piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mapwitch (2022-03-18 07:20:59+00:00): Thank you for working with me on this great challenge!

Ok, this means that a multipolygon with the outermost ways is not the right choice. How about a boundary relation? According to taginfo there is also a usage of "boundary=natural" (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/boundary#values). With this there would be no overlapping of wetland definitions. I have changed the relation now to this. 

If you have another idea, feel free to adjust that as well.
adrianojbr (2022-03-14 17:17:39+00:00): Olá. Não é permitido, a partir da Rua Paulo Alvez de Liz, usar a via de ligação para acessar a Rua São Jorge. Há um meio-fio que impede essa manobra.
LakeComo (2022-03-15 15:12:54+00:00): Olá, Adrianojbr. Obrigado pela sua mensagem. Vejo agora que o Mapillary mostra um meio-fio que impede a manobra da Rua Paulo Alves de Liz para a Rua São Jorge (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=203923405234989). Obrigado por atualizar a conexão e tenha um bom dia! 

Hello, adrianojbr. Thank you for your message. I see now that Mapillary shows a curb which prevents the maneuver from Rua Paulo Alves de Liz to Rua São Jorge (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=203923405234989). Thanks for updating the connection and have a good day!
adrianojbr (2022-03-15 16:26:44+00:00): Exatamente! Eu fico curioso como que você foi levado a corrigir o que estava certo. Você usou somente a imagem de satélite da Maxar? Mas como foi identificar que ali tinha que ser modificado?
LakeComo (2022-03-16 00:36:27+00:00): Eu usei o Maxar Premium Imagery. Parecia um cruzamento típico para mim, e as imagens não mostravam um meio-fio, então pensei que o link_primário estava conectado errado e deveria estar conectado ao residencial. Percebo que devo procurar imagens do solo antes de fazer tais suposições. Muito obrigado por apontar isso e estarei ciente desse fato no futuro. Atenciosamente, LakeComo 

I did use Maxar Premium Imagery. It looked like a typical intersection to me, and the imagery did not show a curb, so I thought that the primary_link was misconnected and should have been connected to the residential. I realize that I should look for ground imagery first before making such assumptions. Thank you very much for pointing that out and I will be cognizant of that fact in the future. Best regards, LakeComo
eggie (2022-03-14 12:21:08+00:00): Welkom bij OSM


Is Heicross lus1 eeen officiele straatnaam?  
Zo niet beter de name= verwijderen.
MVG
eggie
aTarom (2022-03-14 15:46:07+00:00): Carrer d'Arenys was not connected with Passeig de la Vall d'Hebron? Are you sure about that?
sbelemey (2022-03-15 15:37:23+00:00): hi, aTarom!
thanks for your feedback. 
Yes, i'm sure. You can see it on Bing streetside cameras.

best regards,
sbelemey
eggie (2022-03-14 12:22:05+00:00): Dag Jeroen...
Gebruik alleen name=  voor officiele straatnamen.
gr egie
Lee Carré (2022-03-14 23:36:47+00:00): Sigh. It's frustrating when you persist, without response. Why bother spending the extra time & effort to clean up, when reverting the entire changeset would be so much easier & quicker (and perhaps make the point)?

Once again, http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
Stop deleting elements to simply redraw them. Modify (the geometry), instead.

Even if deleting a way makes sense, keep & reuse the modes. However, you could've reused the existing ways for the residential home, changed their geometry, and retagged.

OSM isn't merely about producing a map, but managing a dataset (hence metadata is important). History (of changes) helps other mappers (it's also very difficult to refind (& restore) a deleted element).

Aside from human factors, deleting & re-adding elements for (what is essentially) the same feature, bloats the database.

If you're not sure how to edit while preserving history, then learn before making any other changes (or, only make additions; lots of buildings need their outline tracing, which is earlier using desktop editors than surveying ones).

Sloppy work doesn't have a net-gain, since it requires cleanup by others. Quality work is what's needed.

Please be much more careful, in future.
Lee Carré (2022-03-14 23:39:23+00:00): But, at least source=* & comment=* have improved; so, you're at least reading my reviews, even if not making necessary corrections to previous changesets.

I suggest you start with the basics, such as using StreetComplete. Diving straight into iD is, evidently, a bad idea for newbies.
eggie (2022-03-14 12:48:08+00:00): Dag Jeroen.. Je paadje had je geplakt op de grens zelf en een ander pad. Ik heb het losgemaakt.
Je edits..
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=118467479

MVG
eggie
som-tam (2023-04-12 14:51:03+00:00): Ist das ein Ärztehaus?
zmoliu (2023-04-12 15:52:01+00:00): ja
sravy (2022-04-14 11:15:15+00:00): Hi pavani,
Thanks for editing.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118467639
Lee Carré (2022-03-14 23:48:33+00:00): Source?! 🤦‍♂️
contre_sens (2022-03-15 00:06:37+00:00): Hi Lee I have seen a couple of your comments but they come through as several emails. Are you an OSM moderator or just an enthusiast because you are coming across as quite authoritarian and rude rather than helpful. I’d appreciate if you were constructive rather than sarcastic and for that reason have been listening to your feedback but choosing to directly converse with you as little as possible. Thanks, Finn M.
contre_sens (2022-03-15 00:07:08+00:00): Source: Local knowledge
Lee Carré (2022-03-15 01:32:33+00:00): “Source: Local knowledge”

Then please ensure that the appropriate tag is populated in your changesets.

Part of the point of the metadata is to help other mappers.

Changes must also be from acceptable sources, and verifiable.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:03:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
gabro00 (2022-03-14 13:09:47+00:00): Korábban azért vettem le a weboldalt, mert úgy néztem az egész területet hívják így, mivel ezen az épületen kívül van az OBI és a KFC is.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10603386
GBAB (2022-03-17 13:22:25+00:00): Szia! Igen, ebben technikailag teljesen igazad van, ugyanakkor szerintem hasznos/kényelmes, ha ezen is rajta van; hátránya meg nem nagyon akad: nem félrevezető, nem zavaró…
Gábor
gabro00 (2022-03-18 14:55:04+00:00): Rendben, a lényeg hogy nem tévedés történt.
englu (2022-03-14 15:35:55+00:00): Hej! Mógłbyś mi jeszcze wyjaśnić dokładniej, dlaczego scalenie punktów na linii 577810776 uważasz za wandalizm a nie poprawkę czegoś, co wygląda na błąd lub niepotrzebną dokładność? Czy na prawdę w tym przypadku odcinek długości kilkunastu cm jest uzasadniony?
maciek-szn (2022-03-16 13:42:18+00:00): Przyznam, że nie analizowałem każdego pojedynczego węzła. Znając Twoje modus operandi wycofałem wszystkie zmiany o nazwie „Scalone niepotrzebne punkty” na interesującym mnie obszarze.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:58:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-20 14:20:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 150265070, 150261530, 150261385, 150261427, 150261374, 150261398, 150261463, 150262164, 150264883, 150261443, 150265293, 150265518, 150263711, 150261692, 150263544, 150263148, 150264695, 150263349, 150262918, 150264472, 150264284, 150261551, 150264090, 150262527, 150262687, 150263890, 150261413, 150261488, 150261509 where the changeset comment is: No reply to https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15936 , so we've taken a guess at what was likely derived from Google Earth (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149290548 admits to that use)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:07:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:58:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-20 14:20:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 150265070, 150261530, 150261385, 150261427, 150261374, 150261398, 150261463, 150262164, 150264883, 150261443, 150265293, 150265518, 150263711, 150261692, 150263544, 150263148, 150264695, 150263349, 150262918, 150264472, 150264284, 150261551, 150264090, 150262527, 150262687, 150263890, 150261413, 150261488, 150261509 where the changeset comment is: No reply to https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15936 , so we've taken a guess at what was likely derived from Google Earth (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149290548 admits to that use)
adlid (2022-03-14 13:57:45+00:00): Was this pre-organised and approved as a data import and passed licensing? This has added thousands of data points that are not correctly integrated with the underlying road data and is likely to be reverted in its current state
luxiaghd (2022-03-14 14:48:50+00:00): hello adlid, thanks for comment. I can confirm this was a test that was erroneously uploaded. reverts made and won't be repeated.
adlid (2022-03-14 15:04:46+00:00): Thanks :)

There's some docs on the wiki on how to go about preparing a large import in the future, if the TfL data license is compatible with OSM that is: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
Filip009 (2022-04-11 17:47:22+00:00): Dobrý deň, táto skala nemala pomenovanie, čiže nemohla sa na mape zobrazovať ako Rozsypana skala.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-03-15 09:21:39+00:00): Opis edycji jest nieprawdziwy, patrz np. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/817164708

Wycofuję.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-03-15 09:22:42+00:00): Wycofane w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118502380
Temat-Droga (2022-03-15 10:53:46+00:00): Przyczyna : Droga nie łączy większych miast, Odcinek Olsztynek - Jedwabno zdegradowałem na Tertiary ze względu na niebiezpieczny zakręt. Droga ma znaczenie tranzytowe jedynie na odcinku Szczytno - Babięta gdzie jest połączeniem Giżycka z Warszawą.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-03-16 08:30:08+00:00): 1) uzasadnienie powinno być na nowej edycji jeśli nastąpi

2) "niebiezpieczny zakręt" nie uzasadnia obniżenia wartości highway=* - patrz np. https://naddachami.pl/zakret-idiotow-zakret-smierci
Barroszt (2024-10-25 18:17:51+00:00): Zgadzam się z użytkownikiem Temat-Droga, w przypadku tak oczywistych degradacji uzasadnienie znajdź sobie sam, a nie pytać go. Mateusz Konieczny odbiega od tego, jak powinno to wyglądać.
Barroszt (2024-10-25 18:26:12+00:00): Ale do secondary.
Yunkers (2024-10-25 18:50:04+00:00): Zasada jest taka, że NAJPIERW dyskutujemy zmianę na forum, później przeprowadzamy zmianę. Ta jak widać nie była oczywista, więc została wycofana.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-10-26 06:39:12+00:00): Opis takich edycji powinien podawać uzasadnienie. I jest to w obowiązku zmieniającego klasę dróg.

A w tym przypadku nie jest bynajmniej oczywiste że to dobra zmiana.

A traktowanie klasyfikacji urzędowej jako wprost odpowiadającej osmowej jest popularny błędem.
Barroszt (2024-10-31 23:24:31+00:00): https://olsztyn.wyborcza.pl/olsztyn/7,48726,27993539,zmierzono-ruch-na-drogach-wojewodzkich-co-dzieje-sie-wokol.html
Barroszt (2024-10-31 23:28:07+00:00): Co łączy ta droga? Jakieś miasteczko z stolicą województwa. Czy zasługuje na palmę pierwszeństwa? Zdecydowanie nie! Co poradzić na takich kretynów, którzy priorytetyzują tak mało popularne obciążenia!
Barroszt (2024-10-31 23:30:42+00:00): Jakoś do Kętrzyna, który ma podobną liczbę mieszkańców, co Szczytno, nie ma dróg pierwszorzędnych. To jest jakiś skandal! Zmiany są jak najbardziej potrzebne.
Barroszt (2024-10-31 23:42:08+00:00): Zdecydowanie popieram Temat-Droga, skoro tak interesujecie się kategoriami dróg w OSM, to nie mogę uwierzyć, że w naszym pan̈stwie prawie nic się nie ruszyło z tym. Jak na Poczcie Polskiej. Zamiast sprawdzać, które drogi nadają się do degradacji, to wy się skupiacie na monitorowaniu i zaczepianiu użytkowników, którzy działają w dobrej wierze i impulsywnym wycofywaniu edycji. Przez tak dużo lat nie zostało to ogarnięte. Taki biznes-model niestety.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-11-01 10:35:56+00:00): > to wy się skupiacie na monitorowaniu i zaczepianiu użytkowników, którzy działają w dobrej wierze

Temat-Droga ma historię ewidentnie wadliwych edycji (jak podnoszenie kategorii tylko dlatego bo klasyfikacja urzędowa jest wysoka)

> Zamiast sprawdzać, które drogi nadają się do degradacji

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/225485250#map=16/53.12368/23.89284

> to wy się skupiacie na monitorowaniu i zaczepianiu użytkowników

akurat ja większość czasu OSMowego teraz spędzam na rozwijaniu pewnych narzędzi związanych z sklepami

ale gdybym cały ten czas poświęcał na wycofywanie wadliwych edycji to jest to OK

> Co poradzić na takich kretynów

po pierwsze, przestać bluzgać 

to na przedszkolakach i kibolach robi wrażenie, na bardziej rozwiniętych nie

po drugie: utworzyć na https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/pl/40 wątek z propozycją zmian
Barroszt (2024-12-30 00:41:13+00:00): Z tymi kibolami to rozwaliłeś system, po prostu dla fana sieci drogowej w Polsce jest to nie do zaakceptowania to, że do Mielca nie ma ani jednej drogi pierwszorzędnej, a do Szczytna jest aż pięć dróg pierwszorzędnych, cieszę się, że dzielisz się mądrościami. Aż założę w końcu te wątki, aby uniknąć kontrowersji, bo wiem że zamiast, proponować, czy zmieniać kategorie dróg, to wycofujecie edycje, które zostały przeprowadzone w dobrej wierze i były współmierne do znaczenia danej drogi, to że dany użytkownik wywołał sporo kontrowersji to nie znaczy że każda jego edycja nadaje się do wycofania.
pavvv (2024-12-30 09:48:14+00:00): A więc czekamy na te wątki :)
Akurat za kilka dni Mielec dostanie drogę pierwszorzędną, a Szczytno po prostu znajduje się w takiej "niefortunnej" sytuacji, że przebiega przez nie kilka ważniejszych szlaków.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-18 18:15:14+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5366831723/history has fixme = yes that was added in this edit
What requires fixing here? fixme=yes is not particularly clear, and maybe problem got fixed since then?
Filip009 (2022-04-11 17:45:02+00:00): Dobrý deň, to čo ste pomenoval nie je skala, ale útes.
SilvoPastucha (2022-04-11 18:07:54+00:00): je to vrchol utesu. pomenovanie Rozsypana skala je veľmi výstižné pretože sú tam navršené menšie skaly takže to môže pôsobiť ako by sa jedna veľa rozsypala. Fotku nemam toto miesto si veľmi ľudia nefotia. Dalšej je čierna hora na ktorej je kríž a soška
Filip009 (2022-04-11 18:34:30+00:00): Okej, vďaka za vysvetlenie.
CmdrThor (2022-03-15 04:08:22+00:00): Mike, again, drawing knuckles as loops is incorrect. I have reverted your changes to the knuckles in this changeset.

Please refer to my earlier comments on one of your other changesets for further information: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118211471
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:07:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
user_5359 (2022-03-14 18:26:09+00:00): Hello (again)! Why did you add the following tags on a building node? 
building:levels = 0 (this means: the building doesn't exists)
building:material = reed (building or roof?)
builing = residential (typo of the key, not the node, the way got this key) 
Near by is a node (! not a way) with the tags
highway=pathaway (typo of the value, correct will be path)
surface=unpaved

Please cleanup your change sets and ask the project manager for better introduction.
user_5359 (2022-03-14 18:32:56+00:00): Please have also a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9577791523. You connect a highway and waterway with a building. The tag building:levels=0 is wrong (means no building height). The tag building:material=block_cement is misspelled the correct value building:material=cement_block (used 366.528 times, your value 2 times)
user_5359 (2022-03-15 14:54:22+00:00): Please have also a look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9577752208, http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9577752213. Please notice your typo natural=tree. I could correct this, but booth trees are inside of a building! Please correct the type and(!) the position.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:04:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
yadathot (2022-03-14 13:48:59+00:00): Added delivery access restriction on gate as per Driver feedback.
HirschKauz (2022-03-14 15:18:03+00:00): Hi SDFAVERVTRA! 
kennst Du razed:building=* ?
Solange Gebäude auf Luftbildern zu erkennen sind ist es besser sie mit diesem lifecycle-tag zu mappen, denn irgendein Sesselmapper auf dieser Welt wird sie wieder sonst eintragen ;-)  
Viele Grüße, HirschKauz  
Bleib gesund!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118470893
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-16 12:29:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 118549990 where the changeset comment is: Undoing some US retail updtes, as part of a long-standing complaint to the DWG by mappers in the US. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5777 .
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-03-17 00:25:29+00:00): reverti esta edição, usuário deletou via que tive um grande trabalho para mapear. e ela existe.se quiser mudar o tipo de via, colocar como não pavimentada, etc ok, mas deletar nãoé o correto.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-03-16 05:23:49+00:00): This relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13923291 implies there is no thru traffic on West Highland.
himansne (2022-03-16 12:23:57+00:00): Hi,
Thank you for reviewing my changeset and highlighting the issue.
Apologies for the incorrect turn restriction that was added. We have made the necessary corrections in the changeset #118543089.
Thanks once again for the feedback provided, I'm looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
himansne
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:59:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
Carlos Brys (2022-03-14 14:45:35+00:00): Se cambió el nombre a minúsculas, según las buenas prácticas de edición
opendcc (2022-03-14 14:51:02+00:00): Hallo,

ich habe eine Frage zum Rettungspunkt: hast Du die Tafel vor Ort gesehen?
Carto-Students (2022-03-15 10:41:11+00:00): Ja habe ich, aber leider mir die Nummer nicht gemerkt :-(
opendcc (2022-03-15 11:28:46+00:00): Ah, das bedeutet, es wurden offensichtlich neue Tafeln aufgestellt. Rettungspunkte suchen ist ein Hobby von mir (siehe mein Profil) und in der Umgebung Ebersberg gab es ziemliche Lücken in den Daten der Rettungskette.
IlBano (2022-03-19 14:43:12+00:00): Non mi sembri uno intenzionato a migliorare la mappa, ma piuttosto a vandalizzarla. Questo è un esempio dove ti sei inventato una strada inesistente, ma ce ne sono molti altri.
Dimitar155 (2022-03-17 13:55:45+00:00): Промяната е върната в https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118595192
IlBano (2022-03-19 14:46:03+00:00): Stai chiaramente vandalizzando la mappa. Questa strada con classificazione errata è solo un esempio perchè vedo che ti sei "divertito" anche in altre parti d'Italia.
AS EDF (2022-03-21 08:29:41+00:00): Buongiorno! Mi dispiace aver causato problemi; uno dei sistemi aziendali usa questa piattaforma, ma abbiamo problemi a localizzare delle strutture quindi cercavo di capire cosa impedisse un corretto utilizzo della mappa
IlBano (2022-03-21 17:49:12+00:00): Buonasera AS EDF.

Mi spiace per l'episodio, ma il modo in cui sono state apportate queste modifiche può far scambiare le stesse come un tentativo di vandalizzare i dati presenti nella mappa. Inoltre un altro utente (Stefano Pms) negli stessi giorni ha modificato gli stessi elementi (Grimaldi e Imbal Carton e limitrofi), altro segnale di attenzione.

Ipotizzo che questo secondo utente possa essere ricondotto alla vostra azienda: se me lo confermate proporrei di effettuare un revert di tutte le modifiche che avete apportato in modo da riportare la situazione allo stato iniziale, a meno di evenutali dati prima assenti che vale la pena di lasciare.

A riguardo del problema che riscontrate vi mando una mail osm con qualche indicazione.

IlBano
AS EDF (2022-03-22 11:11:41+00:00): Buongiorno, sì esatto, è un mio collega col quale stavo lavorando per cercare di risolvere il problema. Possiamo togliere le modifiche magari lasciando la catalogazione degli stabili, che prima mancava ed è comunque corretta. Grazie!
whb (2022-03-15 06:48:55+00:00): Hallo,

die hte GmbH wurde entfernt, habe ich wiederhergestellt.

Viele Grüße
whb
eggie (2022-03-14 15:37:54+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
whb (2022-03-15 06:40:51+00:00): Hallo,

Änderungssatz wegen vieler Fehler rückgängig gemacht.
Trotz 10 Warnungen durch den Editor:
Straßenbahngleise zerstört, Zahnarzt defekt, Anzahl Stockwerke falsch.
Relevante Änderungen bitte ggf. nochmals vornehmen.

Viele Grüße
whb
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-03-17 00:18:03+00:00): voce colocou uma barreira na BR e colocou que não passa carro, está errada essa informação, por que fez isto?
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-03-26 18:05:38+00:00): edição revertida.
Dimitar155 (2024-12-21 16:28:53+00:00): Hey Danfost,

In this area you've tagged a few houses as both semi-detached and terraced, starting from way/1040229332 and going east. Can you take a look at them?

Happy holidays,
Dimitar
user_12500175 (2024-12-21 17:02:12+00:00): Hallo,
die Reihenhäuser sind auf jedenfall falsch da einzel gemappt - Habs geändert.
Bei den Doppelhaushälften ist mir nichts aufgefallen
Dimitar155 (2024-12-22 07:35:52+00:00): They have both house=terraced_house and building=semidetached_house which seems a little confusing.
ToniE (2022-03-14 16:48:04+00:00): Hi Flo,

die Werte von

network 	MVG Rad

network:guid 	DE-BY-MVV

network:short 	MVV

passen nun nicht zusammen.

Gruß
Toni
flo2154 (2022-03-14 16:56:30+00:00): Oh, danke für den Hinweis. Die Tags habe ich im iD-Editor gar nicht gesehen, weil ich nicht so weit runtergescrolled habe. Ich habe sie nun entfernt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118477750
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-16 12:17:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 118549536 where the changeset comment is: Undoing some US retail updtes, as part of a long-standing complaint to the DWG by mappers in the US.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5780 .
tomhukins (2022-03-14 16:19:52+00:00): Thank you for this helpful improvement to the map.  You might like to consider using more descriptive tags instead of using a "description" tag in English.  The "parking=layby" tag described at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dlayby is commonly used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/parking#values