| Changeset | # | Tmstmp UTC | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 106193032 by mounicb @ 2021-06-11 06:27 | 1 | 2021-06-11 06:42 | StefanHRT ♦403 | hello, this ways are not for public, Please always take a closer look at such entries to see what other paths from the site have for an access. thanks |
| 2 | 2021-06-11 13:54 | mounicb | Hi StefanHRT, Thanks for looking into my edits. Apologies for the genuine miss from my end. I have now added access=private as per your suggestion. Please find the changeset (106218456) with modifications. Happy to learn from the community. Regards,mounicb | |
| 3 | 2021-06-11 14:32 | StefanHRT ♦403 | thank you ;) | |
| 106095179 by mounicb @ 2021-06-09 12:24 | 1 | 2021-06-11 06:44 | StefanHRT ♦403 | hello, this way is private |
| 2 | 2021-06-11 13:48 | mounicb | Hi StefanHRT,Apologies for the miss from my end. I have added the segment based on Aerial view but missed the details. I have modified the access and geometry as per Bing Aerial imagery. Please find the changeset (106218200) for your reference.Regards,mounicb | |
| 102396494 by mounicb @ 2021-04-06 10:04 | 1 | 2021-04-06 13:25 | tux67 ♦1,945 | How sure are you, that for all 3 new highway=service it is allowed to enter them by car? only the one in the west shows 2 cars, while typically there is no car access on these roads --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102396494 ... |
| 2 | 2021-04-08 02:28 | mounicb | Hi, Thanks for looking into our edits.I have added highway = service as there is vehicle presence in aerial view and road looks paved and wide enough for vehicle access. However, I agree that there might be restriction as all the other vehicles are parked at the entry. As I was unsure , I have not... | |
| 3 | 2021-04-08 07:40 | tux67 ♦1,945 | If you only mapped from aerial images, for the 2 ways where the access by car is not so obvious, I would at least add a fixme tag with a comment, that a local mapper should check the access. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102396494... | |
| 4 | 2021-04-09 03:42 | mounicb | Hi, Thanks for improving our edits. We will take this inputs into consideration in our future edits. Regards, mounicb | |
| 98691145 by mounicb @ 2021-02-04 08:44 | 1 | 2021-02-04 09:37 | Mex ♦72 | Should this be a driveway? --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/98691145 |
| 2 | 2021-02-05 11:28 | mounicb | Thanks for checking into our edits. apologies, I have misinterpreted the highway tag and added a service road. Thanks for the headsup. Please find the changeset (98764433) for the suggested modification. Always happy to learn from the community. | |
| 92560758 by mounicb @ 2020-10-16 06:39 | 1 | 2020-10-16 08:07 | lakedistrict ♦308 | Hi, is there a reason why you removed the access tag? access=private was correct and matched that on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/559785202 |
| 2 | 2020-10-19 02:41 | mounicb | Thanks for checking into our edits. We have added the access tag based on the existing service road and removed it to ensure the flow of valid data into the osm. Thanks for confirming the access. Please find the changeset for the suggested modifications. Thanks for improvising our edits with the gr... | |
| 90695082 by mounicb @ 2020-09-10 10:27 | 1 | 2020-09-16 01:53 | naveenpf ♦714 | Welcome to OSM India.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IndiaTo join OSM India Telegram click on.https://t.me/OSMIndia --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/90695082 |
| 2 | 2020-09-17 06:44 | mounicb | “Hi naveenpf, Thanks for the response. we are delighted to be a part of #hotosm-project and looking for more opportunities to work with you soon” | |
| 87811881 by mounicb @ 2020-07-10 10:37 | 1 | 2020-07-10 17:24 | user_5359 ♦19,605 | Hello! Please check you edits carefully I changed you access value from privatew to private. |
| 2 | 2020-07-13 05:16 | mounicb | Thanks for checking into our edits. Apologies, I have mistakenly added that access tag. Thanks for the quick correction. I will make sure to modify the access tags carefully. Always happy to learn from the community. | |
| 85118104 by mounicb @ 2020-05-13 05:00 | 1 | 2020-05-14 07:45 | ToniE ♦1,237 | Hello mouncib,I doubt that this is actually 'private' - this is a tertiary road with potentially lots of traffic.What kind of signboard was this actualy?On Mapillary (image as of 2018-04-18) I could see signs which would either justify "vehicle" = "destination&qu... |
| 2 | 2020-05-14 14:52 | ravsjith ♦18 | Hi ToniE,Replying on behalf of mounicb, thanks for checking into our edits. please find the suggested modifications in the changeset(85207585). we are improving our editing quality in addition of access tags based for priority roads. however, we are continuously enhancing our editing etiquett... | |
| 3 | 2020-05-14 15:18 | Nakaner ♦3,153 | Hi ravsjith,your comment does not answer Toni's question. You just reverted the changes Toni complained about. What sources was mounicb modification based on?In Germany, data quality is very important for us. We have invested 15 years into a high-quality routable dataset. As a community... | |
| 4 | 2020-05-14 16:12 | ravsjith ♦18 | Hi Michael,Apologies for the miscommunication.the editor has misinterpreted the signboard based on mapillary which is unclear, and modified the access tag. it is a mistake from our end. since the editor is out of office at this point of time, i have cross verified the changeset and made the ne... | |
| 5 | 2020-05-15 07:24 | Nakaner ♦3,153 | Hi ravsjith,according to the Mapillary imagery, the road is signed with traffic signs number 250 and 1020-30 at its intersection with Aachener Straße. The signage at its northern end is not available on Mapillary. Could you please share the material your employees/contractors get to unders... | |
| 6 | 2020-05-15 16:17 | ravsjith ♦18 | Hi Michael,thanks for your response. As per the mapillary imagery(link https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=Iz1_KPdDFy7EJC8f30xo-Q&focus=photo&lat=50.93782216108911&lng=6.88238892980198&z=17&x=0.6782668733719401&y=0.35275795056483905&zoom=0.6643598615916951) dated 24-6-2... | |
| 78918315 by mounicb @ 2019-12-27 09:48 | 1 | 2020-01-14 15:44 | jambamkin ♦82 | Hello mounicb, Thanks for your addition to the map. It looks to me like the service road you have added is a duplicate of way/118974774, which fair enough is far away from where it should be, I suggest removing your way (or repurposing it) and moving Balnabruch Road over to where it should be. Thank... |
| 2 | 2020-01-16 02:48 | mounicb | Hi jambamkin,Thanks for looking into my edit. This is an honest mistake. I understand the mistake now and will be more careful going forward. I have made changes to the segment, refer changeset #: 79628972. Please let me know for any other changes as per local knowledge. Always happy to learn fr... | |
| 3 | 2020-01-16 07:05 | jambamkin ♦82 | Awesome, thanks for the quick fix. |