piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Leo Slager (2019-05-02 22:35:04+00:00): My apologys
I made some corrections:
oneway=yes
oneway:delivery=no
oneway:bicycle=no
alphensebezorger (2019-05-02 23:00:21+00:00): According to official communication from the local municipality, this seems to be a temporary sign, to cope with the busy traffic due to the Keukenhof be opened (https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/stcrt-2019-11541.html). In a few weeks the sign should be removed, it will probably return end of March 2020 though.
StijnRR (2019-09-01 07:49:48+00:00): Please do not add aeroway=hangar to buildings which have nothing to do with aeroways.
InsertUser (2025-04-14 23:50:52+00:00): Is there really a driving school called "Church" here? This seems unlikely.
ID`s (2019-05-02 05:25:54+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Uk:Tag:amenity%3Dschool
Прошу обратить внимание, цитата:
name=* – тип навчального закладу та його номер, наприклад «Школа №8» або «Гімназія №8» або «Ліцей №8». Пробіл між знаком № та номером не ставиться.
Gh0stz0x (2019-10-16 19:05:07+00:00): Sono poi stati cancellati??
Gh0stz0x (2019-11-04 13:32:58+00:00): In attesa di risposta....
Gh0stz0x (2019-11-04 13:34:06+00:00): Ok, mi sono accorto che ha fatto il revert il buon Alecs01 😁
viloan (2019-05-01 19:57:38+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
WoodWoseWulf (2019-05-02 02:16:04+00:00): Hi Jkturtle - looking at Logan Rd Park - there appears to be a house here. Did you place the marker in the wrong location?
eggie (2019-05-01 21:23:36+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
viloan (2019-05-01 20:13:17+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
eggie (2019-05-01 21:28:58+00:00): Wanneer diut de naam van de brug is kan die naam erop blijven. Dat monument is echt niet correct..
Gr Eggie
eggie (2019-05-02 08:24:01+00:00): Dag Jonas.. Ik heb het hier aangepast zodat het routeert voor fietsers. Het is nu een highwaypath. historic=bridge op de brug zelf gezet.
Het historic=monument verwijderd. 
Probeer svp ook zelf zaken te corrigeren. 
Gr Eggie
eggie (2019-05-01 21:27:34+00:00): historic monument is iets heel anders. Bv De taj mahal in India. Kijk eens in de wiki.
De brug is vast geen grafmonument.
Tag dan op de brug zelf historic=bridge
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Tag:historic=monument?uselang=nl
en kijk gewoon even onder historic. Deze tag graag weghalen.
MVG,
Eggie
maraf24 (2019-05-01 20:48:37+00:00): Tak na przyszłość: drogi na moście nie mają nigdy punktu wspólnego z rzeką pod mostem. Z punktem to jest bród:)
GinaroZ (2019-05-01 22:44:48+00:00): Hi, if there is no bank then the amenity=bank tag should be removed as well. Same with the atm tag if that's also gone?
trigpoint (2019-05-01 21:19:48+00:00): What evidence is there that this is a peak in an OSM sense? From historic OSM maps this appears to be no more than a spot height.
It is not good practice to repurpose the island tag, and its wikipedia tag.
PeaksearchWG (2019-05-01 22:00:28+00:00): Hi there, I and a few people visited the area last year. The summit area is small compared to surrounding peaks yes, but has a marked prominence, rather than just a spot height on the island. I suppose I felt the best way to include the summit was to add the peak data to the existing island and wikipedia tag, rather than duplicate data. If this isn't best practice however I'll remember that next time :), all a learning curve!
SomeoneElse (2019-05-03 11:34:17+00:00): As requested on https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2734 , can you provide photographic evidence please?  Many of your previous edits have been found to be unverifiable by people actually visiting the area (see numerous changeset comments on edits by this and your previous accounts).
Viajero Perdido (2020-10-28 17:18:19+00:00): Hi FS99A.

Why access=no for the trailhead parking?  Your changeset source only mentions imagery. According to the current trail report, there's no mention of any restrictions.
mueschel (2019-05-08 08:16:10+00:00): Hi,
could you check this way? There are some 'backward' tags that seem like they should be 'forward':
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/687233156

Btw, the tag "destination:distance" is already in use and should fit here.

Jan
d3mol3k (2019-05-08 16:02:02+00:00): Thanks, I actually made a mistake when adding data. Corrected.
Robert
viloan (2019-05-01 21:32:17+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
viloan (2019-05-01 21:36:40+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
mapper999 (2019-05-02 19:00:43+00:00): Hi,
hast du absichtlich den Node der "Girls" aus dem Nachbarhaus wiederverwendet?
Auf jeden Fall solltest du die Kontaktinformationen auch anpassen, sonst wundern sich noch einige hungrige OSM-Nutzer, wer sich da so an der in OSM hinterlegten Handynummer meldet... ;(
Laut Webseite "wohnen" die "Girls" da übrigens noch und die Hausnummer des Thai-Restaurants scheint mir auch nicht so ganz plausibel?
mueschel (2019-05-07 13:32:58+00:00): Hi,
this way got some strange tags. Could you check that?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/687236420

Jan
viloan (2019-05-01 22:00:56+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
mueschel (2019-05-03 08:27:02+00:00): Hallo,
du hast hier das Tag "bicycle_parking:solingen:id" neu eingeführt.  Üblicherweise werden solche Referenz-IDs mit dem Tag "ref" angegeben. Wenn es notwendig ist, das zu spezifizieren, wäre das Tag dann z.B. ref:solingen. Das sehe ich hier aber eher nicht. Schon eher könnte man den Betreiber angeben z.B. als "operator = Stadt Solingen".

Grüße
Jan
ohligser (2019-05-04 21:45:46+00:00): Hi mueschel,
joa, ref täte es auch. operator=solingen ist aber nicht gemeint, das gilt manchmal, aber nicht immer. Was hältst Du von "bicycle_parking:ref:solingen" ?
Gruß ohligser
ohligser (2019-05-04 22:29:46+00:00): Ergänzung: die Referenz/ID ist temporär, ist nur für die einmalige Übertragung benötigt
mueschel (2019-05-05 09:26:49+00:00): 'ref' steht in der Regel am Anfang des Tags, nur in wenigen Ausnahmen weiter hinten. 
Wenn das Tag aber nicht dauerhaft bestehen soll, kann es ja auch wieder gelöscht werden.
WoodWoseWulf (2019-05-02 04:21:26+00:00): Please do not make fantasy modifications to OSM.
WoodWoseWulf (2019-05-02 02:13:59+00:00): Hi CartographerJ,

Thanks for your recent contributions to OSM! What were you attempting to add here? The 5 very tiny parks you created don't appear to match the regular or expected definition for a park on OSM, they seem more like they might gardens surrounding the building in this location? 

If you need any help, please feel free to ask!
CartographerJ (2019-05-02 15:46:45+00:00): Sorry not 100% sure I guess on what should be considered what. the 5 parks I created are all technically one rather. I just didn't know how to encompass the area while avoiding the concrete areas. It is not a garden as I am a resident of this complex. they are community park type area with BBQ a lounge swing area for dogs etc. So i feel park would be accurate no? Sorry if I am misunderstanding the verbiage. Also there is a pond where I marked it. I hear it and I have seen it while walking my dog along there. its small but I mean its still a body of water correct?
CartographerJ (2019-05-02 15:49:40+00:00): Ps thank you for helping me though. I am trying to learn how to map out my community even if it just means starting with my complex first so having someone help is nice I appreciate it!
WoodWoseWulf (2019-05-03 01:24:41+00:00): You probably only want to map the park as one area. It's a little unusual for a park to be private, but not unheard of - you may want to mark it as such so people don't just see it on the map and turn up (maybe access=private - though I'm not sure of the exact rules for the location in this case)

If there is a pond, it's fine to add it, but the one you added was practically in the building - you'll want to double check the location to make sure it ends up in the right place.

If you need any more help, I'm happy to lend you a hand however I can :)
skorasaurus (2019-05-04 14:30:08+00:00): interesting, thanks for adding; I did not know that it was here.
JJIglesias (2019-05-01 23:25:11+00:00): Ya que veo que ahora estas usando ID tambien, te sugiero que actives en Map Data las opciones KeepitRight y ImproveOSM Issues; para ir resolviendo errores e informacion faltante.
Slds JJ
nevw (2019-05-02 12:36:05+00:00): Any reason you have deleted another mappers trees?
Most respect others mapping so I assume you will remap them in a more accurate manner.
nevw (2019-05-02 14:22:56+00:00): Also, it is preferred that you not extend the park boundaries to the roadway centrelines. It may look pretty but is not accurate and it all has to be disconnected later if mapping in detail near road edges.
Ds5rUy (2019-05-08 12:21:43+00:00): This is by far not the only changeset where surface areas have been wrongly merged to the road center-line. I fear this is going to take a massive reverting of 100+ changesets to clean up and fix.
tuxcomputers (2019-05-10 13:28:12+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dresidential#Separation_from_roads
Ds5rUy (2019-05-10 15:40:20+00:00): "Still it is suggested to let the residential landuse end at the actual border and not extend it to the centre of the road for various reasons, e.g. to simplify later refinements (highway landuse), not to locate things on the public land (road) in adjacent landuses and to avoid inexperienced mappers accidentally connecting roads to landuses rather than other roads."

It's one thing to be lazy when you add new landuse yourself. It's another thing when you purposefully go out of your way to change the work other mappers have already been doing to do this properly.
SomeoneElse (2019-05-11 10:35:18+00:00): Hi Steve,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3721826 looks quite odd.  Is it really all farmland in OSM terms?  The imagery suggests that it looks like the sort of lightly-wooded, part residential (but non-farming) landuse that I'd expect round here.  I'm guessing that the relation itself came from some kind of government zoning information, and if so, it's probably actually not very useful to OSM.  For example, if you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41172401 the edges of that don't correspond to any change on the imagery at all.
I suspect that the quality of OSM here might actually go up considerably here if you deleted some of these imported polygons (which I suspect may date way back, to the original imports in the area) and then just remapped what's actually there.  If people want the zoning info they can go to the local authority for that.
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2019-05-13 10:25:32+00:00): Just to address one thing - you say "I apologize in advance for the length of this" but that is something that you absolutely have the power to change - just use fewer words!  
Can you try answering the question again, but using fewer words so that I can actually read it without it taking all day?
Let me phrase the question like this:
"What is different between inside https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41172401 and outside it, apart from local authority zoning which we don't care about within OSM?".
iandees (2019-05-13 18:24:31+00:00): SteveA: we've talked about this before, but lengthy make it very difficult to follow your argument or the discussion in general. People will skip over your long prose and find the one or two sentences that look the most controversial and argue those. Please work harder at using fewer words.

Another thing to consider is that when you write long responses like this you're asking others to use up their time to read and understand it. We're all volunteers and it's a little unreasonable to expect people to spend the time to read these lengthy replies. Especially when it's in response to DWG volunteers' inquiries.
stevea (2019-05-13 23:27:19+00:00): I appreciate the time volunteers take to answer questions in OSM, DWG included.

Ian, again, these are not tweet-length topics, they require words.  Either folks have the time to engage with me in dialog, or not.  I do not wish to abuse that privilege, so I continue to better endeavor toward the concision you request.

"Concision" is a technique linguist Noam Chomsky talks about which is used by communication networks, propaganda arms of governments and others which often limit the speech that is able be uttered so that only a "party line" gets through.  As I am more frequently repeatedly asked to engage in concision, that's how this feels:  that fully answering the question is replied to with "TL;DR."  I have taken ten years to make a better map.  I believe somebody can take ten minutes to have a conversation with me to continue to do so into the future, especially when I am asked a question and expected to reply to it.

I did offer another venue (besides changeset comments) to have this discussion, as it obviously needs to be had.  When and where that takes place, I will use words to do so and offer my patience to others who offer their words in return — it's the least I can do.

I am respectfully patient as I wait for Andy's reply to answer my questions of "Do you agree or disagree?" and "Does that answer your questions?"  He asked me questions to address his concerns and I have answered them, I believe.

Thank you.
SomeoneElse (2019-05-14 00:21:06+00:00): @stevea - you seem to be saying that you have mapped things in this area primarily based on what your local government allows you do do in a particular area.  This is not how most people map things worldwide.  I often say to people mapping things that don't exist that "OSM is a map of things as they are, not as you would like them to be".  Here it makes sense to say "OSM is a map of things as they are, not as your local government would like them to be".
stevea (2019-05-14 16:47:59+00:00): No, that is not what I am saying; it isn't local government, it is the property owners.  Would you re-tag this area to something else, which would in effect say "I'm asserting away these property rights and agricultural activities by tagging based on what I can see, rather than what the owners of this property do or can do?"  If so, I invite you to do so, but I can discover no such appropriate tags, so I have tagged as best I can — and continue to do so as I discover more distinct and specific agricultural activity in the area:  another local example of the "first draft, then improve" ethos found throughout OSM.  For example, there are many apiaries in the area producing honey, too, that I have yet to map:  another agricultural activity on this farmland.  Can you see bees in visual imagery?

It is not that something (like farming) "does not exist" (as you say).  These property owners either can or do farm here.  Either timber (though some may not have the "last permit"), orchards, vineyards, greenhouse_horticulture or other.  Some owners also live on this property, making it "part residential, part agricultural," yet OSM doesn't have a landuse tag for that sort of "combined landuse."  Perhaps better developing that is a strategy to "fix" what you perceive as a problem here (I don't see one, though I do see room for improvement to add more specific farming, so I do as I add it when I discover it).

It may be that you are being polite or conciliatory by extending me the courtesy of not knowing, but I look at your original message:  you say it "looks" a certain way, you ask "is it really...?," you say the "imagery suggests," you say what YOU "would expect round here" (why is that?), you "guess," you say "probably," you say "the edges don't correspond to any change on the imagery at all," (yet the boundaries, like many in OSM, are both real and invisible) you "suspect" (more than once).  Andy, I don't "suspect," I actually know, I live here, I visit with people here (they are my neighbors and friends) and I have been to these farms, vineyards, orchards.

I believe I have answered how this land is actually used, and why I used the landuse key value of farmland to tag how the land is used.  You assert that what you see in visual imagery is the only thing that defines how the land is used (which would be much better captured with a landcover or natural tag, and I use natural tags when/as appropriate).  I respectfully disagree with the assertion that visual imagery is always a or the definitive criterion for what defines landuse.  I certainly am aware of the "map what is" and "on the ground" tenets of our project but "what is" here is farmland, so I have tagged it as such.  Correctly.  Thank you for your concerns, I hope I have addressed them.
SomeoneElse (2019-05-15 22:53:05+00:00): Just to answer about the only bit I can parse from that:
> you say what YOU "would expect round here" (why is that?)
It's based on having visited the area (though not for over 10 years) when working near San Jose.
As for the rest of what you've said - I really have no idea what you're trying to say.
Can you try again to provide a concise answer to the question ""What is different between inside https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41172401 and outside it"?
stevea (2019-05-15 23:10:51+00:00): Oh, Andy, my goodness; that old trick.  My sentences are complete and grammatical.  I recently had another volunteer read this thread and he had no trouble following it.

Inside it, the owners can and do fell timber. When those trees are down, they plant more trees.  This is called landuse=forest.

Outside it, the owners can and do fell timber after they obtain a timber permit, then they often (and this is the reason the DID cut the trees) develop the farmland from felled trees into orchards, vineyards, greenhouse_horiticulture, apiaries and container farming (berries, tomatoes...).  Some keep trees up to harvest acorns, dissolving out the tannin and making a kind of "oak meal" (I'll see if I can find the folks at the farmer's market who are awaiting for organic certification for that).  Some live on the land while farming it, some simply farm it, living elsewhere.  This is called landuse=farmland.

I tag what I observe.  OSM doesn't have a good landuse tag of something like "live_on_farmland" which is what these largely are (though aren't exclusively, as some farm these lands without living here, I'm not perfectly sure which).

Please answer:  Have I done something wrong with my tagging here?  Or are you simply suggesting that I might have?

Please answer:  Are OSM's landuse tag values too simplistic to well accommodate the complex kind of landuse this is?  (Hint:  I think so, but I haven't proposed a new tag, so I use the ones we have and try to supplement them as best I can).

Please answer:  Can you see bees in visual imagery?

Please tag:  the polygon(s) with better values if you actually know what it (they) should be and assert them.

How would you tag this if you don't have the time (or access) to micromap land uses within the observed area? Is there a way for me to map my observations without needing to conduct further research?