I'm just saying it would be nice if the editors (iD, JOSM) would give a
warning if someone tries to put dinosaurs within the range of human
habitation.
On 16/10/2022 18:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 16 Oct 2022, at 18:05, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Do you have a feeling
sent from a phone
> On 16 Oct 2022, at 18:05, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> Do you have a feeling how many "archeologic" sites in OSM are in reality
> palaeontological? I fear this is a frequent error, but difficult to spot.
It doesn’t seem a huge problem, but even if this was widespread my
There were 4, tagged as dinosaur trackway or dinosaur footprints or
similar. Obviously, even though dinosaurs were quite big, I can't see
them on satellite view, so I just changed the key to description and
added geological=palaeontological_site.
Anne
On 16/10/2022 17:02, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Do you have a feeling how many "archeologic" sites in OSM are in reality
palaeontological? I fear this is a frequent error, but difficult to spot.
On Sun, 16 Oct 2022, 17:33 Anne-Karoline Distel,
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm doing a huge tidy-up amongst the values for "site_type", documented
>
Am So., 16. Okt. 2022 um 17:33 Uhr schrieb Anne-Karoline Distel <
annekadis...@web.de>:
> I've come across a few dinosaur footprints, but that is not archaeology,
> because archaeology is about man made structures. Is there a way to
> implement a warning into the editors not to combine
>
Hello all,
I'm doing a huge tidy-up amongst the values for "site_type", documented
in a diary post:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/b-unicycling/diary/400151
I've come across a few dinosaur footprints, but that is not archaeology,
because archaeology is about man made structures. Is there a
On 14/10/22 22:33, Peter Elderson wrote:
Just a remark: I think a mainly decorative object is not an amenity.
An amenity may be near it, or attached to it, but that still does not
make the object an amenity.
Some view works of art as amenities.
A road is an amenity .. yet they are not
On 16/10/22 02:49, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:08, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
The flow of water is downwards making them difficult to drink from without an
aid e.g. a cup.
while it may be true, you have to acknowledge that there are many
On Sat, 15 Oct 2022, 20:02 Marc_marc, wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Le 15.10.22 à 18:55, Volker Schmidt a écrit :
> > (
> > It is certainly not something that can be represented
> > by a bicycle route relation.
>
> witch issue did you see ?
>
It's not signposted.
At least parts of it are off-limits for
