| Changeset | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 70059021 by mhdrahm @ 2019-05-09 05:41 ~ 6 years ago Active block | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | voschix ♦203 | Hi, the two new roads are on a military area, (gates). Knowing the area I will correct the access tagging. Please be careful when mapping from satellite photos. |
| 67681219 by mhdrahm @ 2019-03-01 10:52 ~ 7 years ago Active block | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,744 | Hello,I'm not convinced that the motor_vehicle yag on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/672031389/history is correct. What was the source here?Best Regards,Andy |
| 71708234 by mhdrahm @ 2019-06-28 13:30 ~ 6 years ago Active block | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,744 | Hello,What was the source of your access change here?Best Regards,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | mhdrahm Active block | Comment not displayed. To view it, please select the "Include blocked users" option. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,744 | Hello,Thanks for that.Best Regards,Andy | |
| 67838139 by mhdrahm @ 2019-03-06 10:24 ~ 7 years ago Active block | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | ndm ♦889 | Is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/673479999 no longer no-entry? |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | jguthula ♦65 | Hi ndm,While removing the parking roads from The Co-Operative Food area (As per recent imagery) editor noticed this way being odd. Taking into consideration that a oneway tag should either be assigned for the complete road segment or should not be added at all, he removed the tag. If you consid... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | ndm ♦889 | The no entry can be seen at https://binged.it/2tRyE4CAdding a one-way tag to a short segment of road creates an effective no-entry. Unfortunately JOSM doesn't seem to support a no-entry restriction -- although it looks reasonable from Bing imagery.Removing the no-entry makes a "qui... | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | jguthula ♦65 | Thanks for your inputs ndm, Added back the oneway.Regards,Jothirnadh | |
| 67769226 by mhdrahm @ 2019-03-04 14:22 ~ 7 years ago Active block | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | trigpoint ♦2,659 | Hi, this edit has gone a little wrong, there is no "2nd" connection to Shaw Lane (Trunk). This driveway should end at Shaw Lane (Residential).Cheers Phil |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | jguthula ♦65 | Hi Phill,Thanks for looking into this edit. Fixed the extra segment that has been added by mistake.Regards,Jothirnadh | |
| 67203784 by mhdrahm @ 2019-02-14 18:32 ~ 7 years ago Active block | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | ndm ♦889 | Why did you delete good tracks you added? How did you determine that access is now private? |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | yaswap ♦68 | Hi ndm,Thanks for looking into this edit. In this case mhdrahm added service roads which are not very clear in satellite imagery. That is why during our quality check we asked him to delete those roads and add roads that are clearly visible in satellite imagery. This is just to make sure high qu... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | ndm ♦889 | Obviously your QA process is for your internal decisions - however, please don't delete them if they get added back in the future.As for "access=private" -- it seems that you are guessing somewhat -- if you aren't sure (can't find photographic evidence of roadside signag... | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | yaswap ♦68 | Hi ndm, Thanks for responding back. As per OSM wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dprivate roads leading to private home are supposed to be tagged with access-private. Also we saw these houses were having closed gateways at the entrance.That is the reason we added private tags to... | |
| 5 | ~ 7 years ago | ndm ♦889 | Maybe a difference between UK legal version of a private road, versus OSM access=private.Surprised you don't mark them as access=delivery :-) |