piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
demon_box (2022-04-04 19:35:51+00:00): ciao Ennio, scusa ma trovo un po' strano/singolare aggiungere un toponimo "Senter del Zan" dove non c'è mappato nessun sentiero....
demon_box (2022-04-04 20:45:01+00:00): ok, capito, grazie, ciao ;-)
ZeLonewolf (2022-04-25 01:59:13+00:00): Broken boundary of Birmingham fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120143296
user_8101879 (2022-04-30 17:26:58+00:00): Hi,

I'm not sure to understand what you have done : why to delete the way 1049111541 and to create the way 1054566363 which is exactely the same (same nodes) ?

In my comment, I fixed Foresdale : the changes on Adamsville and Birmingham are indirected changes and I'm not sure to be the one who broke these relations.

On the forum, I asked a question https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/84249/history-of-members-on-a-map : if you know the answer, you're welcome to participate.

Best regards
demon_box (2022-04-04 19:35:27+00:00): ciao Ennio, scusa ma trovo un po' strano/singolare aggiungere un toponimo "Via Alta" dove non c'è mappato nessun sentiero....
demon_box (2022-04-04 20:44:44+00:00): ok, capito, grazie, ciao ;-)
ZLima12 (2022-04-13 18:18:24+00:00): Thanks! Missed these when I updated the classification.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119313171
Road–Runner (2024-10-13 14:51:21+00:00): Why did you remove the via_ferrata value at the Kreuzjoch Via Ferrata? Thats not a path and with Via Ferrata scale 2 most of the hikers can't walk here anymore.
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-04-04 19:53:39+00:00): These changes have been reversed:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119313695
SHARCRASH (2022-04-07 14:53:45+00:00): Hi! I was well aware there was still a problem with this building after my intervention but the previous contributor to my edits hadn't the geometry correct (the overall structure was not right and the inner was not showing up). I did the changes by having the usual building structure as MP and having the building:part elements simply overlapping inside it, one of these being a MP to have the empty hole as inner) Still it was not rendered... Not sure why... 

So if I understand correctly, you deleted all building:part elements (2 polygons and 1 MP), removed the "buildingpart" links to the main MP and kept the basic MP relation, right. Tell me if i'm wrong.

Which means that you actually deleted the specific attributes to each building part. Why? Do the building:part structures not work in relations?
user_12531033 (2022-04-04 18:38:52+00:00): 把京包线室内拆除的区段画上了razed，因为有些地方路基还是可见的，这样的话一些有名的铁路道口也可以画上。
user_12531033 (2022-04-04 18:39:01+00:00): typo:市内
Vinber (2022-04-10 15:51:58+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_France/bienvenue)

Savez vous à quoi coresponde les 2 batiment entre le lycée et l'EREA le corbusier ?

j'ai tenté de délimiter l'EREA, n'hésitez pas à me dire si c'est erroné !

Bonne journée
rmikke (2022-04-06 19:05:08+00:00): Tej aptece: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1231003169 przypisałaś dane innej apteki https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9006760518 z innego miasta - prawdopodobnie w schowku Ci zostały. Łącznie z ref:csioz tamtej apteki.
iwonaceae (2022-04-06 21:47:49+00:00): Rzeczywiście! Dzięki, już poprawiam.
Frans S (2022-04-08 10:40:22+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not  accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:

A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
C: multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared. They are mostly strickt rectangular.
C: multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.
You duplicated quite a number of already mapped buildings.  Did you not zoom in far enough to get them visible? 
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/119314060
Frans S (2022-04-08 10:41:39+00:00): Hello Again. I noticed that you ignored the warning triangle which shows issues and errors. They needs to be solved before uploading your work.
Best regards
Nathanael204 (2022-06-14 07:01:52+00:00): Die Baustelle hatte eine Geschwindigkeitsbeschränkung von 80 km/h, nicht 60 km/h!
Auch wurde die Baustelle 2 Wochen vorher als gemeldet schon aufgehoben.
aceman444 (2026-02-14 14:19:52+00:00): Zdravim, je zastavka https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9641488744 rovnaka ako https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3439000745 ? A to iste na druhej strane cesty.
t_ja (2026-02-14 19:25:57+00:00): Ahoj, vdaka za upozornenie. Pri pridavani chybajucich zastavok som vzdy stiahol len malu oblast okolo pridavanej zastavky. V tomto pripade boli povodne zastavky v OSM viac ako 50 metrov od spravnej polohy, preto vznikla duplicita.

Zastavky som zlucil, po oboch stranach cesty na presnu poziciu podla Ofmozaiky SR.

T.
legofahrrad (2022-04-10 21:19:26+00:00): Moin! Was hat denn recylcling:*=path zu bedeuten? Habe ich was übersehen, oder hast du dich einfach nur vertippt? Gute Nacht! ;)
highflyer74 (2022-04-11 04:57:20+00:00): Einen sonnigen Morgen wünsche ich :-) Da hab ich mich tatsächlich in den Tasten vergriffen. Ist gefixt. Danke!
TimbyT (2022-04-04 19:04:46+00:00): Updating naming of NW Wheeler Ave to N Williams Ave.
opendcc (2022-04-05 05:14:24+00:00): F-Land? was bedeutet das? Oder ist das ein Editfehler?
streckenkundler (2022-04-05 07:15:55+00:00): Hei,

zu F-Land siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119316134 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3120309

Sven
pio2_122 (2022-04-04 19:18:35+00:00): Dlaczego do POI urzędu został dodany adres Rynek Staromiejski 1, skoro leży on w obrębie budynku o adresie Rynek Staromiejski 5 (i taki jest również podany na stronie tego urzędu)?

Przy okazji, nie ma konieczności dublowania adresów w POI, jeśli leżą one w obrębie obrysów z adresem. Więcej informacji: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=815542#p815542
ptarac (2022-04-04 19:28:13+00:00): Poprawiłem.
Przy wysyłaniu zestawu na serwer pojawiło sie okno konfliktu. Najwyraźniej przy jego rozwiązywaniu "coś się namieszało" ;).
Dzięki.
pio2_122 (2022-04-04 19:30:07+00:00): Jasne. Dzięki za poprawkę.
MiroJanosik (2022-04-13 20:38:13+00:00): Ahoj, niektore domy - napriklad https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/916908427 si dal na 'layer=1' ale to mi nedava pri rodinnych domoch zmysel, ci je tam nieco co nevidim?
marczoutendijk (2022-04-04 19:16:51+00:00): There was a worldwide typing error with residential=condomium (check out your dictionary to find out its meaning!)
Fixed it in a few large areas: residential=condominium.

Marc Zoutendijk
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
marczoutendijk (2022-04-04 19:14:47+00:00): There was a worldwide typing error with residential=condomium (check out your dictionary to find out its meaning!) 
Fixed it in a few large areas: residential=condominium.

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
user_12531033 (2022-04-04 19:10:29+00:00): 更正：东北环线 0336 更改
marczoutendijk (2022-04-04 19:15:21+00:00): There was a worldwide typing error with residential=condomium (check out your dictionary to find out its meaning!)
Fixed it in a few large areas: residential=condominium.

Marc Zoutendijk
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
marczoutendijk (2022-04-04 19:15:14+00:00): There was a worldwide typing error with residential=condomium (check out your dictionary to find out its meaning!)
Fixed it in a few large areas: residential=condominium.

Marc Zoutendijk
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
felipeeugenio (2022-04-04 20:47:21+00:00): Hola. Bienvenido a la comunidad OSM Chile.
El tema de las fotos satelitales es una discusión eterna. Usted vio las imagenes bing, que, por lo general, son las más precisas, pero a veces no, por lo que puede revisar otras imagenes. En realidad es muy dificil saber si acaso alguna se ajusta a la realidad más que otra, por lo que sugerimos no mover calles de acuerdo a la imagen satelital, ya que va a realizar un esfuerzo significativo solo para que otro mapero después desplace todo otra vez y, en caso de tener una conversación, ninguno va a tener muy buenos argumentos para probar que el otro está equivocado.
Jimpack (2022-04-05 00:27:01+00:00): Ciertamente las fotos satelitales de google también les ocurre lo mismo, si es que no son no son las mismas...e historicamente, mirando hacia el pasado, pasa lo mismo, quizás sea una coma flotante con algún bug en el posicionamiento del planeta y aunque tenga todo el entusiasmo infinito, modificar calle por calle sería una historia sin fin XD. Bueno, en realidad, mi comentario quise enfocarlo al nombre de las calles, alguien le puso 5 1/2 poniente, 5 1/2 sur B, pero esas calles de esta villa emblematica de Talca, siempre han tenido nombre de arboles y plantas, es la ecepción de talca de hace ya mas de 6 decadas, reflejadas en las escrituras de los domicilios y en el plan regulatorio de la ciudad. Hay empresas comerciales que no conocen la ciudad, como Movistar que ocupan esta referencia de mapas y confunden a la clientela y los que más mal la pasan, son las personas que llevan la correspondencia. Pensar que es un sector muy cercano a la plaza de armas y Movistar no puede colocar internet por fibra optica porque en su mapa, la calle "Los Retamos" no existe, aunque si existe en todas los planos de la ciudad y hasta en Google Maps. Hay otra calle que se llama "Los Laureles", otra "Rosas", pero ni los carteros conocen estas direcciones erroneas publicadas por OpenStreetMap
felipeeugenio (2022-04-05 12:21:59+00:00): Hola. Gracias entonces por hacer las correcciones.
En todo caso, existe la posibilidad de que los nombres que están en OSM sean los antiguos. Si ese es el caso, por favor dejar dicho nombre como old_name=.
El conocimiento de gente que vive en el sector es importante y es la manera en la que se alimenta el mapa.
Por otra parte, por favor no copiar de google, es una fuente llena de problemas también y con copyrights prohibitivos.
Está invitado a unirse al chat de la comunida en Telegram (app similar a whatsapp) en el link: https://t.me/OSMcl

saludos
ZLima12 (2022-04-05 01:48:35+00:00): Thanks, good changeset. Just know that if you're sure the name is incorrect, you can also delete the corresponding "tiger:" tags. This helps keep things clean.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119315588
Aleks-Berlin (2022-04-06 14:02:32+00:00): Hi gogo25171,
please read this:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:wikipedia#Syntaxe
NO: wikipedia=http..., YES: wikipedia=fr:Title,
For example here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/166904432
Thanks, Alex
elgolfo (2022-04-08 12:51:11+00:00): Hallo opendoor, 
irgendwas passt bei dem Changeset mit dem Schwarzen Weg passiert. StefanHRT hat das in 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119099205 behoben.
Kannst du mal schauen, ob die Wege drumrum noch passen?

Viele Grüße
Moritz
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119316299
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-04-05 20:13:35+00:00): Hole number shouldn't go in the name
SomeoneElse (2022-04-04 20:09:05+00:00): Hello again.
What is the source of this data?
SomeoneElse (2022-04-04 20:14:32+00:00): Hello, what source did you use for this change?  The source hasn't changed since the _old_ name.
WoodWoseWulf (2022-04-05 02:41:28+00:00): Hi danbelair,

Thank you so much for your recent additions to the map!

Just a couple of notes:

You added swimming pools as ponds. The iD editor will allow you to add pools (leisure=pool) if you search for it. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dswimming_pool

It's generally considered good practice to limit the mapping of private yards to just the larger details such as pools, sheds and garages... you can read more here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information
gscholz (2022-09-03 06:10:28+00:00): Hi boschettuzzo,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding overlapping ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=12.04028&lat=46.24933&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Frans S (2022-04-18 10:01:52+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Reminder: Please pay more attention  on squaring all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119317017
GerdP (2022-06-27 11:08:57+00:00): Moin!
Ein Tor auf einem hw=unclassified ist ziemlich seltsam, insbesondere ohne irgendwelche access tags. Ist https://www.osm.org/way/475329505 evtl. eine Sandgrube (landuse=quarry) ? Dann wird doch wahrscheinlich auch am südl. Ende ein Tor sein und der Weg selbst sollte ein hw=service, access=private oder so werden.
PT-53 (2022-04-05 07:38:36+00:00): Hallo clip-fx,
die Einstufung als footway und die eingetragenen Access-Merkmale passen nicht zusammen.
Steht dort ein Verkehrszeichen und wenn ja welches?
Im OSM-Verkehrszeichen-Tool
http://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/
kannst Du das entsprechende Verkehrszeichen auswählen und die korrekten Access-Merkmale anzeigen lassen.

Albert-Schweitzer-Weg 3, 3/1, 3/2, 3/3 ist kein Straßenname sondern nur ein Hiweis, daß es hier zu den Gebäuden 3, 3/1, 3/2, 3/3 geht.
Bitte lösche die falsche Name-Verwendung wieder.
Danke und Grüße vom Fuße des Bussen


PS: 
Für Fragen / Anmerkungen / Rückmeldungen bitte diesen Änderungssatz aufrufen und in das leere Feld unterhalb Diskussion als neuen Kommentar eintragen.
clip-fx (2022-04-05 08:42:45+00:00): Hallo PT-53,

Vielen Dank für die Hinweise. Die Bezeichnung und Merkmale habe ich angepasst. Es handelt sich um einen Privatweg, auf welchem nach Bebauungsplan ein Gehrecht für die Allgemeinheit eingetragen ist. Das Befahren ist nur im Ausnahmefall in Abstimmung mit den Eigentümern zulässig. Schilder gibt es (noch) keine. Passen die Merkmale jetzt?

Viele Grüße
PT-53 (2022-04-05 09:03:41+00:00): Hallo clip-fx, ,
das
access=yes 
ist unnötig (weil Standart) und statt
vehicle=privat
würde ich
motor_vehicle=privat
verwenden. Auch ist
noexit=yes
an einem Weg (Linie) falsch. Allenfalls gehört dieses Merkmal auf den letzten Knoten des Weges, sofern es dort - auch nicht zu Fauß - weitergeht.
Benötigt wird dieses Merkmal auch nur nur für QS-Tools, damit diese Wissen, daß es hier nicht weitergeht. Für das Routing wird das Merkmal nicht benötigt.

lanes:forward=1 ist falsch. Es gibt ja nur eine Fahrspur, die in beide Richtungen befahren wird.

Da dies ein Privat-Weg ist, würde ich den Straßenname ganz löschen.

Grüße
martien-176 (2022-04-06 18:17:34+00:00): Hi, welcome to HOT. You asked for a review of your mappings. The buildings look good as to shape (square corners) and position. Also good to fix up buildings mapped by others. Take care not to let buildings cross other features like eg a barrier. I also noticed a few buildings tagged as house. Rule of thumb though in HOTOSM is to always tag building=yes, and let local mappers decide what the building actually is. Also, if possible, try not to delete mapped buildings done by others. If possible move them to an unmapped one. But in general, good work here, please carry on. Thanks for your time and effort. Regards, Martien, global validator.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119317240
Phil Hesse (2022-04-07 15:19:07+00:00): Thanks so much Martien. I was thinking of asking a few questions, but wasn't sure how. You've answered most of them anyhow, appreciated. I will continue as I have some spare time at the moment. Phil
Jan Olieslagers (2022-04-08 17:47:44+00:00): What is the use or utility of adding Relation 13923241, which has only one single member? I intend to remove, because I see no added value.
RaccoonFederation (2022-04-05 00:28:51+00:00): Are you using your own video or something like Mapillary?
messpert (2022-04-05 09:45:16+00:00): I am using my own gps-enabled dashcam video. I normally record gps in no less than three ways when surveying from a car: my Nextbase gps dashcam, my satnav running navit with track record active and (the most accurate) a garmin Etrek 20 unit. 

So I have multiple gps tracks and gps-stamped video, all collected directly. And I normally work from multiple surveys. So I do normally have pretty accurate traces, and often find the Bing and other imagery has offsets, particularly when parallax errors arise on steep slopes. All except the Garmin gps tracks tend to be less good under tree cover, of course. The Garmin does reasonably well under tree cover, although less well than when there is a clear sky. Of course, all the tracks suffer a bit among tall buildings. But all this is well known. I find mapillary video very poor: my video is vastly better quality than the typical mapillary offering, and of course is continuous video rather than widely spaced frames. I don't think that I have ever used mapillary for actual mapping.

That all said, in this particular changeset, my Garmin was only working for part of the way, but I have previous Garmin tracks along that road.

Short of a professional differential gps, or a home brew system based around a u-blox NEO/LEA-M8T or similar, I don't think I can do much better with consumer gps.

Do you think that I have been inaccurate somewhere here?

On another point, I was thinking of contacting you anyway over speed limits.

I was sure that I had already mapped the speed limits, but my memory may be failing me. I could not check because you had somehow erased the history of at least some sections of the road. Despite your changeset comments about adding speed limits, they were in fact missing, so I put them back. The positions were taken from careful checking from the gps-stamped video frames, further checked against Bing imagery, and I would be very surprised if there was an error of more than a a meter or three in the positions.

In passing, please do try not to erase history. I know that can sometimes happen when a way is split. Also you did not update the source tags: perhaps it did not need an update, but it really ought to reflect the most recent changes, but the impression given is that your latest changes were from a video survey which I assume was not true: but perhaps you too are using video?

I have noticed that you have done a lot of useful work in the area recently. We probably ought to keep in touch. I have mapped various bits around Bodmin Moor, Liskeard and areas mainly down to the South coast including pretty detailed work on the coast path in the Looe and Talland  areas which I had not been able to update because of Covid. I see that you  have done some recent work down there, especially the restored path to the West of Talland Bay. I hope that you have fixed the spurious heath nonsense which got added some years ago which looked like tagging-for-the-renderer.
RaccoonFederation (2022-04-05 11:00:19+00:00): I was just interested in what you are doing and how you are doing it, I don't have a problem with any of your changes.
Any speed limits I have set were from a walking survey using StreetComplete as I go. SC puts the source information on the changeset. If you see any errors please let me know.
user_11609320 (2022-04-04 21:16:57+00:00): splits before the turning circle
hebolz (2022-04-14 17:22:07+00:00): @ElvaFlannery 
you have mapped roads and buildings in the city of Lwambo, Kambove region, DRC, based on Bing imagery. Please be informed that the region is part of a larger project (HOT tasking manager, project #12252) which uses Maxar premium imagery only. I would suggest to map the region by TM only. It loads the correct imagery automatically and avoids conflicts by overlapping mapping. 
Henning (user hebolz)
SomeoneElse (2022-04-05 07:26:59+00:00): Apologies for the "globe-spanning" changeset.  The edits reverted here were mostly in Winnipeg in Canada and Australia, with nothing much in between.  
To email the DWG about it, use a subject line with "[Ticket#2022033110000019]" in it.
The mapper was repeatedly asked for source information but refused to disclose anything meaningful (see e.g. https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=15467027&commented - "Local Data").
Vinber (2022-04-05 09:41:10+00:00): Bonjour,
merci pour vos contributions.
Pourriez vous cependant préciser ce que vous faites dans le champs de commentaire svp ?

Je ne sais pas où cela se situe dans Go Map mais il est de bon ton d'expliquer ses contributions, quelques compléments ici https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bons_commentaires_de_groupe_de_modifications#Pourquoi_devrais-je_utiliser_les_commentaires_de_Changeset_.3F

Bonne journée
Vinber (2022-04-05 10:13:59+00:00): et au passage, il n'est pas utile de renseigner code postal et ville, quelques économies de clic et de claviers en perspective :D

Bonne cartographie
Alban37 (2022-04-05 11:20:29+00:00): Merci de ces précisions. Je vais rechercher comment ajouter des change set à mes modifications, je comprends tout à fait l’intérêt. 
Concernant l’ajout de la ville et du code postal c’est lié à une application professionnelle basée sur OsmAnd. La recherche d’adresse échoue (contrairement à la base nominatim osm) si la ville au minimum n’a pas été renseignée. Voilà pourquoi. ;)
Merci encore d’avoir pris le temps de m’écrire. 
Cdlt
Alban
Vinber (2022-04-05 12:37:47+00:00): Merci du retour,
concernant les postcode et ville, c'est donc du coté de l'application qu'il faut faire des modifs pour que cela réponde aux besoins, mais pas dans les données OSM.
On dit souvent que l'on ne tague pas pour le rendu, c'est aussi vrai pour la recherche d'adresse :)

Bonne carto
Alban37 (2022-04-05 16:59:29+00:00): Pour info il s’agit d’un logiciel d’utilité publique développé et utilisé pour et par la Gendarmerie. 
Cdlt
Vinber (2022-04-05 19:05:38+00:00): C'est super que la gendarmerie utilise un tel outil. 
Cependant est-ce un argument pour dire que l'on ajoute cp et ville sur les voies ?
Au plaisir
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-20 21:07:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 121260282 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some implausible mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5998 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6004 .
Palolo (2022-04-13 14:40:48+00:00): Thank you for your first contribution to OSM, we appreciate the help.
Please go to the Tanzania Development Trust mapping resources to learn more about mapping.
GinaroZ (2022-04-04 23:10:40+00:00): Perhaps motor_vehicle=private instead of access=?
andypreece (2022-04-05 16:34:37+00:00): Yes, that may be more suitable
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-20 21:07:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 121260282 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some implausible mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5998 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6004 .