piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mapman44 (2019-07-07 13:43:11+00:00): Thanks for your edits. What is the source of your information about guidelines and traffic counts?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/71972671
Oregonian3 (2019-07-07 14:01:42+00:00): Traffic counts can be found at https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Data/Documents/Flow_Map_2017.pdf

I'm trying to balance the factors such as traffic counts, length, connectivity, and "feel" when modifying the classifications.
mapman44 (2019-07-07 14:18:29+00:00): Actually ODOT has already posted the correct classifications and you should follow it since it is the official source. You can find the information at https://gis.odot.state.or.us/transgis/ and then in the Classifications tab on the left.
Oregonian3 (2019-07-07 14:44:18+00:00): Ah thank you; I was unaware of that link! Will use it! Looks like the vast majority of my edits happened to follow it anyways though :)
Oregonian3 (2019-07-07 14:46:17+00:00): Red on that map should be orange here, blue and green should be yellow, and pink should be white it seems. With the exception of US routes, which should always be orange?
Oregonian3 (2019-07-07 14:54:11+00:00): Or perhaps, looking at their map more closely, red should be orange, blue we can and should use our judgment to determine if red or yellow, green should be yellow, and pink should be white?
mapman44 (2019-07-07 14:56:04+00:00): Yes, it can be a bit confusing. I really don't remember off the top of my head so it would be best to see if you can search for additional ODOT clarification.
Oregonian3 (2019-07-20 16:55:18+00:00): Ah, looks like ODOT has two different, competing sets of classifications then. If you go to ODOT's TransGIS, and look at "Federal Functional Class" under the Classifications tab, those are the ones I'm using, which seem to represent reality well. Here, red corresponds to primary (of course), blue is a toss-up between primary and secondary, and green is secondary with a few tertiary mixed in there. Pink and gray I'm always denoting as tertiary with these rules. Under these rules, to use one of your examples, having OR 238 as primary makes total sense, seeing as it is denoted as blue on ODOT's map, and has quite high traffic traffic counts for a rural highway (much higher than e.g. OR 66). I've also downgraded a LOT of minor routes (not principal arterial, very low traffic counts) in eastern Oregon to primary to secondary as you say is correct (e.g. OR 19, OR 138, OR 74, OR 31); I agree that many of the routes were listed too high previously

In short, I guess it needs to be decided which of the two classification schemes to follow: OHP Class or Federal Functional Class. They're mostly consistent, but several routes like OR 238 appear to be quite different between the two.

And I agree that secondary routes should be rendered much better at lower zooms :)
Oregonian3 (2019-07-20 16:56:19+00:00): And I can verify all the highways I've either upgraded to or downgraded from trunk either do or don't have high access control, respectively (either driven them myself or have looked closely at maps)
btwhite92 (2019-07-20 16:58:53+00:00): For what it's worth, I think the easiest way to fix the rendering/classification problem is the US would be to ditch equating 'trunk' with "expressway", orthogonalize "expressway" with its own tag (since it's a physical attribute of a road and not a measure of importance), and make 'trunk' equal "most important cross-country routes" and then go down from there. 

However, last time this was discussed on the us-talk mailing list, discussion devolved into a bloodbath that moderators eventually had to shut down. I doubt a true consensus about this issue will ever be reached in the US, but most often, 'trunk' is used for "expressway" so I am trying to tag that way as well.
Oregonian3 (2019-07-20 17:01:55+00:00): Agree on your point about Trunk here; I think there needs to be a classification above primary for the truly vital routes but that aren't expressways (e.g. US 101, US 97, OR 22 and such)
Oregonian3 (2019-07-20 17:02:20+00:00): But judging by what you said above, doesn't seem like that will happen soon :(
btwhite92 (2019-07-20 17:06:51+00:00): Most mappers in the US do not use the federal functional classification since it is both does not correspond well to OSM classification system and is often internally inconsistent. In my opinion, the OHP classes map much better to OSM classes and could safely be used to aid classification decisions.

And believe me, I am on the same page about secondary & state route rendering. I have been on the fence about the main roads in my current Truckee/Tahoe area for years for the same issues.

Anyways, just wanted to explain my reasoning since I am the one who made many of the changes to a region that hasn't seen a lot of love. I will happily defer to active local mappers who know the region better than I do.
Oregonian3 (2019-07-20 17:12:35+00:00): Ah interesting. I preferred the federal functional class because (unlike the OHP class) it also applies to non-state roads, which should obviously use the same classification scheme as the state highways in OR. Seems there's no one good solution unfortunately... Will think on highways like OR 99 and OR 238 some more...

And such constructive criticism of my changes like you provided is course always appreciated!
btwhite92 (2019-07-20 17:24:24+00:00): If you haven't seen these already, here's some good references about US classification:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_Road_Classification

Some discussion about fed/state functional class systems not corresponding to OSM tags:

https://www.mail-archive.com/talk-us@openstreetmap.org/msg16988.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/talk-us@openstreetmap.org/msg03714.html
btwhite92 (2019-07-20 17:31:27+00:00): One other point - while the fed functional class does classify non-state/US roads as you point out, it is usually way off the mark for local/city roads relative to the OSM scheme. The vast majority of urban arteries the federal class with list as "other principal artery" are 'secondary' or 'tertiary' in OSM, only occasionally 'primary'.

I live in Truckee - the fed functional class here lists everything but the state highways as a local road, which is patently incorrect. The functional class map, and to some degree the NHS system (especially MAP-21 roads), seem to be more based around funding and highway policy than necessarily the way OSM classifies roads.
Oregonian3 (2019-07-20 17:34:13+00:00): Ah, yeah from living in Oregon for many years, the federal functional class for non-state highways and state highways in Portland is actually pretty indicative of the true road importances (with a few minor exceptions that can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis). Portland is a city with a very small number of freeways/expressways for its size, so the arterials in the area gather much more traffic and importance than in other similarly-sized cities like Denver.
seattlefyi (2019-07-12 00:45:19+00:00): Hi, glad to see the edit. Do you happen to know if the address for the business that closed is still valid? Perhaps we can just delete the old business tags, and not lose that!  Thanks again!
taki3hira (2019-07-07 03:43:31+00:00): 誤変換：温暖歩道ではなく横断歩道
Sosha1996 (2019-07-09 12:07:23+00:00): بخاطر ویرایش‌هایی که روی نقشه میزنید ازتون ممنونم.
اما طبق قوانین اوپن‌استریت مپ، شما باید یک توضیح مناسب در کامنت چنجست در مورد تغییراتی که در چنجستتون اعمال کردید بنویسید.
ننوشتن توضیحات یا نوشتن فقط یک کلمه مانند «خشکرود» یا مواردی از این دست، غیرقابل قبول می‌باشد.

همچنین اگر تغییراتی میدید که سطح یک شهر یا یک منطقه وسیع رو در بر میگیره، باید اون رو در چندین چنجست بارگذاری کنید. بارگذاری این حجم از تغییرات در یک چنجست غیر قابل قبول می‌باشد.

از این به بعد در صورت رعایت نکردن نکات بالا، این پیغام روی چنجست و صندوق پیام خود مشاهده خواهید کرد. در صورت نادیده گرفتن این پیغام و جواب ندادن به اون، حساب شما گزارش خواهد شد.(البته این یک تهدید نیست. ما سعی داریم این رویه اشتباه رو تصحیح کنیم و امیدواریم که شما این رو درک کنید)

لطفا این متن را مطالعه کنید:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fa:Good_changeset_comments

——————————————————————
Hi,
Thank you for helping improve OSM data in Iran, you're uploading very large number of changes in to the map on a regular basis and to help other people who are monitoring the map changes(like officials frome Data Group or Community Admins), to understand what is happening in your change sets, it's appropriate to leave a detailed changeset comments.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Sosha1996 (2019-07-09 12:07:25+00:00): بخاطر ویرایش‌هایی که روی نقشه میزنید ازتون ممنونم.
اما طبق قوانین اوپن‌استریت مپ، شما باید یک توضیح مناسب در کامنت چنجست در مورد تغییراتی که در چنجستتون اعمال کردید بنویسید.
ننوشتن توضیحات یا نوشتن فقط یک کلمه مانند «خشکرود» یا مواردی از این دست، غیرقابل قبول می‌باشد.

همچنین اگر تغییراتی میدید که سطح یک شهر یا یک منطقه وسیع رو در بر میگیره، باید اون رو در چندین چنجست بارگذاری کنید. بارگذاری این حجم از تغییرات در یک چنجست غیر قابل قبول می‌باشد.

از این به بعد در صورت رعایت نکردن نکات بالا، این پیغام روی چنجست و صندوق پیام خود مشاهده خواهید کرد. در صورت نادیده گرفتن این پیغام و جواب ندادن به اون، حساب شما گزارش خواهد شد.(البته این یک تهدید نیست. ما سعی داریم این رویه اشتباه رو تصحیح کنیم و امیدواریم که شما این رو درک کنید)

لطفا این متن را مطالعه کنید:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fa:Good_changeset_comments

——————————————————————
Hi,
Thank you for helping improve OSM data in Iran, you're uploading very large number of changes in to the map on a regular basis and to help other people who are monitoring the map changes(like officials frome Data Group or Community Admins), to understand what is happening in your change sets, it's appropriate to leave a detailed changeset comments.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Sosha1996 (2019-07-09 12:07:28+00:00): بخاطر ویرایش‌هایی که روی نقشه میزنید ازتون ممنونم.
اما طبق قوانین اوپن‌استریت مپ، شما باید یک توضیح مناسب در کامنت چنجست در مورد تغییراتی که در چنجستتون اعمال کردید بنویسید.
ننوشتن توضیحات یا نوشتن فقط یک کلمه مانند «خشکرود» یا مواردی از این دست، غیرقابل قبول می‌باشد.

همچنین اگر تغییراتی میدید که سطح یک شهر یا یک منطقه وسیع رو در بر میگیره، باید اون رو در چندین چنجست بارگذاری کنید. بارگذاری این حجم از تغییرات در یک چنجست غیر قابل قبول می‌باشد.

از این به بعد در صورت رعایت نکردن نکات بالا، این پیغام روی چنجست و صندوق پیام خود مشاهده خواهید کرد. در صورت نادیده گرفتن این پیغام و جواب ندادن به اون، حساب شما گزارش خواهد شد.(البته این یک تهدید نیست. ما سعی داریم این رویه اشتباه رو تصحیح کنیم و امیدواریم که شما این رو درک کنید)

لطفا این متن را مطالعه کنید:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fa:Good_changeset_comments

——————————————————————
Hi,
Thank you for helping improve OSM data in Iran, you're uploading very large number of changes in to the map on a regular basis and to help other people who are monitoring the map changes(like officials frome Data Group or Community Admins), to understand what is happening in your change sets, it's appropriate to leave a detailed changeset comments.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Leo Slager (2019-07-07 13:41:22+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Leo Slager (2019-07-07 13:44:42+00:00): Dag Marcochil,
In NL worden de bedrijfsgegevens toegevoegd aan de adres-node en niet aan het gebouw.
Gebouwen en de adressen worden in NL rechtstreeks geïmporteerd vanuit de BAG van het kadaster.
Zo voorkomen we dat adressen meerdere malen in de database worden genoemd.
ik verander het even.
Leo Slager (2019-07-07 13:56:06+00:00): Dag marcchil,
De tag access beschrijft het gebruik van een weg voor de verschillende verkeersdeelnemers:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access.
Het toevoegen van access=yes betekent dus dat alle verkeersdeelnemers gebruik mogen maken van de playground.
Dat is vast niet de bedoeling.
Je kunt het beter achterwege laten.
Sosha1996 (2019-07-09 12:01:31+00:00): بخاطر ویرایش‌هایی که روی نقشه میزنید ازتون ممنونم.
اما طبق قوانین اوپن‌استریت مپ، شما باید یک توضیح مناسب در کامنت چنجست در مورد تغییراتی که در چنجستتون اعمال کردید بنویسید.
ننوشتن توضیحات یا نوشتن فقط یک کلمه مانند «done» یا مواردی از این دست، غیرقابل قبول می‌باشد.

همچنین اگر تغییراتی میدید که سطح یک شهر یا یک منطقه وسیع رو در بر میگیره، باید اون رو در چندین چنجست بارگذاری کنید. بارگذاری این حجم از تغییرات در یک چنجست غیر قابل قبول می‌باشد.

از این به بعد در صورت رعایت نکردن نکات بالا، این پیغام روی چنجست و صندوق پیام خود مشاهده خواهید کرد. در صورت نادیده گرفتن این پیغام و جواب ندادن به اون، حساب شما گزارش خواهد شد.(البته این یک تهدید نیست. ما سعی داریم این رویه اشتباه رو تصحیح کنیم و امیدواریم که شما این رو درک کنید)

لطفا این متن را مطالعه کنید:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fa:Good_changeset_comments

——————————————————————
Hi,
Thank you for helping improve OSM data in Iran, you're uploading very large number of changes in to the map on a regular basis and to help other people who are monitoring the map changes(like officials frome Data Group or Community Admins), to understand what is happening in your change sets, it's appropriate to leave a detailed changeset comments.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
SK53 (2021-10-22 16:55:46+00:00): Hi Mike,

wetland=peat_bog looks to be a tag which you are possibly one of the main users of in the UK (and possibly worldwide. Do you have any feeling if it is distinct from wetland=bog? 

Do you know if your main usage is on blanket bogs or raised bogs (I presume the former are much commoner in the Pennines).

Jerry
user_3022894 (2020-07-11 19:41:39+00:00): Hi, an einem Straßenstück wie https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/504405523/history gibt es überhaupt keinen Gehweg! Ich glaube, da hast du dich vertan. Werde das in Kürze ändern, viele Grüße.
seattlefyi (2019-07-12 00:44:19+00:00): Hi, glad to see the edit. Do you happen to know if the address for the business that closed is still valid? Perhaps we can just delete the old business tags, and not lose that! The new iD editor "downgrade" option is supposed to make that easier. Thanks again!
apm-wa (2020-03-23 03:23:33+00:00): The old name of this hospital, imeni Semashko, is already included in the old_name tags.
mosstreet (2019-07-09 07:47:32+00:00): what it is?
abakus_uploader (2019-07-07 22:30:30+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!
Warin61 (2025-06-24 03:22:44+00:00): Hi,
The 'Bruce Ridge MTB Trails' relation 5341192 looks to me like a collection of mtb routes? And each of these routes now have their own relation? In short I think the relation 5341192 can be deleted .. as each individual route is now mapped and a route relation should be a single route not a collection?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-07-09 00:36:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 72032908 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some perhaps well-meaning but ultimately unhelpful edits following complaints from local mappers.  See http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=10045571 for more details.
alphensebezorger (2019-07-09 10:38:25+00:00): Hallo Dick,

Ik kwam via knooppuntnet bij deze changeset uit. Kun je nog eens naar https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1716754 kijken? De key 'capacity' was vast niet de bedoeling hier.

Vriendelijke groet, Alphensebezorger.
SomeoneElse (2019-07-07 18:02:14+00:00): Hello Khayal Gulushov and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
In this changeset you've changed the names of a number of places.  OSM's policy for names in different languages can be seen at https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf .  As an example, if you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1347126901 you can see that names in many different languages are present.  This allows anyone to make a map that shows those places in any of those names.  Individual maps, such as the four different ones that you see at the openstreetmap.org website, can use different names while the main "name" tag is usually the one used "on the ground" by people who actually live there.
If you'd like any more help or explanation about OpenStreetMap please don't hesitate to let us know.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2019-07-07 18:02:48+00:00): Hello Khayal Gulushov və OpenStreetMap-a xoş gəlmisiniz!
Bu dəyişiklikdə bir sıra yerlərin adlarını dəyişdiniz. OSM-in müxtəlif dillərdə adları üzrə siyasəti https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf ünvanından da görünə bilər. Məsələn, əgər https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1347126901 ünvanına baxırsınızsa, bir çox müxtəlif dillərdə bu adların olduğunu görə bilərsiniz. Bu, hər kəsin bu adları göstərən bir harita yaratmasına imkan verir. Openstreetmap.org saytında gördüyünüz dörd fərqli fərdi xəritələr, əsas "ad" etiketi adətən orada yaşayan insanlar tərəfindən "yerdə" istifadə edildikdə fərqli adlar istifadə edə bilər.
OpenStreetMap haqqında daha çox yardım və ya izahat istəsəniz, xahiş edirik bizə bildirin.
Hörmətlə,
OSM'nin Data İş Qrupu adından Andy Townsend.
maraf24 (2019-07-08 09:18:35+00:00): "poprawienie danych"? 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Komentarze_zestawu_zmian
meskobalazs (2019-07-07 19:24:59+00:00): Why the change? The comment is absolutely useless.
leveskockaa (2019-07-07 20:13:13+00:00): So are the changesets themselves. Thank you Carlan, but this highway is a proposed trunk, not a motorway, and it does not exist at this time.

Please do not add this non-existent road again.
GabrielSebastianMoise (2019-07-08 23:09:42+00:00): Revert all his changes ! This one does not respond to messages, and this user, has edits in many countries, and destroy data. In Romania , added inexistent motorways, the same in Greece.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-07-09 00:36:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 72032908 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some perhaps well-meaning but ultimately unhelpful edits following complaints from local mappers.  See http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=10045571 for more details.
user_5359 (2019-10-18 09:44:41+00:00): Hallo Norbert, der Änderungssatz ist schon etwas älter, aber ich habe mal eine Frage dazu: Wieso hat der Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/702189729 ein Tag noexit am Weg und nicht am entsprechenden Endpunkt? (JOSM warnt übrigens, dass in Deutschland dieses Tag nicht auf dem Weg gesetzt wird.)
eggie (2019-08-17 09:09:43+00:00): Svp een camperplaats niet als camp_site taggen. Wanneer je reageert zouden we kunnen helpen.

MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2019-08-17 09:15:03+00:00): aangepast
maraf24 (2019-07-08 09:18:48+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Komentarze_zestawu_zmian
mavl (2019-12-04 09:01:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 77913960, 77919406, 77910048, 77905960 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: an incompatible source].
Truchin (2019-07-08 16:17:36+00:00): Bonjour

Pourquoi sur la route de la Pyramide (bois de Vincennes) as tu supprimé des tags ?
Elle était pourtant taguée conformément à ce que demande le wiki ? Et cela permet également de faire la différence avec un sentier quelconque.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Voies_vertes

Thomas
simon_geovelo (2019-07-16 14:08:39+00:00): Bonjour,
Merci pour ton signalement. Je vais resensibiliser notre contributeur aux bonnes pratiques.
Simon de Geovelo
changchun_1 (2019-09-22 00:08:52+00:00): Hallo Daki411,
bitte an die Regeln halten und nicht deinen Namen an Objekte schreiben. z.B bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/78708932

Gruß changchun_1
dvdhoven (2019-07-07 09:35:04+00:00): Ik vind het geen mooie oplossing. Een route laten staan om te gaan kijken of hij echt wel weg is. Dat geeft foutmeldingen in VMarc en in tegenstelling tot jou moet ik daar dagelijks mee dealen. Ik wil VMarc zo foutvrij mogelijk houden als mogelijk.
Voor mij is het rcn dagelijks werk.
En als routedatabank aangeeft dat hij weg is, dan moeten we het daarmee doen. Ik heb de afgelopen tijd veel routes verwijderd, er zijn overal grote wijzigingen.
En zeker, ik weet het, routedatabank bevat ook fouten. 
Om die storende foutmeldingen in VMarc kwijt te raken, heb ik de route naar lcn gezet. Dan heeft het rcn er voorlopig geen last meer van.

Ik heb 30 jaar in de IT gewerkt en daar heel veel tijd in het fout zoeken en oplossen gewerkt. Mijn ervaring is, dat je foutlijsten zo schoon mogelijk moet houden. Anders stikt het van de known bugs.

Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
alphensebezorger (2019-07-07 10:31:24+00:00): Als je me even de tijd had gegeven had ik die foutmeldingen zelf wel weggewerkt. Omdat ik bij mijn survey her en der nog bordjes op de route 49-82 tegenkwam, ging gelijk wissen van de route me te ver. Zoals in de fixme-tag aangegeven was een extra survey nodig om de situatie goed te bekijken.
Ik probeer zoveel mogelijk de werkelijkheid op de grond in OSM weer te geven, en niet blind een of andere databank te volgen. Als een databank beweert dat iets niet bestaat, maar ik kom het tijdens een survey toch tegen, ga ik het niet wissen.

P.S. Ik ontdekte je reactie pas nadat ik een PM gestuurd had.

Vriendelijke groet, Alphensebezorger.
A67-A67 (2019-07-08 18:22:58+00:00): Ik ben vandaag door Rijswijk-Buiten gefietst. De bordjes zijn daar al aangepast naar de nieuwe situatie. Bij knooppunt 82 wordt naar de nieuwe knooppunten verwezen en in Rijswijk-Buiten ben ik geen enkel bordje van de oude zuidelijke route 46-82 tegengekomen. Ik heb de lcn-route (dat was 46-82) daarom verwijderd.
alphensebezorger (2019-07-09 10:29:00+00:00): Dan was ik net twee dagen te vroeg, zaterdagavond hingen er nog bordjes langs de Van Rijnweg en bij de Laan van Sion. Ik had niet goed op de nummers gelet, daarom leek mij een extra survey nodig. Ik was bang dat er een nieuwe route van gemaakt was.
Als alle bordjes nu weggehaald zijn, kan die "ongebruikte route" inderdaad gewist. Bedankt voor je fietstochtje en melding, ik ga weer verder met de 10 nieuwe knooppunten die ik gister in Rotterdam afgefietst heb. Eens kijken of dvdhoven me weer in de weg gaat zitten.

Vriendelijke groet, Alphensebezorger.
SomeoneElse (2022-06-26 23:00:05+00:00): Hello,
Esri imagery is offset here.  You can tell which is correct by looking at OS OpenData StreetView and OS OpenMap Local, and seeing that that is aligned well to Bing, but not Esri.
Best Regards,
Andy
mundlk (2022-06-29 08:57:29+00:00): Hi Andy,

Thanks for reviewing our changeset. We have now modified the geometry based on OS OpenData StreetView and Bing Imagery as a part of Changeset: 122991410. Thanks again for the feedback. Happy to learn from you.

PS: Replying on behalf of unnsyeda as the editor is on a leave.

Best Regards,
mundlk.
SteMue (2019-07-08 08:31:07+00:00): Beide Artikel widersprechen Ihrer Auffassung, es sind Arbeiter auf der Trasse unterwegs. Weiterhin haben Sie die falschen Trassen und Flächen wiederhergestellt.
kartonage (2019-07-08 09:24:20+00:00): Die von dir angegebene Quelle war "LUBI 2018" und für die Angaben definitiv nicht ausreichend. An den Gleisen und Bahnhöfen wird derzeit nicht gebaut. Dass da entsprechende Fachkräfte für Vermessungen und andere Tätigkeiten herumlaufen mag sein, ist aber weniger relevant für OSM.