Hej,

Bækken hedder "Ormerenden" både lokalt, kommunalt og ministerielt.

Der er over årene måske sket en glidning af navnet fra ubestemt til bestemt form. Noget SDFE ikke er opdateret på.

Det er måske en lokal sydfynsk/tøsingsk måde, at betegne vandløb på. Vi har også Hovedrenden, Lungerenden, Mejerirenden, Bjernemarksgrøften, Skellet, Sogneskellet m.m. Alle sammen vandløb i bestemt form.

Jeg tilføjer gerne "Ormerende" som alternativt navn.

Se f.eks. her:
Svendborg Kommune:
https://www.svendborg.dk/sites/default/files/acadre/Files_3873_4546991/ormerenden.pdf.pdf

Miljøministeriet:
https://kyst.dk/offentliggoerelser/strand/2019/august/dispensation-til-omlaegning-af-vandloeb-mv-paa-valdemars-slot-taasinge/

Trap Danmark:
https://trap.lex.dk/Kanal,_mv.,_Ormerenden

Med venlig hilsen
Michael

Hello Jonas,

Thanks for a quick answer.

I have not knowledge about who mapped "Regionaltog 61", but as local guy, the name for the psysical train route is Svendborgbanen. Like other Danish railroads like "Kystbanen", Vestbanen" and so on.

Feel free to change the route-master as you think it's best.

Best regards and keep mapping :-)

Michael

Uy

Hello,

Route_master relation for the whole of Svendborgbanen is not working properly according to Osmose.

Error reported as: "Non route relation member in route_master relation".

When route_master relation is deleted, the error disappears. I've tried it just for testing but has restored it for you to try to fix, as I'm not familiar with route_master.

Best regards
Michael

Hello,

It's a farm building used for raising pigs.

building=sty

Hi Jan,

Didn't know about the proposals. Have corrected the barriers according to your suggestions.

Best regards
Michael

Hi Mueschel,

Well it's my attempt to map a cycle barrier on at two way footway that also allows for biking in both directions. The cycle barriers is only for cyclists approaching a street in the northern end of Tipsvænget.

You can see the situation here on Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@55.0579643,10.5653377,3a,49y,307.61h,91.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBqBZMo2pKjcJ-q_TP_8zOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm always open to better suggestions. Osmose and OSM Inspector hasn't objected to the tag.

Best regards

Michael

Er nu rettet til nul navne :-)

Jeg lytter, og jeg har kigget lidt på de diskussioner, der har været om navngivning i rundkørsler i både Danmark og udenlands.
Min umiddelbare tanke var, at vejnavnene skulle være der, når kommunerne i Danmark bruger at navngive veje i rundkørsler. Samt at der kunne komme "huller" navigationsapper, hvis der manglede et vejnavn.
Jeg har nu testet i Osmand, og her skriver appen blot "Rundkørsel" uanset om der er navn på vejen eller ej. Vejhavnet ses på kortet, men det bruges altså ikke til noget.
Når den gængse konvention derfor er, at ikke navngive veje i rundkørsler, så er jeg med på at undlade det.
Er vi enige? Så sletter jeg alle navne i rundkørsler i mit nabolag.

Rundkørslerne er dele af vejene Vestergade og Mølmarksvej. Se Svendborg Kommunes kort: https://drift.kortinfo.net/Map.aspx?Site=Svendborg&Page=Kortopslag&sso=0

Vælg Administrative Data > Adresser > vejmidte_navn

Dine rettelser er derfor tilbageført.

Rundkørslen er en del af vejen Wiggers Park. Se Svendborg Kommunes kort: https://drift.kortinfo.net/Map.aspx?Site=Svendborg&Page=Kortopslag&sso=0

Vælg Administrative Data > Adresser > vejmidte_navn

Din rettelse er derfor tilbageført.

Det er en test af, hvordan renderingen i 3D kommer til at se ud.

Jeg bruger det på bygninger i tilknytning til en bolig, som er større og i bedre stand end et skur, uden at bygningen benyttes som bolig.

Jeg er åben overfor et bedre ord for denne type af bygning, men har ikke selv kunnet finde det.

Outhouse må selvfølgelig ikke bruges, da det er et das.

Engelsk definition fra Oxford Languages: "a smaller separate building such as a shed or barn that belongs to a main building, such as a house or farm".

Thanks :-). I forgot that, and I will change it tomorrow.

It's not uncommon to have "holes" inside residential areas with f.x. commercial and industrial areas.

Sorry to say, but just because you would like to tag in another way, doesn't mean an you are right. You just want to be right and that is not the same thing.

I am following the convention om how to use names. Names can be used on tags, lines and areas. I am using it on areas in cases like this. You're using it on tags.

Both approaches are according to the conventions. Neither is marked as wrong in Osmose or in OSMInspector. And I will not use valuable time to find multiple examples on the map that supports my way of doing things.

That's it. End of discussion. Instead of using your time and energy on fokusing on details which are not exactly as you want them to be, look for actual faults or missing things in the map and correct them.

I'm following the convention and the way hundreds of other mappers are doing it. It has nothing to do with mapping to look nice. It has to do with avoiding a lot of unnecessary tags with information that can be given under the specifikations for the building.

Please note the buildings you have tampered with are in an industrial - not in a residential area. And that they not are buildings designated for living.

Please consider stop correcting things you think are wrong, just because they're not mapped as you would have mapped it.

And please stop using "whataboutism" to support your personal views. Don't use cheap tricks in an attemp to strenghten your arguments.

I'm working in the same area and I'm ongoing correcting all observed changes and errors. But I will not do it all the time. I want to map.

It's not wrong to tag the way you do. It's just an alternative solution to the way I do it. Let's accept that!

I'm following the convention and the way hundreds of other mappers are doing it. It has nothing to do with mapping to look nice. It has to do with avoiding a lot of unnecessary tags with information that can be given under the specifikations for the building.

Please note the buildings you have tampered with are in an industrial - not in a residential area. And that they not are buildings designated for living.

Please consider stop correcting things you think are wrong, just because they're not mapped as you would have mapped it.

And please stop using "whataboutism" to support your personal views. Don't use cheap tricks in an attemp to strenghten your arguments.

I'm working in the same area and I'm ongoing correcting all observed changes and errors. But I will not do it all the time. I want to map.

It's not wrong to tag the way you do. It's just an alternative solution to the way I do it. Let's accept that!

I checked it up. The company Ind-Tryk has moved, so tag is deleted.

Hey,

Names can be used for nodes, ways and areas: Please see: name=*

I have for six years been naming buildings (areas) used by only one company with the companys name.

In buildings with more then one company I use tags with the companys name.

I'm following the convention, so please do not start deleting all my company names on building with solely one company.

Hey,

Names can be used for nodes, ways and areas: Please see: name=*

I have for six years been naming buildings (areas) used by only one company with the companys name.

In buildings with more then one company I use tags with the companys name.

I'm following the convention, so please do not start deleting all my company names on building with solely one company.