piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
muralito (2016-02-04 18:43:02+00:00): Estuve normalizando nombres y estaba name=Río Primero/Suquía y solo deje "Primero", "Suquia" ya estaba en alt_name, y los nombres con / es algo que a evitar en OSM (ahora no me acuerdo en que herramienta de QA aparecia el aviso)

Habria que ponerle old_name=Río Primero y name=Río Suquía a todos los tramos y a la relacion waterway
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072356 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
GerdP (2015-11-11 10:47:45+00:00): please review : I've changed
oneway="Rua 10" to oneway=no
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35236573
RicoElectrico (2015-08-12 19:27:41+00:00): Taka uwaga na przyszłość: Przyjęło się, że nie przyklejamy (tj. tak, że mają wspólne węzły) dróg do obiektów takich jak lasy czy inne zagospodarowanie terenu. Trudniej się to później edytuje. W edytorze iD panel po prawej pozwala Ci wyłączyć pokazywanie niektórych elementów, dzięki temu unika się przyklejania (F -> Obiekty na mapie).
Miłego mapowania życzę.
chillly (2015-08-13 15:02:40+00:00): Why are you continuing to add nodes for farms that are already better mapped as areas and already named? Please look at the existing data on the map before you blindly add your 'place' nodes.
will_p (2015-08-12 15:01:00+00:00): I notice you are manually importing a large number of names from OS Streetview. I'm concerned you do not seem to be paying sufficient attention to what has already been mapped. In particular, there are many cases where you are adding place=farm tags when the farms have already been mapped as an area using landuse=farmyard. This causes duplicate names to appear. You should not be duplicating features in this way, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element. Here's an example in this changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3693295857

Additionally, you are adding bridge names using the place=locality tag. Do you have any evidence that these are really locality names? If  not, they are better added as a name to the bridge itself. Determining what is a locality name requires good local knowledge. Here's an example in this changeset of a bridge name added using place=locality, duplicating the name already added to the bridge itself: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3693295867

My comments above apply not just to this changeset, but also to many others you have uploaded over the last few months. Please keep in mind that OSM is a collaborative project. You should not be ignoring the existing data. Additionally, the aim is not to make a replica of OS mapping. Names on OS maps are not infrequently out of date (and even occasionally just wrong) so the decision to add them should really be based on local knowledge or ground survey. 

Have you asked other mappers in the areas you are targeting whether this indiscriminate copying of OS names is actually wanted?
chillly (2015-08-13 15:05:04+00:00): I am a significant mapper in the area and I'm very unhappy with the way this mapper behaves. I feel inclined to revert all these recent edits.
SomeoneElse (2015-08-16 12:47:46+00:00): I can't claim to be familiar with this area, but after a survey of an area east of Goole last year, most of the OSSV-derived data added by a similar changeset where "wrong", where "wrong" was either duplicate, in the wrong place or unverifiable.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072354 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
chillly (2015-08-13 15:05:56+00:00): Why are you continuing to add nodes for farms that are already better mapped as areas and already named? Please look at the existing data on the map before you blindly add your 'place' nodes.
species (2015-08-13 06:46:48+00:00): Wir haben uns in Graz darauf geeinigt, Schienen und Straßen auf einem Way zu belassen, wo baulich nicht getrennt, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Graz#Stra.C3.9Fenbahnen_Graz
Bitte melde dich auf der Mailingliste, sonst werden solche Changesets bald revertet, Danke!
Weltstaat (2015-08-13 07:22:37+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis! Ich werde mich sobald wie möglich an die Mailingliste wenden.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072353 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072351 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072347 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072346 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072344 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072343 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
M!dgard (2015-08-13 11:42:35+00:00): Dag Kristof

highway=construction wordt gebruikt voor wegen die in aanbouw zijn, niet voor omleidingswegen tijdens werken. Daarvoor kan je highway=unclassified gebruiken.

Je hebt ook een parking van het Sportpaleis verwijderd. Is deze echt weg?

Vriendelijke groeten, M!dgard
Kristof Guldentops (2015-08-13 14:14:15+00:00): Beste M!dgard,
Ik heb deze aanpassing gedaan voor de opmaak van de circulatieplannen naar buurtbewoners van dit project. Deze "omleidingsweg" is een naamloze weg die eveneens zal blijven liggen na afronding van de werken, de huidige Vaartkaai zal wegvallen. De parking van het sportpaleis is inmiddels niet meer in gebruik. Het Albertkanaal wordt op deze plaats +- 50m verbreed door NV De Scheepvaart.
M!dgard (2015-08-13 15:27:47+00:00): Hartelijk bedankt voor het delen van die informatie op OpenStreetMap. Zijn de wegen al klaar, worden ze aangelegd, of is hun aanleg alleen nog maar gepland? Zoals ze nu zijn ingegeven, worden de omleidingswegen momenteel aangelegd. Als dit geval is – perfect. Als de werken nog niet gestart zijn, kunt u highway=proposed gebruiken.
valtteril (2015-08-12 13:05:06+00:00): Accidentally added wrong comment. Actually I updated some features based on local knowledge of the area.
escada (2016-03-25 20:22:11+00:00): Hallo,

Ik ben momenteel bezig met het onderzoeken van fouten in de wandelroutes. Nu blijken er nogal wat fouten op te treden in dit gebied.

Zou het kunnen dat u een aantal wegen hebt samengevoegd tot 1 geheel ? Het is over het algemeen beter om gesplitste wegen niet terug samen te voegen.

mvg
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072342 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
Spanholz (2017-03-28 13:00:45+00:00): Hey, I did a little maproulette and saw that you somehow twisted the railways at this point: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/249747250

Maybe you can change the both railway spurs easily
Bulllseye (2015-08-12 13:30:19+00:00): Ich merk grad das ich dsa etwas verbockt habe, könnte das jmd. bitte wieder rückgängig machen?
pyram (2015-08-13 21:31:18+00:00): Erledigt. Hab es gerade zufällig gesehen. Schön, dass Du es selber merkst. Besser wäre es aber, den Fehler als Note einzutragen oder im Forum zu melden. Da kann dann schneller reagiert werden, was das Reverten vereinfacht.
Bulllseye (2015-08-20 06:17:45+00:00): Ok. vielen Dank für den Hinweis:)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072341 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
Kaziu Kisiel (2015-09-21 13:29:08+00:00): Powinieneść całą relację DK 69 na S 69 z wezła "Żywiec" do węzła "Buczkowice".
user_717069 (2015-09-22 11:12:52+00:00): Jak sama nazwa poprawki wskazuje, zajmuję się głównie liniami kolejowymi i nie mam zamiaru wnikać w otagowanie dróg.
Noen (2015-11-18 12:32:18+00:00): Hei!
Du har rett i at det ikke ble bygd fortau på østsiden av Kirkeveien (det er regulert inn), så det var riktig av deg å slette fortauet som var tegnet inn vest for Kirkeveien.
Det er derimot å feil å flytte Meierikrysset, slik at det passer med bing satellittbildene.
Hele rundkjøringen er blitt flyttet sør-øst etter ombyggingen.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qm1jdes3cyml7nz/Meierkrysset.png?dl=0
BushmanK (2015-08-22 02:49:32+00:00): Не пишите ерунду, читайте официальные документы на сайте образовательного учреждения, прежде чем делать такие правки. Я за вами все исправил.
M!dgard (2015-08-13 11:53:16+00:00): Dag Merijn

Hartelijk bedankt om deze nieuwe straat te tekenen!

Je hebt geen tags gegeven aan de lijn, waardoor ze nu nergens kan gebruikt worden. In iD moet je de lijn selecteren, en dan 'Weg' aankllikken, en in dit geval voor 'Straat' kiezen. Zo zal ze verschijnen op de kaart, en kan navigatiesoftware ze herkennen.

Als je de naam kent, kan je die ook toevoegen in het eigenschappenpaneel dat dan opengaat.

Ik heb de lijn alvast wat gedetailleerder gemaakt aan de hand van nieuwere luchtfoto's, maar die zijn nog niet beschikbaar in iD.

Dank u!

Vriendelijke groeten, M!dgard
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072340 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
dolphinling (2015-08-12 19:55:26+00:00): Hi, I'm a little confused by this change. Is there an actual path (i.e. something you can walk on) here, that's named "SATEC SRTS MAP"? Or if not, what's being added to the map here and what's actually on the ground in these locations?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:17:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072339 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
ppr9 (2015-09-10 16:59:49+00:00): what is the source of the Marston changes here? some are incorrect eg south meadow was connected to newland but you have disconnected it - it definitely is connected on the ground. I'm not sure great beanhills exists on the ground either - seems to be a construction site with no sign or public access.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:16:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072338 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
SomeoneElse_Revert (2015-09-16 22:16:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 34072337 where the changeset comment is: Reverted at request of author due to use of Google Maps as source
Supaplex (2015-08-12 15:10:23+00:00): 這樣亂改名稱不大好吧?
我先回退掉
中華民國 (2015-08-12 15:12:04+00:00): 亂改名？
alexz3 (2015-12-01 09:41:35+00:00): PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO GO AROUND DELETING THINGS THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND HAVE NO PLACE ON OSM.
Jean-Marc Liotier (2015-12-01 09:46:10+00:00): Yes, I don't understand how this way could in any imaginable have been sourced from Microsoft Bing since it is nos visible on Microsoft Bing. If I am wrong, please do enlighten me !
Jean-Marc Liotier (2015-12-01 09:47:36+00:00): Yes, I don't understand how this way could in any imaginable way have been sourced from Microsoft Bing since it is not visible on Microsoft Bing. If I am wrong, please do enlighten me !
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-12-21 09:14:38+00:00): Sorry for bothering you about an old change, but I have a question about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39542927#map=17/39.9268178/3.833841layers=N - Why this is not tagged as highway=steps? What is the meaning of steps=yes here? See http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/tPd for more cases (I considered armchair mapping it to highway=steps but I think that verification from local mappers is preferable)
YraFyra (2017-12-22 21:17:02+00:00): Hi
No worries. I think I didn't know exactly how to do it.
I have now updated it a little bit.
It is a bridge for pedestrians only, the reason is that there are steps on both sides (approx 15 steps on each side) and then flat on the top.
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-12-23 22:13:36+00:00): Thanks you! Now whoever attempts to avoid steps will be able to do that :)
literan (2015-08-13 10:56:50+00:00): ну и зачем здесь два альфа-банка? задвоили
whitequark (2015-08-13 21:59:56+00:00): один -- банк, который работает днем. второй -- банкомат, который работает круглосуточно
literan (2015-08-14 08:47:35+00:00): да, именно так стало после моей исправительной правки, которой я удалил зачем-то поставленную вами вторую точку банка.

вот https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3662422871/history точка банка, которая там есть уже 22 дня

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3693654724/history - а это вторая поставленная вами точка, которую я удалил

карты в ОСМанде обновляйте почаще :-)
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-08-24 22:45:45+00:00): Bardzo proszę, żebyś nie zmieniał klas dróg podług jakiegoś widzimisię. Tą drogą miałem wątpliwą przyjemność jechać rok temu i zdecydowanie nie zasługuje ona na unclassified: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40830435
literan (2015-08-14 13:03:50+00:00): А вот как будет правильно:

landuse=residential
residential=rural
Dilon Pait (2015-08-14 16:56:49+00:00): Понятно. Спасибо. С жилой зоной проще. А вот с частным сектором нужно помнить тег. Хотя можно на wiki maps глянуть или на примерах готовых. Я таким образом wifi кое где подставляю и туалеты :-)
GerdP (2015-11-01 10:21:10+00:00): bitte beachten:
Ich habe alle 12 Knoten mit dem unüblichen Tag
highway=emergency_access_point_construction
in 
highway=construction
construction=emergency_access_point
geändert. Siehe
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35008415
Gijs Blonk (2015-08-13 22:38:16+00:00): Sorry Sir,, you have made not connected roads, i did them ok now
SomeoneElse (2015-09-16 23:36:05+00:00): Dunham bridge was already mapped; I've removed the duplicate https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3693857747 .
SomeoneElse (2015-09-13 14:29:40+00:00): Grassthorpe Lane Crossing was already surveyed and mapped; I've deleted your duplicate one in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34000902 .
user_599436 (2015-08-20 10:17:45+00:00): You removed the waterway=riverbank tag from the outer way of the relation but didn't add it to the relation itself. I've added it so that it renders correctly.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/324714/history
Graf Westerholt (2016-12-26 11:08:59+00:00): Hast du hier das PH=off vergessen? Siehe http://openingh.openstreetmap.de/evaluation_tool/?setLng=de
chillly (2015-08-13 15:06:32+00:00): Why are you continuing to add nodes for farms that are already better mapped as areas and already named? Please look at the existing data on the map before you blindly add your 'place' nodes.
luschi (2015-08-22 17:15:18+00:00): Es wird nicht Für den Renderer gemappt. 
Bitte nicht das veraltete highway=platform verwenden
Mammi71 (2015-08-27 05:20:18+00:00): nicht für den Renderer sondern für den Anwender. Veraltet heißt nicht falsch. Gebt dem Renderer Zeit das neue Schema umzusetzen. solange sollten für Anwender wichtige Infos nicht entfernt werden, auch wenn sie veraltet sind.
luschi (2015-12-09 18:07:13+00:00): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
Mammi71 (2015-12-09 21:38:37+00:00): Danke für den Link.
Ich sehe darin meine Auffassung bestätigt: Veraltet heißt nicht falsch.
chillly (2015-08-13 15:07:02+00:00): Why are you continuing to add nodes for farms that are already better mapped as areas and already named? Please look at the existing data on the map before you blindly add your 'place' nodes.
literan (2015-08-13 11:09:31+00:00): писать словами в OSM не имеет смысла, это пустой труд (( - это не Викимапия

следует ставить теги barrier=lift_gate на точку на дороге. 

Если у вас нет времени разбираться - лучше поставьте заметку в месте, в котором следует добавить или поправить что-либо вот здесь http://www.openstreetmap.org - справа кнопки на черном фоне, вторая снизу. Опытные картографы оперативно исправят.
maciek-szn (2015-08-13 07:43:22+00:00): Nie psuj proszę geometrii dróg. Co to za "ząbki", których nie ma w rzeczywistości? http://osm.org/go/0M13e_lbv?m=

Organizacja ruchu na Jagiellońskiej była zmieniana rok temu, na Geoportalu nie ma aktualnych zdjęć.
marek kleciak (2015-08-13 08:56:18+00:00): Geometria drogi wynika z bardziej precyzyjnego narzsowania osi obydwu jezdni. Niestety wychodzi tam taki ząbek, Jeśli znasz dobrze sytuację na miejscu, proszę skoryguj, faktycznie opieram się tutaj na geoportalu nie znając miejsca.
mavl (2015-08-13 15:32:35+00:00): Здравствуйте.

Спасибо за добавление данных в OpenStreetMap.

Если улица имеет название, то лучше её обозначить highway=residential.
Так как по такой улице возможна адресация домов, то на границу территории желательно добавить тег place=allotments.
mavl (2015-08-13 15:32:54+00:00): Здравствуйте.
Сокращениями в названиях лучше не пользоваться. См.:  
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Названия   http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:name
pantufla (2020-05-03 09:47:55+00:00): Hola, esos caminos de carros, estás seguro que existen? Los veo muy inexactos con las imágenes satelitales
Nakaner (2016-02-11 11:35:37+00:00): Bei OSM wird als Dezimaltrenner der Punkt verwendet und nicht das Komma. Beispiel: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/365382754/history

Ich habe es an den highway=path von dir im südlichen Pfälzer Wald korrigiert und den Nordvogesen korrigiert.
ayxis (2025-05-05 13:34:19+00:00): Hi jengelh!
In diesem CS ist diese barrier von dir gepflegt worden: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/442879645

Damals hast du es als sump_buster klassifiziert und angegeben, dass eine Bodenfreiheit von >0,4m notwendig ist. Zählt das überhaupt noch als sump buster? Ein gängiger Geländewagen hat so um die 0,3m Bodenfreiheit. Alle anderen Fahrzeuge sind deutlich tiefer gelegen. Weißt du wer problemlos hier drüber fährt?

Eventuell ist barrier=block oder sogar bollard passender. Was meinst du dazu?

Viele Grüße
ayxis
jengelh (2025-05-06 01:20:16+00:00): Ich hab keine Ahnung wie OSM-Router einen barrier=bollard auswerten würden (die Hoffnung: single-tracked vehicles durchlassen, double-tracked nein), oder barrier=block auswerten würden (die Hoffnung: foot/bicycle/horse durchlassen, sonst nein).

Ein Standardzinkpoller dürfte bei >=1,2m liegen, viel zu hoch selbst für Trecker.
ayxis (2025-05-06 06:15:18+00:00): Oh an Trecker hatte ich überhaupt nicht gedacht! Dann passt sump_buster ja doch, mit agricultural=yes und height=0.4
Für alle anderen Verkehrsteilnehmer ist das zu hoch, da kommt selbst die Feuerwehr nicht drüber.

Ich trage es mal so ein. 
Danke :)
ayxis (2025-05-06 06:17:13+00:00): Änderung siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165875109
gileri (2015-08-13 08:46:55+00:00): Bonjour,

Effectivement le fait d'importer les nœuds d'adresses sans les rattacher aux bâtiments n'est pas idéal, mais je pense qu'il reste préférable de garder les adresses sous la forme de noeuds, pour indiquer le point d'entrée des bâtiments.

C'est d'ailleurs comme ça que sont représentées les adresses dans les bases La Poste par exemple.
acsd (2015-08-14 15:17:27+00:00): Что за маршалы?
Алина Иванова (2015-08-14 15:30:27+00:00): это нужно удалить) без понятия как
Polarbear (2015-08-12 20:38:47+00:00): OSM: fix typos in playground
RobJN (2015-08-12 22:53:51+00:00): This was (and still is) mapped at the roundabout where the road splits. This is what is on the ground. As such do you mind if I revert this edit?
robw (2015-08-13 06:27:25+00:00): If you think that is obvious enough then fine.
RobJN (2015-08-13 18:19:05+00:00): It's not obvious, no, but it does better reflect what is on the ground. For example the cars pulling out of the unmapped driveways on the east of this stretch of road can turn left and travel south (the bus restriction is only a very short segment). I've therefore reverted.
robw (2015-08-13 22:21:26+00:00): Sounds good to me.
Rob.
DaveF (2015-08-13 10:06:06+00:00): Hi again
Ways don't have to be split at nodes with tags, such as stiles, It better if a way is as joined up a it can be. I've connected the relevant ones.
Cheers
Dave F.
JeSe-MX (2015-08-19 23:12:10+00:00): ¿Estan recibiendo algún tipo de curso para poner "ruta a..."?

Lo mejor es usar "relaciones" en vez de vías, pues si se usan vías causan conflictos en los navegadores GPS al tener vías encimadas.
Josef73 (2021-04-01 05:40:48+00:00): Hello, are all of your dates in opening_hour still correct?
naoliv (2015-08-13 13:09:25+00:00): Luiz, você adicionou um monte de "semáforo=j. oliveira" nessa sua edição. Por exemplo: http://osm.org/node/3694543626
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-25 17:31:41+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/256397612/history has waterway = creek that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
What you meant by waterway=creek? Is not using https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dstream intentional and wanted here? How waterway=creek differs from waterway=stream in this case?
SomeoneElse (2015-08-17 00:21:59+00:00): What benefit do you see for adding "name:hu=Nottingham" when "name" is already "Nottingham"?  What is your source for this information?  I've never seen it signed locally.
d1g (2015-08-13 04:14:27+00:00): please add minimal comment like "+name:hu tags worldwide"

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
jlcod (2015-08-13 04:17:58+00:00): hello, just noticed that some tags are probably not what you wanted, please take a look: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/26487670/history "Gaziantep=Diyarbakır" instead of "name:hu=Gaziantep", 
similar: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/26487882
"Gaziantep=Sirnak"
SomeoneElse (2015-08-18 11:29:19+00:00): Hi - is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/365452110 really a house?  It seems unlikely.
SomeoneElse (2015-08-18 11:30:03+00:00): Also https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/365452108 - that does not look like a house either.
SomeoneElse (2015-08-17 14:02:32+00:00): Hi Arun - are you sure that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/329032015 is really an unclassified road?  It doesn't particularly look like one from the imagery.  What I suspect it is is a farm track with a "public right of way" over it (given that someone's named in "leeds country way").  My guess is that highway=track is correct, and the access rights are at the very least "foot=yes; designation=public_footpath" (but that'd need to be verified by survey or by talking to someone local).  Given that it is part of https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5012105 , I suspect that the name of this road isn't "leeds country way" either.  The best locals to talk to are probably the first mapper of this object (this looks like one of the first things they mapped in OSM after they joined - they've done lots more since) or chippy, who's from Leeds, and mapped the bit just to the west.
PlaneMad (2015-08-17 17:04:17+00:00): The section leads only to the Airport service road apart from the couple of properties and the footpath branching out. There are no ways that branch into farms to suggest this is primarily for agricultural use.

Have been trying to understand UK roads better and would really appreciate to know why you would say track is more suitable than service or unclassified for this segment.