piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mueschel (2022-07-05 13:15:58+00:00): Hallo,
was bedeuten denn src_ref und srs_ref? 
Twitternamen kommen üblicherweise in contact:twitter
Reclus (2022-07-08 07:41:36+00:00): Hallo!

Ich meinte source:ref. Danke für den Hinweis! Ich werde es korrigieren.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source
Reclus (2022-07-08 07:51:35+00:00): Bzw. source_ref.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Photo_mapping#Tagging_and_storage
rskedgell (2024-03-12 07:54:11+00:00): Where you have used foot=use_sidepath on this cycleway, do you mean that this is a segregated cycle path (i.e. foot=yes + segregated=yes)?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/247037559
jodd (2023-03-21 19:06:08+00:00): Hallo joe2812,
wenn du Gebäudeumrisse importierst, würde ich dich bitten darauf zu achten, ob deine Eintragungen auch tatsächlich Gebäude sind. Beispielsweise ist ein Balkon kein Gebäude. Auch ein Erker eines Gebäudes ist kein Gebäude, sondern maximal ein Gebäudeteil. 
In Frankfurt und Umgebung habe ich leider schon viele von dir eingetragene Gebäude gesehen, die keine sind. Es macht anderen Mappern sehr viel Arbeit, da wieder aufzuräumen.
VG Jo
GUFSZ (2023-04-14 05:39:11+00:00): Gab es eine Reaktion auf diesen CS Kommentar auf anderem Wege. Auch in Form einer Korrektur?
jodd (2023-04-14 05:45:52+00:00): Hallo,
nein, es gab leider keinerlei Reaktion. Auch auf meine anderen CS Kommentare zu ähnlichen aus meiner Sicht problematischen Änderungssätzen wurde nicht reagiert.
VG Jo
zstadler (2022-06-21 20:47:26+00:00): Hello,

Note that in this edit you have broken several turn restriction relations:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14078186
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14078187
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14078189
Elkim (2023-01-28 09:58:59+00:00): removing this package is vandalism, here is the proof in the photo: https://mariupol-news.ru/img/20221017/1f127a32ff8b24692cbfca63c8b686f1.jpg
Mazda05 (2023-01-29 18:51:27+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian–Ukrainian_war
hackthemap (2024-06-18 17:02:23+00:00): You write "fixed mistakes caused by changeset 113411495 (traffic_calming=table on the road itself)" but traffic_calming=table is tagged instead of removed on the whole road itself here in your changeset. Is that raised road really the case or did you want to remove it and put it on a node instead and this is a mistake?
bxl-forever (2024-07-05 14:44:48+00:00): There is a 36-meter long elevated part stretching across the entire intersection.  This is a fairly common case, and we map traffic_calming=table on the way itself rather than on a random node.  This is what the changeset is about.
Here is a Mapillary pictures that shows the infrastructure.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=823085459041912
hackthemap (2024-07-05 20:32:50+00:00): Ok, yeah I knew about the tagging on the way. I just wanted to confirm that the changeset wasn't a mistake because for me it seemed like you wanted to do the exact opposite ("fixing a mistake which was putting it on the road itself").
Thanks for clarifying and the explanation.
Peter Newman (2022-06-22 13:22:08+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Similar to Bernard's comments on the other changeset, I don't believe any of these footpaths are formally named, and they'd be pavement rather than sidewalk as they're in the UK. You've also missed the path on the other side of each road suggesting they don't exist. Only formal verifiable names should be added to OSM.

You've also marked the whole way as traffic_signals, whereas it should only be used on nodes.

While the micro-mapping will be beneficial, it needs to be accurate regarding showing both sides to be of use.
無調味堅果 (2022-06-21 18:50:11+00:00): adding name:zh-Hant=札波黎沙省
literan (2022-06-19 18:52:52+00:00): да сколько же вы будете эти дубли создавать?
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-07-03 17:15:34+00:00): ¿Por qué bajaste la jerarquía de esta ruta? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32115203 Era muy incorrecto, volví a lo que era antes. Por favor, ten más cuidado.
Tatti Barletta (2022-06-18 21:57:01+00:00): Mh mi pare di ricordare che la biblioteca si trovi al primo piano interrato del copro immediatamente a sud, mentre questo dovrebbe essere solamente il "gabbiotto" informazioni dove una volta c'erano le sbarre per entrare al policlinico.
push-f (2022-06-23 22:57:35+00:00): This change added way 73512079 to the relation 1664664 (which is the EuroVelo 13 superrelation). As per the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/EuroVelo) ways should not be added directly to superrelations.
highflyer74 (2023-04-24 12:06:00+00:00): Moin! Es ist schon etwas her, aber vielleicht kannst du dich noch erinnern: ist es sinnvoll bzw. gewollt, die ganzen Landuses in der erweiterten Umgebung des Bahnhofs Neustadt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/967609) noch mit in die Relation zu packen?

Viele Grüße aus HB!
bjoern_m (2023-07-29 21:25:27+00:00): Moin :)
Welche anderen landuses meinst du?
Nach dem ganzenOpenrailwaymap-Tagging, wie ich es verstehe, sollte es von Einfahrsignal zu Einfahrsignal und das ist es. Seitlich finde ich immer deutlich schwierigerzuentscheiden. Aber es sieht ja schon so aus als wenn der Eingang mit drin ist, ich wüsste also nicht, was da mit dazu sollte.
Hast du vielleicht noch Beispiele der landuses?
Beste Grüße, jetzt aus Braunschweig
gscscnd (2022-06-19 07:48:41+00:00): access=no powinno wystarczyć.
eggie (2022-07-28 11:57:44+00:00): Hoi Famlam

Wellicht dat goedwillende en startende mapper Virgil nog wat assistentie kan gebruiken
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124179436#map=15/51.8595/5.8426

Groet
eggie
PurpleNienna (2022-06-19 17:36:51+00:00): There is no rental or bike parking or similar here, the similar is a motorbike parking zone, but directly in the road. Can you please correct the change
aceman444 (2024-06-06 00:15:58+00:00): Zdravim, nazov bankomatu nie je nazvom jeho banky. A 'brand' sa tiez na bankomaty nedava, je to skor znacka vyrobcu bankomatu, nie banky. Banka je uvedena v znacke 'operator' a to je postacujuce.
Richard Janda (2024-06-06 03:57:42+00:00): Tak to se omlouvám a děkuji za informaci. Snažím se to tak upravovat, možná mi to v tomto případě ujelo.
Filip009 (2024-06-22 09:30:31+00:00): Ten brand je ponúkaný na základe NameSuggestionIndex. Takže sa pridáva priamo cez iDeditor, alebo JOSM ako prednastavený. Pokiaľ to nevyriešite s vývojármi, dovtedy ho ľudia budú pridávať, lebo im to editory tak ponúkajú.
Piskvor (2022-06-20 14:35:23+00:00): Technically not prohibited, but not usable. Added sidewalk:right=separate, as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/141815811 is the actual footway.
xorly (2022-06-20 15:01:40+00:00): Thanks, next time, I'll be more careful.
Carto_Graph (2022-06-19 10:46:52+00:00): У вас угол ларька является остановкой.
SJFriedl (2022-06-18 20:07:58+00:00): This was supposed to checkin just the D-VOR, but ended up getting all the changes I'd made. This includes some residential & retail areas in Rootstown OH.
Frans S (2022-08-23 10:41:40+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here.
Just a short remark.
Please tag buildings just as building=yes. Nothing else.
Best regards
MxxCon (2022-06-19 05:07:27+00:00): I don't see any issues with this edit. 👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122559974
larryv (2022-06-25 03:05:38+00:00): Awesome, thanks!
jcr83 (2022-06-20 09:31:40+00:00): Si la chapelle est ruinée, il ne faut pas la déclarer en amenity=place_of_worship .
J'ai fait la correction.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2023-10-09 16:53:23+00:00): revertido
szydzio (2022-06-29 07:58:54+00:00): Hej! Patrzysz proszę choć trochę jakie punkty wrzucasz? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9829084817 - adres w stawie + mnóstwo mrówek => https://v3.mrowka.org/adresy/#16/52.2514/16.9029
user_4493657 (2022-06-30 09:49:19+00:00): Cześć, dzięki za zwrócenie uwagi. Starałem się wyłapać jak najwięcej byków, niestety spodziewam się że coś przeoczyłem. 

Co jest nie tak z tym adresem https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9829084817 ?
szydzio (2022-06-30 10:04:31+00:00): To adres w... stawie.
user_4493657 (2022-06-30 11:14:47+00:00): Z tego co widzę to adres jest przydzielony prawdopodobnie do działki i akurat na tej działce w odróżnieniu od innych jest staw.
Chyba, że ten adres powinienem zgłosić do gminy jako błąd.
Przesunę trochę adres.
szydzio (2022-06-30 11:18:18+00:00): Gmina Mosina niestety kiepsko prowadzi adresację, to jest na 99% błąd.
gscscnd (2022-06-19 07:50:17+00:00): maxspeed nie pasuje do maxspeed:backward.
gscscnd (2022-06-19 07:50:43+00:00): maxspeed nie pasuje do maxspeed:forward.
Leo Slager (2022-06-19 11:24:31+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Leo Slager (2022-06-19 11:29:35+00:00): Dag Infirno,
Alle begin is moeilijk.
Er zijn hier meerdere fouten gemaakt:
Allereerst heb je een warning gekregen in de editor die je gebruikt.
Diverse lijnen kruisen elkaar met als gevolg dat er niets zichtbaar wordt op de kaart.
Je hebt de carport over het schuurtje heen getekend. Er staat nu dus een gebouw in een ander gebouw en dat is niet mogelijk.
Tenslotte is het geen carport maar een woning geworden door de tag building=house.
Als beginner kun je dat allemaal niet weten, dus we nemen je niets kwalijk.
building=roof is dan de juiste tag voor een carport.
ik maak even wat verbeteringen.
Veel plezier met verder mappen.
Leo Slager (2022-06-19 11:38:01+00:00): Dag Infirno,
Het is goed om te weten dat in NL alle gebouwen en adressen rechtstreeks worden geïmporteerd vanuit de BAG van het Kadaster.
Beter niets veranderen aan de omtrek van een gebouw. Bij de volgende periodieke import komt de oude omtrek weer terug op de kaart.
Als er iets niet klopt kun je bij het Kadaster een terugmelding doen.
De verantwoordelijke gemeente corrigeert dan de tekening en bij een import komt de juiste omtrek dan in OSM te staan.
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?geometry.x=256002.97&geometry.y=532008.6996875&zoomlevel=6
Aan de linkerzijde met het blauwe potloodje kun je een terugmelding doen.
englu (2022-06-19 09:46:26+00:00): Czy na północ od Domu Turysty pod Wieżycą było widać nowe znaki szlaku żółtego? To chyba jakaś niedawna zmiana przebiegu szlaku. Drugie pytanie: czy ścieżka, którą do tej pory biegł szlak (64668694) i którą usunąłeś nie istnieje już w terenie?
maraf24 (2022-06-19 11:23:23+00:00): Tak.
Tak.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-19 20:08:50+00:00): Hello!

Have you meant https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcar_rental here?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2626489335/history
iglezz (2023-03-23 09:26:35+00:00): Hi Mateusz! 
amenity=car_rental looks suitable.
However, this place needs to be resurveyed.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-23 15:00:36+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3609894
gscscnd (2022-06-19 07:58:31+00:00): Dodaj jeszcze name:left i name:right.
PT-53 (2022-06-21 08:44:16+00:00): Hallo Nonexhudlix,
diese 3 TRs
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7204023/history
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7204024/history
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7204025/history
haben nach Deinen Änderungen jeweils nur noch ein via-Mitglied.

Schaust Du Dir das nochmal an`?
Fragende Grüße

PS - Siehe auch:
https://ahorn.lima-city.de/tr/?zoom=19&lat=48.965808&lon=9.278533&layer=Grayscale&overlays=TTT
Nonexhudlix (2022-06-21 17:28:19+00:00): Hallo PT-53,
danke für den Hinweis, das hätte natürlich nicht passieren sollen. Hab's korrigiert.
Jetzt kenne ich auch die Seite mit der die TRs überprüft werden können, danke auch dafür.
user_12531033 (2022-06-18 22:42:41+00:00): My 1000st change set! Yeah!
ottwiz (2022-06-18 22:54:59+00:00): I also aligned WV 32 because it was a bit off.
user_2092025 (2022-07-13 09:14:19+00:00): Poproszę o źródło, z którego zaczerpnięto takie nazwy jak „Ochocza”, „Oddalona”, „Odległa”, „Parterowa”.
NieWnen (2022-06-18 23:40:43+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3137590
user_5359 (2022-06-21 08:08:40+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1071140914. See also https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag%3Aaccess%3Drestricted
mcliquid (2022-06-26 10:53:57+00:00): Hallo Fazoid, ist die S4 an dieser Stelle wirklich eine Einbahnstraße?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/679575303/history

Das heißt von Süden her kommend ist hier keine Durchfahrt mehr möglich?
Siehe Routing: http://brouter.de/brouter-web/#map=18/47.79688/16.25994/standard&lonlats=16.259087,47.796031;16.259925,47.797141&profile=car-eco

Könntest du dir das bitte nochmals ansehen?
mcliquid (2022-06-27 15:13:23+00:00): Habe es wieder rückgängig gemacht.
Fazoid (2022-06-30 07:41:27+00:00): Danke!
b-jazz (2025-01-11 22:32:07+00:00): Then why did you name it Shashta? :-D

Hope you're doing well.
ainola (2025-01-15 17:58:18+00:00): Haha, thanks for fixing that!
ovruni (2022-06-19 03:00:05+00:00): Hola Oscarinche, he notado que en algunos de sus conjuntos de cambios se han cambiado algunos nodos de power=pole a power=substation dejando las etiquetas transformer=distribution, ¿estas subestaciones no se encuentran ubicadas en postes? Puede ver ejemplos de etiquetado según el tipo en https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:power=substation?uselang=es#Ejemplos
Saludos
porfiriopaiz (2022-06-19 20:38:52+00:00): Hola.

He removido el la etiqueta addr:city ya que esta no es la etiqueta que se debería usar para el nombre de la área residencial o condominio.

Ciudad El Doral no es un ciudad, es una zona residencial urbana, muy distinto de a la Ciudad de Managua, por ejemplo.
porfiriopaiz (2022-06-19 20:46:21+00:00): Hola msjcro.

He removido las etiquetas addr:city ya que Ciudad El Doral no es una zona urbanística con la categoría de ciudad, como sí los Ciudad Sandino, por ejemplo.

También he removido las etiqueta name, ya que las has usado para que en el mapa se muestre el número de la casa, y esto no es correcto, no mapeamos con el objetivo que todos los elementos se rendericen en el mapa.

Saludos,
Porfirio
Herman Lee (2022-07-21 01:27:42+00:00): 修改集已经回退
Herman Lee (2022-07-21 01:31:21+00:00): 退回可能存在错误。
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2022-07-21 02:14:20+00:00): 是叶墨寒啊OvO，您好：

OpenStreetMap并非一个虚拟地图试验场，所有物件均要求是真实存在的。若您喜欢虚构地图描绘设计，欢迎您前去OpenGeofiction站。

OpenGeofiction站有“百帝国”与“华夏共和国”两处简体中文虚构地图项目，可能比较便于入手。

再次警告：OpenStreetMap并非个人试验场，继续此类行为可能招致封禁
Kovoschiz (2022-06-19 06:20:01+00:00): Actually you should not use standard as the criteria for classification. Function in the road hierarchy is used. 
Wing Shun St to the south is `=tertiary`. While Ma Tau Pa Rd onwards is `=secondary`, Wing Tak St is the main access from  Tsuen Tsing Interchange. Therefore any reclassification will have to be considered as a whole in the district's network.
Kovoschiz (2022-06-19 06:20:54+00:00): Also, please try to move, or use Replace Geometry in JOSM, instead of deleting then redrawing objects.
Kovoschiz (2022-06-19 06:24:16+00:00): For `covered=yes`, `bridge=yes` does not denote the extent of overhead. `man_made=bridge` area needs to be drawn, which is more effort than splitting `covered=yes`. The opposition to tagging roads under a bridge is mainly on wrongly using `tunnel=yes`. Contrary to documentation, there are debates. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:covered#Discourage_"covered"_for_linear_roads_under_bridges
Patrickov (2022-06-23 02:11:21+00:00): JOSM is not always the best tool to use.  Using browser is often more convenient as they displays points and paths better IMHO.
Patrickov (2022-06-23 02:12:02+00:00): "Actually you should not use standard as the criteria for classification. Function in the road hierarchy is used."
 >> I don't understand this sentence at all.  Also, I am aware of the road hierarchy
Patrickov (2022-06-23 02:12:46+00:00): "Wing Tak St is the main access from Tsuen Tsing Interchange." >> No it is not.  It has a restriction of length which means buses and HGVs are not legally allowed to use it.
Patrickov (2022-06-23 02:20:36+00:00): Both "covered=yes" and "tunnel=yes" are rendered the same.  It's easy to distinguish the two though.  As example, Wing Shun Street under Tsing Tsuen Road is a tunnel; while Kwai Chung Road under Tsing Kwai Highway is covered.

IMHO the Tsuen Wan Road over Wing Tak Street seems too open to make the road under it qualify as covered.  Also, previously the covered path extended well beyond the actually covered part.
Kovoschiz (2022-06-23 04:53:59+00:00): 1. It's about keeping the history. 
2. You should not use the quality/standard of the road cross-section as the defining criteria. Function in the network should be considered. 
3. We do not consider only heavy vehicles, although this is a factor. As an extreme example, a road allowing only cars is still a `=motorway` if it is such. Wing Tak St is a main access for Riveria Garden, and only access to Pavilla Bay and Tsuen Wan Sports Center. Wing Shun St to the south is certainly not only used by heavy vehicles. 
4. Not sure what is your answer . You should split the part in between, and keep the 2 parts as `covered=yes`.
Kovoschiz (2022-06-23 06:42:11+00:00): 4. Forgot to say this section is not the same as the western side. The middle is not spaced. Gaps are only on the slip roads.
Patrickov (2022-06-23 06:59:15+00:00): Re 1.
I also try my best to keep history of paths, but nodes are much more difficult to do so and frankly it's part of the reason why so many paths are unnecessarily zig-zaggy.

Re 2 - 3.
Yes I can relate what you mean to, say, A86 in Paris, which is a motorway but only cars can use.  However, Wing Tak Street is not like this.  Also, Wing Tak Street is not the only way to access the Pavilla Bay and Tsuen Wan Sports Centre.  Cars coming from the north probably find it faster / more convenient to use Yi Lok Street and Yi Hong Street to "turn around", because Texaco Road cannot right turn into Wing Tak Street.

That said, I have read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hong_Kong/Transport/Road and it seems that "unclassified" was reserved for bad roads, which I don't know why and don't agree (Probably you don't too).  But in any case, maybe let's just keep all of Wing Shun Street and Wing Tak Street as tertiary as a compromise.

Re 4.
The part of Tsuen Wan Road over Wing Tak Street has already started to fork, which means there're two gaps through which sunlight can enter.  Therefore it is hard to define which part of the street underneath is actually covered.
oba510 (2022-08-06 10:41:52+00:00): Hi, I noticed that you added a couple of screen captures from Google Maps in the image=* field in this changeset and in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12252748

Are you aware that we cannot use google maps as a source as it would be a copyright violation (and against google's license terms)?  Even if you aren't using it as a source, linking to a screen capture seems potentially problematic.

Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#Why_don%27t_you_just_use_Google_Maps/whoever_for_your_data?
PoultryPants (2022-08-08 04:19:56+00:00): Sorry, I was not aware that we can't use images from Google Earth. I will remove them immediately.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-12-03 14:05:04+00:00): Why you deleted correct building=manor?

also, you have not added historic=manor in this edit

(both fixed)
mavl (2022-08-18 14:38:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125065270 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. The amenity=bus_station as personal note are deleted. Reason: poog mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6253].
zidel (2022-06-20 21:45:38+00:00): Hi, it looks like the only real change here is removing periods from the road name. I'm wondering what the source was for that change since it doesn't appear to match the signs visible in Mapillary.
stadiaarcadia (2022-06-21 08:54:20+00:00): Writing style in both ways is used. If you think the other way is better, you can change it back if you want.
zidel (2022-06-21 20:23:54+00:00): Reverted to the previous street name in 122683954
RaccoonFederation (2022-06-19 21:35:30+00:00): Hi, A little bit more information about what you are changing would be nice. Just typing "Plym" doesn't help people understand what you have done. 
Thank you
julcnx (2022-06-22 04:24:56+00:00): thanks for your contributions! is this a new road/bridge? it doesn't show on satellite imagery.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122569323
ardsur (2022-06-22 11:47:46+00:00): my suggestion for a new bridge and roads is not correct as I now do see the bridge a little tothe south on the correct place. please delete my suggestion.
osmviborg (2022-06-19 07:56:02+00:00): Ét POI er nok.
RP1974 (2022-06-19 14:15:16+00:00): Hej beklager, havde lagt punkter ind som favoriter, jeg ville synkronisere over til en anden konto. Det var ikke meningen de skulle på alles kort.
lefuturiste (2022-06-19 09:14:26+00:00): Hello, because this changeset is across continents, this is very likely to be a erroneous changeset.
Danysan95 (2022-06-19 13:54:11+00:00): Please keep your changesets local (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets ). In the same changeset you made unrelated changes in California (school area details) and Czech Republic (football fields), this makes it really hard to do quality control. Except for the extent of the changeset, from what I managed to check the changes seem ok.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122569478
lefuturiste (2022-06-19 14:12:26+00:00): Anyways, thanks for the contribution and welcome to OpenStreetMap
user_12733236 (2022-08-19 10:16:00+00:00): خالی است
یا ویرایش یا طی چند روز آینده حذف شود
jamshidpour (2022-08-24 06:27:28+00:00): متوجه نشدم، چی خالی است؟ اگر منظورتون عدم وجود این کسب و کار در این لوکیشن هستش باید خدمتتون عرض کنم که نه اینجوری نیست و مبلمان باغی آلاچیق دقیقا در اینجا قرار داره.
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 06:31:37+00:00): درسته، کنارش هستش و مشکل نداره
ولی تو این نقطه تو ادیتور که میبینی،یک نقطه خالی هستش
احتمالا یا قبلا تگ ها رو به این کلمات باغی انتقال دادین 
شما نگران نباشید
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 06:32:37+00:00): من فقط یه نقطه خالی رو حذف کردم، که برحسب اتفاق کنار این مبلمان باغی هستش
اگه هم نگان بکنین میبینین که نقطه مبلمان باغی حذف نشده
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 06:33:34+00:00): من به اشتباه روی این نقطه کامنت گذاشتم
در صورتی که اینجا باید میذاشتم
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9830469663
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 06:35:32+00:00): محض اطمینان دوباره اینجا رو میرم میبینم ،اگه واقعا چیزی حذف شده بود،من عذر میخوام ،خودم برش می‌گردانم
اگه هم نه، که بهتر
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 06:46:45+00:00): چیزی حدف نشده من الان مطمئن شدم با
Josm
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 06:48:21+00:00): این نقطه خالی بوده
چنجست شما
https://www.opwnstreetmap.org/changeset/122297087
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 06:50:12+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122297087
jamshidpour (2022-08-24 07:55:06+00:00): ممنونم از پیگیریت. مرسی که به توسعه برنامه‌های متن باز کمک می‌کنی. موفق باشی رفیق
user_12733236 (2022-08-24 07:57:54+00:00): لطف دارین
شما هم همینطور
موفق باشین
dauhl (2023-04-03 08:49:57+00:00): Hallo user345,

gibt es einen Grund, warum du beim Fahrradweg (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/732073758/history) das surface Attribut entfernt hast? 

Die Abschnitte vor und nach diesem Abschnitt haben weiterhin das surface Attribut, wenn auch mit unterschiedlichen Werten (asphalt/concrete).
avinet_ua (2022-06-28 07:22:51+00:00): відколи сміттєві баки мають назву?
kaktus67 (2022-06-25 14:35:25+00:00): Hallo mk-it-easy

Du hast ein grösseres Waldgebiet (Multipolygon) als Spielplatz getaggt.

Ich nehme an, das war nicht deine Absicht.

Was wolltest du wo als Spielplatz genau anpassen?

Grüsse
Michael aka kaktus67
mk-it-easy (2022-07-19 09:34:00+00:00): Hallo Michael,

oh ja, das war ein Fehler. Danke fürs berichtigen.

Gruss,
Martin
monotar (2022-06-20 17:00:18+00:00): also ich hab das mit der Reihenfolge der Tags noch nie so richtig verstanden, aber warum ist die Reihenfolge da jetzt falsch, ist doch hier auch als oneway:bicycle beschrieben? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway:bicycle

Also das oneway:bicycle nach dem Fußweg links stellen?