piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
akuksouski_lyft (2022-02-21 10:18:32+00:00): Hi, Spaghetti Monster!
My name is Alexander and I am a mapper of the OSM Team at Lyft. I am grateful for your interest in our edits.
Lyft OSM Team uses several data sources for map editing. These sources include proprietary features created by Lyft, specifically the street-level imagery from Lyft’s drivers taken during rides in various markets, together with drivers' GPS tracks. Unfortunately, we cannot provide the Lyft internal data for every OSM edit made by our Mapping Team but we're happy to disclose some of them in case of any specific interest, like in the mentioned request.

In this case, way 15188661 was removed according to the image from 2021/10/15, taken from I 35 freeway near former exit 180 location (29.6377207, -98.2155323) - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OfLIFCSHEFaQwImuEvkTRKMsuI_wmPQ3/view?usp=sharing. The photo shows the absence of an off ramp in this place. It also corresponds to Lyft drivers GPS tracks distribution in this location - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z0AtDIyUdAx8YwxuP4kliKZtv22b1jz-/view?usp=sharing. Near Map aerial imagery confirms the lack of the link road as well - https://drive.google.com/file/d/12kukY7mkdBvU2sAd7FFvLD0aBUzZ6Piw/view?usp=sharing.

The new exit 180 off ramp was opened at node 9485556347 location and the new motorway link was already added here by Lyft OSM Team in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117106987.

I do hope I was able to provide sufficient data to review this edit.
Best Regards, Alexander
angys (2022-03-02 19:35:12+00:00): How you get these road names? From Google? Please refrain from plagiarism road names from any Copyright source, however if this one is your site visit with photo as evidence then should be fine to import.
ZLima12 (2024-06-17 19:44:58+00:00): Hi,

I see that you set highway=trunk on Woodside Ave here, presumably because it is limited access. expressway=yes is the right tag here, since the road is no more important in the network than the primary roads it connects to on each side.

Please see the following pages for more details:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TMP-Proposal:_New_York/Highway_Classification

Best,
John
Vinber (2022-03-19 16:23:12+00:00): Bonjour,
vous êtes partis aux USA, peut-être faire des commentaire en anglais ?

Hello,
you went to the USA, maybe make some comments in English?
Sam Wilson (2022-02-16 08:41:20+00:00): Relevant photos: https://samwilson.id.au/P25272 https://samwilson.id.au/P25266
reedyn (2022-02-16 12:18:51+00:00): Undvik att sätta landuse=residential inuti en annan landuse=residental. Om du vill sätta ut ett namn på ett område/kvarter/stadsdel så är det praxis att sätta en nod med place=quarter (i detta fall) istället.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place=quarter
eggie (2022-02-16 09:31:36+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback: Ziet er netjes uit. Iets is een woonerf als er een bord woonerf staat. Je zou dan maxspeed= 15 kunnen toevoegen

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-02-16 09:34:58+00:00): Die lange parkeerplaats kan niet meer kloppen.
Die kan opgesplitst worden in twee delen.
met extra tags 
parking=streetside
parking:orientation=perpendicular
Ik pas het even aan.
MVG
eggie
YPGGUUY (2023-09-01 18:03:58+00:00): Likely vandalism, deleting existing place name tag and amenity.
CHfish (2022-02-16 09:18:03+00:00): Nachtrag: Nur der nördliche Teil / Zugang ist betroffen, daher wurde dieser Abschnitt gewählt
Dimacn (2022-02-16 11:41:19+00:00): А зачем вы удалили здание в парке? Здание уже снесли?
Дмитрий Марьев (2022-02-17 06:11:25+00:00): Здание на месте, а вот музей переехал на ул.Ленина 222А в 2012 году
Dimacn (2022-02-17 06:44:19+00:00): Пожалуйста, больше не удаляйте реально существующие объекты с карты. Нужно было просто отредактировать свойства здания, удалив теги музея. Я восстановил здание.
Дмитрий Марьев (2022-02-17 07:32:28+00:00): Хорошо. Не разобрался
eggie (2022-02-16 09:41:07+00:00): Top!
Ziet er allemaal netjes uit
mapse
eggie
(lokale mapper)
habi (2022-03-01 14:06:54+00:00): Ciao berasu
Die Gebäude und Strassen im Kanton Bern können vom offiziellen Katasterplan abgezeichnet werden, siehe die Nachricht auf der OSM-Mailingliste der Schweiz hier: http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/2019-January/009875.html
Es hat sich auch eingebürgert, dass wir die Gebäudeumrisse anhand der Grundmauern und *nicht* anhand der Dachvorsprünge einzeichnen.
Ich habe das im Changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117981469 angepasst, welches du hier visualisiert siehst: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=117981469
Gruss, Habi
habi (2022-03-01 14:07:16+00:00): PS: Ich kenne jemanden, der im Largo wohnt, selber wohne ich drüben an der Wilkerstrasse :)
Mannivu (2022-02-16 11:50:09+00:00): Ciao. In realtà water_point va usato solo per quei punti in cui riempire contenitori grandi (per esempio cisterne di caravan e camper). Per la casa dell'acqua è meglio "vending machine"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117467336
dcapillae (2022-02-16 10:46:03+00:00): Buenas días, Antonio.

Gracias por añadir el nombre al sendero. En OpenStreetMap solo deben tener etiquetas con el nombre los objetos que realmente lo tengan. ¿Podría indicar una fuente que confirme que este sendero tiene ese nombre? Conozco la zona y no recuerdo que este sendero tenga nombre alguno ni ninguna señalización sobre el terreno.

Si necesita ayuda para empezar a mapear, por favor, consulte la guía de principiantes: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners%27_guide.

Atentamente,

Daniel
antonioespana (2022-02-16 10:58:20+00:00): Hola Daniel,

Es el nombre ampliamente conocido por la comunidad de enduro (MTB) en Málaga por el que se conoce esta senda que baja del cerro de la Matanza. La fuente más “oficial” es Trailforks, donde también aparece con este nombre.

Personalmente considero de gran ayuda contar con los nombres de las sendas en los mapas para orientarse sobre el terreno. Así está en otras regiones como Madrid y me resulta muy útil.
dcapillae (2022-02-16 11:19:45+00:00): Gracias por las fuentes.

En Trailforks se usan nombres que no son válidos en OpenStreetMap: "Tramo alternativo desde El Mirador", "León por Fuente Olletas", "Túneles Mix", etc., nombres que no deben incluirse en OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions.

Las políticas de nombres son distintas en OSM y en Trailforks. Las correspondientes a OSM puede consutlarlas en el wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names. Para el caso de la etiqueta «name», debe usar el nombre común. «Pompa» no es el nombre común de este sendero.

En cualquier caso, permítame consultarlo con la comunidad internacional de OpenStreetMap y en breve podré darle una respuesta más detallada. Quizás haya una alternativa válida. 

Gracias por su colaboración.

Atentamente,

Daniel
antonioespana (2022-02-16 11:37:06+00:00): Entiendo que no todos los nombres de Trailforks son válidos y la comunidad está evolucionando ahí para evitar nombres descriptivos. Pero eso no es óbice para que muchos nombre sí sean los comunes.

No entiendo por qué dice que ese no es el nombre común y por qué no da una alternativa. Ya he indicado que en la comunidad que más utiliza esa senda se le conoce de forma general como Pompa y que eso ayuda el entendimiento de la cartografía. Los nombres de los senderos primero se conocen por tradición oral y la formalización en carteles, etc. llega luego.

El nombre no es descriptivo. Ignoro su origen pero sí sé que se le conoce generalmente por ese nombre.
jeslop (2022-02-16 11:38:45+00:00): Saludos antonioespana.

Para etiquetar los nombres MTB, existen un esquema propio:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Ciclismo_de_montaña

La etiqueta name no debe ser utilizada para eso, por lo que debes cambiarlo siguiendo el esquema correcto.

Bienvenido a la comunidad OSM.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
antonioespana (2022-02-16 11:39:45+00:00): “ It is certainly wrong for a mapper to invent a name for an airstrip; however most names were invented at some point in history, so if someone invents a name and it catches on and a sizeable group of people refer to the thing by that name, then it's ok to be mapped[1].”
antonioespana (2022-02-16 11:42:00+00:00): @jeslop Gracias, esa me parece una corrección constructiva y clara. Así haré.
jeslop (2022-02-16 11:42:24+00:00): Respecto a lo que comentas de las alternativas, si existen otras, aparte de la que ya te señale:  si es llamado así por la gente de la zona está loc_name. 

Saludos
dcapillae (2022-02-16 12:25:57+00:00): Antonio, lamento que mis comentarios no le parezca constructivos. Lo han sido en todo momento. Le he pedido tiempo para poder consultarlo con la comunidad internacional con el fin de encontrar una alternativa. Sospechaba que la había, por eso le he pedido que me diera la oportunidad de consultarlo. En mi opinión, eso es ser constructivo.

Agradezco a Jesús que se haya pronunciado sin yo pedírselo. La comunidad de OpenStreetMap es una comunidad proactiva y colaborativa en todo momento, y los comentarios en este conjunto de cambios son prueba de ello.

Gracias de nuevo.

Atentamente,

Daniel
eggie (2022-02-16 10:30:34+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
bxl-forever (2022-02-16 14:30:20+00:00): Hello,

The phone number was already there for that node (contact:phone).  No need to duplicate it.

Happy mapping.
Frans S (2022-02-24 10:19:21+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are rather accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared. They are mostly strickt rectangular.
Never end (connect) a path/road on a residential area .


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/117468004
Soshal Distan Singh (2022-02-17 03:05:02+00:00): Выглядит так, что вы воткнули магазин прямо в газораспределительную станцию %) Вы уверены? Я загуглил, кажется, это не та Мариинская ул., которая вам нужна.
RAC_UK (2022-02-16 20:10:05+00:00): Hi, are you sure the footpath through the cemetery is a service road?
arhemon (2022-02-18 11:42:36+00:00): it does seem to be a footway, I've changed the classification. Thank you for your feedback #https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117560756
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117468909
AlaskaDave (2024-03-20 00:03:55+00:00): Hi Julien.

Today I came across this boundary you mapped or adjusted and I have a couple of questions. In the Wiki, it states that there is no admin level 6 in Thailand. This boundary between Mae Taeng and Chiang Dao, both being districts (amphoes), would seem to fit into the admin_level 6 category. In addition, I have zero experience with naming or assigning boundary tags so I'm unsure about how to name this one, or even if I should.

I've been using the Thai Topo map  in JOSM to adjust boundaries in my area of Saraphi and it seems to be fairly accurate. You quoted WorldTopoMap as your source here but JOSM doesn't offer that imagery. Is it still available in the iD editor?

The Saraphi boundary I mentioned always defines two sub-districts. Saraphi itself of course and the various bordering subdistricts. The name of that one is Saraphi in OSM. But perhaps naming such a boundary would be incorrect

Moreover, the Wiki definitions are always suspect because so many contributors and editors are clueless or don't know how to write, or both, but it seems clear that admin_level 5 is not in use in Thailand.

What are your feelings about adding a name and/or changing the admin_level of this boundary?

Dave
AlaskaDave (2024-03-20 00:05:36+00:00): Sorry, the second sentence above should read: "In the Wiki, it states that there is no admin level 5 in Thailand."
julcnx (2024-03-20 01:24:11+00:00): Hey Dave,

Thanks for reaching out!

Just to give you some background, I added those partial boundary edges a while back with limited knowledge at the time. They're handy for detecting paths, like fire breaks, forestry tracks, or walking paths, since they often align with those features.
Regarding the WorldTopoSource, it's deprecated from ESRI and shouldn't be relied upon. I noticed it used on some public government sites and assumed it was viable, but that's not the case.

Ideally, these boundaries should be reworked into districts (admin_level=6) and sub-districts (admin_level=8) relations, similar to what's been done for provinces (admin_level=4). That way, they'd have meaningful names.

It's been on my todo list for a bit, but now that I've found some open data we can use (GITSDA), it's given me a bit of a boost. Just need to squeeze in some time for it!
Anyway, I'm glad to see someone else interested in this topic. Feel free to make any changes you think are needed.

By the way, could you let me know where I can find the "Thai Topo" source you use in JOSM?
AlaskaDave (2024-03-20 06:42:14+00:00): The Thai Topo I mentioned is available as an imagery layer in JOSM. I have been using the OpenTopoMap layer for some time but the Thai Topo layer has details the other doesn't have, for example, boundaries. However, they must be hand-traced from the imagery, just as you would need to do if it was a satellite image. Tedious but better than nothing. It also contains the names of many residential streets, temples, schools, towns, routes, waterways, etc. The route refs, however, are sometimes out-of-date so I presume the data isn't all that fresh. But for the rest, names of towns, rivers, and temples etc., don't usually change over time and the checking I've done shows mostly good agreement with current names.

Please give me some tips about the GITSDA data. I went to the site Paul_012 provided in Discourse and could get only KMZ data for boundaries.

PS: should we move this discussion to the existing Discourse discussion of this topic: "Looking for More Sources on Official Boundaries"?
julcnx (2024-03-20 08:24:11+00:00): Good idea, let's follow up there. 
I would like to get more info about the Thai Topo source in JOSM as I don't seem to have access to it.

I will provide more info on how the GISTDA daata could be accessed as an external layer.
julcnx (2024-03-27 08:17:38+00:00): @AlaskaDave I have fixed the incorrect admin_level on these boundaries, and added a note for further work. I will complete these boundaries once I figure out what dataset we can use legally. Cheers, Julien
AlaskaDave (2024-03-28 05:42:55+00:00): Okay, thanks, Julien!
user_2066394 (2022-02-16 22:58:47+00:00): Sind das nicht drei unterschiedliche Gebäudeteile mit unterschiedlichen Dachformen wie ursprünglich eingezeichnet?
MichaelFS (2022-02-17 07:27:24+00:00): Ein Gebäude, drei Gebäudeteile: Ja.  
Unterschiedlichen Dachformen: Ja.
Ich habe die Informationen zum Heim abgetrennt in den Punkt. Beim Gebäude war das Problem (soweit ich das richtig erkannt habe), das vier Gebäude vorhanden waren: Die U-Form, der Zentralbereich und die beiden Seitenflügel. Das wurde von JOSM wegen "Überlappung" moniert.
Danke und ratlose Grüße, Michael
user_2066394 (2022-02-17 10:24:25+00:00): Der Gesamtumriss ist schon mal ein guter Anfang :-) Die anderen Gebäudeteile hätte man mit building:part:=* erfassen können, dann verschwindet die Überschneidung und den Gebäudeteilen können unterschiedliche Attribute zugeordnet werden, z. B. bezüglich Dachform usw.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:building:part
MichaelFS (2022-02-17 13:50:41+00:00): Hmm, ich habe für's erste drei Rechtecke "building_part" hinzugefügt. Würde ich jetzt noch die versehentlich entfernten Attribute der Gebäudeteile finden, würde ich die hinzufügen. Aber ich finde sie nicht ...
user_2066394 (2022-02-17 15:15:15+00:00): Einwandfrei, die Attribute waren nur als Beispiel gedacht, um die unterschiedlichen Gebäudeteile deutlich zu machen, wichtig war ja die Behebung der Überschneidung.
Frans S (2022-02-21 09:52:01+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here.
A remark.  You mapped just 2 out of 4 buildings on a particular spot. Please map them all when you are mapping there.
Best regards and keep mapping
Andrea Musuruane (2022-02-16 13:11:02+00:00): Ciao. Fatico a vedere i miglioramenti. Le immagini aeree che usi, infatti, non sono correttamente allineate e per essere usate devono essere traslate nella posizione corretta. Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117469628
SomeoneElse (2022-02-16 10:38:42+00:00): Lots of boundaries use https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/377155716 here but the 3 townland boundaries use https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/377155595 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1031961783 so that the bridge and the river don't "join", and all are valid multipolygons.
dieterdreist (2022-05-09 09:37:37+00:00): hi,
can you please explain why you changed the tagging from graveyard to cemetery?
Norman Spirit (2022-05-13 21:04:08+00:00): A graveyard is only a cemetery adjacent to a church or place of worship. There is no such building here.
dieterdreist (2022-05-13 23:14:53+00:00): I don‘t know, maybe there was? Do you know the place?
BCNorwich (2022-02-17 09:05:54+00:00): Shortcut tagged as 
highway=path, description=shortcut
Walkcycles (2022-02-17 17:05:37+00:00): Hi Bernard, I suspect you have changed my short footpath/shortcut - see 1031965656 v1.  The reason why I suspect it was you is that the path entered was not there when I originated my amendments. I originally had the path as an extension to the road Thomas Avenue,  going in line with Thomas Avenue to join the A34.  The entrance is a small gap in the fencing between the path at Thomas Avenue, and the A34. It is difficult to spot on the aerial view due to overgrown hedges but it is clearly meant to be a legal shortcut in that the wire fence stops on either side of the entrance. The distance between the two paths i.e. that in Thomas Avenue and the one running parallel to the the A34 is less that 3 feet. My correction would allow Komoot to correctly direct me to the A34 at the top of my road rather than having to first turn left onto Liverpool Road (the extension of Thomas Avenue) and join via the footpath at the end of Liverpool Road.) It would appear however that you have changed my path, and now inserted one that bears right at the top of Thomas Avenue, and leads up one of our neighbour's drives before joining the A34 through their back garden gate.  may I respectfully request you reinsert my original suggestion, or explain the reason for the change.  Regards,
Rod J
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:59:18+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.
Владимир К (2022-02-20 06:36:07+00:00): а почему забор по зданиям идёт?
Alex Б (2022-02-20 07:11:30+00:00): забор временный. правка в процессе
rab (2022-02-16 16:56:43+00:00): Hello,
could you please check your changes on this road with maxar premium beta?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28675440
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:58:50+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 22:07:51+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.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-02-18 18:38:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 117577381 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for vandalism
ivanbranco (2022-02-16 12:24:00+00:00): Hi Kicking Leaves,

you changed some villages values to a new value place=work camp. The OSM standard for keys it to avoid whitespaces so it should be "workcamp" or "work_camp".

Even if I'm not really sure place is the right tag here...maybe it could be office=charity or office=ngo or something similar?
Kicking Leaves (2022-02-16 12:39:40+00:00): Thanks @ivanbranco, that's really helpful. As I've been working along the S side of this project, I've started to see these large, dense sets of buildings in clearings. They have clear bulldozed roads into them and seem to be associated with new plantings of a uniform vegetation. 
Other mappers / validators have been asking the project managers for advice on labelling of settlements, but no reply yet. 
I thought I would be best to differentiate these settlements from the "traditional"(?) type hamlets and villages in some way, and this is how I chose. But welcome your advice and will follow in future. Would you be kind enough to correct my mistakes? Thanks again and best wishes Kicking Leaves
Frans S (2022-02-21 11:47:32+00:00): Hi. Kicking Leaves. 
Thanks for mapping here.
A remark. Please don't use the tag highway=service for a nearly 3 km long path leading to a hamlet. Path, or when it is wide enough  Unclassified is preferred.
Best regards
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:04:12+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 22:00:52+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 22:01:59+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 22:05:10+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.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-02-18 18:38:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 117577381 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for vandalism
mavl (2022-05-20 15:36:27+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.
mavl (2022-05-20 15:36:23+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.
mavl (2022-05-20 15:36:20+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.
ftcat (2022-02-16 16:12:35+00:00): Hi Charles96,

Please don't use the word 'road' as the name or ref of a highway and please try and use the correct classifications for highways.

Thanks
mavl (2022-05-20 15:36:16+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.