| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 168463266 by jumbanho @ 2025-07-03 22:45 | 1 | 2025-07-07 02:22 | Agoraphilic ♦1 | Hey thanks for adding this. I will probably get around soon to doing the associated on-the-ground mapping of this since it is in the neighborhood. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168463266 |
| 2 | 2025-07-08 16:42 | jumbanho | My pleasure, I'm slowly trying to add all the sidewalks to St. Paul. | |
| 163504855 by jumbanho @ 2025-03-11 22:23 | 1 | 2025-03-12 02:37 | turtlepaddles ♦1 | jumbanho - thank you! I finally got back to this work (many hours after starting it) and it appears you finished it up already (and probably fixed a lot of my shoddy work). I'm not a very experienced editor, and was learning as I worked, so I appreciate the time you put into this. It's l... |
| 159474589 by jumbanho @ 2024-11-22 20:34 | 1 | 2024-12-06 22:35 | Ropino ♦392 | Hi,please check/correct:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/18258365"highway=635th Avenue" could be: name=635th Avenue + highway=???thx in advance |
| 2526756 by jumbanho @ 2009-09-18 18:52 | 1 | 2024-04-10 05:33 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,837 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41075726/history has name = Noname that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)That is probably object without name, not object named "Noname". I think that https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:noname%3Dyes would work better here... |
| 2 | 2024-04-11 12:00 | jumbanho | Fixed | |
| 3017060 by jumbanho @ 2009-11-02 15:26 | 1 | 2024-04-03 14:11 | Mateusz Konieczny ♦7,837 | Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/43645521/history has name = Noname that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)That is probably object without name, not object named "Noname". I think that https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:noname%3Dyes would work better here... |
| 2 | 2024-04-03 15:15 | jumbanho | Thanks for the note, after some digging I changed the name to Hamlin Lake, based on the name of the dam from authoritative US Army Corps of Engineers site: https://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/dams/system/NC01383/summary | |
| 86481338 by jumbanho @ 2020-06-10 20:03 | 1 | 2023-06-14 02:16 | ElliottPlack ♦926 | Hi James, did you mean to add some tags to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/814713863 ? |
| 2 | 2023-06-14 11:26 | jumbanho | Nice catch! If I remember, I was mapping from Strava heatmap, imagery, and some local maps (for confirmation of existence), which I cannot find anymore. I notice they don't show up on Strava anymore, so unless you have other info, they may need to be deleted or at least turned private. | |
| 100779723 by jumbanho @ 2021-03-10 12:35 | 1 | 2021-03-11 18:57 | jmoran314 ♦3 | I see my edit was reverted by changeset 100779723. This was not a cosmetic edit. Homeplace III reserves the right to decide how our parking is presented to the public. Having the parking singled out for units 104-106 can be interpreted as that parking being used differently than other unit parkin... |
| 2 | 2021-03-11 20:17 | Arlo James Barnes ♦102 | What sort of a direct contact are you looking for? This is a community project mostly made up of volunteers. Our main priority is representing ground truth, and we would be happy to put in a reasonable amount of labour to assist in implementing that, and appreciate perspective you can give us on the... | |
| 3 | 2021-03-11 20:56 | woodpeck ♦2,443 | Frederik from Data Working Group here. We have recorded this incident as Ticket#2021031110000139. I have explained to jmoran314 that there is no legal basis on which to request deletion. I do concur however that this particular parking lot sticks out - firstly because of the sidewalks that are relat... | |
| 4 | 2021-03-11 21:16 | ezekielf ♦84 | Also, jmoran314, there are limits on mapping private information. See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_informationA toilet in a private resident is not appropriate for inclusion in OSM and would be removed. | |
| 5 | 2021-03-15 14:08 | jmoran314 ♦3 | The walkways here show on the Transit Map layer, same as the Woodcroft Trail and American Tobacco Trail. Is this necessary? The Woodcroft Trail is public and maintained by the WCA. The ATT is public and maintained by the City of Durham. Google Maps show both of them. But our walkways are private... | |
| 6 | 2021-03-15 16:44 | ezekielf ♦84 | The thing with OpenStreetMap is that the data can be rendered into many different ways. The transit layer focuses on public transit, not paths or roads so it shows them as simple gray lines without differentiation. Other layers like CycleOSM or Cycle Map show different types of paths differently. ... | |
| 7 | 2021-03-15 16:54 | jmoran314 ♦3 | Hrm, okay. | |
| 8 | 2021-03-15 16:55 | jumbanho | If they are truly private, i.e. non-residents cannot use them if not given permission, they should be marked as such. Other access tags that may be useful in this case are "permissive" or "destination" for permission not explicitly given or withheld and no through traffic respec... | |
| 89427552 by jumbanho @ 2020-08-14 19:39 | 1 | 2020-11-26 22:46 | Alex Kamal ♦2 | Went by this recently and Herbert seems to go thru to Holloway again. Can you verify what was there during last edit time is gone? |
| 2 | 2020-11-26 22:59 | jumbanho | Thanks for noticing. The city says that it is permanently closed. Maybe they haven't put up permanent barriers, yet. If you want to reconnect it, feel free. https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2020/2020-08-12-herbert-st-permanent-closure.aspx | |
| 89220282 by jumbanho @ 2020-08-10 23:48 | 1 | 2020-08-15 12:39 | SomeoneElse ♦13,404 | Hello,I don't think that https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/126598#map=14/42.1444/-87.8165 is quite back to how it should be. It was definitely broken before your change (see http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/X4D ) but going back a bit further I think that the original layout was http://overpas... |
| 2 | 2020-08-17 12:09 | jumbanho | Thanks for the note. I have now updated the boundary to match the most recent Tiger data, which I don't know if it is correct or not either, but it is authoritative. Many of the boundary members have a source tag of local, but I don't know what that means.New changeset: 89516909 | |
| 3 | 2020-08-18 06:37 | SomeoneElse ♦13,404 | Thanks | |
| 4 | 2020-08-18 15:51 | iandees ♦727 | I thought I'd point out that TIGER is not an authoritative source for town/city boundaries like this. This linework is reflective of a "Census Designated Place", which usually, but not always, follows a city's boundary (if known). CDP's are built by Census as convenient tool... | |
| 5 | 2020-08-18 16:00 | jumbanho | Yes, we're moving on to trying to figure out where the boundaries are. There were a bunch of ways in this relation that I did not delete, but just removed from the relation. If those are correct, we just need to figure out how to piece the relation together to match the actual boundary. | |
| 80074749 by jumbanho @ 2020-01-25 14:56 | 1 | 2020-01-29 03:44 | npdoty ♦3 | thank you for getting these updates done so promptly! |
| 2 | 2020-01-29 10:51 | jumbanho | Now we just need to update bus stops ... | |
| 3 | 2020-01-29 15:38 | npdoty ♦3 | is there any mailing list or wiki page where this is being discussed? I'm not sure what is needed regarding the bus stops. | |
| 4 | 2020-01-29 15:47 | jumbanho | No, it's not being discussed anywhere. I think that someone had a pretty good set of bus stops before the recent changes, so we need to remove ones that are no longer served (which are listed on the GoDurham page: https://godurhamtransit.org/service-changes ) and add some new ones, which I don... | |
| 79617284 by jumbanho @ 2020-01-15 18:13 | 1 | 2020-01-15 21:22 | Roadsguy ♦43 | Why did you add bicycle=no to many local roads with no posted bicycle restrictions? bicycle=no on a road means that cyclists aren't allowed to use it at all, which is rare.Additionally, motorway status on a road implies total restriction to motor vehicles only, so bicycle=no (along with foo... |
| 2 | 2020-01-16 01:56 | jumbanho | Nice catch. I was trying to edit some sidewalks that I had recently edited and wasn't careful and didn't realize someone else had added a bunch of sidewalk=no tags (to motorways go figure).Did you revert all the changes? I just tried to revert the changeset and couldn't as there... | |
| 3 | 2020-01-16 03:11 | Roadsguy ♦43 | I was just about to fix them myself and saw that you did. Thanks for getting those. I did change back the ones that fell in the area of the work I was doing on the East End Connector, and then I had to resolve an issue from another mapper that involved deleting and recreating some of the ways, and t... | |
| 70282109 by jumbanho @ 2019-05-15 15:51 | 1 | 2019-11-20 05:11 | npdoty ♦3 | How did you choose this tag? cycleway=segregated isn't documented in the wiki and seems to be pretty uncommonly used. cycleway=track is more commonly used (100k uses, as opposed to 1k) and the wiki describes it as used in North America for protected bike lanes: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wi... |
| 2 | 2019-11-20 11:01 | jumbanho | I don't remember! I think it may have been a preset in the editor, so I used it. I'll change it. | |
| 70385577 by jumbanho @ 2019-05-18 12:06 | 1 | 2019-06-09 00:35 | Shawn Riley ♦5 | Be careful when converting streams to intermittent ones. The NHD stream type is not always accurate. I noticed some of the larger streams in my area that flow all year long, are now showing up as intermittent. Not sure, but maybe if you only modified the unnamed streams (which are typical intermitte... |
| 2 | 2019-06-09 00:49 | jumbanho | Thanks for the note. I thought that I had excluded named streams from the conversion, but can go back and undo that. | |
| 65060211 by jumbanho @ 2018-11-30 22:52 | 1 | 2018-12-03 16:31 | dukeforest ♦3 | thank you! |
| 7509071 by jumbanho @ 2011-03-09 21:45 | 1 | 2015-10-09 15:25 | GerdP ♦2,756 | please review:no tags on outer way or mp-relationafter this change. relation 1466957 |
| 2 | 2015-10-09 15:35 | jumbanho | These must have been an unusual tag like basin that was listed in the NHD conversion tool. It doesn't look like an obvious water feature so I deleted both the relation and the outer way. There was another nearby that I also deleted. If you come across any similar that have water as an inner ... | |
| 3 | 2015-10-09 15:35 | jumbanho | Sorry, that should have read "wasn't listed in the NHD conversion tool. | |
| 4 | 2015-10-09 15:50 | GerdP ♦2,756 | okay, thanks | |
| 13146842 by jumbanho @ 2012-09-17 17:53 | 1 | 2015-02-09 03:38 | Glassman ♦5,273 | We are in the process of adding buidlngs and addresses to Kirkland. You marked this road as 117th Place Northeast, yet Kirkland GIS and King County Parcel Viewer show this as a private road with no name. Can you verify that it is named correctly? |
| 28004623 by jumbanho @ 2015-01-08 19:52 | 1 | 2015-01-09 12:32 | emacsen ♦142 | If you're copying data from Strava Global Heat maps, can you show the license for those maps that allow us to copy from them? |
| 2 | 2015-01-09 12:47 | jumbanho | Strictly speaking I'm not "copying data" as the data are a set of points that I or the Strava-produced slide tool interpolates. I assume that since Strava hosts this version of iD that uses this tool that they permit this use of their data.There also is the wiki page: http://wiki... |