piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2020-10-01 18:39:28+00:00): Review... Wanneer je oneway=yes verwijdert kun je ook de uitzonderingen voor tweewielers verwijderen
Dat zijn die tags
oneway:bicycle=no enz. 
Kijk je nog even?
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=91840973

MVG,
Eggie
MaartenTheMapper (2020-10-01 18:57:07+00:00): Scherp! Ik heb de overbodige/foutieve tags verwijderd.
jcr83 (2021-03-24 21:29:06+00:00): Bonjour,
Etes-vous certain que cet objet que vous avez ajouté est une piscine ?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/853999632
Super-Map (2021-03-26 09:50:46+00:00): Ah!Ah! Not yet, but it's appear to be like this on the "Cadastre", need future imagery for to have confirmation, we can't be 100% sure without to be "on the ground"... Have nice week-end.
eggie (2020-10-01 18:56:48+00:00): Hoi,
Yep  een fietspad.. 
Heb nog wat aangepast als voorbeeld. Op fietskaarten Bv OFM renderen G11 paden weer anders dan G12a (dikker) of G13 (dunner) en routeren ook anders.
gr eggie
IlBano (2021-04-12 20:45:21+00:00): Hi SekeRob.

In this changeset you added on one of the "Ponte della Libertà" highways a traffic_sign=overtaking node with motor_vehicle=no.

This access tag characterize the highway as being closed (in that point) to motorized vehicle, which I believe is not what you intended to do.

Can you please fix it ?

Thanks

IlBano
SekeRob (2021-04-13 09:03:34+00:00): Hi,

Fatto.

And yes, one of my early works on OSM (did about 4 changes in the 6 years before that :-))). Per the convention, moved all the traffic_sign nodes off the road in that bridge/rotonda area, tagged way with overtaking=no (the general) there also being an overtaking:hgv=no. Of course the motor_vehicle=no is gone (fortunately just on the sign and not on the road).
Anyway, added destinations and directions while there, the project I'm on the last few weeks. Your in-car router will than show the destinations on the display too. (Map Factor Navigator does).

ciao
IlBano (2021-04-13 09:45:37+00:00): Great! Thanks.

Ciao

IlBano
datendelphin (2020-10-02 19:29:52+00:00): Auf der Brücke ist das Trottoir kaum von der strasse unterscheidbar. Wenn das unbedingt extra gemappt werden muss, dann bitte wenigstens mit Fläche, dass beide Wege zur selben brücke gehören, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dbridge
user_469696 (2020-10-02 21:15:00+00:00): In dem Fall hat das separate Mapping wenig Sinn ergeben und keine Vorteile gebracht. Daher habe ich es angepasst.
datendelphin (2020-10-03 14:48:01+00:00): So ist das natürlich auch gut, danke. Viel Spass beim mappen
eggie (2020-10-01 19:09:11+00:00): Top! 
Als oud Hagenees (eigenlijk. Scheveninger)  kijk ik af en toe maar even mee.
Holly_Tree (2021-07-02 15:41:19+00:00): Mirabelle Road shown to connect to Gotherington Lane in error. No junction to these roads, the end of mirabelle road is a secure fenced storage site with heras fencing to perimeter. No vehicular or pedestrian access.
Russ (2021-07-02 19:03:09+00:00): Ah, my apologies. I can't remember what the context was with my previous edit as it was a while ago - I see you've fixed it now.
eggie (2020-10-01 19:44:05+00:00): Review.. Oke... Da's al beter. Kijk even goed naar de tags in achavi.. Klik op een way dan zie je je mutaties.
material=metal  op dat stukje weg? Dat zal een overblijfsel zijn van je hek.
access=private is voldoende om alles te stoppen. De rest kan weg. 
Hek staat prima. 
je edits.. 
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=91842803
Eggie
eggie (2020-10-01 19:45:22+00:00): Lijkt me prima.. up to the local mapper!
Eggie
mueschel (2020-10-02 09:15:40+00:00): HI,
the tag "x-country ski = yes" is not used in any other place. Please have a look to the wiki to learn how ski-related features are tagged: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Piste_Maps
IIVQ (2020-10-01 19:45:17+00:00): De layout van de weteringen heb ik van de PDOK Aerial Imagery
is-zUser (2020-10-08 21:44:08+00:00): Hallo Lothar2, du hast den Modellflugplatz ein 2. Mal drüber gezeichnet. Er war schon mal da. Dass die Wiese bis zum Wald mit zum Gelände gehören soll, wäre mir neu. Aber du hast das bestimmt genau vor Ort geprüft.
Lothar2 (2020-10-08 22:54:00+00:00): Sorry, das war am Tag der Bearbeitung so in OSM-edit gar nicht zu sehen. Danke für den Hinweis. Hab es wieder gelöscht.
Ich gehe mal davon aus, dass die Wiese daneben zum Gelände gehört. Vor Ort stellt es sich so dar, als ob es sich um Gelände für Startvorbereitung und Vereinstreffen handelt. Zudem ist in der topografischen Karte Sachsen das gesamte Areal als Modeflugplatz verzeichnet. Ich werde es versuchen zu verifizieren, sobald ich vor Ort mal ein Mitglied antreffe.
is-zUser (2020-10-13 09:55:06+00:00): Ich gehe auch davon aus, dass die Wiese dem Verein mit gehört (evtl. urspr. Flugplatz, aber zu nahe am Wald). Aber der richtige Flugplatz für Modellflugzeuge ist wahrscheinlich nur auf dem bereits gemappten Gelände. Man könnte nachfragen. Auf der Website der Stadt Lengenfeld unter Freizeit + Kultur sind die Vereine mit Kontaktdaten gelistet. VG
blackboxlogic (2020-10-02 14:38:02+00:00): Thanks for your edits. Please DO put a change comment, even if brief.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/91844046
eggie (2020-10-01 21:32:09+00:00): Altijd lastig.
De kapper is z'n naam kwijt.. 
Volgens mij is dat nu Royal shears
Het postagentschap zou gewoon PostNL kunnen heten?  De rest kan onder description .. Het symbool geeft al aan dat het om een postkantoor gaat. 
Dus niet een beschrijving geven in de naam. 

gr eggie
.
eggie (2020-10-01 21:32:26+00:00): Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=91844385
eggie (2020-10-01 21:08:08+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.

maar wat is je bedoeling van deze actie.. Alles wat je doet en uploadt komt komt daadwerkelijk op de wereldkaart . Nu loopt een weg dwars door de bebouwing. Wat was je bedoeling?
Zie https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=91844538
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2020-10-01 21:18:13+00:00): reverted by changeset #91846688
Je edits zijn teruggezet. Wanneer je nog vragen hebt stel ze gerust.
MVG,
eggie
eggie (2020-10-01 21:23:00+00:00): Oke.. Je kunt overigens wel een surfacetag toevoegen..
Bv surface=asphalt of paving_stones  Zie wiki.
Editor iD suggereert dat je van alles moet invullen. access=private is voldoende . De rest inclusief het eeuwige terugkomende paard kan weg. :)
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=91844616
Gr eggie
ma-rt-in (2020-10-02 06:44:26+00:00): Hallo,
du hättest ruhig das tag traffic_sign an dem Weg stehen lassen können. Das hat den Vorteil, das man nochmals genauer weiß was da vor Ort steht.
vg
DCA (2020-10-02 07:26:00+00:00): Moin, sorry, hatte das auch erst ab der Straße eingetragen (bzw. begonnen,das zu tun, bis ich dachte, dass die Doku sagt, man solle einen Punkt und keine Linie entsprechend taggen. Da hab ich's wieder weggelöscht, weil ich dachte, ich hätte es da hin gemacht. Würde es an der Straße eigentlich auch logischer finden. Jedenfalls ist die ganze Straße nur für Anwohner frei, Verkehrsschild 260.

ich muss mal mit Calimoto sprechen, warum das nicht berücksichtigt wird, wenn es schon eingetragen gewesen ist...
ma-rt-in (2020-10-03 11:54:20+00:00): Ok. 
Also die Straße soll also wie folgt beschildert sein: http://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/?signs=260,1020-30
Dann werden ich das mal entsprechend umsetzen, da hier von die leider zu obigem noch vehicle=destition gemappt wurde, wobei vehicle => Z250 ist.
vg
DCA (2020-10-03 12:18:08+00:00): ... auf der Seite war ich und das Zeichen an der Straße ist 260 plus 1020-30. das hab ich als *Punkte* am Anfang und Ende der Straße auch eingezeichnet.

die *Straße* soll mit vehicle=destination getagged werden, laut Wiki.
ma-rt-in (2020-10-03 12:19:03+00:00): Wo steht im Wiki das vehicle=destination verwendet werden soll?
DCA (2020-10-03 12:38:52+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:access

Werte für die Zugangsart sind vehicle=destination für Anliegerverkehr
ma-rt-in (2020-10-03 12:40:40+00:00): der wert "destination" stellt den Begriff für Anliegerverkehr. der Schlüssel "vehicle" steht dabei jedoch für Z250.
Schau auch mal hier nach: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:access#H.C3.A4ufige_Fehler
Leo Slager (2020-10-02 17:29:54+00:00): Your changeset will be reverted due to severe damage to the map.
 http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=4.50888&lat=52.17759&zoom=18&opacity=0.89
Leo Slager (2020-10-02 17:46:53+00:00): Adjusted Merenwijk Kinderboerderij border to include the new pony riding area. 
But now without damaging the multipolygon forest.
Please be more carefull with what you are doing. To many times you are damaging the map.
ilias_ (2025-12-06 14:37:02+00:00): Thanks a lot Jordan. I know this was 5 years ago, but I hope now consider using separate nodes instead of adding the shops' information to the whole building. As you can see from Mapillary they don't actually take up the whole building, they're only small shops on the bottom floor.
letihu (2021-04-07 19:53:13+00:00): Hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/854055961/history
fehlen noch tags
Glassman (2020-10-01 22:15:34+00:00): Tip: We spell street names fully with capitalization- no abbreviations. This is because software has a hard time unabbreviating. Can you fix the street name
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/91846300
GinaroZ (2020-10-03 16:24:14+00:00): Is there actually a bar here or is this just someone's house?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-07 01:54:51+00:00): Reverted addition of SEO spam POI with promotional description, malformed tagging and location in an apparent residential house, with no physical POI apparently existing on the ground

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183761260
aceman444 (2020-10-26 00:46:50+00:00): Hi, traffic_calming must also be placed on the node shared with the road, not on a footway crossing it, as otherwise cars will not "see it". It is primarily information for cars, pedestrians do not care. E.g. at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7965032707 .
jurajik82 (2020-10-26 22:19:27+00:00): I know that. I have a car so I also tested some bumps in osmand if they are announced.
I think that point of crossing is common for both pedestrian path and car road. If not then editor is fooling me for traffic_calming=table.
Other bumps are not a problem because I add them before or after crossing on car roads.
aceman444 (2020-10-29 10:39:17+00:00): You added the bump on the footway=crossing way, not on the node shared with road and footway. Sometime you do it right, sometimes not.
jurajik82 (2020-10-29 22:18:38+00:00): OK, I see now. Maybe I thought of foot path as small embankment. But you are right pedestrians do not care. I will read more carefully wiki and think. For Tag:traffic_calming=table they say it can be used on paths. But then Osmand would need to read tags of all crossing paths instead of nodes only. Thank you for clarification.
bxl-forever (2020-10-04 22:38:43+00:00): Your edit has been erased because you created duplicates of existing information.
bxl-forever (2020-10-04 22:40:23+00:00): There is no supermarket named "marche de l'abattoir" on Quai de Mariemont/Mariemontkaai.
I presume you meant the marketplace here, which is already on the map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/263981325
VictorIE (2021-12-21 16:25:32+00:00): Is this polygon inside out? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11700324 It certainly seems to be here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=4557475810#map=18/53.31411/-8.86305
DaCor (2021-12-21 16:42:15+00:00): I can't see any issue with this. Maybe I'm missing something very obvious here but I can't see a problem. Can you give me more details to the issue
VictorIE (2021-12-22 06:00:08+00:00): It's OK. What was happening was that only some of the perimeter ways 
(161 total) were loading and ID was incorrectly rendering inside as outside.
DaCor (2021-12-22 14:48:21+00:00): Ah ok
GeoGladbecker (2021-12-12 18:45:49+00:00): Hi,
ich denke nicht, dass der überdachte Weg einer Tankstelle ein tunnel=building_passage ist.


https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/224391351

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:tunnel%3Dbuilding_passage
Skyhead (2021-12-12 23:32:02+00:00): Hallo,
Was würdest Du vorschlagen?
covered=yes  ?
GeoGladbecker (2021-12-13 18:22:01+00:00): ja, wird auch in der wiki so "gelehrt"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dfuel

Bist aber auch nicht der einzige, der building_passage oder sogar tunnel yes mit layer -1 an diese Wege taggt, frage mich woher das kommt.
pitscheplatsch (2020-10-02 14:05:53+00:00): Hi Phxlxps, welcome to OSM.

You removed several ways which have been mapped as railway=disused. I guess your changeset should be reviewed by another local contributor. Thanks.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
SomeoneElse (2020-10-30 00:09:36+00:00): Are you sure that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/77779903 is a tertiary road?  It really didn't look like one when I was last there (not that long ago).  It was previously in OSM as a highway=bridleway, which looked about right to me.
Best Regards,
Andy
aceman444 (2020-10-26 12:27:30+00:00): What is surface=stone on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/854065552? Did you mean paving_stones or sett? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
jurajik82 (2020-10-26 22:30:50+00:00): I'm not sure why there's value that is not in the select box with 20 values. I think I used cobblestone.
I changed it to sett which is also good value.
aceman444 (2020-10-29 10:40:49+00:00): There is some difference between cobblestone (more round) and sett (more square, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface . Please use the values properly.
jurajik82 (2020-10-29 22:07:25+00:00): In this case there are both used. And I think it doesn't make sense to split short line into 3 segments.
BrackoNe (2020-10-16 08:12:35+00:00): Hi,

Thank you for your edit.
You've could change the existing tag:
motor_vehicle:conditional	no @ (2020 May 21-2020 Sep 15)
rather than changing the type of the object to 'construction'. Since it is maintain (since the crash occurred in March), not actually in the construction, please apply necessary changes.

Thanks,
Nemanja
whatmeinfallible (2020-10-16 16:26:04+00:00): hi Nemanja,
Thanks for the message. i will make the edit you've suggested.
Glassman (2020-10-02 02:50:53+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it look good.

I don't think you need to request reviews on your buildings anymore - you are doing great. Free to request a review when your not sure about what you did.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/91848438
FluffyUnicorn (2020-10-02 04:14:56+00:00): Great! Thanks for taking the time to check everything is good!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/91848438
GinaroZ (2020-10-25 20:27:29+00:00): Is this signed as a cycle path?
eggie (2020-10-02 06:22:04+00:00): Dag Wistaire,

oneway:foot=no is ongebruikelijk  Dat kun je gerust verwijderen.
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2020-10-02 06:30:43+00:00): Dag wistaire

Formeel zou het een fietspad zijn vanaf het G11 bord verplicht fietspad. .. of is dat bord verplaatst? 
Denk niet dat het een highway=service is.. Of cycleway dan met motor_vehicle=destination .. of residential.. Er zijn routers die problemen geven bij highway=service als er een doorgaande fietsroute loopt. 
Kijk je nog even naar je edits..?
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=91848875
MVG,
Eggie
SK53 (2021-10-02 12:18:13+00:00): Please do me the courtesy of asking why I've tagged something in a particular way, instead of 'fixing' it. I have paritally reverted this changeset because it broke more things than allegedly fixed. The Crane Bungalows were entirely validly tagged as building=bungalow, the additional tag indicated more precisely that they are a particular (very rare) type of unusual prefabricated bungalow. Yes another key might be preferred, but if you don't understand a key value please don't alter it without asking why it is tagged that way. BTW this change was much more substantial than a "minor fix, and should have been recorded as such in the changeset comments.
user_5589 (2021-10-02 15:37:00+00:00): It was an unfortunate editing, and I should have been more careful. Classic case of using IDs' automatic improvement suggestions a bit carelessly.

However, that said, using a deprecated tag like that does carry some risk.  To me building:type does not describe a specific design like that. If it were not deprecated it would designate a bungalow or a detatched house or a terraced house or similar. A better (and not deprecated) tag would seem to me to be building:design or something similar. That would indicate a specific design of building, rather a general type of building.

Still there we have it. So my way out of this would be to tag things as building:design, rather than the deprecated building:type. That way the information is recorded, and it won't fall foul of ID's outdated tags search.

How extensive is the area of those houses? Is it essentially all of the area between the ring road and the Jubilee Campus down to Charnock Avenue?

If you haven't already I'll go through those houses in that area and tag to restore the information where it's been removed.
SK53 (2021-10-02 15:56:51+00:00): Whilst I appreciate that iD often makes somewhat erroneous suggestions, as an experienced editor I would expect you not to accept them as gospel.

I note that "building:type" was only prominently marked as deprecated on the wiki in 2019 not in 2013 when I used the tag. You just cannot assume that: a) someone is aware that a tag has been deprecated by some group of contributors (often a small group); and b) that the tag was not added before anyone suggested it was deprecated. Always the goal should be to leave OSM data no worse than before one edited.

In practice I haven't actually correctly identified the Crane houses: there are very similar houses built almost contemporaneously in brick (but also rendered). There is a plan in this document (I have seen originals btw) https://committee.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/Data/Wollaton%20and%20Lenton%20Abbey%20Area%20Committee%20(Area%207)/20110215/Agenda/SuttonPasseysDraftAppraisalV1%20-%2045933.pdf, and once you know the difference it's easy to check on Mapillary as I have traces on most of the roads.

The building:design suggestion is a good one, and will work better than building:type. I do note the key is not documented & has low usage. To date I have used SK53:NCC_building tags as placeholders (partly because I don't know the original design numbers), see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nottingham/Buildings/Council_Housing. Others such as BISF, Tarran-Newland, Wimpey No-fines would fit well with building:design.
anebophil (2020-10-03 22:34:23+00:00): Bonjour merci pour la contribution, mais faites attention, j'ai constaté que vous avez supprimé un tronçon d'une voie principale
tastrax (2020-10-03 00:51:55+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added according to the following format +61 x xxxx xxxx, 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
zyphlar (2022-09-02 19:20:23+00:00): Hi TaniyaS! As part of my Sonoma County Building/Address Import, I'm updating some building shapes based on county data. Since you created many of the buildings in this area, I wanted to check with you before uploading those changes. You can preview them in JOSM by opening the sample-1007.osm file here: 

https://github.com/zyphlar/sonoma-import/tree/latest_data/reference
stephankn (2020-10-03 10:38:44+00:00): I personally would not map individual patches of farmland. I think this level of detail is a bit excessive at the current time. way 854082331 is on maxar imagery not a water feature but looks like a dried out pond. So you could add additional tags like pond and maybe some tagging indicating that water is only seasonal. On way 854082335 you added source tags. This is obsolete. Also, as you stated "local knowledge", please add the name of the temple. If you modify a facebook import and confirm it is reasonable, you could remove the import=yes tagging from it.way 854082325 looks more like a weir on aerial, but as you stated local knowledge you might have seen it and can confirm that it is made from rock/soil. way 854082286 has much larger dimensions. Check out maxar. Also water/pond might be a more suitable tagging. In general your tagging looks good.
Friendly_Ghost (2020-10-04 16:04:09+00:00): Thank you very much for the feedback. I've just made another changeset and revisited most things you had comments about. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/91937436#map=13/15.4937/103.0619

Unfortunately I don't know the name of the temple, but I do know that it is a temple which is currently under construction. 

I think I won't be touching many more water bodies, because I think that most are simply flooded rice fields.
jonorossi (2020-10-02 00:59:31+00:00): Hi, could you please explain why you are changing footpaths from highway=footway to highway=path, but more importantly why you are adding bicycle=no when cycling is permitted on footpaths in QLD.
BCC90 (2020-11-02 22:23:32+00:00): Hi, sorry for not getting back to you earlier, I just saw your message last night.

Thanks for your feedback. I see you fixed my changes and I fixed the other tags I changed in that section.

I didn’t know about bicycles being allowed so thanks for telling me and have that in mind when adding/editing paths in QLD . I will be checking that for other states too.

Cheers
jonorossi (2020-11-03 01:24:16+00:00): Australia is a bit of a mix between whether it is allowed, in QLD as long as there is no sign prohibiting it (e.g. Queen Street Mall, and other outdoor dining on footpath) then you are allowed, it is much safer for kids and casual riders.
https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/wheeled-devices/bicycle#footpath

I get emails for other people's comments on OSM, you might need to change your settings.

Thanks for getting back to me.
technician_lyft (2020-10-23 06:58:15+00:00): Hi, emiliovigil826

My name is Rostom and I am a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. According to OSMwiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dno) tag access=no is used mostly for existing objects (paths) that are blocked or illegal for general access. Service roads (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/689220446, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/204687827, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/689220453, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/204687822, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/847268263, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/847268618, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35481780, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/130214399)  were tagged with access=no, but there is no visible evidence for such edit. This tag on these roads is very harmful for routing, as it blocks the accessability of this parking lot - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/689220446. I noticed that you have added that tag to roads all over the USA, with the help of automated editor BusLanes 0.2.0. Also found that you added access=no to West 14th St in New York in this changeset - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/90889892. Could you please clarify the purpose of such edits? Do you have local or governmental resources that provide evidence for such edits? If so we would love to see it. If not, can you please revert the changesets with access=no tag been applied mistakenly?

Thank you, 
Rostom
DressyPear4 (2020-10-02 22:03:33+00:00): Olá, essa quantidade de andares está correta?
Aparentemente são bem menores.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/91849939