bxl-forever's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 129810905 | Hello, "Un des occupants" would imply it should preferably be mapped as a single node inside the building instead of naming the *whole* building after that single company, shouldn’t it? |
|
| 129783983 | Hello, Thanks for this. If you want to draw buildings, you might want to know that we never trace buildings from aerial imagery. Otherwise, it gives all sorts of funny shapes that do not match the real outline of the buildings. In the iD editors, when you are editing, you can use the Background button and scroll to the "AIV Flanders GRB" layer. Then, you see the real shape of buildings and you can trace on top of that. |
|
| 129773000 | I suppose it must also have "oneway=yes" in the correct direction, otherwise adding the exception for cyclists makes little sense.
|
|
| 129748162 | Hello,
|
|
| 129748519 | Hello,
|
|
| 129752630 | This is not a museum.
|
|
| 129749425 | Hello.
|
|
| 129664121 | I had a look at the details of some of your changes. Adding the "source:website" tag might only be relevant if that website had actually been used to obtain the data put into the OSM database. In reality, our data was here before you added that source. Your contributions are complete nonsense, they only serve to put OSM in legal trouble! I suggest you review all your previous edits one by one and remove the dubious links. |
|
| 129664121 | Hi there! I see you are citing the peeringdb.com website as reference for your changes. May I kindly remind you that OSM contributors are reminded never to add data from any copyrighted sources. The website you are using is very clear about this: https://www.peeringdb.com/aup
It is not allowed to take any data from PeeringDB and use it into OpenStreetMap. I suggest you remove any information you may have copied from them. Have a nice day. |
|
| 129633135 | Hello, OK for water drains and trees.
Let me explain: last week you created non-existing bus platforms at Wiener and Fauconnerie/Valkerij. They were flagged as incorrect and we had to delete them. And now you drew them again! In general, we only draw bus platforms as separate ways or areas when a dedicated infrastructure has been built (those platforms with red bricks are fairly common in Brussels). But not here: there is just a stop post on the sidewalk. We have put a lot of care drawing each one of them accurately over the years. Mapping public transport correctly in OSM is a highly specialised task, I recommend you concentrate on other, easier, actions, until you gain enough experience with the data model. Have a nice day. |
|
| 129578418 | Well, they made an unusual traffic situation here but, no problem, then: the way you mapped it in OSM is correct, it is a regular oneway road. Well done!
|
|
| 129595549 | Hello, bpost (in lower case) is the operator.
Don’t worry, I fixed this one. |
|
| 129578418 | Hello, Beautiful drawings, congrats! Just one point: did you see if there were D5 roadsigns here? way/1118475259 D5 is the blue sign making it legally a roundabout.
Thanks in advance. |
|
| 129136593 | You are talking about this one, right:
It would be appreciated if you would also answer the main part of my comment, about *other* roads you changed in the same upload. I provided you the direct links to some of the suspicious objects. Thanks. |
|
| 129568788 | Your change has been reverted. |
|
| 129568540 | Hello, Private roads are perfectly legitimate on OSM, as long as they are properly tagged with access=private. Your change has been reverted. |
|
| 129556189 | I think there is a problem with this building. way/1118312101 I don’t understand the address you mentioned.
Also, addr:city=Ganshoren and addr:postcode=1083 should not be repeated on every building. This information is already computed automatically. Also, how did you obtain the geometry of the new building? It looks like hand tracing on imagery from another region (the changeset reports it has been traced from Flanders imagery, which is not calibrated in Brussels). I will try to fix it but I'd like to hear your thoughts first, especially if there is something unique about this building, that would require a special way for its address. Thanks. |
|
| 129556189 | Hello, |
|
| 129355483 | Hello, Nice first edit, thanks. Just one thing: if you want to draw small objects like this, be sure to give them a proper shape. 3 of 4 of those swimming pools here are perfect rectangles on imagery, so it’s best to draw real rectangles instead of fuzzy shapes. In the online editor, you can right-click on a shape and use the "square" option to improve it. |
|
| 129357164 | Hello, I am trying to review your changeset.
Those guidelines may help.
1) By default, places like gardens or swimming pools are public. People use OSM-based apps to look for the nearest place where they can have a walk or swim. Be sure to add "access=private" tag on them if those are private places, that way they will not be advertised to passers-by. 2) Houses: very important: all the buildings in Brussels are already on the map. Please never try to redraw them. Here is the reason: the building shape we show on OSM is the real outline of the building. In the online editor you can find this in the UrbisAdm layer on the Background menu. Please never redraw buildings by tracing on aerial imagery. Those are taken during yearly cartography flights and buildings are never shown top-down properly on those pictures. I had to undo all your edits along Avenue Coloniale/Kolonialelaan and Rue de l'Abreuvoir/Hondenwetstraat because buildings were away from their real locations.
3) It’s always a good idea to make smaller edits. If you add a couple of gardens and a zebra crossing on a street, stop there and upload that, and then start drawing on another place. This makes reviewing much easier. That being said, I really appreciate that you write good changeset comments to describe your changes, this is fine. Have a nice day. |