piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
AnneGru (2022-08-03 10:25:24+00:00): Hallo zusammen, tut mir Leid ich bin noch sehr neu hier.. Danke für die Informationen! Wie genau soll ich das Ganze denn jetzt handhaben? Gibt es einen Weg das Objekt wieder zurückzuholen? Ich würde meinen Fehler gerne verbessern! Gibt es hierfür einen Weg?

Liebe Grüße!
highflyer74 (2022-08-03 10:39:08+00:00): Hallo AnneGru!

Das ist gar nicht schlimm, und du kannst es auch nicht wissen. Ich drehe es einmal zurück und füge dem Node entsprechende Attribute hinzu. Du müsstest dann, wie TheNet1996 schon sagte, am neuen Ort einfach die entsprechenden Daten eingeben.

Falls dort schon ein Node (Punkt) vorhanden ist, welcher von einem vorherigen Geschäft stammt, einfach die Daten anpassen. Wenn dort noch nichts ist: einen neuen Node erstellen und diesem dann die Daten hinzufügen.

Und wenn du jetzt vollständig verwirrt bist: einfach fragen. Wir helfen gern!
phoenixsaigon1698 (2023-04-26 08:13:38+00:00): mất "via" member rồi , add vào nhé.
highflyer74 (2022-08-03 12:29:47+00:00): Ich nochmal :-)

Mir fiel auf, dass der Markt, den du gemappt und hier wieder gelöscht hattest, bereits weiter östlich (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4343226644) vorhanden ist. Ist das die richtige Position?

Ggf. könntest du den Node auf die richtige Position verschieben und noch Daten ergänzen.

Viele Grüße!
literan (2022-08-03 17:17:52+00:00):  странно - адрес вы сменили, а местоположение магазина не поменяли
Aleksey Gorelikov (2022-08-03 08:23:52+00:00): https://data-usdot.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/usdot::highway-performance-monitoring-system-fsys-3/explore?location=31.935713%2C-102.290872%2C16.49
DaveF (2023-06-27 19:33:56+00:00): Hi
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1083452572
I'm pretty sure this isn't all a pond. Could you check/correct please.
Palgrave Peter (2023-06-30 07:23:17+00:00): You're right and I've fixed it now.
DaveF (2023-06-30 12:41:04+00:00): Ta
N-E-M-O (2022-08-05 00:12:59+00:00): Ten areál školy nesedí ani podľa katastra ani podľa Ortofotomozaiky, ak máte presnejší zdroj tak treba pridať source, ale keď nie, zakresliť podľa katastra.

Keď ste sa, už rozhodli budovu rozdeliť na menšie a pridať im adresu tak z entrance ju treba vymazať. Taktiež pridané adresy sú nekompletné, chýba im addr:housenumber a addr:streetnumber. Na entrance je adresa v poriadku tak spraviť podľa nej a ešte pridať addr:country=SK a malo by to byť OK.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124424759
arik123max (2022-08-05 07:29:09+00:00): Adresy idem opraviť, a rád by som vedel, čo presne nesedí podľa katastra ani Ortofotomozaiky, pretože som to robil podľa Ortofotomozaiky.
N-E-M-O (2022-08-05 10:25:21+00:00): ten areál školy, zakresliť podľa katastra je to presnejšie ako podľa Ortofotomozaiky SR no ani podľa tej to nesedí minimálne na severe ten areál zaberá aj auta parkujúce na ulici
N-E-M-O (2022-08-05 10:56:56+00:00): vrstvu katastra do JOSM pridať, F12 - mapové podklady - WMS wms:https://kataster.skgeodesy.sk/eskn/services/NR/kn_wms_orto/MapServer/WmsServer?FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.3.0&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=5&STYLES=&CRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}
arik123max (2022-08-05 11:43:18+00:00): Ďakujem za komentáre, areál školy som už napravil podľa katastra, predtým som ho kreslil iba podľa ortofotomozajky a cez stromy nebolo všetky hranice jasne vidno.
laznik (2022-08-09 15:24:53+00:00): neviem odkial je ta informacia, ze polohy budov su v katastri presnejsie ako obkreslovanim z Ortofotomozaiky, kedze moje skusenosti su presne opacne. Mam na mysli tu verziu, ktoru pripravil frremap: tms:https://ofmozaika.tiles.freemap.sk/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.jpg
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124424759
N-E-M-O (2022-08-09 17:50:54+00:00): Keďže sme sa bavili o areále školy, dovolím si tvrdiť, že jeho hranice (parcela) sú predsa len, aspoň pre mňa trochu ľahšie čitateľné podľa katastrálnej mapy ako Ortofotomozaiky. 

Čo sa týka budov, tak osobne pri zakresľovaní nových, používam ako vrstvu katastra tak aj Ortofotomozaiku a vo väčšine prípadov mi to sedí podľa oboch, no ale aj vtedy tú budovu zakreslím podľa katastra. Predsa len mi to príde presnejšie ako obkresliť, budovu podľa strechy z Ortofotomozaiky, hlavne keď samotná budova je nesnímaná tak, že vidím jednu z bočných stien budovy. Ak je ale značný nesúlad medzi budovou na Ortofotomozaike a katastrom, tak vtedy sa skôr prikloním k tej Ortofotomozaike. No ale to asi nebude samotnou presnosťou katastrálnej mapy, ale skôr nesúladom medzi geometrickým plánom a reálnym stavom. 

Ak je môj postup nesprávny, budem len rád ak nám obom poskytnete presnejší návod.
laznik (2022-08-09 18:19:56+00:00): Diskusia na tuto temu (presnost zdrojov ako su kataster a  Ortofotomozaika) prebehla v minulosti na fore OSM Slovensko. Myslim, ze to bola tato: https://groups.google.com/g/osm_sk/c/kj0whFgqnZ0/m/CS8A4wGkAQAJ
N-E-M-O (2022-08-09 18:58:07+00:00): Aj keby mala tá Ortofotomozaika neviem akú vysokú presnosť a rozlíšenie, tak aj tak podľa nej len ťažko presnejšie zakreslím areál tej školy cez tie stromy, no rád si tu diskusiu prečítam. :)
itchybellybutton (2022-08-06 16:26:08+00:00): Hallo bayernuwe,

du hast in deinen Änderungen einige Sachen verschoben oder hinzugefügt, die so nicht richtig sind. Beispielsweise den AKS laden in die Jahnstraße verschoben oder eine Hecke über viele Meter incl Häuser gepackt. Bitte korrigiere deine Änderungen, andernfalls müsste ich diese rückgängig machen. 

Viele Grüße
bayernuwe (2022-08-06 20:10:25+00:00): Habe AkS nicht verschoben. Habe den Straßenbelag in Grüne Auebearbeitet
itchybellybutton (2022-08-10 05:54:50+00:00): Laut deinen Änderungssatz schon, siehe auch: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7124145054

So etwas kann schnell aus Versehen  passieren, deswegen weise ich dich ja darauf hin.
bayernuwe (2022-08-15 11:16:10+00:00): wie bekommt das wieder verbessert?
dx125 (2022-08-17 19:41:44+00:00): Vorschlag: Lass Deinen Änderungssatz mit den versehentlichen Verschiebungen zurück setzen (= reverten). 
Brauchst hier nur kurz bescheid geben, dann mache ich das.
(Mit dem von Dir verwendeten Editor ID geht das zurück setzen nicht). Danach gibt es hier wieder eine Info von mir. Anschließend können wir dann den Straßenbelag der Grünen Aue nochmals eintragen (entweder Du oder ich, wenn Du mir den Straßenbelag verrätst ;-)
bayernuwe (2022-08-18 03:54:02+00:00): Das wäre sehr nett, Danke
dx125 (2022-08-18 14:52:14+00:00): Dieser eine Änderungssatz von Dir ist jetzt zurück gesetzt. Du kannst jetzt (wenn Du magst) dort den Straßenbelag noch anpassen. Solche versehentlichen Verschiebungen kommen immer mal vor, ist mir auch schon passiert und es ist auch nicht schlimm, darauf angesprochen zu werden. Man wird mit der Zeit besser ;-)
bayernuwe (2022-08-18 16:06:52+00:00): Vielen Dank, nett von dir. 👍
skquinn (2022-08-04 18:06:20+00:00): Please explain the meaning of this changeset comment.
Carto'Cité (2022-12-15 11:30:03+00:00): Bonjour Ephtolens,
J'ai observé les contributions de ce changeset et elles sont franchement bonnes. Merdi pour la distinction des traversées avec les crossings. Je me suis permis d'améliorer un peu la précision géométrique car on voit bien la piste sur l'Ortho Express IGN 2022.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1081720713
N’hésite pas à me contacter si tu as des remarques ou des questions.
À bientôt.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #VeloNormandie
eggie (2022-08-04 11:53:34+00:00): reverted by changeset #124477456

Wrong interpretation of this maproulette. No cycleway.
Gr eggie
SNL_photo (2022-08-05 12:45:45+00:00): Here, again, I have made a mistake. This has been a learning curve, and I am sorry for the inconvenience.
eggie (2022-08-05 13:05:40+00:00): No problem... Every start is difficult. OSM looks easy, but infact it isn't.
N-E-M-O (2022-08-05 00:26:49+00:00): housenumber opraviť
N-E-M-O (2022-08-06 17:13:03+00:00): Nemal by byť housenumber na tých bytovkách v podobe conscriptionnumber/streetnumber? Či na takéto budovy sa dáva ako housenumber orientačné?
Jose Riha (2022-08-06 21:09:48+00:00): ano, malo. problem je ten, ze aj napriek tomu, ze sme sa v ramci komunity predbezne bavili, ze tam, kde je supisne i orientacne tak v "addr:housenumber" budeme mat obe, tak v praxi (tak ako to maju napr. v cechach) to takto castokrat nie je. nerobil som si ziadnu statistiku, ale povedal by som, ze "addr:housenumber" rovnake ako "addr:streetnumber" skor prevazuje.

osobne ma to vsak velmi nevyrusuje. ak uz bude slovensko pokryte adresami na velmi dobrej urovni (pozrime sa napr. sem: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/47.89565/17.57627), tak potom sa to da velmi lahko opravit nejakym skriptom.

j
N-E-M-O (2022-08-06 22:14:31+00:00): Vďaka, len som si chcel overiť či sa to náhodou neznačí inak na bytovkách, lebo pár adries som v poslednej dobe pridával, tak nech to nerobím zle.
danieldegroot2 (2022-08-05 01:25:14+00:00): This changeset was manually reverted by another tomtom user and subsequently directly reverted by
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124501444
Gan_toon (2022-08-05 11:41:45+00:00): My apologies, I made a mistake. I have reverted the changes and will review the resources so that I don’t make the same mistake again.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-08-03 10:15:17+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 124311217, 124311262, 124315739, 124315807, 124315963, 124316705, 124316788, 124316966, 124348078, 124348408, 124348786, 124348975, 124396845, 124398226, 124399511, 124400269, 124401299.
DiahW IRM-ED (2023-01-11 03:56:04+00:00): Hi, lorenzo23622.

Thank you for mapping contribution! Currently, I'm doing remote mapping to validate the existing rail network in Indonesia. 

I need your help, especially with this railway (-7.7206893, 109.0086091). I saw in the Changeset history, you added tag "layer=2" to this railway
(https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/106973517)
Did you know that the railway tracks are above the ground? Because there is no accompanying tag "bridge=yes."

I also found you added the tag "railway=level_crossing" at this point (-7.7207698, 109.0085648)
(https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/9929079709)

I'm doubtful whether this railway actually has a different layer or not, so I need to confirm. Do you have any additional information or local knowledge about this issue?

I really appreciate any information and advice you provide. Thank you


Regards,
Diah
eggie (2022-08-04 11:47:44+00:00): Hi SNL   This is in fact a highway=track with a tracktype grade5
Used by foresters and suited 4Wheel drive. 

Please don't retag tracks into highway=path.

Greetz,
eggie
SNL_photo (2022-08-05 12:46:28+00:00): Once again, thank you for the feedback.
eggie (2022-08-05 13:06:47+00:00): No problem...  Thanks for reply.
eggie
willkmis (2022-08-03 14:50:27+00:00): Hello, this left turn is allowed. See the previous discussion I had with one of your colleagues in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122894422
Emey_lyft (2022-08-03 16:20:01+00:00): Hello, willkmis.
My name is Ruslan, and I am a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for raising this up! You are absolutely right again. 
I genuinely apologize for our repeated mistake with this tricky turn restriction. I have added the road that was missing, the entry to which is prohibited by the sign and moved the turn restriction there to avoid another possible iteration of this erroneous edit. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124442556
Sorry for the inconvenience and thank you again.
Best regards, Ruslan
Intrinsical (2022-08-03 09:15:38+00:00): accidentally put the referenced changeset# (124425960) in the source tag, instead of the comment. oops.
somix (2022-08-03 10:43:35+00:00): Roads, not buildings
user_21425661 (2024-08-22 07:41:26+00:00): How come you added the covered roads, but didn't expand the building?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/254748371#map=19/44.112456/-103.272928
vrynkevich_lyft (2024-08-22 12:42:39+00:00): Hi, CjMalone ! My name is Veranika and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.
The edits were made as part of the Missing Roads project (https://github.com/Test-DCT/OSM-LYFT-DCT/issues/27 ), the main goal of which is to map missing roads to improve navigation. Modifying building polygons is out of the project's scope if it doesn’t affect the navigation.
The ways were splitted with the covered=yes tag around the gas station roof visible in the background, according to the osm wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:covered#:~:text=When%20used%20this%20way%20the%20building%20and%20the%20way%20should%20have%20shared%20nodes%20at%20the%20entry%20and%20exit%20points%20of%20the%20building.%20The%20way%20should%20be%20split%20at%20the%20entry%20and%20exit%20nodes%20and%20only%20the%20part%20covered%20by%20the%20building%20should%20be%20tagged%20with%20covered%3Dyes). It is not necessary to have building polygons to split the road and add the "covered=yes" tag for ways actually covered by the roof.
Feel free to adjust the polygon's edges if needed.
Best regards!
eggie (2022-08-03 11:16:56+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
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-09 11:03:08+00:00): Cleaned up SEO spam and applied correct tagging for World of Smoke & Vape POI in changeset 183869322

https://osm.org/changeset/183869322
Frans S (2022-08-29 13:11:52+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but  your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to these points:
I: Tagging of buildings. For HOTOSM projects the standard tagging is 'building=yes' Please keep that in mind at further mappings.

A: buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124427236
archie (2022-08-03 09:56:13+00:00): Hallo, mach die Wege bitte nicht privat durch access=private. Sie sind nicht privat! Setzte anstelle motor_vehicle=destination (oftmals der Fall) oder permit. Es reicht mit motor_vehicle; die anderen Transportmittel bicycle, foot usw werden dadurch nicht beeinträchtigt. Danke
rnaujack (2022-08-09 10:17:08+00:00): Die Wege dort sind privat, jedenfalls durch abgeschlossene Gatter für alle gesperrt. Es gibt auch keine Zaunübergänge o.ä. dort. Man steht nur vor dem geschlossenen Tot und kann umkehren.
archie (2022-08-09 10:30:43+00:00): Ok, dann ist gut. Danke!
Richard (2022-08-04 09:28:10+00:00): You have not updated bicycle access tags on this change which means you have potentially broken bike routing.
Swihail (2022-08-05 12:51:59+00:00): Here again, I did have a good intent-- to create consistent classification between all the elements–service way 253573942 as a navigable element is surrounded by non-navigable elements. I understand that is not aligned with UK OSM.
parsd51 (2022-08-05 12:35:58+00:00): Hej Lytter1

Er det ikke kun en del af Odense Letbane der er layer -1?

Hilsen
Per
Lytter1 (2022-08-05 19:05:30+00:00): Hej Per, letbanen har ingen level -1 på hele strækningen, så jeg tjekkede den lige af og fandt fejlen mellem Hjallese og centrum. Tak for info.
parsd51 (2022-08-05 20:11:04+00:00): Selv tak og tak for rettelsen.
VictorIE (2022-08-10 15:21:28+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943953615

Is this a sidewalk along the road?
craghead (2022-09-30 11:54:00+00:00): Hi,
Eventually getting around to commenting on your query. Yes, this has been developed into a new walkway that now forms an exercise walking circuit. I need to further update it as it has now been lit.
eggie (2022-08-04 11:09:47+00:00): reverted by changeset #124475298
No cycleway   Farmers use
Gan_toon (2022-08-05 11:18:50+00:00): My apologies, I made a mistake. Thank You for reverting the changes and will review the resources so that I don’t make the same mistake again.
chrsmsk (2022-08-05 15:32:58+00:00): Servus Simon, 

das der Klammlsteig gesperrt ist, hab ich schon vor einem Jahr so eingetragen und den Abschnitt als Weg gelöscht. Du hättest also nichts machen müssen. Allerdings ist dieser Pfad natürlich immer noch im Luftbild sichtbar. Deshalb: Trag ihn bitte als Linie wieder ein ohne "highway" bevor ihn jemand anderes wieder ganz einfügt.
alpenvereinaktiv (2022-08-11 08:17:31+00:00): Servus chrsmsk,

danke für deine Infos und deine Erklärung. Da der Weg gesperrt ist und nicht mehr freigegeben wird, da es eine Umgehung gibt und da die gesamte Gegend stark frequentiert ist, hielt ich es für sinnvoll den Weg zu löschen, damit niemand in Versuchung geführt wird diesem Weg zu folgen. Auf Tourenportalen die sich der OSM bedienen, wird der Weg unterschiedlich ausgespielt. Aber ich gebe dir recht, es könnte sein, dass jemand den Weg wieder einträgt und ihn dann als offen definiert. Ich werde ihn bis zum Klamml wieder eintragen
Josef73 (2022-08-24 18:14:14+00:00): Hello, your business is only open on Tu & We ? In this case the value for the tag opening_hours is: Tu,We 08:00-17:30. Also you can change: country=USA to addr:country=US Thanks.
Josef73 (2022-08-24 18:17:40+00:00): You can also add: amenity=dentist
JeroenHoek (2022-08-03 12:10:58+00:00): Why? The main approach to the farm from the south can be highway=service (that's where you would want to route visitors to the premises past), but that track going north-west doesn't look like anything more than a concrete farming track.
SNL_photo (2022-09-06 10:44:50+00:00): Hi JeroenHoek! I have made the necessary changes as per your suggestion. Thank you!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:09:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
bxl-forever (2022-08-03 15:28:20+00:00): Hello,

AFAIK, EKD does not occupy 100% of this building.
The building is shared with other companies or associations.
The church should be tagged as a single POI within the building instead.
kinslayer (2022-08-09 19:30:35+00:00): Hi! Yes, there are also other associations. But the EKD is the main user and other users refer to the house as "EKD Building" e.g. https://www.eurodiaconia.org/events/state-of-the-social-european-union-conference/
eggie (2022-08-04 11:07:07+00:00): reverted by changeset #124475171
It's a driveway
Gan_toon (2022-08-05 11:37:15+00:00): Thank you for the feedback and for reverting this edit. I should have provided connectivity to the service road instead of changing it to a non-navigable element. Could I ask for some feedback? To me it is a map quality problem that non-navigable elements are disrupting the connection between a navigable highway and a general road network. Is there any concern about assuring routing?
eggie (2022-08-05 12:58:14+00:00): No... There must be an exception for residents.
Its'mapped by the local fire brigade as firepath. (on the cycleway) 
It's for navigating emergency-use.
The driveway is private.. So no issue in OSM navigation.
The fire brigade are using OSM with a special app. Liveop
gr eggie
Gan_toon (2022-08-09 14:45:39+00:00): Thanks for your feedback, eggie! I really appreciate it.
Colin Smale (2022-09-27 20:53:43+00:00): Please note the correct admin level for Greater Manchester is 5 as it is now a Combined Authority and no longer an administrative county.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:38:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:13:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
Colin Smale (2022-09-29 08:12:55+00:00): Please don't fiddle with UK admin boundaries. If you change something, please state your source in the changeset comments.
addr2osm (2022-09-01 19:02:06+00:00): Please restore national_information tags and other tags (pile etc).
AlexZam (2022-09-07 21:20:29+00:00): Thanks for restoring them for me. Although combination type=pile + pile:category=post looks less standard and supported than type=beacon_special_purpose + beacon_special_purpose:shape=stake. The latter one is rendered correctly by SeaChart and OpenSeaMap plugins. And type=pile seems to be designed with thought of piles as obstacles and construction element rather than navigation marks. I may be wrong here though.
chris66 (2022-09-28 14:08:52+00:00): Hi, I would like to see the photo for Schultenhook 6 access restriction.
Access Claims (komoot) (2022-10-03 13:20:57+00:00): Hi! Thanks for following up on this. 

The photos we received show a hanging rope to limit access. We ignored the opening hours since there was another picture with show a sign "Privatweg".

Since the pics are shared confidential, we aren't allowed to share them publicly. 

In case you are a mapper on side, we would appreciate if you could do the appropriate edits.
dvdhoven (2022-08-04 14:55:25+00:00): Reverted this changeset
Gan_toon (2022-08-05 11:40:11+00:00): My apologies, I made a mistake. I have reverted the changes and will review the resources so that I don’t make the same mistake again.
Dawid2849 (2022-08-03 12:45:17+00:00): Wycofane.
Richard (2022-08-04 09:27:32+00:00): Do you have evidence that this is a public road open to motor vehicles, as your change to highway=unclassified would imply?
Swihail (2022-08-05 12:50:11+00:00): I do understand the concern here. My intent was to create consistent classification between all the elements: service way 1007116117 as a navigable element is surrounded by non-navigable elements. I was thinking about assuring access to this driveway/service for routing engine users. I have reverted the changes.
Richard (2022-08-05 12:54:30+00:00): Thank you!

The challenge here is that highway tags in the UK have meaning about whether or not someone has a legal right to use that road.
Swihail (2022-08-09 14:47:23+00:00): Thank you for your feedback, Richard!
Minh Nguyen (2023-02-24 00:59:21+00:00): Hi, please remember to square the corners on buildings. The imagery layer you used is somewhat oblique, so the shapes you see are very skewed compared to reality.
Nadzeya_ (2023-02-28 07:41:55+00:00): Hi, Minh Nguyen. Thank you for your notice.Please correct the buildings if they are rendered incorrectly as we have no data other than the image which is not clearly visible
Minh Nguyen (2023-02-28 08:57:37+00:00): Yes, I corrected the buildings in changeset 132948807. I used the same imagery as you but interpreted it differently. It’s important to understand how oblique or offset imagery can distort the shapes you see, especially with a pitched or gabled roof.

In this case, try comparing Esri and Maxar imagery to see how the rooflines differ – that’s the effect of photographing the building from a different angle in the sky.