piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
jnighan (2022-07-06 00:24:10+00:00): There currently is not a state-wide standard in place for New York, so perhaps there is just a loose guideline in place on LI. Since every town paints lines on their roads at their own discretion, it isn't a practical standard for a large area.

In CT, any road designated as a Collector (Major Collector or Minor Collector) by the Department of Transportation is tagged highway=tertiary.

The CTDOT has maps of their classifications for each town at this link. Any purple or yellow roads are mapped as tertiary. Hope this helps!

https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/PP_SysInfo/Functional-Classification-Maps
jnighan (2022-07-06 00:26:46+00:00): Also, here is a link to the status of classification standards in each state of the U.S. CT and RI are both excellent; MA and NY are still the wild west.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance#State-specific_classification_standards
Natsu_ (2022-07-05 03:40:22+00:00): 《2021年度公交停靠站更名方案》
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/o_2R8exL-NB43jZXdzVkZg
ovruni (2022-07-05 06:17:05+00:00): Hola "EDWIN ALBERTO MACHIAVELLO RUIZ", en este conjunto de cambios se han agregado algunos edificios superpuestos, ademas de conectar un edificio a la calle, lo que genera errores en el mapa, por lo que he corregido esos problemas.
Si tiene alguna duda sobre el mapeo de OSM en Perú, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram de la comunidad peruana https://t.me/osmpe 
Saludos
JJIglesias (2022-07-05 16:40:28+00:00): Gracias por agregar las edificaciones existentes pero seria muy beneficioso si agregas los nombres de esos edificios (Si los tienen), Calle de Ubicacion, Numero dentro de la calle, y la Cantidad de Pisos que tienen.
Otro detalle el Hashtag #ymumsabo NO ES UN TAG independiente y NO va alli, sino al salvar el conjunto de cambios hay una casilla para colorar los Hashtags, asi como lo pusiste va a ser borrado.

Saludos
MxxCon (2022-07-06 03:47:01+00:00): Hello.
Could you please elaborate why did you restore clearly non-existing train tracks?
zluuzki (2022-07-06 17:04:03+00:00): railway=abandoned does not mean that there are still tracks.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=abandoned
MxxCon (2022-07-06 17:21:42+00:00): Many that were deleted were completely removed with absolutely nothing left of them, with roads and buildings built on top since. Yet you restored them.
zluuzki (2022-07-06 17:56:52+00:00): If i check the CS at https://osmcha.org/changesets/123215313/ and take a look at the green ways, I see traces on almost all ways. I tagged a few ones without traces as "razed".
MxxCon (2022-07-06 17:59:25+00:00): For the 3rd time, you restored railroad tracks that have been completely removed with no traces left behind and new roads paved or buildings built over them. Why was that done?
zluuzki (2022-07-06 18:03:33+00:00): Because the orginal deletions blindly deleted all railway=abandoned in the area. It is not my responsibility to check every single track if i revert such vandalism. (As is said above, i checked a lot on a lot of tracks if railway=razed would fit better)
Would be nice if you could provide a few examples.
MxxCon (2022-07-06 18:21:14+00:00): I wonder what's bigger vandalism and creates more damage to the map, removing disused and completely non-existing features or or creating fake features in the name of restoring deleted disused ones.🙄
Just a few imaginary tracks that I found spending 5 minutes looking only at one corner of your changeset. I'm sure there are many many more that must be deleted because they don't exist.
1075938749, 95899572, 95917747, 283123430, 11603038, 509892541, 432647217, 95897395, 95897393, 96149044, 96149068
zluuzki (2022-07-06 19:09:55+00:00): 80% of your examples are already tagged railway=razed, which means that they are removed without traces. 
The point of having them in OSM is to render them in openrailwaymap.org. So if you're deleting them, you're damaging this project, and what's your reason to to do so, in other words, how are you improving OSM data by deleting such RRs? Because as i see it, you are damaging OSM data by deleting those ways.
"removing disused" - Disused features are definitely on the ground, so deleting those is definitely vandalism.
"creating fake features in the name of restoring deleted disused ones." - I don't get that.
Way 11603038 and 509892541 are the only ones which should be tagged with railway=razed instead, the northern part of Way 283123430 has a clear "shrubline" along it's path.
3 out of let's say, 30 ways you've checked, are imperfectly tagged. Wow, congratulations.
MxxCon (2022-07-06 19:20:00+00:00): Having non-existing features in OSM purely so that you can have them in ORM is "tagging for a renderer" and that's wrong. 
If you continue to insist to have non-existing features which have been COMPLETELY removed with other infrastructure built in that place, not built over it, but INSTEAD of it, this will be raised with DWG because you are creating an invalid data model with features that do no represent the real world.
MxxCon (2022-07-06 19:21:30+00:00): 3 out of 30 that I looked at, out of 126 ways your changeset affected. 10% error rate in unacceptable in OSM.
MxxCon (2022-07-06 19:22:37+00:00): And no, not 3. All the ways that I listed above are either partially or completely DO NOT EXIST in the real world and do not belong in OSM
zluuzki (2022-07-07 05:18:47+00:00): "Tagging for the render" means adding INCORRECT data to draw a certain render result on the map. Those railway=abandoned/razed ways are NOT incorrect information.

"because you are creating an invalid data model with features that do no represent the real world"
Why is this invalid, although it is used very usefully? What is the problem with this?

"10% error rate" - You're acting like we're talking about the distinction of active/removed rail. No, it is the distinction of removed rail - whether it has traces or not. When most of that rail got mapped, railway=razed didn't really exist, so people used =abandoned. Thats why the tagging is sometimes not perfect.
MxxCon (2022-07-09 03:31:10+00:00): Drawing railways which DO NOT EXIST is incorrect information and tagging for renderer. They might have existed in the past, but not any more. OSM is about the way the world is NOW, not in the past. If all traces of that rail is gone and doesn't exist in the real world, it doesn't belong on OSM.
zluuzki (2022-07-09 08:37:18+00:00): If I and the other people who map them would use railway=rail for non-existing railroads, then it would be incorrect information. But we use railway=abandoned/razed and both tags mean that the RR does no longer exist. Read the definitions at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway#Actual_use
And you still haven't answered my main question "Why is this invalid, although it is used very usefully? What is the problem with this?"
MxxCon (2022-07-09 13:23:42+00:00): Ok, why don't we map every single building that has ever existed during humanity's existence and just tag them as abandoned/razed. That sure will make the map very useful. 🙄🤦
If you want map features from the past, that's what OHM is for. Not OSM
I haven't answered your "main" question because "it is used very usefully" is not a proper English phrase and I have no idea what you mean and what you are asking.
zluuzki (2022-07-09 18:17:14+00:00): "why don't we map every single building" - Because you can't compare this. Abandoned railroads have with at least 90% probability traces, which are mappable. So it makes sense to add the remaining 10% to have a !very! good dataset regarding old routes.
Unlike buildings, this data is as good as complete.

"If you want map features from the past, that's what OHM is for." - OHM in its current form is nonsense and unusable. I could write a long story with many arguments now, but to make it short: My two main problems: You can't move things from OSM to OHM. It's literally illegal, different licences. But we have the data here. In addition, you often need the data of the old routes in connection with the current ones. They are also here, and properly merging that data type from two seperate databases is very hard.
My main question:
What is the problem with the railway=razed ways here? What exactly is so annoying about the ways that justifies deleting them? (Remember, they're other people's work) What justifies damaging the completeness of projects like ORM?
MxxCon (2022-07-09 18:29:43+00:00): You are insisting on mapping features THAT DO NOT EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD. That is outright wrong for OSM and is not allowed.
In this changeset you created many railroad tracks that DO NOT EXIST at all! They might have existed in the past, but not anymore. There are no traces left of them whatsoever! Yet you insist that some form of combination of tags somehow makes it acceptable to have NON-EXISTING features on the map. No!
Tags are intended describe map features from the real world. These tracks DO NOT EXIST and no combination of tags will make them appear in the real world or satellite imagery.
MxxCon (2022-07-09 18:31:13+00:00): The fact that some map can not function properly without these non-existing features means there's a problem with THAT map that needs to be fixed. Not add non-existing features back to OSM.
zluuzki (2022-07-09 19:32:40+00:00): "You are insisting on mapping features THAT DO NOT EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD." - YES I DO! WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

"In this changeset you created many railroad tracks that DO NOT EXIST at all!" - I guess you just don't want to understand. NONE of the re-added tracks here exists 'as track'. 90% of them are railway=abandoned, which implies existing traces (traces ≠ tracks) and are thus completely fine to be mapped, and the other 10% are railway=razed, which were removed entirely (on the ground). And you have still failed to provide ONE SINGLE good reason why those 10% should be deleted. "Out of principle" ain't a reason for me.

"In this changeset you created many railroad tracks that DO NOT EXIST" - 
Just no. If I had tagged them with railway=rail, I would have done what you say here. But I did not.
razed/abandoned are NOT rail tracks currently on the ground.
MxxCon (2022-07-09 20:25:31+00:00): You are shitnitpicking on what I said. You know perfectly well what I meant when I said tracks. And I said that many times before. Too many of the features you mapped HAVE NO TRACES left in the world world and impossible to confirm. It is 100% imaginary mapping by you.

As everybody can clearly see from the available satellite imagery, a ton of features that you added have no traces whatsoever in the real world, therefore can not be mapped. Give me a screenshot that shows any remaining traces of 432647217.
zluuzki (2022-07-10 06:32:38+00:00): How many times do I have to say that "razed" objects have no traces until you understand? I never said "razed" tracks have traces. Only "abandoned" have (if they're correctly tagged).
The example was already tagged razed, therefore i can't give you traces on the ground, but verifying that the track was there (and thus 100% correctly mapped) can be done via old maps: https://i.imgur.com/8ZkQbAe.png
This one is created by the USGS and therefore in public domain (usable for OSM, accessible at https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/)
"shitnitpicking" - if someone is doing this here, then you, because you are constantly avoiding my question. "What's the problem?"

All you're saying is "Uhh it violates my mapping principles because it is not visible on the ground, we should delete it". If you have no other reasons to delete, that is just as dumb as if i would say "Uhh we should delete everything in New Jersey because i don't like the state".
MxxCon (2022-07-10 06:36:58+00:00): Nobody is questioning that it WAS there.
The problem is that they do not exist now and therefore do not belong on OSM.
If you want to map non-existing features, go use OFM or if you want to map the past, go use OHM. OSM is for what exist now in the world.
zluuzki (2022-07-10 09:14:10+00:00): I told you why i want to map them here and and why it is the best way. 

"My main question:
What is the problem... What exactly is so annoying about the ways that justifies deleting them?"

I want to have good data on the subject, and you don't. Ok. But if you expect me to basically redo the complete old rail mapping on OHM from scratch if i want good data, then I have the right to expect a good reason for why I should do that.
You're expecting me to spend thousands and thousands of hours of work, if I want good data, even though the same result could be achieved with SIGNIFICANTLY less work here. And your reason for this is "out of principle, this doesn't belong here". 

No, im not accepting this. I want real reasons, good reasons why I should invest MY time for this. Your feelings being hurt by a few railway=razed ways is NOT a good reason.
MxxCon (2022-07-10 14:56:35+00:00): I gave you multiple reasons in this thread, yet you are not accepting them because YOU don't consider them to be good enough. And yet I'm just supposed to accept your reasons as good enough because you said so? That's not going to work.
CurlingMan13 (2022-07-11 13:27:07+00:00): I don't see how this is so difficult...

If it doesn't physically exist in the world, it shouldn't be mapped on OSM.  You wouldn't map buildings that were demolished decades ago or keep old road alignments for "historic" purposes or because it shows up on the renderer.  What about all the old airport configurations?  Or the old countries and buildings pre-WWII?  Or shoot, by that logic, what the landuse was 50 years ago?  "It 

It isn't personal principle, it is OSM guidance and is the golden rule of OSM.  It is pretty simple.  There is no "out of principle", it is all in accordance to the guidelines. If you are still struggling with this practice of OSM, I suggest you read:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Verifiability

and

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground


OSM guidance makes your argument "The point of having them in OSM is to render them in openrailwaymap.org" completely invalid.  You wouldn't map buildings such that the data is garbage to make it look better or do fantasy maps of how you would like to see the rail placed according to your "ideal" imagination.  I suggest you read this section as well:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_for_the_renderer

This isn't just "a single line", these are many lines that are go through people's bedrooms, are snapped to roadways (incorrectly), and otherwise just do not exist anymore.  You're right, this is no different than an old city layout from the 1940s.  They are both incorrect and should not be mapped since they are not what exists in 2022.  That's what OHM is for.
zluuzki (2022-07-12 05:36:07+00:00): You can't compare 50 year old RRs with 50 year old buildings, borders or even landuse. The point about RRs is to form a network - current and former ones. Forming an network is impossible and unnessescary with your examples (because they're usually independent from each other) and pretty much everything else (except roads, but i think abandoned roads are generally very rare). Most abandoned railways are still visible in some way, so they can be mapped with railway=abandoned. It is a good possibility to add the remaining <10% without traces to have a very good dataset on old RR routes, which dosen't exist elsewhere (except on OSM). And that is a kind of data in which a lot of people are intrested in - thats also why OSM has so much of those RRs mapped. They don't come from one or three mappers, they come from 100s of mappers.

"There is no "out of principle", it is all in accordance to the guidelines." - Then i change my wording to "out of guideline", which is basically the same, but sounds dumb. If i present you a lot of reasons why i think the mapping makes sense, and pretty much all you can tell me is "the guideline! the guideline!" then something is wrong with that guideline.

Stop telling me about "tagging for renderer" if you don't even understand it. None of the abandoned rails I add are "incorrect information" or even "fantasy mapping" if they're correctly tagged. That I want to have them shown on ORM does NOT mean tagging for the renderer. I guess 80% of mappers are motivated by the fact that their work is shown somewhere. I certainly would not have mapped 20k miles power line in GA and SC in such detail if they were not rendered on openinframap or elsewhere.

"This isn't just "a single line", these are many lines that are go through people's bedrooms, are snapped to roadways (incorrectly), and otherwise just do not exist anymore."
The expectation that a normal mapper will constantly encounter poorly mapped tracks is nonsense. However, if you regularly follow around old RRs in order to delete them, it is no wonder that it looks to you like they're all bad. I followed over thousand GA road miles in order to improve things around them, and you have no idea how much trash data there is that needs fixing. But i can't remember having a single problem with old RRs (good, i'm not so sensitive there), but encounters with them are even when i have a very 'dynamic editing area' quite rare.
"this is no different than an old city layout from the 1940s." - i said the exact opposite. Again, we are talking about a single line in most cases. Not hundreds.

Also, i had 4 more arguments where no one bothered to reply yet.
CurlingMan13 (2022-07-12 06:12:10+00:00): If you disagree with the guidelines, then I suggest you get those guidelines changed for whatever you believe in.  If the guidelines are wrong, then that is between you and the guidelines...
MxxCon (2022-07-12 12:51:27+00:00): Your argument doesn't convince me. Non-existing railroads with no traces left behind don't belong on OSM.
zluuzki (2022-07-13 04:58:24+00:00): "If you disagree with the guidelines, then I suggest you get those guidelines changed" - If it's only my time .....
Guidelines are not rules, and I can use my time here better than dealing with bureaucratic nonsense, because a few people get upset about a few lines somewhere for very low reasons.

"Your argument [s] doesn't convince me." - Why not, exactly? Would be intresting. I also wrote why I am not convinced by your arguments.
Frans S (2022-08-23 13:46:12+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but  your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
D: Nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or roads.




Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123215742
user_5359 (2022-07-06 08:27:19+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please use for the keys explicitly British English. For more details have look on the website http://wiki.osm.org.
silversurfer83 (2022-07-05 20:36:40+00:00): Why?
Warum?
Peace_Stroke (2022-07-06 13:01:08+00:00): Hi silversurfer83, I have removed duplicate way/1075776339 as it was overlapping on same highway.
silversurfer83 (2022-07-06 13:55:59+00:00): Oh. I see. Thanks for answering :)
jb54osm (2022-07-05 10:31:28+00:00): Please add POIs to the adresses in the Netherlands, NOT to the building. Will you please correct this?.
(You know this is not the tanking 'place'? That is near the Tamoil icon.)
NastiaP1 (2022-07-06 06:31:54+00:00): Hello, jb54osm!
Thanks for your comment! This edit was updated.
Best regards, Anastasia
pio2_122 (2022-07-07 15:09:21+00:00): Według niedawnej edycji ten most został rozebrany: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123184103.
Dlatego nie był połączony z drogami (możliwe, że został rozebrany tylko częściowo).
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:13:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:56:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:47:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:24:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:57:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
Frans S (2022-09-24 12:00:44+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
* Most buildings are strict rectangular. Your mappings are a bit sloppy. Please square them after you drawn it, and still selected, with the Q key 


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123216678
Discostu36 (2023-07-02 05:47:20+00:00): Wenn du eine Sperrung mit highway=construction statt mit Conditional-Restriction durchführst, solltest du dich auch dafür verantwortlich fühlen, nach Beendigung der Bauarbeiten die Straße wieder umzutaggen.
abakus_uploader (2022-07-05 22:30:53+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!