piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Ralphie Raccoon (2019-09-27 12:47:02+00:00): As an addendum, I've noticed this is a controversial topic within the OSM (I'm reading the talk page on cycle routes!) and there isn't an agreed solution as of yet. I'm open to altering tags if it would conform better to current consensus.
Richard (2019-09-28 09:16:31+00:00): This shouldn't really be in OSM I'm afraid. If we were to tag unsigned routes invented by some well-meaning sort then we'd have the complete collection of Cicerone guidebook routes and so on. Long-standing precedent is that we do not map these in the UK.

The route is also potentially copyrighted by Cycling UK ("freely available" does not mean free of copyright).

At the very very least it absolutely shouldn't be route=bicycle, network=ncn, which in the UK is used for National Cycle Network routes suitable for most bicycles. route=mtb is the correct tagging for a (waymarked) route like this.
Richard (2019-09-28 09:33:14+00:00): I've changed it to route=mtb, unsigned=yes.
Ralphie Raccoon (2019-09-28 09:40:39+00:00): Hi Richard,

I can change the route to mtb if you wish, it was a difficult decision as much of the route is on roads and the tag is almost completely unused in the UK. I understand your concern, I've only mapped walking trails before, and a lot of the ones you find on OSM are unsigned or barely signed. As I mentioned the road route the North Coast 500 is on OSM but under these rules it shouldn't be. So really what I'm seeing is a lot of inconsistency of rules between different kinds of routes, it's actually a little aggravating.

For now I will change the route to mtb as it will remove it from opencyclemap which is probably causing the most issues. As I mentioned I can't guarantee the route has no physical signage, so removing it completely only to revert it back in if/when signage is added would be counterproductive. There are also options mentioned on the talk page on the cycle routes wiki that can hide the route from OCM in similar ways, please let me know if you have a preference.
Richard (2019-09-28 09:45:07+00:00): OSM is rarely 100% consistent :)

From my point of view (I run cycle.travel) it's not actually OpenCycleMap's rendering that's the issue - OCM shows route=mtb anyway. The problem is more that most _routers_, including cycle.travel, use route=bicycle as a flag that "this is a good way to route an ordinary bicycle along". That isn't really the case for some of the gnarlier bits of the Great North Trail!

I've changed it to route=mtb already so no need to do any more work on that.

I would suggest you do need to get clearance from CUK for the route to be entered into OSM though - they may assert copyright over the route (this isn't that unusual for route creators) and we can't have it in OSM if the creators don't give permission.
Ralphie Raccoon (2019-09-28 09:45:38+00:00): Hi Richard,

OK, thanks for letting me know. Sorry for the fuss caused.
Ralphie Raccoon (2019-09-28 09:54:50+00:00): I think part of the problem was the network tags are also used on walking routes, but in a less consistent fashion. The Norfolk Coast Path is nwn, but the Suffolk Coast Path is rwn for example, for no real reason.
SK53 (2020-07-12 15:51:59+00:00): It's really very straightforward, Norfolk Coast Path & Peddars Way are National Trails and the Suffolk Coast Path is not. Thus long distance trail mapping with nwn is analogous to Sustrans routes having ncn: they are signed trails supported by a national body. What surprised me was to see more national trails mapped in Scotland, but apparently things like the Kintyre Way (which in conception & initial implementation was a local initiative) now have this status.

On the general point it's usually not a good idea to extend general concept of a tag by adopting it for something related but which is different in significant ways. It can have the effect of effectively negating all the implicit defaults which then need to be re-established and made explicit.
Ralphie Raccoon (2020-07-12 17:52:49+00:00): Well, the wiki advice is much less clear: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Long-distance_footpaths_in_the_United_Kingdom#National_Trails_.28England_and_Wales.29 It says you could tag the SCP nwn or lwn depending on judgment, suggesting shorter than 15km should be lwn. Considering the SCP is actually longer than the NCP, by that guidance I would interpret it as clearly nwn.

As for your other comment, well that seems to be what the situation is for the network tag on OSM, it's interpreted differently for different countries and different types of route. Of course you could have different tags for all the different route classification systems in the world (or no tag if there isn't one), but as you can imagine that would get very messy.
Ralphie Raccoon (2020-07-12 17:57:36+00:00): Actually, now that you mention it, rwn is not mentioned anywhere on the wiki page. It seems there might be a consensus that hasn't been written down there. Maybe you should make an edit to clear things up if you think anything not mentioned as a national trail but longer than 15km should be considered rwn.
SK53 (2020-07-12 20:36:13+00:00): Unfortunately what this illustrates is that much of the wiki tends to be documenting one view rather than trying to describe the consensus. It may also be seriously out-of-date text having an un-dead existence.

The tag rwn has 650 odd uses in the UK (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=rwn#values). An excellent reference implementation using walking/cycling etc routes is Waymarked Trails (https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/) which not only is global, but also is created by a serious trail user. Nearly always it is better to look at concrete mapping than rely on the wiki (not least because it's often difficult to remove stuff - there are still two descriptions of footpath mapping the UK despite one of them being accepted by all serious footpath mappers including the National Trust.. In this case there are a number of national MTB trails in Switzerland (lonvia lived there for a while), so these provide examples of how things have been tagged elsewhere (route=mtb, network=ncn). A quick check shows cycle.travel does not route over the col between Safien & Uors, but down to the Rhine Valley and back up Val Lumnezia, see https://cycle.travel/map?from=safien&to=Ilanz&fromLL=&toLL=46.775575,9.2054956 (however Richard may have special logic cases for this).

Anyway, this is what I do. Look for analogous cases already mapped, check the tagging, check usage states. If it seems sensible adopt that. If one is in luck the wiki will say the same thing.

Personally I'd like the wiki to be descriptive not prescriptive, but cant see it happening.
Ralphie Raccoon (2020-07-13 07:13:13+00:00): That's really not the way it should be done though, and not the way most people will do it. The wiki is supposed to be the first place people would go for guidance, especially novice mappers. The consensus you mentioned is not written down anywhere obvious, and you have to connect the dots by doing your own research, this is a problem as people will come to different conclusions from the same facts and it's quite frankly a waste of time. You say the designation is really straightforward, but that's no good if there's nowhere obvious that explicitly states it. Since the wiki can be edited by anyone, there's no reason it shouldn't be updated by changes in mapping consensus, keeping it stale is going to cause problems and conflicts.
SK53 (2020-07-13 08:47:36+00:00): I agree that would be the ideal way in which it would work, but in practice it is not. The problem with the wiki is that it is often the voice of a few contributors often with particular bees in their bonnets, rather than a true community resource. No-one has grasped the nettle. The last time I tried something along those lines with footpaths, my edit was immediately reverted. This also tends to discourage contributing to anything other than pages on very minor tags. A good recent example is someone deciding that an immensely popular way of mapping pavements should be marked as depracated.
Ralphie Raccoon (2020-07-13 09:35:53+00:00): Fair enough, but I think you can appreciate why I would see the division between NCP and SCP as arbitrary because it was relying on hidden knowledge. I think to most mappers it probably looks arbitrary too, especially considering the SCP was longer until recently when I added the latest extension to the NCP.
Richard (2020-07-13 09:37:39+00:00): Ultimately, common tag documentation needs to move to a site with a pull request model - in much the same way as install documentation moved to switch2osm because people kept fouling up the instructions on the wiki. But that would require someone to do the work of setting up such a site.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-11 21:06:33+00:00): Boa noite, pode explicar a alteração para parque? Qual o nome deste parque?

cumprimentos
Carnildo (2019-09-11 06:39:48+00:00): The "rest of the reservation" you added isn't part of the reservation, it's off-reservation trust land (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-reservation_trust_land), which is a very different thing.
Howpper (2019-09-11 07:33:49+00:00): Thank you for informing me. I probably should have looked more into it before adding it.
Howpper (2019-09-10 23:28:35+00:00): Adjustment*
GinaroZ (2019-09-11 22:27:35+00:00): Hi, I've remove the five duplicate parks you added as there's already one on the map at the same location.
viloan (2019-09-10 23:58:58+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!
viloan (2019-09-11 00:06:35+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!
user_5359 (2019-09-11 04:24:27+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have delete your SEO SPAM (only name and description, no useful information). If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data.
Túllio (2019-10-05 12:42:54+00:00): Obrigado pelas edições nos cursos hídricos!
LucFreitas (2019-09-11 15:58:18+00:00): Boa tarde, Gusthavo. Você excluiu o ponto que marcam as cidades de Vitória e de Cachoeiro de Itapemirim, além do ponto que marca o estado do Espírito Santo. Estes pontos são importantes para o uso do mapa e não devem ser apagados. Estou revertendo suas modificação.
LucFreitas (2019-09-11 16:01:21+00:00): Recomendo que consulte a Wiki do projeto em wiki.openstreetmap.org para conhecer melhor o OpenStreetMap e esclarecer quaisquer dúvidas que tiver.
skquinn (2019-12-26 01:56:54+00:00): Please review https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours for proper syntax of the opening_hours tag. This edit (and others) did not conform. Thanks!
mueschel (2019-09-20 08:57:51+00:00): Hi,
you added the tag 'xc_ski' to a way - this doesn't exist. For cross country ski routes we do have the 'piste' tag: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:piste:type
Could you have a look and maybe change this?

Jan
chachafish (2019-09-11 12:05:37+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM and thank you for your attempts to add to the map. Here you have incorrectly created a building on top of another building. This has been corrected. In the future, in order to add a business, simply create a node within the lateral confines of the building and then you can add the pertinent tags. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Thanks
chachafish (2019-09-11 12:16:56+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM and thank you for your attempts to add to the map. Please be careful when dragging the map. In three cases here you dragged roads and sidewalks to incorrect locations without realizing it. These errors have been reverted to their original positions. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Thank you
chachafish (2019-09-11 12:28:47+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM and thank you for your attempts to add to the map. Just a few pointers for you, if you want to add a new business, simply add a node within the lateral confines of a building and then add the pertinent information. There is no need to modify the shape of a building that has already been mapped correctly. Buildings should not cross roads unless there is a tunnel of some sort. Also here, the alleyway was mapped straight. Your changes put a bend in it. It's best to leave correct mapping as it is, unless something has changed on the ground. Additionally, you drew the building as crossing into the open area behind Improper City. The building doesn't do this. I will correct these errors so you can see how OSM contributors can correctly add information. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Thank you
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-11 21:05:38+00:00): Hello, the pitch size was correct as the pitch, you adjusted the pitch to the stadium size. which is incorrect. please fix the pitch to it's real size and add another element for the stadium
Paranomix (2019-09-11 22:01:02+00:00): I see your point, but the whole stadium is used for that purpose. So, would I create an element for the stadium with "pitch" as leisure? Or maybe make landuse "recreational ground"?
As I see it, the stadium is directly associeted with the activity of the pitch, thus being considered pitch as well.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-11 22:03:46+00:00): nop. pitch is one thing, the statium is another. therefore you need to make seperate element. recreational ground does not fit into. You can check other stadiums on OpenStreetMap as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/169116953#map=19/32.67062/-16.88356
Paranomix (2019-09-11 22:14:17+00:00): Sorry, I'm new to this.
On the link you sent, it shows me the stadium, but when I try editing, I don't see any stadium element; only covers, buildings and the pitch.
How can I make that?
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-11 22:19:56+00:00): ok, i have fixed the stadium. check it, that's how it's not. feel free to improve
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-11 22:22:51+00:00): by the way, if you are portuguese and need guidance or help, feel free to join the portuguese OSM telegram group, we have a couple of Azores editors there.
Paranomix (2019-09-11 22:31:49+00:00): Thanks!
Silva1989 (2019-09-12 20:12:55+00:00): Thanks for Editing. there is no name tag on the ramp yet, Don't forget it
Paranomix (2019-09-12 22:08:30+00:00): I added it when I did it, when I go to edit, it is there: "Porto de São Vicente". Although, "Porto de São Vicente Ferreira" would be better.
Can you check it?
Silva1989 (2019-09-12 23:18:58+00:00): You applied leisure=spliway on the service=driveway line. Normally, leisure=slipway is applied on a node that connects the service road and the natural=coastline. I made a fix here, and now you also know in the future. Thanks for editing
Paranomix (2019-09-13 10:39:41+00:00): Hmm, ok.
The ramp was a port, so you'd slide boats into or out of the sea. Nowadays, it is not used anymore. Acess is blocked for land vehicles, so you don't see boats anymore. People used it, now, to sunbath, bath, canoeing and dive.
Silva1989 (2019-09-12 19:21:45+00:00): Hi,
Thanks for your contribution. I've checked some refences, namely Portaria n.º141/2019 and Ponta Delgada Municipality website and indeed there's a new name to the Swimming pool, wich is a combination of name you removed and the name you added, therefore I went ahead and corrected upon your change
Palolo (2019-09-17 19:41:03+00:00): Thank you for the mapping. Please follow the HOT instructions. This task is only asking for buildings, not roads.
Kovoschiz (2019-09-11 15:33:36+00:00): 1. Path wrongly changed to cycleway 
2. Quite redundant treatment of footways connecting to the crosswalk
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74333481
TravGW (2019-09-11 11:58:30+00:00): Please do not make fictitious edits to the map. This is a real world map that people depend on, it is not a game. Uploading fictitious edits is a waste of everyone's time and will not be tolerated.
Kovoschiz (2019-09-11 15:36:11+00:00): Think you misunderstood. Siu Ma Hang is both a stream and place. It should be fixed, not removed.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74334150
Esperanza36 (2019-09-11 22:22:55+00:00): Siu Ma Stream is already mapped correctly. Why adding this node ? Maybe for the spring (place) ?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74334150
Kovoschiz (2019-10-02 11:51:29+00:00): Siu Ma Hang is the valley. Siu Ma Stream is the stream.
Sosha1996 (2019-09-24 09:14:19+00:00): بخاطر ویرایش‌هایی که روی نقشه میزنید ازتون ممنونم.
اما طبق قوانین اوپن‌استریت مپ، شما باید یک توضیح مناسب در کامنت چنجست در مورد تغییراتی که در چنجستتون اعمال کردید بنویسید.
ننوشتن توضیحات یا نوشتن فقط یک کلمه مانند «پارک» یا مواردی از این دست، غیرقابل قبول می‌باشد.

همچنین اگر تغییراتی میدید که سطح یک شهر یا یک منطقه وسیع رو در بر میگیره، باید اون رو در چندین چنجست بارگذاری کنید. بارگذاری این حجم از تغییرات در یک چنجست غیر قابل قبول می‌باشد.

از این به بعد در صورت رعایت نکردن نکات بالا، این پیغام روی چنجست و صندوق پیام خود مشاهده خواهید کرد. در صورت نادیده گرفتن این پیغام و جواب ندادن به اون، حساب شما گزارش خواهد شد.(البته این یک تهدید نیست. ما سعی داریم این رویه اشتباه رو تصحیح کنیم و امیدواریم که شما این رو درک کنید)

لطفا این متن را مطالعه کنید:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fa:Good_changeset_comments

——————————————————————
Hi,
Thank you for helping improve OSM data in Iran, you're uploading very large number of changes in to the map on a regular basis and to help other people who are monitoring the map changes(like officials frome Data Group or Community Admins), to understand what is happening in your change sets, it's appropriate to leave a detailed changeset comments.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
jidanni (2020-05-24 19:38:10+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6787296050#map=19/24.51994/120.78874&layers=T
特與他站分開，
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6789715693#map=19/24.52238/120.77596&layers=T
又畫在苗34線上，而非 5815 線上。 又
https://www.mlbus.com.tw/station.php?action=search&button=%E9%80%81%E5%87%BA&select=44
勉強提苗34鄉道，亦無如三坐厝設站。
總之 5815 是由苗34線切！
viloan (2019-09-11 05:27:06+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!
Howpper (2019-09-11 07:09:35+00:00): I originally tagged them all as brick before publishing the changeset, but then I looked at the OSM Wiki and it seemed like bricks fell under the category of paving stones.
radiotrefoil (2022-03-21 09:13:56+00:00): Hi, I'm not well versed in this area but interested as to the reason why geological=volcanic_caldera_rim was removed from way/268080573 by this changeset?
Adam Schneider (2022-03-21 17:52:44+00:00): Good question; I don't have a good answer.  It might have been a mistake.  I've restored that tag.  (Not that it matters much, because "volcanic_caldera_rim" is never rendered as far as I know.)
radiotrefoil (2022-03-22 01:15:43+00:00): Thanks, no problem, just making sure. I see on the wikipedia article that Kīlauea Iki is a pit crater of Kīlauea rather than the main caldera - perhaps this might have been why - but it seems that established OSM tagging doesn't distinguish between the two so I think that tag is fine. Cheers
Adam Schneider (2022-03-22 02:07:30+00:00): Yeah, it's possible that I was thinking too literally at the time, because Kilauea Iki isn't usually considered a "caldera."  Unfortunately, OSM doesn't have a crater_rim tag... but I think it should!
Kovoschiz (2019-09-11 15:37:21+00:00): Both romanizations are in use
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74336298
Sosha1996 (2019-09-24 09:14:17+00:00): بخاطر ویرایش‌هایی که روی نقشه میزنید ازتون ممنونم.
اما طبق قوانین اوپن‌استریت مپ، شما باید یک توضیح مناسب در کامنت چنجست در مورد تغییراتی که در چنجستتون اعمال کردید بنویسید.
ننوشتن توضیحات یا نوشتن فقط یک کلمه مانند «پارک» یا مواردی از این دست، غیرقابل قبول می‌باشد.

همچنین اگر تغییراتی میدید که سطح یک شهر یا یک منطقه وسیع رو در بر میگیره، باید اون رو در چندین چنجست بارگذاری کنید. بارگذاری این حجم از تغییرات در یک چنجست غیر قابل قبول می‌باشد.

از این به بعد در صورت رعایت نکردن نکات بالا، این پیغام روی چنجست و صندوق پیام خود مشاهده خواهید کرد. در صورت نادیده گرفتن این پیغام و جواب ندادن به اون، حساب شما گزارش خواهد شد.(البته این یک تهدید نیست. ما سعی داریم این رویه اشتباه رو تصحیح کنیم و امیدواریم که شما این رو درک کنید)

لطفا این متن را مطالعه کنید:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fa:Good_changeset_comments

——————————————————————
Hi,
Thank you for helping improve OSM data in Iran, you're uploading very large number of changes in to the map on a regular basis and to help other people who are monitoring the map changes(like officials frome Data Group or Community Admins), to understand what is happening in your change sets, it's appropriate to leave a detailed changeset comments.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments