piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ramthelinefeed (2021-10-15 18:26:18+00:00): Mac, are you sure it's sensible to revert that? If you look at the documentation for a "marked cycle crossing" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway=crossing ) you'll see a photograph of one that is simply marked with white paint. (The ones here in Whitechaple are marked with blue tarmac and white paint). There is nothing in the documentation about 'physical' separation (by which I guess we'd mean kerbs?). I don't see how you could generally have kerbs on a marked cycle crossing, because by definition it has to cross another carriageway at something like right angles, so if there there kerbs then the traffic crossing it would bump into them :)
MacLondon (2021-10-18 14:45:13+00:00): Despite the elephant track marks, this is just a junction rather than an actual crossing, basically with the blue anti-skid asphalt marked out to guide cyclists. AFAIK it is not an offence for motorists to enter them and they can definitely 'left hook' into 'crossing' cyclists turning into Whitechapel Rd from Vallance Rd or New Rd. 

The UK forum 'consent' is that mapping should be of actual physical separation and that painted lines/markings are not a physical barrier/separation.

Tagging the road with cycleway=lane is the best way to represent the layout here.

I know you have a keen eye for the coloured asphalt - you could tag here with "cycleway:lane:colour=blue".
ramthelinefeed (2021-10-18 16:35:47+00:00): Well... it's not the same kind of 'marked cycle crossing' as a 'tiger' (paralled to a zebra), no (where the idea is that cyclists always have right of way) - this one is instead controlled by traffic lights, and cyclists get to go first (or is it one of those ones where cyclists have to wait whilst the lights let cars go, then cyclists get a chance after ... I forget!)
I still thought of it as a marked crossing, in that there's a clear marked path across a road that cyclists are directed to use. 


> The UK forum 'consent' is that mapping should be of actual physical separation and that painted lines/markings are not a physical barrier/separation.

But surely crossings (either bike or pedestrian) can't use physical separation? (Unless they are a flyover or an underpass) - where two streams physically cross, they can only ever be indicated with markings, and some kind of control used to enforce who is allowed to be on the crossing at any time - either traffic lights, or automatic right of way for one more? 
How would you achieve physical separation?
MacLondon (2021-10-18 20:05:31+00:00): This isn't a crossing, it's a signalised junction. Vallance Rd <-> New Rd is a single carriageway with no protected cycleway. Crossings usually are perpendicular to the flow of traffic.

This junction just has advisory with-flow lanes for cyclists, with broken white lines meaning that motorists, including ambulances to the adjacent hospital, can still drive into these lanes. It's not much different to all other cycle lanes.

At the junction there's just an early release of 2-3 seconds for cyclists. Although there are markings for a 'turn right in 2 phases' here...  if willing to chance it when the lights change, you can veer out of the painted 'advisory' lane at any point and turn right (if e.g. no cyclists are coming from the opposite direction.) I've done this several times on early Saturday mornings.

Even if sticking to the painted lane to go straight across, it's very obvious you're still on an unprotected roadway (especially as Tower Hamlets doesn't have the best standard of driving!)

If there was e.g. an island then it would be mapped as a separate way, such as at https://goo.gl/maps/HpGo7p1pf4UyGkuq8.
danieldegroot2 (2021-11-16 10:27:00+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9173536458/history

There are some one-ways clashing here. The one-way heading west => east has to make a very sharp u-turn.

Regards,

Daniel
wwunjo (2021-12-13 06:07:39+00:00): Daniel, thanks for paying attention to my changeset, corrections have been made.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112525100
mueschel (2021-10-16 08:56:19+00:00): Hi & welcome to OSM,
All these only contain foreign data, no valid OSM tags. Please read the OSM import guidelines - every import of foreign data has to follow these:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
tastrax (2021-10-17 01:58:21+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
spiregrain (2021-10-15 05:50:08+00:00): Note that Great Eastern Road is signed as being part of C2, toward Bow - sign at Unresolved note #2860161
manings (2021-10-15 03:12:08+00:00): Correction: vacant space
nevw (2021-10-15 07:12:04+00:00): Hi
the land boundary that encompassed a construction site probably would be better tagged as landuse=residential if the construction of the apartments is completed.
The building=apartments tag is meant to be an outline of the individual apartment buildings instead of a blanket use for a area containing multiple buildings.
You will likely be able to map the individual buildings by using the more recent Bing imagery.
nevw (2021-10-15 07:13:15+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dapartments

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dresidential
TylerHurd (2021-10-15 07:22:30+00:00): Hey nevw. Thanks for that. I changed it to residential area now.
Supaplex (2022-10-17 05:04:21+00:00): 請問為何要移除這棟建築的商店屬性?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/695758537/history
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112526214
Warin61 (2021-10-15 07:49:35+00:00): 1) it is NOT possible to source this from the imagery stated.
2) the area over laps the Fryers Ridge Nature Conservation Reserve. 
3) state forests are not nature conservation reserves - they are landuse=forest.
Warin61 (2021-10-15 07:55:07+00:00): I believe MapshareVic is NOT suitable for use in OSM. 
See https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ 

I note that MapshareVic also states that some of the data is from other parties that may need to be contacted for their permission to use their data. 

In short do not use t MapshareVic data. Unless you have written permission to do you  - in which case produce it.
nevw (2021-10-15 05:49:33+00:00): I think natural=tree is the tag used for individual trees
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=tree
nevw (2021-10-18 09:38:46+00:00): You need to correct the tagging or it will be reverted.
nevw (2021-10-24 03:26:34+00:00): Hi
I converted these to natural=tree
adrianojbr (2021-10-15 20:25:21+00:00): Olá, kaykim-. Para as boas práticas de mapeamento, recomenda-se não ligar as áreas (residenciais, matas...) às ruas, isso porque de fato uma área não é grudada na via no mundo real (sempre há um espaço separando, seja o meio-fio, acostamento, calçada...) e facilitar a edição de um elemento sem afetar o outro. Abraço.
kaykim- (2021-10-16 00:29:06+00:00): Okay, entendo perfeitamente e não vou mais fazer assim.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 17:16:43+00:00): Это не residential, а service. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:highway
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112527356
mavl (2021-10-16 13:41:35+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок добавляет тупиковую улицу со статусом highway=tertiary. Этот статус используется для транзитных улиц.  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:highway
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:40:11+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.
rab (2021-10-15 17:13:29+00:00): Promising first edits!
Maxar background imagery layer is much more up-to-date.
You can switch the background by typing "b" or by clicking on the layer icon.
Chipadze residential area has disappeared because one of its outer ways is not closed.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6870420
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/992976075
John Kastner (2021-10-15 12:31:16+00:00): I haven't been over that bridge for a couple weeks, but, iirc, it was replaced some time last year and has been open since then.
ElliottPlack (2021-10-15 14:06:00+00:00): Oh, damn. I was assuming Greenway People have better intel. If that's the case I'll just revert this one.
ElliottPlack (2021-10-15 14:06:23+00:00): PG Parks still shows it closed :p
ElliottPlack (2021-10-15 14:39:44+00:00): I have emailed PG parks to see if they know.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 17:35:00+00:00): Внутри границы НП addr:city избыточен, так как НП наследуется из границы. Тем более статус задаётся тегом, а слово "деревня" в name не пишется.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112528051
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 17:35:37+00:00): Также можно использовать клавишу Q для выпрямления углов зданий правильной формы.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112528051
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:53:54+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.
user_5359 (2021-10-28 12:14:05+00:00): Hello! Please notice your typo "operator:wikipedia=de"="Die Schweizerische Post" the correct tag is "operator:wikipedia"="de:Die Schweizerische Post"
BBMaper (2021-11-15 07:47:51+00:00): Hello, Thanks for your comment. I'll correct it. Thanks.
literan (2021-10-15 17:31:18+00:00): поломали вы лесополосу и прочее мощно. Откачу
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:59:50+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.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:56:47+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.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 17:09:41+00:00): Номера телефонов указываются в формате +7 911 1047404
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112528891
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:56:52+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.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 17:08:24+00:00): тег crossing=zebra не используется в России. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:crossing
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112529200
tigerskin (2021-11-16 11:40:19+00:00): да, спасибо, понял
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112529200
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 17:02:52+00:00): Fix Price - это не супермаркет. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:shop%3Dvariety_store
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112529221
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:03:08+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.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 17:01:27+00:00): Если он закрыт не временно, надо просто удалить точку, а не часть тегов с точки.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112529303
DUGA (2024-05-18 21:19:34+00:00): They are considered as cell towers but not just the antenna
phd0 (2024-05-18 21:25:15+00:00): Hello, no problems, you can correct it, or I'll take care of it. but next time, remember to determine the precise point that is bothering you. On large modifications, it's difficult to find what you're talking about

it is ? : 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/29.74577/-95.74040
DUGA (2024-05-18 21:36:44+00:00): 10ways+11nodes is not a large changeset, you can easily understand what I meant.

Fixed by myself.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:29+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.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:27+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.
literan (2021-11-09 08:54:31+00:00): теги bicycle=yes, foot=yes лишние. Подробнее см. у меня в профиле. Почищу.
tigerskin (2021-11-16 11:41:24+00:00): я такое не должен был ставить.. ххм.. спасибо
gendy54 (2021-12-18 19:44:30+00:00): Bonjour,

L'ajout de données personnelles est strictement interdite (RGPD). Je reverte les modifications
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:57:11+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.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:53:44+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.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 16:59:48+00:00): foot=yes и bicycle=yes - это значения по умолчанию и указывать их явным образом не требуется
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112529950
mueschel (2021-10-17 12:08:36+00:00): Hi,
the key "parking:lane:lanes" is not used anywhere else - what does it mean?
Kovoschiz (2021-10-21 02:24:13+00:00): I need to indicate: 
1. A stopping restriction area across different lanes (this situation)
2. An additional stopping restriction outside of parking bays to control the parking bay and lanes separately
Kovoschiz (2021-10-21 02:27:25+00:00): 2 is needed for double parking, allowing vehicles to stop outside of special parking bays, or allow stopping in a parking bay on the side of a `=fire_lane`.
mueschel (2021-10-22 14:33:45+00:00): This seems to be complicated to tag properly :-) I fear there won't be much support for this tag in the parking-related maps we have.

I would try to put the parking bay on a separate object (there is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dstreet_side )
and have the restrictions outside the bays on parking:condition tags.
fndoder (2021-11-16 21:44:38+00:00): Я чуть-чуть уточнил три точки:
1) У могил перекинул их описание в тег описания, убрал описание из имени - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113870819
2) Удалил дубль тоннеля в Русско-Немецкой Швейцарии (он уже был замаплен ранее)
Tim Apelov (2021-11-17 07:14:37+00:00): Тоннель то тут как достопримечательность. Паломничество к нему не слабое.
fndoder (2021-11-17 07:23:05+00:00): Достопримечательность - понятие субъективное.
Но раз туристам интересно, пусть будет.
Вернул тег достопримечательности (на сам тоннель) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113883245
Tim Apelov (2021-11-17 07:37:40+00:00): Он будет отображаться точкой на условном Maps Me? Это очень мощная локальная достопримечательность - фактически каждый, кто приходит в этот парк сюда заглядывает. Посмотрите сколько там фото и отзывов на Яндекс Картах (33 оценки!) и сколько фотографий в группе парка:  https://vk.com/kaz_sui

Так что считаю, что однозначно это достопримечательность и она станет ещё более важной при реконструкции парка. Будет странно если её нельзя будет найти на OSM, но запросто на Я Картах.
fndoder (2021-11-17 07:47:34+00:00): Да, это будет обрабатываться навигаторами корректно.
В качестве примера см. линию (полигон, а не точку) Эйфелевой башни - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5013364

Там тоже тег tourism=attraction стоит на самой башне, а не отдельной точкой (так как объект один). Навигаторы корректно обрабатывают это.
Tim Apelov (2021-11-17 07:49:53+00:00): Супер, спасибо!
eggie (2021-10-15 12:22:35+00:00): Beste Reisinformatiegroep

Inderdaad niet veilig 
Het lijkt me niet dat hier een highway=path naar de overzijde loopt. Het zal ook niet de bedoeling zijn om hier over te steken. 
Het lijkt me beter om het helemaal te verwijderen. Er is immers helemaal geen pad. 
Haal je het zelf weg?
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-10-15 12:51:27+00:00): De oversteek heb ik verwijderd en tevens bicycle=no en foot=no op de verbindingsstukken tussen Maasbergseweg en fietspad. Dat us niet verboden en zal nu kunnen routeren.
Gr eggie
Reisinformatiegroep (2021-10-15 13:24:15+00:00): Bedankt eggie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:01:42+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.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:59:49+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.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:50:52+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.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 16:07:16+00:00): osm - не для частных точек. Храните свои точки локально, а не в общей базе. Данный чейнджсет откачу.

Если это действительно гостевой дом с именем "Дача" и доступный для найма, то пересоздайте точку с контактной информацией.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112530795
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:54:05+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.
Andrea Musuruane (2021-10-15 09:43:28+00:00): Ciao. I nomi delle strade si inseriscono in OSM senza abbreviazioni. Inoltre, i nomi sono quelli presenti nello stradario cittadino e solitamente riportati sulle targhe. Ciao, Andrea
Riccasoli (2021-10-20 09:50:57+00:00): Sistemato il nome esteso della Strada Comunale. Non risultano altri nomi propri e ufficiali della strada se non "Strada per Frazione Mulino" , ma non è censito. Grazie per l'appunto e scusa l'inesperienza: sono alle prime armi!
msevilla00 (2021-10-15 10:26:46+00:00): Hola noti8,
Acabo de ver tu recien añadido nodo en OSM y quería hacerte notar que el etiquetado de los nombres no pueden llevar acrónimos. O sea has de poner extenso ese "CPI" y si quieres incluir una etiqueta extra con el acrónimo pero bajo la etiqueta name no debes poner siglas. Gracias
Un saludo
noti8 (2021-10-15 10:33:37+00:00): Ya lo he corregido. Gracias!
gallseife (2023-04-23 14:58:55+00:00): Du hast mit dieser Änderung unter anderem das neue ESTW-A gelöscht. Ich weiss nicht was noch kaputt gegeangen ist, aber stelle die Sachen doch bitte wieder her.
ftcat (2021-10-16 14:09:51+00:00): Hi Jesper Kamuhuza,

Isn't place=village a better tag rather than amenity= community_centre
VictorIE (2026-07-01 01:56:04+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/112531926

"fixme=is this a ruin?" - that it shows up in 4 sets of overhead photos over a period of a decade suggests it is more than just funny shaped trees or an optical illusion.

I think marking it as a ruin until we have better information is reasonable.
b-unicycling (2026-07-02 23:58:14+00:00): added
Polarbear-repair (2021-10-16 14:15:52+00:00): Hallo ADAC Kartographie,
welche Quellen benutzt du für deine Änderungen? Eine Einbahnstrasse kann man aus dem angegebenen Luftbild sicher nicht erkennen?
Ausserdem verweise ich auf die https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines und schreibe dich dazu nochmal gesondert an.
ADAC Kartographie (2021-10-26 09:36:13+00:00): Hallo Polarbear-repair,
wie bereits von ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme im Austausch mit dir angesprochen, handelt es sich hierbei um eine Rückmeldung eines Mitgliedes. Wir werden unsere Vorgehensweise diesbezüglich in Zukunft abändern.
MfG
ParadoX_ZLWC (2021-11-04 07:37:17+00:00): 请不要将综合实践基地等非军事区域标注为军事区。
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:54:44+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.
user_10360149 (2021-10-15 08:45:40+00:00): 你们西方记者啊，标注之前先去看看，中科院和中国人民解放军之间到底是啥关系，CAS和PLA之间，一个属于科学系统，一个属于军队，完全不沾边
你要是说国防科大是军事区都还算沾点边，但是中科院是军事区，只能说明你们西方记者还需要学习一个