| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 71662791 by alivelis @ 2019-06-27 08:04 | 1 | 2020-09-06 18:01 | tomhukins ♦226 | It seems strange to for you tag this as a service road attached to what was tagged as a track https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222711494 - based on a visit today I've also tagged the track as a service road, which seems more sensible than the previous tagging. |
| 73096754 by alivelis @ 2019-08-07 07:38 | 1 | 2019-08-07 09:17 | tux67 ♦1,967 | Hi alivelis - I have added a fixme to the service road you added - from the top of my head general access is here not possible. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/73096754 |
| 2 | 2019-08-08 14:46 | alivelis | Hi tux67,Thanks for looking into the edit. I had made this edit based upon the GPS trace of our delivery partner. I would be happy in case local knowledge can improve this edit. Let me know if you have any further suggestions. Regards,alivelis | |
| 3 | 2019-08-22 08:24 | tux67 ♦1,967 | ok, I did a local check and the situation i remembered was correct: There is a gate at the beginning of the way with a sign "Private Access". I will add this to the way.BRtux67 --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/7309... | |
| 4 | 2019-09-03 16:09 | gseethar ♦67 | Thanks for your update tux67. Looking forward for your support in the future. | |
| 72729947 by alivelis @ 2019-07-28 05:54 | 1 | 2019-08-03 02:56 | N50 ♦9 | Why have you vandalized here, Mr. Amazon? |
| 2 | 2019-08-05 13:48 | alivelis | Hi N50, Thanks for looking into my edit. This segment was added by me previously based on an old imagery. However, this mistake was captured in the review and hence I deleted the road as per the latest imagery. This deletion was done not with an intention of vandalism but with an aim to contribu... | |
| 69930588 by alivelis @ 2019-05-06 10:41 | 1 | 2019-07-05 15:10 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Hello,It looks like the addition of the motor_vehicle=yes tag to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/688129366/history here has the same issue as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71668297 . Can you please check and make sure that it wasn't added in error?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | 2019-07-09 09:37 | alivelis | Hi Andy,As per your suggestion the motor_vehicle=yes that was added to the track roads have been reverted. I checked all these type of edits and reverted wherever necessary. Thanks for your insights. Regards,alivelis | |
| 3 | 2019-07-09 09:55 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Hello alivelis,Thanks for that.Best Regards,Andy | |
| 4 | 2019-07-10 10:05 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Hello alivelis,Actually - I've just spotted a couple of others - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/68471332/history is one, and if you use the overpass query https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/KD7 you'll be able to see a couple of others.Best Regards,Andy | |
| 5 | 2019-07-10 10:33 | alivelis | Hi Andy,The motor_vehicle tag was added based on our delivery partner GPS traces which is verified with the vehicles present in the satellite imagery. However, post the community feedback, we have changed our interpretation of motor vehicle access to mean the legal right of access. We are now fu... | |
| 6 | 2019-07-10 10:37 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Thanks alivelis. | |
| 7 | 2019-07-14 12:55 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Hello,I think that just https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/68471298 is left?Best Regards,Andy | |
| 8 | 2019-07-16 02:47 | alivelis | The motor_vehicle tag was added based on our delivery partner GPS traces which is verified with the vehicles present in the satellite imagery. However, post the community feedback, we have changed our interpretation of motor vehicle access to mean the legal right of access. We are now fully aligned ... | |
| 9 | 2019-07-16 10:19 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Thanks for fixing. | |
| 71853647 by alivelis @ 2019-07-03 10:39 | 1 | 2019-07-03 14:14 | rempshaener ♦970 | Hello, I have just seen your edits next to my borrough.The area you just edited ist still under construction, but will be finished in just a few weeks. By using (still old) Esri images you revert current on-the-ground-edits, so that OSM does not show the real conditions. You even deleted streets, ... |
| 2 | 2019-07-09 09:41 | alivelis | Hi,Thanks for looking into the edit. The roads were changed as per digital globe image of 2019-05-15 which is latest. We value local edits over remote sources. Thanks for reverting the changes. Please update the roads as per progress of work.Regards,alivelis | |
| 71668297 by alivelis @ 2019-06-27 10:58 | 1 | 2019-06-28 15:29 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Hello,What was the source of your change to the access tag change here?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | 2019-06-30 06:03 | alivelis | Hi Andy,Thanks for looking into my edits. This edit was made with reference to our GPS data. But as per the request from community removing the motor_vehicle tag. Let me know if you have any further questions.changeset no- 71748753Regards,alivelis | |
| 3 | 2019-06-30 08:35 | SomeoneElse ♦13,464 | Hello alivelis,Thanks for that.Regards,Andy | |
| 70879452 by alivelis @ 2019-06-03 09:53 | 1 | 2019-06-03 11:48 | trigpoint ♦2,393 | Again look at the existing map, You have again crossed a footpath without creating a join and ignored the iD error.Cheers Phil |
| 2 | 2019-06-04 15:14 | yaswap ♦68 | Hi, Thanks for looking into the edit. We will make the changes as per your suggestion. The editor might have turned off the paths feature. We will make sure that these errors wont get repeated going forward.And also the id editor we are using is older one causing this issue. We will fix this... | |
| 70873972 by alivelis @ 2019-06-03 06:45 | 1 | 2019-06-03 11:42 | trigpoint ♦2,393 | Hi, this edit has gone very wrong.Firstly this appears to be a private shared driveway, not a public residential road. A residential road in the middle of the countryside is highly unlikely, especially when it leads into an area with temporary buildings.You have also failed to take any account o... |
| 2 | 2019-06-04 15:07 | yaswap ♦68 | Hi Phil,Thanks for looking into the edit. We noticed that the ID errors are not showing up for us as it is an older version of id editor(2.12.2) that we used. But still the editor should have connected the road segment to the footpath. We have escalated for the id editor update. We will make sur... | |
| 67568109 by alivelis @ 2019-02-26 02:43 | 1 | 2019-02-27 12:43 | trigpoint ♦2,393 | Hi, this edit has gone very wrong. You have created a route though what is clearly a private area and would have some quite serious health and safety issues.https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=52.96414%2C-2.66155%3B52.96457%2C-2.67005 is clearly very wrong.\... |
| 2 | 2019-03-01 18:54 | jguthula ♦65 | Hi Phill,Thanks for your comments. Our objective is to add as much appropriate information as possible to OSM rather than adding wrong information. Since we had limited context of this location from satellite imagery we added just the road class and thought it can be helpful for a local member t... | |
| 67567911 by alivelis @ 2019-02-26 02:29 | 1 | 2019-02-27 12:30 | trigpoint ♦2,393 | Hi, this edit has created a series of overlapping ways. Please take care to ensure that this does not happen.Also please consider the obvious access problems you are creating when linking public highways via what are obviously private industrial sites. Access tags are vital in this case if we ar... |
| 2 | 2019-03-01 18:18 | jguthula ♦65 | Hi Phill,Thanks for looking into this edit. I don't know the exact reason for duplication of ways in this case. Both the overlapping ways were uploaded from my team members but changes were uploaded 20 mins apart. ID editor must have shown the second editor the edits already made in this lo... | |
| 67213494 by alivelis @ 2019-02-15 02:48 | 1 | 2019-02-15 12:02 | cryptickryptos ♦33 | these service roads no longer exist, please stop adding them back |
| 2 | 2019-02-18 05:55 | gseethar ♦67 | Hi Cryptickryptos,Thanks for your update. Alivelis added the service road based on the resources (Digital globe premium - 2015 which is the latest satellite imagery) available in OSM. We acknowledge the local knowledge that you possess and thanks again for helping us with your inputs.Please le... |