piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Lee Carré (2021-09-18 09:07:44+00:00): I had deliberately left the original PoI node in place:
▪︎in order to http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
▪︎because while the ground floor (level=0) is a supermarket, level=-1 is parking and level=1 is houseware retail (though, it's all Waitrose)
▪︎I wasn't sure (especially at the time) of the best (or least-bad) way to map the true arrangement; maybe the non-building: tags should be removed from the building outline and there should be several PoI nodes (I'm intending to (re)survey the site when I get chance). Thus, for the time being thought it best to preserve elements rather than hastily delete (to then decide from surveying).

If I recall, the tagging was non-identical, deliberately.

Accuracy over neatness.

This whole site needs an overhaul; lots of missing features. Hence intending a through survey (but, that won't be quick).
maraf24 (2021-09-14 16:49:44+00:00): Tu podobny problem: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/101657408
To nie jest jeden budynek, ale kilka połączonych.
maraf24 (2021-09-14 16:51:35+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/101650009
Błędne przyłączenie dobudowanego garażu do budynku.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-07-17 13:51:53+00:00): Can you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3784975 ?
StefanHRT (2021-09-13 16:44:18+00:00): cycleway:right=track war aber richtig, ist die Zuordnung zum Radweg (use_sidepath) ;) VG
StefanHRT (2021-09-13 16:45:58+00:00): ups, Sorry, jetzt bin ich durch einander gekommen, cycleway:right=separate wäre hier richtig. Sorry.
emvee (2021-09-13 16:52:50+00:00): Okay, no problem!
StefanHRT (2021-09-13 17:03:04+00:00): Im Grunde gilt bei separaten Radwegen cycleway:right=separate, wenn Nutzungspflicht wiehier vorliegt noch bicycle=use_sidepath. Für Fußwege ist ja hier richtig gesetzt. Kannst es gerne ergänzen, ansonsten mache ich das mit dem cycleway später richtig (Ist mir gerade peinlich das ich damals so durcheinander geraten bin)
emvee (2021-09-13 19:23:40+00:00): Ich finde "cycleway:right=separate" merkwürdig, es gibt bereits "bicycle=use_sidepath:" und man kann sehen, dass es einen separaten Radweg gibt, so warum es explizit hinzufügen
StefanHRT (2021-09-13 23:02:02+00:00): Im Prinzip narrensichere Zuweisung, wo sich der separate Radweg befindet (es gibt ja auch Zweirichtungsradwege welche mal links von der Straße sind, z.B. Land-/Bundesstraßen und selten auch mal in Großstädten wie Berlin). use_sidepath zeigt ja nur an das es einen separaten Weg gibt den man nutzen muss, aber nicht wo der ist. (Wobei Nutzungspflicht unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen nicht gilt, aber das kennst Du sicher)
emvee (2021-09-14 09:19:05+00:00): No, I do think it is not a good idea, it is data-duplication without a good reason. If you map a river, you do not map the grass that is adjecent with "water:left=yes" or something like that, right?
Supaplex030 (2021-09-14 12:44:26+00:00): (english below)

Es ist absolut sinnvoll, cycleway*=separate zu mappen, da Anwendungen nur so zuverlässig erkennen können, dass an diesem Wegstück ein Radweg vorhanden ist (er aber als separate Linie gemappt wurde). Von einer parallelen Radweg-Linie auf das Vorhandensein eines Radwegs neben einer Straße zu schließen ist geometrisch nicht trivial bzw. für Anwendungen und Router mehr oder weniger unmöglich. Für viele Zwecke ist es aber eine praktische Information zu wissen, ob es einen Radweg an einer Straße gibt oder nicht. Wenn ich z.B. auswerten möchte, wie viele Straßen in einer Stadt mit einem Radweg ausgestattet sind, bekomme ich nur dann ein sinnvolles Ergebnis, wenn es mit "separate" gemappt ist. Nicht zuletzt zeigt das Tagging an, dass bereits bekannt ist, ob es einen Radweg gibt oder nicht und Mapper hier nicht mehr gezielt darauf achten müssen.
cycleway*=separate kann quasi meistens als Synonym zu cycleway*=track verstanden werden, nur dass der eigentliche Radweg eben in diesem Fall noch extra vorhanden ist und von Routern und Renderern auch separat behandelt werden kann. Eine doppelte Information ist es nicht, denn es ist eine andere Aussage. Doppelte Informationen wären es nur dann, wenn man anfängt, die Radwegeigenschaften (z.B. Breite, Oberfläche) sowohl an der separaten Linie als auch an der Straßenlinie zu mappen. Aber das tut hier niemand.
Nicht ohne Grund setzt sich dieses Tagging zunehmend durch – siehe hier: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway=separate#chronology

---

It is absolutely useful to map cycleway*=separate, as this is the only way applications can reliably identify that a cycleway is present on this section of road (but it has been mapped as a separate line). To conclude from a parallel cycleway line that a cycleway exists next to a road is geometrically non-trivial or more or less impossible for applications and routers. For many purposes, however, it is a practical information to know whether there is a cycle path next to a road or not. For example, if I want to evaluate how many streets in a city have a cycle path, I will only get a meaningful result if it is mapped with "separate". Other case: Renderers could draw separate cycleways like tracks on higher zoom levels. Last but not least, this tagging indicates that it is already known whether there is a cycleway or not and mappers no longer have to pay specific attention to it here.
cycleway*=separate can mostly be understood as a synonym for cycleway*=track, except that the actual cycle path is still there separately in this case and can also be handled separately by routers and renderers. It is not a duplicate information, because it is a different statement. It would only be double information if you start mapping the cycle track properties (e.g. width, surface) to both the separate line and the road line. But nobody does that here.
It is not without reason that this tagging is becoming increasingly popular - see here: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway=separate#chronology
emvee (2021-09-14 13:44:17+00:00): I really do not see how cycleway*=separate can be useful for routers or renderers. All a router needs is bicycle=use_sidepath and renderers will map cyclewas anyhow on lower zoom levels.

To evaluate how many streets in a city have a cycle path use bicycle=use_sidepath.

Can you describe one or more situations where bicycle=use_sidepath is not 1:1 mapping to what you think cycleway=seperate is for?
Supaplex030 (2021-09-14 14:22:22+00:00): "bicycle" can also have the value "optional_sidepath", for example. Of cause, this is new and undocumented tagging, but however, we should not mix "bicycle" as an access tag/routing hint and "cycleway" as an physical category.

Furthermore, anyone checking whether a "cycleway*" feature has already been mapped should not have to consider another tag.

By the way: In the rendering, I was talking about higher zoom levels if the road line is covering the separate cycle tracks. As I said, here you can treat "separate" like "track" and get correspondingly clear results (I have already done this myself).
Supaplex030 (2021-09-14 14:25:07+00:00): Sorry – I mixed "higher" and "lower" zoom levels in my statements ;) I mean "lower" zoom levels like z12-z15 in carto slippy map.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:38:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
Frans S (2021-09-15 12:33:17+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator during validation of the task.
Please pay attention on these points. 
Accurate mapping and squaring of buildings.
A question. Most of your mappings here have an offset of 12- 13 mtr on the Mapbox image. Did you alter the offset ? Buildings ought to be mapped and placed on their footprints on Maxbox imagery


FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111154878
Puxan (2021-09-14 15:05:33+00:00): Muy bien.  Procura que los edificios no se peguen entre ellos. No olvides escuadrar los edificios.  

Muy bien, sigue mapeando. 

Joaquim
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111155119
wkdgs (2021-09-14 07:53:27+00:00): Hi,

im ID-Editor kann man auch "Trampelpfad" als Typ auswählen. Alternativ kann man den Tag "informal=yes" zum "highway=path" hinzufügen.

LG
winkeldings
NieWnen (2021-09-14 11:24:05+00:00): Było wcześniej poprawnie, teraz nie jest:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Deducation

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool
jothishbabu (2022-01-21 20:44:10+00:00): 982884851 this way  is draw over water delete it..
archie (2021-09-13 17:22:37+00:00): Stort tack för korrigeringarna och kompletteringarna! Det blir alltid bättre efter det att du har gjort en översyn. Tack!
Mordechai23 (2022-01-19 12:45:44+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2852172
Frans S (2021-09-18 11:41:08+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here
Please square each building with the Q key of the iDeditor.
 A remark here. When your corners are not close enough to the 90 degrees angle the Issue triangle on the right hand menu don't react so try to map more precise and close to the 90 degrees corners.
When parts of a building are hidden by trees, extrapolate the rooflines rather than following the treelines.

See this picture (example) Review own work in iDeditor.jpg

Did you have seen these pages ?
https://learnosm.org/en/hot-tips/

Best regards and success with future mappings
wielandb (2021-11-14 15:46:44+00:00): Hey :)

Wenn sich ein Laden noch im (auf)bau befindet, sollte anstatt im name=*-Tag "(im Bau)" besser `construction:*=*` an den Teil, der gerade gebaut wird (hier: shop=supermarket) gehangen werden. Sonst wird der Laden von den Datenauswertern als fertig und in Betrieb wahrgenommen. Habe das mal entsprechend eingetragen. 
LG :)
Jeti87 (2021-11-14 15:57:10+00:00): Hallo und danke für den Hinweis. Hatte den Laden vergessen. Er ist bereits in Betrieb.
joel56dt (2021-09-13 20:24:02+00:00): Hi Andrew,

I'm not sure what the "andrew1" area is supposed to be. This is a public edit, did you intend it to be private?

Thanks,
Joel
andrewboyd (2021-09-13 20:31:32+00:00): yes, I would prefer it to be private
3ngineer (2022-01-10 22:56:26+00:00): Hi, I just discovered this large area named "andrew1", I see it hasn't been resolved. I will delete it in a couple days unless andrewboyd wants more time to export the data for private use.
Frans S (2021-09-14 09:51:59+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Be more accurate. Follow rooflines some buildings have annexes or extentions. Squeare your mapped buildings.

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111157305
Viki_travel_weak (2021-09-13 17:30:09+00:00): editing based on Bavaria imagery
Viki_travel_weak (2021-09-13 17:29:49+00:00): editing based on Bavaria imagery
maraf24 (2021-09-14 16:57:14+00:00): No niestety, ale skasowałeś tutaj garaże na parterze w blokach i błędnie połączyłeś dwa bloki w jeden.
mariotomo (2021-09-13 17:48:40+00:00): :+1: thanks!
normelton (2021-09-13 19:29:22+00:00): Hey thanks for cleaning that up! I'll try to be more careful next time :)
ivanbranco (2021-09-16 15:40:16+00:00): Hi Mrep,

tel=* is not a valid tag, you can use phone=* tho. Also, a guest house in middle of the road?
MarcoR (2021-09-13 18:00:18+00:00): Ciao! Occhio che le mappe di Google non possono essere utilizzate come fonte per le modifiche effettuate su OpenStreetMap :)
Se conosci personalmente quella strada e sai dove inizia/finisce il tratto in cui il limite di velocità è di 50Km/h, potresti aggiungerlo al percorso relativo su OSM (l'autovelox da solo potrebbe non essere sufficiente).
marcorago (2021-09-13 18:08:54+00:00): Beh credevo che google, con le sue foto, fosse una prova fisicamente inconfutabile dell'esistenza di qualcosa. Ho dedotto il limite in quella tratta dallo stesso autovelox. 

Per curiosità a questo punto quali sono le fonti utilizzabili ritenute affidabili?
francians (2021-09-13 19:13:23+00:00): Ciao,

Puoi usare mapillary come fonte, se la zona è stata fotografata. ;)

Francesco
francians (2021-09-13 19:15:04+00:00): Aggiungo che i Velox vanno messi come nodo del percorso e non scollegati, così il navigatore riesce ad avvisare (teoricamente, visto che in alcuni paesi è vietato)
marcorago (2021-09-13 19:46:32+00:00): mapillary non è di aiuto (la zona non è trafficatissima ed il fatto che sia stato io a doverlo aggiungere era già un indizio ehehhe)

Riguardo la posizione posso rimodificarlo o devo chiudere questa e aprirne un altra?
Kerkiq (2021-11-11 22:18:21+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/982887479
Если это совмещённая вело-пеше дорожки, то надо указывать path (тропа) с тегами: bicycle=designated, foot=designated.
Так по вики принято, ну и навигаторы будут правильнее работать.
sergsmx (2021-11-16 18:00:07+00:00): Согласен. Кроме того, велодорожка там размечена отдельной полосой, поэтому я еще добавил segregated=yes (см. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:segregated). Однако остались сомнения по поводу highway, думаю в подобных случаях не будет ошибкой использовать highway=footway.
Frans S (2021-09-14 08:10:55+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Again, square the buildings. Do not include the shadow of a building in your maping.
You overlooked a small building under the top building.

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111158639
parukhin (2023-05-23 18:50:22+00:00): Коллега, здравствуйте.
Подскажите, пожалуйста, зачем в name добавляете "ПС" и напряжение? Оно же уже указано в voltage или можно его там указать, если нет.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-01-13 09:13:38+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9083658006/history has shop = beer that was added in this edit
shop=beer ? Maybe shop=alcohol alcohol=beer would work well, indicating that shop sells primarily this alcohol? Having separate shop types for sake, whisky, cider, beer, wine, red wine etc etc seems a poor idea while cascading tagging still provides full info for anyone interested while providing also top-level basic info for someone wanting 100 shop types rather than 10 000.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=alcohol
felipeeugenio (2021-09-13 18:58:43+00:00): hola
Los predios no se llaman así. es el nombre del dueño, o del operador
hay un tag operator= que sirve para lo que estás tratando de expresar.
Es un error común en chile. hemos intentado ir reparandolo. por si te pillas otros potreros con nombre.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111159415
lenochod (2024-09-18 13:16:52+00:00): Ahoj Roberte.
Z jakého důvodu jsi prosím přidal Adresní bod https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9088911430 když už adresu obsahuje budova?
S díky za info
Lukáš
Robert Knobloch (2024-09-21 10:05:00+00:00): Ahoj, 
asi jsem se uklikl nebo jsem použil nějakou aplikaci třetí strany. Děkuji a omlouvám se.
Frans S (2021-09-14 08:03:58+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
The trace you mapped here is not a building. The (smaller) building is more to the south ( gray square with dark line above it.) The other earth colored squar is to my opinion not a building. To me it seems more as a yard.
Square each rectangular building.

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111159634
Frans S (2021-09-14 08:05:39+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Be sure you map buildings. Square them and stay within the rooflines. You tend to oversize them,

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111159796
Frans S (2021-09-14 08:09:39+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Map buildings. no ground areas. ( It needs experience to recognize buildings with natural material roofing.)
Square the buildings and stay within the rooflines.

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111159796
Pt873 (2021-09-14 20:34:04+00:00): Oi, essa região está em obras, havia modificado incluindo a nova geometria. :((
Pegasus21 (2021-09-14 20:52:30+00:00): Construction makes things difficult...Did I change some of your modifications?
Pt873 (2021-09-14 21:06:54+00:00): Em parte, sim, infelizmente, não consegui identificar tudo. :/
Posso perguntar uma coisa? Não sei se você sabe a resposta. Existe algum motivo para a região de São Luís estar recebendo um volume significativo de edições (vários usuários) nesses últimos dias?
Pegasus21 (2021-09-14 21:15:00+00:00): Yes, this is the area that my team is focused on right now.
Frans S (2021-09-14 07:58:46+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. 
A remark. Don't connect buildings to each other with their node(s)
Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111160238
Yakari (kleiner Indianer) (2023-01-05 16:07:21+00:00): On se tu používá Unicode, takže by s těmi emoji neměl být žádný problém.
Frans S (2021-09-14 08:00:36+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key and just map the rooflines. you oversized some buildings.
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111160772
augxcgrwxo (2021-09-13 22:12:44+00:00): @literan, у меня вопросы к удалению имени, написанному на билетной кассе:
по вики "Элемент с тегом railway=station должен содержать название всей станции. Отдельные здания (например, разные терминалы больших станций) также могут иметь тег name=*, если у зданий есть собственное имя, отличное от названия станции." https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:building=train%20station?uselang=ru 

На этом здании надпись и на нем написано "Тульская" https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/177526486
literan (2021-09-14 13:54:58+00:00): Так оно ведь не отлично от названия станции. Станция тоже называется Тульская.

Эта оговорка сделана, например для :

станция Москва-Пассажирская, но на ней Курский вокзал.
eggie (2021-09-13 19:11:26+00:00): Feedback: 
Tag DerKlops,

Wenn es wirklich ein B@B ist, dann taggen Sie es besser als 
tourism=guest_house
guest_house=bed_and_breakfast... zu markieren.
Grüss
eggie
DUGA (2023-09-11 02:47:00+00:00): Your edit in this area has been partially reverted.

Please do not use ESRI Clarity to edit rural Pennsylvania. Keeping doing will result in a vandalism report.
archie (2021-09-13 19:33:53+00:00): mange tak!
keebguy (2021-09-13 19:18:23+00:00): The source that I used for this edit was Esri World Imagery, not DNIT; IBGE
4004 (2021-09-16 14:44:18+00:00): здравствуйте, спасибо за правку.
с переходами немного запутанно, но marked это не совсем верное значение - поправил на uncontrolled.
также указания для вело, лошадей и прочего - это легальный доступ, а не то, что там физически пройдет или нет. то есть тут разве что можно bicycle=dismount
Supaplex030 (2021-09-13 21:02:40+00:00): Mhm, ich weiß nicht ob ich https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/550152610 wirklich als sidewalk bezeichnen würde... Er ist ja schon recht deutlich von der Fahrbahn getrennt und erfüllt eine etwas andere Funktion (fast schon parkähnlich) – meinst du nicht?
Supaplex030 (2021-09-13 21:03:11+00:00): P.S. Ich liebe die Luxusprobleme Neuköllns!