piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Enock4seth (2022-11-08 11:03:23+00:00): Hi, 
If you can't see what's in the imagery,  kindly just don't map anything. For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1072914511 is not a building. 

Use a good changeset comment that is meaningful to other mappers too, not just some random hashtags that doesn't help.
AngocA (2022-08-01 23:09:57+00:00): Hola Facalderonm, este tipo de cambios es sobre muchos objetos, en una área muy amplia y borrando la historia de muchos objetos.
Para próximos cambios, reutilizar los objetos ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history). Recuerda que es un mapa comunitario.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-co/2022-July/004676.html
Facalderonm (2022-08-04 00:42:40+00:00): Hola. Se tendrá en cuenta los comentarios. Actualmente se está colaborando en la corrección de restricciones dañadas con las ediciones. Saludos.
Facalderonm (2022-08-04 00:44:28+00:00): PD. Todos los cambios se hacen sobre planos proporcionados por la Alcaldía de Bogotá y corresponden a la ubicación real y definitiva de los elementos. Puesto que aún no existen físicamente (están en construcción), se han etiquetado como tal y se irán dejando como definitivos a medida que las obras se entreguen.
Odel Salon (2022-07-23 09:52:55+00:00): Makeup By saniya sareen
Growdigitech (2022-07-23 09:54:32+00:00):  saniya sareen best makeup artist
aharvey (2023-10-10 10:50:57+00:00): The name key is for the name only, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description is a better option for descriptions to show to end map users. I've made the updates accordingly.

For slightly overgrown you might want to consider applying a trail_visibility value.
Langlaeufer (2022-06-24 12:12:57+00:00): danke
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122786304
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-24 14:10:46+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other tagging for POI in changeset 184526153

https://osm.org/changeset/184526153
Piskvor (2022-06-27 11:08:05+00:00): Ahoj, z Hybernské do Havlíčkovy právě i odbočovací cyklopruh přibyl, tam by mi dávalo smysl ho v mapě mít explicitně; nicméně netrvám na jeho vyznačení v mapě: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:K%C5%99i%C5%BEovatka_Hybernsk%C3%A9_a_Dl%C3%A1%C5%BEd%C4%9Bn%C3%A9_sm%C4%9Brem_na_z%C3%A1pad,_k_Pra%C5%A1n%C3%A9_br%C3%A1n%C4%9B.jpg
Martin2035 (2022-06-27 12:46:24+00:00): Ahoj, jenže odbočovací cyklopruh neznačíme v OSM jako cyklostezku. Cyklostezka by byla značená značkou C9 nebo C8 a vedla by mimo vozovku. Toto je integrační opatření ve vozovce, které se nazývá ochranný cyklopruh (v OSM = cycleway=soft_lane)
Piskvor (2022-06-27 11:06:05+00:00): Ahoj, nebyl jsem si úplně jist, jak to zmapovat - sice to není samostatná stezka, ale na pruh je to v tomto konkrétním úseku trochu moc daleko od opačného směru: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kruhov%C3%BD_objezd_p%C5%99ed_Pra%C5%A1nou_Br%C3%A1nou_sm%C4%9Brem_na_jih_z_Hybernsk%C3%A9_do_P%C5%99%C3%ADkop%C5%AF.jpg Nicméně i aktuální stav mapy je podle mě úplně v souladu s realitou :)
Martin2035 (2022-06-27 12:48:04+00:00): Ahoj, nezáleží na tom, jak daleko je pruh od opačného směru. Stále jde o protisměrný cyklopruh. Kdyby to byla stezka, musela byt být více stavebně oddělena s příslušným dopravním značením (C9, C8), což tyto úpravy nemají. Zkratka Celetná –> Na Příkopy toto značení nemá, ale jeho charakter ano, tak jsem to tak ponechal.
Díky i za to focení na Wiki!
vimacs_hacks (2022-06-26 13:39:03+00:00): 北三环东路内环那里和平西桥站左边的不应该是和平东桥站。
另外三环内环的和平东桥站应该还有一个站台在东面，这个是601路终点，大概位置是在电影院西边，和已经标记的75路终点之间隔着一条街。可以参考一下这个601路POV的52:00开始的地方。
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1J44y1h7BQ
Herman Lee (2022-06-26 13:54:06+00:00): 看这个pov来说，和平西桥西侧确实有有一个和平东桥的停车点。我确实少加了一个和平西桥和一个和平东桥的站点
vimacs_hacks (2022-06-26 14:16:14+00:00): 按照这个300内的POV的说法，300内的终点站还真的是在和平西桥站旁边。
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Ev4y137G2?t=483.8
user_2066394 (2022-06-25 15:34:21+00:00): WLAN gibt's da keins mehr?
user_5359 (2022-06-24 10:38:43+00:00): Hello! What is the meaning of the tag bldam:ref ? Did you mean ref:bldam? See https://taginfo.osm.org/search?q=bldam
Sinuhe20 (2022-06-24 21:07:03+00:00): Thanks, you're right, I've confused the positions. I'll correct it.
FixH (2025-04-24 13:19:08+00:00): Gibt es weitere Informationen zu dem Stollen?
Frans S (2022-09-10 10:50:06+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:
B: Overlapping buildings drawn.
A: buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
B: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.


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/122788911
Frans S (2022-09-10 10:50:17+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:
B: Overlapping buildings drawn.
A: buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
B: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.


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/122788911
Frans S (2022-09-10 10:50:20+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:
B: Overlapping buildings drawn.
A: buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
B: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.


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/122788911
Frans S (2022-09-10 10:50:38+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:
B: Overlapping buildings drawn.
A: buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
B: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.


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/122788911
mueschel (2022-06-26 08:59:23+00:00): Hi,
there is no need to add a 'disused' prefix to tags that have a date in the key like
disused:amenity:--2016

The date is sufficient to tag that the amenity is not used any more. So, either
amenity:--2016
disused:amenity
is perfectly fine.
Lzmxya (2022-06-26 11:10:06+00:00): Thanks for the reminder. This makes much more sense, I will check my edits and fix it.
Frans S (2022-07-08 15:25:10+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say that your mappings are not accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extensions).
D: Nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or roads.
E: Rectangular buildings not squared. They are mostly strict rectangular.



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/122789725
mapperue (2023-01-16 07:25:51+00:00): Ahoj, podobné cesty využívané aj správcami povodia ako je táto:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/658734126#map=16/49.3106/19.5044
sa nemapujú ako highway=path, ale ako highway=service alebo highway=track. A keďže sú to dvojstopé cesty a pohybujú sa tam aj vozidlá s povolením, tak sa používa tag motor_vehicle=permit. Tiež je vhodné pridať tag tracktype a smoothness, keďže je to cesta využívaná cyklistami. Zároveň ak tam nie je dopravná značka cyklochodníka, tak sa nepoužíva tag bicycle=designated, ale len bicycle=yes.
Mex (2022-06-28 14:29:39+00:00): Please provide details in change log message.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122790044
danieldegroot2 (2022-06-24 11:29:26+00:00): Hey Laurens,

Welcome (back) to OpenStreetMap!

Building data in The Netherlands comes from the BAG dataset. Any building updates are imported from the BAG manually. The building update you are reporting is not present in the BAG yet. Please report this building update to the BAG using their website (Dutch):
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/

Click on the building. In the right menu, next to "Pand", click on the pencil icon "Terugmelden". Be sure to use formal, complete sentences.

Regards,

Daniel

--

This changeset was reverted in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122798524
(PS: The building was intersecting itself; this makes it no longer display on the map.)
danieldegroot2 (2022-06-24 11:36:55+00:00): Hey again,

Looks like you made a small typo in the "capacity" field ("22" instead of "2"). Don't worry, it can happen. I've fixed it for you here;
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122799284

Regards,

Daniel
redd (2022-06-27 20:29:11+00:00): Hallo mikeho,
bitte vermeide grossflaechige Änderungen nur anhand von Logikwerten.
Vielen Dank,
redd
parukhin (2022-06-26 00:25:01+00:00): Не знаю, что вам скажет сообщество про перерисовывание навигационных карт, я хочу сказать, что створные знаки - это не маяки.
Изучите, пожалуйста, схему тегирования seamark, и уберите все неверно поставленные man_made=lighthouse
Martin Constantino–Bodin (2022-06-24 10:42:32+00:00): Le déplacement de ce point semble involontaire ici : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5838986728
Angustrclarke (2022-06-24 10:52:21+00:00): Tout à fait
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-01-14 18:05:17+00:00): Może lepiej ją skasować? Ma sens ją dalej trzymać?
mcliquid (2022-06-27 15:23:51+00:00): Hi, hast du zu der Baustelle noch mehr Informationen?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1072964215/history

start_date=*, construction=*, ref=*, ...?

Und natürlich eine Quelle. Auf den von dir verwendeten Luftbildern erscheint die Baustelle nicht.

Danke!
krassechanges (2022-06-27 21:28:21+00:00): Nein, hab keine Infos zu der Baustelle. Bin dort nur gefahren und es war eine Baustelle, auf den Luftbildern sieht die Straße aber fertig aus, also war ich verwirrt. Falls ich nochmal dort vorbeifahre, ändere ich den Tag. 

Zur Quelle: Ich verwende folgenden benutzerdefinierten Layer, dort sehe ich eine Baustelle bzw. Straße:

https://gis.stmk.gv.at/image/services/OGD_DOP/Orthofotos_akt/ImageServer/WMSServer?&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=Orthofotos_akt&STYLES=&CRS={proj}&BBOX={bbox}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&FORMAT=image/png
user_2066394 (2022-06-24 10:20:43+00:00): Die Kapelle wurde abgebaut und neu aufgebaut?
Dawid2849 (2022-06-24 10:31:38+00:00): Jeżeli droga nie ma nazwy to w StreetComplete (w innych odpowiedziach) jest opcja, że droga nie ma nazwy. Ten mostek już poprawiłem.
SHARCRASH (2022-06-25 11:30:44+00:00): Hi! You added a set of restrictive access tags for this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1009088592/history except foot=yes. This is ambiguous for coding as it exists different ways to interpret combinations. As you can see, the original standard OSM Carto directly grays up the way no matter extra specific access tags you add. In the end, it just misleads users. So please do not add a general access=* + specific exceptions as this is a interpretative combination. By definition, the access=* is for all means of mobility, no exceptions. It's either all or the specific tags only. Some people from other regions started to make the combo exceptions because they don't have the patience to add properly other specific tags (specially in Germany from my observations). You did it though (with a mistake for motor_vehicles, otherwise how can forestry vehicles exploit the land), so i guess you just added the tag just by calking from others.  Thanks for your understanding!
SHARCRASH (2022-06-25 12:13:58+00:00): Also please, be careful when you remove a highway. For this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/812607194/history there is a reason why people added it. Please read my changeset comment  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122835115 and check the highway's tags.
RicoElectrico (2022-06-24 10:26:20+00:00): Cześć, jak w banku może być "drive through"? W Stanach bym uwierzył, ale w Polsce nie bardzo ;-D

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2382439485
RicoElectrico (2022-06-24 11:29:46+00:00): Poprawiłem też ubezpieczalnię; https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9843639298/history
BCNorwich (2022-06-25 07:23:35+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You made a few duplications of highways here. Don't worry I think I've corrected everything.

Regards Bernard.
Jessy73 (2022-10-10 08:30:45+00:00): Bonjour, 

J'aimerai comprendre d'où viennent ces tracés des boucles VTT ? Sont elles officielles ? Connaissant bien le secteur il me semble que non. Côté Saint Cassin une "liaison VTT entre 2 pistes" a été crée alors même qu'il n'y a pas de sentier qui passe dans le pré en question. 
Si vous avez qques éléments de réponses à m'apporter ?

Merci 
Jessy73
ravenfeld (2022-10-10 09:06:54+00:00): Bonjour, peut tu me dire exactement l'endroit qui pose problème car quand je regarde le GR 96 tout a l'air bon.
Quand j'ai faire cette modification j'ai juste mis dans l'ordre les éléments et mis à jour la route en fonction de la trace disponible sur https://www.gr-infos.com/
Jessy73 (2022-10-10 09:52:30+00:00): Le sentier se situe sur la commune de Saint Cassin, à l'intersection avec la route du Penet (elle même proche de la route de Montagnole). Le sentier traverse le ruisseau des Alberges et rejoint la route des Confins.
Il est noté comme sentier informel sur OSM, sauf que ce sentier n'existe pas du tout, on se retrouve dans un pré avec des vaches. Il a une relation avec une "Liaison VTT" pour rejoindre 2 boucles VTT. Tout autour de Chambéry ont été crées des boucles VTT dans les relations, sauf que sur le terrain il existe aucune boucle VTT officielles. 

Pour le GR 96, il a évolué depuis plusieurs mois et ne va plus jusqu'en Chartreuse, mais des Bauges il poursuit et s'arrête à Aix les Bains. C'est mis à jour sur le scan 25 et le site de GR.infos. 

Merci 
Jessy
Jessy73 (2022-10-10 09:53:09+00:00): Et donc j'aimerai bien savoir qui a aussi crée ces boucles VTT inexistantes officiellement !?
ravenfeld (2022-10-10 10:13:50+00:00): Tu parles de ceci ? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1067553825 ?
Je ne connais pas cette endroit et j'ai l'impression que tu as raison.
Si c'est pas bon, n'hesite pas a modifier moi ce que je cherchais dans cette modification c'est que les routes soient dans l'ordre pour qu'on puisse extraire facilement le GPX.
ravenfeld (2022-10-10 10:19:35+00:00): Pour le GR96 je vais m'en occuper dans la semaine si tu n'as pas le temps et je m'appercois que le GR 965 n'est pas bon non plus.
Jessy73 (2022-10-19 07:15:52+00:00): Bonjour, 

Dsl de la réponse tardive ! 
Oui c'est bien de ce chemin dont je parlais. J'ai retrouvé la personne qui a crée toutes ces boucles vtt.
Pour le GR 96 et GR 965, je ne m'autorise pas trop à modifier les GR et GR de Pays pour des questions "de droits" avec la FFRandonnée et OSM. En effet à l'heure actuelle je suis technicien randonnée pour la FFRandonnée de Haute-Savoie. C'est pour cela que je suis bien au fait de la modif du GR 96 qui se termine à Aix. Côté Haute-Savoie il a subi une modif importante en passant aujourd'hui par le N du lac d'Annecy, si tu souhaites voir et modifié le tracé dans OSM, le Scan 25 a été mis à jour sur ce secteur que tu verras sur Géoportail.
Merci pour ton travail sur les sentiers dans OSM ! 

Bonne journée 
Jessy
ravenfeld (2022-10-19 07:52:24+00:00): Salut, du coup, le 96 j'ai mis à jour et j'espère sans erreur. Pour le 965 pas encore eu le temps de le faire.
Je comprends ta position délicate avec la FFR et Osm du coup pas de souci pour que je fasse les modifications. Pour mon un sentier et un sentier, et dès lors qu'il y a des panneaux visible ont peut le marquer mais bon c'est un grand débat.

Bonne journée.
Jessy73 (2022-10-19 08:58:29+00:00): Salut Ravenfeld, 

Parfait je regarderai ça alors. Auquel cas je corrigerai si je vois qques coquilles ! 
Pour le moment, je ne voudrais pas qu'on voit trop que je contribue sur ce créneau des GR et GRP au risque que ça me retombe dessus. Mais je rejoins tout à fait ton raisonnement ! 
Oui attention sur le terrain le GR 96 n'a pas été débalisé au dessus de Chambéry ... 

Merci 
Bonne journée 
Jessy
Frans S (2022-09-10 08:56:56+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 rather sloppy and not squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
Your mappings will be reverted.



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/122795304
Littlebtc (2022-06-27 06:45:22+00:00): 我看新聞轉運中心應該開工了吧？有任何理由要刪除舊way重建嗎？（例如現場無施工跡象）
太平枇杷 (2022-06-27 12:20:15+00:00): 因為根據臺中市政府與見安營造發布之影片以及市政府新聞稿圖片，確定原轉運中心標記之位置並非後來的施工場地與範圍，因此刪除
太平枇杷 (2022-06-27 12:21:41+00:00): 將其先改為目前的停車場用地，俟將來若有所新規劃，再另行編輯
Dino Michelini (2022-06-24 18:05:25+00:00): Perchè hai cancellato il tag survey:CAI ?
abakus_uploader (2022-06-24 22:33:10+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!
Maarten van der Bent (2022-06-24 10:45:52+00:00): The protocol can be found here: https://www.dna.sr/media/330804/21_1437__Pres._Ch._Santokhi__aanb._overeenkomst_protocol_tussen_Rep._Suriname_en_Franse_Rep._op_de_regeling_van_de_Grens_tussen_Suriname_en_Frans_Guyana_verdrag_parijs_30sept.1915_tot_vaststellen_van_de_Grens.pdf
Maarten van der Bent (2022-06-24 10:46:31+00:00): A list of coordinates is available as Annex 3 (from page 57 in the PDF)
legofahrrad (2022-07-02 16:45:56+00:00): Moin! Bitte beachte, dass zum name=* Tag wirklich nur Namen gehören.
Beschreibungen gehören nicht in dieses Feld.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Names#name_ist_nur_der_Name
Viele Grüße
highflyer74 (2022-07-28 07:34:03+00:00): Hinweis hier: Hier wurde Gebäudegeometrie verschoben. Dies wurde in der Zwischenzeit von einem anderen Mapper korrigiert.
joebucks76 (2022-07-07 21:02:36+00:00): This does not render with these tags in OSM. The best choices are amenity=community_centre
and or
tourism=theme_park.
Your choice of amenity=festival_grounds is the best choice logically thinking but I have realized OSM will not render alot of tags. So if you want it to render in OSM use the choices I suggested.
1998alexkane (2022-07-07 21:26:26+00:00): In general, we shouldn't tag for the renderer (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer). Nonetheless it is of course nice to choose a tag which renders, as these are usually tags which have broad community consensus anyway (which is the important part IMO) An 
option which renders and is quite popular is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Darts_centre , and I don't think that this would be stretching the definition too far :)
joebucks76 (2022-07-07 21:53:38+00:00): Agreed. I just like the way the outline and label show for tourism=theme_park in OSM. It stands out in a good way. I know this is not a theme park but until they render at least an outline whats the point to tag an unrenderable object. I do tag alot of unrenderable objects like pipelines and such but this object is just too popular to not have rendered. Am I right?
1998alexkane (2022-07-07 22:31:19+00:00): I agree that definitely is should render considering how important it is to the city. I actually looked around at the various festival grounds around the world and found no good consensus. Considering it is primarily a space for cultural events, I still think that amenity=arts_centre is the best "rendering" tag. I definitely think it takes more than one ride to make a theme park, and it isn't the main focus of the grounds anyway :D

In regards to unrendered objects in general, I'm not certain how much you follow the OSM "lore", but recently there was this blog post about this issue of how the maintainers of Carto (the standard osm layer) are not rendering everything everyone wants to see: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cristoffs/diary/399189 Just beware, it gets rather heated.
burrscurr (2024-06-06 10:56:35+00:00): Hi Paul17,

wenn du highway=x zu highway=construction änderst, ist hilfreich, wenn du auch noch die Art des highways als construction=x hinzufügst. Wenn Mapper mit StreetComplete vorbeikommen und die Straße als nicht mehr im Bau markieren, weiß StreetComplete sonst nämlich nicht mehr den ursprünglichen Straßentyp, sondern setzt ihn einfach auf highway=road. Siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152325269 bzw. die History von dem betreffenden Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/52497106/history
Das nur zur Info. Happy Mapping!

VG burrscurr
user_2066394 (2022-06-24 21:06:49+00:00): https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/737807104
Da hätte man die ursprüngliche Kapelle auch belassen können, wenn sie identisch wieder angelegt wird.