| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 103875892 by bashwith @ 2021-04-30 02:52 | 1 | 2021-04-30 07:13 | PT-53 ♦3,642 | Hallo,ich kann auf dem Bing-Luftbild aus 2019 dort keine Wege erkennen, nur eine große Fläche.Wenn Ihr neuere Luftbilder zur Verfügung habt, würde ich die gerne sehen.Grüße |
| 2 | 2021-05-05 02:34 | bashwith | thanks for checking into our edits. I have made the changes based on the Bing Ariel imagery. please let me know if it is contradicting with the ground reality. I request you to go ahead and make the necessary changes or let me know with the required modifications. always happy to learn from the comm... | |
| 90160448 by bashwith @ 2020-08-31 02:00 | 1 | 2020-10-18 10:23 | SomeoneElse ♦13,404 | Hello, you've traced this without aligning to the underlying imagery. The gap in the stream at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/842519721 shows where the track really goes. You can see this on OS_OpenData_StreetView. |
| 2 | 2020-10-19 06:45 | bashwith | Hi Someone Else,I have traced the road based on Esri World Imagery, However i have realized that i missed checking OS open data which would have helped me avoid the offset created. Thanks for looking into my edit. Happy to learn from community and i will take this as a learning for my future edit... | |
| 85928348 by bashwith @ 2020-05-29 07:35 | 1 | 2020-05-29 13:10 | aachso ♦242 | Hello, you've used the Bing aerial imagery here. Please always check different aerial imagery and if they show different on-ground situations, try to figure out which one is the latest.In this case, PDOK, Esri and Maxar show a newer situation compared to the outdated Bing imagery. As such, ... |
| 2 | 2020-06-03 10:21 | bashwith | thanks for checking into our edits. I have created the road based on bing since it is clear and the road skeleton is same as the latest iamgery. Post your suggestion, I realised that it is sligtly misaligned with the atest imagery. Please find the changeset(86129276) for the suggested modifications... | |
| 3 | 2020-06-03 14:49 | aachso ♦242 | The road skeleton is not the same, it has been changed and is now more of a curvy path than a sharp right and left turn. IMO this is clearly visible when comparing the different aerial imagery. Also you didn't continue the service road until the end, which is something I often see from Amazon, ... | |
| 85757106 by bashwith @ 2020-05-26 08:48 | 1 | 2020-05-27 23:44 | aachso ♦242 | Hello, why does this service road suddenly stop? It clearly doesn't end there. And it's not connected to the parking lot, which it should be. |
| 2 | 2020-05-29 02:05 | bashwith | I would like to thank you for verifying my edits. I have made this edit based on the driver feedback and available resources. I havent extended the road as the imagery was unclear and looks like a blockage near the building. Please find the changeset(85913932) for suggested modifications. thanks for... | |
| 3 | 2020-05-29 10:02 | aachso ♦242 | I agree it does look like a gate on aerial imagery, but the path you created only goes half way to the gate, so you should have either connected it to just the parking lot and stop there, or extended the path to the gate, not halfway over the parking lot and stop somewhere in the middle of it.I&... | |
| 71704311 by bashwith @ 2019-06-28 11:27 | 1 | 2019-06-28 14:47 | SomeoneElse ♦13,404 | Hello,What was the source of the access tag change here?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | 2019-07-02 01:56 | bashwith | Hi Andy,The motor_vehicle tag was added based on vehicles present in the satellite imagery. Based on this source the motor_vehicle = yes tag was added to this road. As per community feedback reverted the access tag changes. Changeset: 71731892Please let me know if there are any other s... | |
| 3 | 2019-07-02 11:49 | SomeoneElse ♦13,404 | Hello,Thanks for that.Best Regards,Andy |