piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
archie (2021-10-20 23:36:55+00:00): Du, jag var inne på området för din senaste edit och tog bort några småfel (inte av dig). Det ser allmänt stökigt ut. Det behövs en ordentlig städning där. Ge inte upp! Försök få ordning på det!
Lee Carré (2021-10-20 22:04:35+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Since you changed no relations: what makes for http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
VLD165 (2021-10-21 01:19:03+00:00): node that was accidentally moved was unrelated to relation at hand. corrections made to revert edits
Lee Carré (2021-10-21 15:31:48+00:00): What relation? This set only changed a way & a node.
VLD165 (2021-10-21 17:25:21+00:00): it was for relation ID# 12733536 which has been fixed now
gscholz (2021-10-28 04:36:49+00:00): Hi ArielRod,
this changeset has destroyed the boundary relations of "Chiriquí Grande" and "Rambála":

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-82.13228&lat=8.95430&zoom=13

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=112765153

Can you please fix this?
Knd Regards
Guido
ArielRod (2021-10-28 13:06:06+00:00): Hi Guido:

The boundary line was attached with the last wrong transect of Chiriquicito stream. I tried to fix the boundary line but it was imposible for me. My problem was to match as a unique line this cut. 
I need to read instructions how to fix this kind of lines.
mariotomo (2021-11-15 19:04:55+00:00): it is very possible that the source of your mistake was joining segments.  an object that we were using as "outer" for the relation now ends somewhere else.
mariotomo (2021-11-15 19:11:34+00:00): … you added a segment to the Quebrada Chiriquicito (why did you need that?) and you did not add it to the two now broken relations.
… the segment 12451026, "outer" for Rambalá, should end at the mouthing of Quebrada Chiriquicito.
… the segment 255435819, "outer" for Chiriquí Grande, should end at that same point.
(is this enough explanation? do you want someone to fix it for you? would you prefer experimenting a bit further? I suggest make use of chat groups if you want assistance while editing.)
mariotomo (2021-11-15 19:18:41+00:00): I see what happened: you corrected the mouthing of the stream, but did not notice that the stream was being used as a border for the two relations. without knowing whether the river should be used as border or the border should run where the river had been incorrectly placed, I would not know which would be the correct fix.  the easiest one would be to retrieve the nodes you deleted, forming the segment of the river you removed, and put it back as border but not as river. easiest, if you used JOSM.
mariotomo (2021-11-15 19:30:26+00:00): It's a bit more difficult than that, because you reused existing nodes, moving them, and you created objects that need to be split before we can add them to relations.  I'll restore the previous administrative border, saving your fixes. please do contact the community for help when you don't know how to proceed, as in this case.
mariotomo (2021-11-15 19:32:47+00:00): changeset:113820114
ivanbranco (2022-03-13 16:17:33+00:00): Hi Ahmed, 

these look more like ref=* than name=* values. Where do they came from by the way?
AhmedAbouaiana (2022-03-13 16:58:31+00:00): Hi Ivan,
Do you mean why the coding reference, that I have tagged? For example, 103_U379_074?
ivanbranco (2022-03-13 17:00:23+00:00): Yep, I think that it should be ref=103_U379_074 instead of name=103_U379_074, but I'm not sure since I don't know where this codes came from
AhmedAbouaiana (2022-03-13 17:21:53+00:00): I got your point.
1. actually, I couldn't recognize the difference between ref and name.
2. I have updated the map, almost from scratch, as well as I work in a kind of urban development of Pontinia. So I have made a serial number based on the suggested coding of LUCAS.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/205002/13686460/C3-LUCAS-2022.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiIvvbbycP2AhWC3YUKHYOrBc8QFnoECAoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2yvDtRYpRiGqmFrbD5IrGm

(i.e., U370 is referring  to residential land use)

The other numbers are to count the exact number of buildings where the first was for the total building number, while the latest means the serial of the residential land use.
3. I left any previous tag that has been by someone else, as it is.
You may find the map in AutoCad format at the following link
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358090061_Pontinia_Settlement_Map_Latina_Lazio_Region_Italy?_sg%5B0%5D=59fZTO0HOpetv0R72U5IL7O1kWWg35i2VLgT8v6ir_585qYr47L73TiZAjEwuhyegehk_JABMVkKrs9awJITc8eGOJJXEsLogHexOwEj.Fzar30b7IgM9dbSxyVdfEz-98VjTYSRR-x90tX_xw5gzB5BKFqN3w_FtBcIBcbseIAkoryaq2Ta5Ppla3M3ddQ
eggie (2021-10-21 08:20:36+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-10-21 06:30:42+00:00): Hi Ken..  Welcome to OSM.

I reshaped your footpath and the Willem Rijkelaan.
Your edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=112766122

Greetz,
eggie
4TL4S (2021-10-26 16:35:44+00:00): Correction: Source used was Maxar SecureWatch Imagery 2021-10-02
CjMalone (2021-11-09 00:01:34+00:00): Cleaned up in #113543554
jxpsert (2023-05-26 06:59:36+00:00): Hi there fgouget,
"indoor=room" is a tag for indoor mapping of rooms. If an AED is inside, "indoor=yes" should be used.
fgouget (2023-05-26 23:07:26+00:00): Thanks for the notification.
I changed it to indoor=yes.
luiswoo (2021-10-21 08:40:44+00:00): За здание отвечает тег building, а сейчас это территория госпиталя.
adrianojbr (2021-10-21 17:30:05+00:00): Olá, GoatoftheNorth!

Qual o critério usado para a criação dessa saída (ramp off): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/995059056 ?

Conforme Mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=469535800967342), há somente faixa de conversão para virar à direita, a qual eu corrigi há pouco tempo (https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=108140834).
GoatoftheNorth (2021-10-22 18:05:02+00:00): Olá adrianojbr,
Obrigado por entrar em contato. Eu adicionei o link porque as imagens sugerem que há uma via de saída distinta, mas como não há barreira física, concordo que ela deve ser removida. Imagens aéreas e mapas mostram motoristas fazendo a curva à direita do tronco para a rodovia principal, mas você adicionou uma restrição de only_straight_on curva no cruzamento (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5305564). Isso está correto ou posso remover a restrição ao remover o link do tronco?
Hi adrianojbr,
Thank you for reaching out. I added the link because imagery suggests there is a distinct exit lane, but as there is no physical barrier, I agree it should be removed. Aerial imagery and Mapillary show drivers making the right turn from the trunk to the primary highway, but you added an only_straight_on turn restriction at the junction (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5305564). Is this accurate, or may I remove the restriction when I remove the trunk link?
Cheers!
adrianojbr (2021-10-22 21:31:58+00:00): A restrição deve ser removida. Eu adicionei ela e 21/06/2015, quando havia uma via de ligação igual a que você criou (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/285785415/history). Porém, ao corrigir no changeset 108140834, eu esqueci de remover a restrição de conversão também. Abraço.
felipeeugenio (2021-10-21 11:26:17+00:00): Hola Rodrigo. Por favor no agregar información privada a OSM. Supongo que no es necesario explicar porqué esto puede ser muy dañino.

Adicionalmente, por favor dejar de agregar nombres no oficiales y genéricos a OSM. Esto es un proyecto para todo el mundo y no una libreta de notas personales (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name)

saludos
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-05 17:39:22+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/98127053/history has access:motor_vehicle that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
Would using motor_vehicle access tag (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motor_vehicle ) be fitting at least equally well?
MxxCon (2021-10-21 06:18:08+00:00): Hello.
Please don't just blindly "realign" every single street to nys ortho map. It is not always the most accurate imagery. For example in this changeset I see in many places that majority of the other available satellite imagery matches with each other, but not nys ortho. Based on that I think it can be safe to extrapolate that nys ortho is the one that's misaligned. Also you have a bunch of edits which make straight roads look needlessly bendy.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112767672
Hernan (2021-10-21 01:47:57+00:00): usted hace muchas modificaciones que “NO” son reales, avenidas,calles,puntes etc. Si pudiera usar algún medio de comunicación para aclarar las cosas seria muy bueno, y para no considerarlo "vandalismo", ya que esto no es una guerra de modificaciones, esto es un proyecto comunitario donde hay normas que cumplir y “castigos” para otorgar.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Argentina#Contacto
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 06:46:47+00:00): Прочитайте, пожалуйста, про использование тега lanes=* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%8B
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112768061
user_11435438 (2025-01-29 14:45:28+00:00): 🐮🍺
wille (2021-10-21 11:19:30+00:00): Obrigado por ter feito a reversão!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112768465
SherbetS (2021-12-10 16:29:43+00:00): thank you.
Warin61 (2021-10-24 06:45:36+00:00): Hi,
Looks like your edits are breaking route relations ... 
8014084 Syd to Newcastle
9806975 Berowra to: Richmond
8406942  from: Sydney to: Brisbane
8406939 from: Armidale to: Sydney

Note: These are version 2 relation and need the route to be in sequential order - start to finish. The tracks are still in ht eroute but the section you have altered is in the wrong order.
Warin61 (2021-10-26 05:06:16+00:00): I take it your not going to fix your errors????
MapCam (2021-10-26 05:47:03+00:00): Hi,
I am looking into how to fix these errors.  I expected the split function to take care of the sequencing.  If you can shed some light, please do so.
Warin61 (2021-10-26 06:05:42+00:00): I use JOPSM, never used Id. 

When I open the relation I see a list of members - it starts with the stations and then goes on to the ways. 
Looking at the "from Sydney" relations they are in order to Hornsby .. then a selection is in the reverse order and then it is correct again. JOSM shows the gap - even a tool to 'jump to next gap' which makes it easy. 

When you edit these ways the relation needs to be checked, too easy not too .. I have not done it many times myself.. practice makes perfect as they say.
MapCam (2021-10-26 06:43:16+00:00): Thanks. I've downloaded JOSM editor.  I'll look into and resolve.
MapCam (2021-10-27 01:00:47+00:00): Hi, I think sequencing is ok now.  Would you mind seeing if you agree?
Warin61 (2021-10-27 09:32:45+00:00): Hi,
I picked it up on 
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=151.16894&lat=-33.45299&zoom=9&overlays=ptv2_routes_,ptv2_routes_valid,ptv2_routes_invalid,ptv2_error_,ptv2_error_ways,ptv2_error_nodes
It takes a day to update. 
I keep an eye on it as I got the train (quite a few) and 2 bus routes correct some time ago and like to keep them good.
I'll take a look Saturday if they are not good.
markkerrigan (2022-01-30 09:01:48+00:00): hi I noticed these roundabout changes resulted in disconnected cycle paths. I fixed it but it's just something to watch out for as this causes issues for routing - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116770208
austinsnow (2022-01-31 02:07:46+00:00): Oh, thanks so much for picking up that error. When I put in all the city's roundabouts, I tried hard to keep the cycle routes connected, but I guess one must have slipped through the cracks. Thank you!
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2021-10-22 05:28:49+00:00): 您好，注意到您在我国与境外争议地区有较为突出的贡献，诚邀请您加入OSMChina

群聊链接为t.me/osmchina

------
Best wishes
快乐的老鼠宝宝
Belonging to OSMChina DT
Anil Basnet (2021-10-26 11:14:25+00:00): wrong tagging of forest as buildings
marczoutendijk (2021-12-28 15:17:42+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9189150790
What is amenity=3 supposed to mean?
author=* is also not a valid key. Do you mean source=*?
Please correct.
Marc.
jmsbert (2021-10-22 19:24:47+00:00): Hi CachingFoX, just a small thing:
you wrote "marked objects as destroyed", but in fact (at least in some cases [1]) you added a new tag like "destroyed:building=residential" instead of replacing the existing ones (fixed now) .  Please also add  "damage:type:eruption" and (if you can) try to figure out the damage date, e.g. "damage:date=2020-10-21" as these tags are being used by most other mappers here.

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/992057158
Anil Basnet (2021-10-26 11:10:52+00:00): Wrong tagging Rabin Shah !! A path has been tagged as a motorway. Please correct it.
tuttiton (2021-10-23 15:26:38+00:00): Please remove fictional information from the map
ivanbranco (2021-10-21 18:52:35+00:00): Hi Garmin-User,

it's the second time you add Prosto as admin_centre of Piuro, but of course the admin_centre of Piuro is not Prosto, but...Piuro.
The problem is it keeps getting cancelled: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2251998249/
user_177389 (2021-10-22 04:04:47+00:00): Hello ivanbranco,

thanks for the hint.
Why does https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/it:Piuro also mention Prosto?
It says: "Il Comune e le maggiori attività produttive si trovano in località Prosto, ..."

Best regards,
Mario
user_10901495 (2021-10-22 18:16:21+00:00): Hello ivanbranco,
I don't understand your problem here.
The admin_centre of Piuro is indeed Prosto. 
Piuro doesn't exist, it's an ancient town that was destroyed in 1618, but its name was conserved in the municipality's name.
Prosto, aside from being the town hall site, is also the most popolous centre, with about 1000 inhabitants. So it is definitely the right admin_centre.
You prove yourself to be badly informed, yet you are at a wikipedia page looking away from knowing these things.

Martino
ivanbranco (2021-10-22 18:38:31+00:00): Hi Martino,

what you say is true, the town of Piuro doesn't exist anymore, but is still exist as municipality (or "Comune sparso"). Town and municipality are two different entities. As a matter of fact, the node you deleted was tagged as place=municipality (I quote from the Wiki: "L'uso di questo tag è quindi limitato per indicare i  comuni sparsi.") I don't understand though, why you deleted it in Prosto and created a new "Piuro" node in Borgonuovo?: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9191134844
user_10901495 (2021-11-04 11:44:48+00:00): Hi Ivan, I didn't reply earlier because I forgotten about this discussion and haven't received notifications about it.
No, Piuro doesn't exist, simple as that. The municipalites in OpenStreetMap are indicated in the relation associated to its boundaries, even when talking about comuni sparsi.
But Piuro existED.
It's much more sensical to put the label in the location that was once where the ancient town Piuro was.
Plus this place is in the middle of the fondovalle (it seems from wiktionary that the fondovalle word doesn't have a corresponding word in english), so even leaving the tag place=municipality this is the most logical place to put Piuro.
Obviously I created "a new Piuro node in Borgonuovo" (time for flame bcz you're starting to hurt my balls) because I read the wikipedia article (it's not the only thing I've read about Piuro, needless to say, and I've been there many times because I have a house in Prosto) unlike you and I know that the ancient town was located where now is Borgonuovo.
I invite you once again to thoroughly read the wikipedia page before continuing the discussion.
Thanks

Regards,
Martino
Anil Basnet (2021-10-26 11:07:51+00:00): Wrong tagging Manish !! you have tagged farmland as farmyard. 

view these wiki pages to know tagging differences between farmland and farmyard. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dfarmyard%20%20%20%20%20%20

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dfarmland
Manish Adhikari (2022-05-05 04:38:42+00:00): Thank you so much , I will not repeat the same mistake again.
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 06:43:07+00:00): Для чего тег type=multipolygon не на отношении, а на обычном полигоне?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112772874
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 06:41:26+00:00): "Ушаковская школа" больше подходит для тега name. Не следует перегружать карту всеми этими официальными сокращениями. Для них есть отдельный тег official_name. В данном случае следовало добавить именно его, а не исправлять name.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112773453
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 06:38:54+00:00): Не надо дописывать в name слово "Остановка". В name пишется ИСКЛЮЧИТЕЛЬНО наименование. О том, что это остановка, говорят другие теги.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112773634
Ze0zohk1 (2021-10-23 07:46:24+00:00): Hallo Peilscheiben,

bei dem Knoten hier, hast du entrance=yes entfernt. (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2401825527/history) Den Eingang gibt es doch sicher noch? Wenn ja, dann sollte er nicht entfernt werden.

Eine kurze Rückmeldung wäre schön.

Viele Grüße
Ze0zohk1
MxxCon (2021-10-21 21:18:28+00:00): Hello.
You added a building that goes smack through the middle of a bike path.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112774040
annamsir (2021-10-22 11:24:46+00:00): Hi,
Thank you for reviewing my changeset and providing the feedback.
Apologies for mapping the building incorrectly, I have made the necessary changes in the changeset #112833136.
I'll ensure to not repeat such errors going forward.
Thanks once again, I'm looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
annamsir
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 07:49:13+00:00): Это не name, а description. Не пишите в name ничего, кроме наименований. Если нет наименования, то и тэг name не используется.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112774307
Ken Woods (2024-05-23 18:03:44+00:00): This is a cycle path.
The barrier that used to exist no longer does.  THere is no sign.  Flagging it in this manner does not allow for cycle traffic in third party applications.
adamh (2022-04-06 06:13:00+00:00): Are you sure the parking north of Casey Indoor Leisure Complex is 'private'?
I don't recall seeing any particular restrictions in that area. It might possibly be 'customers'?
Warin61 (2021-11-09 11:50:15+00:00): Hi,

layer=0 is unnecessary and will be automatically removed by JOSM validator tools. 

The route relations for Sydney XPT, North West Explorer, North Shore & Western line have been repaired.
Ken Woods (2024-05-23 18:02:37+00:00): This parking is private.  Flagging it as parking is inappropriate and confuses the people who get towed for parking here.
eggie (2024-05-23 18:08:16+00:00): The parking at a public road.
The additional tag is access=private here.
So it's tagged as a private street_side parking.
In case you removed the parking an other mapper will probably add an new parking.
eggie (2024-05-23 18:10:31+00:00): Compare the symbole with an other parking and you will see the difference..the P is not prominent on the map.
Bexhill-OSM (2021-10-21 08:54:56+00:00): Hello! Newer Bing Aerial Imagery has a terrible offset round Bexhill, it's better to use osmuk cadastral parcels here. Hope you don't mind me reverting the change.
Alex
ynikhith (2021-10-22 11:22:43+00:00): Hi, 
Thanks a lot for the feedback. I have found that the Bing imagery was quite clearer than the others. It is a miss from my end that I did not check the offset. I would definitely keep this in my mind for the future edits around Bexhill. Thanks for letting me know.
Best Regards,
ynikhith
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 16:28:13+00:00): Зачем вы добавляете fixme, если уже добавили адрес?

Смещая существующую геометрию, сначала настраивайте смещение снимков по трекам. Двигая объекты при ненастроенном смещении снимка, вы, скорее всего, портите работу того, кто настраивал смещение. Вы сдвинули здания правее, хотя на самом деле они левее, если настроить смещение.
Dimacn (2021-10-31 16:31:07+00:00): Я поправил
Allison P (2022-02-06 03:50:00+00:00): Don't use name=* to describe features...
virbeta (2022-06-04 17:20:13+00:00): I learned some stuff and fixed my mistake. Thanks for the feedback!
VitKlim (2021-10-21 06:59:31+00:00): Sorry, wrong comment.  Changed roads name based on https://maps.dot.gov/BTS/National_Transportation_Atlas/, Bing and customer feedback
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 16:19:49+00:00): Используйте клавишу Q для выпрямления углов.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112775048
Leo Slager (2021-10-22 18:17:50+00:00): You can see your changeset:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=112775085
You took a lot of ways together with the building to a wrong position.
I consider to revert this changeset.
Please give a reaction.
Nickieemp (2021-10-22 18:44:10+00:00): I enabled the imagery in order to see how it stands. Seems correct that way and the map is off compared to the aerial imagery
Leo Slager (2021-10-23 09:43:25+00:00): That is only true for the focus-point of the image.
But that is not the point:
Moving the building means that everyting wich is attached to the building moved too and than to a wrong position. The southern circular part of the building is not shown anymore on the map because of the self-crossing outline.
So severe damage to the map.
I will revert this changeset.
Leo Slager (2021-10-23 09:46:25+00:00): I see someone else has already done it.
Ser9ei (2021-10-21 16:18:53+00:00): Настраивайте смещение снимка по трекам.
Клавиша Q - выровнять углы; клавиша O - сделать окружность круглой.
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-10-21 09:39:08+00:00): Moin ElGranSerio,

wenn Du das Schulgelände als amenity=school einträgst (was richtig und gut ist!), dann achte bitte darauf, dass das amenity=school nicht noch als Node oder am Schulgebäude vorhanden ist. Dort bitte dann löschen. Bei der Grundschule am Eichkamp habe ich das gerade getan. :-)

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
ElGranSerio (2021-10-21 11:39:42+00:00): Danke für den Tipp, ich achte in Zukunft darauf! :)
gscscnd (2021-10-21 09:16:15+00:00): Nie znam sytuacji w terenie, chciałbym się tylko upewnić, czy bieżący stan jest prawidłowy:
— budynek <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/68429817> ma adres Czarneckiego 1 (wcześniej miał Czarneckiego 4),
— w obrębie tego budynku znajduje się punkt adresowy <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4424372563> z adresem Sienkiewicza 1 (wcześniej nr 1A),
— po drugiej stronie ul. Czarneckiego znajduje się punkt adresowy <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4424371761> z adresem również Czarneckiego 1.
Beata Chorzelewska (2021-10-21 13:00:35+00:00): Budynek - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/68429817 - aktualne dane ze Starostwa Powiatowego to ul. Sienkiewicza 1,
Punkt adresowy - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4424372563 - tutaj był błąd przy wpisywaniu, ale prawidłowy nr to 1 - dane ze Starostwa i z dokumentów,
Budynek - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4424371761 - ma przypisany adres ul. Czarnieckiego 1
NHVELDH (2021-10-21 07:27:49+00:00): Bedoeld is: huis "Galgengoorweg 1", dat ligt aan de Larenseweg.
eggie (2021-10-21 08:39:42+00:00): Dag NHVELDH

Je track (Dat zal het toch niet zijn?) heb ik omgetagd naar highway=path en even losgemaakt van het bos.
Trucje.. Wanneer je de linker ctrl toets indrukt tijdens tekenen plakt je weg nergens aan vast. 

MVG
eggie
NHVELDH (2021-10-21 10:23:18+00:00): Hartelijk dank! "Links-control" kende ik nog niet, maar zal ik niet vergeten. Groeten, NHVELDH