On 21/3/20 11:02 pm, ael wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 10:45:53AM +1100, Warin wrote:
On 18/3/20 1:42 am, ael wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:24AM +, Devonshire wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote:
On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
The inability to mark an object's lo
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 10:45:53AM +1100, Warin wrote:
> On 18/3/20 1:42 am, ael wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:24AM +, Devonshire wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote:
> > > > On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
> > > The inability to mark an object's location as "au
On 18/3/20 1:42 am, ael wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:24AM +, Devonshire wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote:
On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
The inability to mark an object's location as "authorititive" has always seemed
like a massive shortcoming of the project to
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 03:08:39PM +, ael wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 06:09:26PM +, ael wrote:
> > I have just noticed some new "Embankments" added around a fortnight ago.
> > These were added to some stone circles in Cornwall which I know well and
> >
> > I have added a changeset com
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 06:09:26PM +, ael wrote:
> I have just noticed some new "Embankments" added around a fortnight ago.
> These were added to some stone circles in Cornwall which I know well and
>
> I have added a changeset comment.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81640861
The u
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:24AM +, Devonshire wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote:
> > On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
>
> The inability to mark an object's location as "authorititive" has always
> seemed like a massive shortcoming of the project to me. Stopping people
>
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:24AM +, Devonshire wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote:
> > On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
>
> The inability to mark an object's location as "authorititive" has always
> seemed like a massive shortcoming of the project to me. Stopping people
>
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:08:52PM +1100, Warin wrote:
> On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
> >
> > I have only just got around to looking in more detail, and discovered
> > that it is much worse than I had realised: vandalism.
> >
> > I have taken waypoints on nearly all of the individual stones, an
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 09:53:07AM +, John Aldridge wrote:
> On 17-Mar-20 02:08, Warin wrote:
> > A single GPS trace is fine if that is all there is, better to average many
> > GPS traces, in some locations I have 50+.
>
> Though, AIUI, once you've reached this level of precision, remaining e
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote:
> On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
>> In cases like this I would use the source tag on the way so that others have
>> a very good chance of seeing it and respecting the previous work rather than
>> simply changing it to what they think it should be. It
On 17/3/20 8:53 pm, John Aldridge wrote:
On 17-Mar-20 02:08, Warin wrote:
A single GPS trace is fine if that is all there is, better to average
many GPS traces, in some locations I have 50+.
Though, AIUI, once you've reached this level of precision, remaining
errors are likely to be systemati
On 17-Mar-20 02:08, Warin wrote:
A single GPS trace is fine if that is all there is, better to average many GPS
traces, in some locations I have 50+.
Though, AIUI, once you've reached this level of precision, remaining
errors are likely to be systematic (e.g. satellites in a particular
direc
On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote:
I have only just got around to looking in more detail, and discovered
that it is much worse than I had realised: vandalism.
I have taken waypoints on nearly all of the individual stones, and then
refined those positions with waypoint averaging on multiple visits.
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 04:18:02:PM +, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 16/03/2020 15:36, ael wrote:
> >
> > There has now been had one short reply essentially admitting tagging for
> > the renderer. I haven't replied as yet, but Andy has.
>
> In this case it looks like the offending data's been rem
On 16/03/2020 15:36, ael wrote:
There has now been had one short reply essentially admitting tagging for
the renderer. I haven't replied as yet, but Andy has.
In this case it looks like the offending data's been removed, though the
tiles haven't rerendered yet (due to the site being busy). I
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 04:08:45PM +0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
>
>
> Mar 15, 2020, 22:36 by witwa...@disroot.org:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 09:18:59PM +, David Woolley wrote:
> >
> >> On 14/03/2020 18:09, ael wrote:
> >> > I have just noticed some new "Embankments" added around a
Mar 15, 2020, 22:36 by witwa...@disroot.org:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 09:18:59PM +, David Woolley wrote:
>
>> On 14/03/2020 18:09, ael wrote:
>> > I have just noticed some new "Embankments" added around a fortnight ago.
>> > These were added to some stone circles in Cornwall which I know w
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 09:18:59PM +, David Woolley wrote:
> On 14/03/2020 18:09, ael wrote:
> > I have just noticed some new "Embankments" added around a fortnight ago.
> > These were added to some stone circles in Cornwall which I know well and
> > have extensively surveyed. There is no trace
On 14/03/2020 18:09, ael wrote:
I have just noticed some new "Embankments" added around a fortnight ago.
These were added to some stone circles in Cornwall which I know well and
have extensively surveyed. There is no trace of any embankments. No
source was given and the user does not appear to be
I have just noticed some new "Embankments" added around a fortnight ago.
These were added to some stone circles in Cornwall which I know well and
have extensively surveyed. There is no trace of any embankments. No
source was given and the user does not appear to be local.
I have added a changeset
20 matches
Mail list logo