OpenStreetMap
Gregory Peony's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 166165518 | Hi generally the buildings you added here are valid and appropriately shaped but significantly oversized. Accurate footprint size is important for generating accurate population estimates. Take case when mapping and use an editing shortcut (shift+[-/+]) to scale selected features and make them the right size. Shortcuts can be found by pressing ? in iD editor. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 166404646 | Almost all footprints valid, appropriately shaped and accurate. I think that the footprint I flagged envelopes vegetation. It appears to have grown compared to Mapbox and colour is quite green. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 166400280 | The vast majority of footprints here are valid and appropriately shaped. The buildings I flagged here do not share a common wall so should not share nodes. Hold alt to prevent your cursor from snapping to existing data.
|
|
| 166403766 | The southern footprint here is oversized (mapped as 100 m^2 actually ~ 65 m^2. Accurate sizing is improtant for accurate population estimates: you can scale selected features using shift+(-/+) to make them an accurate size. Thanks for mapping. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 166400548 | All buildings here are valid and appropriately rounded but are not as accurate as they could be. For example the Western most building was ~90 m^2 as you mapped it but is actually closer to 45 m^2. The accurate sizing buildings is important for accurate population estimates. Building footpritns can be the size of the roof, or smaller if the roof overhangs the walls; you can use the shortcut shift+(-/+) to scale selected features so that their size is accurate. The shadows round buildings cast help determine their size. Thank you for mapping.
|
|
| 166400796 | A valid and accurate footprint. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 166393084 | The footprints I flagged here likely do not represent buildings; the others look valid.
|
|
| 166393469 | All footprints valid and accurate. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 166269624 | All footprints added are valid. Please modify features you can identify instead of deleting them and redrawing. --- Highways should not share nodes with buildings. See the mapping guide of this project (link in instructions) to see how to resolve this.
|
|
| 166118691 | The footprint I flagged looks like it envelopes two buildings. The latger building partially obscures the smaller one with its roof.
|
|
| 165351182 | I think that this footprint is still too large and includes multiple footprints or gardens, though I can see why it's more difficult to interpret in this case because of the partial tree cover, and if you're zoomed way in your interpretation can be thrown off. Looking at a zoom level of 18/19 (scale of 50/100 m) will tend to give the best picture (you can see this in the url when editing in ID editor) for interpretation before zooming in to place nodes. You can see how I mapped these footprints in Changeset: 165741655
|
|
| 165350996 | Good job you improved the accuracy of the existing footprint here; I think it's still a little too large as it includes what I think are 'fenced' areas on its southern side (better seen on bing). You added a valid footprint which represents a building that was previously overlalpped by the existing footprint.
|
|
| 165350817 | You corrected an invalid footprint which outlined multiple buildings. Both footprints here are valid; the left one could be more accurate if it were either smaller or L shaped.
|
|
| 164196108 | Hi, it's awesome if you're adding data you have seen for yourself. When this is the case and you want to let others know use source=survey instead of 'on_the_ground'. You can also add this source tag to your changsets (in the same place the imagery sources are in JOSM on upload). |
|
| 159483875 | All footpritns here are valid and most are accurate. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 164093812 | Overall a good quality contribution. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 164088866 | Tagging an area like this will result in a huge building appearing on the map. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
|
|
| 165223970 | Hi, thanks for your contribution. All footprints you added here represent buildings in the imagery, and generally have the correct shape (suare or round). I flagged those which have an incorrect shape. Buildings with blue roofs tend to be square. Some of the footprints could be more accurate.---It looks like you correctly modifed resiedntial areas to avoid overlaps with footprints. I recommend changing your issue settings to everything in view to help you spot potential issues with data beside your contributions. Highways should not share nodes with landuse areas, so feel free to disconnect them (d) when you see this. Hope this helps.
|
|
| 165176232 | The footprints I flagged here outline multiple buildings. Good job trying to map accurate building shapes like the L and T shaped buildings. When mapping T shaped buildings with even 'shoulders' you can select the 4 shoulder nodes and press L to line them up making them even before squaring the footprint (q).
|
|
| 164179767 | You did well to not square way/1372166507. I noticed that you're using JOSM but didn't accurately map the more complex buildings. If you're interested in how to map some of these buildings please check out this diary entry to see how to draw more complex building footprints. @Koreller/diary/404988
|