piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Korgi1 (2022-03-09 00:00:04+00:00): I hate when JOSM does this. Same as usual, just added buildings.
drivec (2022-05-11 01:53:40+00:00): Reverted and fixed based on free imagery, city GIS, and traces.
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-03-07 04:42:41+00:00): تم عكس هذه التعديلات التخريبية والتخريب مهما كان كبيراً بالامكان عكسه:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118181323
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118181316
drivec (2022-05-11 01:53:31+00:00): Reverted and fixed based on free imagery, city GIS, and traces.
drivec (2022-05-11 01:53:24+00:00): Reverted and fixed based on free imagery, city GIS, and traces.
MxxCon (2022-03-07 07:00:09+00:00): Hello.
It appears that you mapped this restaurant both as a POI node and tagged the whole building.
This goes against the guideline of "one feature - one OSM object." You can read more about it here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
To better figure out which of your edits is more accurate, does this restaurant occupy the whole building or only the ground floor and above it are residential/office space?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118182108
SomeoneElse (2022-03-07 13:55:12+00:00): Hello,
Can you explain in what way you thought that the previous Beaufort Sea node was "redundant"?  Can you explain what your source for https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13899391/history in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118179500 .  That changeset lists sources of "Existing OSM data; CanVec; CGNDB"; can you explain how CanVec or CGNDB defines exactly https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13899391/history , and where you discussed this project with other Canadian mappers?
Best Regards,
Andy
DENelson83 (2022-03-07 16:23:24+00:00): It was redundant under this guideline.  <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element>

These sea names do appear in the CanVec database and in the CGNDB.  As well, I used the IHO definition for the Beaufort Sea given in Wikipedia.

I discussed this project on the talk-ca mailing list, and there was no consensus either for me mounting this project, or against.  I have had some opposition to doing this project, but have also had some support.
SomeoneElse (2022-03-07 16:29:30+00:00): Does CanVec have a name on a map (the equivalent of an OSM node) or the explicit area you have drawn?
DENelson83 (2022-03-07 19:36:33+00:00): CanVec and CGNDB were in fact my overarching sources on this project.  "Beaufort Sea" does appear in CGNDB, and I have not looked in the CanVec data to see that is indeed there.  If necessary, I can change the "source" field in the Beaufort Sea relation to say CGNDB, and I can do this for many other such relations.
SomeoneElse (2022-03-07 22:47:23+00:00): > "Beaufort Sea" does appear in CGNDB

It'd be good to have a look at it - where is that available?
DENelson83 (2022-03-07 23:12:34+00:00): http://www4.nrcan.gc.ca/search-place-names/unique/LACKU
SomeoneElse (2022-03-07 23:40:00+00:00): Thanks
DENelson83 (2022-03-08 00:08:06+00:00): I have just read your urgent message, and I will no longer be editing seawater data until further notice.  I will instead proceed with other edits, such as those around my hometown.
SomeoneElse (2022-03-08 00:13:26+00:00): Thanks again.
Patr1k_P (2022-03-08 17:44:08+00:00): trochu si doplietol to ihrisko, ale neuviedol si to do stavu v akom to bolo predtym..
InfosReseaux (2022-06-21 09:18:27+00:00): Bonjour, 

J'ai remarqué que vous avez utilisé la clé utility=* sur certains poteaux avec des valeurs multiples.
Pourtant il es recommandé de ne laisser que la valeur principale.
Par exemple sur les supports enedis (operator=Enedis), seule utility=power est valide.

Pourrez-vous faire ces quelques modifications svp ?
Q-OSM (2022-06-21 15:26:29+00:00): Voilà, normalement c'est fait !
user_5359 (2022-03-12 09:02:21+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219142454. Did you mean oneway:motor_vehicle instead onewa:motor_vehicle?
user_5359 (2022-03-12 09:04:39+00:00): By the way, I would recommend that you formulate the oneway=yes and the clearance extra (For bicycle there is also a "oncoming traffic is allowed")
Jorisbo (2022-03-12 12:26:08+00:00): Hi!, thx for the info about the typo.
I'm not known there. If I understand you  correctly you suggest oneway=yes + oneway:bicycle=no ?
But that would also make it a oneway for psv which it is not with the current tagging.
If it is an oneway for psv as well, then no problem off course.
My initial intention was solving "automated routing issues" so... for me it seamed harmless to change the uncommon "motor_vehicle:oneway" to the common tagging scheme oneway:xxxxx. (if not making new stupid typo's :-)

Kind regards
Joris
user_5359 (2022-03-12 16:38:29+00:00): Yes, but a router should be able to understand oneway=yes as a minimum. It's not bad if a bike or a bus can't get through, but it's bad if a car or bus comes in the opposite direction without permission.

Regards

Georg V.
GISH_ElAseel (2022-03-08 13:35:38+00:00): Hello rsuwaileh;
 I noticed you changed the value in "name:ar" tag  for this link:-
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/344309059/history
Could you verify the source for your edit?
Note;
there are sources in the mapillary tracks that show "name" tag should the same in "name:ar"
Mapillary links:-
1- https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=29.07737656066101&lng=48.12455424254301&z=17&focus=photo&pKey=602175614093161
2- https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=29.082682058199993&lng=48.13285918910003&z=19.3973337861098&focus=photo&pKey=1107953436361919
Please review  your edits and keep OpenStreetMap data much better.
Regards,
GISH_ElAseel
GeoGladbecker (2022-05-04 20:27:46+00:00): Hi,
du hast hier einiges von der Fahrradstraße entfernt.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/66317906#map=18/51.61005/7.19392

Bist du dir sicher, dass deine Änderung richtig ist?
So wie die Straße von M!Cado editiert wurde deutet es darauf hin, dass hier auch Kraftfahrzeuge durchfahren können, die sieht man auch auf den Luftbildern.

Die meisten Fahrradstraßen die ich bisher sah hatten die Freigabe für Anlieger als Zusatzschild dran ( z.B https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:motor_vehicle ).

Wie genau ist das hier beschildert?
Rom1 (2022-03-07 21:45:18+00:00): Bonjour, j'ai amélioré comme ceci https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9561333566
user_11609320 (2022-03-07 07:52:42+00:00): I deleted the headquarters node, as it is now in the city hall complex on upland. known as the fontana fire protection district
user_11609320 (2022-03-07 07:57:29+00:00): for the rest of the original staffing, not related to fontana fire stations, it is also at city hall. known as west valley division 1
Dodko (2022-03-09 21:14:31+00:00): Email adresa je chybná.
kapazao (2022-03-07 11:55:28+00:00): Hola, ¿de dónde estás sacando esos anchos de vía?
Esa vía junto a la facultad de informática no veo muy claro que tenga 5,5 metros.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118186223
Groctel (2022-03-07 12:10:43+00:00): He utilizado el nuevo sistema de realidad aumentada de StreetComplete contando con el espacio para aparcar coches al lado de la vía pegado a la escuela.
kapazao (2022-03-08 10:42:33+00:00): Entonces no es correcto, ya que la vía no tiene esa anchura. Esa información es para el ancho de la vía solamente.
Habría que añadir los aparcamientos a parte de la vía como parking=street_side.
Groctel (2022-03-08 11:46:15+00:00): Vale, tienes razón. Le he dado ochocientas vueltas y la verdad es que es un detalle que queda poco claro :s

Luego lo corrijo que estoy escribiendo esta respuesta con prisa!
osmviborg (2022-03-07 08:20:40+00:00): Vil du være så venlig at bruge SDFE kortet. Bing ser fint ud, men det er off-centreret i forhold til SDFE. Hvis du mener Bing er nyere skal du tilrette det med korrekt xy.
PT-53 (2022-03-18 06:56:07+00:00): Hallo Qwave,
dieses Multipolygon
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13899887#map=18/48.48907/9.07375
 hat nur diese 2 inner als Mitglieder:
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1037911824/history
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1037911823/history

Da braucht es doch gar kein MP, oder?
Schaust Du Dir das nochmal an?
Fragende Grüße
gscscnd (2022-03-07 12:22:39+00:00): Jeśli nie jest przeznaczony wyłącznie dla pieszych, to lepsze byłoby highway=path.
Leszek Czudek (2022-03-08 08:57:56+00:00): Wg mnie jest to dosyć typowy chodnik dla pieszych: wyraźne krawędzie, nawierzchnia z tłucznia, objęty geodezyjną inwentaryzacją powykonawczą (czego nie robi się w przypadku nieutwardzonych ścieżek). Więcej widać tu: http://cieszyn.geoportal2.pl/map/www/mapa.php?CFGF=wms&mylayers=%20OSM%20bdot500%20&myqlayers=%20bdot500%20&bbox=6554701.296,5526066.480,6554771.218,5526106.763&markery=
gscscnd (2022-03-08 12:16:08+00:00): Chodzi mi o użycie tagu highway=path (z odpowiednim surface) nie w celu oznaczenia ścieżki nieutwardzonej, tylko jako oznaczenie ścieżki, po której mogą się poruszać nie tylko piesi (ale np. użytkownicy różnych pojazdów bezsilnikowych). Zobacz pierwszy akapit z Wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=path):

> highway=path is a generic path, either multi-use or unspecified usage, open to all non-motorized vehicles and not intended for motorized vehicles unless tagged so separately. The path may have any type of surface.

Nie byłem w tym miejscu, nie będę się kłócić, chciałem tylko zwrócić uwagę na takie użycie tego tagu, którego mogłeś nie znać.
Leszek Czudek (2022-03-08 13:56:04+00:00): Dla porządku dodałem tag surface=paved. W dalszym ciągu utrzymuję, że jest ona przeznaczona głównie dla pieszych, ale faktycznie nie ma tam znaku C-16 (droga dla pieszych), więc aby nie wykluczać rowerów (które wg mnie mogą się tam poruszać) zmieniam na highway=path. Dzięki za czujność :-).
gscscnd (2022-03-08 14:17:36+00:00): Dzięki, miłego mapowania!
osmviborg (2022-03-07 08:37:13+00:00): landuse=grass
surface=dirt
Det giver ikke mening.
eggie (2022-03-07 08:39:02+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 


Feedback  Probeer een bedrijf toe te voegen op de bestaande adresnode.

MVG
eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-03-07 08:42:59+00:00): De info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode. 
mvg
eggie
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2022-03-08 01:51:32+00:00): Hi! This entrance is for both the employees of the residence (main entrance), and the residents themselves (home entrance). In our tools, we need both tags to be able to route residents to their home, and employees to the main entrance. Removing one of the tags makes it impossible to know that this entrance has a dual function. Can you explain why using both tags is problematic?
opendcc (2022-03-08 05:16:24+00:00): Ok, understood. I changed it back.

However, consider using entrance=service for employees.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2022-03-08 12:10:01+00:00): Thanks! In fact, we usually use entrances according to their main functions:
entrance=shop : main entrance for customers and/or employees for a commercial or industrial building
entrance=main : main entrance for visitors and/or employees for a public building, a park pavillion or a social facility (like a retirement home with employees)
entrance=home : main entrance for residents of a residential building
We never used entrance=service before, but we may change its function as you suggest. Thanks!
literan (2022-03-07 11:38:44+00:00): не поектируемый, а проектируемый
iWowik (2022-03-07 12:48:06+00:00): А я тут таких не найду никак
literan (2022-03-07 12:55:45+00:00): я исправил
mueschel (2022-03-21 14:08:04+00:00): Hi,
are you sure maxspeed = 0.5 is correct? I.e. almost nobody will be able to ride a bicycle there?
Jakka (2022-03-21 15:54:06+00:00): It must be "stapvoets" no faster then children can walk ? witch speed is that ?
mueschel (2022-03-21 16:20:36+00:00): We do have "maxspeed=walk" used, mainly in Austria and Germany
Jakka (2022-03-21 18:57:26+00:00): done thx
eggie (2022-03-07 09:08:09+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
mjans (2022-04-30 13:36:41+00:00): Ik heb de paden terug toegevoegd en getagd met 'acces=no' omdat deze nog wel aanwezig zijn maar niet toegankelijk. Relatie wandelroutes heb ik aangepast. Zie : https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=3045151&type=relation&map=14.0/51.0045/5.1425
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-03-07 11:11:53+00:00): Czy jesteś pewien że trwa tam budowa parky? A budowa tego tworu co się Cogiteon nazywa została zawueszona?
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-03-07 11:12:01+00:00): Czy jesteś pewien że trwa tam budowa parku? A budowa tego tworu co się Cogiteon nazywa została zawueszona?
JeroenHoek (2022-03-07 16:20:11+00:00): Dit geldt ook voor 10A denk ik?
JeroenHoek (2022-03-07 16:20:52+00:00): Ah die is ook gedaan, de tegel was nog niet herladen bij mij.
Patrickvw (2022-03-07 19:16:37+00:00): Bedankt Jeroen,  nu klopt het weer!
Vinber (2022-03-19 16:21:44+00:00): Bonjour,
parmi les 2 chemins piétonniers ajoutés
( il y en a 1 qui traverse ce qui semble être un domaine privé https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1037919540
- l'autre est également approximatif et peu de chose visible sur la bdortho prise comme source (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1037919541)

Décrit comme chemins piétonniers https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:highway=footway

N'est pas plutôt https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:highway%3Dpath

Bonne cartographie
Vinber (2022-03-19 16:14:48+00:00): Bonjour,
vous n'avez pas créé une piscine mais un plan d'eau.
Pour une piscine privée, il est préférable d'ajouter access=private.

Au regard du nom de votre compte, je pense qu'il peut-être intéressant de regarder https://dane.ac-lyon.fr/spip/bonnes-pratiques-osm-en-snt

Bonne cartographie
PengualaHeadphones (2023-11-12 13:40:51+00:00): Candaba Third Viaduct. As the name suggests, it must be one line on the map. Good job.
user_10901495 (2022-03-07 09:27:11+00:00): Questo mi sembra il tagging più corretto, se qualcuno vuole mostrare il nome di questo luogo sulla mappa il nodo c'è ancora, basta configurare il proprio stile di rendering per includere i place=municipality (che tra parentesi sono documentati sulla wiki di OpenStreetMap[1] e quindi non mi sono inventato).

[1]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dmunicipality
user_10901495 (2022-03-07 09:26:18+00:00): Questo mi sembra il tagging più corretto, se qualcuno vuole mostrare il nome di questo luogo sulla mappa il nodo c'è ancora, basta configurare il proprio stile di rendering per includere i place=municipality (che tra parentesi sono documentati sulla wiki di OpenStreetMap[1]  e quindi non mi sono inventato).

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dmunicipality
ivanbranco (2022-03-07 17:24:31+00:00): Hi Chetan, why you deleted the old place node and created an identical new one instead of just moving it?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118189458
maro21 (2022-03-09 20:16:07+00:00): Przychodnia nie powinna być w budynku?
I czy to jest przychodnia tylko dla pracowników? Bo nie dojdzie się tam po prywatnej drodze
gsapijaszko (2022-03-09 21:33:31+00:00): Zastanawiałem się czy nie zrobić relacji, gdyż przychodnia jest w obu budynkach. Ale uznałem, że punkt adresowy wystarczy. Przychodnia jest ogólnodostępna, łącznie z NFZ. Dostęp dla pieszych jest, jedynie przejazd odcinają szlabany.
maro21 (2022-03-19 20:33:57+00:00): Aha, w dwóch budynkach. To można dać jedno albo dwa POI. Tutaj np. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.09928/16.94150 też przychodnia jest w dwóch sąsiednich budynkach i dałem dwa POI, zwykle inni lekarze innych specjalności przyjmują, więc POI będą się trochę różnić

A o drogi to chodziło mi że jest access=private, więc jeśli każdy może tam wejść, to trzeba odpowiednio zmienić te restrykcje, np. dodać foot=yes albo motor_vehicle=private, w zależności od tego jakie tam są znaki.
Chieftl (2023-08-29 16:06:10+00:00): якщо магазин змінився з "Стиль Дах ІФ" на "Квіти" треба також оновити shop=roof на shop=floring та інші теги.
Розклад і сайт при цьому теж стають неактуральними.
habi (2022-03-10 09:24:00+00:00): Since `review_requested=yes`: Please add squared buildings when the buildings appear aquare in the available images, please *do* square them.
Since you're using JOSM, you could make use of the buildings tools plugin, which greatly helps you to do this: https://learnosm.org/en/josm/josm-more-plugins/
rskedgell (2025-09-18 12:08:13+00:00): I realise that this edit was made 3 years ago, but can you remember your source for the 25t (structural) weight limit on Kingsland Bridge?

I can see 3t mgw weight restrcition signs for goods vehicles at both ends of Kingsland Bridge (the private roads, not just the bridge) and have added these.
trigpoint (2025-09-19 22:27:41+00:00): https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=52.705742%7E-2.757386&lvl=16.5&style=x&pi=4.4&dir=149.9 may help.
Appears to be goods over 3t, which is odd.
I think I need to go and get some recent photos.
Cheers Phil
trigpoint (2025-09-19 22:28:11+00:00): Also a maxwidth of 2m2.
trigpoint (2025-09-20 09:18:20+00:00): See also https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1097517367413894

Its a privately operated road/bridge so the signs don't really conform to what is found on public roads.
rskedgell (2025-09-20 16:59:31+00:00): I've added ownership=private and treated the goods vehicle weight limit and width restriction as if the signs were on public roads. I suppose it also ought to be access=permissive, unless there's a PRoW?
rskedgell (2025-09-20 17:01:56+00:00): Although this doesn't tell us what any structural weight limit on the bridge is (unlikely to be a standard road sign), or whether it's tonnes or tons (lt).
trigpoint (2025-09-20 17:07:43+00:00): There are no signs on the bridge, just these signs at each end of the road.

The width limit will apply to the barriers https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=129075302573824

Note to self to check payment methods.
NieWnen (2022-03-08 11:38:17+00:00): It's already there.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/368946236
EMREOYUN (2022-03-18 18:49:21+00:00): Merhaba, OpenStreetMap'a hoş geldiniz. Harita katkılarınız için öncelikle çok teşekkür ederiz ve ekleyebileceğiniz başka katkılarınız varsa eklemekten çekinmeyin :)
eggie (2022-03-07 11:17:45+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Tip:  Geef concreet aan wat je hebt veranderd.


MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-03-09 09:22:22+00:00): Beste Aschwin..

Zou je eens opruiming hier kunnen houden en al die campings willen verwijderen?
Zet alles in een eigen layer..  bv in Umap. 
Wat is een Moetuin, Wembad, douce.. Zijn dat spelfouten?
Verder niet de nametag gebruiken voor functies. 

Het is nu verschillende keren gevraagd.
Graag een reactie.. 


MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-03-07 11:21:52+00:00): Welkom bij OSM.. Bedankt voor uw bijdrage,
MVG
eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Mahdi Nameghi (2022-03-08 08:45:04+00:00): سلام
تغییرات شما به دلیل نداشتن اطلاعات کافی و خرابکاری در نقشه ریورت شد. لطفا اگر اطلاعات کافی ندارین نقشه را ویرایش نکنید.
osm-esa (2022-06-05 20:55:19+00:00): Hallo Omme OSM,

Als Kommentar zu Deinem Änderungssatz schreibst Du "Lageverbesserung und Ergänzungen. " Warum zerstörst Du dann in diesem Änderungsssatz, andere habe ich bis jetzt nicht überprüft, zu großen Teilen die Historie von Objekten (Wohnblöcke, etc.), die nachweislich auch schon vor Deinen Änderungen in der Datenbank existiert haben?

Ich empfehle Dir nachdrücklich die Lektüre des entsprechenden Abschnittes der Mappinggrundsätze.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Erhalte_die_Chronik%E2%86%99
Dindia (2026-01-20 20:12:24+00:00): FYI: The paths were incorrectly set as FOOT PATH. This is incorrect according to : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway .


Footways tend to be constructed and either paved or with smooth surface (compacted, wood or similar). The elderly and small children and wheelchair users can use them with ease. They tend to be in urban settings. access=* is normally designated for pedestrians, which is often specified by street signs (or implied by local law).

Paths kept mainly by people repeatedly walking on them, or those that are only minimally constructed, are usually tagged as highway=path. Their surface might be uneven (typically ground) and one might need to be physically fit and situationally aware to use them. They tend to be located outside of urban enviromnent. Hiking trails are a typical example 

I fixed it by setting to PATH
taghizadeh11 (2022-03-07 11:33:59+00:00): primary Name
tonyf1 (2022-03-07 21:46:33+00:00): Hi, yes it is a gated community. The wiki says "Transit traffic forbidden" for destination, I can't see any signage prohibiting transiting. What did you base your decision on? Thanks Tony.
HighRouleur (2022-03-20 02:40:27+00:00): Yes a gated community is by definition has access for local traffic only as per the OSM wiki. Do you see there may be a better tag that can be used in this instance ?
tonyf1 (2022-03-20 02:51:32+00:00): So far I have only asked for your reasons for your decision. They may well have asserted "Transit traffic forbidden", by signage or otherwise. I don't know. Do I see a better tag? You could just leave out the access=destination. It may not be better, it may be.  At this point I'm just asking the question.
tonyf1 (2022-03-20 03:04:52+00:00): Thinking it through further, the wiki for access=destination could do with more detail.
There are the roads with zero or 1 outside connection, I would argue that access=destination is a nonsense.

There are estates like here where its very unlikely that anyone would want to use it as a shortcut and the body corporate would not bother to prohibit transit. There are examples, I think it was one of yours where the estate was a wedge between 2 major roads and there was a through connection and it was signposted somehow prohibiting through traffic.
tonyf1 (2022-03-26 05:05:33+00:00): Hi, I have recorded Mapillary images. There is no signage prohibiting transit traffic. The access=destination should be removed. See comment https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2022-March/016036.html

Please discuss at talk au, if I dont hear from you I assume its OK to revert this and similar cases  
Thanks
Tony
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-38.456087457862026&lng=145.25094882914004&z=17&pKey=353381520063445

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-38.456047769098&lng=145.24980862796&z=17&pKey=5422344284442260
tonyf1 (2022-04-09 02:03:34+00:00): Reverted in  Changeset #119489631
Please discuss before reverting
amtplskaart (2024-10-23 02:29:03+00:00): I found this road (way 563721694) is wide enough for motorcar to pass (Bing aerial imagery). Is there any reason why this road is "motorcar=no"?
PontaDoOuro (2024-10-24 03:23:47+00:00): Hello there, 

LakeComo is no longer on the team, so I will be handling this on their behalf. After investigating through the available resources involving the roadway in this location, I believe that our user possibly made an edit here based on information that is outdated. I agree with the updates that you have made here for the tagging as they seem to be reflect the roadway more accurately. 

Happy mapping and thanks again!
amtplskaart (2024-11-05 06:17:49+00:00): Thank you for your confirmation.
Cheers!
pio2_122 (2022-03-07 15:38:33+00:00): Ścieżki pieszo-rowerowe taguje się jako highway=path, a nie highway	footway (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:highway%3Dpath).

Zmiany częściowo wycofane.
mueschel (2022-03-09 17:29:25+00:00): Hi,
you added more than 1000 objects with these tags:
addr:teryt:sym_ul
addr:teryt:simc

These are not used in any other place, the usual keys are
teryt:sym_ul
teryt:simc

Could you check and fix this?
Mordechai23 (2022-03-09 18:08:28+00:00): This is not the only changeset with those tags. I'm aware of the issue and plan will correct all instances of those occuring
mueschel (2022-03-09 18:23:39+00:00): Let me know if you need help with that!