piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Andrea Santorio (2022-02-17 10:48:10+00:00): Si chiama Dei Silenzi per un motivo: perché è poco frequentata 😂! Dell'Alta Via 6 ho percorso svariati tratti, pur non avendola fatta tutta. La zona più problematica è sicuramente quella tra gli Spalti di Toro e la salita al Col Nudo, con le rispettive varianti.
Conosco una persona che l'ha fatta la scorsa estate, senza attrezzatura da ferrata, e non ha avuto problemi. 

Tuttavia il tagging si fa cercando di tenere conto dell'utente medio... che però in questo caso sicuramente non è il gitante della domenica, che al massimo ne affronterà i tratti su singoli sentieri CAI, i quali hanno tag CAI scale propri.

Nel momento in cui c'è una corda fissa su passaggio esposto, a livello CAI mi sembra che di fatto scatti il tag EEA, indipendentemente dalla difficoltà del passaggio. La via normale al Civetta ne è un esempio: era una via normale, poi è stata attrezzata. Percorribile tranquillamente senza imbrago, a patto che uno sappia quello che sta facendo (escursionisti esperti, appunto).

In sintesi, il tag CAI scale vuole dare una visione globale dell'itinerario. Essendoci tratti attrezzati, e non volendo avere sulla coscienza lo sciagurato che ci va disattrezzato senza cognizione di causa, direi di attestarsi su EEA. Altrettanto per l'Alta Via 5. Per la 7 resto dubbioso. Anche se il tratto delle Creste Bianche di fatto penso sia sufficiente per metterlo in EEA.
micheleOSM3 (2022-02-17 11:53:06+00:00): Ok bene, grazie delle info.
muralito (2022-02-17 01:53:10+00:00): Hi. I think you misinterpreted imagery.
¿Or what source are you using?
jedimasterflint (2022-02-17 17:00:44+00:00): Heyo! Me again! So this one I added the one way due to this being more of a divided highway situation. Since the left road already had a one way going south on it, Traffic from the Primary would need to be able to head north. and looking at how cars are driving in Maxar, Bing, and Esri I concluded that this is acting as a one way should and so I added the tag.  Thank you again for reaching out! I'm always happy to talk with a fellow mapper :)
fkv (2022-02-22 16:20:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 117734635 where the changeset comment is: revert 117494739
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-07-26 16:38:16+00:00): Can you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3798858 ?
user_5359 (2022-02-17 08:50:39+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Why did you change the key building to railway? What  happened to the building?
Cmast316 (2022-02-17 15:08:18+00:00): Hi 5359, 
I apologize, I am new to using OSM and I had assumed any changes I do will only be reflected in the map I am editing/saving. I was trying to figure out how the 'clean up' the map so when I export to SVG, only certain layers are in the file (only roads and buildings for example). 

I was not aware it was so easy to make changes that affect the global map. I will be sure not to make these sorts of edits from now on. Thank you for addressing this, let me know if/how I can fix this. ty
user_5359 (2022-02-17 15:31:01+00:00): I will revert you r modification. Did you know the SVG export possibilities on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_on_Paper?
user_5359 (2022-02-17 16:41:13+00:00): Done!
Metasoft™ (2022-02-17 07:01:21+00:00): hey Andy could you use lidargolf.ca for the canada golf course mapping?   They all got to the same place now, but might not when when grow.  Thanks buds.
gscscnd (2022-02-17 10:45:05+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1032386159 i sąsiednie — access=private implikuje foot=private, więc ten drugi jest zbędny.
BPTT (2022-12-05 18:37:11+00:00): Could we perhaps retire the relation Easton to Pen Argyl Regional Trail (2851685)? Is it explicitly called this on trail signs? Since the local relation PTRT connects to other local trail relations, an Easton-Pen Argyl relation may confuse some users and routing engines. What do you think?
nitram1234 (2022-12-05 18:44:56+00:00): Please remove if you think it is better. This is an older area that I don't remember quite as well anymore. Kind regards
☆Finvenkulo (2022-03-02 15:19:19+00:00): Identyfikatory przystanków widoczne w terenie są jednocyfrowe (np. 1t), wewnętrzne identyfikatory ZTM (6-cyfrowe) powinny trafić do "unsigned_ref" albo "ref:ztm".
luktar (2022-03-13 19:57:40+00:00): W tym poście jest wyjasnione dlaczego tag ref zawiera 6-ścio cyfrowy identyfikator przystanku, a tag local_ref zawiera numer przystanku (np. 1t, 2). https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=834516#p834516
Frans S (2022-02-23 10:31:17+00:00): Please tag buildings just as building=yes
ottwiz (2022-02-16 22:17:37+00:00): + aligned south branch potomac river at a point, hence the size of changeset
KrzysztZ (2022-04-26 17:51:44+00:00): Witam,
w tych miejscach:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9512236495
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9512236494
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9512236493
nie ma brodów, ale są przepusty - objechałem te drogi w ostatnią niedzielę.
W najbliższych dniach zrobię aktualizację.
Frans S (2022-02-23 10:43:37+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
You map building far oversized ! Zoom far in to map accurate.
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared. They are mostly strickt rectangular.
D: nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or roads.


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117496058
Layft Greater (2022-02-16 22:39:45+00:00): fix of 116484265
SomeoneElse (2022-02-18 14:16:57+00:00): For completeness, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/937230#map=13/51.7836/-1.4928&layers=C in Witney is very much _proposed_, and (following discussions on IRC with people who know about such things) is a reasonable route that NCN57 might be allowed to take through here.  It probably isn't the cyclists' preferred route, but is perhaps the most likely one.
Branko Kokanovic (2022-02-17 10:54:33+00:00): Zdravo,
Vidim da si pomerao admin_boundary da ukljucis kuce (bar mi se tako cini), u ovom i u https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117496492. Fora je da ove administrativne granice naselja nisu slucajno nacrtane, vec su uzete iz zvanicnog RGZ regista otvorenih podataka i 3 godine ih ubacujemo jednu po jednu. Trudimo se da su granice odlepljene od drugih stvari (sume, ulice, semafori...) i da su 100% tacne i odgovaraju zvanicnim podacima. Ako neka zgrada ne pripada naselju, onda ne pripada, ne treba da je "na silu" ubacujemo tu:) Ako odes na sajt https://a3.geosrbija.rs/, videces da ove kuce (i kat. parcele) pripadaju Prnjavoru, a ne Vracevsnici. Glupo mozda, ali je tako:/ Ako bi zeleo da pomognes na uvozu ovih admin granica, javi se na https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=68288 (tu raspravljamo vec godinama o ovome) ili ako mislis da ovo nije u redu i da ne treba da pratimo zvanicne podatke iz nekog razloga. Ali gledaj, molim te, da ne pomeras admin granice (uglavnom su 99,99% tacne sa RGZ-om), ako mozes!
Branko Kokanovic (2022-02-17 10:58:23+00:00): Inace, svidja mi se kako i sta radis, sve izmene su ti smislene, samo nastavi! Ovo ti vise kazem da te znas za ovu foru
zorglubu (2022-04-08 10:12:06+00:00): Bonjour Antonin, et bienvenue sur OSM.
Tu avais mis office=diplomatic sur un parking à vélo, je me suis permis de corriger.
Je me permets une remarque sur tes contributions, elle se veut constructive, ce n'est pas une critique ;-)
Pense à décrire succinctement l'objet de tes modifications, c'est important pour les autres contributeurs qui vont essayer de comprendre ce que tu as fait. Merci.
Et bonne continuation dans la communauté OSM !
AntoninDY (2022-04-08 11:46:22+00:00): Bonjour, 

Merci pour ta remarque, je tacherai désormais de décrire mes modifications ! :-) 

Merci beaucoup !
_PG_ (2022-02-20 13:25:33+00:00): Drawed objects doesn't seen on maxar imagery. What source did you use?

Please don't forget to specify correct used sources.
sykul (2022-02-20 16:39:23+00:00): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FLv6siLXIAA-5l7?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
_PG_ (2022-02-20 17:01:51+00:00): Maxar allows to use only satellite layer it directly provide us to mapping. Not every image with Maxar label in the corner. :) Please read this article: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maxar

We don't know distribution license of your image, so you can't map objects using it, sorry. So, please delete them. We will map all this objects when they will appear on Bing sat, mapbox sat, ESRI sat, Maxar Standard or Maxar Premium layers.
_PG_ (2022-02-20 17:06:16+00:00): P.S. I think this ponton bridge is a short-life temporary object (for weeks or even days). We do not draw temporary objects. Please read here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features
4004 (2022-02-20 19:19:46+00:00): +1, pontoon bridges are temporary, this area is constantly flooded by the river. And it wouldn’t be unclassified anyway
sykul (2022-02-20 21:07:19+00:00): Alright. Fair points. I've deleted it.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-03-22 11:03:08+00:00): This might be helpful https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117497037
FraukeLeo (2023-07-02 17:01:24+00:00): Hallo, in dieser Bearbeitung wurde https://osm.org/node/1051028529 um 60 Meter nach Westen geschoben, wohl aus Versehen. Hab ich wieder zurückgeschoben. Bitte aufpassen :)
Hans Thompson (2022-02-17 21:07:00+00:00):  I don't know why the feature was mapped here but directly east is a golf course if you look.
user_5359 (2022-02-17 08:47:38+00:00): Hello! Please be careful when editing the map data. You moved an address node over 100 meters, please check the position. See https://www.osm.org/node/9349680838/history
user_10901495 (2022-02-16 23:56:02+00:00): Per risolvere i dubbi che potrebbero sorgere scrivo qui che:
-Lo stradario l'ho richiesto all'ufficio Anagrafe del comune, quindi non lo posso mettere come fonte perché non è hostato su internet (se qualcuno volesse visionarlo mi può contattare)
-Come indicato nel commento sembra che i nomi ufficiali siano rimasti indietro di qualche anno, e la cartellonistica attuale mostra in molti casi il DUG "via" rispetto a "strada/strada comunale"
-Risulta anche che i nomi ufficiali delle vie siano accompagnati dal nome della frazione, cosa che rende ancora meno sensato il fatto di mettere i nomi ufficiali come nomi semplici
Korney San (2022-02-17 10:06:33+00:00): Бодрого времени суток!
А почему Вы используете в качестве места остановки в отношении "Лямино" неподходящие для этого объекты? Стрелки это совсем не места остановки пассажирского транспорта.
Lucifer Kinoff (2022-02-18 01:16:58+00:00): Еще бодрее!
На железных дорогах место остановки обозначается специальным знаком "Остановка локомотива" или "Остановка первого вагона" (для моторвагонного подвижного состава)ю Вы знаете, где расположены эти знаки на КАЖДОЙ станции и на КАЖДОМ из пассажирских путей?! Дерзайте! Заодно почитайте в Вики, что и как обозначается значком "место остановки ОБЩЕСТВЕННОГО транспорта" применительно к железной дороге.
Всех благ и успехов в личной жизни!
Korney San (2022-02-18 07:08:16+00:00): Бодрый день.
Вот-вот, почитайте сами. Стрелки бог знает где вдали от платформы и упомянутого Вами знака явно не подходят (локомотив-то на стрелке не останавливается, ибо перекроет). Что касается «где», то общепринятая практика показывает, что stop_position располагается на пути рядом с платформой, к которой она относится, примерно посередине длины платформы. Хотя я лично ставил бы рядом с концом (где, собственно, обычно и висит тот самый знак). Середина выбрана как раз для того, чтобы не думать о «каждом знаке».
Делаете - делайте, пожалуйста, в соответствии с правилами.
praeteritum (2022-07-25 02:11:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124028946.
praeteritum (2022-07-25 02:06:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124028936.
praeteritum (2022-07-24 10:02:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124003168.
gscscnd (2022-02-17 10:46:36+00:00): access=no implikuje motor_vehicle=no, więc ten drugi jest zbędny.
Kovoschiz (2022-02-17 07:21:31+00:00): Please don't make non-existent connections yet. It's uncertain how the sidewalk will be connected.
praeteritum (2022-07-24 09:59:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124003085.
praeteritum (2022-07-24 09:56:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124003068.
praeteritum (2022-07-24 09:56:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124003047.
Kovoschiz (2022-02-17 07:32:16+00:00): 1. Please don't mindlessly merge road sections. This is supposed to be a landscape deck underpass, which the structure is to be defined. 
2. This roundabout interchange size is obviously too small. It needs to be coordinated with the existing interchange.
Kovoschiz (2022-02-18 09:12:29+00:00): 3. This is unnecessary because most of the existing interchange will be reused.
Kovoschiz (2022-02-18 09:13:49+00:00): 4. Cheung Tung Rd connection is not likely physically divided.
smootheFiets (2022-02-17 08:46:23+00:00): Dear colleague,

May I ask what source you use to add these Polish names? I can't verify names such as Barzenice or Prochowice (Prochowice does exist, elsewhere).
Honestly, I'd be surprised if these tiny places had any foreign names at all (although, of course, their German names derive from Slavic toponyms, presumably in Pomeranian, but that's from prehistoric times. Also, Pomeranian is separate from Polish).

If I'm overlooking something, please kindly let me know.  Otherwise, may I ask you to revert your changes?

For your information, these and similar edits are being discussed in the German forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=74924
Please feel free to weigh in.

Greetings, smootheFiets
smootheFiets (2022-02-18 07:56:25+00:00): I value the enthousiasm with which you continue mapping.  However, may I ask you to answer my question about your source first?  Allow me also to refer you to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names - especially the quote "On the other hand, do not tag names that do not exist. An unremarkable village somewhere in Poland might have only one name (recorded in name=*). In all other languages, this village would be called by its Polish name, because it has no other name."
(It's a funny coincidence that the wiki should speak of Poland of all countries here; I'm not making this up!)
polishnamer (2022-02-19 15:06:45+00:00): I hope I have cleared up your doubts a bit in a PM.
streckenkundler (2022-02-21 19:34:04+00:00): No. You must write here! This is a generaly problem!
smootheFiets (2022-02-21 20:13:45+00:00): Sorry for my late reaction, folks.  I've caught COVID, which sidetracked me a bit (I'm recovering, though).

polishnamer did PM me, which I'm grateful for.  I do agree with streckenkundler, though, that this is not an issue for PMs but for open discussions such as this.

Anyway, I see two concerns:
* is there a source for the name:pl tags at all?
* even if there is a source, do these tiny places _really_ have a Polish name as per the OSM wiki? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names

I'm happy to report that the first issue is taken care of.  To quote polishnamer "I use a polish map from 1937 created by Poznań university as a source and the names are printed on it and according to polish law this source can be freely used."
polishnamer, in any future edits, could you please quote this map as your source?  Complete with details on how to retrieve it, so it can be verified (author, title, year or similar; better yet: URL if a digitized copy is available).

However, this does not address the second concern.  I just cannot imagine that a tiny place like Prisvitz https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/307770653#map=16/54.4390/13.4442 has a Polish name.  Why would Polish speakers ever speak about this place?  It's so small, it's only relevant to the immediate neighbors.  Polish is not (generally) spoken in the immediate neighborhood.

Mind you, places of more-than-local relevance _do_ have legitimate multilingual names: larger cities, areas, probably the island of Rügen itself.  Along the German-Polish border, also smaller places may merit name:pl tags if that's how locals across the border refer to them. Many places to usefully target your attention at.

But please refrain from naming hamlets unless you're really sure you're doing the right thing.

To put it bluntly: I first thought you made those names up.  I'm happy to be proven wrong: they're from a 1937 map.  My next suspicion: the author of the 1937 map made them up, and they're not used by anyone in real life.  Please prove me wrong on that!
polishnamer (2022-02-22 00:12:09+00:00): Hello streckenkundler, I asked smootheFiets to inform people on the german forum about my response as I don't speak german.

Hello smootheFiets, I waited with my edits, but after some time I continued them because of lack of your answer. I thought that everything was clear and well explained from my side. I didn't expect to cause people's interest and suspicion by doing my edits, I was no vandalizing etc. 

These names in the area were primarly polabian, then germanized, then refound/repolinized/reconstructed in polish and can be found in the source polish map of 1937. This isn't the only source that exists and there are newer sources aswell as older ones for some more populated locations that can be surely found on Wikipedia or somewhere else in the internet, so it's not like the author(s) of the map made them up, rather took them all and put in one place (map).

If people think that the tag "name:pl" isn't 100% appritiate because of this unique situation that most lands around haven't belonged to Poland or that aren't commonly used (but by some people are) then I may use old_name:pl or alt_name:pl if people think they fit better but I must know what do you expect because I don't want with my edits to anger people niether make problems to them or create any conflict. And thanks to accessibility of this data in OSM more people could learn or use these names and increase awareness of polish names of places in Germany besides the biggest ones which come from the same/similar sources and the same rule/s were applied when found/created/reconstructed/repolonized these source names.

I found this source while browsing wikipedia articles about places in the area - the articles sometimes say that place XYZ was historically named in polish as ZYX or that it's named YZX in polish so there wasn't always unity, maybe because some of the names are being used and some not and it may lead to confusion. And both names for both places could be found on the same map with one being called historical and one not (by Wiki)...

To answer to your 2nd concern: I know that even today we have historians and linguists that specialize in reconstructing, recreating or finding in old sources the original names of places in Germany that were primarily inhabited by slavic people. They sometimes improve the names for higher accuracy as previous historician could wrongfully assumed something. The names I add are in polish language and not polabian, just to make you all sure.

If you (or anyone) have any further questions then let me know but I feel a bit like explaining myself from doing a totally legal thing :( Well I didn't expect the german inquisition haha ;)
smootheFiets (2022-02-22 17:08:00+00:00): NOBODY expects the German inquisition :-D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqF_nPbX_Ow

I like your humour, polishnamer, and we want the same thing: a better map of the world.
I still fear, though, that you're using name:pl tags for something they're not intended for.  Maybe we really should consider using a separate tag for these names.  Except, I wouldn't know which.

That's mostly because I have yet to understand how those names on the 1937 map were derived.  For a start, I have yet to see a concrete reference to it (hint, hint!): bibliographic details / URL should one be available.  Then I could see for myself.

What I seem to have understood (please correct me if I'm wrong):

* the authors conducted research on the origin of toponyms.  That research, of course, happens at the Department of Slavistics and has obvious scientific merit.

* However, those names are _not_ Polish (Polabian?). They're in a language that's closely related to (but not identical with) the ancestor of modern-day Polish.  That language has gone extinct, AFAIK, before historic times.  

* I understand how the original Polabian names can be seen as worth mapping.  I wouldn't quite know the appropriate language code, but I guess that's a solvable problem.

* Yet, somehow, the authors of the map appear to derive _Polish_ names.  Is this by starting with the reconstructed Polabian names, then applying the known sound changes over the centuries?  I.e., do the derive the hypothetical names those places would have now, had they been inhabited by speakers of Polish over the centuries?
If that's what it is, this is certainly academically interesting.  But I don't see how this is geographically relevant.
Or am I misunderstanding something?

Looking forward to learning more, smootheFiets
polishnamer (2022-02-23 04:57:57+00:00): Hi smootheFiets,
I have a book that is connected with the map with many sources (most of them in german, also in polish, czech, slovak)with 2 pages of sources and the list of places depicted on the map.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140714154235/http://www.mapywig.org/m_documents/PL/ATLAS_NAZW_GEOGRAFICZNYCH_SLOWIANSZCZYZNY_ZACHODNIEJ_ZESZYT_IIA.pdf

And now to answer your questions:

Q1 Probably, I guess not only, I know only that the book says ATLAS OF WESTERN SLAV GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES.
Q2
The names on the map are in polish. If you see aa letter: ąćęółżź you can be sure about it. Polabian language extinct in 1756.
Q3
ISO 639-2 sla (or)
ISO 639-3 pox
Q4
Please check german sources of the link I left above and let me know what they do mean. Polish sources have rather generic titles 4 example "About Slavs once living between Rhine and Elbe and Czech border." "Poland and Scandinavia in the times of the first Piasts" and similar.

So as I proposed earlier these names can be represented as tag alt_name:pl if some don't think name:pl fits as there may not be any other tags more fitting. I found out that official (gov.) names can be found here http://ksng.gugik.gov.pl/pliki/zeszyty/zeszyt_12.pdf
Though I think that sometimes life goes its own way and the government the other or is delayed sometimes. Anyway I hope that this will end our philisophic dispute and end inquisitive german crusade against heretic polish names (ha ha) and get me back into peacefully editing. 
Hope to hear from you for the last time for a while. 
polishnamer