emersonveenstra's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 130068352 | Hi, This changeset drew a new road overtop of an existing road. Please fix this, thanks! |
|
| 129662340 | Road names must not be abbreviated in OSM, could you please fix this? Thanks! |
|
| 130036601 | Hi, A couple things:
Thanks! |
|
| 128859509 | Hi! Just a quick note for the future, when you're editing traffic signals in iD, it's a good idea to hide landuses and boundaries. Several traffic signals i fixed from this changeset were added to the admin boundary, not the road. |
|
| 128207874 | Hi, Can you please fix the website on way/1107938636
|
|
| 130018917 | thanks! |
|
| 129915813 | Hi, When you use highway=proposed, you can't use the construction tag, you have to use the proposed tag (see highway=proposed?uselang=en) |
|
| 130011985 | You removed the highway tag from way/221656349, please fix it. Thanks |
|
| 130018917 | and also this landuse node/6298603454 |
|
| 130018917 | Hi, Looks like you accidentally dragged a corner of this building: way/946960719
|
|
| 130019217 | Hi, In OSM, there's a principle called osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element, which means that, for example, you shouldn't draw a cycleway on a service road. The cycle route was already connected by the service road, so there's no need to draw anything else to connect it. Would you mind deleting that? Thanks! |
|
| 130014833 | Okay, so the problem with that is you're going to remove them, and someone else is going to put them back, then you're going to remove them, in an infinite loop. The correct way to deal with these kinds of trails is to add the tags access=no and informal=yes. That way everyone knows that they aren't meant to be used |
|
| 130014833 | *Some form of trails in those locations |
|
| 130014833 | Hi, I'm curious about the trails in Heritage Park that you deleted. They were created not that long ago, and public GPS traces show people using some form of trails. Are they really non-existent, or are they just not official or not supposed to be used? |
|
| 129980736 | Hi, Please don't delete features like fairways if you're just going to recreate the same thing. That is not fair to the person who originally made the fairway, since you're removing the work they put into it for no reason. Thanks! |
|
| 129994769 | Hi! Thanks for your contributions to OSM. Just as a tip, please add access=private to backyard swimming pools so it's clear they aren't meant for public use. Thanks! |
|
| 129903560 | Hi, Thank you for your contribution, however, please split up your changesets so that they don't span the entire united states, this makes it impossible to do QA checks on your changes. Keeping it to one state or less, except for documented imports or cleanups, is a good rule of thumb. Thanks!
|
|
| 129875532 | Hi, You appear to have drawn over the Sandwich street that was already there. Could you please delete your changes and add the missing attributes to the already existing version of the street? Thanks! |
|
| 129880038 | Hi again! A couple more quick tips, if you are wondering how to tag something, clicking the feature type and searching in there will usually give you what you're looking for, so if you were to type in "daycare" you would see the Nursery/Childcare preset, which is what you're looking for here.
|
|
| 129879798 | Hi, thanks for contributing to OSM! One thing to note, generally a rule of thumb is we don't put duplicate information on points and buildings. So since you already have amenity=cafe, outdoor_seating=yes, and the names of the shops on the points, the building shouldn't have any of those tags, it can just have building=retail |