OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
137480513

> No idea what is that "snc".

*You* have added this.
Are you saying that you are deliberately adding bogus data to OpenStreetMap?

137480917

BTW: I fixed it and added some more details in the vicinity in changeset/137505613

137480917

It's advisable to add the phone number of POIs in international format, to make the life of data consumers easier: phone=*#Usage

There are several Maproulette challenges to fix phone numbers *not* in international format: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges?challengeSearch=&query=international%20format

Have a great day,
habi

137484262

Ciao vmicho

It's great for pedestrian routing that you're adding sidewalks adjacent to the streets.
If you do this, it is advisable though to add a `separate`-sidewalk tag to the street, as specified on the OSM Wiki: sidewalk=*#Separately_mapped_sidewalks
Can you update the streets you've edited in your recent changesets with `sidewalk:both=separate`?

Greetings,
habi

137480513

Can you tell us what `operator:type=snc` means?
You’re the first one to introduce this to OSM: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/operator%3Atype=snc#overview

137386856

I would try to make it 'semantically' correct, e.g. add a path to the ping pong table, and add a service highway to the parking.
That there's no good way to pass between the ping pong table an the parking is - albeit based on the barrier - then mapped by the footway and service highway not being connected.

137427039

Mersi!

137445506

Mersi!

137386856

Sorry, I misinterpreted the lonesome node.
Reverted my merge with changeset/137413944

But the barrier needs to be connected to a path or way to make ‚semantic‘ sense: barrier=*
Such a way is missing here…

137386856

node/10979461217 was added as a duplicate of node/295941367/
I merged both barriers.

137388388

And also not connected to way/11787543/

137388388

way/1182332777/ was not connected to way/147046122/, I've updated this :)

137389067

Here you've added a duplicate path to way/583999765/
I'm removing your addition and aligned the already present path a bit.

136980881

Now you’re just fiddling with tags.
I’ll take care of the building once it officially opens.

137233781

"'simply' to directional road signs?" should be "'simply' two directional road signs?"

137233781

Are there really two guideposts (information=guidepost) in the middle of the traffic islands, or 'simply' to directional road signs?
If yes, then node/10970375041 and node/10970375043 should be mapped as traffic_sign=*

137227894

PS: Also please try to be a bit more descriptive in your changeset comments, as suggested in osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments. All your recent chagnes are simply commented with "Domdidier", making it more difficult to find out what you've tried to accomplish.

137227894

Hey loicdufresne

This thing in the middle of the roundabout (way/1181261285) is most probably *not* a garden: "set aside for the display, cultivation, and enjoyment of plants and other forms of nature" (as steted in the OSM Wiki) but should be mapped as osm.wiki/Tag%3Atraffic_calming%3Disland

This 'smells' of tagging for the renderer, so that the island shows up as a green circle in the middle of the roundabout. Please try to 'abstract' the stuff you see on the ground into correct OSM tagging.

Greetings from Bern,
habi

137301813

Hey vmicho!

You've changed my traffic calming island (way/1177549923) to landuse=grass and barrier=wall.
This is *definitevely* not `landuse=grass` as seen on the swisstopo imagery, it's a little bit of shrubbery and mostly stones/gravel.
Please don't just tag for the renderer, i.e. so that this shows up as a green circle on OSM Carto!
Try to add correct data to OSM, not just to make it look pretty.

Also, if you *really* insist on doubly-tagging this landuse with a wall around it, then please also add a `height`-value.
IIRC when I passed this roundabout on bike it didn't really look like there's a 'wall', and the shadows on the swisstopo imagery seem to confirm this.

In addition you've added way/1181861983/ as traffic island. In my opinion and according to the wiki this tag should only be used for the structure that is *not* possible to pass by vehicles. In my opinion here this looks like it could be passed by cars and trucks, hence I would not tag this as island. See osm.wiki/DE:Tag:traffic_calming%3Disland for an explanation.

Greetings from Bern,
habi

137363362

way/1020502426 hätte eigentlich nicht in dieses Changeset gehört, sorry!