OpenStreetMap
ezekielf's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 114789606 | Hi, thank you for the detailed work on the Burlington Country Club. However, in this changeset you deleted a number of things without replacement. I see that you've since replaced some of the deleted buildings, but without the address information that previously existed. Looks like a forest area has also not been replaced. As this is a collaborative project, it is important to improve upon the work of others rather than deleting and replacing.
|
|
| 114466365 | ||
| 114047325 | Hi, kevinchen1. Thanks for your edits here. However, highway=track is not the appropriate classification for this road. From the VTrans Roads dataset I can see that it is a class 3 town highway and from aerial imagery I residences and other buildings along the road. highway=track is for minor land access roads that aren't used for access to homes or other buildings. I've changed this back to highway=unclassified. highway=track
|
|
| 113865655 | Apologies! Didn't mean to re-explain something you already know about. I primarily use JOSM and the orthogonalize (square/Q) function works nicely for a group of connected objects like this when you select them all together. I just tested in iD and it seems to not work so well unfortunately (I had assumed they worked the same). Seems like the iD function only operates on one object at a time so as you square one object it takes then next connected one out of square 🤷♂️. JOSM does have a number of efficiency boosting plugins for this kind of thing. This one might be helpful for example: osm.wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Terracer |
|
| 113865655 | Hey, Hugh. From the comment I'm guessing you're trying to make these parking spaces as close to rectangular as possible. I case you aren't aware there is a Square function in the iD right-click menu that will make all the corners square for you. You can also just press Q for a keyboard shortcut that does the same thing.
|
|
| 113115473 | Why restore this? Seems like a historical artifact that would be more appropriate for https://openhistoricalmap.org |
|
| 112562827 | Hi Necessarycoot72, it looks to me like you've re-aligned a number of buildings in this changeset by lining the polygons up with the roof outlines on aerial imagery. This results in building footprints that are often significantly out of alignment unless the imagery was captured at exactly a 90 degree angle above the building. In downtown Burlington this is almost never the case. If you want to re-position buildings, please line them up with their ground position, not the tilted position that the roof shows up at. LiDAR from VCGI is another great resource for building positioning and does not suffer from this problem.
|
|
| 112889796 | thank you for restoring my work 🙂 |
|
| 112790931 | Hi webfil,
I fixed it in this changeset: changeset/112811246 It looks like a remnant of the administrative boundary you deleted still exists. I wasn't sure if I should clean it up or not.
|
|
| 112081770 | Love it! One of these that anyone can buy?
I think it's less about a credential and more about what does this building appear to be and are there actual religious services conduced there. If I walk by it would I see a sign making it clear that it is a Church of the FSM? Would it look like a public building where people gather to worship? Or does it just look like the same normal house visible here:
|
|
| 112081770 | While I'm certainly love to drive by this building and see that it is an actual Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I'm having a hard time believing it 😄. Do you have any photos or other evidence that Pastafarians regularly gather to worship his Noodliness here? |
|
| 111656932 | I've opened and iD issue for this false positive: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/8724 |
|
| 111656932 | Also, a warning in iD is not "breaking things". QA tools like this often have false positives that can just be ignored. If there is some data consumer out there that this is actually causing a problem for, that is a different story. |
|
| 111656932 | I see what you mean, although flagging this as a warning appears to be a bug in the iD editor. The "Broadway" way isn't even tagged oneway=yes, just piste:type=downhill. The JOSM validator doesn't flag this an an issue. Nothing wrong with separate ways I guess, but it seems fairly redundant. |
|
| 111656932 | Can you give examples of breakage? I'm not aware of any problems with a way tagged as highway=* as well as piste:type=*. It accurately represents that the road is closed in the winter and becomes a snow covered ski trail. |
|
| 111541419 | Private toll roads up mountains are quite minor and should not be secondary. I've reverted this changeset:
|
|
| 111541190 | This is incorrect. The toll road up Mt Mansfield is a very minor road and should not be secondary. You also removed the piste:type tag which is incorrect because the this road is a ski trail in the winter. I have reverted this changeset.
I see you did the same thing to the Mt Washington auto road. Please stop doing this. changeset/111541651 |
|
| 111656932 | Hi, this changeset deleted the piste:type and piste:difficulty tag from several ski trails at Mad River Glen. Did you do this for any particular reason, or just a mistake?
Please put them back so the trails won't be removed from:
|
|
| 111150595 | If you have no other source than Strava then you don't know there is a trail there. All you know is that "there is a heavy walking activity". This does not necessarily make it a trail. |
|
| 108183522 | Thank you! |