piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Vinber-Pro (2021-03-03 16:21:31+00:00): Bonjour Paul,
n'est ce pas le restaurant le domaine de Testelin, plutôt que teslin ?
à plus
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100329490
mike140 (2021-03-08 21:49:34+00:00): у вас тут получилось удвоение границы поселка: www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7443013
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:28:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
PT-53 (2021-03-03 16:19:03+00:00): Hallo WolfFisch,
Deine Änderungen an diesem Gebäude
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/762451846/history
sind widersprüchlich.
Auf der Ost-Seite hast Du den Gebäudeumriß an der Außenwand am Boden und auf der West-Seite den Dachumriß verwendet. Das paßt nicht zusammen.

Bei den beiden Getreidesilos wolltest Du Dich wohl am Umriß auf dem Boden orientieren, leider sieht man ab den Boden der Getriedesilos auf dem Luftbild gar nicht.

Hast Du Dir mal die verschiedenen Luftbilder (mit verschiedenem Aufnahmewinkel und verschiedenem Versatz) verglichen ?

Grüße
nitro_expander (2021-03-03 08:40:40+00:00): its better to delete this and create new . personal details can still be retrieved from history .
user_5239402 (2021-03-03 08:46:20+00:00): 안녕하세요.
바뀜집합 댓글을 작성해 주시기 바랍니다.
왜나하면 변경 상황이 어떻게 돌아가는지 이해하기 위해 변경 사항을 보면서 의미 있는 댓글이 절실히 필요한 다른사람들을 고려해야합니다. 변경 사항을 설명하기 위해 시간을 약간만 쓴다면, 다른 사람들에게 대답해 주면서 시간을 쓸 필요가 없어집니다.
tux67 (2021-03-03 09:14:23+00:00): Hi, was ist denn Tierwelt Korschenbroich? shop? 
Noch vergessen zu fragen .. das kleine Häuschen in der Mitte des Parkplatzes - ist das der Tiefgaragenausgang?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100331718
Stereo (2021-03-03 23:33:05+00:00): Moien and welcome to OpenStreetMap. Congratulations on your impressive start. Please contact me if you have any questions.

Hope you have fun mapping!

Guillaume
user_5359 (2021-03-03 16:27:58+00:00): Hello! Please have look on your way: I change your access value to yes. Please check this.
ToniE (2021-03-03 09:04:35+00:00): Hallo Konstantin,

ist das wirklich eine 'tertiary' = Kreis-Straße, denn dann müsste sie (eigentlich) eine ref="RO xx".
Ausnahme: die Straße ist vom Ausbauzustand und von der Verkehrsbedeutung (Menge) her so wichtig wie eine Kreis-Straße.

N.B.: QS-Tools meckern, wenn eine 'tertiary' kein 'ref' hat.

VG
Toni
rms_KKRO (2021-03-03 12:57:09+00:00): Hallo Toni,

ich habe mir die Situation im OSM-Wiki angeschaut und werde es wieder in unclassified umändern, da hatte ich einen Denkfehler drin. Für mich war die Straße von der Klassifikation her bedeutender, von der Definition her stimmt das aber natürlich nicht.
VG
Konstantin
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-04-05 07:01:38+00:00): Hello, can you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3628114 ?
dago158 (2021-03-03 10:07:33+00:00): Une (autre) erreur dans les changements précédents ?

Le but était de montrer qu'il est possible de passer  depuis la gare/esplanade sans devoir pousser son vélo sur le passage piéton
MFlamm (2021-03-03 10:12:42+00:00): Oui, j'ai bien compris cela et ton correctif était tout à fait correct. Ici, j'ai simplement été "au bout" du retraçage de ce carrefour modifié, en enlevant le segment de piste cyclable "virtuelle" qui faisait doublon (comme tu sembles l'avoir bien compris, ces courts segments sont absolument essentiels pour les routeurs ;-)
dago158 (2021-03-03 11:55:10+00:00): Parfois je comprends bien directement ;)
Je n'étais pas sur de pouvoir supprimer le bout virtuel précédent.

Un petit truc embêtant avec ces segments, c'est que ça peut laisser penser que c'est aménagé alors que c'est loin d'être toujours le cas. Existerait-il un tag à utiliser/repérer pour les identifier ?
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:28:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:26:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:31:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:29:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
f_husni (2024-02-13 03:41:52+00:00): Hallo Purba Oktaviani. saya ingin menananyakan terkait penambahan akses no dan motorcar=no pada ruas jalan padat karya. kira2 kenapa harus ditambahkan akses no?
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:39:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:25:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:42:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:40:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-03-10 00:58:21+00:00): Please don't add duplicate ways
limes11 (2021-03-03 18:12:40+00:00): Hi, 

why adding bicycle=yes to highway=service? That's the default value. Looks like you added hundreds of redundant tags. I also wouldn't change access tags assuming that cycling routes are correct without checking that. They might not be.

Greets, Limes
ma-rt-in (2021-03-04 18:17:27+00:00): Hello,

with CS 100439485 this changeset was reset, since here obviously without on site examination, arbitrarily data was adapted, so that a data evaluator functions.
Furthermore, redundant additions were made that are not justified.

Martin
SHARCRASH (2021-03-05 13:10:48+00:00): Hello! I know user kewl and he rides really a lot, even every day. So it is very possible that he was on site.

For the tag bicycle=yes, some people use it as a confirmation, hence why he wrote "emphasised cycling access" in his CS comment. In a way this can be seen as redundant since most paved roads allow bicycles, but service roads are kind of multi-purpose in terms of access since they are out of the normal road network. I think you should upload back the edits but there might be a few conflicts though since i've found out about this CS while i was trying to figure out some previous edits (here https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6091008744).
limes11 (2021-03-05 16:10:45+00:00): Lots of things are possible but the facts are that his changes were "based on the assumption that cycling routes are correct" So no, I would not undo this.
ma-rt-in (2021-03-05 16:19:00+00:00): I agree with limes11, it may be that the user is on the road a lot, but for one thing the changes in this CS are very scattered. Furthermore, there is no point in setting bicycle=yes if there is no other restricting traffic type, such as vehicle=no or similar.
Furthermore, I think it is very questionable to imply that driveways are generally open to cyclists.
kewl (2021-03-06 22:58:16+00:00): Hello,
Sorry for the late reply; I didn't get the notifications in my Inbox. And sorry to cause trouble, but let me explain why:
- I've been exploring a lot (cycled 29000 km in 2020) and many times my experience was ruined by some incomplete mapping data:
1. there are many ways which have more than one role, and depending of your point of view they are one type of highway or another. For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23925793; screenshots here: https://g.kewl.lu/index/category/529-catchall <- it's considered as a driveway to an equestrian centre for some people, but since it's used for farming it's also a paved track, and additionally it's part of a bicycle route (which is called locally cycleway and also leads to confusion); (I excluded the fact that this way is also part of a hiking route). When visually looking at a map, service roads do not appear unless we zoom in, and if you want to include them on a larger map it becomes cluttered and we often can't see anything. The idea behind is to render a map that includes service roads that are also suitable for low mobility transit.
2. some ways that are in fact private properties but not tagged as such; in average every second time I went exploring I ended up in front of a gate) and I'm trying to sort out which ones I haven't been verified. Unless we could import private tags to a way I don't see how to do it and continue exploring and verifying ways. So I thought of testing with service roads which are part of cycling routes; I've done most of them but I can't guarantee that someone hasn't changed the route compared to the one onsite.
3. Some of the ways on cycling routes are restricted to motorised traffic and are usually tagged with access=destination and also many were missing bicycle=yes (and foot=yes); therefore bike routing avoids the cycling route unless a waypoint is set on it.
That's the reason I did this changeset. Sorry for the annoyance but otherwise I have no idea how I could improve the mapping quality. Thank you for reading and have a nice day.
Tristan
ma-rt-in (2021-03-07 17:02:02+00:00): Hello Tristan,

After your explanation, I can now better understand your changes. The problem, however, is how you made the changes. For one thing, it was all done in one big changeset and then there was the way you changed it.

Now let's look at your example with Way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23925793 . This way is first of all an access road to the farm, so highway=service is correct for now. Then, of course, the road is used by many different users.
What annoys me here is the use of access=destination. I would argue that in many cases access is used incorrectly. This is certainly also the case here. It would be necessary to check on site what signs have been put up. Access values or sub-keys are set on the basis of the signs. 
Simply setting exceptions in the form of bicycle=yes does indeed improve the routing for cyclists, but not the fundamental problem.

On private property: I don't know how it is regulated in Luxembourg, but in Germany pedestrians are allowed to go everywhere as long as the path is not explicitly closed to pedestrians or prevented from doing so by buildings or gates.

If you have any questions, please ask and, above all, we should better outsource further discussions to the forum.

Greetings Martin

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
SHARCRASH (2021-03-08 18:37:52+00:00): The specificity of this service way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23925793 is not a driveway, which normally is the very last way leading to a feature/property/busines/etc, hence why it is rendered smaller by OSM's carto layer and disappear when zoomed out farther because not deemed to be useful on bigger scales and so avoid a too complex mapped network. This is a driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/914465926 I've corrected. Kewl, in a few days after updated rendered map, you should see it better from farther zoom levels.
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:42:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:39:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
mraison (2021-03-03 13:57:52+00:00): Bonjour,
Comment sont prises en compte les propositions de modifications?
Merci
sikmir (2022-03-15 20:43:15+00:00): Тиверский волок это все же только тропа, отмечать ее рекой не корректно. Все что выше волока течет в другую сторону, порог у Горелого моста явное тому подтверждение.
SomeoneElse (2021-05-01 14:44:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103958280 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits believed by the local community to be derived from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4899 .  Some have already been dealt with; this should address the rest.
sabas88 (2021-03-03 13:45:13+00:00): Ciao Paul,
ma la pizzeria occupa l'intero edificio? C'era già il nodo (vedi l'icona?)
Stefano
rocky2109 (2021-03-03 09:52:37+00:00): Updated ocean geometry and beach geometry as it intersecting with road feature and updated road geometry #MSFTOpenMaps #AtlasChecks
Imagery: LINZ NZ Aerial Imagery
Kovoschiz (2021-03-03 13:04:14+00:00): 1. Please don't delete `=wood` even if you added a `=tree_row`
2. There's no need to add `addr:street=` to each building if it's already enclosed in an area.
ottwiz (2021-03-03 09:58:19+00:00): + sebességhatár meghatározva Platán utca környékén. (30-as zóna)
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2021-03-03 11:30:43+00:00): شكرا لك على توضيح اسم الطريق لكن لتسمية طريق ما بشكل صحيح قم بوضع هذا الاسم على الطريق وليس كنقطة جديدة ويمكنك فعل ذلك عن طريق محرر iD:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id#map=19/26.63048/46.67739
Jørn-osm (2021-03-03 21:20:04+00:00): "Danish community does not approve of merging the imported address nodes with buildings."
ivanbranco (2026-03-14 14:05:39+00:00): Hi SekeRob, the wikidata links to a plant species, is it an error? or is the species of plant present in this protected area? in such case maybe species:wikidata is a better fit

thanks and good mapping
SekeRob (2026-03-16 14:32:14+00:00): Hi ivanbranco

Followed your suggestion and applied the species: prefix. Oddly with the recently added wikidata/pedia JOSM plugin it jumped me to Q721 which has the comment that the tag is a zoo,
At any rate the plant if entering in the browser comes up correct. We can see it, or rather the tower from the living, some 15km as the crow flies and an hour on the bike to get to the Francavilla pier which points at the tower. Asking locals about it while preparing the entry, the became rather coy about it. It's a subject which made it to the local news circulation.. in 2024 with the headline "Posidonia, quella torre sul mare che l’Abruzzo rischia di perdere"
At any rate, it's standing strong after 32 years,

Cheers
SekeRob

PS, it could be a (plant) zoo, as asking in a different way gave another wikidata link, but same picture.
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q877147
MFlamm (2021-03-03 10:44:12+00:00): Une partie des arceaux est payante? (fee=yes côté est)
eggie (2021-03-03 10:25:41+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht. 

Feedback  In OSM zetten we niet nog,maals een adres op de gebouwomtrek. Ik heb het verwijderd.
Is ChickenHouse de naam of is het gewoon een kippenhok en dus de functie? 

MVG, 

Eggie 
namens de OSM Community
grizzlysmit (2021-03-03 10:20:18+00:00): didn't work as expected can't seam to undo what I did
MFlamm (2021-03-03 10:51:34+00:00): Pour info, quand tu mets bicycle=yes sur une voie piétonne (footway ou pedestrian), c'est très important d'ajouter le tag segregated. 
segregated=no est une indication très précise que les piétons sont totalement prioritaires. 
segregated=yes peut être utilisé si la cohabitation est "organisée" par des marquages en faveur des cyclistes (ou autres dispositifs de séparation)
Je pense que ce tag répond mieux que bicycle=permissive à ton intention de cartographier précisément si des espaces piétonniers permettent aux cyclistes de rouler un peu plus vite que "l'allure au pas" ;-)
dago158 (2021-03-03 11:50:51+00:00): Merci pour l'info.
J'imaginais que "segregated=no" était implicite
PT-53 (2021-03-03 15:27:49+00:00): Hallo mathpras,
diese "Straße" ist so nicht korrekt.
Hat sich Eurer Fahrer verfahren ?
Was war die Zieladresse ?
Fragende Grüße
mathpras (2021-03-05 12:16:53+00:00): Hi, 
My sincere apologies for the miss from my end. I have added the segment based on Bing aerial imagery but missed the gate at the entry . I have re verified and added gate and access based on private maxar imagery. please find the changeset for your reference (100490897). Thanks for your valuable feedback. 
Regards, 
mathpras
PT-53 (2021-03-05 15:41:56+00:00): Hallo mathpras, 
der von Dir eingezeichnete Weg verläuft über 2 Betriebsgrundstücke von 2 verschiedenen Firmen!
Das ist so auf keinen Fall korrekt und nicht akzeptabel!

Was haben Amazon-Fahrer überhaupt hinter den Gebäuden zu suchen ?
Die Firmen-Eingänge sind vorne an der Albert-Einstein-Straße.

Welche Ziel-Adresse hatte der Amazon-Fahrer?

Fragende Grüße
mathpras (2021-03-08 08:06:04+00:00): Hello,
We don't add roads in OSM based on our internal driver traces, but only use GPS traces to identify missing roads. We purely add roads based on imageries available in OSM. We do not wish to share our customer address in an open forum like this. We have added the road as per Bing aerial imagery as it is comparatively the latest imagery available on OSM. There seems to be a connection at (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8482418739). However, Thanks for your Constructive feedback. Please find the snip(https://snipboard.io/xouFeO.jpg) as per our understanding of the error that you have mentioned. Kindly, confirm so that we can go ahead and make the changes accordingly.  Always happy to learn from the community.  
Regards,
mathpras
PT-53 (2021-03-08 08:18:24+00:00): Warum nur diese Wege einzeichnen und nicht alle ?
Aber Achtung, die Wege können sich immer wieder ändern. Das ist schließlich ein Lagerplatz!
Was hat Euer Fahrer dort hinten überhaupt verloren? Hat er sich verfahren?
mathpras (2021-03-08 10:07:25+00:00): Hi, 
As per Bing aerial imagery there is a newly constructed entity (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/912562338). We have added the segment to access the entity as per the latest imagery. In Bing Imagery it looks like there is a way to access the entity from (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34844188). Hence, we have digitized the complete connection. As mentioned above please confirm if the edit in the snip (https://snipboard.io/xouFeO.jpg) is correct. We will go ahead and make the changes as per your suggestion. Thanks for your active response. 
Regards, 
mathpras
eggie (2021-03-03 10:29:36+00:00): Beste Waarom name=Groeneveld op de adresnode 
Geen persoonlijke notes svp.
Geen adresinfo op gebouwomtrekken. 
MVG
eggie
Ger Groeneveld (2021-03-03 16:04:43+00:00): Familie. Bijgebouwde Kota heeft officieel adres 6A.
Officieel is Tolheksleane 6 de kas. Bijgebouwde woning is niet gekoppeld aan kas, wat voorheen wel verplicht was (zie no 4 en no 2) vandaar dat het nummer 6A heeft.
eggie (2021-03-03 16:18:01+00:00): Oke.. volgens mij heb ik vanmiddag een adresnode 6a aangemaakt.
Gr eggie
hauke-stieler (2021-03-04 11:53:44+00:00): Hi,

hier hast du die Tempo-Straßenschilder ergänzt, magst du einmal die Straßen selber auch nochmal um maxspeed ergänzen? Ich glaube die wenigsten werten die traffig_sign-tags entsprechend aus.

Grüße
Hauke
kayle (2021-07-01 08:49:15+00:00): Zdravím, prosím pozrite si označovanie na stránke https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Map_Features ak nenájdete v iD vhodné označenie.
Ak dáte bodu len name=Posed je to k ničomu, lebo nie je určené čo to je za bod (samotné meno nestačí) a niekde sa nezobzazí.
Je potrebné označiť to ako amenity=hunting_stand
Tiež meno (name) dávajte len vlastné (konkrétny názov) nie všeobecné pomenovanie.
Takže žiadne name=Posed pre posed a tie plochy stromov prosím tiež neoznačovať name=remizka
Ďakujem
kayle (2021-07-01 09:06:12+00:00): A ešte jedna poznámka. :)
Ak zakresľujete nové veci tak pozor, aby boli spojené len s tými objektmi a tam kde majú zmysel.
Takže napr. nespájať lesné plochy s elektrickým vedením.
opendcc (2023-07-06 18:14:08+00:00): Hallo, ich war da heute vor Ort und habe die Haltestelle woanders vorgefunden. Soll ich da da hin schieben, wo sie sind?
rms_TSCH (2023-07-07 08:37:13+00:00): Hallo, mir liegen keine aktuelleren Informationen zur Haltestelle vor. Wenn sie mittlerweile woanders ist, dann gerne verschieben. Danke.
pio2_122 (2021-03-03 12:06:15+00:00): Hm, nie jestem do końca przekonany, co do tagu tourism=attraction.
Jest to dystrybutor („instrybutor”) jak każdy inny w Polsce. Zresztą jest ich kilka tylko na tej stacji paliw, więc nie wiadomo o który konkretnie chodzi :P

Wydaje mi się, że w tym przypadku samo słowo, a nie konkretny obiekt zdobył popularność.

Prędzej dodałbym ten tag np. dla ulicy, gdzie toczy się akcja filmiku „ale urwał...”, ponieważ w tym przypadku zarówno samo wyrażenie, jak i miejsce akcji zdobyło szerszą popularność.

Zauważyłem jednak, że podobne oznaczenie w Warszawie usunął @kocio w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/100278763

Na dobrą sprawę, gdyby dodawać tourism=attraction do każdego miejsca popularnego przez jakiś filmik, itp., to na mapie byłoby aż gęsto od nich (przez co zasłaniałyby na mapie inne, ważniejsze dla zwykłego człowieka informacje). Wydaje mi się, że taka baza powinna być na jakiś zewnętrznych stronach.
maraf24 (2021-03-03 13:13:29+00:00): Sama stacja jak i dystrybutor jest aktualnie atrakcją, a czy tak pozostanie - wątpię.
Dodając ten tag zakładałem, że to rozwiązanie czasowe.
pio2_122 (2021-03-03 14:20:42+00:00): Przekonuje mnie to :)
skyper (2021-05-11 14:32:42+00:00): Hallo L1nu53
Was willst Du mit cycleway:right=shared_lane plus cycleway:right:lane=pictogram ausdrücken?
Ist das wirklich eine zusätzlich gemeinsam genutzte Fahrspur?

Fragende Grüße,
skyper
Garpul (2021-03-04 03:58:27+00:00): "Категория: III-X"  Скорее всего  перевал проходим с марта по октябрь.
maraf24 (2021-03-03 16:00:17+00:00): Podobno jest remont wałów i nie da się z tego korzystać?
zwirek88 (2021-03-03 17:45:23+00:00): Racja, pospieszyłem się, dzisiaj naocznie przekonałem sie, że nie ma przejazdu.
mueschel (2021-03-08 16:04:43+00:00): Hi,
could you explain what this node is? It got a strange set of tags:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8482189630