Re: [Talk-us] Colorado mappers: Check your notes carefully

2016-05-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
I have been putting out the fire of a mild edit war in Colorado involving the Great Divide Mountain Bike Route, http://www.osm/org/relation/3161159 where MountainAddict keeps setting this to network=ncn when clearly it is network=icn (as it crosses the

Re: [Talk-us] Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?

2016-05-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Ah, my spell-check is to blame! “non” should be ncn “lcm” should be lcm “a bicycle router showing” should be “a bicycle renderer showing” SteveA ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?

2016-05-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Whoops, a couple typos back there: “non” should be non “lcm” should be lcn SteveA ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?

2016-05-01 Thread OSM Volunteer stevea
Elliott Plack wrote: > Update on this. I was out along the AT in the Weverton area and had a chance > to observe this unique condition where cyclists are encouraged to use what is > effectively a motorway for travel. I always found my armchair mapping of this highly

Re: [Talk-us] Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?

2016-05-01 Thread Elliott Plack
Steve and Friends, Update on this. I was out along the AT in the Weverton area and had a chance to observe this unique condition where cyclists are encouraged to use what is effectively a motorway for travel. There is no sign or specific indication of USBR 11 anywhere out there that I observed.

Re: [Talk-us] Colorado mappers: Check your notes carefully

2016-05-01 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Clifford Snow wrote: > Should there be a request to DWG to put a hold on MountainAddict until we > have a satisfactory explanation? > I don't think we're there yet...the problem isn't quite as extensive as previously thought now that I'm

Re: [Talk-us] Colorado mappers: Check your notes carefully

2016-05-01 Thread Clifford Snow
Should there be a request to DWG to put a hold on MountainAddict until we have a satisfactory explanation? On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:37 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > I've reopened the notes since I don't see evidence that they were actually > resolved yet. Was around ~30 on the

Re: [Talk-us] Colorado mappers: Check your notes carefully

2016-05-01 Thread Paul Johnson
I've reopened the notes since I don't see evidence that they were actually resolved yet. Was around ~30 on the ground observations from the last time I was up that direction. On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Mike Thompson wrote: > > > On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Paul

Re: [Talk-us] Colorado mappers: Check your notes carefully

2016-05-01 Thread Nate Wessel
The same person appears to have also just closed a note (with no comment) in Cincinnati Ohio that I was watching. Is this person on a spree? -Nate On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Mike Thompson wrote: > > > On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Paul Johnson

Re: [Talk-us] Colorado mappers: Check your notes carefully

2016-05-01 Thread Mike Thompson
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > MountainAddict has decided he needs to be the notes police and has > apparently bulk closed all notes in Colorado without actually resolving > them, with "edit, don't open notes". > > Have you attempted to contact the

[Talk-us] Colorado mappers: Check your notes carefully

2016-05-01 Thread Paul Johnson
MountainAddict has decided he needs to be the notes police and has apparently bulk closed all notes in Colorado without actually resolving them, with "edit, don't open notes". ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org