On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: > Thanks for citing government data on this one, though. A couple > suggestions I would make would be to use much smaller changesets and > more relevant changeset comments, so people who are mapping on the > ground can follow what you're doing and get a better understanding of > why you're changing something without a GPX to back it up.
Actually here the reason was even simpler: the way was part of the US 169 relation (and that for US 64) but lacked a matching ref. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
