piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Lee Carré (2021-07-01 03:30:33+00:00): Indeed. I, for one, am all about quality. There's a dizzying amount to do for such a small band of regulars. Even in town there's quite a lot missing, nevermind out in the farming parishes.

Getting into OSM has been on my list for far too long. Hence my first changesets were quite large, since I'd been collecting data in StreetComplete for about 2 years before finally getting around to opening an account (and uploading ~2000 quest-answers took an impressive while). Probably why I shot up the local rankings table, so quickly.

Armchair mapping is fine; provides plenty of easy pickings for me to survey. I suspect that it's a good thing that the few regulars each have different styles & interests, rather than (as it were) treading on each other's toes.

Actually, a question from a surveyor to an armchair mapper; what helps most in terms of feedback on needed corrections? E.g. free-form notes, using tags like fixme, or something else?
I suppose, also, what information would be most useful for actually being able to fix the kind of things best done on a micro-computer than a nano-computer?
Do photos (e.g. via StreetComplete) actually help, or is a clear (textual) description better?
So far, I've been mostly thoughtful-guessing.

Any other tips, suggestions, requests? I'm still quite the newbie (hence mostly sticking to tagging, so far, but learning). Unfortunately, despite marking some changesets as review_requested, not many people seem to do changeset reviewing (if only so I know I'm doing things right).
daganzdaanda (2021-07-01 11:32:54+00:00): Sometimes, like it was here, I'm panning across the map looking for open notes with simple enough issues to be closed without checking locally. I wouldn't look for fixme-tags this way, because I would need to download the data first (or use some QA tool like Osmose). Fixme's are maybe more useful for yourself and locals that way.

Photos are very helpful in many cases! I've looked at mapillary when available, and StreetComplete is also great with this option. Of course, often text is clear enough. 

One-word notes mostly aren't very helpful... I like when notes give a bit more info than just "this POI doesn't exist", e.g., if there was a shop, what is in there now? 

I also like to add infos like websites to POIs, but I don't like to google too much for such stuff.

"Review requested" is a great idea, which works best when there are other local mappers who can help the newbies. When I have time, I'll look into some of your "review_requested" changesets. But I'm sure you're doing fine :-)
Lee Carré (2021-07-01 23:28:46+00:00): That was informative. Thankyou.
Especially knowing that notes are indeed useful; I've added quite a lot, lately. So much that I wondered if it was excessive.
Your remarks have given me ideas for improving the (future) notes that I add. In retrospect, I had commented on the tacit assumption that someone else (with more experience) would come along doing a survey, but that doesn't appear true in little Jersey. Thus, I now see that for those not in the field the context is either lost or not apparent. Probably resulting in lack of info to be confident in making any change.
Though, part of my (quasi-subconscious) thinking was that identifying that a problem exists (sometimes, when physically there, the disparity between the map and reality is stark & obvious) is the first step (almost like a reminder, for future-self if no-one else, but public so that others can jump in if they wish). Other contributors could then comment on the note with what's needed to fix said problem or some other kind of exchange in order to yield resolution.
Having recently started dabbling with using imagery as a reference (I assume that all the ones available in Vespucci have been checked for copyright licensing issues, since I notice that Google isn't among the list; that's part of why I prefer surveying, no BS from draconian copyright (and it's trolls)), it was quickly apparent that even those which include “Clarity” in their title lack resolution for non-large (that is, anything smaller than a typical building) objects (the kind which would only need a node, being too small to warrant a way) or the (clear) image is clearly (pun intended) out-of-date (even compared to other imagery, let alone survey), and so dropping a note to confirm that something is indeed there, and what it is (since missing tags trigger various QA (in which I'm including StreetComplete quests which prompt for disambiguation e.g. of type)). Though, one issue tripping me up is misalignment & offsets. Vespucci has the ability to query some (online?) DB but couldn't find published offsets even for (notorious, I gather) Bing. Different sources (even from the same supplier) don't match. The GNSS receiver in my nano-computer also isn't consistently accurate, either; typically (even with excellent reception) the uncertainty radius seems to be ~5m (I recently learned that the chipset is from 2016, despite purchasing (as new) the phone in 2019).

(Besides what just turned into an essay (all by itself, I swear(!) 😁)) I don't really have much to add; I concur with the points you make.

Thanks for your intent to give constructive feedback on my changesets seeking-review.
Lee Carré (2021-07-01 23:33:32+00:00): To turn the tables, for a moment (and almost in jest); it would be helpful if citing (in source=*) the note ID(s) in question, so that they can easily be found in future once they become hidden on the map-overlay.

Though, I'm guilty of forgetting to do this, too.

When I'm on form, the note ID is cited in the changeset, and the changeset ID is cited in the note. Bi-directional pointers.
daganzdaanda (2021-07-02 12:42:36+00:00): Hehe... you are going through all the stages of any serious mapping afficionado :)

Aerial imagery usefulness varies very much, depending on where you are. As you have noticed, the images can be quite old, distorted, misaligned,  with bad resolution and too much shadows or tree cover etc. So it takes a lot of comparing to find out which is the newest, and which is the most detailed for an area. 

To get the alignment right, you can try to use existing gps tracks and your own tracks. The more tracks there are, the smaller the average error will be.
I've looked at the Bing images alignment with JOSM, it is actually reasonably good for the island, no need to offset. Only problem is that the images are taken from an angle, so you don't see straight down in the city streets. You will have to trace the rooftops and then move the outline to where the ground level is.
Bing metadata says the images were taken between 2010 and 2016 :-(
Esri "Clarity" is even older if I look at some construction sites. Standard Esri is newer, Mapbox and Maxar have the same images but processed a little differently. The editors also offer the French BDOrtho, which is sadly not extending to Jersey.
daganzdaanda (2021-07-02 12:45:17+00:00): About the notes, it's completely OK to use them as a "note for my future self". If the local mapping community doesn't like seeing a lot of open notes, then you'll find an agreement someway.
daganzdaanda (2021-07-02 13:03:12+00:00): About citing notes in changeset comments, yeah, I try to do that, too, but it's a bit complicated to do manually. I just found out there's a plugin for JOSM that should automate this: https://github.com/kmpoppe/noteSolver
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-05 14:23:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113411678 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some personal markers in the Philippines.  An attempt to contact the mapper failed.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-05 14:23:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113411678 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some personal markers in the Philippines.  An attempt to contact the mapper failed.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-05 14:22:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113411678 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some personal markers in the Philippines.  An attempt to contact the mapper failed.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-05 14:22:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113411678 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some personal markers in the Philippines.  An attempt to contact the mapper failed.
eggie (2021-03-05 12:34:02+00:00): Hi Ico.. Why this 'funny' name..?
Penis Building?

OSM is a serious matter
Greetz,
eggie
Warin61 (2023-06-12 04:32:27+00:00): Hi,

Adding 'maxspeed' while there are maxspeed:forward and maxspeed:backward ... makes no sense

I am removing the maxspeed tag where there is this conflict.
TheJuBe (2021-03-08 03:57:25+00:00): I'm sorry, this edit should be ignored it should be reverted to the way it was before this changeset. (The area is a new development, and the road that assigns the house its address is actually on the *backside* of the house (which is what caused the confusion).
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-03-05 06:08:42+00:00): Hello lco656,
please try to reduce your changes to small areas. Besides, your comment "minor changes" is not very meaningful.
Greetings
Roger Wilco
Gyrwa (2021-03-05 11:07:52+00:00): This appears to be deliberate vandalism, I cannot verify the name of the allotment but I doubt it is "Simp Squad Gardens". Nor can I see why it would be paired with adding a single node to a track in Austria.
eggie (2021-03-05 12:37:12+00:00): Hi.. Time to check other edits of this very mapper. 
Please inform the DWG
data@osmfoundation.org

-------------------

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/100452230#map=19/53.62120/-0.61138

Greetz,
eggie
OSM the Netherlands
eggie (2021-03-05 13:17:43+00:00): reverted due to vandalism by changeset  #100494442
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-06-16 04:58:04+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/900706839/history - w przynajmniej południowej części budowy nie ma a budynki przemysłowe stoją
mbethke (2021-03-05 07:02:41+00:00): Hi,
please use building=house for houses. social_facility=group_home is not the right category.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:social_facility%3Dgroup_home
puma515 (2021-03-05 02:57:47+00:00): ich das nicht in der wiki nachgeschaut.
Supaplex (2021-03-05 04:08:46+00:00): 不好意思，你加了兩個點在深山中，這真的是遊樂景點嗎?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100454295
rivermont (2021-11-12 03:39:59+00:00): Why did you tag so many things as driveways? Hardly any of these roads look like they actually lead to anything.
Anton Khorev (2021-06-29 12:36:00+00:00): Я этот "Ростелеком" отметил как закрытый, а вы поставили ему режим работы:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5230428621

Он сейчас работает или вы эту правку давно сделали а maps.me её залил гораздо позже?
Ser9ei (2021-06-29 19:33:08+00:00): Делал давно. Возможно, и закрыт уже. Давно там не был.
Kovoschiz (2021-03-05 14:33:08+00:00): Please don't downgrade `crossing=traffic_signals` to an ambiguous `crossing=marked`. For good measures I have added `road_marking=*`/
Kovoschiz (2021-03-05 14:34:46+00:00): There's no problem with `landuse=residential` + `building=` in HK. The former is really more important, until it can be detailed. `building=` with a `name=` is meaningless here.
Kovoschiz (2021-03-05 14:36:21+00:00): (`crossing=unmarked` is even more ambiguous)
opendcc (2021-03-06 04:56:26+00:00): Hallo,

beim Bach in Kronleiten ist über lange Strecke culvert gesetzt und die Fließrichtung scheint mir verkehrt. Von Rimbach geht es schon deutlich aufwärts nach Kronleiten.

Viele Grüße
BeKri (2021-03-06 06:52:16+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis,
geändert
Svalbard (2021-03-07 07:50:22+00:00): Hallo puma515, die Kombination cycleway mit bicycle u. foot=designated ist aber auch irgendwie komisch. Siehe Wiki [1].
Kennst Du das OSM Verkehrszeichen-Tool [2]?

Gruß Svalbard

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway=cycleway?uselang=de
[2] http://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/
puma515 (2021-03-07 20:07:35+00:00): Hallo das Verkehrszeichen tool kannte ich noch nicht. Bisher nur in der wiki nachgesehen.

Geh und Radweg scheind für OSM auch was exotisches zu sein. habe mich vorher in der umgebung umgesehen. fast jeder hat die wege als was andres eingezeichnet.
Laut Wiki ist der cycleway nicht falsch. Das Ergebniss ist das selbe. aber laut der kontroverse unter der info im Verkerszeichentool ist das eine veraltet genutzte bezeichnung. Das wurde das mal  mit highway=cycleway eingetragen wird aber neuer als highway=path
eingetragen.

Das werde ich die Tage dann auch noch für alle Radwege in dem Gebiet auf  highway=path ändern

Gruß puma515
puma515 (2021-03-07 20:08:49+00:00): Also zum verständniss laut wiku und tool: ein Kombinierter Rad- und Fußweg ist: 

highway=path
+foot=designated
+bicycle=designated
+segregated=no
Svalbard (2021-03-07 21:38:36+00:00): Ja, genau.

Gruß Svalbard
Supaplex (2021-04-17 08:55:36+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

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

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

Happy Mapping!
mbethke (2021-03-24 05:21:06+00:00): Hi,
as I explained previously, please don't tag social_facility all over the place. Also "house" is not a name.

cheers,
Matthias
ScottWalkerAU (2021-03-05 10:35:57+00:00): Maitland to Dungog is actually a part of the Hunter line
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100458852
Warin61 (2021-03-06 08:43:29+00:00): Arr yes... This is acually tagged as a 'route' as such it should go from A to B.. as it is in OSM it was A to B .. and C to B and B to A and B to C.. these need to entered as 2 routes.. working on it. 

I was thinking this was a 'railway line' rather than a route .. but I stand (sit) corrected.
Warin61 (2021-03-06 08:44:02+00:00): Errr 4 routes...
ScottWalkerAU (2021-03-06 08:45:42+00:00): Sounds good :)
Warin61 (2021-03-07 04:44:24+00:00): Please see new relation for 'Hunter line to Scone' 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12409977

to come:
'Hunter line from Scone' 
'Hunter line to Dungog' 
'Hunter line from Dungog' 

Note New lines added to make them continuous. Some guess work as to where track changes take place, I think this will change with what traffic there is on the lines andway.
kartonage (2021-03-05 07:48:34+00:00): Why do you need to delete so many objects just to remap them? Can you not modify existing objects?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100462256
Warin61 (2021-04-01 01:51:47+00:00): ? prison ? Ummm 

? Centre of National Resilience ? Arr found a link. So that is 'ok', I think. 

access=permissive implies public has access that could be withdrawn... I'd think access=private would be 'better' as it is more restrictive.
user_5359 (2021-03-05 17:02:07+00:00): Hello! You added many ways only with the key Name (I can changed this to name). Please add the type of the way (waterway or highway). You add also many Name to ways which have also have the key name. Because the name value was better, it delete the key Name.
abakus_uploader (2021-03-05 23:32:40+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-13 17:43:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 106288172, 106291668 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5046 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
dvdhoven (2021-03-05 08:05:53+00:00): Met ID kun je geen routes bewerken.
ID voegt nieuwe delen standaard onderaan de route toe en dat is meestal de verkeerde plek.
Een route ligt altijd in volgorde zonder gaten, knooppuntroutes van laag naar hoog knooppunt en de wegen in de route moeten aansluitend zijn.
Verder heb je voor 23-24 de Sint Janstraat doorgeknipt en dat heeft tot gevolg gehad dat rcn route 12-76 ook een sorteerfout heeft gekregen. Doorknippen van wegen met ID leidt vaak tot sorteerfouten in de routes.
Als je met routes aan de gang wilt, zul je over moeten schakelen op JOSM.
Ik heb 23-24 en 12-76 hersteld.

Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-13 17:42:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 106288172, 106291668 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5046 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
abakus_uploader (2021-03-05 23:32:41+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-03-05 07:33:49+00:00): Hallo BriellaGomez,
bitte keine privaten Rasenflächen/Gärten als landuse=meadow (=landwirtschaftliche Wiese/Weide) mappen. Grundsätzlich ist das Mappen von privaten Gärten umstritten und hat so gut wie keinen Nutzen.
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-03-05 07:34:56+00:00): ... und Danke für das Mappen der ganzen Gebäude! Super!
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-03-08 07:12:08+00:00): Hallo BriellaGomez,
könntest Du bitte auf meine Hinweis reagieren (antworten) und den Fehler korrigieren!
Gruß Roger Wilco
Apocolocyntōsis (2021-03-08 15:48:18+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis. Habe die entsprechende Fläche entfernt. Ist es in Ordnung, solche Flächen als "Grass" klassifiziert zu mappen?
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-03-08 15:53:46+00:00): Danke!
Rasen oder Grasflächen können mit landuse=grass erfasst werden, ja (bei ID "Gras" auswählen).
Bitte aber keine Gärten oder private Rasenflächen mappen.
user_9385968 (2021-10-07 13:43:14+00:00): Hi,
why jou have shiftet 3465342430 form
the right possition 50,8596381, 14,2201100 to the wrong position
50,8619886, 14,2225991 ?

See http://db-sandsteinklettern.gipfelbuch.de/weg.php?gipfelid=1132

Greetings
Milancer (2021-10-07 17:14:22+00:00): Hi, I fix geometry problem of way 438437980

Changeset:
https://osmcha.org/changesets/100437989/

The position is now correct.
Thanks for the info!

Milan
Famlam (2021-04-07 20:33:24+00:00): Dag Ff Dewa, 

Er zijn nu zowel Tolwachterstraat en Tolwachtersstraat (s versus ss). Kunt u nagaan welke de juiste is?

Ook vroeg ik mij af of er tegenwoordig geen verkeersbordje meer staat in het noordpunt van deze straat. Voorheen stond hier een verkeersbord dat aangaf dat (in ieder geval het stukje tussen Tolbroekstraat en de rest van Teersdijk) ook Teersdijk heette.
Famlam (2021-06-30 14:44:21+00:00): Ik ben erlangs gefietst. Straatnaam is echt Teersdijk tot de Tolrechtstraat. Op de kruising met Tolrechtstraat staat duidelijk linksaf Teersdijk, rechtsaf Tolwachterstraat. Hersteld.
vojtechzaboril (2021-03-13 19:10:36+00:00): Dobrý den, prosím o kontrolu těchto cest
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/902205831
a
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/902205832
označil jste ji jako covered, možná se jedná o chybu.
Děkuji.
HaPe-CZ (2021-03-15 07:12:14+00:00): Předtím to zakresloval ještě uživatel MIGORMCZ a levé pruhy k Barandáku měly tag Tunel, u pravých to bylo bez Tunelu a nevšiml jsem si tagu Covered. Ted snad Ok.
Ars-UA (2021-03-05 07:47:44+00:00): Мутная улица, но похоже, всё-таки ОсипенкО, а не А.
murr999888 (2021-03-05 09:13:24+00:00): Щас придет некто, который выложит охапку решений горсовета / постанов Кабмина / решений ГА ООН и докажет обратное. )) Вообще-то на табличках будет вул.Осипенка, а то, что это улица имени женщины - мало кто догадывается. Я бы оставил как в документах - их никто менять не будет. Тем более там в названии нигде нет инициалов и конкретно о каком человеке идет речь - в итоге неизвестно.
Ars-UA (2021-03-05 13:18:32+00:00): Была себе «Осипенко вулиця». Потом иду мимо, смотрю, указатель - «вулиця Осипенка». Ну, думаю, мало ли, переименовали. Типа как ул. Калинина в ул. Калиновую. Исправил. Потом как раз Тот, чьё имя нельзя называть, написал, что указатель с ошибкой. Я посмотрел по кадастру - там «вулиця Осипенка». Посмотрел по месту, нашёл только «ул. Осипенко». Непонятно. Потом пришёл iWowik со своей полуавтоматической исправлялкой и сделал по кадастру «Осипенка». Потом я опять проходил мимо и указатель уже поменяли на «вул. Осипенко». Это как «вул. Клинова / вул. Кленова / Кленова балка».
woodpeck_repair (2021-03-05 08:49:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 100475732 where the changeset comment is: undiskutierte Löschungen revertiert, um der Forumsdiskussion Raum zu geben (s. ommentar zu CS 100471592)
woodpeck (2021-03-05 08:50:32+00:00): Hallo Ro_Ver, es ist gut, dass Du Dich an der Forumsdiskussion zu diesen Löschungen (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=72113) beteiligst. Da Du nun aber weisst, dass es kritische Stimmen gibt, sieh doch bitte von Wegelöschungen jeder Art ab, solange diese Diskussion noch läuft. Du kannst stattdessen ja Kandidaten wie diese drei Wege hier in der Diskussion erwähnen und erklären, warum Du denkst, dass diese nun wirklich gelöscht werden sollten - anstatt vollendete Tatsachen zu schaffen. Ich revertiere diese Löschung jetzt mal, um den "status quo ante" wiederherzustellen; wenn das Ergebnis der Diskussion ist, dass eine Löschung sinnvoll ist, können die Wege selbstverständlich weg!
bxl-forever (2021-03-05 09:53:58+00:00): Hello,

Waow, I didn’t know that.  Did they change the speed limit because of the accident?

In that case, do you know what road signs have been put there?  I suppose they removed the C43 roadsigns completely (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Belgian_road_sign_C43_50.svg) so that traffic should follow the default 30 kph speed limit.  

Hence, we should have "source:maxspeed=BE-BRU:urban".
Thierry1030 (2021-03-05 10:19:36+00:00): https://www.dhnet.be/regions/bruxelles/bruxelles-mobilite/forest-apres-l-accident-mortel-d-iwona-l-avenue-albert-va-passer-en-zone-30-6041df0dd8ad5809d0a48d54?fbclid=IwAR2-Thxk2RmOgOAuTyB60nq38tDXcImLJ7zLackw_ZOG-0oL8cSxSnwcX_c