piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
dgitto (2019-10-25 21:26:54+00:00): there is a typo in this changeset:
"add:county" could be instead "addr:county"?
NatCarseg (2019-11-04 15:16:09+00:00): Thanks dgitto. I changed this.
abrensch (2019-10-28 18:40:07+00:00): Hallo telemaxx,

was hast Du denn hier angestellt, die eine Hälfte der Gabel gelöscht und die Schüttorfer damit zur Einbahnstrasse gemacht:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/504953770

Schaust Du's mal an?

Danke und Gruss, Arndt
telemaxx (2019-10-28 20:59:50+00:00): Hi Arndt,
du hast Recht.
Korrigiere ich morgen.

Grüße,
Thomas
telemaxx (2019-10-29 16:42:04+00:00): So, jetzt darfst du wieder in beiden Richtungen fahren.
eggie (2019-10-05 16:29:59+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2019-10-05 16:35:06+00:00): Je kunt dit topic even volgen. Dan weet je wat er allemaal komt kijken bij busrouterelaties.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=34039
MVG,
Eggie
waaghals (2019-10-05 18:41:29+00:00): Bedankt voor de doorgestuurde tips en linkje over busrouterelaties.

Ik ga er induiken, want volgens mij kloppen er wel meer routes niet in 's-Hertogenbosch.

Eventuele feedback/verbeter punten hoor ik ook graag.

Cheers,
Waaghals
viloan (2019-10-05 15:26:52+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 você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

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!
abrensch (2019-10-06 08:27:44+00:00): Dieser fehlende Anschluss der 8116 hier ist Absicht?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6695619735
Jeti87 (2019-10-06 08:32:59+00:00): Nö, der fehlte sicher schon bei mtb-vamp, kannst du auch gerne selber wieder herstellen sowas
JochenOSM (2019-10-06 10:00:24+00:00): Hallo hhhh,
bist du sicher dass die Bäume auf der Wiese hinter dem Häuschen durch Weinreben ersetzt wurden, oder hast du dich evtl. verklickt? Auf dem 3 Monate alten Luftbild sind die Bäume noch da...
hhhh (2019-10-07 16:33:24+00:00): Hallo JochenOSM,

war in der letzten Woche mit der Bahn unterwegs und habe mit "StreetComplete" die OSM ergänzt. Schon möglich, daß ich das falsche Objekt ausgewählt habe.
LG hhhh
JochenOSM (2019-10-08 12:35:41+00:00): Alles klar, aus der Bahn ist das natürlich schwierig. Ich konnte nicht mal vor Ort genau erkennen was für Bäume das sind, aber es sind Bäume. Korrigiert in Change 75412224
mavl (2019-10-20 17:09:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 75958213 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the deleting of valid data - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75627340].
viloan (2019-10-05 16:11:57+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 você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

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!
InsertUser (2019-10-14 23:47:45+00:00): Why have you deleted the Nassau node?
canfe (2019-10-06 06:14:43+00:00): E che fonte dati hai usato per correggere i dati ISTAT?
(potrebbe tornare utile in altri casi...)
Jrachi (2019-10-06 07:42:28+00:00): La fonte è ... OSM.
Ieri mi sono accorto che mancava il tratto di confine, anzi era parzialmente "inglobato" in un landuse. Invece di cercare il changeset dove qualcuno (sicuramente io) ha fatto il danno. Ho recuperato un gpx che avevo scaricato tempo fa.
canfe (2019-10-06 09:05:40+00:00): Ma fai anche i gpx dei CONFINI??!
Jrachi (2019-10-06 10:00:31+00:00): Li estraggo per usarli in QmapShack.
maraf24 (2019-10-06 18:12:04+00:00): tourism=attraction to nie jest tag główny
InsertUser (2019-10-14 21:06:25+00:00): Even within your preferred database this Great Guana Cay exists as UFI: -1543360. 
Please do not destroy other people's work without checking.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-06 13:05:14+00:00): hello, can you explain why you deleted these elements?
MapObserver (2019-10-07 10:54:51+00:00): os radares apagados estavam incorretamente localizados e a nova posição foi adicionada, e por vezes a velocidasde limite foi também acrescentada.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-07 11:04:39+00:00): Não vi nenhuma nova posição das cameras. De qualquer das formas, os elementos devem ser editados e não eliminados, ou seja, da próxima, mova-os para a localização correta e não os elimine e volte a adicionar.
MapObserver (2019-10-07 19:18:08+00:00): Tenho pouca experiência no OSM e não consigo aceder aos items apagados para mostrar os casos de cameras duplicadas (perto umas das outras ou mal posicionadas) pode me indicar sff com acedo a esses items removidos?
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-07 19:23:45+00:00): daí não se dever eliminar elementos. Verificou se as cameras que eliminou estavam apontadas para sítios diferentes/ sentidos?
MapObserver (2019-10-07 19:29:52+00:00): Elimineias porque passo frequentemente perto delas e verifiquei pessoalmente que estão mal colocadas/duplicadas. Mas após descobrir como se move uma camera, não apagaguei nenhuma mais e apenas as desloquei para a posição correta. Contudo gostava de saber como posso voltar a ver os items que apaguei/editei.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-07 19:38:40+00:00): não se pode, daí ser regra não eliminar elementos.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-07 19:39:08+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history
eggie (2019-10-05 18:06:33+00:00): review.. bicycle yes hoeft niet op reguliere straten. Dat is default.
MVG,
Eggie
П3тр0виЧъ (2019-10-07 05:08:51+00:00): В адресах поле "Город" не заполняйте, лишняя работа.
eggie (2019-10-05 18:05:18+00:00): Dag Ed. Lijkt me helemaal gelukt. lanes=1 zou ik weghalen. Dat is niet gebruikelijk.. meer voor eenrichting opritten. 
MVG,
Eggie
kirma (2019-10-06 06:00:15+00:00): Maybe alt_name:ru or similar would not hurt for searchability in Cyrillic.
j numminen (2019-10-06 07:59:22+00:00): I actually missed the fact that my source webpage sometimes uses Библиотека Ооди as well. I'll make some amendments.

Still, google search results for "Библиотека Оди" and "Библиотека Ооди" in my mind shows that I should use the latter Cyrillic transliteration.
П3тр0виЧъ (2019-10-07 05:07:00+00:00): Владелец конкретно этого сарая? Или всей территории?
На территории название есть, а "фгу схп" и прочее не нужно.
viloan (2019-10-05 17:29:19+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 você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

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!
CjMalone (2020-06-08 18:26:57+00:00): Hello, in this changeset you partially deleted Bristol Sweet Mart. I assume it closed, or looked closed.

However a few days after you removed it supposedly had an inspection from FSA, implying it's still open.

https://ratings.food.gov.uk/business/en-GB/385083/Bristol-Sweet-Mart-Easton

Are you sure it closed? Or if you are local could you check. Thanks.
ndm (2020-06-08 18:46:23+00:00): My guess -- original building was too large -- so split and removed tags, but probably had both halves selected by accident.

Add it back and add a note, or just add a note? I'm not likely to be passing for a while and notes remind everyone, not just me :-)
CjMalone (2020-06-08 19:12:00+00:00): I've added it and a note 2222380. Thanks
Jorisbo (2021-03-02 06:39:35+00:00): Hi user_5121
A while ago you added this bridleway of which my algoritms stumble over the odd access tagging. Bicycle and horse = yes but also inaccesible. Maybe you could have a look and change the to yes/no/designated. Kind regards Joris
user_5121 (2021-03-02 18:57:02+00:00): The standard UK tagging for a bridleway RoW is foot=designated, horse=designated, bicycle=yes which is what I normally use.  However this is a bridleway that runs along the bed of a stream.  At one point it passes under a bridge around 1m high and in other places is only around 30-40cm wide at the base with almost vertical banks for 2m.  This makes it inaccessible to horses or bicycles so I added those tags as well.  If I tag it as horse=no then it would not reflect the legal position.  If I tag it as horse=designated then people could be routed along it which would be wrong.  I have used the set of tags that I think most accurately represents both the legal and practical situation (although having looked now I see that I have not been totally consistent with the bicycle part on the various sections).
Jorisbo (2021-03-02 19:06:54+00:00): Hi 5121

Thank you for your time explaining! I think the legal access is not very relevant in this case. The map is used for real live usage and routing and if your horse needs  to be dismantled 😊 seems to be a one time only access then.
I leave it up to you off course.

Kind regards and thank you for all your effort in our nice project

Joris
user_5121 (2021-03-03 19:14:47+00:00): I've done some more research and "impassable" seems much more commonly used than "inaccessible" (although still very infrequent) so I have changed the tags to include this instead.  I also made the tagging more consistent along all three arms of the stream.
I'm not totally happy with this but I know of no other way to represent both the legal and physical aspect.
Jorisbo (2021-03-03 20:02:02+00:00): There are no mistakes, only variations. kind regards, Joris
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-05 19:41:37+00:00): Hello,can you explain why you added this as a tertiary road? Doesn't seem to fir the Portuguese guidelines for the classification
MapObserver (2019-10-07 10:51:48+00:00): Olá, creio que são Caminhos Municipais (CM) e por isso usei a etiqueta "tertiary road" (ver https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Tag:highway%3Dtertiary ). Estará incorreto?
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-07 11:02:47+00:00): está incorreto. São residenciais e não terciárias. Padronização em PT https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Portugal/Padroniza%C3%A7%C3%A3o

corrija se faz favor
MapObserver (2019-10-07 19:13:53+00:00): De acordo com o link que envia em cima a etiqueta tertiary diz, "Esta etiqueta é atribuída às Estradas Municipais com pouca expressão e/ou com pouca segurança e condições de circulação (normalmente sem marcação na via) e aos Caminhos Municipais", o google street view mostra que a estrada não tem marcações na via, parecendo mais um caminho municipal do que uma estrada residencial. Confirme sff, antes de fazer a alteração: https://goo.gl/maps/ozaGRYvXCBxZfyrR6
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-07 19:22:01+00:00): não é legal utilizar o Google StreetView no OSM. Os termos de licença da google não permite.
As terciárias só deverão ser utilizadas para ligações a outros locais. como pode ver no mapa a Oeste de onde editou, estão residenciais.
Como pode ver aqui a sua edição não bate com tudo o resto que está em volta. https://ibb.co/KWTngkj
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-10-11 23:34:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 75588534 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some doodles and other fake data.  https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3208 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-10-11 23:34:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 75588534 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some doodles and other fake data.  https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3208 .
gscholz (2019-12-10 05:50:41+00:00): Hi Nesil,
your recent changesets have creates several errors in the osm database regarding overlapping ways:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-59.82593&lat=-3.19868&zoom=16&overlays=duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges_areas,snap_points,unconnected_open_ends_1,unconnected_open_ends_4,unconnected_open_ends_5,unconnected_open_ends_6

Can you please fix this?
Guido
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-10-11 23:34:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 75588534 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some doodles and other fake data.  https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3208 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-10-11 23:34:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 75588534 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some doodles and other fake data.  https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3208 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-10-11 23:34:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 75588534 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some doodles and other fake data.  https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3208 .
user_5359 (2022-05-01 07:26:43+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1i4I. Did you mean fixme = "The key "general tag" is *NOT* correct. Please remove it and apply correct tags in accordance with the wiki. ?"
I think we should delete this tag also (I didn't find any possible keys for this value).
rayleigh1 (2022-05-23 15:08:44+00:00): Oh right, thanks for noticing it, I meant "not correct".
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-08-01 06:47:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 88804557, 88803494, 88807545, 88805107, 88806072, 88803983, 88806646, 88807097, 88804272 where the changeset comment is: Reverting Vermont building imports reported to DWG.  See discussions in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75339551 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75326336 .
Pianadinavellihouse (2019-10-05 18:59:53+00:00): Appartamento uso turistico (brevi periodi case vacanze)
Licenza Questura di L'Aquila del 11/08/2019
Jrachi (2019-10-05 20:08:42+00:00): 1) Gli edifici si mappano come aree; in questo caso disegni un rettangolo e assegni il tag tourism=apartment
2) Il tag note serve a comunicare agli altri mappatori e non per fornire informazioni turistiche.
Se hai appena iniziato a mappare ti consiglio di leggere:
https://learnosm.org/it/beginner/
bxl-forever (2019-10-06 11:04:45+00:00): Hello,
Thanks for this.
The new track is visible on UrbIS 2019 imagery, I bet you might want to use this one instead of AGIV Flanders.  I had to redraw it because it runs behind the bus platform and intersections are treated differently.
One-way or two-way?
Compulsory or optional?  (Depends on the type of road signs.)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-08-01 06:47:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 88804557, 88803494, 88807545, 88805107, 88806072, 88803983, 88806646, 88807097, 88804272 where the changeset comment is: Reverting Vermont building imports reported to DWG.  See discussions in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75339551 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75326336 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-08-01 06:47:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 88804557, 88803494, 88807545, 88805107, 88806072, 88803983, 88806646, 88807097, 88804272 where the changeset comment is: Reverting Vermont building imports reported to DWG.  See discussions in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75339551 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75326336 .
InsertUser (2019-10-06 10:08:36+00:00): Is it not a little unconventional to exclude the airport area from an island multipolygon?
RunRunShow (2019-10-06 11:22:26+00:00): If it's not set as inner, the scrub rendering would encroach into the airport area which in this case it's not (unlike some other islet airstrips where both sides of runway are scrubs.) This is to show the runway having a more proper paved area than other airstrips.
InsertUser (2019-10-06 11:52:54+00:00): Norman's Cay is the name of the island, not the scrub. The scrub is a separate entity. As the coastline way is relatively short it is probably the best host for the island related tags.
OSM Inspector (and probably other software) is also alarmed by the segment shared between inner and outer ways.
RunRunShow (2019-10-06 14:37:09+00:00): Not sure if you are aware that the new style of tagging has been to put tags into relation and leave coastline alone as a way so as to have a clear separation of coastline from other tags.

In this case Norman's Cay is the name of island as the tag place=island is there to show this is an island, and the natural landscape of this island is scrub as in natural=scrub. (scrub and coastline cannot be tagged together as both are categorized as natural)

A good place to read about this new tagging method which has been practiced for the past 2 years or so is at https://github.com/osmlab/fixing-polygons-in-osm/blob/master/doc/background.md under the title "Interpreting tags on the relation and members".

I have been using OSM Inspector to correct coastlines mistakes (by others) worldwide and this tagging method has not caused any problems and have been practiced by others as well.
InsertUser (2019-10-06 15:01:53+00:00): Both OSM Inspector area detection, and the link you posted (Figure 18 1st image) say the multipolygon you have made is wrong. The satellite imagery also shows that you have incorrectly extended "scrub" tagging over areas that are construction, beach, cleared for residences and bare rock. And you have decisively excluded areas that are clearly part of the island from the tagged island in order to create the false assertion that the island is all scrub when it blatantly isn't.

It doesn't matter to me if the island related tags are on the coastline polygon (simpler, more traditional) or  on a pointless single-child "multi"polygon (also an OSM Inspector error), but what is currently tagged is nonsense.
RunRunShow (2019-10-06 15:42:48+00:00): I might have missed out on the airport edge being in contact with the island perimeter which i have rectified but I don't think what I'd mapped was nonsense. I was simply improving on what's mapped before me.

I was on a personal effort to try to mapped the Bahamas which most are still without names and even proper outlines. You can have your personal opinion that it was nonsense or tagging style accepted by 90+% of the community as nonsense. You can choose to rectified it and give a proper comment. But to accuse my mapping is nonsense is simply not acceptable.

This would be my final reply and I shall reply no more.
InsertUser (2019-10-06 20:14:20+00:00): If you are interested in widely accepted practice I suggest you read about the principles of One feature, one OSM element [1], which is at the root of this discussion, and tagging for the renderer [2] which you implied you were doing in your first response. 

I don't think "90+% of the community" would accept scrub plastered over existing beaches and properties as an improvement nor would they support a change from the primary way to map islands in the sea [3] to a multipolygon that excludes large chunks of that island.

[1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
[2]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
[3]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland#Islands_in_the_sea
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-08-01 06:47:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 88804557, 88803494, 88807545, 88805107, 88806072, 88803983, 88806646, 88807097, 88804272 where the changeset comment is: Reverting Vermont building imports reported to DWG.  See discussions in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75339551 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75326336 .
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-06-19 15:18:13+00:00): Can you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3230174 ?
pio2_122 (2019-10-05 19:25:21+00:00): Wycofane ze względu na zmianę geometrii granic bez podstaw (typu źródło, komentarz)
Discostu36 (2019-10-21 16:01:47+00:00): Hi,
du hast als Quelle Bing angegeben, aber da können ja die 3D-Daten nicht herkommen. Da ich selbst an 3D-Tagging interessiert bin, würde mich dein Vorgehen interessieren. Machst du Fotos und editierst dann zu Hause oder wie machst du das?
Viele Grüße
Michael
googlenaut (2019-10-21 17:53:13+00:00): Bing ist dabei nur eine Quelle unter vielen. Zuerst isoliere ich die einzelnen Gebäudeteile (parts) und den Gebäudeumriss (outline) aus Vergleich der geeigneten Maps von Bing, Mapbox, Maxar. Dann schaue ich nach geeigneten Gebäudeansichen in verfügbarten Bildarchiven. Daraus ergibt sich die Anzahl der Stockwerke (building:levels, building:min_level). Damit kann man grob auf die Gebäudehöhe (building:height; building:min_height) schließen. Die Feinabstimmung erfolgt dann aufgrund fotogrammetrischer Verfahren. Dachform (roof:shape) und Material (roof:material) ergibt sich wieder aus der Draufsicht. Um dies zur Perfektion zu bringen hilft nur jahrelanges üben. Vor OSM habe ich schon bei GoogleEarth modelliert. Da war die Problematik ähnlich.
Discostu36 (2019-10-21 19:13:58+00:00): Vielen Dank für die ausführliche Antwort. Fotometrische Verfahren wäre sowas wie "das Gebäude ist ca. 5 Autos hoch also ungefähr x Meter"? Oder hast du noch andere Tricks?
googlenaut (2019-10-22 06:43:07+00:00): Bei Kirchengebäuden ist die Situation schwieriger, weil man dort keine Stockwerke abzählen kann. Hier sucht man zunächst nach einer Quelle, die Höhe des Kirchturms angibt. Die restlichen Gebäudehöhen ergeben sich aus den Gebäudeproportionen. Hilfreich bei der Höhenabschätzung sind auch sichtbare Türen und Fenster. Wenn ein Foto entsprechend skaliert wird, kann man die Höheninformationen  aus dem Foto herauslesen. Näheres dazu findest Du unter #Fotometrie.