piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
voschix (2021-03-11 16:36:00+00:00): Ciao Davide.
Vedo che hai inserito la stradina arginale del Muson vechio, che mancava sulla mappa. Perché hai messo bicyle=no su questa? Non penso che sia vietato, anche se  forse solo percorribile in MTB. Di quello che mi ricordo sarebbe tracktype=grade4, surface=grass, smoothness=bad. Hai percosao fatto una foto dell'attuale situazione?
confusedbuffalo (2021-02-16 22:46:13+00:00): Hi, you requested a review of this change. The path you've added looks good, so thanks for doing that.
In this changeset you also made a change to the core paths relation, changing it from hiking to foot. Just wondering why that was?
confusedbuffalo (2021-02-16 22:47:07+00:00): Hi, you requested a review of this, and it all looks good to me.
confusedbuffalo (2021-02-17 10:32:10+00:00): Hi, you requested a review of this and it looks good to me.
VLD071 (2021-02-16 22:44:24+00:00): Data is 12 years old and a new development is in the area.
mariotomo (2022-05-21 15:06:24+00:00): hi. would it be possible for you to share the gpx data file, which I guess you used to georeference the aerial imagery.  GPS data is very scarce in the area.
user_5359 (2021-02-19 05:57:14+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Don't add any private information (My home) from residential or owner to a residential building!
user_5359 (2021-02-17 19:55:39+00:00): Hello! Please use the key source instead of source:
eggie (2022-12-22 08:39:26+00:00): Dag Sven    Beter geen landuse plakken aan de wegen. De kaart wordt dan lastig te bewerken en bij schuiven komt alles mee. 

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=99409529

Ik pas het even aan.
MVG
eggie
joost schouppe (2021-02-18 09:31:48+00:00): Beste,
We kunnen niet zomaar wegen op de kaart wissen omdat die privaat zijn. Wat we wel kunnen doen is deze weg markeren als privaat. In het geval het gaat om wegen die praktisch uit het landschap verdwenen zijn, dan raden we aan om deze als disused:highway aan te duiden, zie ook https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads#What_to_map_.2F_what_not_to_map voor wat meer context.

Waarom? Er zijn verschillende redenen:
- Door ze correct aan te duiden als niet-toegankelijke weg kunnen we het duidelijkste aangeven dat je ze niet mag gebruiken. Als de weg er niet meer is, kunnen we ook niet zeggen dat die niet toegankelijk is.
- Als we de weg verwijderen, kan er misschien later een andere mapper komen en de weg opnieuw intekenen op basis van satellietbeelden. Dan zijn we terug naar af.
- Onze kaarten worden ook gebruikt door orde- en hulpdiensten. Een weg die niet toegankelijk is voor wandelaars, kan dat wel zijn voor een ambulance.

Dus, om ervoor te zorgen dat het kaartmateriaal het minst hinder veroorzaakt voor u, kan dit best teruggedraaid worden, en aangeduid als disused of private.

Normaal gezien zullen routeplanners wandelaars en fietsers niet meer langs deze weg sturen.

Let wel, OpenStreetMap is eigenlijk slechts een gegevensbron. Het zijn de verschillende producenten, apps en websites, zoals Garmin, RouteYou en Strava die onze gegevens downloaden en gebruiken in hun eindproducten. Daarom is het mee de verantwoordelijkheid van deze producenten en website om up to date kaartmateriaal aan hun gebruikers door te geven. Concreet wil dat zeggen dat het enkele dagen, weken, maanden,... kan duren voor iedereen de nieuwe gegevens gebruikt.

De meeste kaarten gebaseerd op OpenStreetMap tonen duidelijk of wegen toegankelijk zijn of niet. Dat is echter niet altijd het geval. Hoewel we als mapper vooral bezig zijn met de kwaliteit van de data dan met de kwaliteit van de vele toepassingen die onze data gebruiken, zijn we wel initiatieven aan het nemen om zoveel mogelijk apps deze info duidelijk te laten visualiseren.

Als je hier nog vragen bij hebt, kan je gerust contact opnemen met community (at) osm.be . We hebben al contact gehad met de regiobeheerder van ANB om tot afspraken te komen. We kunnen dan eventueel de discussie per mail verderzetten.

Met vriendelijke groet,
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap Belgium
joost schouppe (2021-04-14 09:42:21+00:00): Zelfde opmerking als hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99410211
joost schouppe (2021-02-18 09:25:45+00:00): Er is een expliciete tag voor hondenlosloopzones, zie https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Ddog_park
Ik heb het voor je aangepast. Het type en de hoogte van de omheining zijn ook heel interessant op zo'n object; net als de toegangspoortjes. Hier een voorbeeld: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/451076317#map=19/50.72764/4.25643
Ik heb ook de naam verwijderd, aangezien die puur beschrijvend is (zie ook https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only).
marczoutendijk (2021-02-18 13:42:08+00:00): What kind of "construction" is going on here?
osmuser123__ (2021-02-18 15:50:31+00:00): they are building warehouses actually. i live in the area so i know. drive by and see for yourself.
marczoutendijk (2021-02-18 16:03:32+00:00): Then you could consider using:
landuse=construction
construction=warehouse

If you know the individual buildings then use:
building=construction
construction=warehouse
See:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dconstruction
and:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dconstruction

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 05:55:02+00:00): 안녕하세요
왜 군사지역을 지우시는 거죠?
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 06:00:46+00:00): 국내 지도 서비스나 심지어 구글 지도도 군사 지역은 원칙상 열람할 수 없다. 구글 지도와 다른 외국 지도는 위성사진으로 다보이긴 하지만.

그러나 오픈스트리트맵은 이러한 제약이 없는데, 군사용 지도를 그대로 가져왔는지 GP나 GOP, 군사공항 등이 나와 있다 못해 아예 눈에 띄게 표시되어 있다. 현실적으로 공개되더라도 크게 문제가 없는 정보로 이미 위키백과 등에도 모든 군공항의 좌표가 다 나와 있으며 일선 조종사들도 비상착륙이 필요한 경우 좌표를 안내받을 수 있다.

차이점은 국내 지도 서비스와 다르게 군공항 내부 격납고 등 각종 군사 시설물의 노출을 막아놓지 않았다는 점. 오픈스트리트맵에선 일부 군공항의 건물들이 노출되어 있기도 한데, 그나마 다행스러운 점은 일반대대들은 거의 표시가 없다는 점이라 볼 수 있다. 다만 OSM 위키에 따르면, 오픈스트리트맵 측에서는 보안 시설이란 이유만으로 지도에서 삭제하는 행위를 반달로 간주할수 있다고 경고하였다. 각국의 요구에 일일히 답할 생각은 없는 듯하다.
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 06:01:09+00:00): 지우는 행위는 반달행위 입니다.
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 06:01:26+00:00): 명백한 군사 시설도 아니고, 주민들은 다들 거기에 그 시설이 있다는 걸 알지만 군사용으로 쓰일 수 있거나 군사 목표가 될 수 있다는 이유로 애매한 시설들까지도 국내 지도에는 감춰져 있는 경우도 많다. 예를 들어 민간 공항, 민간 항만, 각종 공공 건물, 전기/가스/상하수도 시설, 주요 중공업 시설까지 가려지거나 흐릿하게 처리되어 있거나 논이나 산으로 합성하는 경우가 많다. 이런 이유로 국내 지도에서는 아무 것도 없이 공터처럼 보이는 주요 산업 단지의 지도는 아이러니하게도 오픈스트리트맵이 더 자세하다.
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 06:01:42+00:00): 사실 큰 문제가 되지는 않는 부분이다. 하늘에 떠있는 수많은 인공위성들의 위성 사진들은 재처리도 없이 상업적으로 잘만 판매되고 있는 상황이라 지도 하나 잡아봐야 어떻게 되지도 않는 상황이기 때문이다. 실제로 국가기관도 아닌 38 North조차 이러한 데이터를 통해 기밀시설 위치를 알아내고 북한의 핵실험 동향까지 파악해내는 중이다. 남한이야 말하면 입아프고 북한 또한 사이버전 역량이 무시할 수준이 아닌데 기밀정보도 아닌 돈 주고 사올 수 있는 위성사진을 입수하지 못했을 리 없다. 미국의 경우 미군의 군사시설의 위치가 구글지도에서 찾을수 있으며 위성사진으로 선명하게 볼수있고 백악관 같은 건물도 그대로 나온다.
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 06:01:59+00:00): 사실 이러한 기밀시설은 지도에서 지워달라 할게 아니라 부대 차원에서 정비를 해서 해결해야 할 문제다. 미군도 이라크 및 아프가니스탄에서 ISIS나 탈레반 등 테러단체가 위성 사진을 입수하여 부대 시설을 훔쳐보는 사태가 벌어지자 온갖 수단을 동원하여 위장, 핵심 시설을 알아보기 어렵게 만들고 있다. 당장 상용 지도 제공업체만 족쳐서 해결될 문제가 아니다.
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 06:02:13+00:00): 정부나 군 관계자인지 자발적인 개인인지는 알 수 없으나, 실제로 민감한 군이나 국가 시설의 정보를 삭제하는 반달 행위가 종종 일어나고 있다. 하지만 위키와 마찬가지로 어차피 어떻게 기록에 다 남는데다가, 오픈스트리트맵은 세계 곳곳에서 일어나는 이런 행위를 자동으로 모니터링하고 있기 때문에 몰래 넘어가기도 쉽지 않다. 이런 정보를 삭제해 봐야 오히려 시끄럽게 만들어서 민감한 지역임을 드러내는 꼴밖에 되지 않는다.
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 06:02:31+00:00): 오픈스트리트맵은 사용자들이 직접 참여해 만드는 지도 시스템으로 현재 이를 제재하거나 계도할 법적 근거는 없다고 한다. 국내 지도는 위성사진을 찍은후 군사시설이나 주요 시설들을 가리고 그제서야 위성사진을 볼수있고 그 시간이 오래 걸려 촬영 시기가 늦지만 외국 위성사진은 그런거 없이 바로 찍으면 되니 국내위성사진보다 최신이다.
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 09:10:01+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ko:%EB%B3%B4%EC%95%88%EA%B5%AC%EC%97%AD
user_5239402 (2021-02-17 09:10:46+00:00): 보안구역 으로 지정된 곳의 지도 데이터를 삭제했기 때문에 이곳으로 안내되었을 것입니다. 그러나 오픈스트리트맵은 일반적으로 지도를 생성함에 있어서 개별 국가의 국가안보와 관련된 요구를 존중하지 않습니다. 건물이 위성 사진에서 보인다면, 그 건물이 보안구역이든 아니든, 오픈스트리트맵의 지도에 포함될 수 있습니다. 지도의 내용을 "보안구역"이라는 이유만으로 삭제하는 것은 오픈스트리트맵을 훼손하는 행위로 받아들여질 수 있습니다.

이러한 행위를 자제해 주세요. 감사합니다.
SomeoneElse (2021-02-17 09:09:42+00:00): Excellent - thanks!
Maybe next add some route releations for the actual MTB trails in the area?
Best Regards,
Andy
MTB FORIS (2021-02-17 13:55:51+00:00): Thank you! We didn't know the rules, so we made a markup error. We apologize for the inconvenience. We will definitely try to act in accordance with the rules of Openstreatmap in the future.
Can we, as a TAG, add information that all the elements we place in this area are in fact located within the area of the "MTB City road" bicycle park? Is there a TAG "park"? Or some other way that would connect all these elements (signs, info boards, paths ...) into one whole called the Cycling Park "MTB City road"? Can you refer us and help us with this? Thank you!
SomeoneElse (2021-02-18 00:26:59+00:00): > Can we, as a TAG, add information that all the elements we place in this area are in fact located within the area of the "MTB City road" bicycle park? 
Not directly - but because everything in OpenStreetMap has a specific location you usually don't need to say that something is physically contained within a larger area..
However, things like paths and info boards can form part of a route.
To refer again to one of the examples that I mentioned earlier, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5699311#map=19/54.26900/-0.59763 shows a couple of info boards and part of a mountain bike route.  In your case, maybe the name of the route is "MTB City Road", or maybe that's the "brand" or the "operator" of the routes. and each route will (eventually) have its own route name?
For info, here are some examples not that far from you: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/13Nd .
Best Regards,
Andy
MTB FORIS (2021-02-18 22:55:56+00:00): Thank you! You helped us a lot to learn the best way to present our park in the best way on Openstreatmap
SomeoneElse (2021-03-19 11:07:16+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/861295218 still isn't part of a route relation.  I'd suggest adding it to one so that people know that it is part of an MTB route.  If you don't do this they won't know about your bicycle park at all!
If you'd like help with this you can ask at https://help.openstreetmap.org/ .
Best Regards,
Andy
Glassman (2021-02-18 00:52:18+00:00): #TIP: tactile_paving is usually a node at the curb (kerb in OSM) not on the entire crosswalk.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99410777
ZLima12 (2022-03-31 22:58:21+00:00): Hi,

I think you've been drawing your guardrails backwards. The wiki says:

Guard rails along roadways typically have an inner and outer surface; the inner surface is smooth and faces the roadway, while the outer surface is typically where vertical struts are connected (see example picture in info-box). If there is a clear inner/outer demarcation to the guard rail, construct the line so that the right side is inner and left side is outer.

You seem to reliably be drawing it in the opposite way. Was this coincidental, or maybe you misinterpreted the wiki page?

Also, if you're going to be adding guard rails like this, please make sure that they're not glued to things beneath it, and make sure to set the layer tag on the guard rails.
user_5359 (2021-02-20 06:09:59+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/553764886: What ist the meaning of wifi=1.5? Did you mean width=1.5?
Nordseeküstenradweg (2021-02-20 10:20:36+00:00): Hello, thank you very much for your advice. In fact the wifi tag looks strange. Unfortunately, it's been there since the initial commit. Actually I agree, width looks like a fitting tag, but I can't prove it from my position.
BubbaJuice (2021-03-16 22:39:10+00:00): Hey Oregonian3,

Today I am fixing the roads that you have mistagged with "highway=primary" in Tucson and surrounding areas. These are almost all supposed to be "highway=secondary" based on their wiki definitions. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dsecondary https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dprimary If you could follow up with a message saying that you saw this that would be awesome. Thanks.
Oregonian3 (2021-03-16 23:29:34+00:00): BubbaJuice, I strongly disagree with changing these back to secondary. Per the page you linked, in the US a primary road is a "primary highway or arterial road." These roads are high-speed, high-thruput arterials, and should thus be classified as primary.
BubbaJuice (2021-03-17 00:25:06+00:00): People of the channel #local-arizona in the US OSM Slack seem to disagree with you. The user drkludge said, "Secondary looks like a winner to me. ... I save primary more for when a road would be a signed highway and the like." User Arlo also gave me the go ahead on doing this when I asked if there were any objections if I were to do this.
Oregonian3 (2021-03-17 01:33:41+00:00): Ok, if consensus disagrees with me here then so be it. But note that the local consensus in AZ in that case seems drastically different than the local consensus in the rest of the western US. See cities like SLC, Denver, Boise, San Francisco, LA, Seattle, Portland...
Allison P (2021-03-20 15:07:01+00:00): There's no local consensus in Boise. Boise has only three active and prolific mappers. Seven months ago you reclassified many roads in Boise, and because I don't bother with that kind of thing, I never looked at any of the roads you changed and didn't leave a comment on it. This is not in any way a consensus.
Oregonian3 (2021-03-21 22:09:10+00:00): Ah, you're correct on Boise; thanks for calling me out on using a poor example. However, the point remains that the only cities I have substantially changed classifications in are Boise and Denver. Of the others I listed, I have not touched Seattle, San Francisco, or LA, and have only minorly-altered classifications in SLC and Portland.

Anyways, the point remains that I accept that AZ seems to use a different classification scheme. However, under the scheme you mention it would seem that many of the roads currently classified as Trunk in AZ, like US 60 through Salt River, AZ 77, US 180, and the like should be Primary and not Trunk. BubbaJuice, would you have any objection to those changes?

Also I think IRC or Slack channels aren't the best way to communicate since they're private channels. Perhaps a discussion should be had on the wiki about road classification in the western US? However, it seems like every discussion that's been had there has ended in no consensus.
mariotomo (2021-03-06 16:21:17+00:00): hola andrea20vicky!  podrías por favor revisar el detalle de esta edición?  has introducido varios edificios en conflicto el uno con el otro y quizás resolver tus errores puede ser una oportunidad para mejorar tu estilo de mapeo.
PerplexingPenguins (2021-02-17 08:25:38+00:00): note that for the purposes of this project, mapping sidewalks also includes any curbs at crossings
Allison P (2021-02-17 09:01:03+00:00): Ah, alright. I added that to the damn page. (Throwing that name around makes me sound irritated.) Hope I didn't set back that part of the project too far— I'll just say the area still needs more mapping from now on.
amuppidi (2021-02-17 03:26:47+00:00): created a proposed section of foley branch blvd from gum springs rd to a proposed section of Loudoun Co Pkwy. (includes Lennox Hale and Winning Glory Drive extensions). Created proposed road from evergreen mills rd to old ox rd on sections of West perimeter rd and carter's school rd.
willkmis (2021-02-25 05:35:44+00:00): I agree that leisure=park was not correct for Griffith Park, as it is not manicured and so boundary=protected_area is better. However, I don't think tagging the whole park as landuse=forest is the best approach, as it implies the whole park is covered by trees and perhaps used for timber (per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forest), whereas it's mostly chaparral/scrubs and man-made features like golf courses. After some discussion on the OSMUS slack #tagging channel, I think leisure=nature_reserve is more appropriate, given the definition in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Public_lands#General_Tagging_Guidelines, so I'm going to change the overall park to that, and try to tag more specific landcovers (natural=scrub, natural=wood, etc) separately at some point. But happy to discuss further if you disagree!
Mstew354 (2021-02-25 22:11:43+00:00): Hey willkmis. I agree with your changeset and that different areas within the park should be tagged based on their land cover. I'd be happy to work with you to start tagging areas of the park based on their land cover!
willkmis (2021-02-26 07:39:36+00:00): I think that'd be great!
Dimacn (2021-02-26 14:41:05+00:00): Вы случайно превратили Катунь в здание - https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/239575/history Я откачу эту вашу правку. Пожалуйста будьте внимательнее.
mariotomo (2021-03-06 16:27:31+00:00): hola andrea20vicky.  espero sigas mapeando, y espero quieras aprovechar de la oportunidad de mejorar tu estilo de mapeo, oportunidad que te se ofrece cuando otros maperos comenten a tus conjuntos de cambios.  en esta zona has puestos 59 pares de edificios en conflicto, "overlapping" es la palabra inglesa.  si necesitas de ayuda, a toda disposición.
mariotomo (2021-03-06 16:36:57+00:00): (un ejemplo/sugerencia de solución: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/100544060)
tastrax (2021-02-20 23:02:44+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
karson_ (2021-02-17 14:35:50+00:00): Bshea38,

It appears that there are 2 Reno Memorial Dog Parks marked on the map. The one you added, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8430654390. And another a block away mapped as an area, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/605108717.

Can you confirm which is the correct location? Or are there two separate areas for the dogs?
jgruca (2021-02-17 15:30:10+00:00): Looks like it's moving to this new point from the old area due to flooding. https://www.kcci.com/article/des-moines-to-spend-dollar205k-moving-dog-park-blocks-away/31086942
Taksine (2024-03-01 04:17:30+00:00): 你好，这不是一个只针对外国人看的地图，name请使用本国的名称。
andi9876 (2021-02-17 09:10:52+00:00): del
olo81 (2021-03-27 13:23:52+00:00): nakładające się obszary, do poprawy
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/892995711
C2oc4 (2021-03-28 06:00:31+00:00): już?
olo81 (2021-03-28 11:07:43+00:00): dalej było źle, sam to zrobiłem
❤️‍🔥 (2021-02-17 09:00:55+00:00): looks good 👍 addresses are often separate from buildings because they were bulk-imported separately, but it's more idiomatic to put the address on the house if it's obvious what belongs to what
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99425538
andi9876 (2021-02-17 09:04:09+00:00): Hi, here no roads. Deleted.
chilka_10 (2021-02-17 12:20:10+00:00): Hi andi9876,
Trust you are doing good, Thanks for reviewing the data. We will make sure to follow the update for rest of the scenarios.
mavl (2022-08-18 14:38:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125065270 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. The amenity=bus_station as personal note are deleted. Reason: poog mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6253].
andi9876 (2021-02-17 09:02:59+00:00): Hi, here no residential roads. Deleted.
chilka_10 (2021-02-17 12:19:19+00:00): Hi andi9876,
Trust you are well, Thanks for reviewing the data. We will make sure to follow the update for rest of the scenarios.
abakus_uploader (2021-02-17 23:31:45+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!
andi9876 (2021-02-17 09:01:17+00:00): Dear, here no roads, please look newest satellite images. Deleted.
chilka_10 (2021-02-17 12:16:08+00:00): Hi andi9876,
Trust you are well, Thanks for reviewing the data. We will make sure to follow the update for rest of the scenarios.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:28:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-13 17:42:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 106288172, 106291668 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5046 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:28:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
abakus_uploader (2021-02-17 23:31:44+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!
andi9876 (2021-02-17 09:10:18+00:00): del
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-13 17:41:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 106288172, 106291668 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5046 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
andi9876 (2021-02-17 07:43:21+00:00): Hi Dear, here no roads, its construction site now. Deleted.
chilka_10 (2021-02-17 12:15:08+00:00): Hi andi9876,
Trust you are well, Thanks for reviewing the data. We will make sure to follow the update for rest of the scenarios.
Please let us know which imagery to consider as latest.
andi9876 (2021-02-17 12:19:23+00:00): Try use mapbox or google maps, if not sure survey. I living here. Greetings.
andi9876 (2021-02-17 09:08:51+00:00): del
Mannivu (2021-02-17 13:04:03+00:00): Sono piuttosto dubbioso sull'indicare Via Vivaldi come strada terziaria
flaplunga (2021-02-17 13:46:20+00:00): Non si tratta di una via residenziale poiché è l'accesso a zona artigianale periferica. Prima della selezione ho verificato che fosse coerente con la definizione "Tertiary Road - A road linking small settlements, or the local centres of a large town or city". Se ritenessi più indicato altra definizione per cortesia suggerisci o modificala pure
Mannivu (2021-02-17 13:48:12+00:00): Sono d'accordo che non sia una residenziale, ma secondo me non è niente più che una unclassified
flaplunga (2021-02-17 14:05:13+00:00): fatto