piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Gino-52 (2019-11-05 07:51:29+00:00): Hallo Ifemak,
ich werde nichts zurück ändern.
Die Straßen waren als residental getaggt, was lt. Wiki richtig war. Du hast sie auf unclassified geändert, was lt Wiki auch nicht falsch ist.
Meine Ausgangsfrage war ja nur, warum Du unclassified gewählt hast.
Eine Forumsanfrage halte ich nicht für sinnvoll, da das Problem m.E. im Wiki ausreichend beschrieben ist und im Forum selten ein konkretes Ergebnis rauskommt.
Also weiterhin frohes Mappen.
Gruß Gino
Baloo Uriza (2018-08-08 02:18:40+00:00): I get that there's a lot of ponds around but I don't see one here.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61450453
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-26 09:25:21+00:00): Hi Joseph E.
Hope you are doing great.
What is the type of this relation?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8512380

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Types_of_relation

Kind regards,
TheDutchMan13 (2018-08-10 03:44:26+00:00): Any chance you can tell me why you deleted all those buildings?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61450741
combloop (2018-08-10 03:52:39+00:00): I added some buildings, a glitch duplicated them after I saved my changes, I removed the duplicates.
TheDutchMan13 (2018-08-10 03:57:20+00:00): Thanks for the quick reply!
combloop (2018-08-10 03:59:32+00:00): welcome :)
TheDutchMan13 (2018-08-10 04:05:30+00:00): Before i forget, try to add a more descriptive  changeset comment in your future changesets. Besides just "fix"
combloop (2018-08-10 04:27:18+00:00): Alright! Sure thing.
glglgl (2018-08-09 07:50:08+00:00): May I know what was wrong with the deleted line here? Its deletion left the respective relation (T2 R8 WELS Township, 8439730) broken.
glglgl (2018-08-09 07:51:45+00:00): The other one was incomplete as well, so I reverted this changeset. I hope you are ok with that.
Rustbelt (2018-08-09 12:30:12+00:00): I deleted it a couple of days ago because it was in the wrong place. Your new line, too, is in the wrong location. The actual boundary is north of Kelloch Mountain.
glglgl (2018-08-09 12:59:20+00:00): If you know the correct location, may I ask you to just correct it? I am not from there and only help (among others) to fix boundaries which are structurally broken (such as missing lines which result in incompete relations).
The correct way to fix that is to move the points or to have the lines (ways) touch each other as they do now. If you need help doing that, feel free to ask again.
I try to move the line further to the North in the meanwhile.
Rustbelt (2018-08-09 13:01:36+00:00): Honestly, I don't like someone watching over my shoulder like this. The last time someone else jumped in to "help" screwed up what I was working on and I simply gave up editing for almost a year. I find myself in a similar situation today: an over zealous person who is located nowhere near here, has zero local knowledge of this area, who meddles without asking for answers first. I'm sorry that I work for a living and I cannot watch for changeset reversions at 3:00 am.

If you would like to be helpful, please put it back the way you found it, and when I have time, I will fix this problem using properly sourced materials from the State of Maine. And if you're going to send a message asking for a response—as you did—kindly allow a reasonable amount of time to respond.
glglgl (2018-08-09 13:14:03+00:00): Mmmm… according to https://www.nps.gov/kaww/planyourvisit/upload/Katahdin-Woods-and-Waters-Recreation-Map.pdf, the boundaries seem correct. (While this may not be a legal data source for changes, I think it can happily be used for arguing a "non-change"…)
glglgl (2018-08-09 13:26:03+00:00): Sorry, I saw your second change right now.

I am sorry to meddle with you work, but OpenStreetMap is a community project where everybody is welcome to contribute.

You have told me what you don't like, I, on the other side, don't like it when people randomly remove boundary parts and leave admin relations open and incomplete. Even if this boundary part is slightly misplaced, removing altogether is not good.

I am not watching over your shoulder concretely, I am just looking at the admin relations found to turned defective by (as in this example) https://wambachers-osm.website/index.php/10-osm-reports/1316-countries-compare-2018-08-09.

I am definitely not going to remove this part again, as I am sure "Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument" has a south boundary and "T2 R8 WELS Township" has a north boundary. Removing them would harm the integrity of said boundaries/multipolygon, and repairing things is not "over zalous", as you call it.
glglgl (2018-08-09 13:28:18+00:00): If, however, you feel the need to remove it again, I won't be able to prevent you from doing that. I am going to retract myself from your region and let you destroy multipolygons at your will, but don't be surprised if that reduces OSM's overall usability.
Rustbelt (2018-08-09 15:05:56+00:00): Hey! I'm not just "destroying multipolygons at…will." I've been doing this type of work for about 30 years, long before open source was a concept, so I have a very strong sense of what data integrity should look like so that it works correctly. I simply wish that when someone steps into an area, that more coordination happened between editors towards the same end rather than towards cross purposes.

You've given me a LOT to reply to. In particular, you mention https://www.nps.gov/kaww/planyourvisit/upload/Katahdin-Woods-and-Waters-Recreation-Map.pdf as a potentional source. This map is a solid source, but you read the information on it incorrectly; as I mentioned above, the correct line for this township is north of Kelloch Mountain. This map corroborates this assertion, although it is not a well-designed map, and your interpretation is an easy mistake to commit. 

Although it is not labeled, the actual township line falls between points 3 and 4 (and slightly north of point 7) on this map: https://bdn-data.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs.dir/37/files/2017/08/FKWW-Loop-Rd-map-web-page-001.jpg This map was produced by a non-profit organization that works closely with the National Park Service. It also corroborates your source when you take into account the poor map design.

Its nice to use a PDF like yours—it IS an official source (although it is NOT authoritative). Personally, I use MEGIS (q.v. via Googling MEGIS) for my data sources. This data IS authoritative and better for this type of verification. IMO.
Rustbelt (2018-08-09 15:23:17+00:00): Look, I'm sorry. I don't mean to get in your face about this. Over my first-thing-in-the-morning coffee, I saw two messages without a pause for a reply and immediately thought, "Great. Here we go again."

Last year, some dork really was changing things that I had laid down. He lives in Virginia and usually messes with things in Western Maine—there is a lot to do over there, and I avoid doing data work there. I'm concerned with the poor condition of data in my local area. Apparently, he noticed that work was being done in my "neck of the woods," and took it upon himself to start doing things his way without coordination, without using any sense of standards, etc. Hell, I verify every single road that I tweak with the state and often I visit the area for further verification. That's a step that someone a thousand miles away in Virginia simply can't do, yet new roads were popping up and being used as if they were "real." They weren't, and it was really annoying to clean up his efforts.

I am sorry for my misunderstanding.
glglgl (2018-08-09 16:21:05+00:00): Now, maybe I was a little bit harsh. Sorry for that, I think it is better to get it along like civilized people. :-)

> Hey! I'm not just "destroying multipolygons at…will."

I am sure you do not intend do. But, in fact, your action removed a common part of two  existing multipolygons. That is a thing that can happen by accident, in Germany we say "it's not a broken leg". But I think it is legitimate to fix it when one is pointed to that. And the most simple thing in this case is (for me) to just restore the line which was removed (apparently accidental). That's why I stepped in at the first place.

> I simply wish that when someone steps into an area, that more coordination happened between editors towards the same end rather than towards cross purposes.

This is normally what I as well think about the correct behaviour, and that's why I let local people normally do all changes. But in my opinion, structural changes (where the integrity of borders and other multipolygons is vilated) are excluded from this. Besides that, I think if someone finds an edge of an area to be erroneus, it is better to fix it (after having gotten the necessary data needed for that) than to remove it altogether. But I realize that other people might think different about that.

Having read about your experience with that other guy, I can understand your harsh reply, Although it is a small difference between a restored line and a bunch of streets, I absolutely can understand that you were upset.
glglgl (2018-08-09 16:21:21+00:00): About the data sources, the PDF I found was just a first short search, just to have a look about what is now the real thing and what not.

But now, that we talking about that, thanks for your JPG. Having a look at it, I now think hat we have different scope: 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/439488910 is the very southmost border of the KW&W National Monument, i. e. the line between T2 R8 WELS (see the PDF) and the National Monument (whose borders are green on that JPG). It doesn't even appear at the JPG as it is cropped a little bit at the bottom.
OTOH, the dotted line you talk about is not present on OSM yet.
Maybe that already cleans up all confusion, and you should consider this on your further edits.

Have a nice day!
Russ McD (2018-10-12 01:10:54+00:00): Way: 615044284 - This has been drawn recently, as a residential road ... but yet it goes through the forecourt of a PTT gas station, crosses a pedestrian area, then along the path to the toilets, exits through a gap in a wall, and disappears into trees.  What justification is there for this ?
RVR002 (2018-10-12 16:03:06+00:00): Hi Russ,

This is a case where DG premium and standard showed a different situation on the ground. Presumably, the area was developed sometime after the premium imagery was taken. I've adjusted the road to fit standard better.

-Jeff
user_5359 (2018-08-11 04:30:03+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building.
glglgl (2018-08-09 07:46:41+00:00): I don't know what was wrong with Gadingharjo (5615676) and Srigading (5615521), but this changeset leaves them broken. I fixed them in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61490921.
mueschel (2018-08-11 10:06:29+00:00): Hi,
welcome to OSM! Please have a look to the wiki how tagging of indoor features like rooms work:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indoor_Mapping
Adding 'building' tags and invent new keys like "Level 3" or "building:levels_1" for rooms doesn't work. 

Cheers, Jan
Diógenes de Sinope (2018-08-09 07:19:15+00:00): I cannot say I agree with your choices of edits in this changeset - https://i.imgur.com/EIla4dU.jpg
DantheMovieMan (2018-08-10 08:46:52+00:00): Thanks for pointing that out. I have changed the ways back to residential and added the missing highways. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61523377
tonyf1 (2018-08-08 03:54:08+00:00): deleted SEO spam
mosstreet (2018-08-08 14:55:21+00:00): Уважаемый, если не перестанете подписывать непонятно для чего дома, то  ваши правки скопом будут удалены
literan (2018-08-10 11:07:43+00:00): и даже если перестанет - я весь этот мусор вычистил
mosstreet (2018-08-10 16:52:39+00:00): я уже ему в личку все объяснил, обещал исправиться
Supaplex (2019-02-07 06:19:15+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/opestreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia  https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
user_5359 (2018-08-09 14:35:05+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:payment for a better description of payments. Please add more details as the generic key payment:credit_cards. This key should normaly only be used for negative value.
mueschel (2018-08-11 10:07:53+00:00): Hi,
welcome to OSM! Please have a look to the wiki how tagging of indoor features like rooms work:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indoor_Mapping
Adding 'building' tags and invent new keys like "Level 3" or "building_1" for rooms doesn't work. 
Also, please don't change established tags like "addr:street" to new keys like "street".

Cheers, Jan
Stefan@MUC (2018-08-08 18:43:10+00:00): Dankeschön für's Korrigieren meiner Brücken :) Ich wurde aus der Validierungs-Fehlermeldung nicht schlau, hab dann heute beim OSM Stammtisch nachgefragt um es korrekt eintragen zu können, aber da hattest du es schon erledigt.
opendcc (2018-08-08 18:57:22+00:00): Du kannst mir doch meine Route via Zaiselham zur St. Coloman nicht zerstören ..

Übrigens, da beim Zeltplatz nörldich von Ollerding - irgendwie scheint mir das Tagging noch nicht optimal. Stimmt das mit pier?
Stefan@MUC (2018-08-08 19:10:43+00:00): Das ist ein Holzhaus, vor dem eine hölzerne Plattform über dem Wasser ist. Hast du da nen besseren Tag dafür?

Ich seh gerade, du hast noch mehr angepasst: beim Zeltplatz, die beiden Wege im Wald teilen sich nicht den gleichen Eingang, da sind ca. 30 Meter Abstand, hab's mit Changeset #61478340 schon wieder korrigiert (kann dir nen Foto schicken bei Bedarf). Etwas südlicher: Bist du dir sicher mit dem Knick im Zaun, den du eingebaut hast? Kann da leider nicht mit Fotos dienen.
opendcc (2018-08-08 19:17:47+00:00): Der Knick im Zaun ist ein Editfehler von mir.
Stefan@MUC (2018-08-08 19:25:08+00:00): Kein Ding, hab's korrigiert und noch nen Tor eingebaut.
chnav (2018-08-08 11:12:50+00:00): Если движение перекрыто то применяются теги access, barrier, construction и т.д. Пожалуйста НИЧЕГО не удаляйте пока не приобретете необходимый опыт.
chnav (2018-08-08 11:14:08+00:00): Правка откачена полностью, поставил запрет на проезд по мосту.
MadelNL (2018-08-14 05:43:34+00:00): Hi,

I see you've added the german name Kirchrat for Kerkrade. This is absolutely false, it is just like in Dutch Kerkrade.
Would you please change this on alle places you did this?
beweta (2018-08-15 09:43:47+00:00): Absolutely false? Several references prove the opposite.

a) Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerkrade
b) Local newspaper: http://www.aachener-zeitung.de/lokales/nordkreis/eurode-der-mauer-fall-im-tiefen-westen-1.238644
c) Book: https://books.google.de/books?id=iVbu6jB9tPcC&pg=PA172&lpg=PA172&dq=kirchrath+kerkrade&source=bl&ots=XOfYAGmKD8&sig=XMciBJGssXQ1lSM5MwZb-wusCz0&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwitt7yR4u7cAhVnKpoKHSv9A0A4ChDoATABegQICRAB#v=onepage&q=kirchrath%20kerkrade&f=false

How many more references do you need?
wormitok (2018-08-16 23:54:41+00:00): The sources you use as a, b and c are not compatible with OSM.
a) If I change the Wikipedia name/article to "Kirchrasen", will you trust Wikipedia and ad this name also to OSM?     
b) Realy? newspaper as source? are you kidding me? I see all days a lot of errors in newspaper and this site is from 2007 and talk about the 12th Century.
c) And finally you copied the name out of a book which is written about long ago days!? Are you the writer of this book or do you have asked the author for permission to use his book as source? I dont think so!
With your edits, you make a lot of Copyright infringement what are not allowed in OSM!
     
     

As a user from 2009 you should know the rules from OSM and also you should know how the name of a motorway_junction should be handled.      
Du bist keine Bereicherung für OSM!!
user_5359 (2018-08-11 04:35:45+00:00): Welcome to OSM! For a better description of your objects please have a look on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:healthcare
user_5359 (2018-08-11 04:38:37+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I must deleted you node, because you aren’t a church and the node isn’t well placed. Don’t use the geocoder from Google (Google don’t allow this), look on the aerial image and mark the right building!
Владимир К (2018-08-09 08:43:47+00:00): для компании, использующей карьеры, лучше использовать тег operator, а не название.
Baloo Uriza (2018-08-09 02:16:29+00:00): Which imagery were you using?  I'm not spotting a curb here on Mapbox, but I'm not precluding the possibility.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61454690
PT-53 (2019-07-11 05:08:59+00:00): Hallo stadtmm,
diese Linie https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/615100932/history hat keine Merkmale.
Schaust Du Dir das nochmal an?
Fragende Grüße
PT-53 (2019-07-21 07:03:33+00:00): Erledigt
user_5359 (2018-08-11 05:00:12+00:00): Welcome to OSM! For a better description of your object please have a look on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dstudio
abakus_uploader (2018-08-08 22:31:41+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!
muralito (2018-08-08 13:51:21+00:00): Con building=terrace (o con cualquier otro valor de building) solo se marca el perimetro de cada edificacion, no todo un predio.
mueschel (2018-08-15 14:48:38+00:00): Hi,
is this a letter box belonging to houses nearby? This can be tagged as amenity=letter_box instead of post_box:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dletter_box

Jan
DENelson83 (2018-08-15 15:21:28+00:00): It's a community mailbox, where mail for multiple addresses can be picked up.  That fits the definition of "amenity=letter_box", so I have just changed it to that.  Thank you for the suggestion.
joost schouppe (2018-10-16 16:07:47+00:00): I have upgraded this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/291814018/history back to teriary, since it is the same road that is still mapped as tertiary in the northern part
lmum (2018-09-04 23:32:13+00:00): I haven't determined why, but this relation seems to have affected the riverbank multipolygon   (Way 328738345). Suggest reversion and applying the fix separately.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61455472
kartonage (2018-08-08 17:50:13+00:00): Hey there, 
please don't use Bing aerial imagery for Mauritius. It's rather old and Esri (Beta) or Mapbox Satellite are more recent.
Also keep in mind that buildings can be distorted on aerial imagery. The church geometry was correct. If you are unsure, try referencing different aerial imagery layers, that will sometimes give you a better idea for the shape of an object. 
Thanks.

Cheers
abakus_uploader (2018-08-08 22:31:40+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!
Hjart (2018-08-08 07:39:13+00:00): Does the bakery have a name?
PT-53 (2018-12-18 18:20:29+00:00): Hallo BeKri,
Du hast in diesem CS Hausnummern in Indelhausen ergänzt. Warum hast Du die Straßennamen weggelassen ?
Fragende Grüße
BeKri (2018-12-19 00:49:27+00:00): Servus,
nur da,
wo ich mir mit dem Straßennamen
nicht sicher bin ...
Gruss der BeKri
PT-53 (2018-12-19 09:58:22+00:00): Bei den Gebäuden am Kirchberg (Beispiel: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/242690313) gibt es doch keine "unsicherheit", oder ?
Das ist es ja, warum ich mich wundere.
OSMOSE: http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/de/map/#zoom=17&lat=48.293797&lon=9.494086&layer=Mapnik&overlays=FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFT&item=xxxx&level=1%2C2%2C3&tags=addr&fixable=

Grüße
PT-53 (2018-12-19 10:12:38+00:00): PS: Mit Ergänzung bitte warten, wegen https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=730352#p730352
Danke
BeKri (2018-12-19 14:28:44+00:00): Wenn Du mir erklären kannst,
warum die ungerade Seite Hs-Nr 1 und 3 plötzlich mit 31 und DANN 25, 23 auf der anderen Straßenseite weitergehen soll,
DANN gibt es keine Unsicherheit ...
Für mich nicht logisch/ nachvollziehbar,
wäre was für vor Ort wenn es wen gäbe.
Grüße
PT-53 (2018-12-19 14:53:17+00:00): Das mußt Du schon die Fragen, die das so festgelegt haben (Gemeinde).
Aber warum übernimst Du Hausnummern von Maps4BW, wenn Du deren Richtigkeit bezweifelst?
Die Zugehörigkeit zur Straße Kirchberg sollte aber wohl auch für Dich löar nachvollziehbar sein, oder?
Grüße
DD1GJ (2018-08-08 07:44:17+00:00): Hallo jassesjan,

willkommen bei OSM und danke für Deine Ortskenntnisse. Es fehhlt jedoch das Wichtigste: shop=hairdresser

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:shop%3Dhairdresser

Mehr Informationen findest Du im Tutorial: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf
jschoone (2018-08-08 09:12:35+00:00): Moin,
danke für die Unterstützung, habe es hinzugefügt.
Hjart (2018-08-08 07:42:46+00:00): Please do not check EVERY single field. The majority of tags added here makes no sense in this context and will normally be removed again.
reinsle (2018-08-08 12:06:03+00:00): Ok
reinsle (2018-08-08 12:52:49+00:00): So, I just check the field if it YES, right?
Hjart (2018-08-08 13:05:12+00:00): In most cases, yes. Problem is that if we add up with a lot of tunnel=no, bridge=no etc tags on every road, things will just end up being unnessecarily hard to read for the average human.
reinsle (2018-08-08 13:09:41+00:00): ok. got it :-)
freeExec (2018-08-08 09:39:43+00:00): Кто перекрыл и чем перекрыл?
freeExec (2018-08-08 09:41:54+00:00): Так же если там всё ещё продолжение "Рабочая улица", то она не может быть дорогой для сельхозтехники.
skysamum (2018-08-08 09:49:10+00:00): Перекрыто лентой и надписью проезд запрещен.
Это поселок, дорога асфальтовая прерываться и начинается грунтовая дорога.
freeExec (2018-08-08 09:58:46+00:00): Это странно, т.е. физически проезду кроме ленты ни чего не мешает? Просто в текущей ипостасии это всего лишь надпись и машинонечитаема, т.е. бесполезна.
Раз это улица, то ей и отметьте. То что она грунтовая отмечается через покрытие. Там где асфальт отметьте асфальтом, а где грун - грунтом.
skysamum (2018-08-08 10:12:59+00:00): Ок исправил.