OpenStreetMap

Eliminato segnalazione in OSM Inspector-AREAS

Closed almost 4 years ago by Map47

Tags

• Comment from kuhni74 over 1 year ago

  Shouldn't the "border" between Ghiacciaio dell'Adamello and "Vedretta del Mandrone" be further south, at Passo Adamè? See https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3563051

• Comment from Map47 over 1 year ago

  The glacier area "Vedretta del Mandrone" was included by https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Edoardo%20Zanotti with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/888903146 in the multipolygon https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3320630#map=13/46.1616/10.5284. This change resulted in an OSMI report for duplicate segments, which I corrected without changing the extent of the area.
  If you know the boundary of this glacier edit the incorrect portion.

• Comment from kuhni74 over 1 year ago

  I now moved the border to the approximate area where the glacier tongue starts flowing quicker (crevasses), please check.

• Comment from Map47 over 1 year ago

  Hello,
  Today OSMI
  https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=10.52738&lat=46.15749&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.63&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
  Reports problems at the bare rocks multipolygon.
  That area is described by two multipolygons
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12991396
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12991394
  which could be unified by removing the segments
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1184255723#map=17/46.15989/10.52399
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1184255725#map=15/46.1587/10.5231
  and the straight part of the segment
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1184255724

• Comment from kuhni74 over 1 year ago

  Thanks a lot for checking! When updating the glacier extents yesterday, I realised that these rock multipolygons could be better. In fact, I almost got a headache when trying to join and separate the complicated polygons a) quite efficiently and b) without destroying the relations completely (I'm not very experienced in this kind of work yet, sorry). If you could help me, you are very welcome, but I can try and solve the chaos, too (hoping that it's not getting worse).

• Comment from Map47 over 1 year ago

  I merged the multipolygons of the rocks, removing the relationship with fewer members and the segments no longer needed. Updated the resulting relationship (one outer and two inner areas).

• Comment from kuhni74 over 1 year ago

  Thank you very much!!! I guess with a good editor, this can be done better than with iD which I'm still working with (yes I know, I shouldn't...).

Log in to join the discussion