>I meant he is a person that is obsessed with his map and that rivers in this
>town are his and not to touch his edits.
>
>
>>Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:21 PM -05:00 from Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us <
>>talk...@openstreetmap.org >:
>>
>>I am not a native speaker, but as far as I know "freak"
I am not a native speaker, but as far as I know "freak" is pejorative and quite
strong
slur.
If I am right and it has strong negative associations - please do not use it on
mailing lists
or elsewhere in OSM.
Jun 10, 2020, 23:41 by talk...@openstreetmap.org:
> this is a good one because i had
>Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:17 PM -05:00 from John D. :
>
>other than breaking it up into little bits as in the wiiki.
>
>I got rid of the GHOSTS lines.
>
>>Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:13 PM -05:00 from Warin < 61sundow...@gmail.com >:
>>
>>The Changeset: 85357849 comment is "multipolygons f
The Changeset: 85357849 comment is "multipolygons for the entire river
offer no tangible advantages and not to be used."
Sorry but I don't think that is a great comment.
Is there any advantage in what you did?
If so, what did you do and what are the advantages?
On 11/6/20 8:40 am, 80hnhtv4agou
when i look at the changeset it went to the guy, but did not tell me what he
did. i have had that discussion
before with somebody else that must be listed and we agreed it was a land fill,
with a golf course on top it
is a very small part of the top of the hill only 9 holes only,
how many tim
this is a good one because i had a back and forth discussion with somebody that
was
calling me out on my edit because from space this looked like a flat surface
and then explaned
how to list it as non active.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802256628#map=16/42.1110/-87.8160
but the thing
Jun 10, 2020, 17:25 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>
>> On 10. Jun 2020, at 14:58, Mateusz Konieczny via talk
>> wrote:
>>
>> "Why is the definition for the tag removed" it never had a good definition.
>>
>
>
> the former definition was
>
>> A large water tank, typicall
Can you link any specific changeset damaging data
or object that was deleted and should not be?
Linked ones
http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=86230442
http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=85357849
appear to not be problematic
( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/233949#map=9/4
On 09/06/2020 18:40, Simon Poole wrote:
[snip]
Based on information in this thread and private conversation with some
of OSMF members, it looks like Mapbox has treated the iD project as
owned by OSMF from the beginning. Furthermore, I've been told iD
maintainers are happy with the proposed a
Last week I edited a 10 year old, 81 mile MultiPolygon with GHOSTS in the
ID editor, all I know, Someone
took offence to that,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/85357849#map=13/42.0813/-87.8854
and attacked all my edits of that day, and as he moved from north to south,
every t
Note that this page never lost really useful documentation.
There was
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tank&oldid=1245262
with claims either dubious or completely obvious.
I restored "similar tags" section.
"Why is the definition for the tag removed" it neve
On 10/06/2020 13:07, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
This doesn't make sense. Why is the definition for the tag removed? Why
should someone not " (semi-)automatically change “deprecated” tags to
something else in the database" if these tags are completely synonymous
as the template suggests?
It d
I have seen that some features have been "deprecated" in the wiki by
replacing all documentation with a template like this:
example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tank
>
> {{Deprecated
> |oldkey=man_made
> |oldvalue=water_tank
> |newtext=tag:man_made=storage_tank + tag:co
13 matches
Mail list logo
