piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
kubahahaha (2022-01-26 23:06:02+00:00): @szalona_entropia, ale kilka lat temu sam obniżałeś do tertiary inny odcinek tej drogi, zobacz np. tutaj wersję 2:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/503112375/history
nie chcę obniżać wszystkiego, to nie jest też jakaś rewolucyjna zmiana - po prostu jest już droga (S19) i nie ma powodu trzymać obok starej. Tak jest w całym kraju.
szalona_entropia (2022-01-28 14:30:37+00:00): Moje podejście ewoluuje i skłaniam się do tego, żeby stare przebiegi DK zastąpione nowymi S pozostawiać jako secondary (może z wyjątkiem sytuacji, gdzie S została wybudowana dokładnie w starym śladzie). I wcale też tak nie jest z tym tertiary w całym kraju (ale nie będę podawał przykładów, bo pójdziesz tam i też obniżysz :D)
StijnVtje (2022-03-06 09:14:24+00:00): This road is concrete, not paved
Dodko (2022-01-18 21:07:00+00:00): Ak je na tabuli nápis v angličtine tak sa zapisuje takto
name:en=Helicopter crash
Ak je tam iba slovenský nápis, tak nerobíme preklady.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Key:name
user_5359 (2022-01-18 08:40:31+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Short question about your entry: You have entered two key with a hashtag. Is this really description of the object (what is the meaning?) or "only" a label for your action?
Happycitystore (2022-01-20 19:58:03+00:00): Happycitystore
Pieter Vander Vennet (2022-02-02 14:55:56+00:00): Hi,

I deleted the drinking water point, as it was already mapped.

Please make sure no duplicate points are added.

If you want to, you can also and easily add this kind of POI with https://mapcomplete.osm.be/nature
user_5359 (2022-01-18 08:38:33+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Short question about your entry: You have entered an key with a hashtag. Is this really description of the object (what is the meaning?) or "only" a label for your action? I delete this key.
Please look also onhttps://www.osm.org/way/1021988028. This way have any tag.
eggie (2022-01-17 22:11:44+00:00): Dag Joost.. Je vraagt feedback.. Het komt meer met de werkelijkheid overeen dan ervoor. 
Gr eggie
eggie (2022-01-17 22:13:16+00:00): Het bos komt wel zichzelf tegen. dat geeft een foutmelding. Dat gras in het midden zou eigenlijk in een mp moeten.. Bos outer het gras inner.
Joost4000 (2022-01-17 22:37:08+00:00): Dus op deze manier klopt het?
eggie (2022-01-17 22:42:18+00:00): De standaardkaart pikt het wel..maar dat komt omdat er een lege inner rond het eiland ligt.. anders zou je het eilandje niet meer zien... Wat je daar binnen doet maakt dan voor de rendering kennelijk niet uit.
Het bos zou eigenlijk één outer moeten worden en het gras ligt er dan als inner in.
Zal even een wikipagina opzoeken die dat uitlegt.
eggie (2022-01-17 22:44:10+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Multipolygon_Examples
eggie (2022-01-17 22:47:08+00:00): Hier een voorbeeld waar het water als inner ligt in de outer bos. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.74885/4.77946
eggie (2022-01-17 22:49:57+00:00): Yep.. nu klopt het.. Je hebt het goed gedaan.
Mapse
eggie
Joost4000 (2022-01-17 22:52:24+00:00): Thanks! Dan was de aanpassing zonet nog niet goed doorgekomen denk ik!
Joost
eggie (2022-01-17 22:54:48+00:00): Klopt ik zag het pas toen ik opnieuw het gebied selecteerde.
Patr1k_P (2022-01-18 15:35:21+00:00): zdravim, playground je oznacenie pre detske ihrisko...tam by skor pasovalo toto 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:leisure%3Dfitness_station

...a taktiez tam nepatri name, je to vyjadrene znackou
SekeRob repair (2025-07-02 15:21:25+00:00): Hi Afanasovich

Checked you're still mapping to be sure to not wake you up from OSM retirement as this is rather late, 3 years after, but stumbled on a typo for gore_chevron. which you misspelled as gore_shevron. Also this tag is on multipolygons but no feature tag was added, so marked them all as area:highway=traffic_island, + traffic_island=painted which they appear all to be.

Let me know it this is a problem and I'll reverse

cheers
philippec (2022-01-17 18:56:18+00:00): Papegem kerk.
Is de naam van de kerk een reden om de aed een halve meter te verplaatsen.
Of stond de aed verkeerd ?
Jakka (2022-01-17 18:59:15+00:00): AED staat tegen de muur onder de oversteek Dus correct gezet. via niet map beelden gezien ;)
OSMSam123 (2022-01-17 16:32:13+00:00): Added a railway node*
SekeRob (2022-01-26 05:38:10+00:00): Hi,

You mapped your parh on top of S.Filippo on top of other roads. You cant so that, plus you have 7 warnings of 7 crossing you did not connect. The proper way is to tag a historica hiking route relation using exisring roads and sidewalk. If you're done i can set it up at the forest end and then you can finish it, but the path itselff has to be deleted at it caused 340 duplicate edge warnings

Let me know, OGGI

Ciao
SekeRob (2022-01-26 07:59:26+00:00): OK, I have created the walking route for you of 2° tappa which seems to start/end momentarily as Bosco d'Olmi. Click on link below to see the route.  Up to you to do the rest and delete the path which I've moved OFF to the side of the existing roads and track to resolve the duplicate edges, a non-no in mapping.

If you have questions how to continue let me know.

ciao

link to relation: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13722706
abakus_uploader (2022-01-17 23:31:25+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!
J-MUC (2022-01-17 18:43:27+00:00): Changeset comment should have been: Add bench, add bicycle parking
BubbaJuice (2022-01-17 16:44:29+00:00): Sources: Ersi World Imagery; Mapbox Satellite; USGS 3DEP; Bing aerial imagery
Baloo Uriza (2022-01-18 20:34:24+00:00): Close, but I'd make "St" as "Street" instead.  It's best to avoid abbreviations as much as possible.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116262474
Contributor346 (2022-01-19 01:25:34+00:00): Thanks, I have adjusted that.
mariotomo (2022-01-17 21:39:52+00:00): hola 'soymorera', recibas mi bienvenida a OSM. te comento sugiriendo una mejora: pusiste un 'layer=1' que en general quiere decir que un objeto no está en contacto con el suelo. puede ser correcto para techos, no es frecuente con torres de apartamentos. ;-)
eggie (2022-01-17 17:44:14+00:00): Dag  Ad   Je vraagt feedback.. Keurig paadje. Ik heb het doorgetrokken naar de Wilgnhoekweg zodat het ook routeert en het de naam Herdershof gegeven. Wanneer je er ook mag fietsen kan het beter als highway=path getagd kunnen worden.
Een highway=footway heeft een G7 bord vooraan.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-01-17 17:51:00+00:00): De   nieuwe situatie heb ik gelijk ingetekend. Er is geen fietspad verbinding meer met de Burg Dregmansstraat. 
Gr eggie
Andrea Musuruane (2022-01-18 16:15:11+00:00): Ciao Andrea. Quando una feature ha due nomi, come in questo caso https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5115434813, puoi usare il tag name per il nome più comune e il tag alt_name per l'altro. In questo modo, usando un motore di ricerca come nominatim, si riesce a trovare entrambi. Ciao, Andrea
Atal Hikr (2022-01-19 12:05:28+00:00): Ciao Andrea. Ho sistemato e ho applicato il concetto ad altri casi analoghi.
Andrea Musuruane (2022-01-19 12:13:01+00:00): Grazie!
jnighan (2022-03-03 02:57:21+00:00): In response to ScotttM: 
-- The municipal ROWs mapped in the Berkshire Estates neighborhood are owned by the town, according to the Southbury GIS site. These are not zoning easements on private property--they are municipally owned ROWs, even if no road has actually been constructed.
-- If any of these paths do not exist on the ground, they should be deleted. Some of them are clearly visible from Esri World Imagery.
-- The presence of any path or road on OSM does not indicate that it is open to the public. That being said, the town's GIS indicates that these are not on private property.
CurlingMan13 (2023-02-14 03:37:45+00:00): These buildings are not very well aligned...  Ugh.
CurlingMan13 (2023-02-27 18:59:20+00:00): These buildings need to be squared...
Allison P (2023-02-27 20:10:41+00:00): The unreviewed Bing import that got this user blocked for 10 years is bad? Guess you have to revert it...
CurlingMan13 (2023-02-27 21:38:17+00:00): Here's where the mess starts, the imports are obnoxiously big, and some buildings have added additional details added, such as address.  Do you know if there is a way to filter those out?  (I don't use JOSM).
Allison P (2023-02-28 01:06:10+00:00): I believe if you revert all the changesets at once, and just choose to resolve any conflicts toward what's on the server (assume edits made after the import make the building now usable) you can correct most of the damage.

May be good to ask for help in the OSM Slack. There are definitely some experts there. And it's likely that the DWG would work to revert these edits as well.
zluuzki (2023-03-01 16:50:29+00:00): - Which buildings are "not very well aligned"?
- Which buildings are "not squared"?

By the way, "some" buildings which are "not *very* well" aligned and "not squared" (unless veery bad) is not a good reason to delete someone's work. If you think this are good reasons, then sorry, but you can probably delete most HOT edits.
MikeN (2023-03-01 17:26:47+00:00): Please use caution before reverting old imports for 'poor quality'.  In some cases the best imagery at time of import may not have revealed that additional corrections were needed.
Allison P (2023-03-01 18:23:28+00:00): It's not your work. We've been over this: your "manual review" is either a façade or product of incompetence. Everyone knows what you've done here, including the DWG. Continuing to lie about it just makes people mad. I'm happy to give you a list of bad footprints, but at this point it's clear that you have no sense of shame and doing so will just prompt your newest lie about how "that's such a small percentage of the data!". We both know it's coming, so you can save yourself the trouble.

Cut it out with the whataboutism. I don't care what data dumping they're doing in other countries. I don't map there. I do map in the US!

What will you do if someone reverts this changeset, revert it back? You'll just get blocked again. But by all means, keep digging. I'll be working on the list of low-quality buildings; not for you, but for anyone with lingering doubts.
Allison P (2023-03-01 18:24:10+00:00): I generally agree MikeN, but that is not the case here. Other imports of this sort of data by the same user have been proven problematic and even acknowledged as such by the DWG.
Allison P (2023-03-01 18:47:34+00:00): I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say this and its neighbor were visible on all aerial when you made this edit: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022020937

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010562596 is totally off

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010563197 and the rest of the mobile home park don't approximate the shape well at all

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022017715 doesn't exist

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010566126 is a house with attached carport, not a single building, and the garage nearby includes a bit of driveway

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010566407 was definitely visibly gone when you made this changeset, or perhaps never even existed

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010566759 should just be a rectangle, not this mess

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010568913 is a weird fusion of multiple mobile homes

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1010561528, another fusion

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022020663, anti-fusion (splitting?)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022022691, very wrong

I'll do more later, but I'm busy.
zluuzki (2023-03-02 10:51:57+00:00): "We've been over this...Continuing to lie"
Repeating the same wrong information over and over again won't make it true. I know how many stuff I've fixed before uploading.
"Everyone" You're not "everyone", so don't speak for everyone.
"it's clear that you have no sense of shame" No, shame for what? For having a different view than you?
Yes, today, I would have done things differently, but there's nothing to be ashamed of.
"your newest lie about how "that's such a small percentage of the data!"." Now how exactly is this a lie? It's an quite obvious fact.

And you should calm down a bit. Statements like "I'm happy to give you a list.........I'll be working on the list of low-quality buildings; not for you" just contradict themselves.
And to make one thing clear: I absolutely HATE these never-ending discussions. I would much rather use the time to contribute something actually useful, but I can't leave this here like this.
Allison P (2023-03-02 11:20:41+00:00): You started this back up. Could've let it be, and maybe no one would've bothered to revert this import...

The lie came just as predicted. The small portion of your data can apparently be quickly and easily observed. If it's so easily seen by me to be wrong, why not you? Is it because you think two hours is a reasonable amount of time in which to review tens of thousands of buildings?

Pointing out perceived "contradictions" in my statement doesn't accomplish anything. It's sarcasm (perhaps inappropriate). I'm not happy to give you a list. You should have picked up on these and never uploaded them, or at least gone back and fixed them. But I do think it's worthwhile to show the world that you're willing to completely make things up.

The shame should be that the DWG has pretty much said what amounts to "this is an undocumented import" and you're still trying to say it's not. The only people whose take on the matter has any weight have weighed in.

You are free to leave the discussion any time! You just have to stop defending your buildings. I'll be here as long as you're still trying to muddy the waters of whether these changesets should be reverted. You could end the discussion with your "time to contribute something actually useful" by fixing these errors! Or reverting them, in all likelihood.

Your entire claim about the low error rate is defeated by the simple fact that you haven't caught these errors. You haven't gone back and fixed them. You haven't done squat with this data on OSM to really justify adding it in the first place. No building types, no business info, no addresses. You don't even map here much at all!
Allison P (2023-03-02 11:26:21+00:00): That's a serious offer, by the way. I'm probably running close to a block of my own with this commentary. I'd like to close this off beforehand. Perhaps me reverting this now and just shutting up is the best way to end this discussion. Does that work, or will that just add fuel to the fire?
Sandal man (2022-01-19 20:15:25+00:00): Hola compañero mapeador, gracias por tus ediciones de osm, pero has dibujado dos caminos uno encima del otro aquí (carril bici y residencial) Por supuesto que no puedes.
¿Quieres mirarlo?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022026949#map=19/37.19178/-5.77251
saludos Jan
Outdoor_Chris (2022-01-17 20:58:30+00:00): Hallo opendcc,
kannst du den Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65015323 wieder auf V2 zurückbauen? Der von mir neu angelegte Weg führt außen um den Campingplatz (der eingezäunt ist) herum?
opendcc (2022-01-17 21:19:57+00:00): Hallo, wie genau ist das? Da gibt es den Campingplatz (mit Zaun, außen dann der Fußweg rum und dann kommt eine Wiese, oder?
opendcc (2022-01-17 21:23:04+00:00): Ich habe mal den Zaun ergänzt. Auf dem Strandabschnitt hatte ich mal im April eine Rast eingelegt (beileibe kein Badewetter), dann kam so ein Typ auf einem Quad angefahren und wollte 4€ von mir ...
Outdoor_Chris (2022-01-18 21:59:00+00:00): Ja. Der Typ ist leider der Besitzer des Campingplatzes und des Strandbads. :-(
Grundsätzlich passt das, was du eingezeichnet hast. Ich hab den Zaun jetzt mal bis hinten durchgezogen. Außerdem habe ich versucht bei der Einfahrt das Tor einzubauen. Bitte schau mal drüber, ob man das so machen darf (Zaun kreuzt Straße und auf dem Knotenpunkt sitzt eine Durchfahrt.
VG Christian
Baloo Uriza (2022-01-18 20:28:09+00:00): Seeing quite a bit of landuse that could go under greenfield or highway inside this landuse=residential.  Are you sure you didn't mean place=neighborhood?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116264454
Contributor346 (2022-01-19 01:24:38+00:00): Yes it is a neighborhood, I checked how all surrounding neighborhoods are defined, and I matched what I saw.  Should this be "Neighborhood" instead of "Residential Area"?
Baloo Uriza (2022-01-19 01:43:22+00:00): I made a quick edit, how's that look?
Contributor346 (2022-01-19 12:32:40+00:00): Thanks!
ElliottPlack (2022-02-10 03:00:47+00:00): Hey there, thanks for the work updating the new sections of the OEC connector. The Friends and DNR are working on improving OSM to mirror these important projects!

On the data side, the use of both proposed=yes and the description in parentheses is discouraged in favor of the "lifecycle prefix" style of tagging. You may see this elsewhere in the park where a closed trail becomes closed:highway=path. These do not show up in the rendered map but are visible in the data to let mappers know not to add them.

I have not visited the connector in some months, so you likely have better on-the-ground experience here, but if parts of the connector are merely flagged and not walkable other than bushwhacking, I would not add them as paths just yet. Read about the prefix tags here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Also, for the parentheses, check out https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions as those descriptors should be put in descriptions.
mueschel (2022-01-18 10:54:22+00:00): Hi,
something went very here - this changeset created nodes across the whole world. None of them has any common tag.
I'm going to revert this for now - feel free to add the information again after you cleaned up the locations and tags.
francians (2022-01-18 17:49:38+00:00): Buonasera,

ho aggiunto:
amenity=place_of_worship+religion=christian alla chiesa. Se si tratta proprio di una chiesa suggerisco anche di mettere building=church (chapel se cappella oppure shrine se santuario).
Veda:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:amenity%3Dplace_of_worship

Francesco
canfe (2022-01-20 08:26:16+00:00): Ha trasformato un edificio in un landuse che è già sbagliato, poi ha dato il nome al landuse che non si da.
Cosa voleva mappare in realtà??
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116265932
eggie (2022-01-17 23:05:11+00:00): Hier heb ik het originele adres hersteld.
gr eggie
eggie (2022-01-17 23:07:44+00:00): Dit is oke zo.
Die covid tagging kun je beter achterwege laten. Dat wordt weer een hele klus om dat allemaal te verwijderen.
Zie ook dit draadje en de consensus daarover. 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=69154
gr eggie
plennert (2022-01-18 15:27:00+00:00): Wieso wurde dieser Poller gelöscht???
plennert (2022-01-18 15:28:11+00:00): Der wurde nicht umsonst eingetragen. 
Du hast hier viele Änderungen in Singen vorgenommen, teilweise auch die Anmerkungen im note-Tag nicht beachtet.
Bitte diese lesen und ggf. Rückfragen.
Jorisbo (2022-01-22 15:37:50+00:00): Hallo Plennert, danke fur deinen reaktion. Der pollert had gerade neben den highway gestanden und hatte also keinen zweck fur routing. Aber is naturlich nicht falsh. Sie ist wieder zuruck. Grussen Joris
canfe (2022-01-20 08:26:59+00:00): Non si scrive, secondo le regole OSM tutto in maiuscolo
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116266368
eggie (2022-01-17 22:07:09+00:00): Je vraagt feedback.. landuse=residential is een transparant.
Die ligt meestal globaal.   
gr eggie
aceman444 (2022-05-12 21:36:10+00:00): Pridavat wikidata na dialnicne exity ktore sa len nahodou volaju po najblizsej ulici je asi hlupost. Napr. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/33033459
vojtechzaboril (2022-05-13 09:47:41+00:00): Dobrý den,
blbost to určitě je.
Nejspíš to vzniklo omylem.
Opravím to.
V
Shaun das Schaf (2022-01-19 10:45:18+00:00): Hallo BVBboy, willkommen bei OSM!

Bitte mach dich mit den Unterschieden der Tags maxspeed und maxspeed:type vertraut:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:maxspeed
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:maxspeed:type

Letzteres gibt an, woher die Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzung resultiert, die in maxspeed angegeben ist.

Steht dort ein 50er-Schild? Dann wäre maxspeed:type=sign korrekt, so wie es bereits vor deiner Änderung getaggt war.

Gilt dort einfach die standardmäßige innerörtliche Beschränkung auf 50 km/h? Dann wäre maxspeed:type=DE:urban das richtige.

Bitte noch entsprechend korrigieren.
Bei Fragen kannst du dich natürlich gerne melden.

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
eggie (2022-01-17 22:04:11+00:00): Dag Daan.. Je vraagt feedback.. Lijkt me oke zo.

gr eggie
nw520 (2022-01-19 14:21:29+00:00): Hallo SekeRob, du hast die zwei Knoten für einen man_made=survey_point und einen marker=plate zu einem Knoten zusammengeführt. Meiner Auffassung nach müssten das aufgrund der "One feature, one OSM element"-Regel zwei Elemente bleiben. Analog auch die zwei Türen, wobei die untere ein Notausgang ist, die obere aber ein regulärer Durchweg.
SekeRob (2022-01-19 22:27:06+00:00): The change set notes 3 problem were solved, no warnings. If the is a new problem due to my doing i will get notified automatically in my error reports i review daily.

Cheers
nw520 (2022-01-20 12:16:25+00:00): Same text as above, now in English:

Hi SekeRob, you merged two nodes: one of a man_made=survey_point and one of a marker=plate. My understanding is that these should remain two nodes due to the "one feature, one OSM element" rule. Similary, IMO the two doors should be separate nodes, since the lower one is an emergency exit and the upper one a regular passageway. Semicolon-delimited enumerations are unordered so your modelling is currently verbose.
nw520 (2022-01-20 12:17:12+00:00): * "Verbose" should read "ambiguous".
plennert (2022-01-18 15:34:13+00:00): WArum hast du dieses Note gelöscht? Bitte mache dies rückgängig, da flasch.

Für solche Details sind die verwendeten Bilder von Bing ungeeignet. Die Daten wurden vor Ort erhoben. Warst Du vor Ort?
Wulf4096 (2022-07-17 07:19:20+00:00): Hallo,
wie kommst du darauf, dass man hier mit dem Rad nicht über die Brücke darf?
Siehe auch https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/83785075
ma-rt-in (2022-07-31 13:07:01+00:00): War vor Ort und die Situation entsprach, das der Radfahrer keine Möglichkeit hat legal vom Radweg wieder auf die Brücke zu wechseln.
vg
Wulf4096 (2022-07-31 16:33:22+00:00): Die beschilderten Radwege die man dort kurz vor der Brücke sehen kann, führen nicht zur Brücke hin, sondern in das Nebenstraßennetz bzw. erstmal in eine Grünanlage. Das alles hat aber nichts mit der Brücke zu tun.

Damit aus einem Blauschild auch eine Radwegbenutzungspflicht bzw. ein (bedingtes) Radfahrverbot wird, braucht es einen Radweg, der max. (ca.) 5m neben der Fahrbahn verläuft und an den gleichen Vorfahrtsregeln teilnimmt. Das ist hier ganz klar nicht der Fall.

Wenn der Radweg nicht dahin führt wo man hin möchte (z.B.: über die Brücke) braucht man ihn auch nicht zu nutzen, sondern dann darf ab einer geeigneten Stelle die Fahrbahn nutzen. Das ist in diesem Fall die Kreuzung Schloßstraße (im Norden) bzw. Jüthornstraße (im Süden).
pyram (2022-01-29 19:42:58+00:00): Hallo gs3§zba,
bist Du dir da sicher, was Du da tust? Ich denke nicht, dass ein  Gebetsraum zu einer "Moschee" umtaggt werden sollte. Jedenfalls ist das von außen gesehen niemals ein "Moscheegebäude".
Rendering ist auch ein seehr schwaches Argument.