Smaller changeset areas, please.

For way #111137133
“access=deisgnated”

The I and S are transposed.

Besides, according to access=* for *=designated to have any meaning it must be set for a class of traffic: “Using this value with the plain access key, access=designated, has no meaning, and should not be used.”

You surveyed all these locations (in what appears to be a couple hours)?

It would seem better to at least preserve the full & proper name with the official_name key, and use short_name for the abbreviated version.

Abbreviation (in this context) is a software problem (and going from expanded to abbreviated is much easier than the inverse), whereas OSM is (primarily) about accurate data, not pretty rendering.

OSM strongly advises to avoid osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Especially given the verifiability requirement (and mapping what's on the ground), when road-name signs (discovered during survey) differ (including prefixes, and/or don't include abbreviations) then the tagging should match, rather than being arbitrary.

Unless there's some rationale that I'm missing?

“Should I roll back the edits?”

One of the problems with large changeset areas is that they're inherently difficult to verify, at least in whole.

A (singular) reversion would lead to another large bounding box.

So, taking the changes as well-intentioned & on-good-faith then I would suggest that they can probably be left standing.
I'd recommend taking the remarks of others as advice for the future. Especially the area covered by any one changeset (hence why this one got attention; it appeared in the list for many people checking their local area).

Which parks, fixed how?

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Smaller changeset areas, please.

An airport which covers a quarter of France?

Having perused his other changesets (all 7 of them), they're frequently continent-sized and the entire comment is “.”

He's been told, before, about this, and been pointed to the wiki.

Maybe a PM, just to be certain that he knows that there's unanswered comments awaiting him?

“stuff”

What ‘stuff’?
Where? (Especially since the bounding box is enormous.)
How was it changed (from? to?)?
Why was it changed?

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Disparate changes should be in separate changesets. Keep related changes together, then when starting something different close the existing changeset.

Smaller changeset areas, please.

Smaller changeset areas, please.

While the comment is a osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments it's misleading since the bounding box extends far beyond India.

In general, try to group related changes into changesets. Related how?
▪︎location (same geographical area, e.g. retailers along the same road)
▪︎type (e.g. landuse, buildings, road surface, benches & bins in the same park)

Smaller changesets are much easier to review, verify, and comment on.
Large changesets (of assorted changes) have the problem for would-be commenters of first having to identify which change is being referred to.

Large changeset bounding boxes show up in the list for more people checking their local area, unlike those which cover a small area.
This changeset will have appeared for half of Europe, half of Africa, the Middle East, and everywhere in between.
Multiple changesets, for disparate changes, would avoid this problem.

As a newbie, I would recommend StreetComplete. Start by helping to survey your local area, before doing armchair mapping of places afar.

Other than that; thanks for the contributions.

“expectation that [StreetComplete i]s being used while walking around live”

To my understanding that's how it's intended to be used. That's what source=survey means.

Hence the warnings which SC gives when detected location differs from the element by more than a few metres.

One of the core characteristics (principles?) of OSM is local knowledge (from locals, rather than corporate employees in a far-away armchair making dubious assumptions).

“editing of areas you have been to (recently enough to say that there is a sidewalk)”

While possible, the risk is that the date (of check_date, when the element was last modified, or of the changeset itself) won't match the date of the actual survey.
However, this is avoided if the likes of a ‘does this feature still exist’ quest is answered at the time, since SC will use the date when answered, even if the change is uploaded much later.

There was an example, in my local area, recently, of a amenity=bicycle_parking being changed (apparently to become covered=yes) since I added a note.

For such cases, using an editor which allowed setting source to “local knowledge” and any date-related tags (check_date (and derivatives), survey:date) to match when the observations were made, would be much clearer to avoid any possibility of misleading others.

Besides, while you might be diligent in only using SC for elements which you've surveyed, others ignore the warning messages. It's difficult for others to determine (for purposes of validation & verification) which is which; for large bounding boxes, there's only the mapper's word that they did survey. Whereas, the pattern of clearly-genuine use is different (small areas, uploading batches of no more than a day's worth of changes).

Though, yes, there are exceptions, such as when travelling.

Hence asking.

Even with the best of intentions, it's too easy to slip into marking guesswork as factual. Handling & indicating uncertainty is an important part of a collaborative project which aims to produce accurate data.

“getting points for that motivated me to look at all places where I know for sure about sidewalks, etc, because I've been there 😉 This might be similar for other people.”

Understandable. I can relate, since I too started with StreetComplete (in offline-mode, before I even opened an account; hence my initial changesets are not small). Though, we seem to differ in motivation.

But, constructive improvements are helpful regardless of motivation. So, happy mapping 🙂.

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments 🙂.

Smaller changeset areas, please.

Fair enough, then 🙂. Thankyou for your contributions.

My caution comes from having seen a couple instances, recently, of contributors using StreetComplete, yet in a way which cast significant doubt on the source=survey being entirely truthful. One example: within 30 minutes the same mapper changing something in Germany & Spain. I don't think even a charter flight would be that fast.

@malcolmh

Thankyou for your interest.

I presume that you refer to note:source .

I have been intending to post a diary entry detailing my analysis & conclusions on this matter, since it's received interest from several others. This will be on the next throughly rainy day, when I'm free from distractions.

In answer to your particular questions (sans context, until diary entry):
▪︎the simplest answer is: scope. I added other tags which had a different source, but wished to preserve the noted source for the seamark:* data.
▪︎I do not think that other elements should be mechanically changed. The only relevant way in which the element is unique is that it's the only seamark which I have (so far) surveyed.

Since you seem familiar with seamarks (based on your recent changeset history), do you know of a URL at which I might read “US NGA Pub. 114. 2011-05-26” (or a later edition)? Living on an island means that I'm surrounded by quite a few seamarks, and I wish to understand relevant context when surveying them. For example, I happened to pass by the reported position of another, today, yet was sceptical of the accuracy. I'm not overly familiar with seamarks (either within OSM or beyond), in the first place. In knowing more, I might feel confident setting source:seamark:*=survey and possibly correcting any disparate data.

Thankyou for your attention.

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments 🙂. Especially for changesets covering large areas (though, smaller areas and several changesets would be much preferable).

All these pan-Atlantic ways were surveyed for sidewalks?

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments 😉.

Also, smaller changeset areas, please.

Given the large area of this changeset; what tags, where, for what type of elements, and updated in what way?

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments 🙂.