import account, Xvtn_Import. |
| 137347089 by Xvtn @ 2023-06-14 22:29 | 1 | 2023-06-14 22:30 | Xvtn | Oops, sorry for the huge bbox!! I normally put a lot of thought into preventing that from happening. |
| 127437257 by Xvtn @ 2022-10-12 21:22 | 1 | 2022-10-12 21:24 | Xvtn | Also clean up some excessive nodes along straight boundary ways |
| 123533505 by Xvtn @ 2022-07-12 19:06 | 1 | 2022-07-29 16:28 | Xvtn | Sorry for the huge changeset bbox, it looks like by touching the Snake River relation it's included the entire thing. |
| 116366076 by Xvtn @ 2022-01-20 04:12 | 1 | 2022-01-23 02:22 | Xvtn | ... designated exclusively for either foot or bike traffic |
| 115768411 by Xvtn @ 2022-01-04 19:28 | 1 | 2022-01-04 19:31 | Xvtn | Maybe just a matter of preference? This area https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/38.5260/-115.3446 in Nevada has enormous swaths as wood, which does add to high-level maps in my opinion. However the inaccuracy of the border is poor obviously. |
| 2 | 2022-01-08 15:33 | aweech ♦369 | There's nothing wrong with adding all this landcover detail. If you feel like it's worthwhile, then go for it! Most of Europe is covered in high-resolution landcover information, and it does look quite nice there. | |
| 114459907 by Xvtn @ 2021-12-01 21:58 | 1 | 2021-12-01 22:04 | Xvtn | Feel free to comment or roll back these changesets if my landuse edits are excessive or incorrect. |
| 113712281 by Xvtn @ 2021-11-12 21:03 | 1 | 2021-11-13 01:55 | aweech ♦369 | Hi!I'm answering the questions in the fixme tags that you added in this edit. For the school mapping question, it's preferred to use areas to map out school grounds. So when there is an imported GNIS point that duplicates a hand-drawn area like there was here, it's best to copy the ... |
| 2 | 2021-11-13 02:05 | Xvtn | Thanks for the explanation! I appreciate it. | |
| 113508688 by Xvtn @ 2021-11-08 07:35 | 1 | 2021-11-08 14:58 | aweech ♦369 | Hi!To answer your question and explain why this road was on the map, OSM in the United States had a huge import of Census data back in the late 00s. The data was of varying quality, and it was especially bad in rural areas like here. This way was brought in in that import (called the TIGER import)... |
| 2 | 2021-11-08 19:32 | Xvtn | Got it, thanks for the explanation! |