OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
148848977

source: Swiss Image 2024 + GWR from http://qa.poole.ch/addresses/GWR/5404_all.geojson.zip

147836944

Bex, buildings according to new imagery (Swiss Image 2024)

146465089

Nice! I am happy my images are useful. :-)

144745921

I can confirm from local knowledge that it perfectly possible to walk / jog around the lake. I can't say for sure but it is possible that some restrictions apply to vehicles.

131254152

Thanks for bringing that up. I haf made a typo and now have corrected it.

140837427

What is the Dingerie? Is it really a religious object?

143804328

Wrong changeset comment. It should be : Trient, landuses

141631348

Thanks for the tip. From now on, I will do just like you for the link in the changeset, it is a good idea. However, when I browse the data in JOSM, I don't see the changeset comment and the source is useful to compare the data with other sources.

141631348

La source est sur chaque bâtiment si jamais. Bon week end aussi!

141631348

Swiss topo 2023 et GWR de Simon.

141555620

We dont know if they are individual trees or not and there is absolutely no reason not to draw the surface of of foliage even if we know where the trunk is located. Destroying someone's work is absolutely unacceptable. I am reverting your damage.

141410402

This is simply not the case, nothing is arbitrary and you have vandalized the data.

141410402

It would would be less time consuming but less accurate. An other possible solution would be to reconsider the "low density" forest tag discussed on the forum. Given the accuracy of the Swiss Surface Layer however, this way is the most ground truth compliant.

141410402

It is impossible to me to see if they are individual trees or not according to the imagery. So, I don't know.

140446568

Is the viewpoint really in the lake?

140149289

Indeed, I was. Please accept my apologies.

140149289

Please stop vandalizing openstreetmap.

128410025

A lot of these buildings are not buildings.

Beaucoup de ces bâtiments ne sont pas des bâtiments.

136922168

Thanks for your message. I suspect a mistake from my part. I would need to look at it but I suppose that my intention was to make a building relation with all the part and made some mistakes.

129300636

Danke. Ich werde probieren, das Tool zu brauchen.