piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
kesterlester (2024-04-04 13:56:34+00:00): About 4 years after I started doing gas, I then began to do oil/fuel (mainly just to exclude it from conflicfts / confusion with the gas network).  There I found, when I began, that (1) already what was mapped as fuel/oil was much more like the gas_topology concept, and (2) it was almost never the case that topological (i.e. end to end routes as seen by the operatore) had multiple pipes separated by KM and weaveing in and out.  Thus in the fuel area, it seemed unnecessary to create a separate topology system. In essence, the two concepts are just one commong concept in the case of fuel/oil.  Hence all fuel in the UK stays as substance=fuel or substance=oil, with no oil_topology as no risk of double counting. However, if there is a very long oil pipeline which is only known via its end points (and not by the route between) then I have used the tag "topology=yes" to flag up that its the endpoint connectivity that is known, and not the geographical route between the two.
kesterlester (2024-04-04 13:59:00+00:00): In the long term, now that most of the gas backbones are coming into view, it is my plan to do a pass over the gas netweork to connect the dots between separated substance=gas pipeline stubs with (substance=gas, topology=yes) links which would bring the gas network more into line with the fuel one, while ensuring that gas_topology stays separate (to avoid double counting with gas) and because it does a conceptually different thing (record large scale end to end links that may have multiple paths).
kesterlester (2024-04-04 14:01:34+00:00): In the very long term future, it may then (I hope) be possible to get rid of gas_topology altogether. I would envisage replacing gas_topology with some kind of relation that places all physical pipes (substance=gas) that are in, say "Feeder 6" into a common "Feeder 6 relation".  At that point gas_topology would be redundant and could be removed. However, at present, having gas_topology as a separate network (that I can easily plot in overpass turbo) makes it 100x easier to find and edit real pipes (substance=gas) than would be the case if I could not plot the gas_topology high-level network.
kesterlester (2024-04-04 14:04:45+00:00): As to "community consensus" ..... so far as I can tell I am probably the single biggest gas contributor over the last 4 years, certainly in the UK south of The Humber and East of Birmingham.  In that sense I am most of the community. Having said that, I have taken the approach that I have as a result of discussions (like this one) with community stakeholders and contributors who've asked.  I get about one or two discussions per year with others who are interested -- as you have been.
kesterlester (2024-04-04 14:04:55+00:00): Let me know what you think.
woodpeck (2024-04-04 14:27:28+00:00): Whoa that's a lot at once ;) I think that it would be best to discuss this on community.openstreetmap.org where it is more likely to be found by someone stumbling across gas_topology later! I haven't thought about it in detail but my first ideas were: (1) if I only know start and end, should I really map a WAY (which indicates a linear geometry and therefore forces me to "lie" by claiming a straight line), or should I perhaps map a RELATION with two node members "from" and "to"? (2) should the thing I map really be called a "pipeline" that transports "gas_topology", or should it perhaps use a different top-level tag (e.g. could it be a "pipeline_topology" that transports "gas")? (3) is "there exists a pipeline somewhere between A and B" even mappable? -- all these could certainly benefit from a wider audience!
mtmail (2022-05-21 23:48:32+00:00): I made a mistake in the changeset description. The place doesn't have a website. Instead I looked at postocdes in 10km radius to figure out which digit of the 6+4 was inserted too much.
eggie (2022-05-22 07:46:02+00:00): Dag Nic.. Lijkt me oke zo...  Niet elke fout die JOSM aangeeft hoeft 'fout' te zijn.
Gr eggie
user_8101879 (2022-05-22 13:57:46+00:00): Hi,

Please don't forget to add roles "outer" to the ways on the boundaries : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary

And a boundary should be closed.

Best regards
user_8101879 (2022-05-22 18:13:05+00:00): Please don't forget to add role "outer" on the way of the boundary : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary
Mannivu (2022-05-23 12:09:34+00:00): Ciao. Gli elementi non permanenti (come può esserlo un marker per la distanza di una maratona) non vanno mappati.
PaoloDalprato (2022-05-23 12:40:40+00:00): Grazie
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-07-17 00:17:10+00:00): is is really  a bar?
Gazer75 (2022-05-31 04:56:43+00:00): Please don't merge houses with numbers. They are separate for a reason here in Norway. Number should be at or near the main entrance. Also I do believe the address update script will undo any merging with houses anyway, so your work is pointless.

I have reverted all your merging and did some other tiny changes.
Kovoschiz (2022-05-22 06:37:59+00:00): What is this trying to do?
hd_scania (2022-05-31 09:29:06+00:00): I’m about to restore the access of the southbound motorway starting branch of Tuen-mun road at the NE corner of that frame, which is somewhy still being blocked for routing since this March
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-05-22 13:40:50+00:00): You keep adding tags to relation members like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/989755069

Please be more careful
jyg1093 (2025-08-16 14:23:05+00:00): JOSM 편집
wille (2022-05-24 15:41:24+00:00): Olá,

Muito obrigado por suas contribuições ao OpenStreetMap! Revisei essa edição e está tudo correto!

Caso tenha alguma dúvida, pode entrar em contato comigo.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121303663
DianaDemchuk (2022-05-31 13:15:17+00:00): Geometry broken! Fix it or you'll have to revert the edit!
nevw (2022-05-23 12:50:04+00:00): Hi
You seem to have added three inner parts to the Greenbank Army Range relation
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=152.95375&lat=-27.64026&zoom=14
Not sure what you meant to do but these would seem to be to be part of the range and should not be added as inners to the relation.
Did you instead want to add the inners as holes to the wooded area instead?
nevw (2022-05-30 07:42:57+00:00): Hi
have you had a go at fixing this problem yet? If not, I will in the next couple of days.
clinkers (2022-05-30 10:07:47+00:00): Just fixed it now
nevw (2022-05-31 04:00:09+00:00): Thanks, I updated the wooded areas a bit.
maro21 (2022-05-22 13:17:29+00:00): iD ma błąd, przez który usuwa budynek gdy dodajesz stację i tak usunąłeś budynek
cserpell (2022-05-23 22:43:30+00:00): Hola, gracias por los aportes. Por favor las etiquetas de superficie hay que colocarlas en inglés (asphalt, dirt), en vez de asfalto y tierra. Saludos,
nevw (2022-05-22 09:18:55+00:00): Hi
we don't have permission to use the Corelogic data at		propertyvalue.com.au on OSM as it is copyright.
Only use open data sources or with explicit permission.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources
mueschel (2022-06-10 09:50:56+00:00): Die Gebäude hier haben einige "building:o" tags, kannst du das korrigieren?
kartonage (2022-06-10 09:59:03+00:00): Ohje, na klar. Done in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122202716

Danke dir!
iz11 (2022-05-22 09:28:38+00:00): Szia!

3 útról törölted a name=Beszántva tag-et,  és átraktad megjegyzésbe (note=beszántva)

Valóban nem a névnél kell ennek lennie, viszont így most a térképeken létező útként jelennek meg, eltűnt plusz információ.

Az  abandoned=yes -t tudtommal sok térkép megjelenítő nem veszi figyelembe, mert nem mindig egyértelmű hogy melyik tag-re vonatkozik  (régi elavult jelölés).

Szerintem így kéne jelölni: abandoned:highway=path    és    note=beszántva

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:abandoned:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:abandoned=yes?uselang=en
kogutowicz-mano (2022-05-22 11:59:19+00:00): Szervusz!
Az információ nem tűnt el, csak átalakult. :-)

Abból induljunk ki, hogy nem a renderelő (főleg nem egy bizonyos renderelő)  pillanatnyi képességeihez igazodva töltjük az adatbázist!

Valójában annak kellett volna törölnie az egész utat, aki elnevezte beszántvának. De az abandoned jó gondolat! Alkalmazom.
iz11 (2022-05-22 12:53:29+00:00): Szerintem félreérted amit írtam, valóban, soha sem a renderelőhez kell alkalmazkodni.

Te adtad meg ma  abandoned=yes   -et (ez egy régi, elavult jelölés az utaknál)

Helyette  kellene  abandoned:highway=path (jelenleg használatra javasolt jelölés, a rendelelőknek sincs gondja vele)

Lap alján példák:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:abandoned:

„Older scheme (deprecated)„
abandoned=yes
highway=unclassified

„Current scheme (recommended)„
abandoned:highway=unclassified
kogutowicz-mano (2022-05-22 13:05:18+00:00): Tényleg félreértettelek. Elnézést!
Találtál még más kiigazítanivalót is?
tux67 (2022-05-22 09:44:40+00:00): Die Logik ist, dass wir nur das eintragen, was wir aufgrund von Fakten aus lizenzkompatiblen Quellen oder eigener, sicherer Beobachtung vor Ort auch nachweisen können. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Erfasse_keine_Vorschriften,_die_nicht_durch_Gegenst%C3%A4nde_vor_Ort_repr%C3%A4sentiert_werden%E2%86%99
Einfach mal so 50km/h auf Verdacht einzutragen ist nicht ok, der nächste Motorradfahrer fliegt bei dem Bump aus dem Sattel oder beschwert sich und findet OSM doof, weil er mit 50 bei 30 geblitzt wurde.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.128167315892&lng=6.406264804828&z=17&pKey=156750256403831
Also einfach so eintragen - nicht gut.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305432
tux67 (2022-05-22 09:47:23+00:00): p.s.: Etwas einzutragen, damit ein Tool das OSM Daten interpretiert, das danach vermeintlich besser macht, ist auch nicht gern gesehen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Taggen_f%C3%BCr_den_Renderer
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305432
Nickerchen (2022-05-23 06:23:02+00:00): In meinem Kommentar hatte ich nicht präzise genug ausgedrückt... die 50 Km/h stammen aus eigener Beobachtung (das wollte ich mit dem Wort "die" ausdrücken). Es geht also nicht um "absichtlich falsche Attribute".

Demnach spricht nichts dagegen auch innerorts fehlende Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzungen nachzutragen? Und bestehende Straßen zu "trennen" (ich kann es gerade nicht besser ausdrücken), um veränderte Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzugen zu hinterlegen?
tux67 (2022-05-23 07:17:37+00:00): Grundsätzlich spricht nichts dagegen, wenn du aber mal auf die Mapillary Bilder schaust - Orts auswärts ist vom Kreisverkehr ab der Pelzerstaße bis zum Ortsschild 30, Orts einwärts ab kurz vor der Verkehrsberuhigung die gesamte Sandstraße für die nächsten 200m 30km/h.
50 km/h für alles war also nicht ok (absichtlich falsch wollte ich da auch nicht unterstellen) - da läßt man es lieber weg als den Nutzern ein falsches Bild zu vermitteln.
So ist es jetzt auch eingetragen.
Das Trennen von Wegen sollte sparsam erfolgen und keine Relationen dabei beschädigt werden (Bus, Fahrradrouten etc.)
Nickerchen (2022-05-23 08:57:14+00:00): Ja, die kurze 30 Km/h-Zone gilt es zu berücksichtigen. Das würde ich natürlich alles ganz korrekt in OSM hinterlegen.
Das "absichtlich falsch" war übrigens nur ein Zitat aus "Taggen für den Renderer" und habe ich auch nicht aus Deinen Zeilen herausgelesen. :-)
tux67 (2022-05-23 09:08:24+00:00): Nur ums noch mal klar zu sagen. Du brauchst an dieser Stelle eigentlich nichts mehr zu machen. Hatte ich gestern schon aktualisiert. 
Es sei denn, du findest noch eine Unstimmigkeit.
Nickerchen (2022-05-23 11:14:48+00:00): Alles klar! So gut hätte ich es nicht hinbekommen, denn interessanterweise darf man die Sandstraße schneller runter- als hochfahren. Respekt!
tux67 (2022-05-23 13:08:02+00:00): Die Führerscheintheorie ist zwar schon eine Weile her, aber aus dem Kreisverkehr ortsauswärts wird die 30 erst durch das Ortsausgangschild aufgehoben. 
Ortseinwärts ist ab Ortseingang 50 bis kurz vor der Bodenwelle.
Hungerburg (2022-05-23 21:24:06+00:00): Hallo Gruber, way/1062502799 macht mich wundern: Wo sehen Sie denn auf der umgrenzten Fläche forstwirtschaftliche Nutzung? Die Grenzziehung scheint mir auch recht willkürlich. Am Luftbild seh ich da Latschen, Sträucher und Gras. Bitte um Auskunft.
Mundilfari (2022-05-22 23:32:02+00:00): Hello - what is the source for Continental Park in Warrenville being operated by the park district? The district doesn't list it on its website; and the signage at the park's entrance looks different from the Warrenville Park District operated parks.

Also, a 2018 bike rack inventory* published by the city lists this as a _private_ park. Please explain.

Thank you,

* https://www.warrenville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/8320/BikeRackinv2018?bidId=
Mundilfari (2022-05-22 23:34:40+00:00): On an unrelated note, I fixed about a hundred instances of buildings tagged with building=ret (instead of building=retail), all authored by you. Could you check if maybe a preset you're using is a broken somehow? Thanks!
Zol87 (2022-05-25 16:26:32+00:00): Sorry, I don't have as good of local knowledge of DuPage as you.
Mundilfari (2022-05-27 21:55:14+00:00): This isn't a DuPage issue. Please verify your information. If you haven't been there, and can't verify on an aerial or using *any* other source either, then please don't map (or tag) that particular feature - it's pure guesswork at that point, just shy of vandalism.
Finding features that are mistagged with formally valid, but factually incorrect values is much harder than finding stuff that's missing legitimate tags altogether.

Do you recall other cases where you tagged stuff based on guesses? These may make sense to double check (or just revert) too.

Thanks!
user_5359 (2022-05-22 07:03:29+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/node/9744101370. What is the meaning of the tags clas_vis = 2.0
data_rilie = 23/06/71
?
Please notice for a date value we use the structure yyyy-mm-dd
user_5359 (2022-05-29 16:04:35+00:00): Ciao! Date un'occhiata a http://www.osm.org/node/9744101370. Qual è il significato dei tag 
clas_vis = 2.0
dati_rilievi = 23/06/71
?
Si prega di notare che per un valore di data si utilizza la struttura yyyy-mm-dd
Gianfranco2014 (2022-05-30 06:45:17+00:00): clas_vis è la classe di visitabilità della grotta, sono dati ripresi dalla regione veneto, per la data la devo correggere.
user_5359 (2022-06-01 09:55:20+00:00): Hello!  Please use for the keys explicitly British English. For more details have look on the website http://wiki.osm.org.

Si prega di utilizzare per le chiavi esplicitamente l'inglese britannico. Per maggiori dettagli consultare il sito web http://wiki.osm.org.
ivanbranco (2022-06-01 19:16:00+00:00): Ciao Gianfranco,

scusate se mi intrometto. Se la fonte è la Regione Veneto andrebbe messa quella nella source, e non "knowledge". Inoltre sei sicuro la licenza sia compatibile? Puoi fornire un link puntuale dei dati originali utilizzati?
Gianfranco2014 (2022-06-03 07:49:15+00:00): La fonte è la regione veneto, ed è stata verificata la licenza IODL 2.0, compatibile con osm, e ho citato la fonte e la licenza quando ho caricato i dati, poi c'erano troppi tag, e li ho ridotti ad un numero acettabile, poi mi è stato fatto notare che una data non aveva il formato corretto, e l'ho corretta con knowledge, poi mi è stato fatto notare che i tag devono avere un nome inglese, e questo lo devo ancora fare, e metterò nuovamente come source knowledge. Vuoi sapere altro?
Lejun (2022-05-25 10:53:10+00:00): Au lieu d’une combinaison de :
bicycle=no, highway=path et horse=no, pourquoi ne pas avoir simplement indiqué highway=footway ?
TheBlueRobin (2022-05-22 07:36:18+00:00): Hello.
I checked your changeset but I think the road is slightly misaligned.
MapRoulette's task instructions says you need to use Japan GSI airphoto/seamlessphoto imagery, however, you seem to have used Bing as a source.
Is this correct? If so, could you fix please?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305648
evergreenmorning (2022-05-22 14:08:13+00:00): Thank you. You're right, I used the wrong map. I've gone through and corrected.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305648
TheBlueRobin (2022-05-22 15:22:06+00:00): Thank you :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305648
evergreenmorning (2022-05-22 15:34:57+00:00): This is the first time I've had some advice so as someone still learning OSM, I appreciate it very much!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305648
tux67 (2022-05-22 09:49:29+00:00): Hi, on which basis have you determined, that your value is more precise/correct than the previous one?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305831
googlenaut (2022-05-22 19:47:00+00:00): there's a footway north to the tagged residential highway with same but incorrect width. See Bing and Esri for a better estimation.
tux67 (2022-05-22 20:07:06+00:00): So the answer to the question is you used aerial images as the basis? Can this approach deliver a better precision?
googlenaut (2022-05-23 08:03:41+00:00): YES! aerial images + measuring tool instead of guessing.
tux67 (2022-05-23 08:12:07+00:00): ok, then the hint for you that here the latest images (and possibly best positioned and clearest) are the "Nordrhein-Westfalen digitales Orthophoto" that JOSM and iD offer both.
googlenaut (2022-05-23 15:39:41+00:00): same result with NRW digital ortho.
nyampire (2022-05-23 04:37:48+00:00): OSMへようこそ！
すべてではないのですが、一連の変更セットを確認しました。基本的に、よく描けていると思います。素晴らしい！
次の編集では、もしできれば、変更セットをアップロードする際のコメントを、「修正」などではなく、どんな内容を行ったのか、簡単なサマリーを書くとよりよいと思います。
ぜひ引き続き、マッピングしてみてください。
それでは、Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121305862
Rado209 (2022-05-26 05:28:00+00:00): Úsek zámerne nahodený ako V( aj keď by malo byť o úroveň nižšie, ale je nezmyselné aby kvôli 50m cez kopec neprenavigovalo na cestnom bicykli, je to pekne prejazdné.
mikkolukas (2022-06-24 14:26:37+00:00): What?!!

Hvofor har du fjernet vejen hen over Kennedys Plads?
osmviborg (2022-06-24 15:22:49+00:00): Jeg brugte denne https://listservices.dataforsyningen.dk/#/map/WMS/orto_foraar_temp
mikkolukas (2022-06-24 16:07:52+00:00): Som tydeligt viser at der foregår et eller andet.

Du har lige fjernet en vej som på ortfotos'ne var igang med at blive etableret.

Og som du kan se fra historikken  af vejen var den blevet oprettet 2020-09-05 med en note på vejen der sagde "Vedtaget lokalplan", hvilket viser noget om at dette ikke er en midlertidig vej.

Det korte af det lange er: Vær forsigtig når ortfotos viser noget væsentligt anderledes end det som er tegnet. Vær især opmærksom på hvornår noget er tegnet.

Med det sagt. Jeg har selv været skyldig i at gøre det samme dengang jeg var mere nybegynder.
mikkolukas (2022-06-24 16:10:04+00:00): Jeg har reetableret vejen i https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122809900
mikkolukas (2022-06-24 16:10:51+00:00): Er det også dig som har fjernet den trappe som befandt sig inde på konstruktionsområdet?
eggie (2022-05-22 07:25:35+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback  Svp geen name=  tag gebruiken om iets te omschrijven.


MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-05-22 07:37:10+00:00): Vakantiewoning toegevoegd en van BAGdata voorzien. name= verwijderd

MVG
eggie
SomeoneElse (2022-07-02 18:49:56+00:00): Hello Reims Moderne,
Lots of people have commented on your changesets.  These will have been emailed to you and you can also see them at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8585988 .  Please do reply.  Also, please use good changeset comments, not just things like "mise a jour".
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2022-07-02 18:50:01+00:00): Bonjour Reims Moderne,
Beaucoup de gens ont commenté vos changesets. Ceux-ci vous auront été envoyés par e-mail et vous pouvez également les voir sur https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8585988 . Merci de répondre. Aussi, s'il vous plaît, utilisez de bons commentaires sur l'ensemble de modifications, pas seulement des choses comme "mise à jour".
Cordialement,
Andy
SekeRob (2022-05-23 09:04:31+00:00): weblink incl app at https://www.freeto-x.it
capacity 4

How to blow up the most expensive part of your e-car, the lithium battery, in 10-15 minutes, but your pedaggio is refunded.

ciao
Warin61 (2022-05-22 23:59:08+00:00): Reverted.

Districts are now correct.. as per DCS Base Map
Msiipola (2022-05-22 16:58:21+00:00): Flera vägar i området är satta till residential, men bör vara cykel/service., eftersom dessa vägar inte har namn. Till skillnad från vägarna norr om detta område.
Msiipola (2022-05-25 12:21:36+00:00): Jag har nu ändrat samtliga dessa till cykel/gång-vägar
ratrun (2022-05-25 14:50:34+00:00): Sorry, I don't speak Swedish. Please note that my changes only connected some unconnected nodes and that I do not have local area knowledge such that I could say anything to the classification of the ways.
Warin61 (2022-05-22 23:59:12+00:00): Reverted.
Warin61 (2022-05-22 23:59:17+00:00): This creates 2 districts with the same name. 

Reverted.
Kovoschiz (2022-05-22 15:50:24+00:00): Please be careful not to change the entire building.
*abq* (2023-01-04 09:36:24+00:00): Hallo Mrsuspect,
bitte füge bei Quellen oder Brunnen nicht noch zusätzlich Brunnen im name tag ein. Hier gehören nur Eigennamen rein. 
VG Reiner
bxl-forever (2022-05-22 11:09:37+00:00): Hello,

I’m not sure "amenity=research_centre" and "office=government + government=healthcare" fit together, it’s probably one or the other.
JhowieNitnek (2022-05-22 11:14:06+00:00): I think it does because it is a research institute but it is also a government office for public health
bxl-forever (2022-05-22 18:13:20+00:00): Of course it is.  But the point here is about OSM tags, where those two keys cannot be used together.
Warin61 (2022-05-23 00:19:46+00:00): Roads do not show up on 
ACTmapi Imagery April 2021
DCS Imagery
Maxar Imagery

Reverted
streckenkundler (2022-05-22 12:42:41+00:00): Hei,

du hast hier für den Abschnitt das oneway:bicycle=no entfernt. Mit Schild  https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=145270134671371 allerdings wird für mich für die ganze Straße die Einbahnstraße für Fahrräder aufgehoben. Gut, nun könnte man die Radroute auf den da beginnenden begleitenden Weg legen, der ist aber auch nicht entsprechend ausgeschildert. Ich werde das oneway:bicycle=no wieder setzen. Es kann auch sein, daß StreetComplete da mist  gebaut hat, ohne daß du es gemerkt hast.

Sven
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-06-01 07:59:35+00:00): أستاذي الكريم لماذا قمت بتغيير اسم عرق الحقنة إلى طعوس جاوى
Warin61 (2022-05-23 00:20:17+00:00): Roads do not show up on 
ACTmapi Imagery April 2021
DCS Imagery
Maxar Imagery

Reverted
If you used another source - say so.
Znaika (2026-02-10 18:13:00+00:00): Hi,
noch eine Seltsamkeit.
Kann no_entry
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14168177
Fußgängerrouten durch die Passage verhindern (zwei von drei Diensten)???
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_valhalla_foot&route=51.202432%2C6.686296%3B51.202375%2C6.685022#map=19/51.202250/6.686162&layers=N

Da ist aber bereits motor_vehicle=no definiert
rempshaener (2026-02-11 18:48:36+00:00): Hallo,
wie du offensichtlich ja selbst festgestellt hast, lag das am access=destination.
Die Relation, die du gelöscht hast, stellst du dann aber wieder her?
Viele Grüße
Znaika (2026-02-11 19:26:46+00:00): ich habe es neu gemacht https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20201291
rempshaener (2026-02-11 19:37:05+00:00): Danke