piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SK53 (2021-01-05 14:49:15+00:00): It's a long time ago, but can you remember  why the footpath to the bridge on Heol Pensonby is tagged as accessible to motor vehicles? This doesnt seem very logical & one of the Mapbox mappers encountered this from a driver report https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2486249. Geograph describes it as a cyclist/walker underpass (https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/3812911)

Jerry
SHARCRASH (2015-09-14 11:26:55+00:00): Hello,
Since this edit, there is an OSMi intersection error on way 53238233 (boundary:administrative) including several relations of other boundaries. As boundaries are quite sensitive data, you have the final answer for the correction, if you can recall. Please correct, thank you!
ediyes (2015-09-16 15:47:41+00:00): Hello SHARCRASH

Thanks for noticing the mistake, I have reverted the changeset in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34032268
Also I have added a filter in JOSM so that this does not happen in the future.
Thanks
Edith
SHARCRASH (2015-09-16 18:34:01+00:00): Thank you! :) Hmm, interesting feature from JOSM! I use mainly ID. 
Wishing you a nice continuation!
SHARCRASH
andrewpmk (2015-09-07 22:15:45+00:00): Please use a more descriptive tag than shop=yes
5m4u9 (2015-09-08 06:13:52+00:00): I revert this changeset. In bolivia exists offset of aerial imagery. Anyway, I add level_crossing on intersection of ways.
Natfoot (2026-01-08 09:50:02+00:00): thank you
Recoil16 (2019-07-03 19:30:04+00:00): Hallo Ratz41, 
dieser Änderungssatz von Dir ist nun schon ein paar Jahre alt, aber ich wollte gefragt haben, wie genau Du den Rattenberg hier (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3733408061) eingetragen hast. Da der NRW-Atlas ja nicht mehr vorhanden ist, kann ich das leider nicht nachvollziehen. Ich frage, weil hier (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/399497751) der Rattenberg mit selbiger Höhe schon deutlich länger in OSM eingetragen ist und ich als Ortskundiger auch nur diesen Rattenberg so kenne. 
Grüße Recoil
mavl (2015-09-08 04:05:51+00:00): Википедия здесь не причём. В начале 2000-х годов в Тюменской области была реформа. Многие деревни и сёла изменили названия. До указателей никому не было дела. Не знаю, как в других регионах, но в Тюменской области на указатели смотреть не нужно.

Все названия населённых пунктов устанавливаются субъектом федерации. В данном случае администрацией Тюменской области. Читаем закон Тюменской области № 263 (последняя редакция от 11.06.2015)

АБАТСКИЙ МУНИЦИПАЛЬНЫЙ РАЙОН  
Коневское сельское поселение  
д. Бития  
с. Конево  
д. Лапина  
д. Поротникова  
д. Чумашкина  
д. Шалашина
mavl (2015-09-08 09:22:20+00:00): Можно обсудить это всем вместе на форуме:

http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=535670#p535670
mavl (2015-09-08 10:42:17+00:00): Если вы сейчас настаиваете на названии Чумашкино, то почему вы раньше назвали эту деревню Чумашкина?  
Версия 1 от 31.03.2011. http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1226784499/history

Какие на то были причины? Тоже указатель?

А почему у села Конёво вы убрали букву «ё»?  
Ваши правки некорректны уже потому, что вы меняете свойства населённых пунктов на точке, но не меняете их на полигоне.
geow (2018-02-17 15:18:39+00:00): Hi 7of9, just stumbled over some paths you created in this CS. Some of them appears to me - well, doubtful.

I.e. this one runs normal to the slope and might be a gully/dry stream rather than a footpath: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369570803

These stubs are not clearly identifiable from imagery: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369570793

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369570790

And what about the campsites, i.e.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3733466233

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3733466830

I wonder if you have you been on site or added this data from other sources?

If you are able to help, I would be happy to fix it, as I'm currently reworking this area.

Thanks
Klaus
7of9 (2018-02-19 15:52:20+00:00): hallo Klaus
mit dir kann ich deutsch reden:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369570803/history : ist tatsächlich ein weg, keine Rinne (gully) 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369570793 : ist eine spur ob menschlich oder nutztier sei dahingestellt. versatz zu aktuellen luftbildern bitte berücksichtigen 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369570790 : Stimmt! kein weg auf aktuellen luftbildern erkennbar 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3733466233 : campsite wenn zelte erkennbar, bzw wenn eben fläche mit pferchen. nicht mehr auf aktuellen luftbildern erkennbar
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3733466830 : vertrau mir, da würdest auch du dein zelt aufstellen.
Nein; ich war nicht dort. bin aber mit Nepal, bzw Tibet vertraut. Trage nur Daten bzw Infos ein, die mir für geplante Touren hilfreich erscheinen.
Hoffe deine Fragen hinreichend beantwortet zu haben. Danke für deinen Beitrag in diesem wunderschönen flecken des Planeten :)
lg hans
geow (2018-02-19 22:14:03+00:00): Thanks Hans, as OSM is an international project don't mind that I will answer in english. :-)

It's always good to know that a main contributor in Nepal ist not an armchair mapper only and has some ground knowledge.

Regarding camp sites I may suggest to add tourism=camp_site only for existing spots that are regularly used by hikers or trekking companies and also adding backcountry=yes for unmaintained/ undeveloped sites.

To my impression, locations that are only potential suitable for camping should not tagged as tourism=camp_site.

Thanks
Klaus
Pieter Vander Vennet (2022-03-03 20:04:49+00:00): Hi Frédéric,

I passed through Cierreux today and went over https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/224846605

I taught the bridge here mentioned "Rau de Fagnes" (instead of Ruisseau de Sierfa), but I could be wrong. I don't find online documentation as well.

Any idea what the correct name of the ruisseau is?
Frédéric Gutkin (2022-03-04 17:39:03+00:00): Hello Pieter,

I just went to check on the NGI map and I indeed found that what you say is quite correct: when it passes through Cierreux, this stream is indeed called "Ruisseau des Fagnes". 

On the other hand, when you go back to its source, it meets the Ruisseau de Sierfa in the "Grand Bois" between Cierreux and So Bèchefa. Ruisseau des Fagnes takes this name after their confluence. The beginning of the Ruisseau des Fagnes before the confluence (a very short portion) is in fact not yet mapped.
Pieter Vander Vennet (2022-03-06 13:21:19+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for the research.
Could you indicate a bit more precisely where the confluence is? Or - even better - map it?

Kind regards,
Pieter
Frédéric Gutkin (2022-03-13 09:35:24+00:00): It's done, Pieter. The confluence is about 800 m south-west of the road that connects Commanster to Vielsalm (N823). 

Kind regards,
Frédéric
Pieter Vander Vennet (2022-03-14 13:47:19+00:00): Excellent, thanks!
BáthoryPéter (2015-09-29 21:17:28+00:00): Megjegyzés: felrajzoltál egy Tu-154-es gépet, ami nagyon sokáig állt itt, de 2014-ben elvontatták. A gond csak az, hogy aeroway=aerodrome címkét raktál rá, ami repülőteret jelent. Így a Liszt Ferenc Nemzetközi Repülőtér mellett megjelent a térképen egy Tu-154 repülőtér is :)
zsolt d (2015-09-30 00:23:11+00:00): Ah, valóban! :) Köszönöm a helyreigazítást, és a leszállópálya bevezető és oldalsó fényeinek rendbetételét, hogy a megfelelő cimkékkel láttad el az összeset.
AgusQui (2015-09-07 22:53:12+00:00): Los Look tendrías que etiquetarlos como shop=cosmetics
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcosmetics
GerdP (2015-10-08 03:21:12+00:00): please review:
this change produced two ways with
invalid highway=service;unclassified
tag
woodpeck_repair (2016-01-13 23:31:56+00:00): Edits in this changeset have partly been reverted or modified in 36561697 after complaints to DWG.
eggie (2017-11-13 21:18:25+00:00): Opnieuw Welkom bij OSM per PB verstuurd
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM


Wellicht heb je wat aan de tips en links in de huidige welkomstmail.
mweper (2015-09-08 00:41:57+00:00): Aquí lo mismo que el otro changeset.. Si ya tienes un área como hospital, no coloques un nodo ya que duplica datos y no aporta en nada al mapa. Borra el nodo o el área y corrigelo.
mweper (2015-09-08 00:40:45+00:00): Hola Griselda. Bienvenida a OSM.
¿Que quisiste hacer con el área etiquetada como hospital? ¿En serio allí hay un hospital con esa forma, triangular?

Por favor, corrige eso o explicame por msj privado lo que quieres hacer y te ayudaré a resolverlo.

Saludos.
Griselda Garello (2015-09-08 01:39:26+00:00): Hola, todo el lugar que está marcado es un distrito municipal y dentro de el funciona un centro primario de atención  para la salud, no es un hospital pero sí atienden los médicos allí.
Griselda Garello (2015-09-08 01:40:41+00:00): Voy a corregir la forma triangular que quedó delimitada. Gracias por avisar.
mweper (2015-09-08 01:47:14+00:00): Es preferible que dejes el nodo y borres el área, coloca el nodo donde se encontraría el hospital/clínica.

Etiquetalo con lo que más se adecue:
Hospital: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=hospital
Clínica: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=clinic
Consultorio médico: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:amenity=doctors
zarl (2015-10-15 10:01:57+00:00): Hi! Der Standort war bereits komplett (vermutlich leicht zu übersehen, weil als Fläche statt als Node) eingetragen, ich entferne dieses Duplikat jetzt. Das mit der capacity war auch bereits eingetragen, ich hatte das über dein fixme gefunden.

Gruss,
Carl
dforsi (2015-12-01 18:10:31+00:00): Ciao, nel ringraziarti per gli aggiornamenti che hai fatto a Rosignano, ti segnalo che ho rimesso questa rampa del cavalcavia come pedestrian perché è chiaramente una strada diventata pedonale, con tanto di cartello blu, non è un sentiero, né un marciapiede che sono i significati (ambigui) di footway.
Se per le colonnine intendi i blocchi di cemento, sono mappati come barrier=bollard sui nodi 245005981 e 3206041706
Elinvention (2015-12-03 09:58:41+00:00): Si, in effetti hai ragione. Non mi ricordo bene perché ho fatto questa modifica. Probabilmente ho pensato che la linea rappresentasse una un muro di colonnine...
Comunque grazie per l'avvertimento!
woodpeck_repair (2016-01-13 23:31:57+00:00): Edits in this changeset have partly been reverted or modified in 36561697 after complaints to DWG.
Hjart (2015-09-08 09:15:24+00:00): Kystlinier må ikke overlappe eller krydse hinanden. Jeg har fikset dette i https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33876619
SomeoneElse (2017-12-14 12:58:10+00:00): Just checking - is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369596182#map=19/53.23763/-1.70266 really a stile?  It looks like it's on a small road from the imagery suggesting perhaps gate or cattle grid?
dudone (2017-12-14 20:02:47+00:00): Hi Andy

I've changed it to gate.

Regards

Dudley
gormo (2015-09-08 12:47:20+00:00): Hi Trey,

I just reverted your changes. You deleted all tags on the Harris County admin relation. I think that was an error. Please be more careful next time.

Keep on mapping!,
gormo
user_599436 (2015-09-07 22:51:41+00:00): Hard to find documentation on this tag. Should it be capital=4 instead?
SomeoneElse (2015-09-08 08:58:49+00:00): I'd discuss questions like this on talk-us, I think.  There was also a lengthy thread on tagging: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-May/thread.html#17528 .
user_599436 (2015-09-08 11:06:38+00:00): Thanks for that information. I've decided to use the number approach as it appears to be the most widely adopted in Canada and Europe.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-03 16:13:23+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3733772151/history has aerial=yes that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
what this tag means? Is it maybe taggable with man_made=survey_point as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:aerial claims? Or is maybe some other intended meaning?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-03 16:15:07+00:00): Is man_made=survey_point with aerial=yes having any different meaning than man_made=survey_point without aerial=yes?
Adam Dunn (2024-03-03 16:34:00+00:00): The tag aerial=yes (now deprecated on the wiki) was originally used for survey points that have a marker visible from the air. In the case of these survey points near Yellowknife, the marker is a giant white X painted on the ground, and the survey marker is at the intersection of the X. This serves the purpose of making it easy to align photographs that have been taken from an airplane with a known point on the ground (accurate to a few centimeters). This is very useful for aligning "Bing Aerial Imagery", or "ESRI World Imagery", and I don't know why it was marked as "deprecated" in the wiki without having replacement tagging.

Based on the wiki, as far as I know, there is currently no way to tag survey points that have markers visible from the air, even though it's a very useful feature for mappers.
Adam Dunn (2024-03-03 17:06:56+00:00): Actually, upon looking around the wiki a bit more, if you look at the "Talk" page for man_made=survey_point, there is a table with pictures of example tags (uploaded by user T99), and aerial=yes is the first example in that table. This photo gives an idea of what I'm talking about. However, the X in that photo is much smaller than the X markers near Yellowknife - the ones near Yellowknife are around 2-3 meters across.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-04 07:19:55+00:00): I see that https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:aerial is now undeprecated
Kelerei (2015-09-08 04:20:16+00:00): Hello,

The changes that you have made to the N7 in this changeset are incorrect.  Due to the existence of begin/end freeway signage at the Potsdam Road interchange (exit 22), tagging the N7 north of this point with highway=motorway is inappropriate.  However, from my own surveys, there are sections of the N7 between exits 22 and 39 with motorway-like restrictions: these should be tagged with the appropriate road class (highway=trunk in this case), but additionally with motorroad=yes (I belive that the N7 north of this point previously).  See the motorroad documentation: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motorroad

As such, I'd appreciate it if you would correct this.  If you're unsure how to, or unsure as to my rationale, please contact me, or join us on the OSM-ZA mailing list.

--K
NicEd (2015-09-08 11:06:52+00:00): Hello,

Thanks for the heads up. I'll take a drive on N7 from the point where i started editing yesterday for logging purposes, and will revert the error ASAP, still today hopefully. Thanks for making this observation,
Kelerei (2015-09-09 05:43:58+00:00): I've actually tagged the locations of the begin/end freeway signs from a survey on Saturday afternoon (around exit 22, with note=* tags on the nodes).  Hopefully, that will be of help.  (:

--K
rickmastfan67 (2015-09-08 05:49:25+00:00): Just so you know, with lane counts, when you add the :backward & :forward tags, that's based off the direction the way itself is going, not the cardinal directions.  For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/11691827, when you added the lanes:* tags to it in this changeset, you added them in a way that indicates that going NB on the bridge is 2 lanes, and SB 1 lane instead of the opposite.  Since that way is going North to South, it should be lanes:forward=2 & lanes:backward=1. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes?uselang=en-US#Lanes_in_different_directions
GeoKitten (2015-09-13 19:52:58+00:00): I already understand that forward and backward lanes refer to forward and backward relative to the direction of the way, but thank you for calling me out on this mistake. I'll rectify this ASAP.
GOwin (2015-09-09 04:17:40+00:00): Dondee, is this a baranggay connector road? If it is, you can tag it as tertiary or unclassified, depending on how it terminates.
GOwin (2015-09-09 04:18:07+00:00): It definitely doesn't look like a service road.
MKnight (2016-05-13 15:19:01+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369609446 ist wahrscheinlich eher turn:lanes(:forward) gemeint?
Code (2016-05-14 09:07:31+00:00): Hast natürlich recht, hab's korrigiert. :forward ist aber nicht nötig, da oneway=yes
Supaplex (2015-09-08 01:54:59+00:00): 您好：

一般道路跟建筑物、土地利用不会重合，会分开画，得注意一下
danieltan (2015-09-09 02:27:45+00:00): 注意到了，多谢提醒。
mweper (2015-09-08 12:50:25+00:00): Hola Lulita. ¿Por qué cambiaste el valor de la etiqueta oneway de la autopista de yes a no, si eso estaba correcto? Por favor no hagas vandalismo en el mapa, porque cuesta trabajo y tiempo arreglar las cosas.
Yo ya lo corregí, pero por favor no cambies cosas que están bien mapeadas. Si tienes alguna duda, antes consulta conmigo o ve al foro de OSMArg.
Saludos.
smaprs (2016-06-18 20:00:32+00:00): Olá Adriana, bem-vinda e bem-vindas suas contribuições ao OSM. Apenas uma nota técnica, é importante para que as tags sejam reconhecidas seguir o formato estabelecido. Por exemplo, para "opening_hours" (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours) e "collection_times (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:collection_times)". Caso contrário, dá erro. Importante responder perguntas que usuários lhe façam. Continue, bom trabalho.
maning (2016-02-05 06:39:18+00:00): Hi d1754,

May I ask where did you get the ifsar 2012 data? Where you able to get permission from the source to add it in OSM?

Also tags like contour=0 and id=87 doesn't make any sense to me.
KKS (2015-11-18 11:10:07+00:00): Привіт, ти позначив залізницю як не використовується від станції Житомир до виправної колонії, але там є ще гілка на продуктову базу, вона також не використовується? чи до стрілки на продуктову базу гілка всетаки використовується?  Бо сама гілка на продуктову базу виявилась ізольованою. http://pavlo-dudka.github.io/osm-pg-tests/test.html?map?railway.islands.main#zoom=16&lat=50.27335&lon=28.69315
YAKIM (2015-11-18 17:23:12+00:00): Привет. Я если чесно уже не помню, в каком состоянии была ветка на продуктовыю базу, когда я там проезжал на веле и почему так осталось. Давно это было, сейчас рисую уже другой сектор города. Когда буду следующий раз катать на веле заеду проверю и тогда буду исправлять. Спасибо, что обратил внимание!
KKS (2015-11-18 18:13:10+00:00): Дякую :)
GerdP (2015-10-12 20:31:04+00:00): please review way 283527988
trigpoint (2015-09-08 07:51:45+00:00): Carlton Hayes closed in 1995, please remove this edit.
C Mor (2015-09-08 07:58:54+00:00): chemin inexistant supprimé
C Mor (2015-09-08 08:02:39+00:00): ajout chemin rural
zimba (2015-09-24 20:58:31+00:00): Please stop abusing the "name" tag for data that belongs into the "ref" tag. One of the "rules" of OSM is "don't tag for the renderer" (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer). Thank you!
DarrenOSM (2015-11-25 21:13:14+00:00): Hi,
It appears as though you have deleted the Residential landuse area around Enderby, possibly by mistake without knowing it. Can you confirm what you were trying to do here please? 
Thanks
trigpoint (2015-11-26 18:38:48+00:00): Hi Darren
This mapper made a few dodgy edits 3 months ago and hasn't returned since. 

I don't expect you will get a reply so I would go ahead and revert this edit. Are you happy to do that, or would you like me to do it?
DarrenOSM (2015-11-26 19:49:10+00:00): Thanks for that. I'm happy to give it a go, but as I've not reverted a changeset before, I'll just confirm the steps with you first if you don't mind.

I looked into it last night and I'm now using JOSM anyway, so I have installed the plugin called 'reverter'. So am I right in thinking I should use that and simply pop in the changeset no. and choose the option 'revert changeset fully'?

Thanks
trigpoint (2015-11-27 00:25:45+00:00): Thats all you need to do, give it a go and let me know if you have any problems.

Phil
DarrenOSM (2015-11-27 19:45:25+00:00): Super, thanks for your help Phil. I've just gone and reverted the Changeset and all appears to have gone to plan.
Thanks again, 
Darren
trigpoint (2015-11-28 12:14:09+00:00): Thanks Darren, looks good
adas (2015-09-09 06:35:48+00:00): It isn't secondary road. Please revert your changes.
sashmatash (2015-09-09 07:46:43+00:00): Thanks adas, there had been a few secondary road snippets before which lead to confusion. All updated.
maraf24 (2015-09-12 00:11:26+00:00): Skoro ulica to Uniszowice, to jaka jest miejscowość?
tomek p (2015-09-12 10:02:57+00:00): Przepraszam za nieudolność ale dopiero się uczę. Jeśli możesz to popraw co trzeba. Oczywiście miejscowość to Uniszowice. Chciałem też zrobić obrys budynku ale jest on widoczny tylko w mapach googla. A google maps nie mozna nałożyc na edytor żeby poprawnie odrysować zarys.
maraf24 (2015-09-12 18:05:53+00:00): Poprawiłem na:
addr:housenumber=19B
addr:place=Uniszowice
W taki sposób zapisuje się adres w miejscowościach bez nazw ulic.
Jeśli miałbyś pytania/wątpliwości zawsze możesz wysłać mi wiadomość: http://www.openstreetmap.org/message/new/maraf24
SammysHP (2015-09-08 11:20:54+00:00): "Bäume im Wald zu mappen ist" – aber nur, solange es sich dabei nicht um markante Bäume handelt. ;)
ToniE (2015-09-08 12:48:05+00:00): Hi R0bst3r,

ich glaube, dass "access=no" nicht ganz richtig ist, und dass das bereits existierende "vehicle=no" ausreicht, denn: DE:250 sagt vehicle=no. Siehe
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Verkehrszeichen_in_Deutschland

Gruß,
Toni
ToniE (2015-09-08 12:52:21+00:00): Hmm, ich sehe allerdings ein, dass KeepRight! hier was anderes vorschlägt, was mit dem deutschen Schild nicht zusammen passt.
Na ja, lass' mers so wie's jetzt ist.
R0bst3r (2015-09-08 13:55:48+00:00): Hi Toni, da hast du natürlich recht. Das Zeichen gibt vor, dass vehicle=no das richtige wäre. Aber da es sich nicht um keinen normalen Weg handelt sondern um eine Autobahn, sollten auch keine Fahrräder hier auf die Autobahn fahren. Deshalb access=no.
ToniE (2015-09-08 14:37:24+00:00): Hi, wobei: "vehicle" und auch DE:250 Fahrräder (fahrender, nicht schiebender eise) mit einschließen, im Gegensatz zu "motor_vehicle" = DE:260.
Gruß,
Toni
Andreas Binder (2015-09-08 17:40:20+00:00): @R0bst3r: Das ist Tagging fürn Renderer und vom tagging her falsch. DE:250 ist vehicle=no und nicht access=no
R0bst3r (2015-09-08 17:54:21+00:00): Hat nix mit dem Renderer zu tun. Fachlich habt ihr recht. Trotzdem sollten 99% aller möglichen Straßenbenutzer die Straße nicht benutzen! Praktisch liegt also access=no ziemlich nahe dran.
Wem nichts passt darf gerne wieder umgangen.
Andreas Binder (2015-09-09 17:48:28+00:00): Nicht dein Ernst? Wir sollen deine Änderungen korrigieren? Selber machen?

Wenn nur DE:250 beschildert ist, dann sind nach StVO 100% der Fußgänger erlaubt (Auf die Autobahn dürfen die nach StVO und OSM implizierten Tags für motorway natürlich nicht). Ich hätte ja nichts gesagt, wenn bisher kein access-Tag dran gewesen wäre, aber es wurde ja mit vehicle=no bereits korrekt getagt.
literan (2015-09-08 14:11:00+00:00): Добрый день! Для детской площадки в данном случае тег name не нужен - он только для имен собственных. Например, если бы площадка называлась "Сказочный парк", то надо было бы поставить name=Сказочный парк. Поправлю.
FtW (2015-09-08 14:16:49+00:00): ОК. Понял. Спасибо!
chillly (2015-09-09 15:56:32+00:00): Please changeset comments to your many edits. Finding a specific edit is hard amongst many with no comment.

The makes it look as the the Toyota company operates here, but I doubt very much that Toyota is based here. I think this is a car dealer that sells Toyota cars. The name field should have the name displayed at the site - I think this is John Roe, not the name of the car brands sold there.
Supaplex (2015-09-08 10:54:44+00:00): https://osmtw.hackpad.com/data.gov.tw-XShiQPiO9XI#:h=-%E5%9F%BA%E6%9C%AC%E8%B7%AF%E7%B6%B2
可以用這邊提到的WMS服務，放在iD的自訂圖層裡，就可以直接用描的
chillly (2015-09-09 16:04:01+00:00): I believe this business is called Hing Hua, not Hing Hua Chinese Takeaway. Please don't mix the name and the type of business in the name tag.
chillly (2015-09-09 16:00:53+00:00): I believe this is call Orchard Court, not Orchard Court Residential Care Home. Mixing the purpose in with the name field is not a good thing at all. Please use the name for the actual name as displayed at the site.
tuxayo (2016-01-01 23:15:02+00:00): Hola,

Hay errores sobre las funciones de la relación.
No hay que poner "Vía" y hay que replicar "Parada" por "stop"

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Relation:route#Miembros