piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ElliottPlack (2022-02-01 13:04:55+00:00): Adamant, Elliott from the DWG here. The only one we see in the wrong here is you, for asserting authority over an area where you have none and for using this changeset discussion as a platform. Please cease and desist from further discussion, causing grief to your fellow mappers, and this line of questioning. The OSM community is fluid across a plethora of mediums, many of which are far better for this sort of discussion. Please take this conversation elsewhere. In my own experience there are many, many more mappers that are in agreement on the classification structure than those that care to respond on the wiki or the talk lists. Please take this conversation elsewhere. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5637
Adamant1 (2022-02-01 14:48:39+00:00): ElliottPlack, I sent you a private message. I'd appreciate it if you responded to it. 

Thanks.
Adamant1 (2022-02-01 14:57:55+00:00): Also this discussion is about a specific piece of local road and an edit to it. Not the proposal in general. So this a perfectly appropriate place to have the discussion. Especially since I'm local to the area that is being discussed. That's literally what changeset comments are for. I would have thought you'd know that as someone from the DWG.
Adamant1 (2022-02-01 16:48:43+00:00): Also while we are at it I'd like an answer as to how I have no authority over this area when I'm a local mapper, with 23,000 edits to the area and have driven along the two roads we are discussing for most of my life? I'm not going to claim I'm the ultimate authority over this area, but in no way do I have no authority what-so-ever when it comes tagging here.
Adamant1 (2022-02-01 16:59:28+00:00): A matter of fact I'm a couple blocks from Market Street right now. I could walk there in a few minutes. I was just over there a while ago. My opinion about how to map anything around there would inherently have more authority then say ZeLonewolf's opinion that he formed while sitting at his computer desk in Hawaii or wherever he's at.
willkmis (2022-02-01 18:48:36+00:00): To bring in an example from another part of the state that I think has some parallels, I was initially uncomfortable with proposing CA 1 and US 101 through the city of San Francisco as trunk. I lived in San Francisco for 18 years, and had taken both these routes myself many times. Their built characteristics match other primary roads in the area, as does their use by many SF residents: as the best routes between neighborhoods and from neighborhoods to the freeways, good primary uses in urban areas. But these really are the best routes to go from the Peninsula and points south to Marin and points north, that is, they provide regional connectivity, and thus meet the trunk definition. By not indicating this, the OSM map contains less useful information than it could if these routes were trunk, but it's something that was easy to miss since I was so familiar with the local area. I'll also add for the road at hand specifically, though I know Adamant has consented to CA 299 being trunk through town at this point so I don't want to belabor the point, that by the "more objective" regional designations (NHS, Caltrans FCs, the Strategic Interregional Corridors), CA 299 through Redding to CA 44 meets the trunk route-equivalent standard. Again, to reiterate I don't think any of these are authoritative, but they do qualify as some evidence in support of the road's regional importance.
ezekielf (2022-02-01 19:16:58+00:00): I've also been following this thread without commenting in hopes of California mappers working things out among themselves.  Since that clearly isn't happening I guess I'll pile on.  I support a connected trunk network and I haven't found Adamant1's arguments for why a trunk route should stop at the edge of town convincing at all.
Adamant1 (2022-02-01 19:24:24+00:00): < support a connected trunk network and I haven't found Adamant1's arguments for why a trunk route should stop at the edge of town convincing at all.

For which road? And what exactly about what I said do you disagree with?
Minh Nguyen (2022-02-02 01:39:34+00:00): A lot of the discussions so far have focused on edge cases, hence the hedging and weasel words. You aren’t alone in favoring DOT functional classification as a factor in OSM highway classification because they seem more cut and dry. I’d be interested in hearing everyone’s thoughts about how the Caltrans FC criteria would best translate to OSM tags, so we can identify any shortcomings in that approach and find ways to keep the weasel words to a minimum. Just… not here in this tiny sidebar please. :-)

To participate in the talk-us mailing list, go to https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us/ and enter your e-mail address and a password. You’ll be able to post to the list and reply to others’ messages using whatever software or service you normally use for e-mail. However, you won’t be able to easily respond to existing messages from before you joined the list, so make sure to join before someone starts the thread about the California classification proposal.
Glassman (2022-01-14 18:42:54+00:00): #TIP: Instead of deleting the entire business, just delete the business tags keeping the address tags for reuse when a new business moves in.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116088278
EneaSuper (2022-01-13 11:47:30+00:00): Ciao, temo che un lato del bosco sia troppo squadrato.
Lee Carré (2022-01-14 03:28:43+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Blauwdruk (2022-01-14 12:45:42+00:00): Last week I traveled from Spain the Amsterdam. Bot changes are made on the spot. I see that at this moment the Spanish changes looks like only one day ago, but in reallity I did that las saturday.
Lee Carré (2022-01-14 20:05:23+00:00): That all changes really were surveyed, is great (some people misuse SC).

My point was that it would've been better to have SC upload your Spanish changes, and close the changeset, before beginning to make changes in Amsterdam. That way, different (much smaller) changesets would've been used, rather than one which covers half of Europe, and notified a lot of mappers in the process.

I can understand not wanting to use mobile data while roaming, but airports & hotels have 802.11 for customers to use, now.
Blauwdruk (2022-01-15 15:24:44+00:00): Thanks for answering.
I never realized that uploading changes was not right away. I checked my settings, they are on 'automatic' (not on 'ony wifi').  For some, for me unknown, reason it waited for days to upload the Spanish changes. This while I do not mind to use mobile data.
Soon I expect to travel every day a lot, so more people might send  me a likewise message like you did.  :-) If you know a way how to manually send SC changes, I would like to know.
Lee Carré (2022-01-16 02:43:05+00:00): Odd, indeed.

“I never realized that uploading changes was not right away. I checked my settings, they are on 'automatic' (not on 'ony wifi').”

Hmm, that's what is supposed to happen in that mode.

Perhaps file a bug report with SC (and cite the URL, since I'd like to follow it).

“it waited for days to upload the Spanish changes. This while I do not mind to use mobile data.”

My next question was going to be if you actually had usable network connectivity, at the time. If you have roaming mobile data enabled, then I would've thought so.

“If you know a way how to manually send SC changes, I would like to know.”

Yes; disable auto-upload. This will present a new button on the main UI. Pressing it will upload all changes since your last upload, and close the changesets.
So, tell it to upload between finishing in one area and starting in the next (else, per-day).
Lee Carré (2022-01-16 03:03:29+00:00): This may now be a solved problem.

See https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3640 from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116101839 . I suspect that it may be the same bug at work, in that case, and this one.
MxxCon (2022-01-14 07:00:40+00:00): Hello.
Please note that whenever possible it's better to write full names, not abbreviations. If strings are too long, computers can easily figure out how to abbreviate them, however, it's virtually impossible to do it other way around. Please see this article for more detailed explanation: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29
👍🙂
Warin61 (2022-01-13 21:56:10+00:00): Error .. see https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=134.51292&lat=-30.45849&zoom=17
fkv (2023-06-20 23:53:12+00:00): Zu https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1020729508 :
Warum vehicle=forestry? In Google Streetview (Aufnahme August 2022) ist da noch kein Fahrverbot sichtbar, sondern ein öffentlicher Parkplatz. Außerdem stellt ein Fahrverbot highway=tertiary in Frage.
Luzandro (2023-06-21 06:18:30+00:00): tatsächlich ist dort unmittelbar nach dem großen Parkplatz auf beiden Straßenseiten ein Fahrverbot "Forststraße" zu sehen, was offenbar zahlreiche "Förster" nicht daran hindert, danach noch zu parken.
Das müsste dann aber eben auch schon track sein.
gscholz (2022-01-14 05:38:39+00:00): Hi Crazywarfeather,
this changeset has added several errors to the OSM database regarding duplicate nodes:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-123.27146&lat=52.08479&zoom=16&overlays=self_intersection_ways,self_intersection_points,single_node_in_way,duplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=116089269

Additionally the added roads are not connected to other existing roads, so no routing software can use them.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
nevw (2022-01-13 09:33:48+00:00): Hi
There is a tag barrier=fence instead of using a description for the fence. You should also add a barrier=gate tag at the entrance
rthik007 (2022-01-17 11:37:38+00:00): "Hi Maxim Probolinggo,
I have changed the classification of road 
way 1020750137
Kindly check with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116250431.
Thank you."
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116090702
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-06 20:05:01+00:00): City of Pewaukee was correct to differentiate from Village of Pewaukee
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116090859
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-06 20:05:44+00:00): Nevermind
Joseph R P (2022-01-14 03:53:07+00:00): Hello, this section of US 19 should not be a motorway since it crosses at-grade intersections and should remain trunk. Motorway tags are for highways that have grade separations like interchanges, such as Interstates.
mavl (2022-01-14 13:10:17+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок понизил статус дороги (14 км) с tertiary до track. Отсутствие твёрдого покрытия не является причиной для снижения статуса дороги, так как статус определяет важность дороги в дорожной сети.    
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:highway  
  
Этот пакет правок отменён.
mavl (2022-01-14 13:13:48+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок понизил статус дороги до track. Отсутствие твёрдого покрытия не говорит о том, что эта дорога является полевой (лесной) и не является причиной для снижения статуса дороги, так как статус определяет важность дороги в дорожной сети.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:highway

Этот пакет правок отменён.
aharvey (2022-01-13 08:48:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116096916 on behalf of the DWG as a mass automated edit without prior community consultation, while discussion of the change can take place.
Ds5rUy (2022-01-13 06:21:40+00:00): This undiscussed, undocumented mass edit that didn't follow the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct is introducing a huge amount of incorrect data to the database and should be reverted.

public_transport=platform doesn't automatically go onto every highway=bus_stop, only in cases where that's the only thing that's mapped.
if there is an actual waiting area of any kind, the public_transport=platform belongs on that instead.

see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport#Buses
slice0 (2022-01-13 06:32:44+00:00): what Ds5rUy  is saying above is completely wrong, in Australia all Bus Stops are legally platform that must accomendate wheelchair access, so weather the is a chair to sit on at the bus stop or it's irelevent , the area around each bus stop sign is legally a platform https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/publications/bus-stops-and-disability-standards-accessible-public-transport
slice0 (2022-01-13 06:34:07+00:00): also the built in ID editor even agrees with me
Warin61 (2022-01-13 07:32:39+00:00): The mass edit should have been discussed. The 'rules' do state that these kinds of edits need to be discussed, as such the Australian talk list should be the first port of call. See https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
tastrax (2022-01-13 07:35:25+00:00): I can assure you slice0 that very few bus stops in my state easily accommodate wheelchairs and easy access into buses. I am also not sure its a legal requirement unless works are occurring in and around the bus stop which MAY trigger the requirement for an upgrade and yes, I did read the document that you linked
Warin61 (2022-01-13 07:42:05+00:00): As per tastrax .. most Australian laws are state based, as such 'bus stop' laws may well vary from state to state, just as traffic laws do.
aharvey (2022-01-13 08:47:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116096786 on behalf of the DWG as a mass automated edit without prior community consultation, while discussion of the change can take place.
PT-53 (2022-01-13 07:30:06+00:00): Hallo  wailhoas,
Du hast diesen Weg
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/112716754/history
gelöscht. 
Warum ? War das ein Versehen?

Das ist - wie man auf den zur Verfügung stehenden Luftbildern - klar erkennen kann die Zufahrt zum Gebäude Hohenmorgen 1. Ich habe den Weg daher wieder hergestellt.

Fragende Grüße

PS:
Für Fragen oder Anmerkungen bitte den Änderungssatz aufrufen und unterhalb Diskussion in das leere Feld eintragen.
wailhoas (2022-01-13 07:32:02+00:00): Ok, danke. Versehen :)
eggie (2022-01-13 07:23:14+00:00): Dag McMoor.. 
Tja.. dat is een paadje geworden.
Hier loopt (liep?)een fietsroute die nu niet meer routeerde.  Waar staat een bord dat bicycle=no rechtvaardigt?

Ik heb maxspeed 30 verwijderd. bicycle=no in yes omgezet. 
De afslagbeperkingen verwijderd. Je zou anders gevangenzitten met een motorvoertuig. Kennelijk mag je gewoon weer afslaan van en naar de Rondweg. Dat kan niet anders.
Je moet maar eens kijken. 
Staat het route bordje voor fietsers naar knooppunt 77 komende uit Abbenbroek er nog steeds? 
Zoniet dan zal de fietsroute verlegd moeten worden. 
De fietsroute in ieder geval hersteld. 
Gr eggie
eggie (2022-01-13 08:33:54+00:00): Laat even weten hoe de knooppuntfietsroute (49-77) nu echt loopt... Dan kan ik 'm evt omleggen naar het zuidelijke fietspad.
Het heeft geen haast.
eggie
McMoor (2022-01-13 08:50:59+00:00): Eigenlijk is er helemaal niet meer en is dit gedeelte een berm geworden. Voetgangers gebruiken dit deel nog steeds om over te steken en daarmee is een pad ontstaan. Omdat het eigenlijk een berm is staan er ook geen borden, geen snelheid, etc.  Alles behalve voetganger zou "nee" moeten zijn. Als dit alles te verwarrend is, is het beter om dit gedeelte in zijn geheel te verwijderen.
De route om de Rondweg over te steken is ligt iets ten zuiden gescheiden voor auto's en fietsers.
Fiets route boord staat aan de andere kant van de weg t.p.v het stukje asfalt van de "Oude Kadesdijk" tussen de fietspaden.
eggie (2022-01-13 08:59:00+00:00): Oke.. Ik verleg de fietsroute wel.
Dat paadje wordt natuurlijk gewoon gebruikt. Het is vanzelf ontstaan. Een zgn. olifantenpaadje.
Die mappen we wel gewoon als highway=path
path=desire
informal=yes
surface=dirt

Geen accesstags svp. Want er staat vast geen bord Verboden voor fietsers.. 

Weghalen dus liever niet.

Ik zal nu de fietsroute verleggen.. dan kun je zelf het olifantenpaadje aanpassen met bovenstaande tags. 
Tenminste als het informele paadje er nog is. Up to you.
Moment .. ben dan even die route aan het verleggen..  Dat gaat niet met editor iD .. alleen met josm.
eggie
eggie (2022-01-13 09:06:38+00:00): Fietsroutes zijn verlegd.. Up to you wat je met het olifantenpaadje doet.
Denk dat het met bovenstaande aanpassingen wel in OSM kan blijven.
eggie
eggie (2022-01-13 09:13:53+00:00): De fietsroute loopt nu zo... https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=18.0/51.8458/4.2504
McMoor (2022-01-13 12:26:18+00:00): Fiets routes heb ik nog niet kunnen vinden hoe ik die moet aanpassen, maar zoals nu aangepast door jouw is deze correct.
Ik begin de TAG nu ook meer te begrijpen. Het echter verschil tussen velden en TAG is mij nog niet helemaal duidelijk. Als ik de velden invul zouden de TAG ook gelijk goed moeten staan toch?
Ik krijg de toegang / accesstags niet aangepast/verwijderd.
eggie (2022-01-13 12:38:06+00:00): De tagging bestaat uit een sleutel key en een waarde value..
Bv highway is de sleutel.. path is de waarde.. Samen heet het de 'tag'

Editor iD is heel beperkt. 
ID maakt van yes bv weer no of andersom.
Dat is om gek van te worden. Je kunt ook de regel sleutel=waarde eerst verwijderen en dan via aanvullen een nieuwe regel aanmaken.
Ik gebruik zelf editor josm zoals de meeste mappers. ID is niet populair.

Fietsroutes pas gaan aanpassen als je veel ervaring hebt. Het zijn de specialisten die dat onderhouden.. en alleen met josm.
Eggie
eggie (2022-01-13 12:39:46+00:00): En veel van die voorkeuzes bestaan niet in iD.. dus gewoon zelf invullen.. niet de presets gebruiken.
eggie (2022-01-13 13:15:23+00:00): Olifantenpaadje aangepast..
eggie (2022-01-13 07:05:19+00:00): Dag McMoor.. Wanneer een bedrijf verdwijnt hoort het adres wel achter te blijven. Je hebt dat helaas verwijderd.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=116092415
Svp alleen de bedrijfsinfo verwijderen. 
Ik zal het herstellen.
MVG
eggie
McMoor (2022-01-13 07:18:09+00:00): Ik dacht alleen de POI icon t hebben verwijderd. Ik begrijp nu dat dan gelijk het adres weg is.
eggie (2022-01-13 07:25:59+00:00): Oke, maar dat is er weer  :)

Ben wel even bezig bij die verdwenen oversteek. De fietsroute heb ik daar hersteld (was geblokkeerd door bicycle=no) en de afslagbeperkingen verwijderd.
Zou je even kunnen kijken of het nu klopt..
tastrax (2022-01-29 22:43:44+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
neuhausr (2022-01-13 15:03:47+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap! Something to think about for the future: instead of deleting the node, you could just delete the tags with store info, and leave the node with the addr:housenumber, addr:streetname, and level info. Then someone in the future would potentially be able to reuse the node when there is a new store there. Happy mapping!
chatruthai (2022-01-13 07:41:12+00:00): cancel
Jakuje (2022-02-28 20:48:27+00:00): Ahoj,
proc jsi cestu 628642568 oznacil jako proposed? Silnice je na miste jiz nejaky patek a jezdi po ni trolejbusy, jen vkytlica zapomel v 112027157 smazat tag proposed (a ja jsem to v 113614623 prehledl) a ted v novych mapach koukam jak puk proc tam neni.
Jakuje (2022-02-28 21:00:40+00:00): Opravil jsem v https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117959050 vcetne tech access tagu, ktere byly evidentne spatne. Prosim, nez udelas nejakou takovou skoro-automatickou zmenu, koukni do historie a pokud neco neni jasne, ozvi se v komentarich, zvlast v oblastech, kde jsou aktivni maperi s lokalni znalosti.
Frans S (2022-01-13 11:27:52+00:00): Thank you for mapping. 
A remark. Please decide which tag to be added to a trace , based on the Highway wiki, the widht and the route of that trace. 
If it wide enough to be driven by a 4 wheel vihicle, it can be tagged as highway=unclassified.  This tag covers all kinds of roads in the country side where it connects settlemens, farms etc. For traces, leading to farm fields, woods, riversides, depending of the widht, track or path can be used,

A hint: how to measure the width of a road in iDeditor to decide which tag to be used Zoom in as far as possible and draw a line between the shoulders of a trace and click ctr +shift+M to shows measurements click on the line between the nodes and you get the width.

Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116094880
philippec (2022-01-13 09:08:36+00:00): Aalst Stadsbibliotheek Utopia aed.
Ik vind die niet op het stadsplan https://www.aalst.be/stadsplan
Maak je een melding, of ben ik verkeerd ?
Heb je ook een location beschrijving en mapillary's ?
Ivan Lievens (2022-01-13 13:00:24+00:00): Ik heb gewoon de contouren van het gebouw aangepast. Die AED stond er al door iemand anders. Volgens dat stadsplan zijn er maar 7 in groot Aalst. Dat lijkt mij wel weinig.
philippec (2022-01-13 13:17:37+00:00): U hebt hem wel 190 centimeter verplaatst.  (stelling van Pythagoras).

Dat is waarschijnlijk niet erg want Systainable Mobile mapt toch niet juist.
philippec (2022-01-13 13:21:03+00:00): Het stadsplan van Aalst toont er veel meer.  OSM heeft er 32
[out:json][timeout:25];
{{geocodeArea:aalst}}->.searchArea;
( 
  
  node["emergency"="defibrillator"](area.searchArea);
);
// print results
out body;
>;
out skel qt;
Ivan Lievens (2022-01-13 14:41:11+00:00): Ik had het over het stadsplan van aalst.be waar er niet veel op staan.
Moest ik nog weten waar die stond wil ik die gerust terug plaatsen en als ik eens in de buurt ben zal ik eens gaan kijkenn waar die hangt.
mike140 (2022-01-13 10:26:39+00:00): Тут после вашей правки лес пропал: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6695223/
Shaun das Schaf (2022-01-13 11:22:32+00:00): Hallo dave_hilp, willkommen bei OSM!

Ein paar Anmerkungen zu deinen Änderungen:
- Bitte nutze für den Wert des Tags "water_source" an den verschiedenen Hydranten die bereits bestehenden Möglichkeiten. Diese sind z.B. hier aufgelistet: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:water_source
- Heißt diese Pumpstation https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9414867355 wirklich offiziell "Pumpstation Im Gäßchen (Abwasser)" oder hast du diese nur so genannt? Zumindest das "(Abwasser)" gehört sicher nicht zum Namen, sondern sollte durch einen der hier genannten Tags beschrieben werden: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:man_made%3Dpumping_station . Gleiches gilt für diese Pumpstation https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9414867353
- Das hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1020775391 erscheint mir dem Namen nach eher ein https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dwater_protection_area anstatt man_made=water_works zu sein, oder?
- Auch hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/487044120 gehört das "Aufbereitung" wohl eher nicht zum offiziellen Namen
- Hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9414867351 gehört das "(Abwasser)" ebenfalls nicht in den Namen. Das "B54" erscheint mir eher eine Referenznummer zu sein (siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:ref). Das verbleibende "Pumpstation" im Namen kann man sich sparen, denn das wird ja bereits durch man_made=pumping_station erfasst. Somit könnte/sollte hier der Name-Tag komplett entfernt werden.
- Hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9414776704 erscheint mir das "Quellsammelschacht Quelle Höhwald" eher in den description-Tag anstatt in den ref-Tag zu gehören, oder nicht?
- Für was steht hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/487044121 das "TZ" im Namen? Abkürzungen sollten in Namen generell vermieden werden.

Bitte noch entsprechend verbessern. Bei Fragen kannst du dich natürlich gerne melden.

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
wwhide (2022-01-13 08:26:16+00:00): I aligned some stuff back but left some stuff out because I don't have time to fix everything