Copyright © Pascal Neis | Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors | ResultMaps | Latest OSM discussions | Autoreload 5:00 min | Page limited to max. 500 changesets
26 changesets created by datbrahm have been discussed with 11 replies of this contributor
Participated changeset discussions | More details | Discussions (Include blocked users) | Discussions without answer | Discussions without own answer | RSS feed
Changeset # Tmstmp UTC Contributor Comment
88482526
by datbrahm
@ 2020-07-25 04:00		12025-01-04 09:13paulbrunner
♦61		 Hi datbrahm,

this changeset breaks routing for emergency access, pedestrians, and cyclists. Bing Streetside shows that the streets are connected, but were blocked by a truck in 2015, this might however have been temporary.

I've reverted this changeset in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/ch...
22025-01-04 09:17paulbrunner
♦61		 I have now created this note: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4575279
108168264
by datbrahm
@ 2021-07-17 17:30		12021-07-17 17:32datbrahm Hi,

I have changed the access tag of the service road in this case based on the driver feedback. If you are local or are going to survey this location. Please feel free to make the necessary changes.

Regards,
Brahm
107895263
by datbrahm
@ 2021-07-13 09:24		12021-07-13 09:26datbrahm Hi,

The edit made on this changeset was done based on the driver feedback. If you are local or are going to survey this location. Please feel free to make the necessary changes.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
105326725
by datbrahm
@ 2021-05-26 04:57		12021-05-26 15:36aweech
♦373		 Hi,
Barnard Hill Road is a Class VI road in the town of Weare. From what I could find, Weare places no restrictions on motor vehicle access on Class VI roads besides in mud season, so motor_vehicle=agricultural is incorrect. There's also a sign at the north end visible in Bing street-level ima...
22021-05-27 08:37datbrahm Hi,

Thank you for providing the information and correcting the edit. Apologies for the incorrect access tag,I'll ensure not to repeat such errors. Looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
Brahm
104666740
by datbrahm
@ 2021-05-14 05:02		12021-05-14 05:04datbrahm Hi,

We have added access:delivery=no on the gate in this changeset; based on the Driver Feedback. If you are local or are going to survey this location. Kindly make the appropriate changes.

Regards,
Brahm
102978788
by datbrahm
@ 2021-04-15 08:38		12021-04-15 08:40datbrahm Hi,

The edit made on this changeset used the following sources https://www.dol.wa.gov/driverslicense/docs/driverguide-en.pdf and https://i.snipboard.io/PCfv40.jpg . If you are local or are going to survey this location please feel free to make the necessary corrections.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
100653524
by datbrahm
@ 2021-03-08 17:32		12021-03-21 21:13Polarbear-repair
♦690		 What kind of driver feedback is that edit based on?

In fact, some other user invented fictive roads, and you edited them further.

DWG Ticket#2021032110000101
22021-03-21 21:47Polarbear-repair
♦690		 reverted in 101457784
32021-03-22 07:59datbrahm Hi,

We generally don't delete information existing in OSM unless we have an absolute evidence, here I have modified the road to track because our driver notified presence of non drivable path. Since there is vegetation present in this vicinity, I'm not sure whether path exist or not, he...
42021-03-22 10:41Polarbear-repair
♦690		 Ok, when you have no further details than it is better to leave the object as ist is. This makes it more obvious for somebody with ground knowledge to deal with it.
In this case it was fiction, and further edits on the object make the revert much more difficult.
Thanks
99603604
by datbrahm
@ 2021-02-19 15:20		12021-02-19 15:23datbrahm Hi,

In this changeset we have added access:delivery=no on the lift gate based on the driver feedback. If you are local or going to survey this location. Please let us know if you found any correction to be on the edit done via this changeset.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
99317881
by datbrahm
@ 2021-02-15 14:55		12021-02-15 15:13datbrahm Hi,

We have added the access:delivery=no tag based on the driver feedback. If you are local or going to survey this location please make the appropriate changes or Let us know we would be happy to update the map.

Thanks & Regards,
Brahm Datt
97715461
by datbrahm
@ 2021-01-18 18:34		12021-02-01 04:47datbrahm Hi,

We have marked the gate in this changeset `access:delivery=no` based on the feedback received from our Driver. If you are going to survey this location or have local knowledge; please make the appropriate changes. Or let us know the changes to be made related to the edit made in this changes...
97988840
by datbrahm
@ 2021-01-22 17:22		12021-01-24 04:25ezekielf
♦85		 looks good to me. thanks
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/97988840
22021-01-27 06:49datbrahm Hi,

Thank you for reviewing the changeset and appreciation. Looking forward to learn more.
Happy Mapping!

Regards,
Brahm Datt
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/97988840
97703479
by datbrahm
@ 2021-01-18 13:51		12021-01-18 13:54datbrahm Hi,

In this changeset the access:delivery=yes was added based on the source "Driver Feedback". If you are local or have surveyed this location please make the necessary changes. or Let us know the changes to be made on edit done in this changeset.

Thanks & Regards,
Brahm Datt
96271078
by datbrahm
@ 2020-12-22 16:29		12020-12-22 16:35datbrahm Hi,

The edit made in this Changeset is made based on the "Driver Feedback" as source. If you are local or going for survey near this location feel free to make any changes as seen fit. Or contact in case there are any queries related to this edit.

Thanks & Regards,
Brahm Datt
95917768
by datbrahm
@ 2020-12-16 06:10		12020-12-16 06:15datbrahm Hi,

The edit made in this changeset utilize the "Private Maxar Imagery" and "Driver Feedback" as source. Feel free to contact us in case there are any queries related to edit made in this changeset.

Thanks & Regards,
Brahm Datt
94515440
by datbrahm
@ 2020-11-20 17:29		12020-11-26 08:13datbrahm Hi,

The edit for this Changeset: 94515440 was made based on the Driver Feedback source. If you are local or visiting the area, Please make any correction if required for this changeset. Or reach out to us we would be happy to make the corrections done in this changeset.

Thanks & Regards,
...
93474689
by datbrahm
@ 2020-11-03 10:27		12020-11-03 10:52datbrahm Hi,

We have made the edit for this (changeset# 93474689) using the Private Maxar Imagery. If you are local or going to survey this location and find any new changes for this edit. Please make the necessary changes or let us know we will make the edit from our end.

Thanks & Regards,
Brahm ...
86358275
by datbrahm
@ 2020-06-08 13:54		12020-06-09 03:11treestryder
♦184		 Thank you for your OSM work in the Lansing area.
22020-06-10 04:21datbrahm Hi,
Thank you for the appreciation. Looking forward to contribute more to OSM.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
32020-08-11 01:40treestryder
♦184		 Eastbound 496 has been open, for a little while, and now westbound is closed.

I am thinking, that unless we plan to keep road closures up to date, it would be better to keep a roadways tagged as open.
42020-08-11 05:52datbrahm Hi,

Thank you for reviewing and correcting the edit. Apologies for the miss in the road update, will ensure not to repeat such errors. Looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
52020-08-11 15:11treestryder
♦184		 No problem. If Amazon Logistics is using OpenStreetMap for routing and would like to maintain construction status, that is great. I would love it if someone were to do this.

In the meantime, I have re-opened eastbound 496. And, I intentionally left westbound 496 open, because I am not sure that I...
85015934
by datbrahm
@ 2020-05-11 09:52		12020-05-11 14:34datbrahm Made the changes mapped in this changeset,
considering the number of buildings associated in this location and the clear road structuring. So, changed the track road to unclassified road.
85017939
by datbrahm
@ 2020-05-11 10:21		12020-05-11 14:31datbrahm Made the changes mapped in this changeset,
considering the number of buildings associated in this location and the clear road structuring. So, changed the track road to unclassified road.
65658037
by datbrahm
@ 2018-12-21 03:43		12019-08-16 17:18Gas & Electric
♦7		 You've altered the street into a wrong state: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=65658037
65629450
by datbrahm
@ 2018-12-20 04:21		12018-12-20 16:21jmapb
♦417		 Hi datbrahm -- To encode an exception to a turn restriction, add the except=* tag to the turn restriction relation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9130540) not the intersection node (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/42466290).

Also, there's no need to use the `conditional` syntax ...
22019-07-11 06:21datbrahm Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit and apologies for the delayed response. Thanks for the updates. We will follow your suggestions going forward while adding restrictions at ramps/turn lanes.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
32019-07-11 06:26datbrahm Hi jmapb, Thanks for reviewing the edit and apologies for the delayed response. I made the changes as soon as I received a comment from your end but missed to reply back. Thanks for the updates we will follow the same as per your suggestions going forward.

please ignore the previous comment.
Reg...
60170774
by datbrahm
@ 2018-06-26 07:08		12019-03-18 13:24Minh Nguyen
♦578		 This changeset removed important turn lane information. The ramp should begin where the physical separation begins, not where the lane change restriction begins. Turn restrictions should be mapped as relations, not as incorrect geometry.

To the team at Amazon Logistics: if you see that a road has...
22019-07-11 06:21datbrahm Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit and apologies for the delayed response. Thanks for the updates. We will follow your suggestions going forward while adding restrictions at ramps/turn lanes.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
66113785
by datbrahm
@ 2019-01-08 01:04		12019-01-23 04:14Baloo Uriza
♦2,180		 Physical medians should be mapped as dual carriageway.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/66113785
22019-01-23 09:29datbrahm Hi Paul,

Thanks a lot for your response. I have made the edit and added the dual carriageway.
Please let us know if you have any recommendations or suggestions. We are always happy to engage with local OSM community and learn from them.

Regards,
Brahm Datt
---

...
65656213
by datbrahm
@ 2018-12-21 00:57		12018-12-21 03:30jmapb
♦417		 Well, this looks good now except that you've deleted the `highway=traffic_signals` tag from this intersection node. Don't worry I've put it back.
22018-12-21 03:41datbrahm Hi Jmapb,

Thanks for your update. As per your recommendation I have edited the turn restriction from Atlantic Avenue to 3rd Avenue.
Please let us know if you have any recommendations or suggestions. We are always happy to engage with local OSM community and learn from them.


Regards,
Datbra...
64469544
by datbrahm
@ 2018-11-14 05:58		12018-11-15 06:51Bickendan
♦8		 This change needs to be reverted. See Changeset: 64421203.
Falk Road no longer crosses WA 500, and the ERSI 2017 data is no longer accurate.
22018-11-15 08:32datbrahm Hi Bickendan,

Thanks for your update. As per your recommendation I have reverted the connecting segment between Falk road across WA500 and Northeast Falk road.
Please let us know if you have any recommendations or suggestions. We are always happy to engage with local OSM community and learn from...
63218702
by datbrahm
@ 2018-10-05 06:34		12018-10-05 10:02tux67
♦1,967		 Hi,
what is the source of your change here - any "on the ground" knowledge/reference?

BR
tux67
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/63218702
22018-10-05 13:29gseethar
♦67		 Hi Tux67,

Thanks for pointing out the issue.
The source used to make this edit are the 'cars parked along the Leifhelmstraße in both sides' and 'the medians present in the road'. However this is not a conclusive evidence.
We have caught this case in our Review process ...