OpenStreetMap
Gregory Peony's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 151799532 | WAY: 1286509577 is a T shaped building, again because of the illumination and shadows on the roof.
|
|
| 151799532 | WAY: 1286509640, WAY: 1286509615 (,and others) are L shaped buildings, look at the way the roof is illuminated and where the shadows are to help you determine the shape of buildings. N.B. the shadows in this imagery are cast to the SW and secions of the roof facing the sun will appear brighter.
|
|
| 151799532 | I do not believe that WAY: 1286509575 is a building, because it does not cast a shadow similar to other nearby buildings.
|
|
| 151855368 | The white part to the East of some buildings here appears to be the buildings' wall. This should initially be ignored when using the roof to map a footprint. Then the footprint should be moved to align with where the building's wall meets the ground. Otherwise the footprint will be oversized and misalligned with nearby features.
|
|
| 151796419 | Good job extending the footprint of the Western buidling which is partially obscured by vegetation.
|
|
| 151796419 | The building footprints you drew here are too large. A building's footprint is usually <= the roof shape/size. I modified these footprints and you can see that via their history.
|
|
| 154149821 | oh, and you're welcome!
|
|
| 154149821 | You can use this as an aid when determining the classification of highways https://www.canva.com/design/DAFrDF4ptto/AjjrER_Dd7d-gjSh6jJdgw/view?mode=prototype#main-page , source: UN Mappers Published under Creative Commons Attribution – ShareAlike 2.0 Generic
|
|
| 154149821 | I think that the majority of highways tagged as residential e.g. WAY: 1302540340 in this case should instead be unclassified, becuase these highways serve to connect different settlements via the highway network or they go through the settlements, and the largest settlements connected by them are villages.
|
|
| 154005332 | It appears that you deleted a node which represented the same school that you added in this change-set. Elements should be deleted if they no longer or never existed. If the feature is already represented by an element, then it is good practice to modify it instead, because that preserves the metadata and history of the element. A positive is that I can tell which buildings in the imagery the nodes represent. The church looks like it's tagged correctly, other than the address.
|
|
| 154001466 | Changeset tags: This and other changesets you've uploaded seem to be made with information sourced from either a survey or local knowledge. When uploading your changesets please add the relevant source tags (found below the comment when saving), becuase it will make it easier to find these changesets and the information is less likely to be incorrectly deleted/modified. In this case, for example, I was unable to see the petrol station in any of the default imagery sources, nor when checking the mapillary street view imagery available. If the petrol station does in fact exist, then you are ahead of the imagery; that's excellent! The comment you provided with this changeset is also good, because it provided me with a reason why the petrol station may not be visible in the imagery sources I checked. Adding a source tag just makes it that much easier for other mappers to properly handle the data you've contributed.
|
|
| 154001466 | A positive I see is that it seems like you checked the OSM wiki page(s) related to fuel stations before adding this feature, although there are some errors in this changeset. I'll mention the errors in further comments on this changeset with each comment relating to a specific part of the changeset.
|
|
| 155063792 | I believe that the footprints represented by WAY: 1306868118 & WAY: 1306868117 (flagged) should be smaller and circular; not 'tic tacs'. The shadows cast by these buildings do appear to originate from the edges of the footprints you added, there is a colour difference between the east and west part of the features, and the imagery is off-nadir making the north and east walls of buildings visible in the imagery used to digitize them. If you wish to view my modifications you can do so via the way's history. I hope this is helpful.
|
|
| 155031020 | In future, if you want to change the geometry of a feature already in the database, then please modify it or use the replace geometry plugin, so that its history is preserved. In this case you deleted a building footprint which was added in 2014, and masked its deletion by adding a footprint in its stead. Don't feel too bad about it; I undeleted the footprint to preserve its history. osm.wiki/JOSM/Plugins/utilsplugin2#Replace_geometry_(Ctrl+Shift+G)
|
|
| 151787726 | WAY: 1286394684 is an accurate building footprint: map more like this in future, please.
|
|
| 151847277 | I don't think that there is enough evidence in aerial imagery to justify adding this footprint. I deleted it.
|
|
| 151847379 | This outlines a vegetation; not a building. I deleted the footprint.
|
|
| 151765076 | The vast majority of building footprints in this changeset are inaccurate. WAY: 1286229296 & WAY: 1286229294 are quite accurately mapped; please map building footprints to their standard in the future.
|
|
| 151841775 | WAY: 1286759355 includes a little bit of the building's shadow to the south, but is otherwise accurate. Don't include shadows in footprints, becuase building footprints will be over sized. If the shadow were not included, it would be an accurate footprint. Please map like this in future. It is one of the most accurate footprints in this changeset.
|
|
| 151783267 | If you want more feed back, then get in touch. You could also check these out; If you want to experience the OSM community I encourage you to attend a mapathon [here's](https://www.tickettailor.com/events/missingmapslondon?) one that occurs regularly. You can find other events [here](https://osmcal.org/) Learning resources and links can be found [here](osm.wiki/Beginners%27_guide)
|