Mar Mar's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 99910749 | almost 5 years ago | Hi ABDURAHMAN AL FURJANI, as I have mentioned in a previous changeset naming the trees as "palm tree" is against established tagging rules. It is perfectly fine to map each single tree but please don't name them. I need to inform you that the name field will be removed within some time should you consider to ignore this mesage. In case you have doubts about the tagging of trees I recommend reading the wiki: natural=tree.
|
| 99777800 | almost 5 years ago | Hi ABDURAHMAN AL FURJANI. I think it is great you are putting all individual trees on the map, this is a lot of work! But I'd like to kindly point out that according to the wiki the "name:" field is not to be used for the description of the species but only in rare cases the tree is very special and has received specific name as "individual". As you can see the wiki leaves no room for interpretations: "This tag must not be used for a description of the species." It is very useful to have the species but this should go in the "species:" tag. For further clarification I recommend reading the wiki: natural=tree In any case: Thanks for your contribution! Kind regards, Marcos (Mar Mar) |
| 72945607 | almost 5 years ago | Hi there, I see that there are a few buildings on County Road 1208, opposite Grange Hall Cemetery that don't appear on any satellite imagery. There is one that is particularly big and has a very awkward shape. Can you please confirm these buildings should be there and delete them if necessary? Best regards and keep mapping :) |
| 87399926 | over 5 years ago | Hola jlcc78, sugiero que bajes el nivel de crispación. El mapa es de todos y por tanto solo funciona si se mantienen criterios lo más consensuados posible. Si hay algo que te parece mejorable o discutible puedes sacar el tema en los canales que están para esto, por ejempo Telegram. Aquí muchas veces hay opinones divergentes así que te recomiendo unirte y exponer lo que quieras. En cambio, si cada uno mapea por su lado y como quiere al final se resiente el valor del mapa. Ya somos pocos para encima pelearnos. En cualquier caso el talante debe cambiar radicalmente... |
| 19664921 | over 5 years ago | Hi Sergey, I just stumbled across the locality Тиман and with Maxar imagery it gives the impression it is abandoned. Can you confirm this?
|
| 84062984 | over 5 years ago | Nut sure if there has been a misunderstanding. The links you have provided are related to Tanzania but the changeset we are commenting on is located in Rigo District, Central, Papua Region, Papua New Guinea. Is there any relation? Regarding HOT: I know about it and have already contributed a little in some of the projects. I was also aware about FGM; HOT has related projects going on for quite some time I believe. Best regards and happy mapping! :) |
| 84062984 | over 5 years ago | Hi Frans S, nice to meet you. Actually I wasn't aware that there was a program in this area, I've just mapped out of personal interest. Could you please explain which project is being carried out here? If buildings are specifically needed I will pay special attention to this point (compare also a few hundred meters south, were the wood area stands out and I did a few small settlements). Regarding surface: no problem, I will change all surfaces to ground if that's the accepted standard in this area/project. |
| 36225589 | almost 6 years ago | Hi DelgermaaNamsrai, first of all thanks for mapping in this remote region :). I see that you seem to have created a few nodes in this area, some of them with only a name tag, for example: huhhun am; emch; nogoonii ehen.
|
| 51573291 | almost 6 years ago | Hi mueschel, you are right, this was wrongly pasted. I have corrected it right now. Many thanks for te heads up. |
| 78567158 | almost 6 years ago | Hi Frans, first of ll thanks for your feedback. I am aware that you don't request landuse features in this task but I chose to do so as it is not wasted time for me. You might not need it for this specific project but I believe it is good to have the data available in OSM anyway. Regarding the track/residential highway I take note and will be more careful in the future, taking into consideration the link you have provided. |
| 77755721 | about 6 years ago | Hi archie,
|
| 77755721 | about 6 years ago | Hi archie,
|
| 77670950 | about 6 years ago | Hallo PT-53,
|
| 77670950 | about 6 years ago | Hallo PT-53,
|
| 58193701 | almost 7 years ago | First of all apologies if I did anything that disturbed navigation. If I remember well I only changed the tag -> residential inside the town, not the roads that connect large areas. To understand better and avoid this in the future,can you specify (maybe with screenshot and arrows) which streets have been incorrectly modified by me? |
| 52752776 | about 8 years ago | Hi meilandharezty,
|
| 52144992 | about 8 years ago | Hi Harald, this is my mistake. I just inadvertedly did a copy/paste of something that has nothing to do. It's already removed. |
| 50256456 | over 8 years ago | Hi mavl. I absolutely see your point. My appraoch was the following: According to the imagery there are "roads" in this town that appear to be VERY basic. Basic up to a point that their characteristics are more like a track (in the sense of OSM). I imagine a driver with a GPS device, thinking he will drive on a residential road, and instead his car gets stuck in the mud. That's why I chose track instead of residential road. But of course I don't know the area personally and if you think it's better to stick to the general tagging rules I will from now on do it. |
| 41990675 | about 9 years ago | Hi Andy,
Please let me know how I can help avoiding: Thanks and best regards, Marcos |
| 37749403 | over 9 years ago | I agree with SK53, the proof is that I actually didn't see that the George was already there because the icon was so far away from the building, even less visible than the parking lot also named the George. But hey, these are details, just wanted to put this nice pub on the map... |