piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
TheBestIdea (2022-02-14 19:08:23+00:00): You are totally right about the mismatch between the DO NOT ENTER signs indicating motor_vehicle=delivery and regular ASP parking regs. I went with delivery because generally drivers are required to follow the most restrictive sign (i.e if you get pulled over for ignoring the "Do Not Enter" sign, the ticket is probably valid even if ASP signs indicate you could otherwise park on that block).

Idk if you have followed the whole saga about the Willoughby open street being ripped out and then reinstalled last week (see links below), but I'm not sure anyone knows for certain what's going on. 
It had been the first open street to get the new DOT revised "light touch" treatment with the planters, painted curb extensions, and mid-block pinch points so people had thought it was becoming permanent. I'm certainly paying close attention and will update if things change. (And I think for now I will also update it to highway=living_street.) But let me know if you think it should be something else!

https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/02/11/mayor-adams-says-he-didnt-give-the-order-to-erase-fort-greene-open-street/
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/02/10/city-erases-hugely-popular-fort-greene-open-street-allegedly-on-mayors-orders/
jmapb (2022-02-15 16:19:46+00:00): Nope I've been completely out of the loop on this nutty drama. I just happened by and thought it looked odd.

Based on what I saw, I think living street is correct.

Cheers, J
Glassman (2022-02-12 13:48:54+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

One suggestion - The road and the lake shouldn't be connected.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117306874
Glassman (2022-02-12 13:49:07+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117306892
Glassman (2022-02-12 13:51:04+00:00): #TIP: pick either pond or lake for the water tag.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117306897
Glassman (2022-02-12 03:26:35+00:00): #TIP: Unless the water body is good size, I just leave them as water=pond since there is no real definition of what a lake is. Can you review this edit?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117306930
8329 (2024-02-18 19:59:59+00:00): historic maps show a lake named beaver lake in this spot.
Glassman (2022-02-12 03:24:03+00:00): #TIP: The building outline already had the church name - the name in the node is not needed. Can you fix?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117307113
Glassman (2022-02-12 13:57:35+00:00): Thank you for your edit. However - it appears the stream is headed away from the Columbia River. I would have guessed that it would flow into the Columbia River. Check out https://apps.nationalmap.gov/ for the NHD.  Can you review this edit?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117307139
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-06-10 21:37:34+00:00): Este carril no es solo para bicicletas, ¿por qué cambiaste el tipo a este incorrecto? Estoy invirtiendo esta edición.
kubahahaha (2022-02-12 01:37:08+00:00): Przetarg nieograniczony - Przebudowa dróg gminnych w ciągu ulic: 11 Listopada, R. Dmowskiego i Parkowej w Jędrzejowie wraz z budową ronda na skrzyżowaniu tych ulic - znak sprawy: RIZP.271.14.2020
http://www.jedrzejow.eobip.pl/bip_jedrzejow/index.jsp?place=Lead07&news_cat_id=11&layout=1&offset=30&count=15
PolyDunami (2022-02-12 01:53:40+00:00): For the area surrounded by Julius Drive and Julius Place, I've tagged it as landuse:residential and added driveway paths as I could tell where they were.

The note at this area stated that the Aerial Imagery was not good enough for this part of the map. No doubt, the imagery does include roads obscured by surrounding trees. This does not necessarily mean that it's impossible to accurately plot out these roads.
PolyDunami (2022-02-12 02:01:26+00:00): I haven't plotted out the buildings in the RV area due to latest aerial imagery from Bing having been taken in July of 2020.
RuffLayers4 (2022-02-16 20:17:19+00:00): Comment should have been, "Edited barrier near Prefeitura Municipal de Camaçari. #adt," source used was Maxar Premium Imagery and Mapillary.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-14 07:49:34+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4454956087/history has shop = vape that was added in this edit
shop=vape ? Could it be tagged as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=e-cigarette (if shop=vape / shop=vaping / shop=vape_store is needed - how it differs or is better than shop=e-cigarette ?)
tastrax (2022-02-21 02:43:00+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) 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
Micha (2022-02-21 04:01:31+00:00): Thanks; just updated phone numbers for Scubaworld (which I just added) to match this preferred layout.
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-02-15 11:19:14+00:00): نرجوا منكم التوقف عن إضافة أماكن غير صحيحة إلى الخريطة
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 03:24:19+00:00): 影像偏移设定：（9.89, -8.45），此设置仅为了与现有道路、建筑对象对齐，以尽可能少的修改现有对象，与卫星影像的准确度无关。
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 03:26:05+00:00): 链接有误，应为：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dplace_of_worship#Multiple_places_of_worship_on_the_same_grounds
ZLima12 (2022-03-02 05:14:04+00:00): Hi,

Welcome to OSM! There's a couple things I'd like to point out here.

First of all, it looks like you didn't remove the node after mapping out the pool as an area. Please do so when doing tasks like this.

Second, please don't put things like "pool" in the name tag. It looks like your editor warned you about this too, and you must have clicked to ignore the warning. Please give careful consideration to any warnings shown to you, as it will help reduce issues with the data you produce.

Specifically, "pool" would be an example of a descriptive name. Essentially, you're describing the element with your own words. This is not really useful to anyone; the fact that it's a pool is already represented in the other tags. If you want to know whether something in OSM should have a name, consider how you'd mention it to someone in conversation. Would you say "that bridge by the park"? If so, don't put a name on it. Or, would you say "the George Washington Bridge"? In this case, you would put a name on it.

Hopefully my examples help you understand the rules for this, but please let me know if you still have questions about this or anything else in OSM.
i2004 (2022-02-12 19:50:09+00:00): las fines de semana el 130 panamericana hacia la boca va por libertador  es algo que yo lo vi porque pasa por la puerta de mi madrina
AgusQui (2022-02-12 23:23:26+00:00): Si lo sé, lo conozco desde hace años, pero faltan mapear cosas más importantes y no le di bola. Debes mapearlo con otra relación indicando los horarios con opening_hours
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 03:47:17+00:00): 影像偏移设定：（9.89, -8.45），此设置仅为了与现有道路、建筑对象对齐，以尽可能少的修改现有对象，与卫星影像的准确度无关。
ftcat (2022-02-12 06:28:40+00:00): Hi Wire Guy,

Suggest you use MAXAR Premium imagery, it is more current, you will notice most these buildings no longer exist. They tend to be temporary anyway as it is a flood plain and the 'buildings' are built by fishermen when the water levels drop then they move away when it rises again in the rains. It is pointless mapping any buildings in these areas.
wireguy (2022-02-12 12:14:33+00:00): Ok, thanks for the info.  I was mostly  correcting the typo on the tag value.  Removed.
ZLima12 (2022-02-13 05:17:16+00:00): Hi,

Thanks again for using NYSDOP imagery in these areas. Your work looks very good.

Your imagery_used tag on the changeset is set correctly, which is good. Your changeset comment is still on Bing though.

Thanks for your work!
btwhite92 (2022-02-17 02:03:40+00:00): Hello thehedgehog,
I'm reverting this changeset since it broke the LTMBU NF relation. I'm not sure why members were removed from the relation - the members removed define the land ownership boundary and were correct. ID is undergunned to deal with these complex relations in my experience - please consider learning to use JOSM instead if you wish to modify complex relations in the future.
Bradley
thehedgehog (2022-02-17 03:33:39+00:00): Hey Bradley,
Thanks for the comment, and I'll look into learning JOSM for these types of relations.  
The reason I made these changes is because the LTBMU extends into the Desolation Wilderness area (to the Sierra Crest) as shown by this published Forest Service map  (https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MEDIA/stelprd3827909.jpg) and plenty of other official sources. 
If I've changed the relation incorrectly or there's another way to show the LTBMU's full area, would you mind letting me know?
btwhite92 (2022-02-17 04:40:10+00:00): This relation represents a protected area rather than an administrative boundary - it maps land that is physically owned (and therefore protected) by the USFS as opposed to federally designated administrative boundaries. Desolation is a separate relation because it is protected at a higher level than other nearby federally owned land. The wilderness here would be considered jointly operated by LTBMU and Eldorado, with the exact line where the jurisdiction changes not relevant to the relation since, again, that is a federal administrative boundary rather than a change of name or protection level "on the ground". Were these boundaries to be introduced, it should be as a 'boundary=administrative' rather than 'boundary=protected_area', but that would be a question to bring to the community via mailing list or slack/discord as to whether this information should be included in the database, and if so, what administrative level these administrative boundaries should be at. Having stood multiple times on the ridge that splits the LTBMU and Eldorado management of the wilderness area, I can assure you there is no way to know there is a change in managment outside of consulting official maps.
Bradley
thehedgehog (2022-02-18 18:55:34+00:00): Thanks much for explaining that.  If it wasn't completely apparent already, I'm new to OSM and I apologize for my shoot first, ask questions later approach to changing the data.  I'm currently working on a project that uses relations to map the boundaries of these areas, and aims to showcase the protected area of Desolation Wilderness, but also who manages what sections (so the full administrative boundary of both LTBMU and Eldorado NF).  

The reason I thought my change was appropriate was because if you take the nearby Mokelumne Wilderness for example, the Eldorado NF and Stanislaus NF's 'boundary=protected_area' extend through the heart of it.  So I figured the same should apply to Desolation.  

So as you suggested, I guess this is a good question for the community.  I just joined the Slack channel and will pose there for discussion / clarification.
thehedgehog (2022-02-18 22:28:34+00:00): Just heard back from multiple users in the Slack forum - 

The consensus was that [boundary=administrative] is to be used for cities / towns / etc. so that wouldn't work in this case.

There were two solutions offered:

Use [boundary=forestry_compartment] to add the internal management zones.  

OR 

Have the boundaries overlap, and make sure that the [protect_class] tag is correct for the areas in question.
btwhite92 (2022-02-18 22:43:13+00:00): Cool, sounds like there's buy-in on overlapping protected area boundaries. What'd need to be done at this point is to reimport the boundary line between the LTBMU and Eldorado NF within the Desolation boundary and then correct the relation members. Gimmie a couple hours and I should be able to have this done. Day off today - just got back from skiing Tallac this morning, speaking of Desolation!
thehedgehog (2022-02-19 00:07:04+00:00): ​​Thanks a lot for doing that - just so I can start to wrap my head around it - 

You're going to import the boundary line from JOSM and then ensure the relations for the LTBMU and Eldorado connect nicely with it?

Tallac looks like a cool objective!  I haven’t been following Tahoe’s conditions, but hopefully it’s not bone dry like it’s been up here at Mt. Hood!
btwhite92 (2022-02-19 00:34:46+00:00): I'll be importing the boundary line from USFS GIS data with the result that:
- The LTBMU/Eldorado NF protected_area boundary relations will contain all land owned by the federal government and administered by the LTBMU & Eldorado NF respectively (protect_class=6 lands)
- The separate Desolation Wilderness boundary relation (protect_class=1b area) will overlay the two previous relations as a proper subset, rather than as separate mutually exclusive sets.
Mod_0range (2022-02-12 04:17:21+00:00): Ich bin unsicher, was den gesamten Knoten angeht, weil er nicht auf der Karte erscheint.
DD1GJ (2022-02-12 07:53:12+00:00): Der Eintrag ist in Ordnung und wird auch gefunden:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=Musikschule%20Saltarello!o

http://overpass-turbo.eu/?q=LyoKVGhpcyBoYcSGYmVlbiBnxI1lcmF0ZWQgYnkgdGhlIG92xJJwxIlzLXR1cmJvIHdpemFyZC7EgsSdxJ9yaWdpbmFsIHNlxLBjaMSsxIk6CsOiwoDCnGFtxI1pdHk9bXVzaWNfc8WCb29sxYjCnQoqLwpbb3V0Ompzb25dW3RpxYzFpMWmMjVdOwovL8SPxJTEnXIgcmVzdWx0cwooCiAgxbggcXXEksSaxKNydCBmb3I6IMWIxYrFjG7FjsWQxZLFlMWWxZhoxZrFnMKAxZ7GiW5vZGVbIsWLxY3FjyI9IsagxZXFl8WZxZsiXSh7e2LEqnh9fSnFtsaJd2F5xq7GsMadxrLGtMa2xqLGuWzGu8a9xr_HgceDx4XGiMW-ZWzElGnFqseLxpzGnsazxrXFk8a3xqPGpceUxr7HgG_HgseExbbHmcaLcMS3bsaTxb_GgcaDxoXFscSYxqt5xbY-xbbHu3Nrx5zGjHQ7&c=BMgXhX_e1K&R

OpenStreetMap ist eine Geodatenbank und jeder Ersteller einer Karte, Anwendung oder App entscheidet, was er in welcher Form anzeigt. Dieser Kartenstiel zeigt derzeit grundsätzlich keine Musikschulen an.
Mod_0range (2022-02-12 16:45:55+00:00): Verstehe, vielen Dank.
CurlingMan13 (2023-03-02 00:05:07+00:00): Please take your time when adding buildings to ensure they match what is on the ground, and be sure to square them.

The low quality ones have been removed accordingly.
ALu68 (2022-02-13 08:09:45+00:00): building=*
Use building=yes instead.
azakh-world (2022-02-12 07:09:45+00:00): Hello.
You've created many station nodes with railway=station/halt tag. Those nodes duplicate existing station objects drawn as polygons, e.g. node 9485209419 and way 765854480. Regardless of preferred method of mapping train stations (nodes or polygons) at given location, having two objects with railway=station tag is definitely an error. Please correct the duplication. You may use the validation page https://cdn.organicmaps.app/subway/mexico.html

Best regards,
Alexey
Allison P (2022-02-21 23:34:00+00:00): Why do some of these buildings have such strange shapes? Generally you'd expect them to have right angle corners. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1030586862 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1024126699, for example. The cover created by an individual tree does not a forest make.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:41:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 06:23:14+00:00): 影像偏移设定：（9.89, -8.45），此设置仅为了与现有道路、建筑对象对齐，以尽可能少的修改现有对象，与卫星影像的准确度无关。
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 06:34:43+00:00): 影像偏移设定：（9.89, -8.45），此设置仅为了与现有道路、建筑对象对齐，以尽可能少的修改现有对象，与卫星影像的准确度无关。
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 06:46:51+00:00): 影像偏移设定：（9.89, -8.45），此设置仅为了与现有道路、建筑对象对齐，以尽可能少的修改现有对象，与卫星影像的准确度无关。
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 06:51:50+00:00): 影像偏移设定：（9.89, -8.45），此设置仅为了与现有道路、建筑对象对齐，以尽可能少的修改现有对象，与卫星影像的准确度无关。
TheSwavu (2022-02-21 02:28:35+00:00): This one had crossing ways but I have already fixed them.
user_13980615 (2022-02-12 07:18:55+00:00): 影像偏移设定：（9.89, -8.45），此设置仅为了与现有道路、建筑对象对齐，以尽可能少的修改现有对象，与卫星影像的准确度无关。
TheSwavu (2022-02-21 02:28:46+00:00): Crossing ways
TheSwavu (2022-02-21 02:29:04+00:00): I've already fixed this one.
Littlebtc (2022-02-23 09:57:12+00:00): 您好 QQ

發現您的編輯量異常大，加上在繪製時我因為遇到一些狀況所以檢視了一下，我會認為您的編輯涉及自動化編輯手段的機率很高（不合理的編輯範圍跟編輯數量）

可以的話希望您稍微說明一下您的資料來源跟做法，如果涉及其他政府資料來源的匯入（我猜台中市有），希望您先到 FB 社團 / Telegram 等管道溝通；如果涉及圖資的 AI 描繪，我認為準確度沒有高到可以直接匯入的程度，直接無經校對上傳會產生很多問題。

Wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits

以上，感謝您的貢獻！
twF6wdEYwL (2022-02-26 08:50:38+00:00): 台中市部分圖資來自開放資料"109年度臺中市建物TWD97"

https://data.gov.tw/dataset/146559

其餘區域都是手動照衛星圖像繪製
TheSwavu (2022-02-21 02:30:20+00:00): This one has two duplicates on top of an existing highway. Not exactly sure how this is happening.
mapperue (2024-02-05 11:28:49+00:00): Táto cesta nie je footway=sidewalk. Pozri si kedy sa táto značka používa.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway=sidewalk?uselang=sk
mapperue (2024-02-05 11:29:11+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1030599384
gymko (2024-02-05 11:55:00+00:00): Ahoj, mohol by si skontrolovať taktiež cestu 68 lebo sú tam poznámky z Keep right a neviem ako to opraviť.
mapperue (2024-02-05 12:06:47+00:00): Co som našiel, tak si na túto cestu pridal značka landuse=residential, ktorá sa používa len na plochy.
Ešte poznámky ukazujú značku abutters=residential, čo je však nejaký bug.
gymko (2024-02-05 12:19:47+00:00): No ja len pretože predtým tam bolo residential a písalo že použite abutters...
A teraz neviem čo s tým
gymko (2024-02-05 12:20:49+00:00): Mám zrušiť značku landuse=residential? poprípade čím to nahradiť, ak to vieš opraviť tak to uprav.
mapperue (2024-02-05 14:46:27+00:00): Je to už opravené.
mapperue (2024-02-05 14:47:18+00:00): Značku abbuters=residential na ceste nechávaj. Editor ID nie je aktualizovaný a často obsahuje chyby.
mapperue (2024-02-06 15:21:44+00:00): Ďalší príklad nesprávne označeného typu cesty je napríklad tento:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1068946096
Je to cesta na zberný dvor a je označená ako highway=unclassified, pričom takéto cesty sa značia ako highway=service.
Hneď vedľa je cesta k poľnohospodárskym pozemkom a je značená ako highway=path, pričom je to cesta pre poľnohospodársku techniku.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1073909761#map=16/49.1933/20.9578
Dave Venables (2022-02-12 08:33:03+00:00): Looks good thanks https://ratings.food.gov.uk/business/en-GB/1173/Kathmandhu-Gurkha-II-Amber-Valley matching fhrs:id and addr:postcode values
Not sure how this was missed by me previously as it even shows on the suggested matches layer https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhodot/?lat=53.05&lon=-1.40&zoom=15&layer=suggest
Rainero (2022-03-22 20:20:43+00:00): Hallo redweizn,

die Adresse müßte doch eher Gaußstraße 6 sein, oder? Es gibt in Unterföhring eine Feldstraße, aber 2 km weiter nördlich.

Servus,
Rainer
FbrG (2022-02-12 12:25:51+00:00): Hi wie ich sehe hast du die Parplätze an der Alberstraße separat gemappt. Die Parkmöglichkeiten sind allerdings schon am 'highway' der Albertstraße. Um sie nur einmal in der OSM abzubilden müsste das wshl noch entfernt werden. Falls du also noch die Straße weiter bearbeiten willst, sie ist in der Hinsicht bereits relativ detailreich gemappt ;)

lg FbrG
Layft Greater (2022-02-12 09:11:11+00:00): Added wikidata
ivanbranco (2022-02-12 09:19:46+00:00): Ciao

surface=sterrato non è un valore valido. I tag e value in OSM sono per convenzione in inglese. Sulla Wiki puoi trovare i valori in uso: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:surface
user_5359 (2022-02-12 15:15:49+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please save your work before you change the area.

Note that in OSM classification of the objects has the highest priority. Objects that have only one name, have little sense. As home page for the question "How do I describe you?" I recommend the web site http://wiki.openstreetmap.org.
user_5359 (2022-02-17 14:29:43+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on the newest version of your node http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7017567308
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-02-12 10:02:53+00:00): رسم أودية والتعليق كان بالخطأ
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-02-12 10:02:49+00:00): رسم أودية والتعليق كان بالخطأ
deneb48 (2022-09-05 15:57:56+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour ces ajouts mais sur les rues Madame Curie et Haig Tbirian il me semble que les marquages DSC correspondent plutôt au cas S1 sur https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Bandes_cyclables_sur_les_routes_%C3%A0_sens_unique

(source : j'y passe tous les jours).

Est-ce que quelqu'un voit un inconvénient à ce que je rectifie ?
Carto'Cité (2022-09-30 17:22:58+00:00): Bonjour deneb48,
Non je vois pas d'inconvénient :)
Ta source a l'air fiable ;)
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
Carto'Cité (2022-09-30 17:24:58+00:00): J'ai également corrigé ces 2 DSC :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28553543
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/700887092
Charles
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-02-12 10:02:47+00:00): رسم أودية والتعليق كان بالخطأ
user_5359 (2022-02-13 09:25:53+00:00): Hello! You add a lot of unknown keys like
AENR_GLTOM 	20010214
AVST 	0.848291881399999
BESKTNNGSS 	b4
BISBJETNNR 	27090
BISBJETTNR 	6000
BYGNADETNG 	13
BYGNADODLL 	Kur
FRAN_DATUM 	20000101
INGAARIATC 	J
INGARITCKR 	Ja-Skapad vid överf från ATC-stöd/PATCY
KM(ROJKTT) 	80
KMTAL 	80+ 562
KMTALTI 	80+ 562
OBJEKTTEXT 	FS 22 >
PLUM(POJT) 	562.0
RIKNINSGET 	>
RIKTNING 	Med
RLID 	2000001:11093
SIDA 	Vänster
SIGALNMALT 	-1
SIGNALNR 	22
SKYDSGLLER 	N
STNIGNTUUR 	Lub
TILL_DATUM 	99991231
TYPAVIP 	FS
TYPVHUUDAL 	-
TYPVHUUDKR 	Ej relevant
TYPVIPBEKR 	Försignal
What is the meaning of this keys and what is the licence of the source?
Tomas Marklund (2022-02-13 10:02:04+00:00): Bummer, these are the raw data tags from Trafikverket which I always delete before uploading, but for some reason missed this time. They are now removed in changeset 117346885. Thanks for the heads up. 

The licence is CC0.
Roelieboelie (2022-02-13 17:43:55+00:00): Hoi,

Deze grenzen kloppen niet helemaal vam 'sociale voorzieningen '.. Ten zuiden School en gebouw daarnaast horen hier echt niet bij bijvoorbeeld. Ff dubbel checken lijkt me handig.
Roelieboelie (2022-02-13 17:44:50+00:00): Ook de woonhuizen ten zuiden behoren er niet bij
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-02-15 11:38:48+00:00): نرجوا منكم عدم إضافة الأماكن الغير صحيحة للخريطة
rupertvdk (2022-02-12 10:29:54+00:00): Änderungssatz-Kommentar wurde fehlerhaft nicht hinzugefügt: Eigene Erhebung von Radverkehrsinfrastruktur von Ebensberg bis Nutzfelde u. Lentau #LGMaps
archie (2022-02-12 11:21:07+00:00): Nu är den fixad på riktig (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117317249).
archie (2022-02-12 10:41:29+00:00): Den här cs reverterade jag. Det pågår omfattande vägarbete här f n.
SekeRob (2022-02-12 10:49:23+00:00): PS There are a few more grassland inner role tags on borders that are shared such as between bare rock and scrub.
喵耳引力波 (2022-02-12 10:47:03+00:00): [out:xml][timeout:25];(nwr["name"="蜜雪冰城"]["brand"!="蜜雪冰城"];);out meta;>;out meta qt;
喵耳引力波 (2022-02-12 10:47:08+00:00): amenity=cafe
brand=蜜雪冰城
brand:en=MIXUEBINGCHENG
brand:wikidata=Q107406476
brand:wikipedia=zh:蜜雪冰城
brand:zh=蜜雪冰城
cuisine=bubble_tea
name=蜜雪冰城
name:en=MIXUEBINGCHENG
name:zh=蜜雪冰城
takeaway=yes
喵耳引力波 (2022-02-12 12:11:41+00:00): 自动化编辑有个缺点就是总是会不小心搞得bbox很大，对牵连到的先说抱歉，属于意料之外
喵耳引力波 (2022-02-12 12:12:56+00:00): 您可能会想推荐我的文章：
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
confusedbuffalo (2022-03-07 22:25:34+00:00): Hi, see comments in these notes
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3048286
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3048291
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3048289
Better to ensure that speed limits are mapped (they are) and tag the lack of pavement, cycleway and hard shoulder (they weren't, but I have now done so).
Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118214991
Emilius123 (2023-11-22 15:27:35+00:00): source=Bing

😫😫😫😫