piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
maro21 (2020-03-17 20:10:28+00:00): Chodziło mi o to, że węzeł jest otagowany tak samo jak linia:). Wiki chodzi o to, że można taki obiekt otagować albo jako węzeł albo jako linię. Podobnie np. z parkingami - można parking dać jako węzeł jeśli nie znamy dokładnej geometrii lub nie ma zdjęć, ale dokładniejsze będzie narysowanie obszaru.

Węzeł jest otagowany tak samo jak linia więc de facto to są dwa obiekty. Np "aeroway=parking_position + ref=18" - czyli pas parkingowy nr 18 jest dwa razy.
Czy mogę w takim razie usunąć te tagi z węzłów?
GerdP (2026-07-17 07:42:12+00:00): Moin aus Wildeshausen!
Ich wundere mich gerade über die Tags an diesem Weg: https://www.osm.org/way/722624436
Auf meinem Foto an dieser Stelle https://www.osm.org/node/4892952843 sehe ich da keinerlei Schild, das den Weg als Radweg (highway=cycleway) ausweist. Ist (bzw. war) das auf der südlichen Seite anders? Ohne Beschilderung hätte ich das eher als highway=path, surface=grass erfasst, auf dem z.B. auch Reiter sich bewegen dürfen.
NGL-engel (2026-07-26 15:58:26+00:00): Hallo Gerd,
   wenn ich mir (halbwegs) aktuelle Bilder ansehe, kann ich dir nur recht geben. Mein Eintrag stammt ja auch schon von vor 7 Jahren, und tatsächlich war ich seitdem nicht mehr dort (nur noch an der Westseite des Alfsees). Also, entweder war es schon damals falsch (1. Möglichkeit), oder es hat sich seitdem geändert (2. Möglichkeit). 

Wäre nett, wenn du es an den aktuellen Stand vor Ort anpassen würdest. 
Lieben Gruß, Angela
GerdP (2026-07-26 18:27:11+00:00): Vielleicht komme ich da in den nächsten Wochen nochmal vorbei. Ansonsten weiss ich leider auch nicht mehr.
NGL-engel (2026-07-27 13:26:36+00:00): Ok, dann passe ich es erstmal nach den Bildern im Netz an – die sind schon mal aktueller als mein Eintrag – und wenn du dort noch einmal kommst, wäre es nett, wenn du noch einmal drauf achten könntest und es dann ggf. anpasst. 
Jedenfalls, Danke für den Hinweis
viloan (2019-09-06 22:35:50+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt
Se você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
giggls (2021-03-18 13:55:01+00:00): Hello,

I am the author of https://opencampingmap.org and I think that the tagging of a couple of camp-sites you mapped in this area can be improved significantly to make them appear more correct on this map.

So here I my suggestions:

First it is not a good Idea to map individual pitches as camp_site.

We have an approved tag called tourism=camp_pitch to tag them.

Tagging them as tourism=camp-site will prevent me from showing them correctly.

BTW, the Fact that they are not shown in osmand tagged the way I suggested is what we call "tagging for the renderer" and this is something we do not appreciate in OSM.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
for details.

Next try to map the whole site as a closed way or polygon rather than a node. This way my map will be able to show amenities inside the polygon as features of the side.

Here is how a very small backcountry side in the black forest tagged this way looks like:

https://www.opencampingmap.org/#19/48.67891/8.26062/0/1/bef/way/503231600

And here is how your stuff looks like:
https://www.opencampingmap.org/#18/39.84998/-105.42751/0/1/bef/relation/8119723
rsavoye (2021-03-18 15:26:40+00:00): When I changed from camp_pitch to camp_site was while the proposal was being discussed, I kindof jumped the gun, so changed them back. That is now an approved tag, and supported by the renderers, so I'll change the tag again this weekend. I will note that our local fire department has been using the ability to find campsites incredibly useful.

All our official camping areas do have a boundary polygon, except for the more dispersed camps. These are all in my local area, btw.
rsavoye (2021-03-18 18:15:50+00:00): I changed the tag, but the chances of mapping hundreds of campsites as polygons is probably not going to happen very fast. Some I could probably trace using imagery, most are in the forest, so I'd have to walk the perimeter of each site.

Having each camp_pitch as a node with the ref has been invaluable to my fire department for medical response. While there are tags for bearboxes, firepits, or picnic tables, they are not geo-located, so wouldn't display the way you want anyway.
giggls (2021-03-18 20:29:26+00:00): Looks already better now!

https://opencampingmap.org/#18/39.86583/-105.41784/0/1/bef/relation/8118172

Also have a look at the bug Tab in https://opencampingmap.org
eggie (2019-09-07 06:59:13+00:00): Welkom bij OSM.. Zwembad Wotterwille ia al getagd als waterpark.  Je nieuwe tag zal ik verwijderen.
Een bedrijf taggen we het liefst op de reeds bestaande adresnode. Ik zal de info daar mee samenvoegen.
MVG,
Eggie
noisi2000 (2019-09-11 10:45:37+00:00): Some of the deleted cliffs were the headwalls of cirques, some were other cliffs. Most of them have a glacial origin and are found this paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223612190_Late_Pleistocene_Glaciation_of_the_Kosciuszko_Massif_Snowy_Mountains_Australia
Warin61 (2019-09-11 11:17:13+00:00): That publication was not quoted as a source. Does OSM have the right to use it? 

I have left a comment on your changset 73406830  some 19 days ago on this subject and you have made no response there. 

Further comments have been placed by me on others of your changesets and there has been no response to those. 

One other person has commented elsewhere that one of your additions, a small lake, to their knowledge is not there.. and they have personal on the ground knowledge .. not based on satelite imagery.
user_5359 (2019-09-07 04:56:00+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful when editing the map data. You moved a node  (busstattion https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4729560280/history) over 100 meters.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-07 17:21:56+00:00): Viva, qual  o fundamento para alterar a toponímia de Levada das Cales para Caminho do Monte?
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-07 17:22:33+00:00): e do Caminho das Lajinhas para Caminho do Monte
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-09-07 00:42:34+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 73984259, 73984551, 73984748, 73984785, 73992824, 73992972, 73992987, 73994053, 73995158, 73995367, 74000673, 74000942, 74001827, 74003043, 74012561, 74012765, 74012854, 74012970, 74014279, 74105277.
didier2020 (2019-09-07 09:50:25+00:00): bonjour,

il y a un probleme de doublon avec vos 2 changesets :

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74196041
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74196126

erreur détecté grace a osmose :
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/errors/?country=france_poitou_charentes_vienne&item=1230
gfdklgdldsfgkgfd (2019-09-07 21:07:59+00:00): corrigé via un revert des changset, erreur d'upload suite à un crash de josm. Je vais tout recommancer
user_5359 (2019-09-07 05:13:38+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Yo can mark this also on the map  with building=garage, but without any address information.
user_5359 (2019-09-07 05:23:19+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on the four relation 7611499, 7611503, 9791269, 7611504. They miss the role from and to.
DiogoBaptista98 (2019-09-10 12:36:03+00:00): Olá, 
Estou a enviar esta mensagem porque acabou de destruir conteúdo relacionado com transportes públicos e relações, nomeadamente edições feitas e alterações incorrectas em paragens de autocarro na zona do Restelo.
Peço que da próxima vez tenha mais cuidado.
O problema já foi corrigido.
Cumprimentos.
mueschel (2019-09-10 08:58:19+00:00): Hi,
this node has many tags that don't seem to belong to OSM - could you check that?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6778525738

Thanks!
ke9tv (2019-09-10 11:06:43+00:00): oops - fixed

(Those tags didn't even belong to the tower, they were on a nearby road in a layer that I was using for a visual reference. No idea how they got copied-and-pasted onto the tower.)
Warin61 (2019-11-24 23:07:06+00:00): Reverted fully. 10 minutes.
Mazezito (2020-02-15 13:35:07+00:00): Porque a alteração e eliminação do nome?
Este local não é um campo agrícola.
Estava correto.
SomeoneElse (2020-01-29 00:43:02+00:00): Hello,
Are you sure that the brand information on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1596293118/history is correct? The website for that brand http://ginospizza.com/Locations.aspx suggests that they are WV only.
Best Regards,
Andy
jtracey (2020-01-29 08:42:40+00:00): Good catch, that should be the Gino's pizza at https://ginospizza.ca/ (which, ironically enough, is a larger franchise, but no Wikipedia or Wikidata). I'll try to remember to fix it tomorrow, or you can fix it before, whichever.
SomeoneElse (2020-01-31 23:07:15+00:00): Thanks - it's been fixed by maxerickson now.
TravGW (2019-09-07 12:17:33+00:00): What is your source for this name change?
freebeer (2019-09-10 04:40:07+00:00): even today i am unable to find any links to this proposed name, no news reports, no official announcement.  enclosing this alleged naming in quotes results in my local google datacentre returning a single result directly drawn from osm.  it seems premature to rename this without evidence and for a major event as this i know it will be easy to fihd.
TravGW (2019-09-10 16:03:57+00:00): No answer, time to revert.
Kovoschiz (2019-09-07 04:15:59+00:00): Why is Third St and Water St not `secondary`?
小智智 (2019-09-07 04:19:15+00:00): Because it is not designed to handle a lot of thorough traffic, same as Western Street uphill.
L'imaginaire (2019-09-07 10:31:28+00:00): Hi,

We have put together instructions for using the GRB building import tool: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AIV_GRB_building_import/Instructions

An important part of the instructions: "We require that you join the dedicated GRB channel (#osmbe-grb:matrix.org / irc.oftc.net #osmbe-grb) and announce your first changesets there."

Hope to see you there!

Seppe
L'imaginaire (2019-09-07 10:46:22+00:00): (all friendly people there :-) 
happy to help and work on this import together )
TravGW (2019-09-07 12:25:45+00:00): What is the source for these name changes? We must use the official name of a feature regardless of our personal opinions or feelings.
freebeer (2019-09-10 04:53:06+00:00): coming up empty-handed still for all three of these as well, which doesn't give much confidence these changes are real, and subjective undocumented ``facts'' should not appear in osm.
TravGW (2019-09-10 16:04:13+00:00): No answer, time to revert.
Mark Esperanto (2019-11-07 21:19:14+00:00): What exactly have you changed with this changeset?
ChehrehBargi (2019-09-13 06:39:22+00:00): کاربر محترم، جناب Behzadnl چندمین بار است که این قسمت را حذف می کنید. این قسمت راه بن‌بست است. اگر دوباره این گره را حذف کنید خرابکاری تلقی می شود و گزارش خواهید شد.
MV_GIS (2019-09-09 17:16:54+00:00): Good morning. What is the nature of the duplicates that you are fixing? The node count was below 2000 as was specified. Why is the changeset #74197855 closed and no data has been posted?
freebeer (2019-09-10 03:02:06+00:00): being familiar with this sort of repair, i can speculate that the tool you used either put two nodes in the same spot, or included the same node twice.

seeing v2 of the nodelist takes 123 pages in my `lynx' browser, and the full history takes 242 pages, there may have been just one redundant or duplicate node removed.

as i also do this sort of repair, i don't know how to easily get a post mortem and trivially identify the now-missing node(s) or do a `diff' between versions.  several dozen new cases appear daily in north america at a minimum, mostly due to an unsolved bug in iD editor, but also from josm.

nothing is posted because one or two redundant co-located points were removed.  and yes, i guess it is a fine morning now (once it warms up)
Andre68 (2019-09-10 04:50:07+00:00): Yes, exactly. These dupe nodes are nearly always due to a faulty editor tool. I do a lot of these fixes all day and it seems that all editors do this. To compare the versions you could load the way with JOSM and use the history tool (ctrl-h) to visualize the difference.
freebeer (2019-09-10 12:01:50+00:00): as i've been unable to sleep for days, i decided to try and analyse this without the usual visual inspection.

on the original changeset seen at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74189315 which created this polygon, you see that 1868 new nodes were uploaded to osm.

when i process the node list of post-andre's polygon, i get the same number:
freebeer@Jim ~ $ grep  \ 677.......$  /tmp/722581561 |wc -l
1869
freebeer@Jim ~ $ grep  \ 677.......$  /tmp/722581561 |sort -u | wc -l
1868

one node is counted twice as both start and end of the closed polygon ring.

as nothing was deleted, i can compare the list of both without a diff just yet:

freebeer@Jim ~ $ grep  \ 677.......$  /tmp/722581561.v2 |sort | uniq -c | grep -v -e '      2 '
      5      * 6778004510

so somehow this node was included at three extra positions in the original...
or less sinisterly, it was the start/end node and only duplicated once, your original below andre's fix:

freebeer@Jim ~ $ grep -1  6778004510  /tmp/722581561.v2 

     * 6778004510
     * 6778004511
--
     * 6778003887
     * 6778004510

--

     * 6778004510
     * 6778004511
--
     * 6778003887
     * 6778004510
     * 6778004510

hope that helps to understand, and see no change of significance was made.
MV_GIS (2019-09-10 17:49:20+00:00): Good morning again. Thank you for your insight and mods of this. The original problem may have originated from the simplification of the original 11,000 nodes of this very intricate and large polygon. I would guess that the simplification process does condense 2+ points into one vertex. I was about to review and modify my original polygon to see if I could fix it. If you have already sufficiently modified it, I am satisfied if some vertices are inadvertently dropped. We are more concerned to simply display the polygon than to be 100% accurate. Should I modify and resubmit this?
freebeer (2019-09-11 01:15:26+00:00): if you are satisfied with the detail in the simplified polygon, no need to do anything.

you are aware that if you want to keep the full level of detail, you can split the original polygon into a number of smaller sections, uploading each as outers of a multipolygon?

i would have to zoom into some closely-separated points to see what i think about the amount of detail,  which varies greatly across canada from miserable to poor, and probably excellent in places.

i can't guess how many figures of cm detail you have, but if i still can't sleep again, i may look into this too.
freebeer (2019-09-11 03:58:53+00:00): good morning, almost, depending on how you define it - the to-work commuters are flowing in the dark.

i zoomed in on your polygon around https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6777984774 where it looked sufficiently jaggy.  i measured the distance to the nearby node as over 15 metres, far outside of the osm pickiness/pettiness range today, so the simplification you applied is more than i feel comfortable accepting.

more importantly, what is this you are uploading?  it has no tags, and i suspect it is a boundary that may be related to the rough mapped boundary i see following it near here.

i would say, now that i have looked at it, split this into multiple pieces at the original resolution, that appears to be greater than a metre, not cm as i feared.

with 1868 nodes resulting in over a hundred text pages per change when reviewing details, i'd almost want to compromise closer to 500 where something is frequently modified, but i suspect whatever this is, that should not be the case here.

so, if your data is precise, go for the multipolygon at full resolution detail, unless this is something where it doesn't matter (yet).

\happy to help, i'm learning a lot.
MV_GIS (2019-09-13 21:36:47+00:00): Good afternoon

Thanks for your help on this. I did modify the tags - basically it is a closed drinking watershed - but the polygon is not displaying when zoom out to its full extent. If I zoom in, I can see the boundary and i can query it. The neighbouring Seymour Watershed does display. What else do I need to do? I was hoping that it just needed an overnight refresh of the data.
Enjoy your weekend
freebeer (2019-09-14 22:41:22+00:00): good middle-of-the-night, with a wonderful moon here.  after one of the most amazing sunsets i spent well over an hour watching when i should have been mapping.

thanks for the update; i can confirm the area you have added is displayed viewing https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/49.55191/-123.10189&layers=N .

it will take some time until it appears at all zoom levels like the default for this changeset that is a low seldom-updated zoomlevel.

in fact, viewing the link i provided and zooming out to z14 or z13, i see weirdness that i can only explain by realising at the moment i'm lacking 'net connectivity, so...

back again.  cheers...
user_5359 (2019-09-07 05:29:27+00:00): Welcome to OSM! The standard keys for address in the United States are addr:housenumber, addr:street, addr:postcode,  addr:city, addr:state. You can also add addr:country but you miss addr:state.
ChehrehBargi (2019-09-28 05:44:44+00:00): در نقاطی که اطلاعی ندارید به هیچ وجه تغییر ندهید. این کار شما خرابکاریست. زحمات دیگر کاربران را چرا خراب می کنید؟ شما قبلا هم بلوار جام جم را که انتهای آن بسته شده، به بلوار مقدس اردبیلی متصل کرده بودید. این کار شما برای چندین بار انجام گرفته و گزارش خواهد شد.
Kovoschiz (2019-09-07 08:42:59+00:00): `foot=designated` tagged as `cycleway`
ClarkstonCorrect (2019-09-07 09:01:05+00:00): what
hasaan22 (2019-09-07 09:17:27+00:00): nothing. I made a mistake.
Carnildo (2019-09-08 03:07:20+00:00): You've been making these mistakes every few days for quite a while.  Please figure out what you're doing wrong and stop doing it.
4004 (2019-09-08 19:32:47+00:00): уже отмечено, смотрите например в османд
user_5359 (2019-09-07 10:44:26+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have revert your changeset because your business is not the street. Please try again to mark the place of your business (and not the street) to add your business information.
mavl (2019-09-08 16:29:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74230370 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3144].
کانون تبلیغات نگارستان مهر (2019-09-07 06:01:05+00:00): از همکاری شما متشکرم
mavl (2019-09-08 16:29:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74230370 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3144].
freeExec (2019-09-26 05:23:01+00:00): Раз переехали, то точку с собой забирайте, что она на Карла Маркса осталась
Светлана Демидова (2019-09-26 07:48:10+00:00): Спасибо! Точку переставили!
rivermont (2019-09-08 00:57:54+00:00): Hi,
Did you actually check this data before removing it?
I started a multi for an in-progress landcover and even added a note to alert other mappers to its intent.
sebastic (2019-09-08 06:01:26+00:00): I did. You shouldn't upload invalid multipolygons. Upload it when it's ready. If iD doesn't allow that, switch to JOSM.
rivermont (2019-09-08 16:52:44+00:00): That's probably fair.

But it would be nice if you explained to all these mappers why you are deleting their edits. Most will likely never notice their work is gone, and won't know how to check where it went.

Your changeset comments are also rather misleading; you say you're "fixing old-style multipolygons" but really you are just deleting those that have errors.
sebastic (2019-09-08 17:04:50+00:00): I'm fixing objects in the old-style.osm.pbf dataset, which includes relations with only type=multipolygon and no other descriptive tags, the changeset comment reflects that.

See: http://area.jochentopf.com/

If a mapper doesn't notice that his incomplete/incorrect relation is gone, it's not a loss.

I don't have time to educate mappers about their edits, I already spend my time on fixing the issues.

To any of these mappers reading this, here's some advice. Use the only decent editor: JOSM, it has a great validator and tools to help you map correctly, catching issues like these before upload, or preventing them all together. iD is not a good editor for none trivial objects like relations, and its developer has shown a disturbing disconnect with the OSM community, making it highly unlikely that it will ever become on par with JOSM or even superseding it.
mueschel (2019-09-10 13:18:30+00:00): Hi, you added several objects with a tag "man_made_feature" - this is not a common tag and is not documented. Please have a look to the Wiki to find a tag that is appropriate for these objects.
Thanks
Jan
Alecs01 (2019-09-07 07:30:51+00:00): Ciao e benvenuto su OpenStreetMap, se devi indicare che quel negozio non è più lì, devi togliere nome e tag shop=* non l'indirizzo, così è ancora presente
scratera (2019-09-07 07:11:18+00:00): ...dal sito l'indirizzo è :
Informazioni base:
Regione:
Trentino-Alto Adige
Provincia Trento
Tipo di scuola:
STATALE
Categorie:
Scuola primaria
Indirizzo:
VIA PROVINCIALE
38060  ISERA
Codice fiscale:
TNIC845008
Telefono:
0464421098
Fax:
0464421098
E-mail:
segr.ic.isera_roveretoE-mailscuole.provincia.tn.it
ic.isera-roveretoE-mailpec.provincia.tn.it
WWW:
www.isera-rovereto.it
drazde (2019-10-01 13:44:31+00:00): Non mi sembrava di aver modificato l'indirizzo
abakus_uploader (2019-09-07 22:30:59+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!
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-06 17:20:00+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6778924992/history has shop = carpeter that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
Was it supposed to be shop=carpet? craft=carpenter? Something else?
philippec (2020-05-04 08:02:53+00:00): Is het verstandig een naam te geven aan een openbare boekenkast ?
Jakka (2020-05-04 08:27:32+00:00): Als deze daar opstaat waarom niet, soms vul je operator in, van welke organisatie deze afhangen, dan komen die ook zichtbaar ter vervanging naam .....
user_5359 (2019-09-08 11:14:06+00:00): hello, there is no need to translate a hydrant value into two languages and insert both into OSM! Please remember that OSM keys are written in lower case letters. And don't forget to enter the meaning of these keys in the wiki.
user_5359 (2022-03-04 07:46:14+00:00): Hello, I am trying to find out the meaning of the tag addr:rt. Can you kindly tell me something about the meaning?