piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
EneaSuper (2015-11-01 16:39:25+00:00): A capito capito, pensavo si trattasse di un mezzo pubblico AMT come quelli del centro città ma non mi tornavano affatto i conti, grazie :)
maciek-szn (2015-10-31 20:49:45+00:00): Skąd ta informacja? Znak końca autostrady znajduje się za mostem nad rzeką Chełszcząca.
d3mol3k (2015-10-31 20:58:36+00:00): A nie tak? Zaraz za zjazdem z węzła w A6S3: http://www.berlinka.pcp.pl/berlinka2/A6_29.06.2014-6.jpg
d3mol3k (2015-10-31 21:00:18+00:00): Jak by było nie tak to proszę popraw - nie mogę znaleźć aktualnych planów i nie pamiętam dokładnie jak to było kilka dni temu. Ale o ile wydaje mi się - to jest właśnie przy zjazdach z węzła i wjeździe na niego. Od mostku jest 90 do Rzęśnicy i od nie do niego.
maciek-szn (2015-10-31 21:00:29+00:00): Nie chce mi się przekopywać odpowiedniego wątku na forum Skyscrapercity, ale autostrada była wydłużana wraz z postępującą wymianą nawierzchni i ja to starałem się na bieżąco uwzględniać. Tydzień temu znak stał za Chełszczącą i zakładam, że nie został przeniesiony.
d3mol3k (2015-10-31 21:03:12+00:00): O to chyba ja dałem ciała -  cofniesz? Bo wyłączyłem kompa :(. Sorka.
maciek-szn (2015-10-31 21:06:53+00:00): Wycofałem, ale ograniczenia prędkości wymagają pewnie ponownego naniesienia.
d3mol3k (2015-10-31 21:08:26+00:00): Ok jutro rano zerknę
 Dzięki.
Daniel Specht (2015-11-01 00:23:16+00:00): Sorry, I must have used the Worldview by mistake. I reverted the change, so it should be consistent with Bing now. Thanks for letting me know.
GerdP (2015-11-23 21:31:25+00:00): Hi there!
Was was meant by landuse=2 ?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/377778265
harg (2015-11-24 08:33:27+00:00): Aha! I was puzzled myself for a while. 

It was meant to say layer=2 to ensure it appears above the water surface rather than under water. Now fixed, thanks for the observation.
GerdP (2015-11-24 08:42:49+00:00): Thanks for the feedback. I guessed that layer was meant (I fixed plenty of them yesterday) but did not understand that it is some kind of man_made=pier. The surface=wood tag makes that clearer now.
harg (2015-11-24 09:14:50+00:00): I did consider using pier -- but the description of "long and narrow" and "for berthing of vessels" discouraged me. There is boardwalk but that is intended for bridges. Various usages of platform imply transport. This is just a recreation and observation area. Nothing quite fits.
GerdP (2015-11-24 09:24:16+00:00): Yep. Still, the wiki for man_made=pier says
"Most piers can be mapped as an open way for the length of the pier tagged with man_made=pier; wider piers should be tagged as an area."
I think that covers your case ?
esp, if you think of an 
air mattress as a kind of vessel ;-)
freeExec (2015-11-02 08:53:17+00:00): Блин ну что трудно написать развёрнутый комментарий, что за фикс на пол страны и 2к линий.
MissingCSAA (2015-11-02 18:25:53+00:00): There is no proposal to extend I-70 here. There is also no formal proposal for Interstate 11 to route here. This edit needs to be removed.
skorasaurus (2015-11-08 18:38:28+00:00): Nice job! You're almost done with tracing all of the buildings in Olmsted Township!
MissingCSAA (2015-11-03 17:35:07+00:00): Please cite your source for mapping I-70 and I-11 here. I am unfamiliar with any routing that has been chosen for I-11 or any plan by NDOT to extend I-70 through Nevada.
literan (2015-11-02 14:48:21+00:00): barrier=curb или =kerb? Или между ними есть разница, глянул, вроде и curb есть, и kerb в базе?
BushmanK (2015-11-02 17:37:47+00:00): Вообще, так называют бордюрный камень (не только тот, который по краю тортуара, но и разделительный) в США и UK соответственно. Не вижу конкретной разницы между ними. Есть предложения?
literan (2015-11-02 20:19:49+00:00): Полагаю, в таком случае, использовать тот вариант, что описан в вики http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dkerb и гораздо чаще встречается в базе.
BushmanK (2015-11-02 22:45:54+00:00): Поменяем, на проблема.
GerdP (2015-11-01 07:45:57+00:00): please review 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51728571
You accidently changed it to motorway_junction, I've reverted this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35006379
I guess the other changes are OK?
Omnific (2015-11-02 19:42:41+00:00): Thanks, that was unintentional.
Kakaner (2015-10-31 23:30:57+00:00): Gibt es dort PZB?
rurseekatze (2015-10-31 23:38:51+00:00): Da ich das anhand meiner Quellen auf die Schnelle nicht ermitteln konnte, habe ich diese Information erstmal weggelassen. Auf den Bildern, die ich bisher von der Strecke nach ihrer Reaktivierung gesehen habe, war das leider nirgendwo zu erkennen.
ViriatoLusitano_import (2015-11-01 03:21:49+00:00): Olá achaves, não necessitas de perder o teu tempo a adicionar o resto dos limites em Viana do Castelo.

Este é o distrito que me irei focar neste momento, depois do de Braga e Vila Real.

Agradeço contudo as contribuições, poupaste-me imensas horas!

Para mais informações podes ver esta página:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Portugal/Divis%C3%B5es_Administrativas
achaves (2015-11-01 13:34:03+00:00): Viva!

Não sabia que "divisões administrativas" era uma cena.

Há cerca de um ano atrás tinha começado a colocar as freguesias. No momento quase que não havia em Portugal a divisão de freguesias. Deu-me tanto trabalho que só fiz 4 concelhos. Ao ver o distrito de Braga todo feito, pensei que seria uma boa altura para continuar a empreitada e fiz mais 4 concelhos.

Neste momento, no distrito de viana, só devem faltar os concelhos de Ponte de Lima e o de Viana. Diverte-te!!!

Acho que já deves ter uma metodologia para fazer estas coisas e que ficará mais consistente se for a mesma pessoa a fazê-lo.

Sendo assim vou dedicar-me a outras coisas para completar o mapa.

Se precisares de uma mão, é só dizer ;-)

Cumprimentos!
ViriatoLusitano (2015-11-01 16:56:22+00:00): Obrigado!

A metodologia em si em muito básica, apenas acrescento os atributos básicos que a definem como uma relação e depois apenas a população segundo os Censos 2011 e o Código INE respetivo.

Em municípios já acrescento a data de fundação e o respectivo website.
anderfo (2015-11-04 21:14:04+00:00): Hei,
velkommen som OSM-bruker! Supert at flere syklister bidrar! :)

Jeg har et par tips ettersom jeg ser du nylig har begynt å redigere:
1) Du trenger ikke (bør ikke) bruke vanlig mtb:scale og mtb:scale:imba på samme sti. Enten er det en vanlig sti og kan få mtb:scale, eller så er det en bike park og kan få mtb:scale:imba. På denne stien kan du altså fjerne IMBA-taggen.
2) Det er svært, svært uvanlig at det er lettere å sykle oppover enn nedover en sti. Derfor er jeg tvilende til taggingen av denne stien, når du har satt graden to hakk høyere for mtb:scale:uphill (oppovergraden) enn for mtb:scale (nedover). Fint om du kan revurdere disse graderingene på de stiene du har lagt inn!
3) Jeg anbefaler å bruke JOSM for å redigere (istedet for iD som du har brukt), og å bruke Statkart/Norgeskart N50 og Strava heatmap som bakgrunn: Dette er bl.a. fordi Bing er svært dårlig i Norge (kartflisene ligger alltid skeivt, så stier og veier havner på feil sted...), og fordi iD dessverre skjuler endel tagger (som fører til feiltagging).
4) Gå inn på OSM-wikien til denne siden, hvor jeg bl.a. har skrevet en guide til hvordan man kommer i gang med JOSM og hvordan man tagger stisykling: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/No:Mountain_biking

Ellers regner jeg med du er klar over http://mtbmap.no som rendrer disse stiene? Flott at flere vil bidra!

Spør meg hvis du lurer på noe!

-Anders
Rodrigo Rega (2015-11-01 16:01:41+00:00): El nodo [1] tiene el siguiente tag: "distance=%")". ¿Es correcto?

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3812001116
pfg21 (2015-11-02 06:38:24+00:00): Please, on next time commented "added name:pl"
it will be much expressive
Vale- (2015-11-01 00:41:04+00:00): La escuela donde me desempeño. primer escuala de la localidad. Erigida por los primeros pobladores y la Compañía Italo Argentina de Colonización... el 12 de octubre de 1925. Hemos cumplido hace poco nuestros 90 años.
LWK (2016-02-02 23:37:16+00:00): NOTA: da correggere utilizzando i dati contenuti nei fascicoli circolazione linee (https://normativaesercizio.rfi.it).

NON USARE l'allegato al Prospetto Informativo Rete (PIR) per risalire ai valori di maxspeed.
5m4u9 (2015-11-01 20:25:45+00:00): Thanks for your edits. 

but be careful when classifying the ways. From the satellite image you can not distinguish, it should be with local knowledge.
Supaplex (2015-11-01 06:01:07+00:00): 是不是有合併同路名道路？
有些公車路線變怪怪的，不是連續線條，像是5006
ElliottPlack (2016-10-13 21:15:16+00:00): MD 4 is officially prohibited to bikes between Chaney Road at the north end of Calvert Co, to MD 408. Some of that had cycleway tags, but that is not possible, unless SHA has bad information. Have you surveyed the lane north Chaney Rd by chance?
Sparks (2017-04-04 01:56:36+00:00): Hmm, I don't recall seeing any signage of that type before.  I'm on MD 4 almost weekly and I can try to run a Mapillary survey from the MD 2/4 split up to Dunkirk the next time I'm up that way.
Sparks (2017-04-04 01:59:30+00:00): Oh, CHENEY Road.  Sorry, I was thinking Cheneyville Road.  I still can't recall seeing such signage but I will take a look and try to do a Mapillary survey next time I'm up that way.
ElliottPlack (2017-04-04 02:28:18+00:00): Awesome, thanks for looking out! I think that the prohibition might be a paper one. Let me know what you find.
Omnific (2015-11-02 19:40:13+00:00): Oops, thanks. I guess I missed that one. JOSM copies the motorway_junction tag too if you copy the exit_to tag.
GerdP (2015-11-02 08:32:40+00:00): please review the invalid
tag highway="Cap del Barry"
Not sure what you wanted to change here.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/161463048
Alex3271 (2015-11-01 23:31:50+00:00): Dear Γιάννης 4,

some recent edits of yours in Greece area seem to be wrong, showing unexisting motorways in several locations.

Is it possible that you accidentally saved some test edits, or that someone else used your account?
I would be glad if you could review the changes and correct or undo them.

If you need help, contact the OSM community.

Regards,
Alex3271
user_5359 (2015-11-01 10:36:11+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Danke für die Ergänzung der Daten, aber ein Restaurant mitten auf der Straße? Könntest Du das bitte überarbeiten oder beschreiben, was dort wirklich vorliegt?

Mit freundlichen Grüßen        Georg V. (OSM=user_5359)
EstiaSYS (2015-11-03 03:51:44+00:00): As my first attempt to contribute, i firstly thought that the system is clever enough to let me "experiment". This should not be on the real map. After this i created a most precise listing for this restaurant. Not sure how to delete the old one, though...
Stereo (2015-11-01 17:57:19+00:00): Great :)
GerdP (2015-11-04 15:20:41+00:00): please review:
the tag highway=demolished is rarely used.
Does it mean something like highway=construction or is it more a highway=abandoned?
See 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
GerdP (2015-11-04 15:22:36+00:00): or maybe highway=dismantled?
wilda69 (2015-11-04 15:50:08+00:00): dismantled is another tag that could be used. There is so much construction going on that very little is left. The point is that there are relations still attached to them which someone needs to update, so at the mom these nodes can not be deleted.
GerdP (2015-11-04 16:16:02+00:00): okay. I try to reduce the different highway tags which mean something like "no  highway", see also 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/how-to-tag-a-highway-that-doesn-t-exist-tp5857111.html
If I got that right, most of the ways tagged demolished will not be rebuilt (at the same place), so I'd say highway=dismantled is better because it is used more often and it is documented in the wiki .
Stereo (2015-11-04 17:28:15+00:00): Hi! I have updated the relations Dan mentions, is there any reason we should still keep those demolished highways as highway=dismantled?
GerdP (2015-11-04 17:35:01+00:00): I prefer to remove those ways, others want to keep some kind of history in OSM,
for example they build relations with names like "old interstate xyz " in the USA.
wilda69 (2015-11-04 18:09:20+00:00): Many thanks for taking care of all the relations. 
Difficult to judge if these roads have a historic value, but as I have not seen any plans what will happen to these after the tramcomplex has been built, it might be worth keeping them for a while. The new road looks very temporary, so there are bound to be more changes next year
Stereo (2015-11-04 18:55:33+00:00): This is the latest I've found:

http://images.newmedia.lu/rtl2008.lu/nt/p/2014/07/07/16/0740ac7672f01e8e9b3525f0bd47c948.jpeg

http://images.newmedia.lu/rtl.lu/cms/imagegallery/2014/07/07/22496//1024//f1e236d0ea2e41899e237fdab606a4ea.jpg

I think we should map what we can reliably check on the ground. Who knows what the future situation is really going to be like? I have just deleted the demolished ways.
ndm (2015-11-01 22:30:19+00:00): So you removed my maxweight "not heavy" -- how do you consider one should map a road that's marked as "Unsuitable for heavy vehicles" -- a common UK sign? Obviously hgv:no  doesn't work -- psv *might* be heavy.
karussell (2015-11-02 08:34:14+00:00): Sorry, I've reverted and put the hgv:no on the list. That is indeed an ugly sign :)

Please see my steps which leads to the removal action here:
https://karussell.wordpress.com/2015/11/01/units-in-openstreetmap/
SomeoneElse (2015-11-01 13:36:58+00:00): Please don't just _remove_ data that you don't understand such as "maxweight=7ft6in" on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/130645490/history .  Presumably either something here is maxheight 7'6" or there's a maxweight of (some value).  The best way to find out what the previous mapper meant is to ask them.
pnorman (2015-11-01 10:33:43+00:00): It looks like this removed information and din't replace it. Should it be undone?
karussell (2015-11-01 10:36:12+00:00): Sorry, I've placed a note to avoid loosing information, I'm not unsure how to map it. Would you help?
SK53 (2015-11-01 10:40:42+00:00): Never replace tagged information with a note. At the very least add a description= or note= tag. But in practice the only really acceptable edit is to change the perfectly understandable prior value with the relevant conditional tags. Relatively few users (myself included) know the syntax of these, let alone that they exist.
karussell (2015-11-01 10:46:59+00:00): Okay, so please undo.
dvdhoven (2016-01-11 10:50:32+00:00): Er is iets teveel aan losse stukjes fietspad samengevoegd. Route 03-04 is nu stuk.
dvdhoven (2016-01-11 10:51:54+00:00): Verder staat er weer overal foot=yes op de fietspaden, terwijl dat absoluut niet nodig is. 
Fietspaden zijn bij default al foot=yes, dat hoeft niet apart getagged te worden
ijsb (2016-01-11 21:20:46+00:00): Fietspaden zijn lang niet overal ter wereld foot=yes; beter expliciet taggen dan een router laten gokken op impliciete, per regio verschillende default, wat mij betreft. Je bent inderdaad niet verplicht dit te taggen, maar laat a.u.b. de tags van een andere mapper wel staan.
Route 03-04 was trouwens al een tijdje vóór deze changeset stuk, en ik zie in de historie geen delen van die route die ik heb samengevoegd(?)
Neldo (2016-01-30 22:44:56+00:00): Dieser Poller ist mir bei einem Routine-Check als merkwürdig aufgefallen. Bist du sicher, dass das kein Versehen war? ;-)
florian601 (2016-02-01 08:43:31+00:00): Ja richtig da ist jetzt ein Poller. Habe letzten mit dem Auto davor gestanden. Links und rechts liegen sogar Steinblöcke.
Neldo (2016-02-01 20:42:24+00:00): Merkwürdig... Und dann soll man die Straße über Graben nehmen?
florian601 (2016-02-02 09:23:30+00:00): Nein man soll über die L306 ( Marienheider Str. ) und die K45 ( Lienkamp Str. ) fahren. Die K45 ist jetzt voll ausgebaut. So haben wir auch die Mitteilung bei der Feuerwehr bekommen. ( "Die K44 ist im Ortsteil Holzwipper nicht mehr Durchgängig befahrbar" auszug vom Schreiben des OBK. )
ndm (2015-11-01 22:39:15+00:00): You've deleted the T -- this is a UK ton, not a metric ton.
ndm (2015-11-01 22:45:07+00:00): Ok looks like metrication may apply, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/222621/dg_191955.pdf lists it as tonnes.
GerdP (2015-11-02 09:04:29+00:00): please review: I guess highway=sres meant
highway=residential?
I've changed it to that.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/377835619
cquest (2015-11-02 11:16:47+00:00): Oups... thanks for the fix !
Danidin9 (2015-11-01 18:34:04+00:00): а может всё-таки retail?
fserges (2015-11-01 19:15:41+00:00): Рука похоже дрогнула - набрал "re" и не проверил что вывалилось residential вместо retail.
Georges62 (2016-01-09 14:30:07+00:00): En cours 9/1/15
secmap (2015-11-02 07:07:04+00:00): Hallo,

die Anbindung der B4 Richtung Parisdorf in diesem Changeset existiert seit ca. 2 Jahren nicht mehr. (Kreuzung bei Club Balegro / Pizzeria). Hier ist anstelle dieser Kreuzung nun eine Nebenfahrbahn, beginnend bei der Anschlussstelle Ravelsbach, Auffahrt L 48a, bis zur ehemaligen Kreuzung Balegro. Die einzige Abfahrt an dieser Kreuzung, die noch existiert, ist jene von Horn kommend Richtung Ravelsbach. Dies hatte ich bereits vor längerem auch so eingezeichnet.
LG
Wolfgang B (2015-11-05 09:43:51+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis. Straßenanbindungen angepasst.
zstadler (2017-03-27 11:47:39+00:00): Way
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/377839956
has no tags. What is it?
zstadler (2021-07-11 12:23:40+00:00): Deleted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51108603
literan (2015-11-02 15:28:55+00:00): зачем вы везде ставите кавычки и родовое обозначение (вроде "салон красоты") объекта? За него отвечает тег (shop=beauty и т.д.). В тег name надо писать только название (если только это не "Школа №...").  Также у вас категорически неверно заполнен тег opening_hours.
Я все переделал. прошу дальше делать согласно правилам: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35036643 - Гляньте историю каждого объекта, что я поправил. И вообще, читайте документацию, пожалуйста. Если есть вопросы - обращайтесь.
ndm (2015-11-01 22:38:47+00:00): You've deleted the T -- this is a UK ton, not a metric ton.
Sint E7 (2017-05-04 09:52:53+00:00): Hoi, 
De route van buurtbus 591 lijkt niet te kloppen met de werkelijkheid. In de dienstregeling van die lijn komen Fleringen en Albergen helemaal niet voor.
Maarten Deen (2017-05-04 18:04:21+00:00): Tja, op het moment dat ik die relatie maakte (2015) was dat wel de route.
SomeoneElse (2015-11-01 12:38:50+00:00): If you've got software that can't handle OSM values with units it sounds like a bug in the software to me.  Please don't change OSM data when you should be fixing broken software.
karussell (2015-11-01 12:49:34+00:00): It has nothing to do with software. The wiki is very explicit when it comes to weight: 
Therefore if a maxweight for a country that uses U.S. customary or Imperial measurements is desired, a conversion is required. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweight
SomeoneElse (2015-11-01 12:52:52+00:00): "The wiki" is not "OpenStreetMap".  The most scarce resource we have is mappers.  Anything that we do to persuade mappers (especially in the US) to stay away is counterproductive to the project.  Please do not make US data harder to use for map consumers and mappers alike.
karussell (2015-11-01 12:59:04+00:00): Why is this harder to use? In fact consuming values like this is very confusing. The mapping software should make it easier with conversion, so I my counter argument is: your mapping software should be improved to make consuming the data easier. And an important btw: such a value '15 us tons' is used VERY rarely world wide (and therefor for US too)

Just have a look here: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/maxweight
karussell (2015-11-01 13:06:26+00:00): And I agree with you that the mapper is very important (I do not agree on the term 'resource' ;)). And so we should fix the mapping software making converting US short and long tons etc into tons.

Also I do intend to change 'lbs' values because they are a lot more frequent and kind of 'unwikied' standard, so I also do not think 100% that the wiki is OSM.
But e.g. I intend to change 'lb' into 'kg' because such values are also very infrequent.
maxerickson (2015-11-01 13:10:10+00:00): It's fairly likely there is a sign that says "15 tons" somewhere there.

One argument that this is harder to use is that no existing editor is smart enough to take "maxweight=13.607" and show the user "15 tons", so it's more difficult to verify.
SomeoneElse (2015-11-01 13:10:11+00:00): Firstly, show me the sign that says "13.607" - I'm guessing that it won't exist.  What exactly is a local supposed to do when they see this value in an OSM tag?  They will have no idea what it means. 

If "consuming values like this is very confusing" then bluntly, you're doing it wrong.  For many years I worked on large statistical systems that dealt with thousands or millions of data points.  Always there will be outliers - stuff you can't trust because it "makes no sense in context".  With user-contributed freeform data you get exactly the same problem.  it's your job (as it was mine), when writing software that deals those values to handle "things that can't be understood" or "are probably wrong" to do the best you can with such data - ignore it, convert it, whatever.  Just changing a few values in OSM will achieve nothing - if mappers don't know any different they'll add "15 US tons" next time too, and you'll have the same problem again
SomeoneElse (2015-11-01 13:12:42+00:00): An an aside, the reason why I suspect you found few US specific values is that previous recording had been tagfiddled away.  For example, http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32719427/history (changed 3 years ago by a different mapper) now shows an incorrect value.
SomeoneElse (2015-11-01 13:29:04+00:00): Also, just in case you're not aware, OSM has a policy in place for under what circumstances automated edits should take place.  In particular it says http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct#Document_and_discuss_your_plans "you should discuss and document your plans beforehand".  I'd suggest that all of your units changes (and also key changes such as maxweight to maxaxleload) deserve to be discussed - if only in the latter case to make data contributors and other data consumers aware that "maxaxleload" is an OSM tag that is already in use.
Nakaner (2015-11-01 15:21:13+00:00): I think that values of maxspeed, maxweight, maxwidth etc. should have the unit they have in reality. If maxweight is signed in US tons on US roads, it should be tagged as US tons.

Every data users who wants to show the maxweight value in US tons (the original unit used on the signs) has to convert and round your metric tons value back to US tons just because one developer did not want to write code to convert US tons into metric tons.

Unit/Coordinate transformations are often lossy. That's why the original unit should be preferred. It is not difficult to convert units. You just have to hold a list of units and their conversion factor.

When do you propose to convert all UK maxspeed=* to kph?
karussell (2015-11-01 18:47:56+00:00): This wasn't an automated edit.

And I disagree about the tagging here. Because messing in every unit is not only ugly but is just a lot simpler if done on the editing side. OSM is a database AND not necessarily 'readable' by humans (although partly important I of course agree)

A good editor would read the value and convert to the readers preferences. The same for writing the value.
maxerickson (2015-11-01 20:28:26+00:00): I don't see how it is objectively simpler on the editing side.

A consumer can parse the US tons and just multiply to get tons.

An editor that wants to show US tons, in a way that sensibly matches the signs on the road, has to calculate the conversion,  14.9991 in this case, and then use some heuristic to decide whether to show that or 15 (yes, rounding will work fine here, but the point is that convert to store loses information).