piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ovruni (2021-04-23 22:45:56+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se ha ingresado el texto " campos de cultivo", sin embargo tambien se ha eliminado un nodo que era parte de la frontera de algunos distritos. Por favor evitar retirar los nodos o vías de estas relaciones de llímites administrativos.
Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe 
Saludos
Anisa IRM-ED (2021-07-07 08:21:55+00:00): Hola, @Facalderonm.
Espero que estés bien.

ID de relación: 5592706 (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/5592706) está marcado como restricción de turno, pero no está bien formado: Falta un miembro de y / o para.
No encontré ningún giro a la derecha en esta relación, solo encontré un letrero de giro a la derecha basado en la imagen de Mapillary (https://is.gd/vLlX7s).
Le importaría arreglarlo / modificarlo? No pude encontrar ninguna fuente de imágenes válida para solucionarlo.
Gracias y feliz mapeo!

traducido por Google
user_5359 (2021-04-25 05:01:57+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please use the key name instead of Name
vorpalblade (2021-04-26 02:12:56+00:00): Thanks for removing the service road (it looks like it was supposed to be a driveway or something though).

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

JOSM also has access to the 2019 and 2020 aerial photos with the names starting as "Mesa County GIS".

Thanks for your contributions,
vorpalblade
portalaventura (2021-04-23 22:03:33+00:00): PM Luiz Alves, boas-vindas ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira contribuição!

Em https://wiki.osm.org/Brasil você encontra informações úteis sobre o projeto de mapeamento colaborativo.

Enquanto você se acostuma com o OpenStreetMap, procure conversar com pessoas mais experientes se tiver dúvidas ou antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que lhe causarem estranheza.

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Em https://wiki.osm.org/Pt:Canais_para_contato estão listadas formas de interagir com a comunidade brasileira. Nacionalmente, no grupo de Telegram https://telegram.me/OSMBrasil_Comunidade você encontrará muitas das pessoas que colaboram com o OSM. Regionalmente, a comunidade de Santa Catarina mantém o grupo https://telegram.me/osmsc.

Boa diversão com suas edições!
Jordi MF (2023-01-06 13:08:14+00:00): Hola Sandal,
He estado recientemente por la zona de la Serra del Ferrer y me gustaría que me confirmases si existe esta senda que añadiste tú: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/934479007

Caminé por la cresta y en ningún momento vi una senda que esté hacia el suroeste a partir de este nodo: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10310857490

Puedes confirmármelo. Si es así, creo que debería añadirse trail_visibility=no o eliminar la senda en caso de que no exista ninguna senda y que se trate de un tramo de campo a través.
Saludos,
Jordi
Sandal man (2023-01-06 14:21:19+00:00): Hola Jordi, hace un año que no voy, así que es posible que esté completamente cubierto de maleza como muchos otros senderos por aquí :-(
Sin embargo, quería explorar un poco a finales de enero.
Saludos Jan
Jordi MF (2023-01-06 14:35:45+00:00): Pues si te parece bien, voy a etiqeutar esa senda como trail_visibility=no. Pero si está llena de malea, yo la eliminaría. Es lo que haré con una senda que va paralela a las crestas de la Serra del Ferrer. También añadiré el tramo de la cresta.
Sandal man (2023-01-06 15:08:49+00:00): Multa
Jordi MF (2023-01-06 15:24:00+00:00): Hola Jan,
No te he entendido... hehehe. De todas formas, dejaré la senda que te he dicho como trail_visibility=no, pero no la eliminaré para que la puedas revisar sobre el campo cuando vayas.
Saludos,
Jordi
Sandal man (2023-01-06 15:33:53+00:00): quise decir perfecto :-)
abakus_uploader (2021-04-24 22:31:39+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
SomeoneElse (2021-07-10 13:38:00+00:00): Hello,
in among the "sorting out of the merge" it looks like the lanes tag is still wrong on http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=934479984 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/934479979 .  Any idea what it should be?
Best Regards,
Andy
ottwiz (2021-05-01 17:52:02+00:00): Sorry, why do you give stupid names for parks and stuff? OpenStreetMap isn't for that. Please don't do vandalism.

And also, when you edit with iD editor, please specify the correct source
like: local knowledge, or survey...
CountyRoads (2021-05-01 18:51:01+00:00): Local knowledge. 😁
ottwiz (2021-05-01 18:55:47+00:00): Oh well, but giving names like "Obese Jim" isn't acceptable. Even if you hate Jim Justice(probably, if you gave names to stuff), giving names on maps isn't acceptable. I hope you get this.

The other thing that bothers me that the changeset description "UPDATE", i mean, you should elaborate more "I updated road names in WV State Capitol", for example. or "Aligned roads". Just some tips
CountyRoads (2021-05-01 19:06:00+00:00): Allow me to take this time and deeply apologize for upsetting you by adding “update” when I have updated things in the past. I will take your advice into consideration the next time I make an update. I have aligned roads, creeks and adding buildings in the past without any issues from anyone. I was unaware of the proper wording and didn’t know I had to be descriptive while making any updates. Again, I will take that into consideration. 😁
ottwiz (2021-05-01 19:12:30+00:00): Good to hear it :) Sorry, my OCD gets triggered when I see something suspicious. Also, there's the OSMUS Slack chatting platform about OSM stuff. If you wanna join, here's a link for it: http://slack.openstreetmap.us/
and there is a #local-west-virginia channel in it, where we discuss issues that may arise when mapping. (but that instance has many more rooms, not just that one in particular)
user_5359 (2021-04-24 05:22:07+00:00): Welcome to OSM! For a better description of the golf course have a look on https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course, please. Use ref instead of name.
Kha_nam (2021-04-24 03:50:23+00:00): Hi Cj Rodriguez
Fixed the alignment, as building polygons 
overlapping kindly check with 
way 155750338, way 406131503, way 174553403 ,  way 174553401,way 174553400 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103512156
Thank you
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103508759
Kha_nam (2021-04-24 05:42:03+00:00): Hi Vincii
I have removed the tags one way=yes and layer=-1 kindly refer way 893655452,way 893655451
way 91998095
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103515807
Thank you
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103508842
tonyf1 (2021-10-25 09:59:24+00:00): reverted  Changeset #112938745
mavl (2021-04-24 08:22:27+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 101995304, 101999051, 101999062, 101999081, 101999094, 101999107, 101999123, 101999147, 101999159, 101999169, 101999183, 102000121, 102000132, 102000151, 102000174, 102000194, 102000210, 102000225, 102000232, 102000249, 102000265, 102004405, 102129532, 102129547, 102130318, 102130340, 102130366, 102130404, 102130420, 102130438, 102130453, 102131903, 102131920, 102131940, 102131953, 102131970, 102131987, 102132001, 102132023, 102132038, 102132055, 102132068, 102132087, 102132104, 102132118, 102132132, 102132151, 102132165, 102132185, 102134541, 102134564, 102134585, 102134618, 102134646, 102134665, 102134684, 102134701, 102134728, 102134744, 102135761, 102136318, 102136879, 102200426, 102200445, 102200466, 102811729, 102814725, 102870669, 102870755, 102874279, 102875657.
jb54osm (2021-04-24 12:43:54+00:00): Dag JTnl,
Jammer genoeg vertellen luchtfoto's niet het hele verhaal. Vooral niet bij recente ontwikkelingen.

Ik heb een fiks aantal recente wijzigingen van mij opnieuw moeten intekenen. :-(((
TIP: controleer de wijzigingsdatums van gebieden, wegen e.d.; als die wijzigingen recent zijn zullen de luchtfoto's wel verouderd zijn. Dan is een survey de aangewezen weg.
Jan
cserpell (2021-04-24 02:53:46+00:00): Hola! Gracias por los aportes. Sabes que noté que uniste los puntos de los paraderos a las líneas de las calles. Esto es un error común (yo mismo lo hacía al inicio), pero los paraderos van separados de la calle, ya que están etiquetados como el punto donde uno espera el bus, no donde éste pasa o se detiene. Hay más información en la wiki:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:highway%3Dbus_stop

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:public_transport%3Dplatform
ovruni (2021-04-24 03:51:11+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se han conectado tierras de cultivo con varias carreteras y además un vía eléctrica, por favor evite esto. Procedo a revertir este conjunto de cambios.
Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe 
Saludos
ovruni (2021-04-24 03:55:56+00:00): Del mismo modo que en el conjunto de cambios 103507108 hay zonas que cambiado y que no son parte de tierras de cultivo según la imagen de Maxar.
Saludos
felipeeugenio (2021-04-24 11:47:47+00:00): Estimado. por favor no pegar paraderos a las calles. Saludos
lutz (2021-04-25 06:01:22+00:00): Danke fürs Verschlimmbessern, zurückgelassen wurde ein defektes Multipolygon:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=51.5682992&mlon=13.0186137#map=18/51.56830/13.01861
Palolo (2021-04-24 03:17:03+00:00): @Sam1104 Thank you for helping map Tanzania. Please take the time to trace the buildings accurately. Use the q key to make square corners and do not generalize the buildings.
SherbetS (2021-04-27 15:07:00+00:00): Nice catch, I double checked on the Mapillary imagery.
nevw (2021-04-24 05:03:17+00:00): Hi
the wiki explains how to add your address in a useful manner.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr
nevw (2021-04-28 05:13:58+00:00): Hi
I re-mapped this a bit. Please review and change if you find it needs further mapping.
woodpeck (2021-04-26 21:20:29+00:00): Dear NM$L, in this changeset you have taken a statement I made about a different area as a justification for making an edit to the Aksai Chin area. Please refrain from doing that, and please also refrain from making any other edits to any boundaries that are subject to a conflict between China and other countries. If you encounter a boundary that is mapped incorrectly, inform the data working group and we will look at the issue. Thank you.
NM$L (2021-04-27 15:42:20+00:00): Dear Woodpeck, I've made my point clear and asked you if you would change other disputed area such as Aksai Chin. You didn't give me a direct answer but I could feel your attitude from your reply. So I just did it. And I think there're still some disputed areas not being changed to meet your standard. All in all, not change them, or change them all. Thank you for your understanding.
Kautilya3 (2021-06-22 00:47:29+00:00): NM$L, what is the problem with marking it as a disputed admin area? All the areas claimed by China are being marked. Why do you change Indian claimed areas only?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:45:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
Polarbear (2023-08-17 08:06:45+00:00): Hi Stefan, bei der Kita nordwestlich im CS sind alle Gates auf private. Wie kommt man denn dann rein? Müsste nicht ein Tor auf customer stehen? Welches?
StefanHRT (2023-08-17 09:32:43+00:00): Hallo Polarbear,
Oh ist das lange her. Im Prinzip ist beides richtig, customers oder private, da es ja nur für die Kinder gedacht ist die dort einen Kitaplatz haben. Ist eine Ansichtssache ;) Nur als Gedankenanstoß, wie ich es aus der Kitazeit meiner Tochter damals kenne (und auch aus dem Freundeskreis aktuell) , es gibt Haupteingänge beim Gebäude die genutzt werden sollen. Die Tore zu den Gärten sind bei gutem Wetter und für die Abholung nachmittags mal offen, sonst verschlossen. VG Stefan
aweech (2021-04-25 14:02:21+00:00): Hi,
Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thank you for your contributions! I reviewed your edits, as you requested, and I think they're good :)
santamariense (2021-07-09 19:30:16+00:00): Estive aqui tentando identificar quais seriam essas duas cidades. Cheguei a conclusão que seria Guarapuava - Dourados, porém Dourados estaria fora do raio de Guarapuava em 60 km ou menos.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:56:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
Hb- (2023-01-15 19:02:45+00:00): Wandella State Forest got a duplicate OSM relation with this. r12622666 has the wrong landuse=forestry tagging while the already existing r5951472 has the correct landuse=forest tag.
user_5359 (2021-04-24 07:17:28+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/934515757/history: What ist the meaning of tag faces=yes?
woodpeck (2021-05-02 08:02:33+00:00): Is there a source for the name "Senator Joe Manchin III Alley" that you have assigned in this changeset? Also, please use better changeset comments in the future; "UPDATE" is not a sufficient description.
woodpeck (2021-05-02 07:59:58+00:00): It sounds implausible that the road in this changeset would really be called "Bucket Road". What is the source of this information?
Your Village Maps (2021-07-09 04:30:21+00:00): Shouldn't ND 66 from the west side of the I-29 interchange to the Minnesota state line be primary? Or maybe MN 11 should be secondary?? The difference really stands out to someone looking at the map and seems inconsistent.
elijahmathews (2021-07-10 00:36:42+00:00): Yep - I totally agree, although I'm not sure which classification (primary/secondary) is more merited here. Essentially, I went through all of ND's major highways and reclassified them based on NDDOT's classifications, marking "State Corridor" highways as primary and "District Corridor" and "District Collector" highways as secondary with a few exceptions (e.g. setting ND 10 to tertiary). This did unfortunately yield numerous inconsistencies across state/province lines that I was unsure how to handle, especially since neighboring state/province DOT classification schemes appears to differ from NDDOT's.
Your Village Maps (2021-07-10 01:59:09+00:00): I've panned and zoomed around there and Pembina and have come to the conclusion that ND 66 east of I-29 should be primary. Same with ND 59 in Pembina.
NickHu (2021-06-01 08:10:51+00:00): Hi, ref way 161542969, I couldn't find this path when I was walking in the area on 14 and 15 May 2021.  Is this update based on a physical survey?
tonyf1 (2021-10-25 09:28:31+00:00): tags reverted  Changeset #112937468
tonyf1 (2021-10-25 09:37:00+00:00): I have added a fixme,  HighRouleur may not have visited, I havent, so could be 9 years since last seen
flexagoon (2021-04-24 11:57:57+00:00): Проверил, все верно
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103518708
M!dgard (2021-04-24 10:46:49+00:00): removed: is a lifecycle prefix[1]. It is completely valid. I obviously added them because the lamps are removed in real life, but still visible on the aerial imagery.

Before making remote edits like these, please make sure to understand the tags you are editing if they are documented.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
M!dgard (2021-04-24 10:47:24+00:00): I reverted this edit in https://osm.org/changeset/103529778, no further action from you is necessary here.
M!dgard (2021-04-24 10:51:28+00:00): It's also often helpful to look at the history of elements. In JOSM, select an element and use View→History (shortcut Ctrl+H). You can see Peilsheibe added them, then on 2021-04-18 I removed them with comment "lamps removed (still visible on imagery, so use removed: prefix instead of deleting" and source "survey".
marczoutendijk (2021-04-24 07:28:26+00:00): Deze (houten) brug wordt vervangen door een nieuw exemplaar van beton. De fietsroutes ter plekke worden NIET omgeleid. Vermoedelijk in juli 2021 gereed.
https://www.ad.nl/den-bosch/vinkel-krijgt-nog-dit-jaar-nieuwe-fietsbrug~a54eb3d9/
dvdhoven (2021-04-24 08:12:57+00:00): Ik heb aan de zuidkant ook een kp 58 gemaakt, dat staat ook in Visit Brabant.
De routes eindigen nu in de noordelijke en zuidelijke 58
Als de brug gereed is, moet er nog een route 58-58 worden gemaakt.
Tot die tijd loopt er geen fietsroute meer over de brug.
Houdt jij in de gaten wanneer de brug gereed is? En kun je me dan een seintje geven?
Kunnen wandelaars nog wel over de brug? Anders moet de wandelroute ook verwijderd worden en later weer opnieuw ingelegd

Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
marczoutendijk (2021-04-24 10:02:05+00:00): Nee, wandelaars kunnen er ook niet langs want de hele brug is feitelijk verdwenen. Ik hou de nieuwe brug in de gaten!
Groet,
Marc.
marczoutendijk (2021-06-08 17:16:45+00:00): Vandaag langs de brug gereden en hij is weer in gebruik!
Alle routes kunnen worden hersteld.
user_5359 (2021-04-25 18:04:58+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8661303454: What is the meaning of the tag "Barrier"="Cycle Autorise"?
user_5359 (2021-04-25 18:09:47+00:00): There are also four other nodes with "Barrière"="Cycle autorisé". Please have look on https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:barrier
literan (2021-04-24 08:54:31+00:00): mistake in restriction. fixed it: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103524538#map=19/55.81773/37.35173
Dimitar155 (2021-07-26 12:34:31+00:00): Здравей Ники. Мисля че не е правилно това име на улицата да бъде основно. Най-малкия проблем с него е че "чупи" връзките с адресите на сградите. По-добре би било то да стане official_name, докато "Алабин" да си се изписва на картата.
niki88z (2021-08-26 11:28:14+00:00): Здрасти :) 
Честно казано не съм забелязал какво и как чупи, но съм съгласен, че ако пречи на нормалното функциониране трябва да се коригира. 
Просто исках да се въведе официалното и пълно име на улицата. Ясно е, че никой няма да започне да я нарича с инициалите :) 

Ако имаш идея за по-добра редакция - направи я.
Dimitar155 (2021-08-26 12:07:07+00:00): Вече я направих редакцията. Проблема идва от това че адреса на сградите е "Алабин", докато името на улицата беше "Алабин И. Вл.", което би объркало някои програми. Важното е че вече е отстранен проблема.
Поздрави, Митко
niki88z (2021-08-26 12:10:30+00:00): Благодаря ти!
Andrea Musuruane (2021-04-24 12:48:42+00:00): Ciao e benvenuto su OSM. 

Non usare le immagini aree di Bing perché sono molto disallineate nelle nostre zone. Meglio usare Esri Clarity.

highway=living_street è un tag che non si usa in Italia. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:highway%3Dliving_street

Le restrizioni si aggiungono solo se c'è un cartello che le riporta.

Ciao,

Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103522851
hrohn (2021-04-24 08:28:57+00:00): is quatsch, war schon da
StC (2021-05-03 21:47:42+00:00): Hi,
E4 is a documented European hiking route, and you have deleted its swiss part. Could you please consider how to repair it?
Balmfluh (2021-05-07 19:28:14+00:00): Hi
Unfortunately, E4 is not marked in Switzerland.  It is not possible to find it on the ground. For a user, this is misleading information that reduces the quality of the map. As soon as the route is marked,  I would be happy to map it.
steenkobberoe (2021-06-01 09:17:01+00:00): HI
I ask you to re-establish it. If the route is not marked, OSM is one the few ways to walk the route (E4).
Many strechtes of our E-paths are not marked, but they are visible on OSM (and Waymarkedtrails), which is of high value for the long distance walkers.
Best regards
Steen Kobberø-Hansen
Chairman of the ERA E-paths Working Group
https://www.era-ewv-ferp.org/e-paths/e-path-coordination/
cquest (2021-07-31 10:12:08+00:00): In OSM a lot of routes or other objects (like admin boundaries) are not marked or visible on the ground. This does not means they're not verifyable and we map them based on available open or authorized sources.
Deleting such a route without prior discussion within the community is not a good practice.
I'm in favor of reverting this deletion.
Balmfluh (2021-08-05 12:30:11+00:00): I myself am often on hiking trails and would like to see the E4 on some maps. 

On the other hand, OSM is a project with the aim of mapping the real situation on the ground (See Welcome page [https://www.openstreetmap.org/welcome],  Good Practice  [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice], Verifiabilty  [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Verifiability], Map what's on the ground and many others). Unfortunately, the E4 is not marked in all sections and is therefore not recognisable on the ground.  It is quite a frustrating experience to expect E4-markings where none can be found.  

'Route=hiking'  is defined as *signed* walking route. Users expect to find some kind of marking and to be able to follow it without a map. [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dhiking#Tagging_walking_and_hiking_Route_Networks]

We should not mix this tagging scheme with routes that currently lack a verifiable on-the-ground marking. To map an unmarked route in the same way as a marked one is simply misleading. This would reduce the quality of the data. Examples of poor quality cannot be used as an argument to continue a poor practice. 

How can we help those who want to walk the E4?
1) Propose a tagging scheme for the situation. This would allow a renderer or other data consumer to clearly distinguish between marked and unmarked sections and handle them accordingly. 
2) Use a custom service like umap  [https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/] to create a map for the specific needs of the E4. 

If needed, we can discuss this further via private message. 

Please refrain from the temptation to force the unmarked sections into the map. 

Best Regards
pyrog (2021-08-05 20:52:25+00:00): __Unfortunately, E4 is not marked in Switzerland. It is not possible to find it on the ground. __

E4 is probably never marked in any country (at least in France).
pyrog (2021-08-06 06:37:52+00:00): @Balmfluh Please, have a look to "Walking routes described in books" and also trust experienced contributors 😉

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Walking_Routes#Walking_routes_described_in_books

Best regards,

Yves (french contributors and hikers that lived several years in Switzerland)