piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mavl (2018-12-25 00:33:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:30:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:58:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:31:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:52:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:11:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:50:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:51:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:06:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:35:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:42:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:54:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:14:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:51:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
Maradona11 (2018-11-27 23:18:26+00:00): Hi,
Did you change the type for Up Shore (449335855)?  If so please be careful changing these as it will have big impact on routing.  I have changed this way to Rail.
mavl (2018-12-23 16:13:29+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
Jakka (2018-11-26 19:22:37+00:00): livingstreet indien de borden F12a is maxspeed 20 https://wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/182-art22bis
Navid Hosseinzadeh (2018-12-04 16:34:54+00:00): سلام و تشکر از اینکه حضورتون برای ویرایش نقشه.
نکته ای رو میخوام اشاره کنم که درجه پرایمری برای مسیر بلوار ظفر استباه هستش و همون سکندری که بود درست بودش. بخصوص اینکه مسیرها درجشون باید ادامه دار باشه و بخش کوچکی از یه مسیر یه درجه بالاتر دراشته باشه اشتباهست. یعنی درجه مسیرها باید پیوستگی داشته باشه.
باتشکر
Jørn-osm (2018-11-25 19:56:25+00:00): This is more than Kattegat. 
Looks more like "Kattegat, Sound and Belts"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kattegat#Extent

The danish description is better.
https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kattegat
geozeisig (2018-11-26 07:01:31+00:00): On the Danish wikipedia page you will find a map and a description of the area. That's roughly the basis I used.
osmviborg (2018-11-26 07:58:59+00:00): Extent in the wiki is "Kattegat, Sound and Belts". For Kattegat use this http://denstoredanske.dk/Danmarks_geografi_og_historie/Danmarks_geografi/Indre_danske_farvande/Kattegat
geozeisig (2018-11-26 08:13:38+00:00): Sounds plausible too. I can change it, but I need some time for it. Maybe you can do it if you know the area.
osmviborg (2018-11-26 09:13:10+00:00): Done. http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/64890197
mavl (2018-12-24 23:54:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:39:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:04:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:47:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
Glassman (2018-11-24 22:16:11+00:00): I changed the street name to its full spelling. We don't use abbreviations in OSM for streets. It save confusion for software trying to give directions.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/64838706
Glassman (2018-11-24 22:17:13+00:00): Instead of a node for the apartments, if you use an area around the complex, tag it landuse=residential with the name of the complex, it will render nicely. I'd do it but don't know the boundaries.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/64838706
MEstr8 (2018-11-24 22:18:19+00:00): Thanks! I'll try that out
Glassman (2018-11-24 22:23:02+00:00): Another tip: if the walking paths are named, you can add it to the footpath.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/64838955
mavl (2018-12-24 23:48:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:35:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
Lokai (2018-11-24 14:02:40+00:00): Hallo,

dein Beitrag ist unklar, was möchtest du darstellen? Zur Zeit ist es ein Gericht auf der Straße mit Namen "Zu Hause"

Gruß

W
Lokai (2018-11-28 13:46:27+00:00): Keine Antwort -> Unsinniges Gebäude gelöscht (Unsinn im Sinne von Falsch)
mavl (2018-12-24 23:41:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:44:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
sergeybe (2018-11-26 19:55:37+00:00): Вы добавляете не значок перевала, а значок седла. Это совершенно разные теги.
mavl (2018-12-25 00:39:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:32:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
freebeer (2019-05-13 22:02:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 70210551 where the changeset comment is: fake maps.me bogus personal bookmark castles totally wrongly tagged
Osm1980 (2019-01-09 17:04:09+00:00): tage gardesh be rast bedoon tag sabt shode!!!!
mavl (2018-12-25 00:04:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
4004 (2018-11-25 02:35:03+00:00):  расчехлили таки, летом наката не заметил
mavl (2018-12-24 23:46:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:44:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
user_1470980 (2018-11-24 22:41:54+00:00): Hallo Luzandro,
ich habe dich bereits darauf gebeten, der Empfehlung im OSM Wiki Zitat: Versuche, die wahre Position der Grundfläche am Boden zu ermitteln und nicht die des Daches. Folge zu leisten: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:building#Wie_mappt_man_Geb.C3.A4ude Uns stehen in Österreich weitgehend verzerrungsfreie, sehr hochwertige Luftbilder zur Verfügung. Wenn Du Gebäude systematisch geringfügig abweichend von der OSM Empfehlung mappst, versiegelst du hierbei praktisch die von Dir jeweils bearbeitete Region, und wir können keinen weiteren Mapper mehr motivieren OSM dort weiter an die OSM Wiki Empfehlung anzunähern. Du schädigst also durch deine systematische Handlungsweise OpenStreetMap. Ich habe dieses verhalten auch bei weiteren Mappern mit sehr vielen Edits beobachtet, keiner dieser Mapper reagiert auf meine Vorwürfe, weswegen ich von einer organisierten Arbeit ausgehe. Ich werfe Dir und dieser Gruppe nun vor, durch eine organisierte Arbeitsweise OpenStreetMap OpenStreetMap systematisch  zu schädigen.
user_1470980 (2018-11-24 22:46:47+00:00): Hallo Luzandro, 
ich habe Dich bereits gebeten, der Empfehlung im OSM Wiki, Zitat: Versuche, die wahre Position der Grundfläche am Boden zu ermitteln und nicht die des Daches. /Zitat folge zu leisten: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:building#Wie_mappt_man_Geb.C3.A4ude Uns stehen in Österreich weitgehend verzerrungsfreie, sehr hochwertige Luftbilder zur Verfügung. Wenn Du Gebäude systematisch geringfügig abweichend von der OSM Empfehlung Mappst, versiegelst Du hierbei von Dir bearbeitete Regionen, und wir können keinen weiteren Mapper mehr motivieren OpenStreetMap dort weiter an die OSM Wiki Empfehlung anzunähern. Du schädigst also durch deine systematische Handlungsweise OpenStreetMap. Ich habe dieses Verhalten auch bei weiteren Mappern mit sehr vielen Edits beobachtet, keiner dieser Mapper reagiert bislang auf meine Vorwürfe, weswegen ich von einer organisierten Arbeit ausgehe. Ich werfe Dir und dieser Gruppe vor, durch organisierte Arbeitsweise OpenStreetMap systematisch zu schädigen.
mavl (2018-12-24 23:54:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:30:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
rmikke (2018-11-25 15:07:45+00:00): Byłoby trochę lepiej, gdybyś zrobił kilka trochę mniejszych obszarowo changesetów. Tak, to ciężko zobaczyć, co było zmieniane.
Artek (2018-11-25 18:47:10+00:00): Wszedłem na OSM Inspector i akurat poprawiałem po kolei widoczne błędy w jednej warstwie.
rmikke (2018-11-26 00:48:01+00:00): Jasne, i oczywiście bardzo fajnie że to robisz, ale gdybyś częściej zapisywał zmiany, to mógłbym zobaczyć w Achavi co tam zmieniałeś w okolicy, za którą jestem poniekąd odpowiedzialny, a przy tak dużym changescie Achavi stwierdziło że zabrakło dla mnie pamięci na serwerze. BTW, zgłosiłem do WhoDidIt, żeby umożliwili pokazanie w Achavi tylko części zmian, może będzie z tego jakiś pożytek ;)
mavl (2018-12-25 00:36:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
Frans S (2018-12-14 10:24:41+00:00): Hi,  I am reviewing taks and have a few remarks on your mappings.
1. When tagging a bridge, add tag layer=1
2. don't use the generic tag highway=road. This is a tag which has to be avoided because this is an old tag and obsolete. Please follow the India Highway tag page
Thanks for your effords and keep mapping
Best regards
mavl (2018-12-25 00:46:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
axelr (2019-03-04 16:04:02+00:00): Könntest du dich gelegentlich mal in das Thema Routen-Relationen einlesen, um deren Zerstöringen möglichst zu vermeiden.
abakus_uploader (2018-11-24 23:30:38+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!
wolfbert (2025-06-04 15:32:26+00:00): Hallo, kleiner Tippfehler bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/7556699, zone:maxspeed sollte AT:30 sein. Grundsätzlich würde ich von diesem Tag eher die Finger lassen, was das bedeuten soll ist fraglich. Empfehlenswert wäre zumindest zusätzlich maxspeed:type=AT:zone30, das ist definiert.
wolfbert (2025-06-04 15:36:31+00:00): Bzw. AT:city_limit30, falls die Beschränkung für den ganzen Ort gilt.
mueschel (2018-11-24 14:22:24+00:00): Hallo,
bitte setze keine Tags mit dem Wert "unknown":
rooms = unknown
smoking = unknown

Wenn du etwas nicht weißt, lass das Tag einfach weg.

Viel Spaß mit OSM!
Lokai (2018-11-24 13:51:17+00:00): Hallo schönes Elbsandsteingebirge,

um die Fremdenzimmer, Pension etc. darzustellen musst du anders vorgehen.

Ich mach das mal aus der Ferne, schau dann nach und nimmt an der Diskussion teil.

Gruß

W.
Phyks (2018-11-24 13:54:08+00:00): Bonjour,

L'itinéraire n'est pas continu à ce niveau, est-ce voulu ? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25058250

Bonne journée,
LoloCab (2018-11-24 18:38:43+00:00): Bonsoir Phyks,
à ce niveau, c'est vraiment pourri.
Je rencontre les personnes de Perpignan Méditerranée semaine prochaine pour évoquer ce point et faire le forcing.
Mais à ce jour, oui, on peu passer sur le trottoir et rejoindre le l'itinéraire suivant mais je l'ai laissé en suspend volontairement.
Phyks (2018-11-24 20:07:08+00:00): Ok ! Bon courage :)
LoloCab (2018-11-24 22:58:49+00:00): Il en faut !
Colin Smale (2018-11-24 11:57:29+00:00): Hi, I notice the boundary you entered diverges in several places from the OS data and I am wondering which version is more accurate... Can you point me at your source in LGBCE? Have there been any boundary changes in the area recently?
Thanks,
Colin
Libarch (2018-11-24 12:11:38+00:00): Hello Colin, I've done a couple of things:
1) I added the new local government ward boundary for Whalley Range (in Manchester) which came into effect in May 2018, using data I downloaded from LGBCE here:
http://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lgbce/__data/assets/file/0005/33197/Manchester_final_proposals.zip
2) The Manchester-Trafford boundary also runs down the centreline of Upper Chorlton Rd and I've moved that segment of it accordingly, as IMHO that will be more accurate than the original OS data.
Please let me know if you have any issues with this change or want any more info
regards,
Rick Bowlby
Colin Smale (2018-11-24 13:08:08+00:00): Hi Rick, yes, it looks like the LGBCE data coincides with the OS data. There would be something wrong if it didn't!
Two comments about Upper Chorlton Rd: Firstly neither data set appears to put the boundary exactly on the centre line w.r.t. the Bing imagery. This is most likely an alignment problem with the imagery itself, but the road seems to align with the imagery - hence the boundary is actually now in the wrong place. Secondly it is "best practice" to use a separate way for boundaries and not reuse the highway way. The boundary should also normally have its own nodes as well. The reason for this, is that the legal boundary is the line on the map, and it is not linked to the centreline of the road. If a junction is rebuilt for example, changing the centreline, the boundary will not change with it, but remain in its old location until and unless it is changed by a formal process. Linking the boundary to the road in this way implies a correlation by definition, which is incorrect.

I have also retagged Whalley Range as boundary=political as it is an electoral ward, and not an administrative unit (civil parish or whatever) in line with OSM practice. Hope you are OK with this!

Thanks and regards,
Colin
Libarch (2018-11-25 11:06:03+00:00): Cheers Colin, yes you're right about the boundary=political tag, I missed that.
Regarding the correct location of the boundaries along Upper Chorlton Road (in this case, but generally as well) - are you sure about this? If you underlay the OS StreetView data (I'm using JOSM), it's apparent that the OS boundary line runs exactly down the centre of the road (in StreetView), so it seems to me that in a "legal" sense, that's what the relationship between the road and the boundary should be. So then there's the question whether the OS data is more 'accurate' (in geo-location terms) than the OSM data, which I can't answer definitively because my mobile phone GPS is only accurate to about +/- 4m anyway.
I had regard to this discussion - https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/8910/adding-administrative-boundaries-to-osm-data-layer-in-josm - (in particular Ed Loach's comment) when making the change.
Libarch (2018-11-25 11:09:03+00:00): Sorry, it was Frederik Ramm's response (last para) that I meant to refer to
Colin Smale (2018-11-25 12:29:44+00:00): Hi Rick,
That the boundary (appears) to follow the centre line or the road, makes it tempting to link the two; but the legal definition of the boundary these days is "the line on a map" which possibly has a historical link to the line of a road or watercourse at the time it was drawn, but the link is broken at the instant the act or S.I. is made to create the boundary. If the road or watercourse is subsequently altered, the boundary legally remains in its old location. The maps giving the legal definition are held by the (local) government concerned and OS are informed of any changes. So the one true source is (local) government and the OS is a very close second. In some cases (not necessarily in the UK) the boundary can be defined by descriptive text, like "following the centre line of the river" - in this case the boundary would move with changes in the river, but this is not the case with UK admin boundaries (AFAIK...). Frederiks comment suggests reusing the highway nodes only in these cases...
Re: the alignment: points from and authoritative source have to be considered accurate in terms of lat/lon (as they have been surveyed to centimetre accuracy and/or digitised from a very large scale map), whereas we all know that aerial imagery can be offset by many metres depending on the orthorectification process. So when we import a boundary from an official shapefile, as we are both doing, this geometry is IMHO more reliable than any imagery. I admit I have been looking at the Bing imagery, not OSSV...