piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
segubi (2024-10-28 12:02:18+00:00): Du hast hier die Routenführung des Werretalradwegs in Hildburghausen (die anderen Stellen habe ich mir nicht genau angesehen) geändert, so wie sie auch heute im Internet präsentiert werden - aber ist sie tatsächlich auch so ausgeschildert? Die Quellen im Netz sind weder urheberrechtlich ganz sicher, noch zuverlässig - die Betreiber aktualisieren oft geänderte Routenführungen nicht im Netz. Freigeist20003 hat die alte Variante nun wieder eingebaut (Changeset 153568293). Ich stolpere nur darüber, weil ich die Relation sortieren wollte - aber die Daten sind mehrdeutig.
TrunkTraveler (2023-06-07 18:58:24+00:00): Correction: Source used was Maxar Premium Imagery.
puma515 (2021-12-22 16:31:22+00:00): Moin, kleiner Tipp für zukünftiges Mappen wen was Abgerissen wurde.

Solche Objekte nicht Komplett löschen sondern auf razed ändern. 

Passende Wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:razed:

Schön Gruß 
puma515
puma515 (2021-12-22 16:37:21+00:00): razed:building
Link vom ersten kommentar geht nicht: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:razed:
eggie (2021-12-20 21:37:29+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
mccabejd (2021-12-21 21:00:15+00:00): Please delete the WVFD Fire District.  I should not have added it to the map.
Frans S (2021-12-21 12:58:07+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115181953
Ducky17 (2021-12-21 00:08:41+00:00): Correction: Aligned highways near Благовещенская улица to fit imagery in the area. #adt
Source used was Maxar Premium Imagery
karson_ (2021-12-21 17:02:04+00:00): Why did you change this pond from water=pond and convert it into golf=water_hazard? Both tags can coexist. Also, there is no golf course here, so the golf=water_hazard_tag is inappropriate.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115182620
flohoff (2021-12-22 12:06:37+00:00): Moin,
ich halte das zerschneiden nicht per se für falsch. Aber dann müssen auf allen die Namen runter. Denn es gibt ja nur den einen Teutoburger Wald, man findet den in der OSM Suche aber gerade "zig mal" - und das ist ja falsch.

Flo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115182848
DeFra85 (2021-12-22 12:37:03+00:00): Dann sollten wir das mal in der OWL-Liste besprechen oder gab's da schonmal eine Diskussion drüber?
Denn die vielen Benennungen waren ja schon vorher da.

Die Kleinstflächen zu benennen finde ich auch unsinnig. Bei größeren, zusammenhängenden Flächen fände ich es schon sinnvoll.

Oder kann man die einzelnen Flächen in die Region-Relation "Teutoburger Wald" aufnehmen und dann steht da der Name auf den einzelnen Flächen?
rskedgell (2021-12-21 05:41:56+00:00): What do you mean "not fixed"? If the objects still exist, as seems likely, please don't delete them from OSM.
Zhytomyr (2021-12-21 13:12:39+00:00): I've retraced them in another JOSM layer, but in the moment won't upload due to conflicts.
rskedgell (2021-12-21 14:24:17+00:00): No problem. Many thanks.
Frans S (2021-12-21 12:55:31+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
See my comments on a previous changeset.
Square each rectangular building with the Q key !!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115183168
ezekielf (2021-12-23 03:47:03+00:00): Thanks for updating the map here.  I feel like there must be a good story behind this "sad experience".  What happened!?
TomPar (2021-12-23 04:08:51+00:00): Sorry about what sounds like a bad experience.  I did a bit of investigation.  These tracks were part of a TIGER roads import.  Looking at a 1960 USGS quad, it looks like this is the old route for the AT.  However, it's right close to some other tracks that show in lidar data so I think just bad or redundant data.  I deleted out:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115278986
James Maughan (2021-12-24 22:05:40+00:00): Well, I'm exaggerating a bit. I thru hiked the AT this spring/summer and followed the older AT routes on occasion just to amuse myself since I enjoy the mapping and exploring. It was clear in this case (as well as many others) there's no trail there. But I bushwhack it anyway just for completeness and try to correct it later.
Frans S (2021-12-21 12:53:15+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared.They are mostly strickt rectangular


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115183339
chris66 (2023-02-18 09:45:00+00:00): addr:unit ?

Ist das ne Erfindung von Dir? :-)

Grüße
Mammi71 (2023-02-18 16:55:46+00:00): Nein, hab ich aus dem Wiki. Hatte wir im alten Forum auch mal diskutiert. Die Häuser haben "Hausnummern", die aber nur eine interne Nummerierung des Tropical Island sind. Nicht zu verwechseln mit der postalischen Hausnummer, die ist hier für alle gleich.
eggie (2021-12-21 10:25:59+00:00): Beste bb

Het was al goed getagd hier.. Het hoeft dus niet nog een keer op het gebouw. 
In principe gebruiken we de adresnode.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-12-21 10:28:52+00:00): Deze tags had ik gisteren al op de adresnode bijgetagd https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=115182602
Wellicht rendert lifeguard nog niet. Zet dan alle tagging evt op het gebouw, maar verwijder dan de info van de adresnode. Niet dubbel gaan mappen.
MVG
eggie
MxxCon (2021-12-21 07:20:00+00:00): Hello.
From what I understand you are trying to do in this other similar edits, is to give names to sidewalks and crosswalks.
The way you are doing it is not a commonly accepted way of handing that. As documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalks there are https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:associatedStreet and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Relation:street ways of doing it. And otherwise, such wide-scale changes should really be discussed and accepted by the local mapping community.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115184045
JayMontana36 (2021-12-26 15:54:04+00:00): Alright, noted; I'll defer making such edits for now but maybe refine some of the already made edits to also utilize the tags mentioned in the links, although there is a section in the first link stating "this method provides for nicely narrated directions from routing programs" which was actually the exact thought that had me begin adding name tags to various foot paths for pedestrian routing and whatnot in the first place.
Rus Ionut (2023-03-09 10:53:05+00:00): Salut,

Ai pus access=no pe way 4274826. Probabil ca in 2021 era in lucru dar acum se poate circula asa ca am modificat accesul.
PLima785 (2021-12-21 13:55:31+00:00): Boa tarde, obrigado pelas suas contribuições, mas por favor use as imagens mais recentes para a sua localidade mais info :

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Uso_de_Imagens#Imagens_sat.C3.A9lite_em_Portugal

Ajuda no telegram:
@OSMPortugal

Cumprimentos,
Pedro Lima
user_5359 (2022-01-05 19:33:18+00:00): Hello! What is the meaning of the key MN_to_trunk?
rjgambrel (2022-01-05 22:01:28+00:00): This is part of a highway classification project in the U.S. State of Minnesota. Please look at OSM wiki for Key:MN_to_trunk. It is also explained in more detail at the Minnesota/Minnesota Highway Classification page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Minnesota/Minnesota_highway_classification and at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rjgambrel/Trunk_highway_overpass_turbo_mashup. If you have any further questions you can message me or add question here.
user_5359 (2022-01-06 06:20:37+00:00): I can't see any discussion about the name of the keys on the fly. If, for example, Iowa also wanted to use the system, a new set of keys should not be developed and documented again.
I propose (for discussion)
class:road:US-MN:type (with the values to_trunk, metro_spoke, metro, city_tier, metro_edge)
class:road:US-MN:ref

Using relations would generally make more sense here, but of course also has a higher complexity.
rjgambrel (2022-01-06 17:22:41+00:00): I thank you for your interest. I forgot to send you a link that explains even better. Please look at this page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Minnesota/Minnesota_highway_classification/Helper_keys  As that page explains whether these keys are truly useful (some have proven to be, others not yet) and how long we will be using them is to-be-determined. They may just be used for the duration of our project (perhaps a year?) The other thing you will notice is some of the usage is subjective. And some of the keys (like MN_metro_edge, MN_metro_spoke and MN_to_trunk) are very sparsely used). Another mapper could choose different segments to map, for example and still be "correct" for the purpose of the project. I did worry as I came up with newer ones whether I was using well designed name spaces, but I focused instead on short-term utility. If any other state (or country) wants to use this type of approach I would gladly co-operate to make improvements. The link above has renderings (overpass turbo) showing what roads & boundaries have been tagged. That will give you a better idea about what they are trying to do. Thank you for your comments, and keep them coming!
Frans S (2021-12-21 12:51:49+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115184241
eggie (2021-12-21 06:40:30+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback.. Elk begin is moeilijk. 
Geef om te beginnen concreet aan wat je hebt gedaan. Gouda en regio zegt helemaal niets. 
Het gebied van je edit is veel en veel te groot. Schuiven met de kaart met editor iD levert schade op aan de kaart. Dat kun je hier goed zie n.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=115184368

De Anna van Meertenstraat en fietspad loopt nu dwars door de bebouwing van Gouda.
Wat bedoel je met landuse=construction Van Loon?
area=yes parkeerplaats voor treinen  hoort zo niet in OSM thuis.
Alle gebouwen zijn directe import vanuit het Kadaster en als zodanig precies ingemeten. Dus niet naar de daken kijken. Dat is niet het maaiveld waar de gebouwen echt staan. 
Beperk je in het aantal wijzigingen in één changeset. Dat is corrigeren makkelijker. Nu wordt dat een hele klus.
Dus beter iets veranderen.. concreet commentaar en dan uploaden. Uit de editmodus. Dan naar het volgende project.
Ik stel voor deze changeset in zijn geheel terug te draaien. 

MVG
eggie



MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-12-21 06:45:53+00:00): Aanvulling.. Bedrijven in OSM Nederland worden bijgetagd op de adresnodes. Dus niet op de gebouwomtrek. Ook de aard van het bedrijf hoort erbij. Bv office=? meestal company. 

Mapse.. Begin bv eerst met een bedrijf om er in te komen.

area=yes niet op zichzelf gebruiken. Dat hoort gebruikt te worden in een comvibatie met andere tags.
Dus geen vlakken overal met area=yes en een description.
Lees je goed in svp.
Mapse
eggie
eggie (2021-12-21 06:50:34+00:00): reverted by changeset #115192790
De schade is daarmee hersteld. 
Mocht je nog vragen hebben stel ze gerust
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-12-21 06:58:06+00:00): Even Swagelok Nederland BV  toegevoegd aan de adresnode met extra info als website en phone.. office=company.
Wellicht heb je hier iets aan als voorbeeld.

Al die bedrijven op het bedrijven terrein zullen dus naar de adresnode moeten. Even voor de uitdaging.


Succes,
eggie
mariotomo (2021-12-21 14:16:54+00:00): please do not confuse the name of a building with the name of an enterprise inside that building.  did your enterprise move again?  or is this a new office?  
please validate your intentions against the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tourism_tag_overview
mcliquid (2024-02-18 09:15:38+00:00): Hallo, da du die Kratkystraße zuletzt bearbeitet hast, kannst du etwas mit dieser Notiz anfangen? https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4116168

Danke dir!
thopf (2024-02-18 10:46:47+00:00): Hallo! Nein. Wenn man das neueste Luftbild und sich die Situation vor Ort ansieht, sieht man, dass die Straße weitgehend richtig gemapped ist. Tatsächlich macht die Fahrbahn dort einen kleinen Schwenker nach Norden, während auf der Südseite sich eine kleine Grasfläche mit ein paar Bäumen befindet. Den Hinweis auf eine gelöschte Weitenangabe kann ich nicht nachvollziehen, es gab nämlich dort nie ein Tagging mit einer Weitenangabe. Wenn es das ist, könnte man in nächster Zeit vor Ort Fotos machen und die Fahrbahnbreite zusätzlich mappen; die ändert sich mit dem Schwenker.  LG.
thopf (2024-02-18 11:11:51+00:00): Jetzt weiß ich, was mit "gelöschter Weite" gemeint sein könnte: Der mittlerweile gelöschte User "r3b3x" hat in dem Bereich eine Fußgängerzone als Fläche gemapped. Das ist dort aber nicht zutreffend. Die Straße dort ist eine allgemein befahrbare Zufahrtsstraße, erst weiter östlich, beim Poller, wird sie zur Fußgängerstraße (mit entsprechendem Verkehrszeichen). Auch ist die gemappte Fläche neben der Fahrbahn, dort großteils keine Straßenfläche, sondern Grasfläche/Blumenbeete/Bäume. Erst daneben befinden sich die richtig gemappten Gehsteige (die ich nicht als flächenhafte Fußgängerzonen bezeichnen würde). Ich habe deswegen diese area=yes, highway=pedestrian dort wieder gelöscht. Man kann ja dort demnächst noch die Grasflächen/Blumenbeete/Bäume, zwecks weniger Missinterpretationen, mappen.
mcliquid (2024-02-18 11:42:59+00:00): Vielen Dank für die ausführliche Auskunft, dann liegt der Ursprung der Notiz in der Vergangenheit. Weil ich eh dort war hab ich das Micromapping der Grasflächen ergänzt :)

Schönen Sonntag dir!
Allison P (2021-12-20 23:26:58+00:00): This is almost certainly a residential stub that hasn't been named yet.
Mappingbananas (2021-12-22 16:55:51+00:00): Ok. Will fix.
archpdx (2021-12-21 02:29:36+00:00): Thanks for adding this path! I know that wooded trails like these are difficult to map, so I highly recommend tracing from the Strava heatmap using this tool:
https://github.com/zekefarwell/josm-strava-heatmap

I would follow the instructions for iD, which is the editor you're using. If you have any questions feel free to respond.
mariotomo (2021-12-21 14:12:46+00:00): hola. is this node real? also: the reason for adding a comment to a changeset is to explain what you changed, not to advertise your (however interesting) services.  please follow the guidelines, and be welcome to find other ways to improve OSM.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Leo Slager (2021-12-20 23:26:17+00:00): bushalte Jaromirgaarde toegevoegd.
bron: dienstregeling miv 12-12-2021
syntex (2021-12-21 11:50:13+00:00): WOW, nawet numery miejsc parkingowych dodałeś, szacunek
Grzegorz_Kujawa (2021-12-21 12:34:47+00:00): Dziękuję. Nauczyłem się od Ciebie, kiedy pierwszy raz zobaczyłem parking przy CH Ursynów. Szkoda jedynie, że miejsca dla niepełnosprawnych nie renderują sie inaczej.
nmombo12 (2021-12-21 13:33:34+00:00): Hello John, thanks for your contribution. Please check out this reference guide for the fairway-green intersection. The fairway should share nodes with the green and not overlap.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls
I flagged way 1013909218 on osmcha if a visualization helps.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115185234
Glassman (2021-12-28 20:33:58+00:00): Did you add the farm building because of the google image of the b2 plane? https://www.google.com/maps/place/39%C2%B001'18.5%22N+93%C2%B035'40.5%22W/@39.021748,-93.5948294,64m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0xd87af7588b9c362e!8m2!3d39.0218056!4d-93.5945833
Arlo James Barnes (2021-12-28 23:37:00+00:00): Sure. I didn't know that's where it was from at the time though, my friend just sent me a screenshot and coords and I tried to see if it was on any of the imagery iD had for the area. It wasn't of course, but I took the opportunity to do a minimal amount of mapping in the area.
TWHB (2021-12-26 17:52:19+00:00): Why did you delete the Kunming Pool (Doumen Reservoir)
ロングアイランド (2021-12-28 12:51:18+00:00): There are some issues and i would recover it soon
Владимир К (2022-02-18 07:36:59+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/119913634 
ошибочно здесь поменяли статус
Frans S (2021-12-21 12:44:10+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
In general your mappings are precise exept on the buildings with en extention
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115186946
MxxCon (2021-12-21 07:26:09+00:00): Hello.
When mapping tennis courts, it's best to drawn to the actual marked tennis court itself, and less so to the surrounding fence. While the way you mapped it is not wrong, it's less accurate. 👍
You can read more about this here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dtennis
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115186969
bamnet (2021-12-22 04:19:03+00:00): I was confused by that.  Looking at the wiki and talk page, it sounds like the guidance was updated in April to suggest the clearance was acceptable to include since it's a part of the playable surface (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Asport%3Dtennis&type=revision&diff=2141982&oldid=2099108).  Happy to refine if local conventions dictate otherwise.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115186969
MxxCon (2021-12-22 04:30:34+00:00): As I mentioned, the way you mapped is not outright wrong. 🙂
However, the difference is that tennis court sizes are fixed and standard, while fenced area around it can be whatever size there is available. Also mapping specifically to the marked area would allow you to map multi-court situations more accurately, for example like here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/564451752 👍
mueschel (2021-12-22 14:25:57+00:00): Hi,
this way can be removed? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1013928481
Jeff Underwood (2021-12-22 17:40:52+00:00): Oh totally, just cleaned it up. Sorry about that. 

I had some NE ways in JOSM to help with the digitization and missed cleaning up one of them.
zstadler (2022-06-23 07:29:46+00:00): In https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120591354
user BodhidharmaI placed several questions in the fixme tag for the relation "1949 Israeli–Syrian DMZ" 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13574166 :

1. What does "disputed_by" represent here (at the boundary of a DMZ)?
2. Does it mean DMZ itself is not recognized by these countries?
3. In which case, why IL?
4. Or does it mean the boundary is disputed (i.e. the disputing countries believe it should be elsewhere)?

I believe these question belong here and not in the fixme tag.
zstadler (2022-06-23 10:14:39+00:00): May I add that https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13574166 is a strange disputed boundary. I believe a boundary cannot be "disputed" when it is not "claimed_by" any country. 

Specifically, Syria is not claiming this boundary. The Syrian claims were apparently mapped by https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13574167
BodhidharmaI (2022-06-23 13:14:23+00:00): @Jeff Underwood. Additionally, you mentioned a “public domain reference map” in your original edit when you added this boundary. Can you explicitly provide a reference to this source?
zstadler (2022-06-23 14:21:49+00:00): @BodhidharmaI see the source tag for this changeset -
https://www.loc.gov/item/92682948/
Jeff Underwood (2022-06-23 16:52:04+00:00): Hello zstadler and BodhidharmaI

Thanks for reaching out. I believe I’ve covered most of what you asked below. Let me know if you still have more questions. Disputed borders are complicated to map and tricky to visualize using typical OSM tooling unfortunately.

To preface, this is the tagging schema in general. For rendering purposes, consider a claimed_by or recognized_by tag to mean this is a solid border for those viewpoints, while a disputed_by tag means this border should not render at all for those viewpoints. Lastly, for the remaining viewpoints that are not specifically tagged one way or the other, a dashed line showing that this border is in dispute will be shown.  For the DMZ, none of the main parties currently claim it as their border, but it is one possible border with some historical precedent. So for rendering here, the intent is for uninvolved viewpoints to see it as a dashed line showing it as one of several possible borders. Since none of the main disputants claim this particular line, it is only marked with disputed_by tags in order to hide it for them as generally claimants should only see the one “correct” border for their viewpoint. 


Here are direct answers to your questions as well BodhidharmaI

1. It means this is not considered a correct or possible border by the marked countries. The tag itself means do not render for those iso codes
2. Yes, this is not considered a valid border by the marked countries
3. Israel does not recognize this as a legitimate border
4. Yes, the countries marked believe the borders lie elsewhere and their viewpoints should be covered by other claims in the area.