the checkbox with addresses is
here :
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/?zoom=15lat=50.94194lon=3.06984layers=BFFTitem=2060level=1,2
if the link isn't ok, you have to set level 1 and 2 then the item in fr is
numéros de rue
you might find some helps about the errors here :
thanks !
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:33 AM, eMerzh merz...@gmail.com wrote:
the checkbox with addresses is
here :
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/?zoom=15lat=50.94194lon=3.06984layers=BFFTitem=2060level=1,2
if the link isn't ok, you have to set level 1 and 2 then
On 2013-05-29 07:39, Marc Gemis wrote :
Why do they complain about
access = no @ (weight 3.5)
?
I thought this was an accepted way of tagging conditional
restrictions. Is there another way ?
Remember that, instead of coding all the rules that are in the Wiki,
they prefer to
It's complaining that neutron pipe is incorrect. Of course it is a
non-existing tag! How many neutron pipes exist on the entire OSM map? This
is the largest linear accelerator in Europe (just across my home). How can
we teach osmose to accept new tags? Just mark it as false positive ?
We can teach osmose by saying it's a false positive...
a dev will propably look at all the false positives and decide what to do
with it
So wa can probably say : Teach osmoses devs :p
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Gilbert Hersschens
gherssch...@gmail.comwrote:
It's complaining that
Hi,
i don't know if everybody knows osmose ( osmose.openstreetmap.fr ) : a OSM
QA tool.
While i was talking about the integration of urbis with the osmose devs,
they told me that nearly half (ok might less than that) of the DB of errors
are in fact
Addresses errors in Belgium .
Like here :
I don't see which checkbox corresponds to the addresses. Hopefully they are
smart enough to look at the associated street relation as well (unlike
another quality control tool).
Too bad they do not understand that for walking networks you can have a
relation with 1 member. Now I have to click
Why do they complain about
access = no @ (weight 3.5)
?
I thought this was an accepted way of tagging conditional restrictions. Is
there another way ?
m
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:00 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see which checkbox corresponds to the addresses.
