Thanks, I hadn't noticed this. Is this already being discussed with ChrisM4?

Hi,

Another mapper noticed that you have created a number of empty nodes with this changeset. Looks like an accident.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/117853

Happy mapping!

Hier wird das erläutert: osm.wiki/Area#Multipolygon_area

Ich glaube, dass multipolygons im Wiki in der Regel als "Fläche" verstanden werden, nicht als "Relation". Ich finde das auch verwirrend, weil es technisch ja eben Relationen sind und keine Flächen.

Hi APneunzehn74,

danke für die Korrektur des amenity-Tags der Studentenwohnanlage.

Kannst du erläutern, was du damit meinst, dass es "nicht erwünscht" ist, flächige Features als multipolgygon zu mappen? Gibt es dazu einen Konsens in der Community?

Thanks for the link.

I can't find the name "Bulfon Weg" on that web page.

Hi,
You've added the name "Bulfon Weg" to way/1186561470 which looks suspicious. Are you sure "Bulfon Weg" is the local name of this path?

Hi Bathyscapher, can you help with this note?
note/4340905

Hi,
Thanks for checking this. On the 2023 Ljubljana orthophoto, it also looks like the path has gone for the time being. I've hence just removed most of the path.

I don't know. Best ask the original mapper what they had in mind when they created the relation: @MitjaJez in changeset/93028251

I just found this thing and then over time put a lot of work into its boundaries around Ljubljana using topographic imagery because I found them to be very imprecise.

JunosL, you claimed that landuse=basin is discouraged.
Please note that the tag here is not landuse=basin, but natural=basin.

I'm against these two options:
1) Use wrong tags because a renderer processes correct tags in a wrong way. This is the renderer's problem to fix. (see osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer)
2) Deleting the relation.

I am for:
- Find an agreement what's the correct tag.
- Then use this tag and encourage data users (renderers) to render the tags correctly.

way/1271178553

Hey,
is "Lepena - Dom pri Krnskih jezerih" really the name of the path or is it a description?

Hi,

Thanks for your contribution. Just remember that creating changesets with huge geographical extent is discouraged.

Happy mapping!

Great, thanks!

Hi,

Thanks for reaching out. The residential area relation relation/14869357 (Janezova vas) originated from an area that I did not create or name myself: way/280874901/history

I simply converted it from an area to a multipolygon -- without properly documenting my work, sorry!

I totally share your view that it would be preferable to name the neighbourhood, not the residential area. Feel free to do so!

Ok.

The wiki says that the "ref" key is used for numbers and codes. "PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most" doesn't really seem to be a number or code.

I think that "PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most" could be the name in this case. The current name looks more like a description to me.

+ I think that building:levels:underground should only be used on buildings and means "(total) number of levels that this building has underground". If the thing is inside a building, but is itself not a building, then level=-1 would be correct in my opinion. If it is not inside a building, then layer=-1 would be sufficient, I believe.

Hi,
It think that on node/10973560597

description="PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most"

should be used instead of

ref="PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most"

(as I understand the wiki)

Hi,
Just a reminder that foot=use_sidepath (+ sidewalk=separate) is preferred over foot=no on roads where you map the sidewalk separately.