piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
clay_c (2022-07-28 18:15:31+00:00): Hi cmitchell,

It looks like you've merged the station nodes with the new building polygons you mapped at Brooke and Leeland Road. Note that station buildings are just one part of stations. If you intended to map the station as an area, draw an area enclosing the grounds of the building, platform and any switches.

I've gone ahead and restored the station nodes here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124198156
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-07-07 15:28:49+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changeset .
mavl (2022-07-08 04:25:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 123341796 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6126].
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-07-07 15:30:19+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 123319611, 123319725, 123319912.
literan (2022-07-07 17:50:29+00:00): ваши правки полностью деструктивны. Вы хаотично меняете статусы дорог, ломаете роутинг.
francians (2022-07-07 17:29:32+00:00): Ciao,

grazie per i contributi, ma si tratta di marciapiedi/percorsi pedonali?

Grazie
Francesco
Langlaeufer (2024-02-23 15:13:35+00:00): Du hast hier die offiziellen Namen von den Anschlussstellen entfernt. Die sind zwar nicht an den Straßenschildern wurden aber so in den Bauplänene und Pressemeldungen kommuniziert und dürften auch vor Ort so bekannt sein.
Hast du einen Alternativvorschlag wie diese Namen erfasst werden können?
Langlaeufer (2024-02-23 15:31:20+00:00): Ich diskutiere das mal hier:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/namen-von-ausfahrten-von-schnellstrassen-ohne-zeichen-448-50/109658
ElliottPlack (2022-07-25 13:26:48+00:00): Hi, please do not tag trunks in Maryland until a concensus is reached on the wiki and all are on board via posts on talk-us.

-- Elliott Plack
OSM Foundation
Data Working Group
keithonearth (2022-07-22 16:07:19+00:00): I've cycled on the 99 past Squamish, and never seen any signage prohibiting cycling. Can you please provide evidence that cycling is prohibited on the sections you changed the tags from `bicycle=yes` to `bicycle=no`?
voteforpedro (2024-06-25 18:30:35+00:00): There are multiple sections of the highway that have both painted bike lanes, and signage to alert drivers to the presence of bicycles. Specific places that you listed as "no" bicycles conflict with this, so I'll be changing it to remove the restrictions.
keithonearth (2024-06-26 07:08:05+00:00): Thank you for reminding me about this voteforpedro, I'd meant to give alex circuit a chance to explain themselves, and then remove the `bicycle=no` if they failed to provide a reasonable rational for their change. Or at least the opportunity to write a full sentence. But I forgot to deal with it.

They have not made any attempt to explain themselves, and I am opposed to their change that banned bicycles from this route. I've gone ahead and changed the `bicycle=no` to `bicycle=yes`. I think I got them all.
keithonearth (2024-06-26 07:10:56+00:00): Here's a link to my edit making the changes:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153187014
keithonearth (2024-09-17 18:54:05+00:00): I'd missed a couple places these tags had been added, and only cleaned them up today.  Please be cautious about adding tags like this, and don't base edits on assumptions, as it is a pain to clean up messes like this.
kartler175 (2022-07-08 09:17:56+00:00): Bitte sei gerade als Anfänger vorsichtiger mit deinen Bearbeitungen. Offensichtlich ist dir nicht bewusst, was Du mit unbedachten Löschungen anrichten kannst: https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=8.56579&lat=47.91637&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.95&overlays=ring_not_closed%2Cways

Es is ja gut, dass Du JOSM verwendest, aber benutze dann auch dessen Validator. Der hätte dir die gezeigten Fehler vor dem Hochladen angezeigt.

P.S.
Eine Openstreetmap-Karte als Datenquelle für Änderungen von OSM-Daten anzugeben, ergibt keinen Sinn.
user_16476606 (2022-07-08 10:06:21+00:00): Hi, wenn ich das gerade richtig sehe, dann sind die Löschungen gerade durch josm entstanden - weil ich die Meldungen nicht richtig interpretiert habe und auf löschen gedrückt habe. Das beste ist vermutlich den ganzen Änderungssatz nochmal zu revertieren, sodass ich noch einmal drüber gehe, und die Meldungen von josm besser angehe.

Osm als Datenquelle ergab für mich insoweit Sinn als dass ich nur duplikate löschen wollte, also named landuses. 

Ich kann es leider nicht direkt bearbeiten, kümmere mich aber zeitnah darum. danke fürs melden und dass dir mein Fehler aufgefallen ist!
loveshack (2022-07-08 19:27:58+00:00): Do you have any more to upload around here?  I was about to upload some building outlines around Fossebridge place I'd done before, in the hope of surveying in the next few days. I thought I'd better check if you already have data.
nickjohnston (2022-07-08 19:48:36+00:00): Hi,

I'm actually planning on going to the area tomorrow to collect a few missing house numbers, and to see how the construction is progressing near Fossebridge Place. Based on imagery it looks like some of the houses may well be finished by now.

Feel free to add the building outlines. I will try to get addresses for them ☺

Nick
loveshack (2022-07-09 08:57:51+00:00): OK, I added the outlines I had.  Last time I looked it seemed mostly finished, but not all accessible. ("Finished" in some form that didn't impress a painter who worked there...)

I'm not sure all the NSUL postcodes are for the right road, by the way.

-- Dave (who mostly can't get out, even if you'd left much to do!)
nickjohnston (2022-07-09 20:51:36+00:00): Hi,

I went there today and collected some missing addresses, which I've now added. Construction has mostly finished. (There are only two houses being built now.)

I also fixed one of your FIXMEs. (20 Fairford Road wasn't in the correct place.)

Several houses on Withington Close (which I added the name for) are now occupied. The others are mostly sold and awaiting occupation.

Can you please copy the UPRN from the node you created near Fossebridge Place to the appropriate way? (The other node is for a building which is still under construction I think.)

Thanks,
Nick
highflyer74 (2022-07-08 04:53:09+00:00): Moin und willkommen bei OSM!

Die von Dir hinzugefügte Angelstelle bringt in dieser Form niemandem etwas. Auch haben wir für so etwas kein Tagging Schema.

Meine Empfehlung:

Schau Dir mal https://umap.openstreetmap.de/ an. Dort kannst Du eigene Karten frei gestalten und sie anderen zur Verfügung stellen, ohne an der OSM Datenbank etwas zu verändern.

Wenn Du Fragen hast, melde Dich gern!
aTarom (2022-07-08 05:25:47+00:00): Hola, parece que hay un pequeño typo,
"abandonded:" -> "abandoned:"
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/971771676/history
Saludos
dcapillae (2022-07-08 05:49:14+00:00): Corregido. Gracias.
Linkid (2022-11-29 13:10:57+00:00): Bonjour,
Je me suis permis de supprimer ce doublon car ce nœud existait déjà, avec des champs plus précis.
Cependant, je vois que ce dernier ne s'affiche pas sur le fond de carte par défaut d'OpenStreetMap. Je suppose que c'est pour cela que vous avez rajouté un nœud. Si c'est le cas, alors ce n'est pas une bonne idée : il ne faut pas cartographier pour le rendu, mais pour une vérité terrain ;).
Dans tous les cas, merci pour la contribution :) !
Chepycou (2022-12-19 12:24:32+00:00): Bonjour,
Bien que je sois d'accord que la "vérité terrain" est la priorité, il me semble peu intéressant de cartographier une information que l'utilisateur final ne verra pas. Cet escape game n'apparaissant ni sur OSM en tant que tel ni sur Organic Maps ou sur Magic Earth.
Linkid (2022-12-19 13:05:12+00:00): Je comprends l'idée, oui. Mais si un objet n'apparaît pas sur un fond de carte, c'est ce fond de carte qu'il faut corriger, pas la donnée. D'ailleurs, un rapport de bogue existe à ce sujet pour le fond OSM par défaut sur le site : https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/3368. Et d'autres fonds comme celui de OSMand permettent de voir ce type d'objet.
Par ailleurs, il existe toujours des moyens pour faire resortir l'objet : via la recherche, via uMap, … Suivant le niveau de zoom, les détails ne sont pas les mêmes et c'est normal.
Chepycou (2022-12-19 14:52:22+00:00): Après cette issue n'a pas l'air d'être très d'actualité. Et la recherche ne donne rien sur un certain nombre d'applis :/
eggie (2022-07-07 18:52:47+00:00): Oke.. 
Elk begin is moeilijk. 
Het is steeds zoeken in de wiki en ervaring opdoen met mappen. 
Er ligt ergens een steenblok. 
Dan zal dat blok ook op de juiste plaats op een node 'moeten' worden gezet.
bollard=stone is niet de correcte tag.
Op een fietspad routeren per default geen auto's.
Het blok zorgt er in ieder geval voor dat auto's er niet verder 'kunnen'.
Ik heb op de plek van de barriere een node gemaakt met barrier=block
foot=yes
bicycle=yes
Het blok houdt per default motorvoertuigen tegen. 
bollard=stone heb ik verwijderd van het lijnelement.
Het fietspad is één van m'n eerste acties zie ik nu ergens in 2010. 
Ik heb het nu aangepast naar een G13 fietspad. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-07-07 18:55:33+00:00): Een paar keer ctrl-F5 of F5 en dan zie je een stipje waar volgens mij dat betonblok ligt.
archie (2022-07-07 19:12:14+00:00): Hej, du taggar rätt många byggnader som "shed". Kan detta vara rätt? Vill du kolla med wiki-sidan, så att du är överens med den?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dshed
Du vet att du även kan tagga byggnader med "service"? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dservice.
Evergreen (2022-07-09 14:12:02+00:00): Hej!

Tack för feedbacken. Tror att det ska vara rätt eftersom det är äldre redskapsförråd och bodar. Men jag ska ta mig en liten funderare när jag passerar dem nästa gång om något annat faktiskt skulle vara mer korrekt.
archie (2022-07-09 15:12:12+00:00): Hej,
det var bara en lätt undran från min sida. Du verkar veta vad du gör, så fortsätt bara. Om det är shed så är det det. Lycka till i fortsättningen och tack för din medverkan!
eggie (2022-07-07 18:59:41+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
adrianojbr (2022-07-07 22:06:47+00:00): 👍
aceman444 (2025-11-29 11:48:03+00:00): Tak tu cyklocestu ako https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172636950 pozdlz Dvojkriznej ste si dobre vymysleli. Fakt kvalitne vyriesenie "fixme". Je to tam uplne inak. Nie su tam ziadne oddelene cesty, vsade idu cyklisti po chodniku, alebo v pruhu po ceste. Takze tieto separovane cyklocesty ste mali odstranit a prislusne upravit chodniky a cesty. Pritom na tej ulici uz cycleway=lane je, takze cele tieto paralelne ciary su zbytocne.
latvia-bot (2022-07-07 18:57:17+00:00): Only 2 of 4 parts were uploaded due to error. Remaining ones uploaded in changeset 123332406.
danieldegroot2 (2022-07-07 17:55:39+00:00): *to the west
JJIglesias (2022-07-08 00:39:40+00:00): Why to have a node and also a line, and in one case an area, for the same features? Airstrip and Runways? and Abandoned airstrip that is not even visible?
Please explain the logic behind?
danieldegroot2 (2022-07-08 09:49:57+00:00): The node is synonymous to aeroway=aerodrome + aerodrome=airstrip
(to indicate further details of the landing site as a whole)
"For small or very small aerodromes, aeroway=airstrip can be used; this is preferred in certain countries."
I'm fine with either.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Daerodrome

The runway which was mapped as an area elsewhere -I did not map this runway- should be mapped as a way aeroway=runway and can additionally be mapped with an area area:aeroway=runway to indicate the area. My focus was purely on adding runways which weren't added yet.

The abandoned: lifecycle prefix is to signify to other mappers that something is visible in some imagery (Bing), but has been abandoned since, which is only visible in Maxar (and regular Esri) imagery in this area. That way the object isn't constantly removed, mapped again, removed, etc.
JJIglesias (2022-07-09 03:27:54+00:00): Thanks that sounds logic, however I did prefer to have just an element, considering that these are Non approved, and sometimes temporary runways...
JJIglesias (2022-07-09 03:29:50+00:00): By the way this is sometimes very contencious with authorities because some of these airstrip are used for narchotic tracfiking.
JJIglesias (2022-07-09 03:31:19+00:00): so their view is that we are in certain way givins hints of the whereabout of this ilegal runways not associated with a current human settlements
danieldegroot2 (2022-07-09 10:20:26+00:00): 1) If something, ie. a runway, is visible on aerial imagery, someone will map it, regardless of what function it serves or what status it has. A status given only by a single (local) government is not verifiable on the ground.
It is true that (cartographic) representation of certain sites, ie. military sites may be deemed illegal by a country's government and therefore may not be mapped by inhabitants of said country, but can be mapped by those not under said country's laws, unless otherwise agreed by the OSM community (see the Ukraine case, where mapping a country in war would likely do more harm to the country than good)
2) To indicate the type of aerodrome, ie. consists of small runways with little to no infrastructure and is usually used by small planes and not used by public transport, the aerodrome is mapped as a seperate node, unless the extent is verifiable, ie. there's physical barriers around the whole site, in which case it is (additionally) mapped as an area
The same goes for the runway, which can be mapped as a way and to which length and width can be specified, though additionally mapping as area is ok.
3) If you have the local knowledge, a compatible source, or done a survey yourself which shows that
- a certain object, i.e. an aerodrome, is private you can add an access=private tag to further specify this
- a certain physical object or i.e. construction work is temporary (ie. yearly construction work, cable-laying), e.g. less than 6 months (what is considered temporary varies..) then -and only then- you can indicate that by instead leaving it unmapped or (may be better in some cases) instead mapping a node or area with a "note" tag to indicate to other mappers the area is only temporary.

1) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability#Subjective_opinions

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Military

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war

2) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Daerodrome

3) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features
JJIglesias (2022-07-10 04:14:40+00:00): Agree, Thanks
DaveF (2022-07-08 12:21:14+00:00): Hi
Welcome to OSM.
All UK railway stations are mapped as nodes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5077066091#map=19/52.88819/-4.41616

This building should be tagged as a train_station.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182089979/
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-10-09 20:26:23+00:00): You added some man_made=drinking fountain

I am writing to you as I also tried using this tag, discovered some problems with it (and other drinking water point tagging), and want to improve situation. I started from recommending to not use this tag as it has some problems and is a trap (partially due to English being confusing). Discussion takes place on tagging mailing list, and it is best to comment there ( see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_mailing_list for some hints how to join ).

See https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2022-October/thread.html#65730 for the thread

Currently no one opposed and I plan to describe it as deprecated at OSM Wiki.

If you think that it is a bad idea for some reason - let me know (for example, full scale deprecation proposal could be done)

The man_made=drinking fountain is for example at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2714594025/history
SomeoneElse (2022-08-16 21:15:24+00:00): Hello,
It might be in this changeset, I'm not sure, but it looks like some gaps got introduced in some relations here.  I've filled them in in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124990481 .
Best Regards,
Andy
opendcc (2022-07-16 03:41:57+00:00): Hallo,

die Adressen sind da immer doppelt - auf dem Gebäude und auf dem Entrance. Das sollte man besser eindeutig halten.
Eifelkobold! (2022-07-07 21:46:03+00:00): Hi Ichbinvonhier,

mir ist aufgefallen, dass du in deinen Änderungssätzen zuerst building=hospital zu building=yes geändert und in diesem Änderungssatz den building-Tag nun vollständig entfernt hast. Damit gibt es (für OSM) das Gebäude nicht mehr.

Der building-Tag muss also auf jeden Fall am Gebäude dranbleiben und schneidet sich auch nicht mit amenity. Zudem bleibt die Gebäudeart weiterhin ein Krankenhaus/eine Rehaklinik, so dass es auch bei hospital bleibt. Nur nach massiven Umbauten, die die ehemalige Nutzung nicht mehr erkennen lassen würden, wäre der Tag zu ändern. Die aktuelle Nutzung wird daher mit building:use=* beschrieben (siehe dazu auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:building:use). Die Unterkunft wird übrigens nicht durch die Bezirksregierung betrieben, sondern durch ein Unternehmen, welches die Ausschreibung gewonnen hat. Zudem ist mir aufgefallen, dass du den Briefkasten der Deutschen Post wieder eingetragen hast, wurde der wirklich wieder aufgebaut? Bei meinem letzten Besuch war er nämlich noch weg.

viele Grüße

Eifelkobold
Pikse (2023-01-05 13:47:02+00:00): Ways such as 48124277 and 47985238 are not named streets really. They are only adjacent to Mahtra tänav, they are not part of this named street. See https://xgis.maaamet.ee/adsavalik/LP00023305
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2023-01-05 15:56:01+00:00): Google maps loves to name adjacent roads by the street name. I sure hope Tobias1996 doesn't use it as a source.
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2023-01-05 16:35:47+00:00): Here are ways named by this user which match with Google Maps, but you wouldn't have any idea of how to name them on the ground and there is no such data on maa-amet.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49953815#map=17/59.43680/24.82379
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/628927061
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/639165721

Here are other changesets which are very similar to the current one
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123204834
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123097908
(here Google doesn't have street names)

And there are many more which name small connecting parts of the road. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28812875
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2023-01-05 16:37:01+00:00): @Tobias1996 how exactly did you obtain these street names?
ZLima12 (2022-07-17 21:57:41+00:00): Hi,

I'm not so sure about using a multipolygon for this, but I'm not aware of a better (commonly used) relation for this.

For now, I'm just going to move the current name to official_name, as it is long, cumbersome, and no one would really use it in normal speech. I'll move alt_name (University at Buffalo) to name, and make alt_name "SUNY Buffalo". I feel that this is more representative of the way people refer to the university.
JessAk71 (2022-07-19 15:44:54+00:00): Thanks ZLima12, great update on the names that looks good to me.  Ive seen it like this for other universities that have multiple disparate campus areas but are administered as one larger university entity but open to ideas on the multipolygon concept.
OSM_RogerWilco (2023-11-07 15:34:51+00:00): Hallo FriedhelmLG,
was macht Dich da so sicher, dass man auf dem Geh- und Radweg parken darf?
Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
FriedhelmLG (2023-11-07 18:13:50+00:00): Nicht "Parken", nur Be- und Entladen, Wird durch ein Schild entsprechend ausgewiesen.
Viele Grüße
Frioedhelm
OSM_RogerWilco (2023-11-12 09:00:03+00:00): Hallo Friedhelm,

danke für Deine schnelle Antwort.
Ich habe das nach Rückfrage im OSM Forum etwas angepasst. Ich hoffe das ist auch für Dich OK so.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/halten-zum-be-und-entladen-von-kanus-auf-geh-und-radweg-erlaubt/105764
PT-53 (2022-07-14 07:30:17+00:00): Hallo Rainero,
nach Deiner Bearbeitung ist diese Linie ohne Merkmale
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/503244529/history
übrig geblieben.
Schaust Du Dir das nochmal an?
Fragende Grüße
Rainero (2022-07-14 11:01:03+00:00): Hallo PT-53,

danke für den Hinweis. Das ist, denke ich, bei einer anderen Bearbeitung ein paar Tage nach mir übriggeblieben. Der JOSM-Validator würde mich ja auf sowas hinweisen. In https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123426693 wurde die nordwestlich anschließende Wiese in ein normales Polygon umgebaut. Da sind auch noch weitere Elemente aus dem alten MP übriggeblieben:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/503244523  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/503191189  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/503191192

Wie auch immer, ich räume die mal auf.

Viele Grüße,
Rainer
Zaneo (2022-07-08 01:54:11+00:00): Was this really a "survey" ?
Supaplex (2022-07-08 02:15:15+00:00): Same question here. I think the bbox included at least 3 dozens countries
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123332341
Laveure (2022-07-09 08:24:49+00:00): Are you for real?
masch (2022-07-11 07:37:39+00:00): "survey" was added by StreetComplete... I've been in Auckland for many years so I made this addition from memory. If you don't feel fine with them: roll them back...
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-05 11:36:21+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1596385843/history has roof = gabled that was added in this edit
Maybe roof:shape=gabled was intended here?

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roof:shape and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roof
Christian Nilsson (2025-12-05 11:47:47+00:00): Hello. You are correct, that was the intention here. Thank you for discovering it.
datsteves (2022-12-31 00:05:21+00:00): Eigentlich ist dort ja kein Gehweg vorhanden. Man läuft da halt eben auf der Straße :)
rempshaener (2022-12-31 09:09:34+00:00): ich hatte nur die Verbindung zur Straße wiederhergestellt, der Weg "hing in der Luft"
Auf dem Luftbild war nicht erkennbar, ob es einen Gehweg gibt
Sandal man (2022-07-29 16:11:03+00:00): Still a lot of ways without tags
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1076671354
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=tagging&lon=4.30630&lat=39.81196&zoom=12&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=1.00&overlays=nodes_with_empty_k%2Cways_with_empty_k%2Cnodes_with_empty_v%2Cways_with_empty_v%2Cnode_tags_with_whitespace%2Cway_tags_with_whitespace%2Cnode_with_unusual_char%2Cway_with_unusual_char%2Cnode_with_short_or_long_key%2Cway_with_short_or_long_key%2Cnonop_confusion_on_nodes%2Cnonop_confusion_on_ways%2Cno_feature_tag_nodes%2Cno_feature_tag_ways%2Cfixmes_on_nodes%2Cfixmes_on_ways%2Cways_without_tags%2Cnodes_with_empty_k%2Cways_with_empty_k%2Cnodes_with_empty_v%2Cways_with_empty_v%2Cnode_tags_with_whitespace%2Cway_tags_with_whitespace%2Cnode_with_unusual_char%2Cway_with_unusual_char%2Cnode_with_short_or_long_key%2Cway_with_short_or_long_key%2Cnonop_confusion_on_nodes%2Cnonop_confusion_on_ways%2Cno_feature_tag_nodes%2Cno_feature_tag_ways%2Cfixmes_on_nodes%2Cfixmes_on_ways%2Cways_without_tags

Regards Jan
dudone (2022-07-30 15:46:55+00:00): With luck these are all now fixed.

Dudley