OpenStreetMap
yelisey90's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 168696047 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168696025 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168696016 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168656590 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168656538 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168656521 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168654979 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168654964 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168654952 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168654931 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168652231 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168652189 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 168652175 | reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc. |
|
| 177071346 | reverted for node/7117622289 & node/7117622294 |
|
| 177071346 | Hi! This needs to be partly reverted (or possibly in full). The aerial imagery from gov.ge is relevant as of March 2024 (and there isn't any imagery available for mapping from 2025), but many things have changed since that time. For example, node/7117622289 & node/7117622294 have been relocated eastward, just like they were mapped before your edit.
|
|
| 177003240 | Isn't the lift gate *behind* the regular gate, which is open at some times but closed at others?
|
|
| 176943151 | Hmm... The intention of way/1266937816 was to represent both a cycleway and a pedestrian way, as they are not physically segregated. This is why the way was drawn as something in the middle between the actual cycleway and the border of pedestrian space. In contrast to this, way/1266937829 represents only cycleway, as there is no pedestrian space nearby. However, it may be better indeed to draw them separately... In this case the pedestrian way needs to be added; but maybe it would be better to draw it as an area, not as a line. |
|
| 176901977 | This one, I meant: way/1464595667 |
|
| 176901977 | Hasn't this building been demolished following the renovation of the street and the opening of the tunnel? |
|
| 176901752 | reverted — these are not underground passages, but rather indoor passages. More careful "fixing" is required |