piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mavl (2018-12-25 21:22:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
wilkis (2018-01-06 17:54:11+00:00): Nicht öffentliche Parkplätze können mit access=private gesetzt werden
aceman444 (2018-11-13 22:45:53+00:00): Dobry den, naozaj su v budove Cubiconu dve lekarne s nazvom Rubicon (odlisny nazov ako Cubicon)? A "Poliklinika Mlynska dolina" tiez uz zakreslena bola takze ju nebolo treba pridavat, este k tomu ako nemocnicu (cim nie je). Skor keby ste mohli overit, ci v Poliklinike naozaj este stale funguju dve lekarne, hlavne ta Alibabacentrum je otazna.
Dakujem.
Roman00C (2018-11-14 08:48:16+00:00): Ja som nikomu nechcel mazať body, ale:
Rubicon lekáreň je len jedna a to vedľa Geco. A volá sa Rubicon. V poliklinike Mlysnká dolina je jedna lekáreň. Druhá spomínaná v Cubicone. V poliklinike Mlysnká dolina je vedľa tejto budovy kontajner s fast foodom, ktorý sa zrejme volá Alibaba ako pozostatok, preto by bolo vhodné ho tam nechať. Bývam Cubicone - viem overiť nejaké prípadné komenty.
aceman444 (2018-11-14 22:00:29+00:00): Dakujem, takze tato druha lekaren v Cubicone je duplicita: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2443987388 ?

A tato lekaren v Poliklinike Mlynska dolina uz neexistuje: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1996166145 ?
Namiesto nej je tato: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4339519775 ? Mozete prosim potvrdit/ overit? Dakujem.
mavl (2018-12-25 20:50:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
arvdk (2018-02-26 17:19:50+00:00): You added Hughes Reef as inner to Hughes Reef (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7704873) Thank you for your effort. Mind the description/source when uploading.
mavl (2018-12-25 20:04:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:32:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:20:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:04:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:33:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
GOwin (2017-11-12 05:22:59+00:00): Hello there. Thank you for your edits, and welcome to OpenStreetMap (OSM). 

You requested for a review of your edits, and my comments are as follows:

* your use of the tags `building=service`, `repair=medium`, and the use of JOSM  are unusual for beginners. May I know if you received any instructions regarding these tags, and if this is part of an organized mapping activity? If so,  which group are you affiliated with, or the persons directing the activity?
* as for the tags themselves, `repair` may not be the correct tag for the information you're trying to convey.
* a building tag over the complete landfill area is probably incorrect as well

If you need help, or want to know more from fellow mappers, check out http://fb.com/OSMph/community and fee free to post your questions there.

Detailed information about OSM is available from the http://wiki.osm.org
mavl (2018-12-25 20:13:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:17:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
PT-53 (2017-11-10 10:48:46+00:00): Hallo Cherub,
Du gibst als Quelle für Deine Eingaben den Liegenschaftsplan der Stadt Aulendorf an. Hast Du geprüft, ob die Daten vom Liegenschaftsplan nach OSM übernommen werden dürfen?
Nutze doch den Edito JOSM mit der amtl. Karte Maps4BW als Hintergrund. Die Daten aus Maps4BW dürfen wir übernehmen.
Grüße
Cherub (2017-11-10 10:58:31+00:00): Hallo!
Naja das ist nicht der "richtige" Liegenschaftsplan, wie man ihn auf dem Rathaus auf Antrag erhält. Ist noch ein Grundstücksplan, als dieses Neubaugebiet geplant wurde. Er war frei zugänglich und für jeden einsehbar, deshalb sollte es ja keine Lizenzprobleme geben.
Den Editor kann ich zur Zeit leider nicht verwenden.

Grüße zurück
PT-53 (2017-11-10 12:21:12+00:00): Hallo Cherub,
auch wenn ein Plan öffentlich einsehbar war / Ist, heißt das noch nicht, daß die Daten nach OSM übernommen werden dürfen. Ohne ausdrückliche Erlaubnis der Stadt Aulendorf, müssen wir davon ausgehen, daß die Datenübernahme nicht legal ist.
Bitte klär das mit der Stadt Aulendorf oder unterlasse weitere Datenübernahmen. Andernfalls kann es sein, daß Deine Eingaben wieder gelöscht werden müssen.
Grüße
trigpoint (2017-11-10 11:46:19+00:00): Hi, welcome to Osm. Your dental surgery is already mapped on the other side of the road.

Which is correct?
user_3022894 (2018-07-05 17:23:55+00:00): Sorry, dass ich frage aber: Ist denomination=protestant an diesem Landuse hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/519771505
falsch? Du hast es gelöscht, obwohl es doch auf den Bereich zutrifft, oder? Oder übersehe ich etwas? Am Kirchengebäude ist es dran, und ich denke mal doppelt wäre es nicht weil das würde ja sonst auch für ein religion=christian gelten...
pili-pili (2018-07-10 14:44:40+00:00): Ich halte nicht viel von landuse=religion, weil hierzulande das religiöse Leben doch eher in den Gebäuden stattfindet. Die Pfarrerwohnung und Garage sind mMn besser in einem landuse=residential aufgehoben.
user_3022894 (2018-07-10 16:54:52+00:00): Stimmt, ich persönlich halte das Landuse für diesen kleinen Bereich auch für überflüssig. Aber wie damit verfahren? Löschen wird wahrscheinlich nicht gern gesehen. Vielleicht sollte man im Wiki mal festhalten, dass landuse=religious nur für größere Flächen genutzt werden soll.
user_3022894 (2018-07-10 16:59:36+00:00): Wegen einem Friseur in einem Wohngebiet tagge ich ja auch nicht direkt landuse=commercial oder retail drum herum...
zors1843 (2017-11-10 12:03:47+00:00): Please do not save a "test".  All entries are stored in the original database.  I removed the test.
Kind regards
Sanniu (2017-11-29 10:28:06+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5221361634 don't have a type, what shop is it?
theipu (2017-11-29 10:55:41+00:00): It's a carpentry shop I think
Sanniu (2017-11-29 13:18:07+00:00): Ok, fixed
mueschel (2017-11-11 10:50:30+00:00): Hi,
you uploaded twice the same dataset, containing points like this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5221310477
They do not have any valid tag. I'm going to delete them, please upload this again _after_ you have fixed the tagging.

Jan
Colin Smale (2017-11-10 20:17:40+00:00): hi... i think the role should be main_stream, and not main stream (i.e. with an underscore not a space)... see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:waterway
smb1001 (2017-11-13 09:34:14+00:00): Thanks for that. Is there an easy way of selecting and changing all of them at once? The "select all" only selects those that are loaded in your current view.
aharvey (2017-11-13 07:05:02+00:00): What's your source for changing P2 as shown in https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/53663839 ?

If you look at the Mapillary imagery https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=n_XySOWOiOvah91TDXfS_w&focus=photo&lat=-33.821719&lng=151.19080397220682&z=17&x=0.15626994051340276&y=0.5274092764743991&zoom=0.33670345817231884 you can see that the way it was mapped before this changeset matches the Mapillary photo (ie. the building doesn't go further south as per your change, but rather stays as a rectangle), but now it doesn't. I don't think it's been changed since the date of the photo as it was taken post construction.
aharvey (2017-11-13 07:06:10+00:00): PS. once this is resolved we can add in that footbridge connecting Douglas with P2.
BrettM6000 (2017-11-13 10:30:26+00:00): I parked in the P2 car park a few days ago. I went in from the east and exited to the west. I can see how it is confusing though because I only mapped the outline of the car park. There are 2 sections to it. One section is the multistorey rectangular section that has about 7 levels (don't know exact number). The other section is a large triangular section on the south that has only 2 levels I think. When you enter the car park from the east you go down the driveway and end up at the lowest level. As you proceed you can only go up a level and into section 1. On this level you can go up to higher levels or out on to the roof of the triangular section. The cars you see in the distance in your Mapillary imagery that look to be below the overhead footbridge are on level 2 of the triangular section. So it is actually one car park with two different sections. I think what I have done is right if concerned with the building outline but I agree is is lacking detail regarding the 2 sections of the one building/carpark.
BrettM6000 (2017-11-13 10:35:58+00:00): The elevated footbridge that connects the Douglas Building with P2 and then goes on to the main building is not accessible to the general public so I didn't think it was worth adding. I believe it is only used by certain staff and to transport patients.
BrettM6000 (2017-11-13 10:44:37+00:00): P.S. the Mapillary image below shows that the exit to the east is blocked off by the vertical orange pole in the driveway. I don't know if this is temporary or permanent. So once you go in this driveway you have no choice at the moment but to exit via the driveway to the west.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=lT2haVxfjThI4RTx0QFvDg&focus=photo&lat=-33.821886083320095&lng=151.1909716111461&z=17&x=0.3640728413323347&y=0.5297068173580674&zoom=0.33670345817231884
aharvey (2017-11-13 21:53:25+00:00): Got it, thanks for the detail! Since it's all the one car park what you've done to mark out the footprint is correct. I'll map the building:parts separately so each can be assigned a building:levels.
geoaria (2017-11-11 18:16:10+00:00): عدم تغییر صحیح درجه راهها(شهید روح الامین
لطفا در هنگام تغییر درجه راه ها ، مسیر بطور کامل پیمایش شود و تمام لینک ها و پل ها نیز تغییر درجه شوند
درضمن تغییر درجه راهها را به کاربران باتجربه تر واگذار نمایید
به ویژه در شهر اصفهانو شهر های بزرگ
اشتباهات شما اصلاح گردید
maraf24 (2017-11-22 20:03:17+00:00): Z tym "stan faktyczny" to gruba przesada, w Polsce nie ma podziału na city i town więc wypadałoby podać choćby link do wiki, gdzie są wyjaśnione kryteria.
poeiradasestrelas (2017-11-15 22:38:40+00:00): olá alexandre. tudo bem? muito boas suas contribuições. apenas em alguns locais que vi a imagem de satélite do DigitalGlobe Standard está mais atualizada. sendo assim, sugiro avaliar essa outra imagem quando for mapear.

abraço.
Rainero (2017-11-26 19:54:45+00:00): Hallo bison166,

hast du hier evtl. unbeabsichtigt die PLZ 27283 von Verden nach Langwedel verschleppt? Nindorfer Landstraße, Waller Straße und Siebenberge müßten als Straßen in Langwedel die 27299 haben.

Grüße,
Rainer
bison166 (2017-11-27 07:14:56+00:00): Hallo Rainer,
danke für deinen Hinweis. Habe das korrigiert.
Da ein paar Häuser in Nindorf noch zu 27283 gehören, habe ich wohl das in der Eingabemaske übersehen.
Gruß
Rolf
bison166 (2017-11-27 07:40:22+00:00): wie bist du auf diese Fehler gekommen ?
Rainero (2017-11-27 19:59:12+00:00): Hallo Rolf,
für OSM gibt's verschiedene Qualitätssicherungstools. Für Adressen nehme ich meist https://osm-suspects.gbconsite.de/map#13/52.9681/9.2134/osm-outsideplz-plzoverlay
Das zeigt in der Einstellung Postleitzahlen von Gebäuden, die nicht zu den PLZ-Grenzen passen.
Es muß nicht immer die PLZ des Gebäudes falsch sein, es kann auch die PLZ-Grenze nicht stimmen. 
Ich nehme das Tool auch gerne, um meine Änderungen 1-2 Tage später zu kontrollieren. Ein Tippfehler oder eine PLZ vom Nachbarort ist schnell mal möglich, zumal es Fälle gibt, in denen sich die PLZ-Grenze nicht mit der Verwaltungsgrenze der Gemeinden deckt.

Grüße,
Rainer
Rainero (2017-11-27 20:00:06+00:00): Weitere QS-Tools sind hier aufgelistet:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Qualitätssicherung
manings (2017-11-17 13:37:24+00:00): hi sheinna,

we noticed your edits was part of an organized edits, we documented it here: https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/33
eggie (2017-11-10 16:10:19+00:00): Welkom bij OSM per PB verstuurd
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM
pyram (2017-11-10 23:38:06+00:00): Hallo nitrox26,

gibt es einen speziellen Grund, warum Du das von mir in 3D gemappte Dorfhaus in Waizenhofen gelöscht und banal neu gezeichnet hast?
Unkenntnis?
wwweg (2017-11-24 20:54:43+00:00): Hallo,

Warum wurde hier ein Teil der FRG39 gelöscht und dadurch auch zwei Relationen zerstört?

Viele Grüße
wwweg
wochenblatt (2017-11-30 11:59:00+00:00): Hallo, tut uns leid, das haben wir nicht bemerkt.
naoliv (2017-11-10 12:09:14+00:00): SNTPxx, POR FAVOR, entre em contato com a comunidade brasileira.
Os dados que vocês estão inserindo não estão corretos.
Continuar editando desta forma apenas gera inconvenientes.
smaprs (2017-11-10 22:21:34+00:00): SNTPxx,  
por favor responda aos contatos.  

Veja sobre "boas práticas" no OSM,   
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:How_We_Map:  
"Por favor, não ignore mensagens de outros. "  
"Não faça importação de dados de terceiros ao OSM sem primeiramente apresentá-los, discuti-los e ter a concordância da comunidade OSM."
4004 (2017-11-10 23:26:15+00:00): здравствуйте и спасибо за обновление карты,
там и правда вьезд асфальтирован а выезд нет?
nikorai (2017-11-11 17:39:54+00:00): Добрый день,
допустил ошибку - въезд и выезд грунтовые
4004 (2017-11-11 17:43:35+00:00): отлично, спасибо за ответ, поправлю. и еще: такие сьезды не обозначаются тем, что в редакторе называется "сьездом", а скорее проездом, тем более грунтовые. "Сьезды" для развязок
4004 (2017-11-11 17:45:19+00:00): ах да, и через парковку тоже линию дороги ведите впредь - дорога то идет
Sanniu (2017-11-29 11:00:20+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5221388292 - have no tags, what office is it?
mavl (2018-12-25 19:28:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:38:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:49:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:01:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:45:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
n76 (2017-11-10 15:30:16+00:00): Care to explain this restriction? I Don't see any evidence on aerial imagery that there could be a restriction here. And I don't see any mapillary images in JOSM for this. I guess I'll drive there today to check in person but I think a left turn restriction is highly unlikely here.
manoharuss (2017-11-13 11:07:18+00:00): hi n76,
thanks for flagging and fixing the wrong turn restriction. this was a mistake.
Manohar
KelvinKLi (2020-01-24 22:11:02+00:00): Hi metaniq,
My name is Kelvin and I work on the OSM editing team for Lyft. While mapping in this area, I came across this way segment https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/539631254#map=19/33.85457/-117.95924 in OSM. Per OSM wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Destination_details the middle segments between on ramps and off ramps should not be tagged as destination:ref. Would you please to revert this changeset #53665177 and remove the destination:ref tag? If you have any further questions or evidence that disproves this, I would be happy to learn more.
Thank you!
kli_lyft
eggie (2017-11-10 16:23:22+00:00): oneway=no kan er zeker af. Niemand maakt van een doodlopende straat "eenrichting" Haal je het er zelf af?
eggie (2017-11-10 20:53:24+00:00): oneway no verwijderd... unclassified omgezet in residential
mavl (2018-12-25 21:16:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
Hjart (2017-11-10 13:09:51+00:00): What is this supposed to be? 
This appears to be an unlikely name for a beach here
Warin61 (2017-11-13 21:37:16+00:00): Hi,
The relation 7723473 - building=house has 3 outers that touch. This is flagged as an error in OSMinspector. They do look like all one building - so a single way rather than a relation?
Joel Hansen (2017-11-14 05:29:36+00:00): Yeah this is probably due to the way the iD editor handles merging.

Anyway I fixed it.
lleung (2017-11-14 05:28:00+00:00): 暨南大学不是一个行政区域，添加 admin_level 和 boundary=administrative 是不适当的
lleung (2017-11-14 05:32:12+00:00): “根据缺省名称遵从本地语言的规则，中国大陆区域的名称应使用简体中文字符。其他语言译名,包括少数民族语言文字，请使用 name:code=* 独立标注。”
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:China_Tagging_Guidelines
SHARCRASH (2017-11-13 11:59:17+00:00): Bonjour, Je cherche toujours à améliorer la positions des différents élements sur OSM car il ya  parfois un manque flagrant de précision. Or, ici sur ce carrefour https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2420202298 , j'ai remarqué votre "contournement" qui ne suis pas les images sat. du track. Vous dites en commentaire que vous avez aligné selon le heatmap de Strava, mais ce heatmap ne retranscrit qu'une moyenne de multiples traces GPS selon le parcours des utilisateurs. Donc il ne reflète pas la réalité. Faites attention à cette grossière erreur!
Christophe Mathieu (2017-11-13 12:09:45+00:00): Bonjour,
En effet, et désolé pour l'inexactitude. Disons que j'ai ajouté une grande quantité de tracks car j'ai constaté qu'il en manquait beaucoup dans nos forêts, et je m'appuie pour ce faire sur les données https://strava.github.io/iD/ . Mais il faut reconnaître que l'algorithme est parfois déficient ... J'essaie donc de les corriger manuellement mais celui-ci a du passer à le trappe.
SHARCRASH (2017-11-13 12:15:38+00:00): Merci de votre comprehension! Je suis en train de corriger. Bien à vous,
DD1GJ (2017-11-11 07:55:32+00:00): Da du nur lauter unsinn in einen weltweit sichtbaren und verwendeten Datenbestand eingefügt hast, habe ich alle deine Änderungen rückgängig gemacht.

Für was brauchst du die komischen Bezeichnungen?
andi9876 (2017-12-10 08:41:09+00:00): Dear, no attraction there! Please stop add!
Christophe Mathieu (2018-01-13 10:37:13+00:00): Hello!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/53667714
Christophe Mathieu (2018-01-13 10:37:19+00:00): Hello!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/53667729
literan (2017-11-11 12:25:47+00:00): дык если участок открыл для движения - зачем блоки на въездах поставил?
iWowik (2017-11-11 20:41:02+00:00): Так в кино еще не открытое. И рисовал, когда еще не было новости про открытие.

А ближе к вечеру появилась новость, но что там именно открыли из нее не было ясно.
К вечеру можно было посмотреть версию ЯК, но там не все достоверно, как мне кажется.

Да, надо бы понизить статус на ступень дороги через Звенигород.
Basstoelpel (2017-12-25 11:52:52+00:00): If you have a look at other available aerial images like the ones from DigitalGlobe, it is obvious that these are not buildings.
SafwatHalaby (2017-11-11 14:43:39+00:00): Hi, there are now two buildings tagged as 53. (The second one is on the right). Perhaps this is an error?
gleighton (2017-11-23 14:09:24+00:00): 57 should be 55
55 should be 53
53 should be 51
51 should be 49

I'll try to check the next building over the next few days
user_5359 (2017-11-11 07:40:39+00:00): Hallo, wer viel einträgt, macht manchmal auch was falsch: Ein Rettungspunkt hat keinen Namen sondern "nur" eine Referenznummer siehe auch http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Demergency_access_point
L-Klitschi (2017-11-11 21:43:59+00:00): Namen in ref geändet
gruss L-Klitschi
Mike Baggaley (2017-12-12 16:13:34+00:00): Hi, way 43330779 which was marked as access=no in this changeset appears to have two cycle routes and one hiking route running along it. If the access restriction is only for motor vehicles, please change access=no to motor_vehicle=no. If the way is currently closed for some reason, please add a note to say why it is closed and when it is expected to reopen.

Thanks,
Mike
Joe E (2017-12-27 20:25:46+00:00): The way is closed and the reason correctly tagged as construction=yes as per https://www.middlesbrough.gov.uk/weekly-roadworks-report
though the re-opening date was unavailable at the time.
Commodoortje (2017-11-10 15:59:45+00:00): Welkom Joop,
Ik heb je een beetje geholpen.
Ongetwijfeld waren je bedoelingen heel goed. Maar er zijn regels waar we ons aan moeten houden.
Hier kun je zien wat ik gewijzigd heb.
http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=53670425
eggie (2017-11-10 19:27:59+00:00): Welkom bij OSM per PB verstuurd
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM
Joopbraam (2017-11-10 21:09:25+00:00): Dank Commodoortje, 


Weet niet goed wat ik fout heb gedaan, behalve nummers op de wegen.
ziet er nu wel beter uit, Dank daarvoor. Er ontbreekt nu nog wel een stukje Braamberg van de weg langs het kanaal naar de kruising van 1, 2 en 3. Ik zal  eens kijken of ik dat op de juiste manier kan toevoegen. Ook moet ik bepalen wat straat of oprit is.

joopbraam.