OpenStreetMap
Udarian's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 176817678 | can you please check if it has a ref again, all of the MDT bus stop signs I have seen have a ref number and QR code. I have attached an example image below showing what they look like below
happy mapping,
|
|
| 176800145 | this is incorrect as definitionally footways do not exist within the area of a road as a road is a different mode of transportation then footways and thus the only footway that should exist within a road area is a crossing or a link, these are clearly not crossings and thus they are links, please do not remove them. Happy mapping,
|
|
| 176630467 | all of the other addresses in the area have a postcode of 33122, what this used to be, what is your source for this change. |
|
| 176621206 | question, can you please check this again as there seem to be multiple commercial and retail businesses along this street so there is a good chance that hgv vehicles would be allowed on it. Happy mapping,
|
|
| 176556159 | this also seems to add a duplicate address. |
|
| 176556159 | what is "Darris hall", what type of amenity, shop etc is it? |
|
| 176497056 | entrance=* should not be on the vertex of a road intersection, they are intended to represent the entrance of a building or similar structure. happy mapping,
|
|
| 176453315 | if your going to add address data please add the house number and street name on the address happy mapping,
|
|
| 176451225 | when you add address data please add the correct road name as that can be hard to interpolate to the correct value at times. happy mapping,
|
|
| 176364186 | next time please don't just add a name without a tag specifying what the object is, aka what type of business is this. I have put a changeset in adding something but I am uncertain of that. Happy mapping,
|
|
| 176263793 | A few comments about this changeset:
Happy mapping,
|
|
| 176258669 | two questions, first why did you remove the building:levels=49 tag as it seems to be correct for the building. Second, it this the only business in the building as it seems like there could be others. Happy mapping,
|
|
| 176158152 | the arcgis link provided has the following error that does not allow others to see the data and check correctness:
|
|
| 176142084 | why did you remove the way that used to represent the building, the building tag should have been added back instead of being removed. |
|
| 176142000 | why did you remove building=yes as this does seem to be a building, you also remove the height tag which if not correct should have been fixed instead of being removed, that tag is there as this building was initially added as part of the 2016 Miami building import which added the height tag to buildings that were added as part of that import. I also agree that the contents of the description of this business is not very good. The opening hours are also not formatted correctly. Happy mapping,
|
|
| 176126772 | next time can you please use alt_name=* instead of name_1=*, alt_name is the encouraged tag to be used for this type of situation. Happy mapping,
|
|
| 176142170 | also it the changeset comment on this change is not the best, "-" does not tell me anything about what you did in this changeset.
|
|
| 176117319 | this is still within the road |
|
| 176117311 | this is still in the middle of the road/parking lot, and now that camera:mount=pole has been added it makes the positioning highly unlikely unless the parking lot has been completely rebuilt since around February of this year, as there is no good reason as to why there would be a random pole in the middle of area that cars drive on. happy mapping,
|
|
| 176114589 | The ALPR added in this changeset is in the middle of the road, I doubt that the position is correct, please check what the correct position is and fix it happy mapping,
|