piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
iWowik (2021-09-13 18:54:48+00:00): День добрый!
Вы представляет едороги с одной полосой движения в каждую сторону в виде двух односторонних way.
Это не правильно.
Вероятно вас сбили с толку ранее неправильно замапленные улицы, но в OSM сложилось так, что двумя односторонними веями дорогу мапят либо при наличии физического разделителя между полосами, либо при большом количестве полос (3+3 и более).
А обычную проезжую часть мапят одним объектом (way).

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=840939#p840939
AleksandrB007 (2021-09-14 12:42:32+00:00): Здравствуйте, при добавлении маршрутов общественного транспорта столкнулся с проблемой восприятия OSM движения общественного транспорта в случаях, когда транспортное средство при совершении рейса в одну сторону несколько раз проходит один и тот же участок дороги. Как пример - это автобус №72 в г. Калининград, он следует в Чкаловск по Советскому проспекту, далее он разворачивается и следует в микрорайон Западный, там опять разворачивается, опять проезжает Советский проспект и возвращается в Чкаловск уже на конечный остановочный пункт. Для решения данной проблемы и в целом для упрощения восприятия движения маршрутов общественного транспорта я решил разбить основные дороги г. Калининграда на попутное и встречное направления с указанием направления движения через перекрёстки для каждого из направлений. После данных нововведений перекрёстки стали более понятны. Почитав wiki сделал вывод, что данный метод отображения улично - дорожной сети не запрещается. Хотелось бы узнать Ваше мнение насчёт моих предложений по отображению улично – дорожной сети.
literan (2021-09-15 08:26:16+00:00): AleksandrB007, согласно вики, односторонней дорогой мапятся дороги, на которых есть знак одностороннего движения. Из этого есть исключение - если улица разделена физическим разделителем, либо если есть три полосы в каждую сторону, тогда каждое направление следует мапить отдельным веем. Если две полосы в каждую сторону - то на выбор мапера. Если три и менее, то исключение не действует.

Что касается маршрутов автобуса, то отрезки дороги вполне могут включаться в отношение несколько раз. В Москве есть такие маршруты, где автобус даже  по односторонней дороге за один маршрут два раза проезжает (пример: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2742064)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:13+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.
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2021-10-01 14:18:45+00:00): 您好，注意到您修改了香港游艇会的区域，但是leisure=marina+sport=sailing所包围的区域为何不包含任何水域？
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:39+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.
habi (2022-12-16 11:45:01+00:00): Ciao defikarte_app
Der Defi gehört wohl ganz woanders hin, genau wie https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8571838626
Gruss aus der Nachbarschaft,
habi
chnuessli (2022-12-18 20:13:16+00:00): Ciao Habi

Ich habe den Defi gelöscht und am richtigen ort wieder eingetragen.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:54:17+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.
abakus_uploader (2021-09-09 22:32:14+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!
user_5359 (2021-09-09 10:15:26+00:00): Hello! Please don't add GPX traces to OSM. (use ele instead gpx:ele and reduce the number of digits)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:03:50+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 00:55:04+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 00:54:07+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 00:48:32+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 00:56:15+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.
goodidea (2026-04-13 02:10:21+00:00): Hall Teddy73! 

Im Neubaugebiet Franzenbrunnen hattest du 2021 mal Hausnummern eingetragen mit der note "Neubau, Hausnr geraten". 

Das war nicht immer so ganz glücklich geraten ... ;-)

Z.B. die obere Häuserreihe in der Echternacher Straße ... hier etwa ist es HN 28 statt der geratenen HN 16: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/974090922. Falsch war es ab der jetzigen HN 10. Und 12 und 14 scheint es nicht zu geben, hab ich jedenfalls nicht gesehen.

Ich war gestern dort + war erst mal sehr verwirrt wegen den eingetragenen Hausnummern und denen vor Ort (weil ich auch die note nicht gleich gesehen hab ...). Und mir ist es eigentlich auch nur durch Zufall überhaupt aufgefallen. Hat dann etwas gedauert, bis ich durchgeblickt hab, was zu ändern war und was die richtigen Nummern sind (das falsche Raten lag dort vielleicht an der 2. zurückgesetzten Häuserreihe, die halt mit nummeriert sind – vielleicht gab es die 2021 noch nicht?).

D.h.: vielleicht nächstes Mal besser doch nicht raten. Denn die waren jetzt 4 1/2 Jahre lang falsch ... Es fällt eben kaum auf und man kommt nicht ohne weiteres auf die Idee, dass solche Hausnummern falsch sein könnten. Ich denke, es ist besser, gar keine HN anzugeben, wenn es nicht klar ist. (Wenn neue Häuser keine HN haben, checkt es sicher eher mal jemand bzw. ein fixme, z.B. „Hausnummer noch zu ergänzen sobald bekannt“ könnte sinnvoll sein.)

Wollte es bloß mitteilen ...

Da sind jetzt noch ein paar Häuser mit dieser Note (Louis-Pergaud-Straße 13 bis 25 und Anita-Augspurg-Straße 8, 10, 11, 12) – das hab ich erst zuhause gesehen. Sollte man wohl auch nochmal checken zur Sicherheit und die note dann entfernen.

Viele Grüße und happy Mapping!
Teddy73 (2026-04-13 09:20:51+00:00): Hallo goodidea, ja, hast recht. Das war zu dem Zeitpunkt, als ich dort war, zu voreilig. Ich komme leider nicht mehr in die Nähe in nächster Zeit, um die restlichen fraglichen Nummern zu prüfen. Hoffe du findest mal die Zeit oder meine Raterei hat dort eine bessere Trefferquote. VG Teddy
goodidea (2026-04-15 11:55:35+00:00): Ja, kein Problem. Ich komme da öfters vorbei, vielleicht sogar heute noch. An den fraglichen Stellen stimmt es wahrscheinlich auch, nehme ich mal an. Es sind auch neue Häuser fertig gebaut oder noch in Bau, von denen nur wenige bisher sichtbare Hausnummern haben (im 3. Bauabschnitt). Ich versuch es im Auge zu behalten. VG!
JeroenvanderGun (2021-09-22 19:14:22+00:00): Ik heb deze wijzigingenset teruggedraaid.

LEZEN A.U.B.: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110855731
kartonage (2021-09-11 07:33:08+00:00): Hej und willkommen bei OpenStreetMap,

die beiden von dir veränderten Objekte sind building:parts. Diese befinden sich in einem Gebäude-Objekt um 3D-Elemente darzustellen.
Da sie nur eine Erweiterung zum schon vorhandenen Gebäude-Objekt sind, benötigen sie kein vollständiges building-Tag. Mehr Informationen dazu hier: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Simple_3D_Buildings

Beste Grüße
ivanbranco (2021-09-14 20:30:38+00:00): Hi Chris,

you added many check:date tags (40 uses) while the correct tag is check_date (310.000 uses), can you fix it?

https://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22check%3Adate%22%3D*+global&R
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:01:14+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 00:59:15+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.
maraf24 (2021-09-30 09:41:58+00:00): Usunęli znak D-40?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/744159043
Mordechai23 (2021-09-30 10:47:45+00:00): nie, to źle zmapowałem z rozpędu. Dzięki za czujnosc, poprawiłem
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:22+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 01:02:45+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 00:55:41+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.
maraf24 (2021-09-14 14:56:23+00:00): Dlaczego zmieniłeś kładkę na footway?
Nie ma tam zakazu jazdy rowerem.
maraf24 (2021-09-14 15:01:44+00:00): Podobnie połączenia przy schodach, nawigacja rowerowa po takich zmianach nie działa.
maraf24 (2021-09-14 15:47:09+00:00): Poprawiłem.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:01:28+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.
aachso (2021-09-09 12:50:41+00:00): Hallo stoni100, die richtige URL für diese Tankställe wäre doch https://www.oil-tankstellen.de/tankstellen-tankstationen/tankstellenfinder-kraftstoffpreise-benzinpreise/tankstelle/trierer-strasse-856-52078-aachen/ und nicht der Tankstellenfinder, oder?
aachso (2021-09-09 12:51:10+00:00): (Warum ich da jetzt "Tankställe" geschrieben habe, weiß ich auch nicht :D )
stoni100 (2021-09-09 13:28:17+00:00): ja ist besser und auch schon drin 

Grüße

stoni100
joost schouppe (2021-09-10 09:29:38+00:00): Hoi,
Kan je even aangeven waarop je je baseert om deze paden te veranderen naar fietspad? Zie ook https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110615732
natuur_POV (2021-11-09 09:45:32+00:00): aangepast aan opmerkingen
alexey_zakharenkov (2021-09-17 11:01:44+00:00): Добрый день.
На панорамах видны адресные таблички, например на доме w539902162. Кажется, всё же надо было улицу переименовать, а не адреса исправлять.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:57:48+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 00:52:00+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 00:53:49+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 00:51:32+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 00:48:48+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 01:00:36+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 00:59:12+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 00:59:11+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.
Allison P (2021-10-13 17:46:32+00:00): These are residential roads. I have updated them as such.
chosayan (2021-10-14 06:42:56+00:00): Hi,

Thank you for reviewing my changeset and correcting the edit.
Apologies, for the incorrect road classification, I'll ensure not to repeat such errors going forward. Thanks again, I'm looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
chosayan
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:51:08+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.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:58:11+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.
tpcolson (2021-09-09 14:47:03+00:00): It appears you are adding many parking areas where in fact they may not be parking areas. Are the parking areas you're adding marked/designated as parking, or simply areas where others in the past have parked a vehicle, destroying vegetation and causing resource damage? Do you have a secondary data source that can be used to verify the validity of these parking areas? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking defines "authorised users". Are all of the parking areas you're adding authorized parking areas?
tpcolson (2021-09-09 14:50:37+00:00): In addition, it appears your are deleting parking routes (lines), and replacing them with polygons, often without the tags that were associated with the routes, most importantly, name. Can you source the reason for deleting the routes, which per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking, prevents this statement from being true: "Routers generally are unable to route within an area without explicit roads and paths". Please justify your deletions.
DougPeterson (2021-09-09 16:12:49+00:00): I have not added any parking areas that were not paved and lined accordingly. I have avoided adding any informal parking and am looking at removing one area that looks like it could be that way. There is not an uninterrupted lane edge marker on that one. 

The service roads are non-existent in the majority of cases. There is no separation between the road and the parking area. You park there, you do not drive there. You have immediate access to the parking from the main road.

I am not knowledgeable enough about routers and why they cannot route to a parking area attached to the road as that is a common situation. That would mean creating roads where they do not really exist.
DougPeterson (2021-09-09 16:14:33+00:00): In terms of tags, I had attempted to be diligent in copying tags from either the parking node or the service road. If I missed some, that was unintentional.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:58:59+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.
Impulsu (2021-09-22 09:59:54+00:00): The river continues into Germany, so a relation is necessary
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/81452245/history
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-09-15 23:55:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 111264809 where the changeset comment is: Reverting a number of changes (at the request of the mapper) following PM reply to https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111068364 , https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/111046069 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5333 .
ivanbranco (2021-09-12 06:53:07+00:00): Hi Cubbe,

I see many undocumented tags, is this an import?

Here for example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/981206553
They seem all new undocumented tags to me, the only two that already exist ("layer" and "path") have invalid values instead
chiho_kang (2021-09-12 08:58:31+00:00): It seems like the debris that was not properly handled in the import process. I'll take care of it as soon as I find it.
eggie (2021-09-10 11:16:17+00:00): Dag Peter.. Jevraagt feedback.. Klopt helemaal met de BGT.
Dus correcte actie.
MVG
eggie
Cartographer10 (2021-09-09 18:45:03+00:00): Hey,

Je had in deze changeset busroute 9 beschadigd. De leden in de relatie waren verschoven. Weer gecorrigeerd. Misschien even op letten.

Mvg,
Vincent
dx125 (2021-09-10 19:44:24+00:00): Hallo Thorsten,
an einem der Wege hing die Grenze vom "Naturpark Südheide" dran.
Ich habe den Ring von dem Multipolygon wieder geschlossen mit Changeset 111039366. 
Gruß
dx125
jogemu (2022-11-02 13:03:25+00:00): Last year this changeset added several buildings that had existed for years. In some cases I prefer your geometry (due to more recent imagery). However, almost all of them would benefit from the iD function square (shortcut q). Furthermore, the existing buildings have addresses associated with them, which is not the case with yours.

Therefore, I would suggest that someone deletes your buildings and adjust the geometry for the existing buildings if needed to avoid having duplicates. Is that ok with you? Do you prefer to do it yourself or is it ok if I do it?
PacerCZ (2022-11-09 22:54:42+00:00): Hi, thanks for the comment. I do not know, what better is, the real buildings so haw they are, or something other with false geomotry etc. If someone would like that change, feel free..
Dodko (2021-09-12 10:50:50+00:00): Nie je potrebné pridávať značku foot=yes to automaticky vyplýva z toho, že je to chodník highway=footway tak tam môžu aj chodci.
Klenko (2021-09-12 17:08:10+00:00): Hlavne aby tam ten chodník aj bol pridaný.. každá mapa ktorá ma podklady z openstreetmap tak tam ten kusok chyba
Patr1k_P (2021-09-12 17:35:33+00:00): zas nemozes byt taky rychly :) ten kusok tam bol pridany pred 4 dnami, az prebehne aktualizacia, potom tam bude vidiet
Klenko (2021-09-12 18:02:27+00:00): Tak ale z nejakeho dovodu to vypdlo, alebo to niekto vymazal, a pred 4 dnami som to reklamoval cez mapy.cz…. Takze hadam to bude fungovat po update ako aj doteraz
Dodko (2021-09-12 18:13:04+00:00): Freemap aktualizuje podklad každú minútu https://www.freemap.sk/?map=19/48.323632/18.086637&layers=X
OsmAnd+ viackrát za deň a mapy.cz prekreslia cestičky o 3 týždne.
Axelos (2023-11-05 15:50:50+00:00): Note à traiter : https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3870878
eggie (2021-09-10 10:39:30+00:00): Beste Tvdb

Alle wegen zijn in osm highway. Dat zegt niets over de status van een weg. 
Staat hier dan een G7 bord?
Dacht van niet.

Een node met doodlopende weg klopt hier ook niet. 

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-09-10 11:05:26+00:00): Het routeerde nu niet meer voor fietsers. Ik heb de oude situatie teruggezet zoals ik hem ken.
Het zal niet routeren als doorgaande weg voor motorvoertuigen want er staan paaltjes aan de zuidwest kant. 
Wanneer hier een bord G7 is gekomen laat het dan even weten. 
Er kan natuurlijk altijd iets veranderd zijn. 
Hier de verkeersborden kaart.
Als er een bord staat doodlopende weg. dan niet noexit=yes gaan typen. Dat is een node aan een einde van een weg waar je niet verder kunt. Dat is hier niet het geval. Wel zou je het verkeerbord kunnen aangeven. 
traffic_sign=.... zie wiki
Het routeert nu weer naar behoren. 

https://smoothefiets.ddns.net/html/verkeersbordenkaart/index.php?lat=51.819361455&lng=4.670023620&z=19

MVG
eggie