| Changeset | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 181491293 by bxl-forever @ 2026-04-18 10:06 ~ 12 days ago | 1 | ~ 12 days ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | The tunnel does have a name, https://databrussels.be/en/id/streetname/4655 this is the official name reposetory of street, stations tunnels etc in Brussels |
| 2 | ~ 12 days ago | bxl-forever | This is a long-standing problem with UrbIS data (which has been copied into the BeSt address register). They use descriptions, which have been (imho incorrectly) transcribed into the same text fields they use to name streets. This is why this description looks like "an official name for the t... | |
| 3 | ~ 12 days ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | I see your point, and I agree that descriptions should not be treated as names in principle. That said, in this case it still appears to function as a name: unusual and descriptive, yes, but presented in the source data in the same way as other official names, which makes it difficult to interpret i... | |
| 4 | ~ 11 days ago | RaphaelPasloin ♦136 | This revert is for my point of view not faulty , i will try to explain : - Best address dataset is for "address" (yes it's self referecence but let's me explain not for geographical name or something else see the UML of the EU directive : https://inspire-mif.github.io/uml-mo... | |
| 5 | ~ 11 days ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | These names don't fall under the municipality but the Region, like the region decides the names of the metro station and road tunnels | |
| 158478547 by bxl-forever @ 2024-10-29 00:43 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 16 days ago | Joske1020 ♦43 | moeten deze tags niet op het gebouw zelf staan? kan je uitleggen waarom je dit niet doet? |
| 2 | ~ 16 days ago | bxl-forever | De watermolen moet aangesloten worden op de rivier, het was niet het geval, en dit is ondertussen opgelost, bedankt voor de opmerking. | |
| 166569535 by bxl-forever @ 2025-05-21 13:27 ~ 11 months ago | 1 | ~ 20 days ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | This adjustment blocked some cycle routers from using the path on Pastur. I've now fixed it - based on mapillary, I'd say the path splits into the footway you mapped and a branch that goes to the Avenue Dolez. |
| 2 | ~ 20 days ago | bxl-forever | Your solution is better, indeed.Thanks. | |
| 181133509 by bxl-forever @ 2026-04-10 08:40 ~ 20 days ago | 1 | ~ 20 days ago | bxl-forever | The following changesets have been reverted:181129123181129467181129534181129600181129652181129897181130021181130201181130271181130571181131142181131250181131287181131450181131679 |
| 180573890 by bxl-forever @ 2026-03-29 09:26 ~ 1 month ago | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | gwahak ♦6 | I understand that sub-admin_level=10 areas are generally not mapped in Brussels. However, this case appears to be structurally different from typical sub-10 divisions.The “South Extension of Brussels” is not merely a minor local subdivision, but a geographically distinct protrusion o... |
| 2 | ~ 29 days ago | bxl-forever | I get your point but did you read the description of this changeset? Are you ready to discuss this with the Belgian mapping community?Also, why did you use an English name for it? This is not coherent with all our mapping practices and conventions. Thanks. | |
| 180098564 by bxl-forever @ 2026-03-19 09:35 ~ 1 month ago | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hey! So the NL name officially uses "en" and not "et"The municipal decision: https://www.woluwe1200.be/app/uploads/2025/12/Proces-verbal-public2025-11-17.pdf |
| 2 | ~ 1 month ago | bxl-forever | Thanks, but we know that already.However:1) UrbIS uses the "et" word in the official NL name. Whereas we all agree that it makes no sense, that is the official name. Your document is useful but it confirms that what the municipality says is not how it has been transcribed in the of... | |
| 180151571 by bxl-forever @ 2026-03-20 10:29 ~ 1 month ago | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | renadr ♦1 | I'm wondering why the postal address was removed, could you please explain? |
| 2 | ~ 1 month ago | renadr ♦1 | Ok, I think I get it. Never mind :) thank you | |
| 3 | ~ 1 month ago | bxl-forever | Just because OSM is a geographical database, and information like addresses should never be written several times. | |
| 179662511 by bxl-forever @ 2026-03-10 23:13 ~ 1 month ago | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | bxl-forever | The real changeset title should have been this: Fixed mistakes by changesets 179662050 179662005 179661977 179661917 (new user messed with building geometries, addresses and relations + user also broke a school polygon).(The title from a previous changeset had been used by mistake, after inadver... |
| 178374701 by bxl-forever @ 2026-02-10 19:01 ~ 2 months ago | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | question: food court Le Wolf is mapped as an area > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/754772541why not here as well? |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | bxl-forever | Both options are fine.I don’t mind mapping it as an area… but, contrary to Wolf which I surveyed myself, I don’t know if Ratz uses the entire building here, including the NW extension. Not to mention that, since it is a new building it is difficult to know whether the building s... | |
| 178360578 by bxl-forever @ 2026-02-10 13:37 ~ 2 months ago | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | regularcheese ♦1 | the path is not visible because of the trees. Lack of this information is making routing toward the building inefficient |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | bxl-forever | I understand that. The paths are still there, we simply retagged them because, as far I could see on Mapillary pictures, there is a gate barring access.Private access, right? If access is private, most routing engines will ignore them by default. | |
| 177740072 by bxl-forever @ 2026-01-26 22:00 ~ 3 months ago | 1 | ~ 3 months ago | gcorem ♦2 | Whoops, thank you! I had looked at your previous corrections and tried to do it right this time, but clearly I hadn't quite succeeded yet :) |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | bxl-forever | You are welcome.(Next time, please use direct messages instead of commenting on changesets, because by doing so you have flagged my changeset as incorrect, which it isn’t.) | |
| 177653189 by bxl-forever @ 2026-01-24 16:27 ~ 3 months ago | 1 | ~ 3 months ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.8696707&lng=4.3621935&z=17&focus=photo&panos=true&dateFrom=2025-05-01&pKey=1189780856320022&x=0.09727501442757774&y=0.6106483200657118&zoom=0 |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | according to me the "zebra crossing" is rather wide to justify my changeset ... you still don't agree? :-) | |
| 3 | ~ 3 months ago | bxl-forever | That is a point of view, but IMHO the node with the tactile paving for blind people should preferably be aligned where the tactile guiding strips for visually impaired people have been installed. | |
| 4 | ~ 3 months ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | last attempt: can we find an agreement like you mapped here? > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/805346523/history/1#map=19/50.854579/4.347041 | |
| 177566224 by bxl-forever @ 2026-01-22 14:03 ~ 3 months ago | 1 | ~ 3 months ago | SachaBe ♦13 | Hey, armchair-mapper here :)I'd love to understand what was bluntly oversimplified so I can improve next time.Thanks in advance ;) |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | bxl-forever | Have you opened the Mapillary link in my changeset description? I linked to a picture which shows what the path looks like.The path does an interesting set of curves and on some parts there are two paths running in parallel. Your changeset was undone because you changed that to redraw everythi... | |
| 149409636 by bxl-forever @ 2024-03-31 21:56 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | marc__marc ♦1,508 | Bonjour,https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3126953150tu as renseigné qu'il n'y a pas de feu à ce passage piéton. de mémoire si.n'y aurait-il pas confusion avec le passage piéton quelques plus loin qui désert l’arrêt de tram e... |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | bxl-forever | This changeset was 18 months ago, I do not recall the details for every node, but this looks like a mistake.https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=2110048189479248I fixed it, thanks. | |
| 153415081 by bxl-forever @ 2024-07-01 14:22 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | ericvb ♦3 | entrances should be parts of the building outline. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entrance |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | bxl-forever | Very true, indeed. But what is the purpose of flagging my changeset as erroneous? What mistake are you reporting here specifically? | |
| 175205069 by bxl-forever @ 2025-11-27 16:19 ~ 5 months ago | 1 | ~ 5 months ago | Joske1020 ♦43 | merci! |
| 2 | ~ 5 months ago | bxl-forever | You are welcome.Just one thing: in the future, please avoid commenting on changesets directly, when there is nothing *wrong* about them.This is because OSM has statistics of mappers who got changeset comments, and comments are implicitely assimilated to… criticism. (People with a lot... | |
| 163131618 by bxl-forever @ 2025-03-02 17:29 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 5 months ago | olizil ♦1 | 13, rue Moris : nouvelle affectation > salle de sport |
| 2 | ~ 5 months ago | bxl-forever | Please do not comment changesets unless you want to report a mistake in what the mapper did. It looks like there was no mistake with my changeset.If something changed recently in this area, you can either change it yourself or open a note. | |
| 173988198 by bxl-forever @ 2025-10-30 17:31 ~ 6 months ago | 1 | ~ 6 months ago | Sim100v ♦2 | What do you mean by "vandalism" |
| 2 | ~ 6 months ago | bxl-forever | The official name of this stop is "Alma".This is the correct spelling, and this is how it should be written on OSM.You changed the name of the stop and changed it into "STIB / MVIB - Alma", which is a strange mix of the operator and the stop.This is incorrect because we... | |
| 97268803 by bxl-forever @ 2021-01-11 00:48 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 months ago | 54dx5a ♦1 | Is there another way than the `level` tag to indicate that this part of the road is below the surrounding surface level? It would be a useful piece of information for noise models for example. |
| 2 | ~ 7 months ago | bxl-forever | There was a typo in the changeset title because the wrong tag, which was correctly removed here, is "layer=-1".If you want to mention that a road is below the surface (while not being in a tunnel), level=-1 would be okay.If you want to ask questions, you can reach out through direc... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 months ago | 54dx5a ♦1 | Thanks, setting `level=-1` seems the way to go.I didn't comment on a "random" changeset and didn't suggest that your edit was incorrect, but will prefer direct messages for similar questions as you suggest. | |
| 171257298 by bxl-forever @ 2025-08-31 08:24 ~ 8 months ago | 1 | ~ 7 months ago | kabelhaai ♦93 | Merci |
| 2 | ~ 7 months ago | bxl-forever | You are welcome. | |
| 165111505 by bxl-forever @ 2025-04-18 13:02 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 8 months ago | pedantic-pillow ♦2 | I'm sorry but this is wrong. This tab isn't functional anymore, including during the summer. |
| 2 | ~ 8 months ago | bxl-forever | All right, thanks for this. I’ll retag it as broken, then. | |
| 170779664 by bxl-forever @ 2025-08-21 13:20 ~ 8 months ago | 1 | ~ 8 months ago | Vanesiĉka ♦1 | Hello, it's not a facility, it's a cargo bike you can rent from Monkey Donkey, it all electronic, there is no shop just just one bike in free service outside just next to the bike parking. open street map automatically linked it to Velo ANtwerpen, how is it possible to correct it ? |
| 2 | ~ 8 months ago | bxl-forever | Hello.Why did you comment on this changeset?I removed the link to "Velo Antwerpen". Do I understand that you want it back? | |
| 3 | ~ 8 months ago | Vanesiĉka ♦1 | No, I am new here, and don't understand everything yet, I taught you erased the point. It is not related to Antwerpen. The studio and bike stuff I added doesn't appear yet on the map so I am confuse how it does work. its only appear whan I am in edition mode, is it normal ? | |
| 4 | ~ 8 months ago | bxl-forever | Thanks for writing back.About your other questions now.All the objects you added today are still in the database, so they will be available for searches.There are 3 reasons why you won’t see them immediately on the map. (The explanation below might be a little technical, I hope it&r... | |
| 165501215 by bxl-forever @ 2025-04-27 11:29 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 8 months ago | marc__marc ♦1,508 | Bonjour,https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/532086999par oü va le traffic de transit ? il y a une discontinuité de niveau de voie, il faudrait probablement réduire le segment sud aussiCordialement,Marc |
| 2 | ~ 8 months ago | bxl-forever | Thanks for spotting the issue. Authorities really created a mess here.A full grid for secondary roads can be achieved when the tunnel reopens.Until that happens, we can solve this issue by demoting the southern part as tertiary.Fixed by changeset 170468924 | |
| 168498422 by bxl-forever @ 2025-07-04 19:15 ~ 9 months ago | 1 | ~ 9 months ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi the Wikidate you added for this neighbourhood refers to Plateau Engeland - Engelandplateau (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299301349) and not the neighbourhood |
| 2 | ~ 9 months ago | bxl-forever | What is the correct value then? Does a wikidata entry exist for the neighbourhood? | |
| 3 | ~ 9 months ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | As far as I know one doesn't exist, you can make one and add it. Or if you want I can do it | |
| 4 | ~ 9 months ago | bxl-forever | Incidently, I had created entry Q111035324 myself and had tagged is as a neighbourhood… until you changed it into a plateau.I would be grateful to you if you could take care of fixing the wikidata entries; I understand we need two separate entries here, so that we can link each OSM object... | |
| 169403808 by bxl-forever @ 2025-07-24 14:49 ~ 9 months ago | 1 | ~ 9 months ago | k1100lt ♦1 | No idea what UrbisAdm is, but I got the information from my brother who is living there! Made one mistake; the south-most 27A should be 27B. |
| 2 | ~ 9 months ago | bxl-forever | Hello,UrbIS is the authoritative reference for adresses within the Brussels-Capital Region. (UrbisAdm is one of the viewers.) Addresses in OSM are imported from UrbIS.The edit was flagged as potentially suspicious because you are a new account and you moved a lot of addresses, and even era... | |
| 167772688 by bxl-forever @ 2025-06-18 09:23 ~ 10 months ago | 1 | ~ 10 months ago | Christian Materne ♦1 | It's closed, but not vacant. Everything is still as it was, but it was sealed for weeks, and it still hasn't reopened. |
| 2 | ~ 10 months ago | bxl-forever | Honestly, it makes no real difference, because when it reopens we can very easily retag the node, which is still there.But if that is important to you, here is what I’ll do here: restore it so that it shows again as a restaurant on the map, but setting its opening hours to "off".... | |
| 3 | ~ 10 months ago | Christian Materne ♦1 | restore it so that it shows again as a restaurant on the map, but setting its opening hours to "off". OK | |
| 163710736 by bxl-forever @ 2025-03-17 00:17 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | Best to leave a changeset comment on the changeset you reverted as well |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | As a matter of fact I wrote to this user instead of commenting the changesets directly, to ask for more information and find out what is going on with all those edits. | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | OK, thanks | |
| 4 | ~ 1 year ago | jogemu ♦46 | I do not agree that my title was misleading and I doubt that fixing your concerns, which I would have done gladly, would have been worse compared to erasing. Since improving the position of tram switches inherently modifies the tram routes it is part of, I would love to discuss how I can make it les... | |
| 5 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Hello and sorry for the delay about this. I finally found some time to inspect the situation here.I apologize if the wording of this changeset title may have sounded harsh. The main concern was about the outline of Marconi depot. Like all other buildings in Belgium, the reference data is the offi... | |
| 6 | ~ 1 year ago | jogemu ♦46 | Thank you for your time. I can live with what you didn’t restore with changeset 164668069. If you ever have the time and desire, we can discuss some refinements that aren’t necessarily better. My apologies for making you feel the need to please me by restoring everything, instead of simp... | |
| 164170200 by bxl-forever @ 2025-03-27 15:47 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,it seems that, on this changeset, you accidentally deleted the sidewalk south and west of Victor Boin Stadium.Also, shouldn't the sidewalk north of Av. de Marathon have access=permissive as well till the second gate?Cheers |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks for the advice, I restored the sidewalk.I don’t know if I am expected to have a strong opinion about this "permissive vs. private" tags. It looked fairly natural to open the western sidewalk because it is connected to the stadium; as for the road it can also make sens... | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | well, no strong opinion about private vs permissive tags here neither.I happen to pass by there quite often, but mostly on week ends and, most of the time, the gates near Av. de Bouchout are closed. This is why it didn't surprised me that a fellow mapper marked the roads as private. I did t... | |
| 4 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | You have a valid point.If you think everything should be set back to access=private, you may want to reopen https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4684538 so that we can also get RaphaelPasloin’s opinion, especially his first remark about this being public land. | |
| 5 | ~ 1 year ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | I hadn't seen Raphael's note yesterday when I wrote here, I saw it this morning.Raphael visited the place as recently as yesterday morning ;-) and the gates were open: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=566427145793535&focus=photoSo, I think the current 'permissive' ... | |
| 163856104 by bxl-forever @ 2025-03-20 10:51 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Autonomia asbl ♦1 | i think the address node must be #12574415208 not #12574415207the pharmacy lay on number 252 |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | Autonomia asbl ♦1 | Oups i made a mistake its number 250 its correct | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Indeed, my changeset is correct. | |
| 129578094 by bxl-forever @ 2022-11-30 22:08 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | I think this Brood is closed. The other place with the same name is correct, but it appears they moved from here to there |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Just for clarity, this is not a mistake on this changeset, but merely information that 2 years later this POI has moved.Thanks for this information, I updated the map. | |
| 162933496 by bxl-forever @ 2025-02-25 13:56 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | niyaven ♦2 | Sorry for adding the address, new here.The rest of the changes should be valid, don't you think? The website is a 404, and Proxy is not a supermarket but a convenience shop (according to the definition given in the wiki). |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | The 404 error has been fixed in a subsequent changeset.As for the supermarket vs. convenience choice, this is a borderline case again. We settled it some time ago, having all the Proxy Delhaize tagged as supermarmets (on the ground that in general those shops are large enough to potentially pus... | |
| 160765531 by bxl-forever @ 2024-12-29 19:37 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | burning forests ♦1 | ooh yeah, i had a feeling i did something wrong here so i came back to check it but you corrected it instead. i missed the one way road sign. thanks and sorry! |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | You are welcome. | |
| 160172137 by bxl-forever @ 2024-12-11 14:50 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Wolf takes the whole floor of the building that is why I expanded the area |
| 159745492 by bxl-forever @ 2024-11-29 15:03 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | This entire way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/419562680 now has bollards in the middle, so I guess we should split it into two parallel ways? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | I don’t mind any option but you may be interested to know that this is a temporary situation.The city does that every winter now, to prevent having too much motor traffic across the winter market, and the normal situation is resumed in the first week of January. Perhaps not worth the hass... | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | Oh really!? I was surprised to see this situation pop up again. I thought they just changed their minds one more time.I agree - let's keep it simple then! | |
| 152642668 by bxl-forever @ 2024-06-13 17:04 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | olecky ♦18 | Are horses really allowed here? IIRC there is a cycle and pedestrian track sign from the Brussels side, and a cycle track sign from the Flemish (Vier Armen) side. I haven't seen any horses on it, and they would be bad for the compacted surface. It's also not included as a bridlepath on the... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | I get your point, so probably horse=yes should be removed here.But if you want to comment a changeset, you should address your comment to the mapper who introduced "horse=yes" here. If you inspect the history of those ways, you will see that my changeset was not about deciding to change... | |
| 157100157 by bxl-forever @ 2024-09-25 20:04 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | Shouldn't these two nodes be amenity=school? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Wise choice, indeed.As you see, my changeset was only there to clean up a problem with the addresses, I merely re-used the tags from the previous user. I will change them now. | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | Thanks!(both office nodes are at version 1 here, so I didn't see they came from deeper down) | |
| 158634992 by bxl-forever @ 2024-11-01 20:04 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Bigon ♦11 | This should be removed (or the history merged) since it's a duplicate of the now "green mango" at the same address... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Good point! In that case, we can safely delete this one, thanks. | |
| 155191582 by bxl-forever @ 2024-08-13 11:47 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | VLD549 ♦319 | Hi, I was asked to verify the name change from Consulat Général De Türkiye to Consulat Général de Türkiye - Consulaat-Generaal van Türkiye. I understand the Dutch name needs to be written, since it's an official language to be used. I can't find... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | I don't mind either spelling but didn’t this country request the "Türkiye" spelling to be used in every language?https://www.trtworld.com/turkey/un-to-use-türkiye-instead-of-turkey-after-ankara-s-request-57633 | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | VLD549 ♦319 | Ok, thanks! | |
| 157041354 by bxl-forever @ 2024-09-24 14:02 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | RichdeLim ♦4 | sorry for the mess with the former name, I wasn't familiar with the "old_name" tag, my bad & thanks for fixing it |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Don’t worry, we are here to help. | |
| 125055191 by bxl-forever @ 2022-08-18 10:34 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | BBJIB ♦17 | Is het nu Marché Au Poisson of Aux Poissons? In het meervoud volgens: Tomtom, Google Maps, Apple Maps. Wordt niet aangegeven op: NGI, Bing Maps. Wikidata vermeld beide, maar het meeervoud als primaire. Best aan de stadsadministratie zelf vragen? :') |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | I transferred your question to another mapper who can do some research about how to name places.Next time, please abstain from commenting on other people’s changesets to ask ordinary questions.Commenting on a changeset implies that there is something wrong with the changeset itself. This ... | |
| 154765289 by bxl-forever @ 2024-08-03 09:14 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | bemapper ♦9 | The address was the correct one for the restaurant, which is now not obvious on the map. |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | There are linked together, aren’t they?https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17903934 | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | bemapper ♦9 | Indeed, sorry for that, and thanks for keeping the surveyed data alive.Perhaps you could make comments match the change more closely, like here if it was about moving the data to a relation, not just saying the data doesn't belong there. | |
| 154671083 by bxl-forever @ 2024-07-31 23:17 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Added, thanks.https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1304930696https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1304930697 |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | The changeset is correct, the previous comment was intented to thank the user who opened a note. | |
| 154442793 by bxl-forever @ 2024-07-26 13:22 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Adding craft=handicraft is okay.But adding an address on the place is not okay. In Belgium, we do not repeat addresses on objects. Please ignore text boxes of the simple online editor (iD), which does not know about conventions in every country.Addresses are computed by inheritance... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | This changeset is correct. This comment was expected to be posted on the faulty changeset 154442668. | |
| 153589729 by bxl-forever @ 2024-07-05 13:37 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi I digged a bit and Le Berger and Jardin Secret share the same entrance but both still exist. Jardin secret on their website states "Currently, the entrance is located a little further at Le Berger." And the website of Le Berger still exists too. Their Instagram also confirms this https:... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | OK, this is useful follow-up info, thanks.Next time, please do not comment the changeset itself, which was not faulty. (This changeset did not erase anything, it merely transferred existing tags to a node.) | |
| 153652856 by bxl-forever @ 2024-07-07 09:23 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | bemapper ♦9 | Would you please not destroy surveyed information that is lost with a few of your edits, like this ChangeSet?It's my interest to make my familiar areas correct, and useful, and not just in a 2D view, in line with openstreetmap.org - "OpenStreetMap is a place for mapping things that are... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | This changeset only cared to realign the polygon. This is routine maintenance work, as people using the online iD editor are often unaware of this when drawing. No information was lost: 5 nodes were touched, with a move of respectively 3, 7, 25, 28, and 28 cm.OSM mappers are fully aware that UrbI... | |
| 122554797 by bxl-forever @ 2022-06-18 17:25 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | hackthemap ♦95 | You write "fixed mistakes caused by changeset 113411495 (traffic_calming=table on the road itself)" but traffic_calming=table is tagged instead of removed on the whole road itself here in your changeset. Is that raised road really the case or did you want to remove it and put it on a node ... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | There is a 36-meter long elevated part stretching across the entire intersection. This is a fairly common case, and we map traffic_calming=table on the way itself rather than on a random node. This is what the changeset is about.Here is a Mapillary pictures that shows the infrastructure.https:... | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | hackthemap ♦95 | Ok, yeah I knew about the tagging on the way. I just wanted to confirm that the changeset wasn't a mistake because for me it seemed like you wanted to do the exact opposite ("fixing a mistake which was putting it on the road itself").Thanks for clarifying and the explanation. | |
| 153477151 by bxl-forever @ 2024-07-02 21:28 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | bemapper ♦9 | House numbers 104-118B (even) and 101-105 (odd) are not in Evere/1140 but in Schaarbeek/1030 according to the administrative boundaries. Should the street relation be split accordingly? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Yes, it’s better to create separate associatedStreet relations for each postcode/city combination. I’ve just added the missing relation to fix the issue (btw, most streets were in the wrong relation before this changeset). | |
| 150539096 by bxl-forever @ 2024-04-26 13:23 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | marc__marc ♦1,508 | Bonjour,https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17519037j'imagine que tu voulais renseigner "Brasserie Ommegang " comme targetCordialement,Marc |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | OK, merci. | |
| 153367144 by bxl-forever @ 2024-06-30 12:29 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | arafin ♦120 | Thanks for your mapping . #OMGuru --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153367144 |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | You are welcome, thanks. | |
| 152180704 by bxl-forever @ 2024-06-03 01:21 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | hackthemap ♦95 | Hi! Thanks a lot for the note tag and splitting the way to add more surface details. Could we add the surface:forward and surface:backward in addition to surface because they seem clearly defined with the general forward/backward suffix, just not used very much? The normal surface tag could still s... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | So, you want to keep the surface tag and adding surface:forward=asphalt and surface:backward=sett on top of them?Feel free to do if you want, it would probably not do much harm. | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | hackthemap ♦95 | Yes, to just keep the surface tag for now to keep compatibility with current data consumers. Changed it now. I think it's better to have the information in structured data (proper tags) compared to a note and if nobody is using the suffixes, then data consumers will understandably not care to i... | |
| 152497840 by bxl-forever @ 2024-06-10 13:18 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Sarmate ♦1 | Thank you for your very useful explanations and my apologies for my rookie errors, I'll be more careful in the future! |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | You are welcome.Next time, please make sure to comment on the existing changeset here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152496180 to keep all discussions in the same place. | |
| 152213813 by bxl-forever @ 2024-06-03 19:05 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Svanhildur ♦5 | Isn't it still correct to add this stop code, as it is used (even though rarely)? What would be the requirement for adding a stop code in Brussels? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Why do you need that, precisely? | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | Svanhildur ♦5 | I work on routing and need to link GTFS stops with OSM objects. Seems like ref:STIB_MIVB is tagged extensively (in no small part thanks to you :) ) and GTFS stop IDs *should* be mostly equivalent to it, so this tag can be used for linking purposes.According to GTFS, every day first metro 6 towards... | |
| 152213902 by bxl-forever @ 2024-06-03 19:08 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Svanhildur ♦5 | Thanks, I made a mistake |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | No problem, you are welcome. | |
| 151872472 by bxl-forever @ 2024-05-26 23:00 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | izen57 ♦1 | The thing is that the part of this building is in fact the courtyard paved with paving stones |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | I don’t blame you for the bad changeset, you know. It has already been fixed and the courtyard you are referring to is now correctly mapped.I understand it is a difficult case for you because this is one (rare) occurrence where we must strive to keep OSM data in sync with official UrbIS dat... | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | izen57 ♦1 | Alright, anyway thank for your diligent work. | |
| 151501434 by bxl-forever @ 2024-05-18 16:08 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Vivek Dumre ♦84 | Good and accurate mapping.#OMGuru --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151501434 |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks for the compliment. | |
| 151616631 by bxl-forever @ 2024-05-21 08:48 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,despite the name, I don't think this shop is a Delhaize Shop & Go.On the link below, you can have a look at their sign, it doesn't look like the Delhaize one https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.894364&lng=4.3826641&z=19.24339938691478&pKey=216385191209294&... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Yes, you are right, it’s fixed now. | |
| 151368889 by bxl-forever @ 2024-05-15 16:00 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Bigon ♦11 | I would suggest that if you feel that iD presets are bad (for Belgium) that you propose fixes (or at least open bugs) here: https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema.That would made everybody workload lower if the tags are OK the first time |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | Bigon ♦11 | And as there is a sign saying explicitly that pedestrian are allowed, foot=designated was still OK, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Yes, I saw the issue you raised on GitHub about this.Those discussions have been endless in the past years, primarily because legislation is different in every European country: "designated" is really important in the UK but also in Germany, whereas countries like Belgium do not ... | |
| 148070292 by bxl-forever @ 2024-02-29 20:25 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | v_martyanov ♦6 | And you successfully restored "too many nodes" I've deleted. |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | Hello,You are right; this changeset was followed by another one a few days later where we took care of removing extra nodes, but while preserving the correct outline of those buildings.Have a nice day. | |
| 127848720 by bxl-forever @ 2022-10-20 17:22 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | I believe the name:en is also an informal translation? And perhaps those should be removed from the 5 other stations in Brussels as well? |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | I realize I never replied on this one. Good suggestion, of course. | |
| 74207215 by bxl-forever @ 2019-09-07 14:47 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | mehmet8118 ♦3 | dsadsa --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74207215 |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | mehmet8118 ♦3 | dsadsa --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74207215 | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | mehmet8118 ♦3 | dsadsa --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74207215 | |
| 4 | ~ 1 year ago | bxl-forever | I have always wondered why the user left changeset comments here… | |
| 147046722 by bxl-forever @ 2024-02-04 10:01 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | VLD549 ♦319 | Hi, isn't the name just Circus Zonder Handen? According to their site it is.Thank you for elaborating. |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Please refrain from commenting on users’ changesets if you don’t understand how OSM works.Please have a look at the *history* of the object and address your comments to the mapper who introduced that name. Discuss that with that person, and NOT with the last mapper who tou... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | VLD549 ♦319 | Thank you for your response. I am only referring to a name change. In case you are not responsible for that, I guess you don't need to get involved and thus respond. | |
| 149060037 by bxl-forever @ 2024-03-23 17:05 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,there are a couple of ATMs outside, on the building wall on Rue Marie Christine, and more (don't know how many) inside the building.https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=594021539489602I had mapped them ouside to make it clear that they are accessible from the stree... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks, in that case we’ll stick it to the wall. Done. | |
| 148069883 by bxl-forever @ 2024-02-29 20:14 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | v_martyanov ♦6 | Could you please specify the maximum "distortinon" of the building shape in meters I've made? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Some parts of the building have a roof extension which does not match the real outline on the ground. For those cases, I measured a difference of slightly more than 7.5 meters.Indeed, we are lucky to be allowed to trace directly from government numerical data which has been licenced to ... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | v_martyanov ♦6 | Seems you're talking about some other changeset. During my edit I just deleted 4 nodes from the way and it is clearly visible from the changesetCould you please gave a look at my changes https://osmcha.org/changesets/148069462 and your changes https://osmcha.org/changesets/148069883 of this... | |
| 148585381 by bxl-forever @ 2024-03-13 10:04 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi, this building will not only be a office but also apartments and a hotel. Thats why I didn't tag it as an office |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks. In the meantime we obtained more information about the current situation of the building and we will update it accordingly. | |
| 146941888 by bxl-forever @ 2024-02-01 11:23 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | The Wikidata refers to the whole area and not just the old part, if you read the wikipedia (which I didn't edit) and look at the wikidata (which I edited) |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,This comment would have been preferably left on the note where the problem was discussed instead of here. Reference to the note was provided in the source of the changeset.However, to me it looks like the request in the note was correct, and the part built in 1930 by architects Michel... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi, I hadn't seen the note sorry for this I have been very busy lately. I think you are right o leave the architects on that part of the building and moving the Wikidata en -pedia to the whole building. | |
| 147063432 by bxl-forever @ 2024-02-04 17:48 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Sylle_99 ♦2 | Hello bxl,what a nice way to speak about people with less experience that would like to start contributing :(These 6 house numbers are all part of one big appartment complex.I wanted to group them in one outline and maintain the 6 different entities as building parts. I don't see how ... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | Sylle_99 ♦2 | I just downloaded the most recent version of your osm handbook (big thanks for that by the way, it was a big help in the past) which why I am surprised by the tone of voice in your initial post above... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Thanks for reaching out. Apologies for the harsh tone, I realize it was not fair, especially since most of the blame is actually directed at the iD editor (the Javascript editor behind the "Edit" button on osm.org), which encourages bad mapping practices.I will reply to the other mess... | |
| 147067749 by bxl-forever @ 2024-02-04 20:06 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Valerio_Bozzolan ♦40 | Sorry. Thanks. |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | No problem, we are happy to help. As you can see, we have a complete Mapillary coverage of our region taken in 2022-2023 and that helps us a lot.Your other contributions were fine and appreciated. | |
| 146560658 by bxl-forever @ 2024-01-22 16:21 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,I may be wrong but, it seems to me that this polygon (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/243559628) is representing two different buildings. One of them is part of UGC De Brouckère cinema and shouln't have been demolished.Cheers |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | You are right, I have probably too hazily assumed the entire building had been demolished, though only the part behind the other building is gone. I’ll change it. | |
| 146085263 by bxl-forever @ 2024-01-10 00:40 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Bigon ♦11 | Hello,Please find here the pictures of the intersection that I took today: https://imgur.com/a/go7Y5xZI highly doubt that anybody can consider the sign and the painting on the ground as "temporary". notice the painted passage (and yield sign) for the bikesI'll let you fix ... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hi and thanks for the pictures.Indeed, you are right, the situation has changed very recently, then. I passed by a few months ago, and on the Mapillary pictures from a few months ago the no-left-turn sign was only temporary. OK, they put a permanent sign and made a correct situation with the p... | |
| 139565982 by bxl-forever @ 2023-08-07 13:41 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | VLD549 ♦319 | Hi could you let me know what source was used? https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q86256936 indicates it to be with a hyphen. Thank you! |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | This changeset aims at fixing an old mistake by someone who wrote the name with a hyphen.The authoritative source for street names in the Brussels Region is and has always been UrbIS. We provide a link to UrbisAdm (it works out of the box in JOSM and iD) or the map can be viewed here: https://d... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | VLD549 ♦319 | Thank you for the extensive explanation. | |
| 145454166 by bxl-forever @ 2023-12-24 00:23 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi why did you remove the Wikidata and the Commons links? They still refer to the building. |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Do they? They are named after the former place that no longer exists.Perhaps it would be more appropriate to rename the Wikidata and Commons entries, then we can link to them again. Or, if what is required is to show a picture of the building (regardless of the café currently operating ... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | They do as i have created the wikidata and edited the commons. But I think renaming the commons and the Wikidata would be appropriate. | |
| 140338996 by bxl-forever @ 2023-08-24 19:19 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | VLD549 ♦319 | Hi, just wanted to make sure it is correct. Wikidata for example, and other sites claim that the Dutch street has 'laan' included. And it would make sense considering the French 'avenue'.Just double checking, thank you for letting me know. |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | What is your question exactly?The changeset title correctly explains that we refer to the *official* name, and the changeset source links to UrbisAdm, which is the official reference in the Brussels-Capital Region.Again, the official name does not include the -laan prefix. This is confirmed... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | VLD548 ♦20 | I would suggest to folllow the opinion of bxl-forever. As I am not speaking French I am not able to check properly if the Dutch name is correct with relation to the French one. | |
| 141428617 by bxl-forever @ 2023-09-18 14:45 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Fabrício ♦3 | It seems that changeset 141428617 (made by you), reverting changeset 141422198, is indeed incorrect. Point 1635651356 is referenced as admin_center by several entities of differente admin_levels (Brussels-City, Bussels-Capital Region, among others). Since point 1635651356 has property admin_level=2... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for raising the point. I’ve just found out that a beginner incorrectly changed the wikidata entry for this node and linked it to a larger urban area, which is incorrect.There is a frequent confusion here for people who are not familiar with Belgium: one of the regions is ... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | Fabrício ♦3 | Thank you very much for the explanation.There is still the issue that the population tag is missing. I am not sure if it is to be put on the node itself (point 1635651356) or on the related polygon (boundary) elements. "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:population" says that it can... | |
| 144219538 by bxl-forever @ 2023-11-19 18:48 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Danaosh ♦1 | I must be wrong but I thought building outlines should match the footprint of the building, not overhangs |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | Danaosh ♦1 | https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=382626530194106 | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Marek_S3DB_sumOfMoreElements.jpgIf needed, we can map some parts separately but the large outline is what is found in official UrbIS data, which is the reference in the Brussels-Capital Region, and has been attributed a unique ref number, that is why we r... | |
| 4 | ~ 2 years ago | Danaosh ♦1 | Based on that, this one is incorrect : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005532952But this one is correct : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/226558119?I hope I'm not crowding this node's history, maybe I can delete my comments | |
| 5 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | OSM is a map which anyone can edit, and there are several hundreds of thousands of buildings in Belgium alone; you will easily find examples where random people made mistakes, like in the links you provided.I will be happy to help you understand how OSM works. It’s better to write to me d... | |
| 143535979 by bxl-forever @ 2023-11-02 14:52 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | SachaBe ♦13 | Hello,It's not a foot path, it's a shared foot/bike path.Why is it "bad"? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Please inspect the tag before criticizing a changeset. I never pretended this was solely a foot path. The tags on this way correctly include, "bicycle=yes", which grants access to cyclists.When a path is open to two categories of users, mappers may choose, and "highway=footway +... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | SachaBe ♦13 | Understood, thanks!I'm reading your handbook and realize I was definitely relying on iD way too much :')I'll think more in tags in the future... | |
| 139964758 by bxl-forever @ 2023-08-16 13:22 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | It has reopened now https://www.bruzz.be/culture/eat-drink/le-cheval-marin-beschermde-brasserie-eindelijk-heropend-2023-10-13 |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Thanks for sharing the information that the current situation is not like it was when this changeset was created.I’ll update it. | |
| 39927293 by bxl-forever @ 2016-06-10 10:51 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Der Bierpuncheur ♦37 | Hi, I have a question. Beside the main street of Avenue de la Sauvagine - Waterwildlaan there is a designated "highway=service road," but then also has the tag "busway." Why don't we identify these features as "highway=busway?" Just trying to understand, and not co... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,For generic questions, it may better to write a direct message to mappers instead of commenting on their changesets, since this will give the false impression that this changeset is faultly. This is a changeset from 2016, there was no change we could have used a feature that was proposed ... | |
| 142436841 by bxl-forever @ 2023-10-11 13:18 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | SachaBe ♦13 | I'd appreciate detailed feedback so I can improve, rather than just saying it's "poorly drawn". I don't see how it's poorer than the sidewalks that were validated on the map.Where can I find some guidelines?Once you revert a change I don't know how to review wh... |
| 140797794 by bxl-forever @ 2023-09-04 10:34 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi, How did they move the spring? It's usually not something you can really move. Also how do you know where they moved it to? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | This changeset is a consequence of the following note:https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3867076My understanding is that the didn’t *move* the spring, but rather that it was never there in the first place.If you have concerns, please reopen the note and discuss it with the mapper who... | |
| 87596976 by bxl-forever @ 2020-07-06 11:04 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | I'm not sure it makes sense to map this as a relation only. For one, the two sites have different addresses, so having the relation have an address is wrong, I think. Also the small site has only secondary education, whereas the bigger one has both primary and secondary. That makes it feel like... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | I agree with you. We have a few other cases of schools that have a satellite location, and sometimes not the same tags, despite they "brand" themselves as a single entity.This school has been annoying me for quite a time, it raised validation problems.https://www.openstreetmap.org/w... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | In this case I would honestly just flatten it into two ways. You could still bundle them together with a wikidata or operator tag. There's a few site relations as well, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10592577 . That particular relation is an example of what I would recommend we DON... | |
| 142062134 by bxl-forever @ 2023-10-02 21:21 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Bear-in-a-box ♦56 | Hi, even if it might still exist on Mapillary, in reality it does not exist any more. The field has been plowed up until the limits of "Zandgroeve". The plowing has completely destroyed it. What is to be done in such a case? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | A user made pictures during a survey, these pictures are very recent.The usual rule is that if a footway can be seen and used, then it "exists" for OSM.We would bar access (with access=private) only if there are signs or documents that explicitely forbid people to use it. And we a... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Link to the Mapillary pictures (August 2023).https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1408422306369091 | |
| 4 | ~ 2 years ago | Bear-in-a-box ♦56 | But I was there 2 days ago and it was as I described.....no more path.I believe that is more accurate than 2 month old pictures | |
| 5 | ~ 2 years ago | Bear-in-a-box ♦56 | Just checked the mapillary pictures. Compared to the actual situation this looks like a highway. There is absolutely nothing left of the path. It's a pity and illegally removed by the farmer! | |
| 140900761 by bxl-forever @ 2023-09-06 15:38 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | user_5359 ♦20,551 | Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/node/11172052660 (one of three objects). What is the mean of the tag ref:8154332 = 8154430? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Indeed, copy/paste error, this is ref:UrbIS.Fixed, thanks for having spotted the issue. | |
| 141106238 by bxl-forever @ 2023-09-11 11:09 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Done. |
| 137947430 by bxl-forever @ 2023-06-30 08:14 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi, Why did you mere these 3 buildings? They are all clearly different things and the Vauxhall isn't even a building but just a roof. |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello.I suggest you inspect OSM data more carefully before dropping comments like this.The reason for the merge is that UrbIS considers this to be a single building structure with a single ref:UrbIS number.I agree that this structure is made of several parts, and that is why it was desig... | |
| 139845945 by bxl-forever @ 2023-08-13 21:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | I also left a message on the original CS |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Good, thanks. | |
| 136036915 by bxl-forever @ 2023-05-12 22:52 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi what is your source to expand the N. to Nancy? On a sign and on UrbIris it says N. |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Not my choice, in fact, it is essentially a follow-up of changeset #136006447 where the user expanded the name. The user modified name:fr, name:nl and the French part of the name tag, but failed to change the Dutch part of the name tag. This caused a validation problem.I agree with you that if... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | I edited the name of the street to reflect on ground situation | |
| 137882392 by bxl-forever @ 2023-06-28 14:33 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Mapperke ♦2 | How can I see what you changed? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | This conversation should rather go to the original changeset, i.e. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/137878661and not here.In a nutshell: in OSM you can see the list of objects touched by a changeset below this comment, i.e. 1 way and 5 nodes were touched here. In a nutshell, this is a ... | |
| 137407354 by bxl-forever @ 2023-06-16 10:08 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Interesting shortcut, indeed.Thanks.https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/137407354 |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | ↑ The comment above was meant for https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3720027 to thank the user. | |
| 119976200 by bxl-forever @ 2022-04-21 00:04 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Der Bierpuncheur ♦37 | Hi, at 4 Arms, there is a cycleway drawn adjacent to N227 on the west side of the street that extends from Brusselsteenweg as it intersects N227. It is feature #1053473710. I think it should be removed. Cycles can proceed from Brusselsteenweg, staying in the bus lane for about 40m, until Tervurenlaa... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,The cycleway you are talking about was not created by me (you may have seen my username on it but it’s because I split a longer way to solve an unrelated problem, and upon doing so the database generates new ways and starts numbering at version 1 even though they had been on the map ... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | Der Bierpuncheur ♦37 | Yes, based on my experience navigating that intersection, and knowledge of the roads and signs, your proposed fix will represent the actual infrastructure for cyclists and pedestrians as it exists. I’ve gone ahead and made the changes. As for that node you’ve linked, the intersection is ... | |
| 4 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, it looks fine, well done. | |
| 134913608 by bxl-forever @ 2023-04-14 17:17 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | Hey Yves,Metdat Imgur mogelijks foto's gaat verwijderen, ben ik eventjes aan het rondkijken naar welke IMGUR-foto's er online staan.Het viel me op dat je hier een foto hebt toegevoegd en een beschrijving op IMGUR hebt gezet (https://imgur.com/XfBrn4w).Deed je dit met de hand of... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | bxl-forever | 100% handwerk wat mij betreft. 😉 | |
| 135269644 by bxl-forever @ 2023-04-23 16:41 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Added, thanks.https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135269644 |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | (Sorry, this comment was intended to be added to the note.) | |
| 135062300 by bxl-forever @ 2023-04-18 14:16 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,indeed, the house number is not in UrbIS but, Camping 58 –that uses the building–, state in their contact page that the house number is 2Ahttps://www.camping58.be/contact/ |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | also here (see 'Préambule') Brussels municipality is talking about house number 2Ahttps://www.brussel.be/sites/default/files/bxl/workflow/23-05-2022/23%2005%202022%20OJ%20point_punt%20(025)/025_Convention%20d%27occupation%20pr%C3%A9caire%20Fr.pdf | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Oh, very good, thanks for checking. | |
| 132266143 by bxl-forever @ 2023-02-08 16:51 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Kristjan ESPERANTO ♦58 | Hi bxl-forever :-) Can you please explain why you removed the address? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,The address is still there, it belongs to the building.When a POI is located inside a building that has a single address, it will automatically "inherit" the same address.What’s the trouble exactly? Did you encounter problem with some software, requiring duplicatin... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Kristjan ESPERANTO ♦58 | Some applications only use the Overpass API to get information from POIs. Now you can no longer get the address from this node. Or is there a way to get to an inherited address via the API? I haven't found it yet. | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | I suppose the "(around:)" instruction in the Overpass API will do the job.It’s fairly trivial to do proper reverse geocoding with Nominatim, e.g. this will return a JSON file which can be easily parsed.https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/reverse?format=geocodejson&lat=50.85... | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | Kristjan ESPERANTO ♦58 | Okay, I'll have to deal with Nominatim then. Thank you for the tip and example! | |
| 132589695 by bxl-forever @ 2023-02-15 16:12 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ManualTagFixer ♦42 | Hello,I see that you have added some landuse=village_green. Please read:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvillage_greenWould a more specific tag like grass or shrubbery be more appropriate?Please read:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landcover%3DgreeneryFor a lis... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Yes, I believe you are right. I did not give enough attention to the definition of a village green, I had used it to match existing tagging practice I saw elsewhere. (And, honestly, there are way more important problems to fix on the map at the moment.)I changed those to natural=shru... | |
| 131763000 by bxl-forever @ 2023-01-27 09:02 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | MarkpageBxl ♦5 | Thanks, didn't know about that convention being important. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | You are welcome! | |
| 73972909 by bxl-forever @ 2019-09-01 13:20 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | jbelien ♦20 | I'm currently checking streetnames in Brussels (compared to UrbIS - official data from Brussels Region).It is (at least) now registered as "Rue Porselein" in UrbIS (official data) so I'll remove the "Rue de la Porselein" since streets signs + official data only mentio... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | I did not formally reply to this comment from 2020 but, as you guessed, I entirely agree with your suggestion. Thanks for the fix. | |
| 131313347 by bxl-forever @ 2023-01-15 20:31 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi, the MIVB does in fact own the whole building + collections and they refer to the depot as the whole building. The museum and depot part overlap a bit inside. That is why I merged the buildings and made the museum a node in the building. could you please revert this change./https://www.stib-miv... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,I get your point and indeed, STIB/MIVB is the legal owner of all the walls here, this is true. They have a convention with the museum, which occupies about half of the building and runs the museum activities.What worries me here is that pretending the depot is the entire building would be... | |
| 131223767 by bxl-forever @ 2023-01-13 10:41 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | bemapper ♦9 | FYI - I'm not sure driver_training is a good fit here, that would be for the physical area where the cars are being drive (i.e. the parking place n/nw from here). Not even driving_school, as far as I can tell, this is just for the official tests, not for any instruction/learning. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | What is the difference between the two areas? Shouldn’t it treated as one single object? | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | bemapper ♦9 | The Examencentrum and the Technische keuring are completely separate offices, with distinct opening hours, need separate rendezvous, with different entrances. The first can only be accessed by foot, whereas for the inspection, after queuing with your car, you need to leave it at the workshop entran... | |
| 131017411 by bxl-forever @ 2023-01-08 14:30 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | bemapper ♦9 | 110 is the exact same as 108 and 112, you can see on every 3D map (that's not how I got the shape: I can re-survey it any week from any angle). How should I tag it so that it stays correct?For example, UrbIS has a shape for Kolonel Bourgstraat 120, yet there's absolutely no building the... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks for spotting this. If that is a mistake, I can restore the previous shape, then. In that case, I suggest adding a note tag on the building itself saying the shape was confirmed by surveying and that UrbIS data should not be followed for this building.(UrbisAdm is the official georef... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | bemapper ♦9 | Yes, I'd appreciate if no mapping detail was lost, and the map matched the world instead of other sources.For 3d/side views you can review google earth, or maxar (as used by realo to show the area).Of course this is not to imply that these services should be (or even can be) used for mappin... | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Done. | |
| 119834336 by bxl-forever @ 2022-04-18 00:11 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Der Bierpuncheur ♦37 | Good evening and bonne année à toi. Looking at this area, I saw w845752209 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/845752209/history) which was originally a "highway=path" but was changed to a cycleway. Is this correct? Functionally, it would be inefficient and unsafe to cycle on ... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for sharing thoughts here. The change into a cycleway was in v2 of the object, not in my changeset.That being said, I see a D10 sign here, which makes it legal to use this path, and intended as such by the local authorities.https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=115889621114934\... | |
| 130534557 by bxl-forever @ 2022-12-26 23:41 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ghia ♦8 | From cartographers point of view, this is a nice clean-up. For the ordinary map user, this makes the access rules in the forest unclear. Therefore it is better to reverse this to the explicit rules: path/track foot, bike, horse: yes/noThe paths are also signed in this way with pictograms for their... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Can you please provide an example of a forest path where the current tagging made it unclear.This changeset did not change current access values, it only removed duplicate values. For instance, in OSM we do not say "this is a motorway and I tell you that cars mays use it and that... | |
| 129936983 by bxl-forever @ 2022-12-10 15:21 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,location=underground, really? As far as I know, only the westmost part of the platforms is underground.Cheers |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | It’s mostly a filtering issue here. (It can also be useful to warn StreetComplete newbies that the platform is not on the surface, to avoid the "There is no station here" notes.)I cannot immediately find the reference of the discussion about it, but I seem to recall a discussion... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | >It’s mostly a filtering issue here. (It can also be useful to warn StreetComplete newbies that the platform is not on the surface, to avoid the "There is no station here" notes.)Well, then it looks to me that you are mapping for a particular render here. The issue, if there i... | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, good point, I will update it. | |
| 125104444 by bxl-forever @ 2022-08-19 12:09 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi, what did you base on using name:bru as the language code of Brusselian? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | bru should not be used as the language code as it is the language code of Eastern Bru https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bru_language | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | You are not trolling, right?The reason is: We had to make *choices*.There is no ISO-639-* for this dialect.The most legitimate choice was to create a new value. "name:bru" was entirely free because there was no single use of it in the entire OSM database.The wiki says this: ... | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | I think bxl would be a suitable replacement but you are maybe right it's not worth it | |
| 128781697 by bxl-forever @ 2022-11-11 15:18 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Added, thanks.https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1112296331 |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | The comment above was aimed at the note, to thank the user who surveyed it. No problem with the changeset here, of course. | |
| 128401864 by bxl-forever @ 2022-11-02 16:42 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Why did you remove the amenity=community_centre tag? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Exactly for the reason I explained in the changeset title. Primary keys such as amenity:* and leisure:* may not be used together. (In the same way that if a hospital is also a shop, we must choose and have either one, or create two POI.)To solve this, I felt the "leisure=sports... | |
| 125584803 by bxl-forever @ 2022-08-30 19:39 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | change website shop Damart: https://winkel.damart.be/24-damart-brussel-anspach-center |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Updated, thanks. | |
| 126229827 by bxl-forever @ 2022-09-15 15:33 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | They did not demolish this building only started renovations on it https://www.bruzz.be/politiek/eiken-sneuvelen-voor-renovatiewerken-onthaalcentrum-brussels-parlement-2022-10-04 |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks for the link. Indeed, the building was removed from UrbisAdm and is hardly visible on latest aerial imagery. We restored it. | |
| 126399724 by bxl-forever @ 2022-09-19 23:40 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | RaphaelPasloin ♦136 | Hello,changeset 126295133 is correct. The route to 32 is passing on Rue des Petits Carmes and ther's no route passing on Brederode. Signs when you "up" Rue de Namur is placed after Brederode and here is the view from Petits Carmes : https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=492184509079... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,I get your point. Until they create more connectors, your claim is valid: I restored the node to the other intersection, it makes sense because that is really the forking point.In the future, we’ll probably have to duplicate some points to ensure that all cycle routes connecting... | |
| 124913226 by bxl-forever @ 2022-08-15 06:56 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | RaphaelPasloin ♦136 | Just check this morning all the street until the crossing of rue des commerçants is cyclestreet. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Thanks for having surveyed other parts of this street.Just one thing again: commenting another mapper’s changeset flags the changeset as being wrong. Only do this if there are mistakes. There are no mistakes in this changeset. ;-) | |
| 124838330 by bxl-forever @ 2022-08-13 01:44 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | user_5359 ♦20,551 | Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/133018205. what is the meaning of the tagsAdolphe = BuyllaanAvenue = AdolpheBuyl = -? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Pressing the "paste" button in JOSM on the wrong moment, indeed.Thanks for spotting this, it’s fixed. | |
| 124816230 by bxl-forever @ 2022-08-12 12:16 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | RaphaelPasloin_mobile ♦4 | https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RQvC-Z3afGkmXRgh1uFQ9wWrqHPa2LUl/view?usp=drivesdkhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1RMJtojzqye-Xo8dpCmp-NxCg6-gJnmhI/view?usp=drivesdk |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | (I think this discussion should have been inserted on the reverted changeset which resulted into having two restaurants with the same name, not under this one.)That being said, I also went to have a look earlier today. I think I found the source of the confusion: on their website they claim to ... | |
| 124684791 by bxl-forever @ 2022-08-09 12:52 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Sint-Hubertusdreef and Harasdreef aren't also in the LEZ anymore |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | You are right but this critic has nothing to do with *this* changeset.After our discussion, I started editing the LEZ. It will take something like 10 or 20 changesets to find all the parts where they changed the boundary. It’s better to do this than one giant changeset, as it’s a l... | |
| 123693124 by bxl-forever @ 2022-07-16 15:17 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | RaphaelPasloin ♦136 | Hello,J'ai ajouté d'autres blocs qui se trouve à ce croisement + un nouveau bollard installé hier , peut-être ça fait doublon avec celui qui est ici sur la piste ? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for adding them.In reality, it won’t really matter here: the only connector is tagged as a cycleway, i.e. routers will only allow cyclists to pass through and disallow motor vehicles, whether the bollard is attached to the cycleway or not.Just one thing: if you want to g... | |
| 123584348 by bxl-forever @ 2022-07-13 23:46 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Hi, I was not confused about the smaller base on UrbIS, the reason In made it bigger is because the building is bigger with pillars and stuff. Could you please revert this change? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,There is an elegant solution to this situation, i.e. joining the two parts within a type=building relation. This will also improve rendering for 3D modelling, I know some people care about that too.Normally, you should see the building rendered as much larger now, while we keep the ba... | |
| 121901990 by bxl-forever @ 2022-06-03 15:37 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ollegol ♦5 | Thx for having fixed the wrong "oneway:bicycle=yes".But nevertheless, a tag "cycleway:left"=lane should be added to reflect the current situation. Am I right ? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | On the latest Mapillary pictures we took (January 2022) there was no such lane.https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=763400435062488If it was painted recently, indeed we can add it. As a matter of fact, I was preparing to survey it myself in the coming days, to be sure. This is because cycle i... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | I surveyed it the other day. The tags are fine now. | |
| 121902859 by bxl-forever @ 2022-06-03 15:55 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ollegol ♦5 | Thx for having fixed that mistake. The OSM online editor does not allow to define, using the "fields" part of the user interface, any cycle lane when highway=trunk. I didn't see that tags like cycleway:right can be directly defined in the "tags" part.The way to define ... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, I get your explanation.Indeed, your edit was flagged as suspicious because it broke the continuity of existing highway types. | |
| 121609584 by bxl-forever @ 2022-05-28 10:02 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Tchet ♦8 | undreground metro station would tipically get a low (<100) ref:STIB_MIVB |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | The changeset here is not about this.In this changeset, we added 4-digit ref numbers to the metro platforms themselves.What you are talking about is that stations also have a 2-digit identifier on their own. In the past we used to have the ref numbers on the station nodes, until user Zverik c... | |
| 121542277 by bxl-forever @ 2022-05-26 19:14 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | shouldn't be part of this tunnel be tagged as under construction aka the part under the railway at the North Station |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | The tunnel under the railway is herehttps://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1064125550and it is precisely tagged as being under construction.The subway line is another object in OSM, and it is tagged as proposed:*. | |
| 120876678 by bxl-forever @ 2022-05-12 08:57 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Der Bierpuncheur ♦37 | Yikes! I saw that relation and thought I had taken care to not disrupt it. It was not my intent to break that. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | (This discussion is a follow-up of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120858034)OK, fine. | |
| 120824223 by bxl-forever @ 2022-05-11 07:17 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,I agree with you that the Atomium is more a tourism atraction/landmark than a museum but, why did you removed the addr=* tags?If you look at the changeset #116509567 comments you will see that my goal there was to update the address (Atomium - Updated addr:street to Place de l'Atom... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,I had looked at your changeset and found it quite good indeed, because you:1) added the address to the ground structure (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/442046313)2) removed the address from the monument itselfFor me, that would be the best choice: buildings have addresses, monum... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | ah, I did not remember that I had done that and here I only looked at the history ofthe monument itself.Indeed the address should be on the ground building, if a parcel should be delivered at the Atomium, the postman would deliver it there, not at any of the spheres.Cheers | |
| 105527964 by bxl-forever @ 2021-05-29 10:15 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | philippec ♦751 | Brussel Fontainas drinkwater ZW, ik zie het niet.https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1388710331600650 |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Hallo,Ja, het is blijkbaar enkele meters naar het noorden verplaatst. Zie de aanpassing hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120767954 | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | philippec ♦751 | Gelukkig heb ik niets gewist. Ik geraakte er niet wijs uit omdat grasveld https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=876143934#map=20/50.84526/4.34636 niet rendert. | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | philippec ♦751 | Ik zie op de foto's ook geen enkel bankje op een grasveld. Ik laat Brussel aan u over. | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | bxl-forever | Veel fouten komen van https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94726641Het zou nu in orde zijn, bedankt. | |
| 120005994 by bxl-forever @ 2022-04-21 15:14 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Der Bierpuncheur ♦37 | I adapted your changes to the other crossings to add uniformity. I wasn’t sure how to properly tag the crossings designated for the bicycles, but seeing your edits made it clear. Thanks! Very helpful. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | For clarity, I suggest we continue the discussion under the original changeset of yours, not here.https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119995779 | |
| 119827822 by bxl-forever @ 2022-04-17 18:38 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Added, thankshttps://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9672650541 |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | (Sorry, not meant to be a comment on this changeset, this was the reply to a note.) | |
| 119375987 by bxl-forever @ 2022-04-06 09:00 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | The base of the building is much smaller then the actual building so I thing it's best you reverse your edit |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,The building is impressive because it very tall, and that’s why it "looks" much larger than it really is on aerial imagery. The current area is around 815 m² and is plausible. We followed offical outline of the new building set in UrbIS. When drawing this shape, I w... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | *were surprised | |
| 118998082 by bxl-forever @ 2022-03-27 22:37 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,this building is under construction, you asjusted its shape as per the industrial building that was there before (see 2019 aerial imagery) and has been demolished.It was already marked as demolished but I deleted it a week ago or so because another user added the new one under constructio... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for spotting this, and apologies for the mistake.I wanted to trust note #3106677 here that announced the building could be traced, but that was a mistake, then. (That user is definitely not reliable. 🙄)I restored the former structure and added a fixme tag, so that we kno... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | I see the note now, it migt be that the user is right and the construction is finished. It has been a while since I visited the area.In any case, what is currently displayed in Urbis is the old (demolished) building | |
| 118691030 by bxl-forever @ 2022-03-20 10:37 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | M3tacat ♦3 | Thanks for helping with healthcare:speciality tag !Regarding the amenity tag, I don't think that "doctors" fits the situation. According to definitions on OSM wiki, "clinic" refers to a "medical centre, with more staff than a doctor's office, that does not admi... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | M3tacat ♦3 | Ooooh... while reading further, I saw on the wiki* that the tag "heathcare" could describe services (rather than "speciality" which describes field).1) I suppose that I could tag in this way : heathcare=doctor;nurse;physiotherapist ?2) With the same reasonning, maybe it i... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,I guess this discussion is a follow-up of a comment on your changesets 118697660 or 118674078.I get your point and I admit we a borderline case here. I recall a discussion we had within the community several years back. We found a consensus about using amenity=doctors here, because a... | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | M3tacat ♦3 | Hello,Thank you so much for considering this matter and for spending time on it !I would like to rephrase to ensure that my point gets accross. It was not about how large the collection of physicians is. In fact, doctors represent only a part of the services provided in MM, and only a part of ... | |
| 118252502 by bxl-forever @ 2022-03-08 20:57 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | philippec ♦751 | Mechelen Guldenstraat - added addr:housenumber 10 and 12Zesde keer, goede keer. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | :-) | |
| 118210932 by bxl-forever @ 2022-03-07 19:59 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | philippec ♦751 | :(Er lijkt wel een huisnummer te zijn :https://www.geopunt.be/kaart?viewer_url=https%3A%2F%2Fmaps.geopunt.be%2Fresources%2Fapps%2FGeopunt-kaart_app%2Findex.html%3Fid%3D8ab21c5a7f0c58a1017f6b4447460399 |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Je hebt gelijk, ik heb het nu opgelost. | |
| 116746654 by bxl-forever @ 2022-01-29 14:37 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Thanks, this helps us improving the map. 😊https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116746654 |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | The comment above was aimed for that note: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3028892 | |
| 116974766 by bxl-forever @ 2022-02-03 17:53 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | mueschel ♦7,056 | Hi,could you check this building? It got a strange tag. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | My mistake, sorry. Thanks for spotting it. | |
| 116363848 by bxl-forever @ 2022-01-20 01:15 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | user_5359 ♦20,551 | Hello! Please have a look on http://overpass-turbo.eu/?Q=%5Bout%3Ajson%5D%3B(node%5B%22building%20name%22%5D%3B)%3Bout%20meta%3B&C=50.8123;4.38298;18Did you mean building:ref instead "building name"? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Those invalid "building name" tags were created by a newbie earlier this week.I am currently trying to fix all the mess that user created, this is why you will see my name in some changesets in this area. I am still waiting for the answer from them before cleaning up all the... | |
| 112970181 by bxl-forever @ 2021-10-25 23:22 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,there are road works ongoing on Sint-Annalaan, between the roundabout at the junction with the Romeinsesteenweg and the junction with Groendallaan.Also, the Mutsaartplein/plaats roundabout (in front of the Colruyt) is gone and the portion of the street between that roundabout and Sint-Ann... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Thanks for this information.The way I understand it is that is does not invalidate this changeset, because the works along Sint-Annalaan are temporary, and buses will resume their normal route, is that right? | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | No, the routes will change once the works are finish.- Works on Sint-Annalaan are for the ring trambus (line 821 I think). There will be a dedicated bus lane running in the middle, starting at the roundabout on Romeinsesteenweg until the junction with the Meeuwenlaan. The section between Meeuwen... | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,I've now mapped the new configuration of Mutsaartplein/plaats and moved the bus stops previously located there to their new location on Kasteeelstraat. I just changed some tags, there is now tactile paving and there is no shelter, I didn't touch the ref:De_Lijn tag, I don't k... | |
| 115624709 by bxl-forever @ 2022-01-01 00:00 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | RedAuburn ♦227 | congrats on the first changeset of 2022! |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | Lejun ♦513 | I mean, I’d have expected the first changeset to be in the east asian area but congrats for it nonetheless! | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Thanks, everyone. I didn’t expect that small changeset to become famous. An ordinary change at 1:00 a.m. in my timezone. ;-) | |
| 114890812 by bxl-forever @ 2021-12-13 16:56 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,It seems that you drawn this street over aerial imagery that was taken before the end of the works (July 2021). The street layout chaged during those works and it is now almost straight, running very close to buildings with house numbers 2 and 4. The left side of the road, where the old one w... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for spotting this. I am sorry, I didn't expect they would have done that. I hope we’ll soon have more recent aerial imagery because there are more and more outdated places waiting for fixes. I undid the change.Have a nice day. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Yep, they did ...I guess this is because the new NOH tramway, line 10, will go through this street, which is crazy, this is a living street.http://move-nohw.brussels/sites/default/files/2021-11/Pr%C3%A9sentation%20publique%20du%20projet_Mobilit%C3%A9%20Environnement%20et%20Chantier.pdf | |
| 107899057 by bxl-forever @ 2021-07-13 10:12 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | The street was named after the Château de Béthanie and not Bethany/Al-Eizariya https://www.ebru.be/Streets/streets1070/bruxelles-1070-rue-de-bethanie.html |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks for seeing this. Feel free to change it then.As it seems, that castle got its name from… Bethany, but technically it is more accurate to say that this future street is named after that local castle, indeed. | |
| 112966930 by bxl-forever @ 2021-10-25 20:52 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Eros/Eroos is the name it isn't a multilingual name https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2019/08/27/kunstwerk-eros-eroos-van-johan-tahon-wordt-ontmoetingsplek-aan/ |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Oh, that is interesting and fairly unusual.I suggest you fill the note tag for this monument to explain that the name is spelt exactly as intended by the artist (+ source).This will prevent others from making the same mistake. | |
| 111113903 by bxl-forever @ 2021-09-12 22:06 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | The solar panels now cover the whole roof... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks for this.We should keep it as a separate object from the building but I made it larger, then. And we could improve it further once 2021 aerial imagery is available. | |
| 110753144 by bxl-forever @ 2021-09-05 14:58 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | This changeset was supposed to cover a small part of Brussels, on the border between Jette and Wemmel.It also contains an update for node 1808792792 in Woluwe, which I thought I had uploaded separately, hence creating a large bbox. This was unintented. My apologies for this. |
| 109401933 by bxl-forever @ 2021-08-09 11:27 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | On a plaque besides the gate is the name written and on https://monument.heritage.brussels/nl/streets/10401167#:~:text=Aan%20de%20Etterbeekse,van%20de%20Jourdanwijk. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,You shouldn’t worry about this, no-one erased your monument. ;-)As I put in the description, the problem was the badly-formed multipolygon.It looks like you used the "split" button in iD on a way. iD is a very basic editor aimed at making it easy to edit OSM data dir... | |
| 50966147 by bxl-forever @ 2017-08-09 09:21 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | I already passed several by this place and I think this restaurant is permanently closed. The website is not active anymore. Do you add lifecycle prefixes? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Yes, it has obviously not survived the lockdown and has shut down. I had spotted this several times but failed to update the map. I’ve just done it now.(disused:amenity=restaurant looks fine, indeed) | |
| 95966617 by bxl-forever @ 2020-12-16 22:52 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | this part is registered as 'Rue de Hal - Hallestraat' while the rest of this long street is called 'Bd de la Deuxième Armée Britannique' ... isn't that an error? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,It depends what kind of error we are talking about.I bet the error is when municipalities have a long street and give it a different name for the part in the middle, this is certainly confusing for everyone.But OSM data looks correct to me: the name of the ways matches UrbIS refere... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | ok, thanks for the explanation! | |
| 107557440 by bxl-forever @ 2021-07-07 11:01 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | The name isn't made up it is referred in official communication of the city of brussels |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Just for the record: I enquired about this to the city department in charge of those matters, I will keep you informed about what they say.This is a very common issue: municipalities often publish brochures or maps; I can understand the reasons why you took that information for granted. | |
| 106702688 by bxl-forever @ 2021-06-21 08:54 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Isn't the bridge in the center of the elevator? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,I think you are right. The current orthophoto has a large angle over that part and for large structures this creates a bias. I found properly calibrated pictures using 2015 UrbIS imagery and I fixed the shape of the footbridge.Thanks for having spotted this. | |
| 105885943 by bxl-forever @ 2021-06-05 15:02 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | Should we maybe use a long hyphen for the name because the name is with a hyphen |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Good point.Yes, feel free to update it, the same way you did for the campus.I looked up the Wikipedia article but sadly the EN, NL and FR articles spell it in three different ways.Thanks for spotting this. | |
| 67383919 by bxl-forever @ 2019-02-20 09:22 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | It'st it more of a covered market than a buther? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | I don’t know.This info was created in this changet, not by me: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42557630My changeset was only to fix a name tag. | |
| 105886319 by bxl-forever @ 2021-06-05 15:10 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Apologies for this large changeset.This was supposed to be two independant changesets:1) Intersection of Louise/Louiza and Vleurgat: some fixes in crossings and footway connectors (lower-left corner of the bbox).2) Bouleaux/Berken stops in Woluwe (upper-right corner of the bbox). |
| 105802104 by bxl-forever @ 2021-06-03 21:46 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Fixed by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105802104 |
| 104344269 by bxl-forever @ 2021-05-07 23:10 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,as you said in your changeset comment, this road is now a narrow one way street. Shouldn't it be 'demoted' to residential?Cheers |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hi,Yes, that is a good idea. I followed your recommendation. | |
| 104496415 by bxl-forever @ 2021-05-11 08:12 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | OsmAnd_Pieter ♦17 | did you change the location of the recycling container? please go an look at the spot yourselve. I have used the new location 50 meter south 1 month ago. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Oh, that’s interesting. I thought you might have moved the node by mistake because I found it in changeset 104433598 about something unrelated.Indeed, the change must have been very recent, then. Latest Mapillary pictures have the former location. We’ll keep your change, the... | |
| 103719794 by bxl-forever @ 2021-04-27 16:31 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,unless it changed recently, max speed on Indringingsweg is 50 km/h as in Av. de TyrasCheers |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for spotting this.My source of information was this: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/QnWf-MhHnR9zHXJT7S6hHQBefond the F3b sign (end of city) we enter a rural zone. Unless there is a new speed signs, default speeds apply.But this picture was taken in 2018, maybe the situation c... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | yeah, it changed a few years ago, I do not remenber exactly when.If you look at the pictures in the link below you will see that in 2015 there was indeed a 70 signal there, in 2017 it is gone and now, (sorry, I do not have pictures) there is a 50 signal instead.This is on the opposite direction,... | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | BTW, before the speed limit change on Flanders side, this road was a trap for drivers coming from RO towards Brussels, where speed limit suddenly changed from 70 to 50. It was quite usual to see hidden police cars with speed cameras around ;-) | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | OK, thanks again.I trust you, I changed it to 50. | |
| 103188991 by bxl-forever @ 2021-04-19 10:25 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | JhowieNitnek ♦190 | It is still a peak so the name may not be correct but the peak itself still exists |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,I get your point but in that case, you’d better use old_name instead of name.The source you are using says it explicitely: "De plaats ligt bij wat vroeger de Flotsenberg werd genoemd." | |
| 88197507 by bxl-forever @ 2020-07-19 10:57 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | Hey bxl-forever,Is the city center still living_street or simply zone30 by now? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello Pieter,About half of the streets are still living streets; this is officially still a test, hence there are notes on those roads and proposed:highway=residential to make it easy to restore the situation if it changes.The other half have been turned back to 30-kph.OSM data reflects the ... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | Ok, great! Thanks for the mapping work. | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | I just asked my mobility contact @ the city for an 'official notice'.To be continued ... | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | The test has been extended to February 2022.https://www.bruxelles.be/sites/default/files/bxl/Decision_FR.pdfhttps://www.brussel.be/sites/default/files/bxl/Besslissing_NL.pdfI suggest we keep the notes until then. | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Thierry1030 ♦270 | ok, thx for the info! and yes, let's keep the notes until then ... | |
| 87888610 by bxl-forever @ 2020-07-12 20:29 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,those works are now ongoing. I reshaped the ways in this changeset:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/825484313/history |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Excellent work, thanks! That is true, the situation has probably changed since that last changeset 8 months ago. | |
| 98238252 by bxl-forever @ 2021-01-27 15:28 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Apologies for creating a large changeset here.The work on node 2487864374 was supposed to be something else. |
| 97169669 by bxl-forever @ 2021-01-08 12:22 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | maximekgkmuis ♦5 | Hello,I know that roads must connect for pathfinding but I must have missed a connection somewhere. Can you tell me how you found out about my mistake? That way I can check myself in the future.Thanks for the help. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Please do not open multiple threads for the same discussion.See discussion there:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/97119240 | |
| 94739019 by bxl-forever @ 2020-11-25 01:38 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | OsmAnd_Pieter ♦17 | Can you revert your revert?You made one of the busiest bus streets a one way after your survey. Emile Carpentier. I just went and had a look and observed busses and cyclists use of the crossing at the part Crickx. yes I live in Kuregem. the only thing that was wrong was the pedestrian crossing, w... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for your feedback.I didn’t mean to offend you about the "outdated map" stuff. It is very common to see other mappers rely on aerial imagery and fail to catch very recent stuff. ;-)Perhaps it would be better to inspect elements one by one.Buses: I kept your... | |
| 93128263 by bxl-forever @ 2020-10-27 14:42 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi,this car sharing station is not located there anymore, it moved -somewhere during the lockdown- next to the church Place Peter Benoit, on the west side, they have now two parking places reserved for them. I already moved it to the new location several weeks ago.BTW, there is now a bus pla... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,My mistake, indeed. Nothing will ever beat local knowledge. :-) | |
| 93128549 by bxl-forever @ 2020-10-27 14:48 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Hi Again,Cambio is now using the 4 parking spaces here. I surveyed this less than a month ago.Do not trust their website ;-) it's not up to date.Also, I guess that something went wrong with your change set, I am seeing this \t### as value for capacity and names tags.Regards |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | JuanjoMC ♦88 | Sorry, one more thing, correct website for this station is: https://www.cambio.be/fr-bxl/stations/de-wand | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks a lot for spotting this. Yes, on this one it was pure armchair mapping.(The tags were wrong too indeed; I created presets to create all the keys at once but inadvertently erased my own work while selecting the preset again.)That should be fixed now. | |
| 90927195 by bxl-forever @ 2020-09-15 12:43 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | VéloJesse ♦16 | We meet again :) What was missing in the URL? The http:// ? |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Precisely.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website#Format | |
| 90800402 by bxl-forever @ 2020-09-12 17:32 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | Jan Olieslagers ♦212 | Platforms 3/4 continue more eastward: they have an exit on Archimedesstraat/Rue Archimede. With stairs, perhaps even elevators too, I'll check that. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | Jan Olieslagers ♦212 | Elevator given in node 5670835804. | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Yes, it is not finished. For very large stations like this one, it usually takes several surveys before I can catch everything. | |
| 71206700 by bxl-forever @ 2019-06-13 07:50 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | Hey Bxl-forever,While there definitively is something round in the middle... This is _not_ a roundabout. The thing behaves more as crossroads with a central island + there are no 'roundabout' signs |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | I've removed the roundabout tag for now, but I would even opt to 'straighten' the roads there as that is more realistic. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | bxl-forever | If you surveyed the place recently, I suppose you must be right. Either UrbIS 2018 aerial imagery was misleading—it really looks like a roundabout—or the place was rearranged quite recently.oneway=yes around the central island anyway? | |
| 4 | ~ 6 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | I've passed there last week - and yes, the oneway is needed. | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Someone "fixed" this and set junction=roundabout again.I reverted it and added a note tag explaining the issue. | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | I've thrown in an additional 'not:junction=roundabout' and reinstantiated the oneway | |
| 86621293 by bxl-forever @ 2020-06-14 11:11 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | wardmuylaert ♦28 | Hey, I had started mapping the top floor's indoor at some point in the past, is that perhaps what you saw? (I dont know if there is an easy way for me to see what you deleted exactly)There are balconies there, which is what you see in the aerial view.I thought I had correctly tagged the... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Indeed, my fixes were for the building outlines, because the balconies are there if we map an area with building:part, for instance, but not for the main building structure—expected to match official UrbIS numerical imagery.Your indoor mapping was preserved. This is nice work—... | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | wardmuylaert ♦28 | I think you are correct on the building:levels key, I changed it for E, F, and G | |
| 87929270 by bxl-forever @ 2020-07-13 14:28 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | thank you for your work on this! |
| 74255386 by bxl-forever @ 2019-09-09 10:50 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | s8evq ♦195 | Hello bxl-forever. Would the street Laskouter really be a rural street? (buiten bebouwde kom / hors agglomération). Does that exist in Brussels? |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for spotting this.Indeed, this is a mistake. I used StreetComplete and must have pressed the wrong button. Fixed now. | |
| 72446171 by bxl-forever @ 2019-07-19 20:58 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | Pieter Vander Vennet ♦464 | LOL! I passed here last weekend and wanted to map the urinoir today ;p |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | bxl-forever | 👍 | |
| 71962838 by bxl-forever @ 2019-07-06 16:12 ~ 6 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | user_5359 ♦20,551 | Hello! Please check the three tags "Delhove"="-", "Louis"="Delhovestraat", "Rue"="Louis" on the node 5065155550. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks for spotting this. It was a mistake: hitting Ctrl-V in JOSM and inadvertently pasting bad data onto a node.Have a nice day. | |
| 68200621 by bxl-forever @ 2019-03-16 11:37 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | user_5359 ♦20,551 | Hello! The language of the full name is set by the short cut of the language code after the key full_name (full_name:fr). It isn't necessary to add a list of the existing language code ("full_name:language"="nl - fr"). |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,To be frank, I had hesitated about this one.Some mappers have been particularly keen about using the "name:language" key when the name tag was not following the standard "fr - nl" order typically used in Brussels.It is not there to *list* the languages but to know how... | |
| 61160392 by bxl-forever @ 2018-07-29 10:00 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Wulfmorn ♦195 | Hi. The way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30724767 has a very unusual "oneway" value, as you can see :). I assume this was supposed to be "note", but I will let you fix it. |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,Thanks, it was a mistake indeed (the note came from a former edit, I must have slipped a C-v command here). I’ve fixed it. | |
| 61146180 by bxl-forever @ 2018-07-28 16:07 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | joost schouppe ♦1,453 | why not highway=pedestrian ? (seems logical since it's just a virtual line representing the underlying polygon of this type, and it would also be more visually pleasing) |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | bxl-forever | I suppose you’re right and despite I had read otherwise at first, the wiki seems to support that viewpoint that there should be tagged as highway=pedestrian. I will revert this. | |
| 55160273 by bxl-forever @ 2018-01-04 14:59 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | Ilona_S ♦8 | Hello, I've noticed that now there is the sign for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/231063265#map=19/50.80310/4.40218 limiting max height till 3.20m https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.80290482999999&lng=4.401817370000003&z=17.95344960031963&focus=photo&pKey=ZGJRcoWuheeNrTg... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | bxl-forever | Hello,I get your point about the spelling. We have discussed this within the Belgian community some time ago and it turns out that whereas street signs are certainly to be followed to be sure that this is street X and not street Y, it would be foolish to introduce non-existing spellings in OSM ju... | |
| 54047263 by bxl-forever @ 2017-11-24 11:17 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | mapper999 ♦382 | Hi, what is the point of these turnaround relations? It is not used for passenger transport, so it is not a public transport line, right? |
| 54119158 by bxl-forever @ 2017-11-27 11:20 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Zverik ♦175 | Hi, could you please explain this change? How come there are four relations for a station? What are you using the reference number for, why it is on a stop_area (is it?) and what are the restrictions for mapping it? Is that documented somewhere? |
| 45004731 by bxl-forever @ 2017-01-08 16:05 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | philippec ♦751 | Would crossing=unmarked not be better here ?https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=KqDVXDI1HFR15cnHjIIxUQ&lat=50.848139348026166&lng=4.359861632659461&z=17&focus=photohttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing?uselang=en |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | bxl-forever | Indeed, I used "uncontrolled" instead of "unmarked". Shame on me because I knew the difference. Many thanks again! | |
| 3 | ~ 9 years ago | philippec ♦751 | There is much to read about crossings and I am not going to specialise in it. Are you sure that place is meant to be a crossing in the OSM sense ? People on the service road would be advised to cross it there, but there are many obstacles there. I'll also give coblestones to the service ro... | |
| 4 | ~ 9 years ago | escada ♦171 | @philippec: there is a tag called smoothness with which you can indicate the "quality" of the road's surface | |
| 39249845 by bxl-forever @ 2016-05-11 18:45 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | Polyglot ♦86 | Hi Forever,It's good to see you're working on public transport in Brussels! When you go from the old way of doing things to the new way. You can create extra route relations, but please also keep the original one for one of the variations. |