piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
insl (2021-09-04 10:06:11+00:00): respektive, ist das das Feld 'relations'? Oder macht man das (eigentlich) immer beim speichern?
SimonPoole (2021-09-04 10:26:39+00:00): also wegen quellenangaben, mach man normalerweise in dem man ein "source" Feld im changeset ausfüllt.

Aber leider dürfen Drittquellen ohne Erlaubnis nicht als Quelle für OSM verwendet werden (wird einem auch bei der Anmeldung gesagt). Du kannst ja bei evpass mal um eine explizite Erlaubnis nachfragen (google verbietet die Verwendung als Quelle für andere Karten, da muss man sich also nicht bemühen).
insl (2021-09-05 08:49:12+00:00): ok, gelernt. Ich dachte naiverweise wie praktisch, wenn man solche Stationen auch auf OSM finden könnte. Aber klar, einfach abkopieren wäre wohl zu einfach.
insl (2021-09-05 08:55:42+00:00): aha, den Änderungsstatz Kommentar mit einem Quellen Feld ergänzen. (Oder, weil illegal, meine Eintragungen löschen, denn die evpass Karte ist ja Google Derivat)
SimonPoole (2021-09-05 09:20:10+00:00): Wie gesagt, ich würde bevor du zu irgendwelchen drastischen Massnahmen greifst, mal zuerst bei evpass die Situation erklären und anfragen ob sie uns die Daten zur Verfügung stellen können.
insl (2021-09-05 09:39:48+00:00): yo, habe denen grad geschrieben. Wäre ja fein, wenn man die auf z.B. OsMand oder PureMaps finden könnte ;)
Dimacn (2021-09-03 17:33:15+00:00): Адресная информация должна быть на здании (полигон здания). На точке внутри здания адресная информация необязательна. Если одна организация занимает всё здание, то её также можно прописать на полигоне здания. Пожалуйста исправьте.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:49:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
wkdgs (2021-09-03 15:47:29+00:00): Hi,

bei deiner Änderung ist mir aufgefallen, dass der Schlüssel "information" nicht ganz korrekt verwendet wurde.

Die Tags in OSM sind leider überhaupt nicht intuitiv, weswegen man am besten immer kurz im Wiki nachschaut, ob man den richtigen Schlüssel verwendet.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:information

Für die Angabe "Benutzung auf eigene Gefahr" eigent sich, glaube ich, der Schlüssel "description" ganz  gut. Das habe ich eben so angepasst.

LG
winkeldings
user_13975366 (2021-09-03 21:38:11+00:00): OK!
Vielen Dank für die Infos.
dieterdreist (2021-09-27 16:00:09+00:00): Ciao Rinzxc, ho notato che hai aggiunto il tag "amenity=place_of_worship" (luogo di culto) al cimitero acattolico di Roma. Il cimitero non è in tutto un luogo di culto, al meno non lo è nel senso del tag place of worship. Ho rimosso il tag.

Saluti e buona mappatura,
Martin
dieterdreist (2021-09-27 16:04:37+00:00): hai anche aggiunto "building=yes" sull'area dell'intero cimitero e rimosso il tag "landuse=cemetery" che significa cimitero. Puoi vedere le tue modifiche qui (ad esempio): https://osmhv.openstreetmap.de/changeset.jsp?id=110683275
Famlam (2021-12-19 15:53:40+00:00): De tag opening_date (op weg 979353274 ) geeft aan wanneer de site gereed gaat zijn (en dus geen constructiesite meer is). Omdat deze is toegevoegd op september 2021 met een datum in 2020, vermoed ik dat je ofwel de key "start_date" bedoelt (en iets anders dan landuse=construction, ofwel een datum in de toekomst :) )

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_date
Walter-NL (2021-12-19 20:44:44+00:00): Terechte conclusie Famlam. Ik ben lange tijd niet op de locatie geweest en ken de actuele situatie nu niet, maar daarvan ga ik me zsm op de hoogte stellen. Voorlopig is de "grammaticale" fout hersteld door de datum aan te passen. Niet de schoonheisprijs :-)
Famlam (2021-12-19 21:10:15+00:00): Dankjewel! Ach, klein foutje ;). Op basis van de recentste satellietfoto's (satellietdataportaal.nl) gok ik dat het (bijna) voltooid is
Falsernet (2021-10-06 19:34:47+00:00): It's best practice to describe the changes you make in the changeset comment. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:40:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
x58 (2021-09-03 15:16:00+00:00): fixed Lidle parking road. (Forgot changeset comment).
x58 (2021-09-03 15:16:22+00:00): Lidl,
ugh.
Hanan Tikveša (2021-09-04 13:48:48+00:00): Hi.
i added some of the buildings around the buildings you added in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110717402
if you want me to add more buildings around this place, let me know.
tuttiton (2021-10-23 15:31:53+00:00): please revert fictional edits
bxl-forever (2021-09-03 17:30:40+00:00): Hello,
This changeset breaks a few dozen bus routes: I tried to fix the most urgent damage, see changesets 110685945, 110686091, 110686229, 110686241, and 110687140.  Plus the route itself had a problem: 110687529
Thierry1030 (2021-09-03 18:59:12+00:00): Hello,
I asked in the OSM Belgium chat group (https://riot.im/app/#/room/#osmbe:matrix.org) if a cycle route only based on a brochure should be mapped in OSM and Joost Schouppe confirms that a large majority says no, me included.
Can can you please remove this cycle route?
Thank you in advance.
If you still have questions/issues you can always join the chat room and post them there. We will be happy to help you!
Best regards.
Thierry
JhowieNitnek (2021-09-03 20:41:35+00:00): Hi Thierry, 
I will remove it. Thanks for letting me know.
Jhowie
Carto_Ferret (2021-09-03 15:48:10+00:00): Source: ESRI World Imagery, Mapillary
eserte (2021-10-30 14:59:12+00:00): In diesem Changeset wurden fälschlicherweise einige Radspuren in der Hauptstraße (Rummelsburg, am Ostkreuz) entfernt. Kannst du das wieder korrigieren?
mottiger (2021-10-11 14:50:21+00:00): thank you very much for your contribution to this project. In maproulette you can choose "I fixed it!" so that the task is considered as done.
thanks
user_5359 (2021-09-06 08:56:27+00:00): Hello! Please use highway instead of Road!
RicoElectrico (2022-03-04 23:29:02+00:00): Cześć, ta pralnia jeszcze istnieje? Ja widziałem tu Kebab Drwal, ale może przeoczyłem ją.
piotr_9 (2022-03-05 15:35:53+00:00): Nie byłem z pół roku. Jesli zlikwidowano, to straciłem środki na karcie lojalnościowej. 
Wydaje mi się że kebab powstał w narożniku południowo-wchodnim, zaś pralnia miała wejście od strony zachodniej.
RicoElectrico (2022-03-23 12:08:34+00:00): Muszę Cię zmartwić - byłem tam w zeszłym tygodniu pod wieczór i żadnej pralni nie widziałem. Obszedłem cały budynek.
syntex (2021-09-06 16:25:15+00:00): Trochę ci się tutaj droga przesunęła https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=110685963
Poprawiłem
Rogoyski (2021-09-11 22:51:33+00:00): Dziękuję.
adas (2025-02-17 12:46:07+00:00): A czy ten ciąg nowej linii kolejowej nie jest juz przez przypadek poza jakimikolwiek planami? Powinien zostać?
Jurygr (2025-02-17 16:16:30+00:00): Cześć!
Moje zmiany dotyczyły jedynie przywrócenia przeciągniętego węzła ('dragged node') do jego pierwotnego stanu. Nie opierałem się na dodatkowych zasobach danych. W związku z tym nie mogę potwierdzić trafności istniejących zmian.
PT-53 (2021-09-04 05:45:42+00:00): Hallo sbelemey,
hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9060685006/history
ist keine Kreuzung.
Dieser Weg
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/200516336/history
führt nicht über diese Straße
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/890752594/history
sondern endet dort.
Bitte korrigieren.
Grüße
sbelemey (2021-09-16 14:54:49+00:00): Hi!
thank you for your feedback.
I rechecked the satellite imagery and corrected it.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?changeset=110686621#map=20/48.29685/9.71830
Best regards!
PT-53 (2021-09-16 15:40:16+00:00): Hallo sbelemey, 
dieser Weg
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/200516336/history#map=17/48.29516/9.71687
endet an dieser Straße
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/890752594/history
und nicht vorher und nicht nachher !
Grüße
sbelemey (2021-09-17 08:17:15+00:00): Hi!
thank you for your feedback. I connected track road to service road. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?way=200516336#map=19/48.29712/9.71754
Best regards!
Kaziu Kisiel (2021-09-03 16:47:10+00:00): Podczas ostatniego przejazdu tymi okolicami, przed komentowanym przeze mnie zestawem zmian, w okolicach zachodniego ronda w ciągu budującej się nowej DW801 był prowadzony ruch wahadłowy.
Kovirii (2022-12-19 21:52:40+00:00): Still rehabbing Trail 243?
mamanakis (2022-12-19 22:44:57+00:00): Some. I use these trails a lot. After I get maybe 20-30 GPS tracks I can see some areas where the average is off to the side.
One of these days I plan to take a RTK or survey receiver along with me and nail down a few spots where I think the GPS is off and the LIDAR isn't as good, but all small tweaks.
gurglypipe (2021-09-03 21:07:13+00:00): Heya, seems a bit odd that the name now includes ‘Penrith’. I can’t check locally but it seems pretty unlikely that’s going to be on the signage at the school. Where did the name data come from? Ta
confusedbuffalo (2021-09-03 21:22:58+00:00): Originally from https://get-information-schools.service.gov.uk/Establishments/Establishment/Details/136732 (available under OGL)
Then confirmed by the branding on the website
From the gov website you can see under links that the previous establishment didn't have Penrith in the name.
gurglypipe (2021-09-03 22:18:31+00:00): That seems pretty convincing! I should have checked the school’s website, sorry. Thanks for your work on schools recently :)
confusedbuffalo (2021-09-03 22:46:33+00:00): No worries
I've set up a Map Roulette challenge to make adding detail to schools easier (which is what I used here)
Check it out if you're interested:
https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/21922
Eifelkobold! (2021-09-03 20:17:29+00:00): Guten Abend,

du hast in diesem Changeset die Hausnummer Turmgasse 3 gelöscht (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1382982818) und auf einen anderen Node umgelegt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/360402737). Die neu Position kommt mir etwas allerdings etwas merkwürdig vor. War das evtl. ein Versehen?

viele Grüße

Eifelkobold
TG-map4 (2021-09-30 20:28:37+00:00): Hi, I'm so sorry for the late response and that you had to send me a PN reminder because I haven't answered. I only check my mailbox and OSM account sporadically.
Of course this was a mistake! I think when dragging the map with iD Editor this happened. I corrected it.
noelbov (2021-09-06 11:02:06+00:00): Beste Hans,
Zijn er op kruising Sas en Rijksweg na plaatsen van railing de fietsknoopbordjes om van 03 naar 40 te rijden (of omgekeerd) ook gewijzigd?
Momenteel wordt dit als niet-continue fietsroute gemarkeerd.
Dank voor antwoord.
Noël
H4N5-antw (2021-09-06 19:22:03+00:00): Waarde Noel, 
Prentjes dezer dagen op Mapillary. 
Kort gezegd : bordje FKP 03>40 gaat nog gewoon rechtdoor, over de railing, of rechtsaf en hoge boordsteen af, of links, en bij de verkeerslichten oversteken : dat laatste lijkt enige redelijke uitweg, zoals u mogelijk zult beamen eens prentjes gepubliceerd.
H4N5-antw (2021-09-08 08:51:15+00:00): Prentjes nog in limbo, railing op https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=924930444966621 , 
vanaf Scheldebrug : https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=3942635612496365 , 
vanaf Bornem : https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1743692185833800  
tonen situatie zoals die ook nu nog bestaat.
aceman444 (2022-02-05 20:06:41+00:00): Zdravim, bankomaty vacsinou nemaju nazvy, a nedavajte do nazvu nazov jeho banky. Ta uz je v znacke 'operator'. Dakujem
Pheggas (2022-06-23 20:25:42+00:00): Aha, dobre.
voltairovicz (2021-09-03 18:41:33+00:00): Importowane na streamie? ;)
SekeRob (2021-09-04 16:12:14+00:00): These turn restrictions were NOT wrong! Assess before you delete. You can mark them as false too in Keep right, which gives many wrong alerts. Here Northbound from church a turn right sign, south to the church, a turn left sign. That was mapped. Kindly put the rules back, OR map the signs. The codes you can find in the "IT:Road signs in Italy - OpenStreetMap Wiki"

cheers
ualios (2021-09-04 19:13:37+00:00): Ok keepright is not always... right, but here we have only oneway roads, so restrictions seem useless other than wrong. 
Actually I deleted two relations:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11848500/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11848499/history
with same "from" way and restrictions to both (and opposite) directions.
SekeRob (2021-09-04 19:20:35+00:00): I stand corrected, see now they were set up in the opposite direction... a to from instead of a from to. I'll code the signs up.

thanks
Glassman (2021-09-05 21:46:25+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

One question. The name of the footway indicates it's a trail. If it is actually just a trail, then the appropriate tag is highway=path. highway=footway is similar to what we call a sidewalk, even if not paved, in the US. Can you verify if this should be a path instead of a footway?

I'll send you more info on OSM in a message.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110691200
maxerickson (2022-02-22 04:37:07+00:00): Hi, I just changed a fair number of addresses from Az to AZ (looks like a typo on some changesets) and came across a few duplicates, like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979395140

Since you appear to be familiar with the area, figured I would flag it to your attention.
Glassman (2021-09-05 21:46:50+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110691952
Strubbl (2021-09-07 10:32:18+00:00): hi fleisswolf, Tines Nudelküche ist bereits länger eingezeichnet, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3806363059
Daher habe ich diese Änderung rückgängig gemacht (siehe CS https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110851004).

Eventuell sind deine Mapsme Kartendaten nicht aktuell?
Discostu36 (2023-05-13 20:11:01+00:00): Ist das da im Wasser jetzt ein Gebäude oder eine Seebrücke?
Todeskuh (2023-05-16 10:20:43+00:00): Das building sollte bestimmt woanders hin, ich hab es wieder rausgenommen.
Glassman (2021-09-05 21:47:11+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110692167
maraf24 (2022-02-14 22:56:58+00:00): No niestety to nie jest prawda.
Tutaj jest droga w strefie zamieszkania, tak jak to było wcześniej prawidłowo zmapowane.
Więc na pewno nie było to survey.
maraf24 (2021-09-05 20:17:21+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2362077597

Cmentarz i pomnik to są dwa różne obiekty.
maraf24 (2021-09-05 20:18:07+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8807709120

Albo budowa stacji albo stacja działająca.
maraf24 (2021-09-05 20:19:18+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3438082486

Wg wikipedii to jest stacja a nie przystanek.
kokoimatsuchi (2021-09-05 23:05:22+00:00): Odnośnie do Warszawy Pragi - pokierowałem się otagowaniem określonym na wiki (ale mogę oczywiście przywrócić poprzednią wersję, zgodnie z załącznikiem 2.6 regulaminu sieci): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:railway%3Dyard

Odnośnie do przystanku Warszawa Targówek - zmieniłem tylko rodzaj ze stacji na przystanek, ten węzeł był zdecydowanie wcześniej niż moja edycja. Uważam jednak, że usuwanie go i ponowne wstawienie (w grudniu ma być oddany do użytku) jest trochę bezsensowne.

Pomnik poprawię.
maraf24 (2021-09-06 06:13:55+00:00): "Uważam jednak, że usuwanie go i ponowne wstawienie (w grudniu ma być oddany do użytku) jest trochę bezsensowne."

Mapujemy to co jest takie jakie jest, a nie jakie będzie. Inaczej ludzie byliby kierowani do nieistniejących lub jeszcze nieuruchomionych POI. To byłby dopiero bezsens.
danieldegroot2 (2021-09-03 19:21:09+00:00): *and fixed issues.
maraf24 (2021-09-05 20:15:52+00:00): Duplikat stacji.
kokoimatsuchi (2021-09-05 22:45:12+00:00): Analogiczna sytuacja jak w przypadku Warszawy Centralnej - Na OpenRailMap nie wyświetlają się stacje oznaczone poprzez obszar, tylko przez węzły
maraf24 (2021-09-06 06:07:13+00:00): A, no to problem ma OpenRailMap.
Proszę się zapoznać z https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
user_1566574 (2021-09-07 13:57:02+00:00): Bonjour,
C'est une boîte aux lettres La Poste ?
Merci ! :)
NKA (2021-09-03 20:55:20+00:00): Vær snill å ikke fjerne ref-tag fra kjeder. De brukes til å oppdatere butikkene. La også brand etc være i fred.
Disse endringene må rulles tilbake.
Jostein Kjønigsen (2021-09-03 21:07:50+00:00): Fjernet ikke noe led vilje. Trodde bare jeg la til info. Brukte OsmAnd iOS-appen.
NKA (2021-09-04 14:04:43+00:00): Tok en titt på OsmAnd-appen nå. Det ser ut til at den fjerner noen av taggene. Så da bør ikke den brukes, dessverre.
Jostein Kjønigsen (2021-09-04 14:10:13+00:00): Meh. Takk for info. Da vet jeg det.
NKA (2021-09-04 14:17:38+00:00): Hvilen versjon av OsmAnd har du? Står nederst under Hjelp.
Jostein Kjønigsen (2021-09-04 14:19:23+00:00): 4.0.6 for iOS.
geo-d (2021-09-03 19:37:05+00:00): Ergänzung: auch Hausnummern Am Hochriß wurden korrigiert
4004 (2021-09-05 23:05:21+00:00): здравствуйте, спасибо за правку.
рекоммендую вам пройти обучение в редакторел (значок книжки справа).
вкратце, в осм недостаточно написать на здании магазин, чтобы оно считалось магазином, надо добавить тег магазина (например convenience=shop)
confusedbuffalo (2022-03-12 11:55:34+00:00): You marked https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/529207530/
as a hotel, when it is a residential area.
If there is a hotel there then it should be mapped as its own separate building. (I have reverted it to residential area)

Also, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments to let other people know what you are mapping and why
Raf_de (2021-09-05 15:57:37+00:00): Hello wajde12,
I've noticed you have been drawing highways and steps that have been floating, or not connecting to any ways. You've also drawn some highways where we can't really see any evidence of their existence. Here are some examples of this,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979318511/history#map=19/31.86534/10.98328
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979404460/history#map=19/31.86534/10.98280 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979318349/history#map=19/31.86712/10.98708
I wanted to bring this to your attention so you can be more careful in your future editing so that the data on OSM can continue being as accurate as possible!
Happy mapping!
-Raf_De
gerzim (2021-09-04 10:14:23+00:00): Hallo bresomch

Ich habe gestern gesehen, dass das Mythos wieder geöffnet ist.
Auf Vespucci ist es mir aber nicht gelungen, die Notiz zu bearbeiten bzw. zu löschen.
Danke für die Korrektur.
Schöne Grüsse
Gerhard
Jakuje (2022-01-11 10:42:52+00:00): Seems like this change added the tags also to the points of the area, which is for some reason common in Bystrc, for example 5296266789 -- can you take a look and fix the additional unneeded tagging on the boundary points?
mahdi1234 (2022-01-11 18:11:17+00:00): Thanks. Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116035210
eggie (2021-09-06 21:21:57+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
SomeoneElse (2021-09-03 21:17:31+00:00): Also footpaths etc. near Husthwaite, from survey 18/8/2021, tr8070b.
sorcrosc (2021-10-31 19:38:36+00:00): Ciao. Puoi dirmi come hai mappato tutti questi lampioni? Ce ne sono alcuni in posizioni strane come dentro al perimetro degli edifici per esempio.
Minh Nguyen (2021-09-06 09:18:27+00:00): Hi, I changed this stretch of the 101 back to a motorway because signs at the Monterey St. on-ramp say “Freeway Entrance”.

Bicycles are sometimes allowed on Interstates in California. (Notably, a large stretch of I-280 in San Mateo Co. allows bicycles.) The roadways in question already have bicycle=yes tags to indicate that bicycles are allowed. If you’re seeing different behavior from a routing engine, it may be due to a bug in that routing engine.
DaveF (2021-09-19 18:27:40+00:00): Hi
Can you take a look at your edit.
you've created multiple, unnecessary mutli-polygons, 
At least one of them renders areas of grass as buildings!
eteb3 (2021-09-19 20:07:49+00:00): Hi
Thanks for spotting. I'm wondering if I should just give up on relations: they must always be complex, but iD makes it almost impossible (for me) to assess the work while one builds them.

Fixed, I hope, here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111423153

If you have time and inclination, you could check my other relations edits of the past few months: this one I remember being a headache, for example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110697193
SK53 (2021-09-20 09:04:58+00:00): @eteb: basic multipolygons should be as convenient as drawing the ways selecting each of them and pressing "c". Not sure if you are doing something different.

It gets much more complicated if you cut an existing area as iD converts that to a multipolygon, so generally I avoid it & do things which require it in another editor.
eteb3 (2021-09-20 10:29:47+00:00): @SK53 thank you. I don't use the shortcuts, rather right-click and +

But that sounds much simpler, so I'll do that in future (and eventually learn JOSM perhaps...)
DaveF (2021-09-21 00:53:45+00:00): You're original looks good.
For the second: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:site

Relations were only invented to enable mapping when using just ways & nodes weren't sufficient. Regrettably there's a growing feeling that using relations should be the default standard & as you're testify it gets confusing.

The iD editor was meant to be a clear, simple editor for beginners. Something appears to have gone astray. 
It no even attempts to validate, but again, regrettably, presents them as items that are definitely in need of correction, rather than suggestions which require further investigation.
Pollux17 (2021-09-04 20:07:28+00:00): Ciao, stavo provando le immagini aggiornate Bing in zona del changeset e ho visto che hai rimosso dei marciapiedi che avevo aggiunto abbastanza di recente, in via Cimabue. Hai fatto survey da quelle parti recentemente o ti sei basato sulle immagini ESRI? Perchè a me risulta che i marciapiedi ci siano
fedc (2021-09-06 13:55:58+00:00): Ciao, i marciapiedi ci sono, ma io ho rimosso i "passaggi pedonali" separati dalla strada, che non esistono.
Pollux17 (2021-09-09 07:25:16+00:00): Ma i marciapiedi sono mappati quasi dappertutto come footway, con lo schema highway=footway+footway=sidewalk, che è quello che ho seguito in questa situazione
fedc (2021-09-10 12:13:09+00:00): In realtà mi pare che solo a Milano ci sia questa abitudine, che comunque mi sembra sbagliata: dei semplici marciapiedi a lato strada non sono dei percorsi pedonali indipendenti...
Pollux17 (2021-09-11 12:37:42+00:00): Insomma, il tag footway=sidewalk ha 2 milioni e mezzo di utilizzi ed è regolarmente utilizzato in tutto il mondo. Ho fatto un veloce controllo su Overpass su una decina di città italiane ed estere e l'ho sempre trovato (in alcuni casi più di altri). È anche un uso regolarmente documentato sulla Wiki, quindi direi che non ci sono dubbi sulla legittimità di quest'uso
Pollux17 (2021-09-15 08:13:41+00:00): Io rimetterei i marciapiedi se non hai niente in contrario, anche per uniformità con la situazione circostante
fedc (2021-09-17 10:19:14+00:00): Sí, anche se la questione andrebbe discussa in maniera generale, credo.