piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2017-10-06 16:42:28+00:00): De speeltuin zat geplakt aan de wegen en de landuse. Hij liep ook over het pad.
Let op dat je geen zaken aan wegen vastplakt.  Ik heb m vervangen door een node. Op afgeleide kaarten zie je zo'n vlak toch niet

Succes met mappen voor HOT-osm
fantomas (2017-10-06 15:55:04+00:00): Hello. Please, use special OSM account for the imports. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
Zverik (2017-10-06 17:15:22+00:00): Hi fantomas, sorry for this. I have an imports account (Zverik_imports), but forgot to change settings in JOSM. I'll be more careful next time.
Anton Khorev (2017-11-24 21:25:39+00:00): Берёт из Бургер Кинг из "Галереи" и перебрасывает его в "Стокманн". В "Галерею" добавляет новый, но с псевдо-координатами.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4762656467/
Anton Khorev (2017-11-24 21:37:32+00:00): Conflator его на 600 метров перетащил
Anton Khorev (2017-12-12 09:39:52+00:00): Время работы на сайте тоже не обязательно правильное. Например https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3461870802 на сайте написано, что в 10 открывается, а на дверях, что в 7. Я туда зашёл в полдесятого - уже был открыт. Если верить тому, что на дверях написано, то время на сайте и, соответственно, в этой ботоправке неправильное у большинства ресторанов, которые я видел.
Gertjan Idema (2018-10-02 20:39:30+00:00): Jeroen, ik kom 31 wissels tegen die getagd zijn met railway="double outside slip"
Zou je die willen aanpassen? Wissels worden met railway=switch. Met railway:switch en railway:switch:configuration kan het type worden aangegeven.
JJJWegdam (2018-10-02 21:58:05+00:00): Daar ben ik zeker van op de hoogte. Deze changeset is gemaakt tijdens het project om alle spoorlijn ways in Nederland te vervangen. Dat was al best wel wat werk, dus dit soort fouten oplossen viel toen buiten de scope. Dus ja, deze fouten heb ik toen meege-edit naar de nieuwe ways.

Op het moment ben ik geluidsschermen aan het importeren, maar ik kan dit wel even op m’n todo lijstje zetten
Gertjan Idema (2018-10-02 22:22:19+00:00): Heb ik die gemist? Ik kan me niet herinneren dat ik deze import heb zien langs komen op imports@openstreet.org. Daar maak je je niet populair mee binnen de osm community.
JJJWegdam (2018-10-03 10:24:14+00:00): Ik denk het wel. Er is uitgebreid uitleg gegeven op https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30234

Als je er verder vragen over hebt dan beantwoord ik die graag via de forum thread of via pm. Vragen over de volledige import lijken me niet relevant voor deze changeset.
user_5359 (2017-10-07 09:30:47+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please move your node from the street to main building! (see Sleep Inn Hotel)
freebeer (2017-10-07 00:41:30+00:00): For the sake of accuracy, the claim of 10cm resolution is something I cannot verify, I was thinking of elsewhere.  The ESRI zoomlevel is up to 21 with three different apparent resolutions.  Naturally I focus on the best, sharpness near 10-15 cm, maybe.
The age of the ESRI imagery here is slightly older than Bing updated overzoom z19; a construction area had a new house on the latter, missing in ESRI.  But the Bing ``quality'' is such that I'd rather trace since-obsoleted outlines.  Piled remains of snow can be seen in places.
I've added orphan nodes at imagery boundaries in an attempt to get an overview if the imagery corresponds to political or administrative outlines, a work in progress...
GinaroZ (2017-10-06 20:13:56+00:00): Hi, thanks for the edit and welcome to OSM. I notice you have requested a review, so I have a couple of comments:
It looks like this should be tagged as a residential building, instead of residential landuse: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530584512
In the editor, after drawing a building - press the S key to "square" the corners.
Also, the bus stop name has the American spelling of centre :)
Cheers
jpennycook (2017-10-07 18:02:07+00:00): Hello NickEd90.

In this edit, you joined footway 32404316 with a building (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/170104948).  The footway is not part of the building (the walls would present a barrier to walking) but separate. Could you unjoin them please?

Jon
naoliv (2017-10-07 15:10:42+00:00): Gabriel, de onde você copiou o nome das ruas?
Gabriel iTer (2017-10-09 20:49:09+00:00): Boa tarde.

Os nomes que coloquei nas ruas são referentes à um mapa que um cliente me mandou por foto. 

Gostarei de verificar contigo também, quando eu não achar informações dos locais para não copiar da Google ou outros mapas, onde posso estar copiando as informações?

Grato!
smaprs (2017-10-10 01:26:33+00:00): Por favor, mande uma foto deste mapa que seu cliente lhe enviou. Você pode mandar em um link, por exemplo do site imgur. Precisamos conferir o tipo de mapa fonte original. Será muito importante. Obrigado.
smaprs (2017-10-10 02:46:12+00:00): As informações de nomes que podem ser copiados são as que estão nos mapas IBGE, que já vem por padrão no editor do OSM
Gabriel iTer (2017-10-10 13:15:30+00:00): Bom dia!

Segue:

https://imgur.com/a/wdvXR
smaprs (2017-10-10 13:29:26+00:00): Obrigado Gabriel.  
De fato são mapas do Google.  
Informações do Google (e de outras fontes proprietárias) não podem ser usadas no OpenStreetMap. Isto dá sérios problemas de copyright, por não haver licença do Google para uso de dados no OSM.   
Veja em:  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Google_Map_Maker  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt-br:Beginners%27_guide.  
Masi informações importantes voc~e encontra na wiki também.  
E sobretudo avise seu, ou seus, cliente(s) que isto é ilegal. Já houve outros casos parecidos de clientes que fornecem dados ilegais. Os dados tiveram que ser apagados do OSM e o usuários que fez as edições perdeu todo seu trabalho.  
Veja aqui por exempo, este usuário teve todas as suas edições removidas pela equipe de controle de dados do OSM (DWG), em:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52338424  
Como:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415302410/history
Gabriel iTer (2017-10-10 13:40:34+00:00): Bom dia.

Puts... Entendi... Problema que este meu cliente está me cobrando bastante deste mapa também. Tentei verificar no site do IBGE como me informou acima, mas fica bem complicado de ver os nomes das ruas. Tem alguma outra forma de eu coletar essas informações? 

IBGE: https://imgur.com/a/1i6LM
smaprs (2017-10-10 13:46:37+00:00): Só pode usar o IBGE ou outra fonte que ateste licença explícita para o OSM.  
Quando você acessar imagens deste tipo, olhe no Google Maps e vai ver que no rodapé da tela tem a marca de copyright, como em:  
https://www.google.com.br/maps/@-8.2917583,-35.960215,15z  
  
Só que com um procedimento muito "ilegal" seu cliente "removeu" o copyright, que ali aparece.  
  
Quem é seu cliente?
naoliv (2017-10-10 15:02:04+00:00): Gabriel, na hora que você salvou a modificação, não viu que está escrito que não pode usar dados do Google de outros locais que não possuímos permissão?
Está bem claro isso: https://i.imgur.com/eyETUa6.png
E aperta "B" ao editar que você pode escolher a camada urbana do IBGE
Gabriel iTer (2017-10-10 17:08:42+00:00): Realmente, perguntei para meu cliente de onde ele tirou o print, e o mesmo me informou que era da google. Bom, peço desculpas pelo ocorrido, vou tirar as informações do IBGE.
naoliv (2017-12-07 04:34:20+00:00): Olá, Fredporto.
Nesta sua edição você criou uma proibição de retorno onde a origem e o destino são iguais (ou seja, você falou que é proibido fazer um retorno na própria rua). Com algumas poucas exceções, criar este tipo de proibição de retorno na própria rua não é correto e nem necessário. Evite criar este tipo de proibição. Em caso de dúvida, entre em contato com a comunidade através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
Fredporto (2017-12-07 10:33:53+00:00): Bom dia naoliv. 
Quanto à restrição do retorno, já estou ciente e, se foi intencionalmente da minha parte, eu não farei mais. Se foi um descuido, prestarei mais atenção.
Obrigado pela orientação, mas como sou iniciante, confesso que esse quadrado que aparece em sua mensagem (changeset) eu não consegui identificar qual a rua em que editei. Desculpe meu pouco conhecimento, mas poderia apontar exatamente qual cruzamento você se refere?
naoliv (2017-12-07 10:44:28+00:00): Bom dia, Fredporto.
Entendo perfeitamente que não foi intencional, não tem problema. Não precisa se preocupar quanto a isto.
Foi nesta rua que você criou a restrição https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530588935
No editor que você utiliza é desta forma que a restrição aparecia https://i.imgur.com/8CNHBEr.png
Se você reparar no símbolo em vermelho ele representa uma proibição de retorno, com o detalhe de ser uma restrição da rua para ela mesma.
Abraço!
Fredporto (2017-12-07 10:49:23+00:00): Grato pelo seu alerta e orientação!
mavl (2017-10-06 19:15:07+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 47970300, 47971002, 47971873, 47972248, 47972646, 47991142, 47991203, 47991250, 47991274, 47991397, 47992899, 47993930, 47995580, 47995668, 47995744, 47995823, 47995936, 47998155, 47999188, 47999389, 48000012, 48000421, 48000605, 48001076, 48001602, 48001703.
ToeBee (2017-10-10 09:13:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by changeset 52784001
mapper999 (2017-10-07 08:37:22+00:00): Hi,
please have a look at https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufnummer#Deutschland before "fixing" more phone numbers. Also not everything that was mapped a power=cable_distribution_cabinet is actually a street_cabinet=power. So, for some cases you are hiding errors instead of fixing warnings. Please also read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits
315Lukas (2017-10-07 08:54:54+00:00): I will check again, thanks
kreuzschnabel (2019-06-22 16:46:33+00:00): Hallo nicomputer, wenn ein Wohngebiet einen Namen für sich hat wie „Burgsiedlung“ oder „Dichterviertel“, dann kann und sollte der natürlich als name=* ans entsprechende landuse=residential gesetzt werden.
 
Aber der Name des gesamten Ortes gehört da nicht dran. Orte werden in OSM durch ihre admin-Grenzen und ihren place-Node repräsentiert, dann ist das optimal auswertbar. Das ist wirklich breiter Konsens in der Mappergemeinde, und wenn du den Namen zusätzlich nochmal an Flächen setzt, sorgst du für etwas Unklarheit. 
 
Nimm zum Beispiel die Suchfunktion: Wer jetzt in Nominatim (also der normalen OSM-Suche) nach „Weiterdingen“ sucht, findet drei Treffer: a) ein Dorf, b) ein Wohngebiet und c) eine Obstplantage, die alle so heißen, direkt nebeneinander. Das ist nicht sinnvoll. Die Beziehung „das hier gehört zu Weiterdingen“ wird nicht über name-Tags ausgedrückt, sondern sie muss überhaupt nicht getaggt werden, weil eine geospatiale Datenbank das auch aus den Daten selbst bestimmen kann :) 
 
Bitte nimm die Namen von den landuses wieder weg. Auch wenn du die aus irgendeinem Grund nützlich finden magst, unterm Strich stören sie mehr. Siehe dazu auch die neueste Diskussion unter https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64923. Danke!
dgitto (2017-10-07 12:05:09+00:00): Hi. The way
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/164919855
has a key "ano_construcao", that is absolutely new in OSM (never used). Probably you mean the key "start_date". See the wiki
santamariense (2017-10-08 00:09:55+00:00): @dgitto, ano_construcao is like start_date tagging, more exactly construction date. It oughtta be corrected.
bjoern_m (2018-05-21 10:14:11+00:00): Hey, addr:housenumber passt glaube ich nicht gut auf Parzellen, da es keine postalischen Adressen, sondern nur eine Art "ref" sind. lot=82 sollte aber z.B. für Parzelle 82 gut passen (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dallotments). Wahrscheinlich sollte auch "name" gelöscht werden.
Viele Grüße und danke trotzdem für die Fleißarbeit (ich hab auch noch nichts geändert, vielleicht später, kümmer dich gern selbst drum)
Viele Grüße
Björn
fierh (2018-05-21 14:37:49+00:00): Moin!
Langsam wird das alles kontraproduktiv: es wird seit Jahren ziemlich ergebnislos über genau solche Fragen diskutiert. So wie es ist, werden Infos wenigstens angezeigt, aber natürlich ist es nicht die reine Lehre.
Mit deinem Argument müssen halt auch alle Weg-, Sportplatz- usw. -bezeichnungen gelöscht werden - nicht nur im Bieberhof. Und nein: ich möchte keine Karten / Ansichten rendern oder sonstetwas, sondern einfach die Standardansicht nutzen.

Ich persönlich bin's leid, mach' doch was du willst!
bjoern_m (2018-05-21 15:10:59+00:00): Moin,
die "name" sind da nicht so der Punkt, auf den ich aufmerksam wurde, es sind eher die addr:housenumber, die ich für falsch halte. Vielleicht könnte man statt addr:housenumber in Zukunft einfach ref (und mit gleichem Wert lot=*) nutzen, dann sollten ja eigentlich die Werte z.B. auf openstreetmap.org angezeigt werden und das ganze ist auch noch von der Semantik her in Ordnung. Wenn dann irgendwann auch lot=* gerendert werden, könnte man dann die Doppelung durch ref gelöscht werden. (name wäre meiner Meinung nach eher sowas wie "Kürbisparzelle" oder was auch immer sonst (Phantasiename, ich kenne mich mit Parzellen nicht aus, ob da irgendwer echte Namen vergibt..)
Aber ja, ich sehe ein, dass es auch deutlich wichtigere Diskussionen gibt. 
Und einfach machen, was ich will, find ich doof; jeder hat ja auch gute Argumente. 
Also vielleicht einfach lot oder ref statt addr:housenumber? dann wirds zumindest gerendert (müsste doch wohl? es gibt auch nen pull-request für ref-rendering in carto..) und passt.
Und wenn Sportplätze einen Namen haben (also sowas wie Sportplatz des 42.Sportverein blabla..), dann gehört das da ja auch in name=* rein..
Viele Grüße
Björn
fierh (2018-05-21 17:01:20+00:00): wie schon geschrieben: ich bin diese diskussionen leid. nichts gegen dich, aber es bringt nichts, über möglicherweise irgendwann kommende änderungen zu diskutieren und an den beiträgen anderer herumzudoktorn.

ich bin raus - mach was du willst
carciofo (2017-10-21 14:09:55+00:00): Hi, I've removed tags making reference to Carrera 45 on Autopista Norte north of the city limits as the nomenclature is only applicable within city limits.
PT-53 (2017-10-14 08:31:10+00:00): Hallo Ottmar,
Du hast in diesem Änderungssatz u.a. in Ertingen diese beiden Wege neu eingezeichnet:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530607521/history und 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34171592/history#map=18/48.10105/9.47737
Sind das wirklich Geh- und Radwege die mit dem Verkehrsschild Nr. 240 (Siehe: http://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/?signs=240) ausgezeichnet sind? Ich kann mich nicht erinnern, dort diese Verkehrsschilder gesehen zu haben.

Die Chronik dieses Weges hat mich sehr irritiert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34171592/history#map=18/48.10105/9.47737
Der Geh- und Radweg soll bisher als Wohnstraße eingezeichnet gewesen sein!?
Ich habe eine Weile gebraucht, bis ich die Lösung gefunden habe. Der neue Geh- und Radweg wurde automatisch mit der  Krähbrunnenstraße verbunden. Du hast dann die Highways entsprechend aufgetrennt, dabei aber die History der Krähbrunnenstraße dem neuen Geh- und Radweg zugewiesen. Das ist leider sehr verwirrend und sollte Rücjgängig gemacht werden.
Grüße
Peter
HoloDuke (2017-10-13 15:37:12+00:00): Hallo roadheimer,

der Blitzer am Ortseingang steht immer noch (bin gestern mal da gewesen). Warum hast du die Tags highway=speed_camera und maxspeed=50 entfernt?
Sanniu (2017-10-09 09:44:11+00:00): Way http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530608645 have no way tags, is it path?
osmtools (2017-10-12 14:41:16+00:00): Hello fabio nelson isoto. At
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530611535
and many others, you have introduced the new key `bosque natural`. What is it for? What is it in english? (keys should be in english)
dgitto (2017-10-08 05:42:47+00:00): Hi. I suppose you mean "name:en", rather than "name:Enlglish"
Svalbard (2017-10-06 18:23:01+00:00): Hello pkjash,

you have deleted several ways and nodes from OpenStreetMap.

Was this your intention?

For example the pitch you deleted can still be seen on the satellite image.

Perhaps you should undo your edits.

Svalbard
Svalbard (2017-10-07 15:54:50+00:00): Full revert of CS 52690437 and 52690327.
eggie (2017-10-06 19:11:42+00:00): Amenity=school ontbreekt. Zet je het er zelf bij? Graag reactie
jwmj4j (2017-10-06 22:50:38+00:00): ok thanks voor de review, ik ga 't toevoegen
4004 (2017-10-06 21:59:08+00:00): здравствуйте и спасибо за обновление карты,
ваша перерисовка дороги малопонятна
Glassman (2017-10-06 19:58:00+00:00): I noticed that the house address is different than the street. According to King County records, it should match your house so I updated the street names - Feel free to correct if KC is wrong. Also changed the name of the street across from 245th Pl NE to Northeast 1st Court.
moli2378 (2017-10-06 18:32:17+00:00): added street lamp to post,added bench to post, added waste basket to post
moli2378 (2017-10-07 16:38:17+00:00): added street lamps, added benches, added waste baskets
surveyor54 (2017-10-07 20:32:13+00:00): Hallo tomtom71,
willkommen bei OSM.

bitte bei Änderungen oder Korrekturen an Objekten, diese bitte nicht löschen, sondern nur die Punkte verschieben und gegebenenfalls neue ergänzen.
Dann bleibt die Historie der Objekte oder Linien erhalten.

Dies bitte in Zukunft beachten.

Weiterhin frohes Mappen
surveyor54
daganzdaanda (2017-10-07 17:59:24+00:00): Hi Tubk86,

I see you are trying to clean up a bit of the messy tagging here. Please note that in order to be useful for anybody, tags should be used as defined in the wiki.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:information

All addr:housename=a should be deleted, they don't make sense.

addr:place with some number is also very likely wrong. What do you want to express with the numbers in that tag?

Also, information=* has to do with tourism=information only in OSM. If you have any other information that belongs in the database, maybe put it as note=* ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:note )

If you need help cleaning up here, please say so! If these wrong tags are not cleaned up, I fear someone will just delete all the nodes without keeping any address information.
Jarek 🚲 (2020-08-13 01:38:25+00:00): Hi SparklesMaster! As far as I can tell, you added the Old Highway 6 bridge near Little Current https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530632710 in this edit. Current satellite imagery suggests that the old bridge no longer exists here. Do you happen to know if the satellite imagery is incorrect?
Miroslav Suchý (2017-10-09 13:05:18+00:00): Ano. Tahle zmena vypada dobre.
JJIglesias (2017-10-06 23:43:07+00:00): Saludos Andres.Entiendo q editastes el Riverbank de esta area, aparentemente la imagen satelite y la edicion no coinciden.
Como este riverbank no es significativo para la navegacion. No seria mejor dejarlo solo como rio?
Gracias
Hjart (2017-10-06 19:36:36+00:00): What's the point of this?
ChrissW-R1 (2025-01-03 21:38:59+00:00): What do you mean?
Hjart (2017-10-06 20:11:06+00:00): Adding area=yes is completely unnecessary
ChrissW-R1 (2025-01-03 14:48:26+00:00): You're right, but at this point of time there was no tag natural=peninsula, this was added later. The tag place (https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:place) has not the implicit tag "area=yes".
ti-lo (2017-12-03 22:12:50+00:00): "after discussion on the Tagging list" implies that there was a consensus, but there wasn't any. It was rather said that "We all map our personal preference and hobbies" :
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-October/033767.html
Please check this documentation :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like
Polarbear (2017-12-04 13:29:57+00:00): Please stop trolling. This analysis show how you were continuously fooling the community this year:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-October/033723.html
You continue by sending further troll subjects to the tagging list:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-December/034313.html
 
Please stop misquoting. The post you cite was about reflecting "our hobbies", not other people's personal preferences or vehicle registrations.
 
If you go on to the next response, you read "this sort of information does not belong in the OSM database". 
 
The tags about other people's vehicles were removed because they were their private data for which you have not obtained permission to publish them. They were not removed because of the tagging form as in "any tags you like". 
 
As you might see, your disputed "motorcycle_friendly" tag remained untouched.
4004 (2017-10-06 21:51:17+00:00): здравствуйте и спасибо за обновление карты,
теги для организаций верные, если они там есть то все хорошо. одна мелкая ошибка - маленькая а в адресе, поправлю
4004 (2017-10-06 21:52:13+00:00): погодите, а откуда там 2а, если здание 2?
tank666 (2017-10-08 18:20:03+00:00): Это здание — пристройка к зданию 2, которое жилое, а 2А — только государственные организации.
4004 (2017-10-08 18:43:36+00:00): понятно, спасибо. надо бы как нибудь отдельно отрисовать 2а
ToeBee (2017-10-10 09:12:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by changeset 52784001
Harald Hartmann (2017-10-08 10:19:30+00:00): you have tagged
`mapilary` instead of
`mapillary`, right? #typo
elifz (2017-10-07 03:33:51+00:00): SOURCE: MAPILLARY
COMS2200A
ma-rt-in (2017-10-07 08:30:49+00:00): hallo,

nett das du die Feuerwehr ergänzt, aber so ist es aber nur durch den namen ersichtlich das es eine FW ist. Bitte korrigiere das. Einen Blick ins Wiki hilft auch ungemein.
lg
elifz (2017-10-07 03:33:35+00:00): SOURCE: MAPILLARY
COMS2200A
gurglypipe (2017-10-07 00:00:31+00:00): What’s a frog permit? Without a changeset description, this looks like vandalism.
lakedistrict (2017-10-10 11:43:36+00:00): Reverted in  changeset 52788976
gurglypipe (2017-10-14 17:11:11+00:00): From a private message from pamman:

> With reference to Mill Yard, Staveley the intention was to make users aware that parking can no longer be regarded as free. During weekdays the first 2 hours are free after that a “Frog Permit” is required, apparently if you are not a frog you’re . . . . . . toad and nobody likes to be towed! so a “Frog permit” must be obtained from the business being visited. Weekends still remain free.
gurglypipe (2017-10-14 17:16:38+00:00): Hmm, this is a tricky one to tag. I think the tags as they currently stand – fee=no maxstay=2h – are the most appropriate I can come up with. They are correct, in that the first 2h are free. If people choose to park there, they should see the big signs explaining what this Frog Permit system is, and realise they can potentially extend their stay.

What do you two think?

pamman, please do add descriptions to your changes in future to give rationale to other editors for your changes. (Or at least a summary so when we’re looking at the list of edits, we can see quickly what each edit is.) Thanks.
pamman (2017-10-14 17:53:15+00:00): Agree, even if a Frog Permit is obtained the parking is still free.
lakedistrict (2017-10-14 18:16:24+00:00): I agree with your tagging ideas gurglypipe, I suppose any other info could always go in a note= tag. Maybe some conditional tags could be used here if any of them are suitable: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:parking:lane#Parking_conditions_.28terms.29
ToeBee (2017-10-10 09:12:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by changeset 52784001
erickdeoliveiraleal (2017-10-08 13:34:37+00:00): Você duplicou avenidas aqui, por exemplo: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530661701 e https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/308779403/history estão uma em cima da outra
erickdeoliveiraleal (2017-10-09 22:22:51+00:00): erros corrigidos
gurglypipe (2017-10-06 23:58:30+00:00): Please add a description to your changesets so others can easily know what you changed. Thanks.
elifz (2017-10-07 03:33:21+00:00): SOURCE: MAPILLARY
COMS2200A
JJIglesias (2017-10-06 22:37:32+00:00): Excelente trabajo. Muchisimas gracias
ToeBee (2017-10-10 09:12:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by changeset 52784001
elifz (2017-10-07 03:33:04+00:00): SOURCE: MAPILLARY
COMS2200A
Vonter (2017-10-07 03:23:42+00:00): Nice work adding details to the college!