| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 135425247 by anilkgba @ 2023-04-27 11:52 | 1 | 2023-04-27 16:11 | skyper ♦871 | Hi anilkgba,while most of the changes seem to be alright, I wonder why you have deleted some of the ways and that many nodes. Looking at Maxar, Esri and Bing, I think at least https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/19393527 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/19394810 exist but maybe `track` is the c... |
| 2 | 2023-05-05 21:33 | deepikja ♦58 | Hello, Skyper. We modified the road geometry of the segment https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/19394810 and added a service road going to the entity https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1169187831 in the change set #135757521 . However, the track road https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id&a... | |
| 3 | 2023-05-16 13:33 | skyper ♦871 | Hi,sorry, I do not know exactly how `highway=path` and `highway=track` are handled in the US but I think your view is too car-centric. Yes, the tiger import was of low quality, though, in Europe I would only change the highway's value and add a `FIXME=recheck existence` instead of deleting an... | |
| 4 | 2023-05-18 18:04 | deepikja ♦58 | Hi Skyper,We apologize for the incomplete change set comment provided by the editor in this particular change set. We have provided the editor with feedback and coached them to follow the change set commenting etiquettes.According to OSM wiki the tag highway=track is used for minor land-access r... | |
| 135410647 by anilkgba @ 2023-04-27 05:55 | 1 | 2023-04-27 09:50 | skyper ♦871 | Dear anilkgba,all three new turn relations express the identical u-turn restriction, e.g. only one (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15772475) is needed/useful. But why did you delete instead of updating the old one (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7672430)? Please, restore and use th... |
| 2 | 2023-05-05 21:11 | deepikja ♦58 | Hi Skyper, The editor accidentally has added three identical U-turn restrictions and we are sorry for the duplicate relations added. We have reverted the edits in the change set 135740711 and will make the necessary modifications once we fully understand the usage of JOSM tool to avoid any furth... | |
| 3 | 2023-05-16 14:29 | skyper ♦871 | Hi,here only the turn relation where a problem. I have partially reverted https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135740711 plus corrected/added :lanes tagging in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136172129.Cheers,skyper | |
| 4 | 2023-05-18 17:51 | deepikja ♦58 | Hello Skyper,Thank you for making the edits. We are working on collating such change sets with complex edits to be used as reference for the editors and train them on JOSM usage which will help us make the correct adjustments in edit we make on OSM for dual carriage ways. We will ensure that t... | |
| 135176595 by anilkgba @ 2023-04-21 05:16 | 1 | 2023-04-26 12:35 | skyper ♦871 | Hello anilkgba,are there u-turns allowed at the ends of the dual-carriage parts (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10828760928 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6967044714)?With route relations for both directions like `route=road` or PTv1 bus routes,you need to set the role `forward` for ... |
| 2 | 2023-05-10 12:39 | deepikja ♦58 | Hi Skyper, The editor refrained from adding the U-turn restrictions in the edit as we were unable to find sign boards indicating U-turn restrictions at the nodes (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10828760928 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6967044714). We performed the deep dive as per ... | |
| 3 | 2023-05-16 17:44 | skyper ♦871 | Hi,regarding u-turns the road markings are often a good indicator. If there is an restricted area or a solid line u-turns are usually not allowed.Regarding the roles of two-way route relations like `route=road` or PTv1 bus routes the wiki is correct (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:rou... | |
| 4 | 2023-05-18 17:45 | deepikja ♦58 | Hi Skyper,Thank you for sharing your insights. The suggestions provided by you definitely has helped us understand the tagging. We will work on documenting these change sets as examples for our editors which would help them to make a complete edit on OSM without tampering the existing tags/att... | |
| 134849953 by anilkgba @ 2023-04-13 08:12 | 1 | 2023-04-26 12:10 | skyper ♦871 | Hello anilkgba,you missed to add a `highway=traffic_signal` at the intersection (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10806958605).Are u-turns allowed at the end of the dual-carriage parts (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7383839966 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10806938101)?You need... |
| 2 | 2023-05-05 20:49 | deepikja ♦58 | Hi Skyper,We have currently reverted the edits made in the change set #135740390 as we do not have latest resource to confirm if the U-turns are allowed at the end of dual carriage ways (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7383839966 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/108069381)Also, we wil... | |
| 3 | 2023-05-16 20:28 | skyper ♦871 | Hi,I have reverted https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135740390 and instead fixed the tags in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136185357.Cheers,skyper | |
| 4 | 2023-05-18 17:41 | deepikja ♦58 | Hello Skyper,We reverted the change sets created by the editor as we did not we do not have latest resource to confirm if the U-turns are allowed at the end of dual carriage ways. Thank you for making the changes we will incorporate these as learnings in our internal wiki. Appreciate your suppor... | |
| 135005539 by anilkgba @ 2023-04-17 08:51 | 1 | 2023-04-25 20:15 | skyper ♦871 | Hello anilkgba,when splitting roads into parts per direction, you often need to adjust some tags. I doubt that the two one-way parts (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1163336909 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1163336910) each have a sidewalk on both sides. Please, talk with your team to up... |
| 2 | 2023-05-05 21:03 | deepikja ♦58 | Hi Skyper,I have adjusted the tagging information regarding the sidewalks present on each side of the roads in the changeset 135745782 referring the details on the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sidewalk. We apologize that editor failed to adjust the attributes correctly in the fir... | |
| 135175317 by anilkgba @ 2023-04-21 03:52 | 1 | 2023-04-25 19:56 | skyper ♦871 | Hi anilkgba,if you change a two-way street into two one-way street you have to adjust several tags and take care of route relations. I doubt that both one-way parts (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1164325509 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1164325508) have each bicycle lanes on both sides... |
| 2 | 2023-05-05 20:10 | deepikja ♦58 | Hi Skyper, We apologize for the incomplete edit made by the editor in this change set. We have currently reverted the edits made in the change set 135740097 and will ensure to make dual carriage way modifications only using JOSM so that the existing attributes/relations are not tampered.Regard... | |
| 134772747 by anilkgba @ 2023-04-11 12:48 | 1 | 2023-04-21 01:23 | skyper ♦871 | Hi anilkgba.You did not properly fix the relations nor properly map the intersection like the `highway=traffic_signal` and more. Did you even read all my previous comments? What did you not understand? See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/132036902 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changese... |
| 2 | 2023-04-28 09:20 | deepikja ♦58 | Hello, Skyper.Thank you for resolving the problem. The editor tried to fix the directions, lane count, and relations, as indicated in the previous changeset. However, the traffic signal was not corrected. Please accept my apologies for missing out on the additional attributes. This is an hones... | |
| 119703193 by anilkgba @ 2022-04-14 09:22 | 1 | 2023-04-22 17:06 | Minh Nguyen ♦569 | Hi, as you redraw roads to be dual carriageways, please remember to align the imagery layer you’re using with other features in the immediate vicinity of your edits. In this changeset, for example, the surrounding roads and other features had been aligned to a high-resolution imagery layer (OS... |
| 2 | 2023-04-25 10:26 | rababdul ♦26 | Hello Minh Nguyen,Thank you for reviewing the changeset and making the necessary corrections. We have provided feedback to the editor to ensure that the future edits are made using latest resources available to avoid such errors. Your help in fixing the issue is greatly appreciated.Regards,\... | |
| 116326435 by anilkgba @ 2022-01-19 06:31 | 1 | 2022-03-06 01:44 | Mxdanger ♦77 | When splitting a road into a dual carriageway please check ALL the tags especially :forward and :backward tags, as you left the turn lanes unmodified in the change. The adjacent junction was also incorrectly set up missing one-way segments and messed up turn restrictions. |
| 2 | 2022-10-31 12:59 | anilkgba | Hi, We apologize for the delayed response. Thank you for reviewing my changeset and correcting my edit. Apologies for adding incorrect turn lane tags and turn restrictions, it is an honest mistake from my end. Going forward, I'll ensure to be extra cautious while splitting the segment into ... | |
| 120238315 by anilkgba @ 2022-04-27 04:31 | 1 | 2022-06-01 18:53 | impiaaa ♦429 | When splitting a road into a dual carriageway, you have to make sure that all direction-dependent tags, like "change:backward" or "lanes:forward" are migrated to the correct objects and keys adjusted accordingly. |
| 2 | 2022-10-31 12:58 | anilkgba | Hi, We apologize for the delayed response. Thank you for reviewing my changeset and correcting my edit. Apologies for adding incorrect tags, it is an honest mistake from my end. Going forward, I'll ensure to be extra cautious while splitting the segment into dual carriage way. Thanks on... | |
| 125300093 by anilkgba @ 2022-08-24 06:51 | 1 | 2022-09-15 18:49 | IgorSKiselev ♦1 | That change is incorrect. That change add private access to all roads in Questa village. Most of this road are public roads served by Mountain House CDS, same as most other roads in the Mountain House |
| 2 | 2022-09-16 08:24 | anilkgba | Hi, Thank you for reviewing my changeset. I have added the private access tag to the road segments based on the "Private property" street sign board present in the Bing street-side overlays (link: https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=37.785964~-121.551866&lvl=17&dir=181.007&style=x... |