OpenStreetMap
CurlingMan13's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 144561902 | When features are "private", they are not access=no. It should be access=private. I have corrected this feature, but please be aware for future edits. |
|
| 146202943 | Please do not perform tests on the live OSM server. This is not allowed.
|
|
| 146230448 | 'This changeset has been reverted in part or full. The feature is still visible in aerial imagery. Access tags should be used instead of deleting the feature. You can read why deletion is not the solution here:
Please don’t do that; in OSM, if a trail/road exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact.' |
|
| 146220224 | 'This changeset has been reverted in part or full. The feature is still visible in aerial imagery. Access tags should be used instead of deleting the feature. You can read why deletion is not the solution here:
Please don’t do that; in OSM, if a trail/road exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact.' |
|
| 146230834 | 'This changeset has been reverted in part or full. The feature is still visible in aerial imagery. Access tags should be used instead of deleting the feature. You can read why deletion is not the solution here:
Please don’t do that; in OSM, if a trail/road exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact.' |
|
| 146139608 | This changeset has been reverted in part or full. Do not delete features that still exist. If you are updating the features, please just manipulate what is there to maintain revision history of the features. |
|
| 145774765 | 'This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset where the changeset comment is: undo undiscussed and large-scale deletions of paths not open to public - use access=private instead In OSM, if a trail exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact. Property owners do not have the right to dictate what we map about their property; we can map private trails all we want as long as we correctly state that these are private. If you would like to discuss this rule, please bring it up on community.openstreetmap.org. Please do not perform further deletions.' |
|
| 145774554 | 'This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset where the changeset comment is: undo undiscussed and large-scale deletions of paths not open to public - use access=private instead In OSM, if a trail exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact. Property owners do not have the right to dictate what we map about their property; we can map private trails all we want as long as we correctly state that these are private. If you would like to discuss this rule, please bring it up on community.openstreetmap.org. Please do not perform further deletions.' |
|
| 145773795 | 'This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset where the changeset comment is: undo undiscussed and large-scale deletions of paths not open to public - use access=private instead In OSM, if a trail exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact. Property owners do not have the right to dictate what we map about their property; we can map private trails all we want as long as we correctly state that these are private. If you would like to discuss this rule, please bring it up on community.openstreetmap.org. Please do not perform further deletions.' |
|
| 145634128 | 'This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset where the changeset comment is: undo undiscussed and large-scale deletions of paths not open to public - use access=private instead In OSM, if a trail exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact. Property owners do not have the right to dictate what we map about their property; we can map private trails all we want as long as we correctly state that these are private. If you would like to discuss this rule, please bring it up on community.openstreetmap.org. Please do not perform further deletions.' |
|
| 146086646 | Why did you delete the golf cartpath just to redraw it?
|
|
| 116005477 | Features should not have descriptive names when there are better tags that can be used. |
|
| 132388593 | Do not purposely change lakes to water hazards. This is a lake, not just some golf feature. I have reverted this changeset in part or full to return this feature to a lake. |
|
| 146079251 | When mapping buildings, "Q" can/should be used to square the buildings. |
|
| 146078455 | Do not partially overlap landcovers. The fairway and green should not overlap. I have gone through and fixed this error. Please review the following to avoid other common mistakes.
|
|
| 146052623 | Do not map things for test purposes on the live OSM map.
|
|
| 146052670 | Do not map things for test purposes on the live OSM map.
|
|
| 146013392 | This should not have been deleted. Access=private should have been applied instead. This is to prevent someone from completely readding it. If we tag it as private, then people will know it is added, etc. I have reverted this changeset to readd it, and have added the private access tag instead.
|
|
| 146011152 | What's up with consistently not adding the golfcart paths as a bridge over water? Like why end your cartpaths so abruptly? I have fixed these for you, and have cleaned up other mistakes. |
|
| 146012018 | Why did you change the parking lot to a building?
|