piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Peter Fowler (2017-01-16 09:38:36+00:00): Sure.

I am very, very new here, and I read the paragraph,

> type=triangulation, 
> type=observation_spot,
> type=fixed_point and type=benchmark 
> have meaning in nautical maps, where 
> they refer to INT-1 codes B20, B21, B22 
> and B23 respectively. Note: it would be 
> better to use a different key when 
> tagging these values, for example
> survey_point=triangulation or
> survey_point:type=triangulation. See
> Key:type for more info about why 
> type=* is to be avoided outside of 
> relations.

as counseling against adding =triangulation unless in the context of a nautical map. Further, had I decided to add such a tag, I would have been guided by the comment about type= (and I may have got that wrong, actually, as there seems to be a type= and a survey_point:type=triangulation).

There is very little material about triangulation pillars in the forum or the wiki, which struck me as odd, as checking the ability to identify and/or mark known fixed points on the map seems to be an obvious thing to do when starting out. It must look as though I was practising for the practical of an Englishness test.

Is there a way of looking at every node with a tpuk_ref= tag so I can see what others have done?

(Note: The Garmin recorded the elevation, of the top plane of the pillar, as 149 (units?); and the Ordnance Survey give the HEIGHT as 150.330, presumably metres above Newlyn. I didn't add either, because I see reason to trust my measurement, even if I knew t=what it was, and there might a copyright problem with copying the Ordnance Survey's datum).

I am very grateful for your attention, and most grateful for your help.
SomeoneElse (2017-01-16 11:34:30+00:00): "type=triangulation" was a new one to me too...
SK53 (2017-01-17 13:34:52+00:00): type=* anything should be avoided as type really should be reserved for relations. I would agree with either of survey_point or survey_point:type as being suitable values.
Peter Fowler (2017-01-19 07:02:05+00:00): Please believe me that I had no notion how difficult I would find this. Please feel invited to fill in the correct tags perhaps from http://trigpointing.uk/trig/3033 . Further, I am not quite certain that the [wiki page that I used](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dsurvey_point) is well laid out and comprehensible.

At some point I will go and take a look at [Wood Close](http://trigpointing.uk/trig/7029) and [Launde](http://trigpointing.uk/trig/4367) .
Peter Fowler (2017-01-19 07:18:08+00:00): I have found, on my shelves, a paper copy of sheet 122 of the Seventh Series (Melton Mowbray) published 1962. Looking at SK865065, it is between the 500 foot and 450 foot contour line, I would judge at about 470 feet, maybe a little higher. Should I add this figure, or the one from the Garmin (149 metres)? (Or neither?).
SK53 (2017-01-19 11:44:04+00:00): Not to worry: somewhat surprisingly trig pillars are not that well documented. This discussion is useful for helping clarify what should be documented. By a remarkable co-incidence last weekend I also mapped a trig pillar featured on sheet 122 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4608321916), so it's helping me too.

My copy of the map has your point with a spot point of 492 ft which is just shy of 150 m. I'd run with either 149 or 150.

Normally for lowland Britain I just transform old OS heights to metres before adding to OSM. You can also add ele:ft=492 but this ain't really necessary.
Peter Fowler (2017-01-20 03:39:27+00:00): OK. My map does not appear to have the spot height. The green Pathfinder 896 has metric contours and a spot height of 150 and the Orange Explorer 15 is identical. My only concern is to avoid being accused of wrongful copying of the issued data from [TrigpointingUK](http://trigpointing.uk/trig/3033) .

P.S. I might not get to it for a month or so, but I have waypoints for three Posting Boxes near Stamford Road, and six Benchmarks, and a track for some new development off the Uppingham Road. If someone wants to to pip me to the post …
SK53 (2017-01-20 11:16:22+00:00): My map is issue B/* (c) 1962, updated with PRoW and major roads 1967. I notice the map on NLS doesnt have the spot height either, and the earlier interpolated contours on the 6" and 2.5 inch OOC maps dont really agree with the spot height (http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=52.6502&lon=-0.7246&layers=10&b=2). I guess the ground rises more steeply from the Uppingham Road.

I'm probably not going to in Rutland until August so I suspect you'll still get the chance.
Peter Fowler (2017-02-26 12:47:48+00:00): Thank you.

I have never previously seen that map, and I agree that the land rises quite steeply from the Uppingham Road. This triangulation pillar does not seem to be shown. Had it been erected? The OS claim that their "leveling" dates from 1963. Perhaps the contour lines on the 1937-61 maps are not correct!
chillly (2017-01-15 22:32:42+00:00): Welcome to OSM.

You have added Rainton Meadows as a single point. Thanks for that. There is another way to add areas of land like that, and that is as an area rather than a point. Someone has already done exactly that so your new point is doubling up the nature reserve. 

Please don't be put off by this. Getting started with OSM can be daunting. I hope you add some more detail.
Upendrakarukonda (2017-01-17 06:02:25+00:00): Hello  Kolombiken,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Your mapping contributions are appreciated. The bing imagery you used to delete the buildings is not up-to date. According to recent Mapbox satellite imagery the buildings exist. I reverted your changeset to bring back the data. You can also use Mapbox satellite imagery for clarification before mapping.

Best,

Upendra.
Kolombiken (2017-01-17 12:09:23+00:00): Thank you Upendra!
I didn't know that there were several satellite imagery. Need to look into this in the future. 

Thanks again for the helpful feedback!
ivanbranco (2021-12-30 13:43:17+00:00): Hi German,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4610677865

I think you added by mistake the name value in the place value. Can you check it out?
German C (2022-01-05 14:24:03+00:00): Hi,
Fixed!
10q
pfg21 (2017-01-16 09:49:45+00:00): можно попросить пользовать хотя бы инструментом ортогонализации, а то твои кривые домики режут глаза...
вариат2Ж не рисуй геометрию дома нафиг, коль не хочешь делать это хорошо. ставь точку с тегом дома и адресом. работать будет йоптыть.
Hjart (2017-01-16 09:08:25+00:00): Velkommen til vores projekt og tak for dit bidrag.
Bemærk at eventuelle skulpturer kan markeres i stil med https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2175163983 (se https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dartwork)
Hjart (2017-01-16 08:30:43+00:00): Velkommen til vores projekt og tak for dine bidrag.
Jeg har rettet stien flere steder og især forbundet den til Vigerslev Alle, idet den ellers ikke ville kunne bruges korrekt af navigations programmer
letihu (2017-01-18 11:14:00+00:00): Bitte immer die Wege miteinander verbinden. Nicht nur die Punkte übereinander legen. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/44092097/history#map=19/51.48885/11.90525
hatte keine Verbindung zu
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4610733993/history.
Leider ist iD kein guter Editor, weil er solche Fehler nicht erkennt.
Warin61 (2018-06-12 03:40:17+00:00): Hi,
Way: 466215252 - forest is not entirely covered with trees.. and if you look closely on th eLPI base map you can see it extends to the east for some distance too. I have extended the area and tagged it as a park. It could be a nature reserve though.
corfede (2017-01-23 08:26:50+00:00): Ciao, per l'inserimento delle masserie non è opportuno il tag place=locality, che serve per indicare la denominazione delle località. Per le masserie conviene invece assegnare il nome direttamente agli edifici, oppure all'area di perinenza da indicare con landuse=farmyard. Infine IGM non è una fonte utilizzabile per inserire informazioni su OSM.
Makkio (2017-01-26 20:04:47+00:00): Ciao, grazie per le precisazioni, io ho semplicemente seguito il "metodo" che avevano usato altri utenti della mia zona prima di me. Aggiungerò le precisazioni. Ci tengo a precisare che molte masserie sono storiche e abbandonate, quindi denominano aree e località. Per quanto riguarda igm perchè non è una fonte utilizzabile?
pitscheplatsch (2017-01-24 17:49:25+00:00): Hier wieder ein ähnliches Vorgehen: Vorhandene Objekte werden einfach gelöscht und neu eingetragen. Bitte beachte: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Erhalte_die_Chronik

Gleiches Problem wie in Changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45200954
joost schouppe (2018-08-20 10:54:45+00:00): Hoi Jonas,
Ik had de meeste paden in de buurt als "path" gemapped, omdat ik enkel "footway" gebruik indien het aangeduid staat als specifiek voor voetgangers. Ongeveer zoals hier omschreven: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Highways
Maar maakt op zich niet veel uit welk type het juist is; alleen track is natuurlijk heel duidelijk iets anders.
Het park van Buizingen staat wel degelijk als park ingetekend, maar een deel óók als bos. In de praktijk wordt landuse=forest heel vaak gebruikt als "hier staan bomen". Dat is niet helemaal juist, maar er is op dit moment niet echt een geaccepteerd alternatief.
joost schouppe (2018-08-18 18:56:49+00:00): Aangezien het inderdaad slechts om een toegangsweg lijkt te gaan, heb ik de naam maar verwijderd. Of zou hier toch nog een straatnaambordje staan?
Wat ik niet begrijp is dat je bovenop deze toegangsweg ook nog een voetwegje had getekend. Dit is inmiddels weggehaald omdat we dat nooit doen. Wat wou je hier precies meegeven?
grouper (2017-01-17 00:23:24+00:00): Welcome OSM! I reverted your changeset due to the nonsense you added. Please only add real-world features to OSM. For example, there's plenty of real footways to add.
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 04:15:12+00:00): Welkom op OSM.
.
MAPS.ME is helaas niet de optimale editor voor OpenStreetMap. Waardoor vervuiling kan ontstaan.
.
Lees hier hoe je OSM het beste kunt gebruiken en hoe je kunt bijdragen aan een betere kaart: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/help 
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM

Mocht je vragen hebben, kun je altijd contact met me opnemen, ik (en medemappers zijn/) ben bereid om je te helpen.
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 04:20:57+00:00): Dit is bijvoorbeeld een veel voorkomend probleempje bij MAPS.ME.
Te aangebrachte node heeft geen name=*
wel een name:en= maar deze wordt niet gebruikt voor nederland.
Ik heb de poi aangepast.
Mocht je vragen hebben hoor ik het graag
https://www.dropbox.com/s/orcuat75sb1nur3/2017-01-16_05-16-53.png?raw=1
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w5pb36l9xezawmf/2017-01-16_05-20-31.png?raw=1
Ranger444 (2017-01-17 19:45:26+00:00): !??? This is not a oneway

Where are you getting this information.

You have an error somewhere.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/-34.53036/-58.52329
AgusQui (2017-01-17 20:17:45+00:00): No es un error, es un cambio reciente dispuesto por la municipalidad: http://www.vicentelopez.gov.ar/noticias/cambio-de-sentido-de-villate-y-velez-sarsfield-en-munro

It is not a mistake, it is a recent change arranged by the municipality: http://www.vicentelopez.gov.ar/noticias/cambio-de-sentido-de-villate-y-velez-sarsfield-en-munro
Ranger444 (2017-01-17 20:22:24+00:00): Wow, your right! good find. I'm sorry for calling you out. I will try to fix what I have undone...
AgusQui (2017-01-17 20:34:12+00:00): Jaja no problem, good for you to consult!
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 15:42:10+00:00): Is het alleen een webshop, of kan men binnenlopen?
Aleks-Berlin (2017-01-17 08:06:53+00:00): Hi Someoneelse, please be careful introducing typos like key=";ayer". I fixed to layer. kr, Alex
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 15:53:12+00:00): Is dit een webwinkel of kan men binnenlopen?
mueschel (2017-01-18 20:25:50+00:00): Hi,
welcome to OSM!

You added many objects with tags like
area =yes
name =lote2

You may see that these are not shown on the map - all objects need a tag describing what they are, for example building=yes or amenity=hospital. Have a look to the OSM Wiki to find these tags.

Let me know if you need help.

Cheers, Jan
Littlebtc (2017-01-16 15:28:08+00:00): I revert the changeset as the construction area is still under construction as far as I know.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45218416
franta prochazka (2017-01-16 04:26:55+00:00): not a house but a swimming pool
mbethke (2017-01-16 14:47:19+00:00): Hi Weiyang,
are you sure about this OpenStreetMap edit of yours this morning? You created a shelter, which would be the first one I see in Laos. And there is a hostel called "Khamngoi village"...? 

cheers,
Matthias
pitscheplatsch (2017-01-24 17:51:28+00:00): Und wieder: Objekte werden gelöscht und neu eingetragen. Siehe auch https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45203837
Lokai (2017-04-22 07:19:11+00:00): Hallo jagdpächter, bei deiner Arbeit gibt es unverbunde Punkte (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4602864398/history).
MikeN (2017-01-16 14:07:06+00:00): Hi, I noticed that the original O2 had been deleted and replaced by the new POI.   However some information was dropped in the process: the opening hours and business type.   Also, the new position was not as accurate as the original position as surveyed.   It is best to just modify an existing POI to add information instead of deleting and creating a new one.    This has been reverted in changeset 45214545
Chetan_Gowda (2017-01-16 06:43:57+00:00): In this changeset also, you've deleted a existing road. It can be clearly seen from the BING imagery.
SomeoneElse (2017-02-25 21:37:19+00:00): @Chetan_Gowda does this need restoring?
Chetan_Gowda (2017-02-27 14:16:23+00:00): Hi SomeoneElse, yes! Need restoring
izmickobe (2017-04-03 07:06:17+00:00): Sorry, if I happen to do something wrong.
Can you please restore it if possible?
Because I don't remember what I did.
Chetan_Gowda (2017-01-16 06:40:48+00:00): Hi izmickobe, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Thanks for contributing to the free editable map of the world. In this changeset, seem like you've deleted existing road. It might be accident.
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
gosausee (2017-01-18 08:11:14+00:00): ich kann die zwei neuen Forststraßen auf keinem Luftbild sehen, werde diese wieder löschen.bitte um kurze kontaktaufnahme
pitscheplatsch (2017-01-16 18:26:57+00:00): Hi Shratox, welcome to OSM. Could you please explain why you change the mapped paths to footways? For more details about the tag highway=footway pls see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
LACDH (2017-01-16 07:31:29+00:00): This is a trail to see if walking mode can be improved.
Ogmios (2017-01-30 15:10:43+00:00): Hallo Volker,

(seit 1772) ist leider nicht teil des Names. Du kannst diese Eigenschaft mit start_date=1772 hinzufügen aber in den Namen gehört sie nicht.

Gruß

Ogmios
volker g (2017-01-30 18:12:42+00:00): Hallo Ogmios,
vielen Dank für deine Info. Ich habe es  geändert. 

Gruß
Volker
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
literan (2017-02-09 08:38:32+00:00): пожалуйста, не надо от балды назначать статусы дорогам. Они присваиваются не от названий, а от фактической значимости в дорожной сети. Куда вот, по вашему, из этого тупика идет межрегиональный и международный трафик (trunk)? Откатываю.
ANDREY888 (2017-01-26 23:30:43+00:00): Не надо рисовать то, чего нет. Эти космо снимки давно устарели.
mavl (2017-10-14 12:49:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:49:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:49:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:49:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2017-10-14 12:49:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
nlehuby (2017-02-03 15:39:42+00:00): hello, 
pour cartographier un office de tourisme, il faut ajouter aussi les tags information=office
cf http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Doffice
Commodoortje (2017-05-05 22:28:11+00:00): Op onderstaand stuk gras heb je acces=restricted aangebracht.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/59307328
Wat bedoel je hiermee?
Het is geen kritiek, maar de tag wordt niet echt veel gebruikt.
Hier kun je de meest voorkomende acces=* teruglezen.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
Commodoortje (2017-05-05 22:29:06+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/59307328
Dit stukje gras bedoelde ik, en niet zoals vorige link aan gaf.
Dvdb-84 (2017-05-06 05:24:16+00:00): het is gemeente grond waar een afsluithek omheen staat. ik kweet toevallig dat je daar met toestemming (de sportschool af en toe) wel mag komen.
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 16:39:07+00:00): Welkom op OSM.
.
Lees hier hoe je OSM het beste kunt gebruiken en hoe je kunt bijdragen aan een betere kaart: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/help 
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM

Mocht je vragen hebben, kun je altijd contact met me opnemen, ik (en medemappers zijn/) ben bereid om je te helpen.
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 17:50:52+00:00): Hetzelfde geld voor:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466332581
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466330853
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466332585
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466332576
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466330105
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466334759
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466329846
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 17:58:58+00:00): Je hebt hier acces=no 
Hier kun je lezen wat de standaard restricties zijn op een highway.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#The_Netherlands

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466332585
https://www.dropbox.com/s/toujkmaqsg167y6/2017-01-16_18-52-01.png?raw=1
mavl (2017-10-14 12:49:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
mavl (2019-01-14 16:37:19+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2017-10-14 12:49:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
literan (2017-01-16 12:13:05+00:00): Здравствуйте! Правильно писать адрес addr:housenumber=1 к2 (т.е. перед "к" обязателен пробел). Я здесь поправлю.
lucomsky (2017-01-16 12:14:54+00:00): Благодарю, учту!
SomeoneElse (2017-01-16 10:16:07+00:00): Hello Wetitpig0,
Re the "Kosovo to disputed territory" part of the changeset comment, did you discuss that change with any of the mappers in the region?
Administrative boundaries is an incredibly sensitive topic within OSM.  In this particular area, there have been "edit wars" over the boundaries and the languages used within the region, and the DWG has in the past had to take action over that.  Can you explain the change in a little more detail?
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OpenStreetMap's Data Working Group.
marcknj (2017-01-18 15:27:52+00:00): Hello,
I dont agree with "desputed". Kosovo is a sovereign state and Serbia has no controle of it anymore. Anyone in Kosovo (especially the mappers)a are FOR administrative, doesnt matter if they are Serbian or Albanian (also Serbs accepted Kosovo already) so it should stad administrative. There is no need for disputed and wioth thios step, you just started an edit war (in my opinion)
Wetitpig0 (2017-10-16 11:45:12+00:00): Ok. But anyway not all countries have recognised Kosovo.
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].
SK53 (2017-05-26 14:23:58+00:00): This wikidata tag added is erroneous. It refers to Carshalton, not Carshalton Beeches. No doubt because there is no wikipedia article about the latter, merely a re-direct to the Carshalton article. This has then been replicated on Wikidata. I have removed this value as it is wrong. Do please check such items before adding them to OSM.
Commodoortje (2017-01-16 16:47:11+00:00): Vermoedelijk per ongeluk, maar je gebruikt een verkeerde tagging.
addr:street=Bisschop Janssensstraat deze gebruik je op een adresnode en  niet op een highway.
Hoort te zijn 
name=Bisschop Janssensstraat

Ook zie ik dat er verder geen historie meer aanwezig was. Ik wil je adviseren om te proberen geen wegstukken weg te gooien en nieuwe in te tekenen. 
De methode is: muteer het bestaande stuk. Dan blijft de historie behouden.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/466332581
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wkmg5opbx9hmjth/2017-01-16_17-39-29.png?raw=1
.
Ik heb het nog niet aangepast, mocht je hulp aanvaarden wil ik je hierbij helpen.
mueschel (2017-01-20 22:13:30+00:00): Hallo,
bei deinen Edits von Waldwegen sind hier in der Gegend sehr viele "überlappende Wege" entstanden. D.h. zwei Wege, die  auf einem ganzen Stück übereinander liegen. Würdest du da nochmal einen Blick drauf werfen?

http://keepright.at/report_map.php?zoom=12&lat=49.69647&lon=7.97224&layers=B0T&ch=0%2C201%2C202%2C203%2C204%2C205%2C206%2C207%2C208%2C210&show_ign=0&show_tmpign=0
mavl (2017-10-14 12:50:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52921700 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45130082].