trigpoint's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 90088310 | Hi, in order for routers to use this road you need the connect it to the track. Cheers Phil |
|
| 90088526 | Same as the previous comment, it is already part of The Severn Way relation. Cheers Phil |
|
| 90088488 | Hi, welcome to OSM. In OSM names are used for the actual name of an object. In this case the name of this footpath is not Offa's Dyke Path but it is part of the long distance path. Long distance routes are mapped as relations and this path is already part of relation/9649 It is also part of The Severn Way relation/112738 Cheers Phil |
|
| 90047039 | Again the mast and the building are two separate objects. How did you find this as its a bit out of the way? Cheers Phil |
|
| 90047199 | Hi, this edit is not quite correct. The mast hould not a building object, the site has a building and a mast. These should be mapped as separate objects. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89977347 | Hi
Cheers Phil |
|
| 89699285 | Hi Ron
|
|
| 89699840 | What do you mean by Postcode Directory? Please remember that postcode are copyright and we have to be squeaky clean about only using opendata sources. We are absolutely not allowed to copy from Royal Mail. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89701194 | Please stop duplicating information that is already mapped. The university details are already on the campus object. There is no need to duplicate that information on the building.
Cheers Phil |
|
| 89454454 | Hi Mitch
The leisure centre tags were already mapped on the campus object and in this edit you have duplicated them on the building and in so doing have lost the building object. Curious what you were trying to achieve? Cheers Phil |
|
| 89666775 | Hi, way/838894289 is just a private service road leading to a parking area for the houses. It is certainly not a residential road. Cheers Phil |
|
| 45146331 | Hi Mike
It appears to be a valid name based on OS Opendata. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89480302 | Hi, in cases like this you should split the building into two, or provide two nodes. 58-60 should only be used where it is a single point occupying two addresses. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89480418 | Please only use the name tag for actual verifiable names, the name tag should not be make detail appear on the map. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89318855 | Thank you, I had never considered mapping such a thing and spotted a very large changeset area. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89318855 | Hi
Cheers Phil |
|
| 89345828 | Please do not let your cat walk on the keyboard when you are writing changeset comments :) |
|
| 89267543 | Hi, welcome to OSM. I think this edit has added incorrect information.
2. The allotments do not have a name, they are just referred to a The Allotments, but that is a description not a name. 3. The node you added Markfield Surgery to is a duplicate, the correct name is Markfield Medical Centre and that was already mapped. The duplicate is my fault, sorry. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89328234 | Hi Mario
This edit should be reverted. Cheers Phil |
|
| 89055197 | They added bicycle=yes which will have improved routing, although it is tagging for the renderer. |