piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2021-08-07 20:09:29+00:00): aavulling
amenity=parking_space is een vak op een amenity=parking
Je kunt dan bv aangeven dat het om een invalideparkeerplaats gaat of om een elektrische auto op te laden. 

Maar dit zijn geen parkeerterreinen.
Probeer te voorkomen dat je een wijk krijg vol met P's. 
Ik gebruik amenity=parking voor grote parkeerterreinen.
andrewsuzuki (2022-07-29 19:27:29+00:00): Hi, are those segments of Grayville Road you marked private (for example, 492444880) really private? It seems to be within the state forest, and also highly trafficked on strava. There's a closely parallel unmapped driveway, perhaps you meant to tag that as private? Thanks.
jnighan (2022-07-29 19:48:23+00:00): Hi, you're right! Not sure how that happened. I removed inaccurate access restrictions from Grayville Rd
geoaria (2021-08-19 07:55:58+00:00): شما اتصال بین مسیر ها را به صورت گسترده قطع کرده اید. مسیر ها را به صورت جزیره رسم نکنید حتما به شبکه راهها متصل باشد. مسیر را به boundary ها وصل نکنید. ایجاد خطا در نقشه می کند. مکان اشتباه : 32.51554/51.48645
اصلاح شد.
dcapillae (2021-08-07 20:57:42+00:00): ¡Buen trabajo!
areyesl (2021-08-07 21:09:37+00:00): ¡Gracias! Parece que voy entendiendo el tema de las relaciones :-)
SpecializedRider (2021-09-11 15:34:42+00:00): Please don't use the Motor_vehicle_yes tag for a river crossing! I'm removing this incorrect tagging.
SpecializedRider (2021-09-11 15:37:52+00:00): Also please don't use the Footway tag for tracks in the desert. Highway=track is more appropriate
os-emmer (2024-03-10 14:22:09+00:00): Hi TheCavalery,
I think you made a typo here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/971204739
I think insetead of the amenity=* it should possibly be emergency=water_rescue. Do you agree?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dwater_rescue
tekim (2021-08-08 14:29:46+00:00): The sources cited do not support all of the changes made, for example one can not deduce from "Bing aerial imagery;Esri World Imagery;Mapbox Satellite" that maxspeed=20 for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/164014396
Clarke22 (2021-08-10 05:59:46+00:00): Default speed limit on campus is 20 mph.
Clarke22 (2021-08-10 06:00:13+00:00): based on University traffic regulations
Clarke22 (2021-08-10 06:00:26+00:00): but only 10 mph in parking lots
abakus_uploader (2021-08-07 22:31:41+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
eggie (2021-08-07 21:12:14+00:00): Tip...  Geen vlakken aan wegen vastmaken svp...  De kaart wordt dan onwerkbaar. Ik heb de vlakken losgemaakt.
gr eggie
DaniëlV (2021-08-07 21:37:03+00:00): Goeie tip, dank! Gr Daniël
Jessica Lily (2021-08-07 21:00:57+00:00): JOSM warned about an empty role and role of member not matching with regard to the associatedStreet relationship between Main Street and the building with 37 Main Street Cafe.

I can't quite figure out what the problem is or how to fix it though.
lakedistrict (2021-08-07 21:23:00+00:00): Hi, thanks for your edits. The relation was unnecessary so I've deleted it. Hopefully that will stop JOSM complaining :)
Emerson Figueiredo Leite (2021-08-25 23:49:41+00:00): Olá Gustavo. Acredito que você excluiu nossos dados considerando "correção uso inadequado das tags de abustro". Precisamos deles para nossa pesquisa. Qual a sua justificativa para tal exclusão?  O que considerou inadequado? Emerson
Gustavo22Soares (2021-08-26 13:30:14+00:00): Opa, então vcs estavam mapeando as copas das arvores como arbustos, oq é incorreto, alem de deformarem as ruas em alguns casos....
no caso de mapeamento de arvores urbanas deveria ser usado a tag natural=tree (ponto) ou natural=tree_row (linha) verificando sempre a realidade

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Tag:natural%3Dtree
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Tag:natural%3Dtree_row
VLD166 (2021-10-19 20:55:45+00:00): Hello fellow mapper,
First, I want to thank you for your contribution to OSM. I can see that you are trying to add the best data possible; however, the names you have added to the sidewalks seem to be invalid. Unless the sidewalk has a distinct name, typically sidewalk names should mirror their associated road. Currently,  I have not found any sources or OSM Wiki articles referencing the addition of your supplementary name info. Do you have any sources or articles relating to these additions? 
Best regards.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-14 14:35:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 127521226 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some changes by joserrg12.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6439 and previous blocks for context.
Famlam (2021-08-07 21:21:32+00:00): +bron: Mapillary (2020-2021 data)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-14 14:34:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 127521226 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some changes by joserrg12.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6439 and previous blocks for context.
gscholz (2021-08-27 04:44:06+00:00): Hi Carlos,
your recent changesets have created several errors in the OSM database regarding unconnected ways (red dots):

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-54.33320&lat=-26.05754&zoom=10&overlays=duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges_areas,snap_points,unconnected_open_ends_1,unconnected_open_ends_3,unconnected_open_ends_4,unconnected_open_ends_5,unconnected_open_ends_6

As you probably know these cannot be used by routing software. Can you please fix this?
Kind REgards
Guido
Carlos Brys (2021-08-27 14:11:33+00:00): All fixed!
Thanks
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-14 14:34:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 127521226 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some changes by joserrg12.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6439 and previous blocks for context.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-14 14:35:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 127521226 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some changes by joserrg12.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6439 and previous blocks for context.
DressyPear4 (2021-08-08 11:52:26+00:00): Olá, como já informado, não adicione "park" em tudo que vê pelo caminho, veja a definição em 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109327096
Kachkaev (2021-09-04 11:58:19+00:00): 👋 4004! I was hiking last week and was routed via [way 971139720](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/971139720), which was behind a [pretty massive gate](https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8988985522) with a lot of cameras on it. The gate was closed and the only way to enter it was to call one of the intercoms on a pillar.

I made some fixes to your data in [changeset 110713304](https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110713304), could you please double-check them? Access to the industrial area is now private and there is no through-pass. This seem to match what I see in Bing and on the Strava heatmap, but it might be worth confirming.
4004 (2021-09-04 16:04:51+00:00): Hi, sorry it was my fault for not checking this is/was a transit route - hence my access=destination did not stop your routing software. I will change the gate to access=customers (as a customer can gain access using the intercom), and access=destination on the road (as it no longer connects to the public footpath)
Kachkaev (2021-09-04 16:11:18+00:00): 👍 Thanks, that makes sense!
flohoff (2022-05-10 09:39:47+00:00): Nur weil ich gerade drüber gestolpert bin und die gleich mal entsorge.

Es bedarf keiner turn restriction auf einen oneway was ein Kreisverkehr ist.


https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13066799
osm-user12 (2021-08-08 06:51:01+00:00): Hallo, ich hatte an der Stelle bereits einen Schnellimbiss "Gil-Lato Softeis" mit u.a. Eis im Angebot gemappt. Hältst Du es für wichtig, daneben noch einen weiteren  Node "amenity=ice_cream" zu pflegen oder wäre der eine bereits bestehende Node ausreichend?
mo465 (2021-08-08 10:17:06+00:00): Hallo, danke für den Hinweis. Ein Node reicht für mich auch. Deinen Node hab ich wohl aus warum auch immer übersehen. Ich habe das Duplikat entfernt.
ralley (2021-08-08 07:20:28+00:00): This changeset has marked a huge portion of O'Farrells Track as a culvert, I suspect what you wanted to achieve would be tagging the portion of the stream that passes under the track with tunnel=culvert and layer=-1
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109328059
MaxL (2021-08-08 22:53:10+00:00): Error corrected :)
maro21 (2021-08-07 23:48:53+00:00): Dlaczego zmieniłeś nazwy dworców i co jest źródłem tych nazw?
Mariusz_Wxxx (2021-08-08 13:10:33+00:00): Napisy na miejscu i rozkłady jazdy.
maraf24 (2021-08-08 14:35:20+00:00): Do wycofania, jakieś bzdury.
Np.
operator=Przedsiębiorstwo Państwowej Komunikacji Samochodowej we Wrocławiu
abakus_uploader (2021-08-08 22:33:32+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
Illio (2021-09-11 20:13:02+00:00): Zdravím. Táto cesta (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/971243841/) tu podľa mňa nie je. Na základe čoho ste to zakreslili?
aceman444 (2021-09-11 23:45:21+00:00): V principe som potreboval nejaku cestu na ktoru prelozit ten dusoftov vymysel lcn=provisional, kedze to mal rovno na plote (pozrite https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=109328394 a https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=95072514).

Ano je to tam take osemetne, minimalne po budovu Delikatesy stoja na Ortofotomozaike auta, zrejme k tomu obchodu. Ak teda cesta konci tam, mozem to dalej zmenit na chodnik. Ten usek je pod strechou, takze to nie je dobre vidiet. Pozrite teraz. Dakujem za upozornenie.
aceman444 (2021-09-11 23:53:46+00:00): Teda tam ta highway=service povodne uz bola, a tak som ju presunul o par metrov doprava, ale vytvorenim noveho OSM objektu. Ked teda hovorite, tak som ju skratil, pozrite ci je to lepsie.
Illio (2021-09-12 00:49:22+00:00): Tie autá k budove Delikatesy sú na druhej strane plota, od Železničnej nemocnice. Na tejto strane plota nie je reálne ani chodník, podľa mňa úplne stačí, že je tam vyznačený ten cestný objekt "Trnavské mýto". Plus ešte by tam bolo vhodné vyznačiť malú budovu medzi Delikatesami a tržnicou (vstup do podzemia).

Keď tak kuknite na Google StreetView: https://www.google.sk/maps/@48.1560382,17.1252781,3a,17.8y,359.76h,89.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2FQ7w3CTmUglqDq0kVZrsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=sk&authuser=0
aceman444 (2021-09-12 19:50:54+00:00): Nerozumiem. StreetView sa neda pouzivat ale aj tam priamo vidite auto pod strieskou pri Delikatesy a tiez tam ide aj clovek, takze prejazdne to je. Na Ortofotomozaike je vidiet auto na severnej strane Delitakesy, smerom k trznici. Cize auta za plotom k Zeleznicnej nemocnini nemam na mysli. Ten vstup do podzemia kludne zakreslite, ked viete co to je, na Ortofotomozaike to nie je jasne, takze som to nedal.
Illio (2021-09-12 20:31:20+00:00): Dá sa tam ísť autom, ale okolo tržnice (smerom od Krížnej), nie popri plote. Je tam obrubník. Ani ďalej na sever sa nedá ísť autom, tam je zas rampa.
aceman444 (2024-12-26 22:07:48+00:00): Uz som to odvtedy zase upravil, pozrite teraz. Mam tam aj rampu aj ten vstup do podzemia (ale zrejme trvalo zavrety).
Warin61 (2022-04-17 03:47:54+00:00): Hi,
What is the source of this address?
JoniBarTeam (2022-04-17 05:49:10+00:00): The owner
Mr_Atlas (2022-03-02 22:51:58+00:00): Hi joserrg12, I noticed you updated many of the highway refs in South Sudan back in August, but I saw RN 2(way 972869585), A43 (way 1008226339 to way 323986421), and B38 (way 323986421 to way 191424465) are still present, which appear to resemble the previous format. Do you know if these refs should also be updated, or are you aware of a resource I could check to find out? Thank you!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-14 14:34:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 127521226 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some changes by joserrg12.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6439 and previous blocks for context.
Violaine_Do (2021-08-09 21:26:46+00:00): attention tu avais retiré des tags relatifs au batiment... J'ai rajouté le tag building=yes, nécessaire. Pour les autres merci de controler et les remettre le cas échéant, c'est a dire si t'as pas fait exprès de les supprimer. (building:levels=3, building:use=residential, max_level=2). Par ailleurs merci de mieux décrire tes changements. Ca fait référence à les 2 règles des bonnes pratique de la communauté, qui ne sont pas la pour rien, merci pour tes futures contributions :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109328485
Violaine_Do (2021-08-09 21:34:44+00:00): il y a bien une route d'accès, je les passée en service, cf wiki
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109328584
Violaine_Do (2021-08-09 21:40:45+00:00): tu as indiqué un portique électrique ici, : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dportal
Merci de vérifier/ corriger le cas échéant. Si tu ne trouves pas le tag adéquat, tu as toujours l'option de décrire ce que tu as voulu mettre dans un tag description, ou mettre une note.. :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109328647
MxxCon (2021-08-08 02:13:18+00:00): Hello.
Nicely done there. 👍
I'd like to point out way 830738538 that you created.
You mapped tennis courts as individual areas, but then also mapped the whole complex as tennis court too. This goes against the concept of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
Perhaps it should be updated from an enclosed area to simply map out the fences surrounding those courts.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109328742
outoftheHouse (2021-08-08 03:28:11+00:00): Dear MxxCon,
Hello! I wasn't expecting any fellow locals to map/validate the Bayside area, so you kind of made my day!
As for your suggestion, I didn't create the tennis court way you mentioned. However, I have corrected the courts based on you suggestions (changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/109330341).
Nonetheless, thank you for catching this error!
Violaine_Do (2021-08-09 21:48:55+00:00): attention à la qualification des routes... j'en ai profité pour corrigé la route d'accès à pointe des pêcheurs aussi.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109328850
tekim (2021-08-08 14:36:47+00:00): The source cited "Bing aerial imagery" does not support all of the changes being made in the changeset, for example, there is no way to tell for sure from "Bing aerial imagery" that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/781963882 is surface=wood.  It could be composite decking for example.
Clarke22 (2021-08-10 05:51:40+00:00): You sure are making this a lot less fun.  Hours and hours and hours of mapping, but "could be composite decking".
tekim (2021-08-08 13:45:34+00:00): This is another changeset that where the source cited "Bing aerial imagery" does not support all of the changes made, such as bicycle=yes
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109329363
Clarke22 (2021-08-10 05:57:05+00:00): see comment in changeset 109431450
gscholz (2022-12-29 08:57:35+00:00): Hi Editors,
this changeset has left behind broken boundary relations for "Llano alto" and "Parque del Niño":

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-78.77814&lat=-2.89555&zoom=17&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
adlid (2021-08-08 10:05:53+00:00): Why did you not discuss this first before reverting all of my changes? The changes made were correct as of the status of the roundabout last week
MacLondon (2021-08-09 18:42:40+00:00): Hi. I did some further edits last night after another survey of the area, looking for some of the changes you had made. Most of my prior edits that you'd changed were accurate though. Among your changes that were inaccurate:

- I'd noticed during a survey on Thu that the separated cycle track (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/888020105 ) had recently moved further west, but you had moved it further east to where a simple painted cycle lane begins

- the westbound cycle track ends on the east side of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6154905994 rather than extending through the crossing

- there is only a painted cycle lane on the north side of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/693294644, not a one-point entry separated cycleway

- the temporary cycle crossing at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/948893550 only crosses 1 motor carriageway, not 3 carriageways

- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/971266072 is not a dual carriageway

- there is still a works access road at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/886590035

- there is no separate northbound left-turn carriageway yet at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/886590027

My edit wast night will have restored some of the changes that you'd made at the NE arm, though I will have been more strict regarding what is physically fully separated (e.g. the northbound wanded cycleway=track that can be entered at any point)

The mapping of cycling infrastructure is best view with the CyclOSM map, but it hasn't at present rendered to the current data.

One thing I am unsure about is the speed limits here, especially with the east-west route through the roundabout. I wonder if that was something you'd be able to shed any light on from your surveying here.

Regards,
Mac
adlid (2021-08-09 21:55:38+00:00): Ok, a number of these seem to arise from a differing of tagging style for physically vs paint/wand separated cycleways. Whereas you've strictly stuck to only physically separated tracks being permitted to be separate ways, I've allowed paint separated lanes to continue as independent ways where it avoids awkward hard joining of ways or gives an indication that cyclists are not just being dumped in the main lane. As far as I'm aware, both of these are perfecly viable and permitted tagging schemes and I was careful to ensure no loss of cycle routability through the junction (indeed, entering/exiting the lane between the wands on the north eastern side is particularly trecherous, so the open access there is somewhat moot).

To address the particular points:

- See above paragraph. There was still a construction area at that location on Tues that appears to have been removed in the revert, was this gone?

- See top paragraph

- Ditto, with comment about wands

- This comes down to when you allow road ways to be separated to allow clearer indication of routing through complex junctions (and this one is a mess... :/); it's for sure one expanse of tarmac but presently the northbound road route is rather awkward through that section. Again like with cycle lanes, I've allowed adjacent turn lanes to be independent where necessary, whereas you enforce only physically separate.

- Whilst there is no island here yet, there is sufficient separation of the counterflowing lanes that I felt it was clearer on the map to show these independently, rather than merge and fork multiple times since the overall road width is the same as where is it mapped separately further east

- Correct, that shouldn't have been removed

- See three points up

Re speed limits, I would expect 20mph. The roads to the south and west are definitely 20mph as they're Islington roads. The surrounding TfL roads (north and east) are tagged as 20 mph and that's what I'd expect but I have no direct confirmation of that. Given that the whole roundabout itself is TfL owned, I would expect it to follow that it'd be 20.

I'm happy this has improved the mapping here, but a bit of a heads up prior to just reverting it all would have been nice, as is commonly recommended where it's not clear vandalism, that's all :)
kyy0602 (2022-01-19 02:33:28+00:00): Hi there. Can you please elaborate on the fixme tag?
Jarek 🚲 (2022-01-19 02:41:52+00:00): No problem! ... but this was 5 months ago so I don't remember adding a fixme. I went through all the ways and relations touched by this changeset and I don't see a fixme on any of them - I might have missed it. Which way or relation were you asking about?
kyy0602 (2022-01-19 02:51:17+00:00): oops forgot to include that. The fixme tag was for relation 10664523 GO LW Union to Hamilton GO.
Jarek 🚲 (2022-01-19 02:59:55+00:00): Oh sorry my bad! That must have been a work-in-progress note to myself to route it via the slow tracks through Toronto since it makes all stops and gets overtaken - I must have missed removing it when uploading.

I can remove the fixme tag, or if you're working on it now, feel free to remove it along with your changes.
kyy0602 (2022-01-19 03:11:57+00:00): I see. No worries! It looks fine for me as well. Just a bit confused when I first saw the iD prompt.
Hanan Tikveša (2021-08-08 06:27:21+00:00): Hi.
Why did you edit in England and then in Australia to surround so many countries?
Please don't do that anymore.
SekeRob (2021-08-08 11:51:16+00:00): And then save when there's an error warning to include. "warnings:disconnected_way:highway". Please fix!
Dolf Andringa (2021-08-09 02:26:15+00:00): What did you do? You have edited half the world in one edit and destroyed the hard work of many people.
az09 (2022-01-17 10:44:01+00:00): здравствуйте.
откуда взялись кавычки? и особенно ёлочкой
Кремлёвский штурман (2022-01-17 10:50:44+00:00): Здравствуйте! Учите русский язык! Названия газет в русском языке пишутся в кавычках. Что елочкой, что топориком, вообще «елочка» это печатная версия, а запятые —письменная. На всех картах употребляются только печатные кавычки.
az09 (2022-01-17 12:29:42+00:00): Тогда поменяйте пожалуйста еще всем POI и домам их addr:street на этот, с кавычками.
Создаём лы мы (все вместе) печатную карту или же базу данных - оставим за скобками.
Кремлёвский штурман (2022-01-18 04:28:34+00:00): Хорошо, будет время заменю!