OpenStreetMap
Gregory Peony's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 169093591 | Hi, you outlined buildings with residential areas here but they are neither valid nor accurate. Landuse areas hould not overlap or be duplicated. The guidelines recommened for place point tagging are minimums i.e. there need to be at least X buildings within close proximity for them to be considered a settlement. Think about place names and ask yourself when is it likely that a village or hamlet would have a seperate name. --- Look around the area with ESRI imagery to see how I mapped it. Resolved: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169213955 ---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/
|
|
| 169091843 | You correctly updated the residential area (though it could be slightly more accurate), and correctly modifed the tags of the existing place point. 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/
|
|
| 169092087 | Quite an accurate residential area and accurate place node. 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/
|
|
| 169092164 | Good judgement on not extending the Northern residential area across the highway/waterway just to add two buildings to it. 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/
|
|
| 169092072 | Hi, it looks like you mapped this inline with project instructions. Good job with your residential area accuracy; buildings don't appera to have been left out or overlapped.
|
|
| 169092896 | Individual plots like this do not warrant place points.
|
|
| 169092636 | Hi, you deleted an existing place node that represented the settlement in the South. The reason for critical severity is that information about this place like its name were likely sourced via survey meaning that the information must be reaquired and added to the new place node you added if the deletion were not noticed. The value of the place tag of the existing place node should have been modified to village. Don't fret I un did the deletion of the old place node. In future consider if it is appropriate to delete of modify existing data. Resolution https://osmcha.org/changesets/169207856 ---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/
|
|
| 169092969 | Hi Isis, this residential area should include the buildings just to the south . 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/
|
|
| 169092662 | Hi ChienC, you mapped valid settlements here but the residential areas could have been more accurately mapped. If you choose to map with two distinct residential areas then you don't need to include the space between these settlements becasue it appears to be mainly road/driven on.
|
|
| 169091937 | Hi yennien, You added a redundant place node here. When there is existing data please modify it rather than duplicating it. In this case the place tag should have been modified from place=hamlet to place=village . --- Residential areas should include the entirety of appropriate buildings and yards. See how I mapped it by looking through the task changesets. 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/
|
|
| 160634295 | It's a while since you mapped this, but the buildings you mapped and tagged as huts generally have either circular or square footprints. Search for images of "Tukul hut" to see how these buildings loook at ground level. Almost all of the footprints you added represented buildings in the imagery you used for mapping, but it looks like you copy and pasted the footpritns which led to many of them being inaccurate, some would have been better represented by square footprints. Copy and pasting can be effective when used appropriately e.g. when the architect did too. It can save time to copy and paste round footprints becasue they have no aspect ratio, but please move (m) and scale them [shift+(-/+)] to make them accurate. 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/
|
|
| 169093021 | Hi welcome to OSM. Please include the yards and all appropriate buildings fully within the residential areas you 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/
|
|
| 169092016 | Valid steeltment mapping but the residential area should be extended in some places. You should envelope all appropriate buildings and land within a residential area and not have it cutting across buildings in the imagery.
|
|
| 169092210 | Land use areas and highways should not share common (grey) nodes. Hold alt when mapping in ID to prevent the creation of shared nodes. 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/
|
|
| 169092535 | Overall a good contribution. The SE residential area could have been extended West and South. 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/
|
|
| 169091850 | This residential area should have been extended south and the place node would then be tagged as a village. Resolution in Changeset: 169134539
|
|
| 169093181 | You addressed your previously incorrect tagging of this landuse area, well done. 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/
|
|
| 169091948 | Resolved in Changeset: 169128435
|
|
| 169091948 | The place POI is accurately mapped and tagged. The residential area could be extended in places to include all likely residential land. You added unnecesary tags to the residetial area; landuse=residential is sufficient. Name is reserved for features that have names e.g. Eiffel Tower. 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/
|
|
| 169093513 | It's potentially okay to add this place node here, though it may not be necessary to map it.
|