piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
unterdenwolken (2016-03-16 10:32:57+00:00): Hi Michael,

ich habe die älteren Daten aus eigenen Beobachtungen und die neueren aus dem Stredax. Insofern sind die Bahnhofsangaben in Schwerin sicherlich ungenau.
Mein Eindruck war jedoch, dass das Eintragen von Höchstgeschwindigkeiten in OSM eher ein iterativer Prozess ist. Ich habe nur sehr wenige Bahnhofsbereiche gefunden, die exakt eingetragen waren, jedoch einige, in denen nur ein grober, an der Streckengeschwindigkeiten orientierter Aufschlag gemacht wurde. Ist es deiner Meinung nach eher erstrebenswert, die Felder frei zu lassen, bis jemand es ganz genau weiß, oder ist es Teil des Prozesses, dass Ungenauigkeiten nach und nach verbessert werden?

Andere Frage: Warum genau darf das Stredax nicht genutzt werden?

Viele Grüße
Nakaner (2016-03-16 10:42:08+00:00): In Mecklenburg-Vorpommern und dem nördlichen Brandenburg gibt es auf einigen Strecken Geschwindigkeitsangaben in OSM, die aus der Wikipedia stammen (dort steht die höchste Geschwindigkeit der gesamten Strecke, dauerhafte Langsamfahrstellen werden dort übergangen). Ich werde einen Teil davon in Kürze entfernen.

Solche Angaben sind in OSM unerwünscht, weil sie eine Erfassungsgenauigkeit vorgauckeln, die nicht gegeben ist. Aus demselben Grund sind Importe aus Fremdquellen, die Nacharbeit durch andere Mapper erfordern, unerwünscht. Diese Nacharbeit geschieht in den seltensten Fällen und so bleiben die fehlerhaften Daten jahrelang in OSM. Erfahrungen mit dem TIGER-Import in den USA sowie Importen in den Niederlanden und Frankreich (Importe erfolgten zwischen 2006 und 2010) zeigen, dass eine Karte, die voller – meist falscher – Objekte ist, keine Newbies anlockt. (Deutschland hatte solche Importe nicht und hat eine deutlich größere Community trotz einer um den Faktor 3 kleineren Bevölkerung)

Du darfst das Stredax und auch fast alle anderen Quellen nicht verwenden, weil du damit gegen die Vereinbarung für Mitwirkende verstoßen würdest. https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms Wir haben nicht die Erlaubnis von der DB, Daten aus dieser Quelle unter der Open Database License weiterzuverbreiten.

Ich möchte dich daher bitten, Daten, die du aus dem Stredax übernommen hast, zu löschen.
Nakaner (2016-03-16 08:46:59+00:00): Und wenn du noch genauer hingeschaut hättest, wäre dir aufgefallen, dass addr:street=* kein Straßenname ist, sondern als addr:place=* dort erfasst gehört. ;-)
ndm (2016-03-15 19:00:02+00:00): http://map.n-somerset.gov.uk/publicrightsofway doesn't seem to be a valid URL?

What rights do we have to use this source on OSM?
Yorvik Prestigitator (2016-03-15 19:05:43+00:00): no idea about this edits or rights, but the correct url is probably http://map.n-somerset.gov.uk/publicrightsofway.html
tcdiosm (2016-03-16 17:03:23+00:00): My apologies for not giving the full URL , I shall do so in future. I was hoping that contributors to OSM would be inquisitive enough to research this resource for themselves and read further; it is a minefield but useful.
I have used the online map of  local authorities as a resource to check the accuracy of their trace with my own gps recordings, Bing satellite imagery and on the ground knowledge. Using the  information provided, I have then traced the Public Right Of Way as accurately as possible using Bing and tagged it with the access rights accorded by the definitive map that the authority supplies. This does not always follow the path marked on the definitive map and no assurance can be given to the accuracy of the definitive map or information; http://www.rowmaps.com/. I then try to include landmarks which may be useful for navigation.
Where I have crossed a path, I will occasionally check that the person who has mapped it previously has given the appropriate tags for the access and that the route is in line with the satellite imagery and definite map. In the case of the North Somerset map I found a route clearly marked as a bridleway on OSM which was marked as a footpath on the definitive map. I believe it is important that we should abide by the knowledge we have. I queried the source given and felt my source more valid for the access rights to a PROW, only the local authority officer responsible for PROW can give us the up to date information, failing that we have to rely on the data the local authority has provided. NSL OS Maps were used to draw up the definitive maps but are not as up to date. There is a significant difference between the right of access in the case of footpaths, bridleways, byways or boats and we must respect that. Locally it may be that cyclists and horse riders are using the footpath but it would require an 'order' for it to be labelled a bridleway.
As mentioned above (http://www.rowmaps.com), 86 local authorities have provided information and pointed out its limitations including the fact that they use OS crown copyright maps to show this data on their websites. The raw data is rather different though there is no agreement as to its status, open source or copyright. Perhaps this will come with the PROW review in 2026. The traces I have used are sets of coordinates which I have had to convert to GPX format which I can then overlay on the map but not copy and paste. It is not possible to upload them as tracks as they do not have timestamps. Does this breach copyright?
If I have got it wrong, I apologise and would take no offence at it being corrected.
SomeoneElse (2016-03-16 17:22:20+00:00): (as a brief aside on "footpath" and "bridleway" tagging):
I'd use "highway=footway" for something that looks like a footpath; "highway=bridleway" for something that looks like a bridleway (typically "has gates instead of stiles and horse poo on the ground") and "highway=track" for something that's wide enough and occasionally used for farm traffic.
In addition I'd add "designation=public_footpath" where a path is signed as a public footpath, "designation=public_bridleway" where a path is signed as a bridleway, regardless of whether the thing on the ground is a "footway", "bridleway", "track" or something else.
I'd also add "foot=yes" for footways and bridleways, and "horse=yes" for bridleways (and perhaps also "bicycle=yes").
tcdiosm (2016-03-16 17:38:45+00:00): definitive information from the authority gives us the legal status. A horse rider would be in the wrong to use a footpath. Yes many tracks look wide enough for a 4x4 but that does not give them the right to use it.  We must be careful to provide accurate information, landowners also have rights and anyone using OSM as a source for navigation needs accurate knowledge.
SomeoneElse (2016-03-16 17:44:49+00:00): @tcdiosm if you're replying to me, I'm confused :)
tcdiosm (2016-03-16 17:57:13+00:00): sorry new to the Forum.
Hope this will make it clearer.

Footpath
Public footpaths are public rights of way on foot.

Bridleway
Public bridleways are public rights of way on foot, or leading or riding a beast of burden (e.g. a horse). Cyclists may also use bridleways, but must give way to riders and pedestrians.

Byway
Public byways open to all traffic are public rights of way for all types of traffic but are mainly used by pedestrians, horse riders and cyclists and may not be suitable for all types of motorised vehicle.

There are also restricted byways.
SomeoneElse (2016-03-16 18:14:24+00:00): @tcdiosm The point that I was trying to make was that for example "highway=footway" does not indicate the legal status of access.  It just means "used mainly or exclusively by pedestrians".  There are permissive footways, and private ones.
In order to indicate that something is designated as a public footpath in England and Wales the convention is to use "designation=public_footpath", and it helps to add explicit access tags too.  That way it's possible to differentiate between things that are definitely designated as public footpaths, and those places where people are allowed to go that aren't actually public footpaths (for example across CROW act access land).
For byways, the tags that get used are "designation=byway_open_to_all_traffic" for byways that aren't restricted and "designation=restricted_byway" to those that are (restricted byways allow non-motorised traffic - so yes to a horse and cart, but no to a motorcycle).
This tends to get discussed every know and again on the talk-gb mailing list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb and also there are questions and answers on the help site https://help.openstreetmap.org/ .  Either of those places might lead to a slightly more legible conversation than a series of comments on one changeset :)
Cheers,
Andy
ndm (2016-03-16 19:13:58+00:00): Dear tcdiosm, thanks for the details on sources, etc. -- I'm always interested when someone remarks that they're copying another map (doesn't help that I can never remember which Ordnance Survey products have which licence, etc).

Have fun mapping,
Neil
literan (2016-03-16 12:17:48+00:00): не совсем понимаю, в чем суть дублирования контактов из тега contact:phone в тег phone? Это равнозначные теги.
dbf_ (2016-03-16 15:36:48+00:00): Интересно, я поменял только время работы, а манипуляцию с телефоном в фоне провел редактор. Напишу тогда авторам.
malenki (2016-03-16 17:13:59+00:00): Hallo Jse,

ist die "Arrasser Straße" vor Ort als "Arrasser Straße" ausgeschildert? Ich bin nicht ortskundig; die amtlichen Daten kennen diese Straße als "Arraser Straße".
(Vergleiche (nicht: schreibe ab :) ) http://www.gdi.sachsen.de/inhalt/info/bericht/160108/160108.html)
malenki (2016-04-09 05:20:51+00:00): Danke für die Korrektur.
rab (2016-03-15 18:01:12+00:00): What are you doing here?
Go back to your Sandbox!
Hjart (2016-03-15 18:12:45+00:00): For toiletter i større bygninger kan det være en god ide at tilføje en beskrivelse i stil med http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3260090011
Hjart (2016-03-15 18:15:05+00:00): Jeg sidder iøvrigt og følger med på http://osm.expandable.dk :-)
ff5722 (2016-03-15 18:31:48+00:00): Jeg kender ikke hvordan jeg kunne sige det i dette tilfælde, fordi hovedingangen er ikke altid i brug. Og den er meget nemt for at finde. Så, måske kunne en anden beskrive den. Jeg tilføjer en beskrive i fremtidige redigeringer.

Og jeg forstår ikke hvad du mener med den anden kommentar.
Hjart (2016-03-15 18:42:44+00:00): The second comment basically says that I'm reading the page in the given link. Recommended :-). It's described in https://github.com/MichaelVL/osm-analytic-tracker
ramyaragupathy (2016-04-26 15:24:38+00:00): Hey @SanjeevKumarT, While it is good that you have added roads here, can you also make sure to split the long roads here 👇

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403915295/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403915224/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/404982438/history

It is good to split roads at points where they separate into another. Please make the corrections to the traces.
ramyaragupathy (2016-04-26 15:27:00+00:00): Also can you make sure to combine the small segments this road?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/371608049/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403915308/history
jinalfoflia (2016-03-17 06:25:47+00:00): Hey  AV31!

Just want to tell you that you should not be using Google as a source of information for addition of any data on OSM. Look in here for more information - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#Why_don.27t_you_just_use_Google_Maps.2Fwhoever_for_your_data.3F

Best, 
Jinal Foflia
AV31 (2016-03-17 13:45:31+00:00): For the next time, I wont write any mention of Google Earth. Please note that the Pullman St. is actualy close to the public. It's only use for access to the construction site.
jinalfoflia (2016-03-17 16:24:15+00:00): That will be great. Thank you!

Happy Mapping!
jinalfoflia (2016-03-16 08:36:19+00:00): Hi Sanjeev,

I came across your edits in this changeset. Here are few points which I would like to put across:

- The buildings are not orthogonalised (tools -> orthogonalize)
- There are duplicated nodes. You can check that using the validator and fix it.

There is some excellent documentation about OSM here - http://learnosm.org/. You can learn more about OpenStreetMap here as-well - https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/wiki/Mapping-with-OpenStreetMap.

Best,

Jinal
SanjeevKumarT (2016-03-16 08:54:18+00:00): Hi Jinal,
Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions and references. I will fix those errors as soon as possible.
jinalfoflia (2016-03-23 07:42:50+00:00): Hi Sanjeev,
I have seen that you have corrected most of the errors here, but there are still some errors like 'Over Lapping ways'. You can have a look at this post to know more about it https://www.mapbox.com/blog/josm-validation/
SanjeevKumarT (2016-03-23 20:27:58+00:00): Hi Jinal,
Thanks for your feedback. I have corrected those overlapping errors. 
Please let me know if there is any other errors.
jinalfoflia (2016-03-24 04:57:23+00:00): Hi,
That's great!

Happy Mapping : )
Andreas Binder (2016-03-15 19:46:55+00:00): Schreibfehler im Kommentar mtb:scale:downhill => mtb:scale
Hjart (2016-03-15 20:12:43+00:00): Hvad har dette med Assentorpvej at gøre?
opendcc (2016-03-15 20:26:48+00:00): Hallo,

wo genau ist da bitte das Freibad?
literan (2016-03-16 12:19:00+00:00): И зачем для amenity=pharmacy слово "Аптека" в name? Неужели надо давать ссылку на вики, где написано, что так делать не нужно? Поправлю.
Zverik (2016-03-16 13:33:40+00:00): Потому что это часть названия. Не аптека «ИФК», а «Аптека ИФК». http://www.apteka-ifk.ru/
literan (2016-03-16 15:09:43+00:00): Это может быть только в одном случае - если можно сказать "Я купил аспирин в аптеке "Аптека ИФК"". Собственно, они и сами так не говорят: см. на стр. http://www.apteka-ifk.ru/o_kompanii/ слева - "Все аптеки ИФК"
VlIvYur (2016-03-16 22:06:45+00:00): Комментарий неправильный: убраны постройки, изменения в магазинах, добавлены банки,магазины
naoliv (2016-05-16 23:48:15+00:00): sjorgebarros, "Rotatória" é um nome genérico que não deve ser utilizado.
Caso a rotatória não possua um nome próprio, basta deixar sem nenhum nome.
yamada-as (2016-06-09 18:26:38+00:00): Hi, Thank you for contributing to OSM. Please try to avoid using a  grade for roads higher then it should. These are most "service roads" they are not public. I fixed this one. If you unaware of the grade use "unknown road" instead. someone on the ground may fix it.
literan (2016-03-16 12:58:59+00:00): Вот иногда хочется поставить "лайк" или "спасибо" к правке - а нет возможности! Если не секрет - вы в наших краях на квадрике гоняете, или пешком ходите?
volkalex (2016-03-18 14:20:33+00:00): Езжу на велосипеде, в том числе и зимой. По результатам поездок по трекам правлю тропинки и дороги.
lcat (2016-03-15 21:50:18+00:00): И таки да, знаю, что поломал транспорт. Чуть позже поправлю
Peilscheibe (2016-03-15 22:56:28+00:00): Eine Fußgängerampel ist korrekt getaggt mit highway=crossing crossing=traffic_signals. Ein highway=traffic_signals wird verwendet, wenn ein Kreuzungsverkehr ampelgeregelt ist. Ich habe daher die Änderung rückgängig gemacht.
RrPt (2016-03-19 09:23:00+00:00): Sorry, ich habe nur gesehe dass diese Ampel im Vergleich zu anderen Ampeln auf der Karte nicht auftaucht.
Danke fürs korrigieren
Peilscheibe (2016-03-19 21:55:16+00:00): Nun, "die Karte" gibt es ja gar nicht. Es gibt x verschiedene Karten(stile) und jeder davon hat sich entschieden, bestimmte Features zu rendern. Das funktioniert nur, wenn die Objekte auch richtig attributiert sind. Wenn man eine bestimmte Objektklasse in einer Karte sehen möchte, dann muss man das in diesem Kartenstil definieren, nicht im Datenmaterial.
Wenn Du hier in der Nähe von Stuttgart unterwegs bist, schau doch mal beim Stammtisch vorbei oder auf der Mailingliste. Nette Leute dort und es gibt auf alles eine Antwort :-)
Hjart (2016-03-15 21:54:17+00:00): Hvad mener du med "Geodata"? Noget med GPS-spor?
mremil (2016-03-15 21:58:28+00:00): Hov, nej, det skulle stå geodatastyrelsen. Det gik lidt for stærkt.
mremil (2016-03-15 22:01:21+00:00): I øvrigt dejligt, at du gider gå tingene igennem. Der er meget at holde styr på, og tror ikke, at særligt mange af dem bliver berørt i de forskellige tutorials og introduktioner, jeg har set/læst.
mremil (2016-03-15 22:06:41+00:00): ... og det er jo i øvrigt forkert, ser jeg. Det er bing, der er brugt. Det skal jeg lige være opmærksom på.
Hjart (2016-03-15 22:07:39+00:00): Hmm. Hvis du brugte Geodatastyrelsens burde det så ikke stå i "imagery_used" herover?
mremil (2016-03-15 22:09:31+00:00): Jo, som jeg skrev ovenfor, så er det bing, der er brugt. Jeg havde ellers skiftet til geodatastyrelsen, men må havde fået det skiftet tilbage til bing.
Hjart (2016-03-15 22:13:04+00:00): OSM er jo nærmest blevet mit job (som jeg dog sætter stor pris på). Jeg har puttet en frygtelig masse arbejde i vores data og den eneste måde jeg realistisk set kan "beskytte" resultatet af mit arbejde er jo ved at holde øje med og så vidt muligt "opgradere" mindre erfarne folk.
mremil (2016-03-15 22:14:40+00:00): Det forstår jeg godt. Jeg tager meget gerne imod gode råd og rettelser.
Hjart (2016-03-15 22:15:41+00:00): Ok. Jeg synes nu også godt at iD i det mindste kunne underrette brugeren om at der f.eks. her i Danmark er et alternativ til Bing. Jeg har efterhånden mange måttet gøre nye folk opmærksom på det.
mremil (2016-03-15 22:17:36+00:00): Ja, jeg har snuset lidt rundt i mail-liste arkivet og det er jo helt tydeligt, at geodatastyrelsen er væsenligt mere opdaterede. De bygger højhuse som nogle sindsyge i mit lokalområde, og der er kæmpe forskel mellem kortene.
mremil (2016-03-15 22:17:44+00:00): .. eller billederne.
R0bst3r (2016-03-16 07:27:05+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM!
Der erste Versuch sieht schon ganz gut aus, ich habe mir aber erlaubt kleine Korrekturen vorzunehmen. 
Unter anderem habe ich den Döner weg vom Gebäude auf einen Node platziert, da mehrere Geschäfte in dem Gebäude sind. Bei manchen Tags sind nur bestimte Werte zugelassen, diese habe ich angepasst.

Das Ergebnis findest du jetzt hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4062917770
muralito (2016-08-18 11:53:16+00:00): Cierto que se puede deducir de los boundary, pero lo que no podes es asegurar que las relaciones esten sanas, cada tanto algun cambio rompe alguna, asi que no podrias deducir nada en esos casos.
Aleks-Berlin (2016-03-17 20:44:42+00:00): please follow:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia#Examples
will_p (2016-03-16 01:24:50+00:00): I see you have added highway=footways along the walls that mark the layout of Shipley Hall (e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/363666662/history). Are you sure they really should be mapped as paths? Some of the walls are flush with the ground, but they are too narrow to walk along comfortably, and there are drops on some edges and between the different sections. I think the intention is that people walk on the grass inside the walls and for this purpose there are steps connecting the different levels, which you haven't added.

I would map the walls with barrier=wall even through they are mostly close to ground level. The real still missing paths through the middle and around the edges could then be added.
Rovastar (2016-03-16 18:54:01+00:00): Ummh I am not sure.

For drops yeah I should not have joined them for the drops and add steps where applicable but the others I would I suppose class them as walkways.
My reasoning is although narrow they have put down paving slabs for walking on rather than leaving the uneven ruins.

here is a photo for reference, http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1995431

Maybe I need another path next to the wall path where the steps are.

As you likely suspect I did may mapping from the imagery (it has been a long time since I last was there)
Anyway i am due a trip there soon (Easter time) and that is the reason I am updating this area now so my phone can get the maps in time and I will get improve the area more then. The vast majority of the work has been done for the area now.

If I make it to next weeks meeting we can chat about it then in more detail.

ummh..I thought I got alerted about changeset comments but that didn't happen.
Mateusz Konieczny (2018-05-16 20:05:44+00:00): Zerkniesz na https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=699545#p699545 ?
Władysław Komorek (2018-05-16 20:39:43+00:00): Kilka lat temu chciałem wyrysować/poprawić granice gmin i wsi w tych okolicach.
Po kilkunastu godzinach poddałem się. Taki był tu bałagan z łączeniem jedną liną kilku niezależnych bytów i z dziwnymi obrysami.
Napisałem wtedy do Zbyszka, że więcej nie dotkną czegokolwiek w tych okolicach.
Także możecie usunąć wszystkie moje stare edycje w tych okolicach, jeśli uważacie, że nie pasują.
Pełna Moc (2018-05-17 08:44:18+00:00): Czyli .... zwykły wandalizm ... zniszczył pan coś co istniało, wprawdzie było nie doskonałe ale istniało, nie zaoferował pan nic w zamian. Tylko dlatego ze nie spełniało to pańskich ideałów. Zrobił pan bałagan i nie posprzątał. Teraz dziesiątki ludzi muszą się zastanawiać jak to naprawić. Pisze pan żeby po prostu usunąć stare edycje ... ale to było ponad 2 lata temu więc pewnie będzie masa konfliktów. Co innego usuwać zmianę z wczoraj a co innego zmiana sprzed 2+ lat.
Mateusz Konieczny (2018-05-17 09:05:27+00:00): Nie nazywałbym wandalizmem coś co nie miało na celu niszczenie danych (nawet jeśli do jakichś zniszczeń doszło).

W pewnych sytuacjach usuwanie błędnie zmapowanych obiektów jest OK (np landuse=residential przyklejony do dróg) ale koniecznie trzeba o tym wspomnieć w opisie edycji - co i dlaczego było usuwane.
user_4493657 (2018-05-17 14:53:39+00:00): Akurat landuse=reidental i innych obiektów przyklejonych do drogi nie trzeba kasować jeśli używa się edytora JOSM można calby obiekt odkleić doslownie dwoma kliknięciami. Sam korzystałem z takej opcj przy edycji jezior. Gorzej jest w edytorze ID  zwłaszcza jak droga ma dołączona relacje.
Pełna Moc (2018-05-17 17:30:03+00:00): poprawiłem granicę i otulinę ...
Mateusz Konieczny (2018-05-18 08:01:47+00:00): @Cz ja - jeśli landuse=residential było poprzyklejane do dróg to jego geometria na ogół jest bezużyteczna.
MKnight (2016-09-24 12:17:16+00:00): Moin, noexit beschreibt keine ausgeschilderten Sackgassen, sondern "echte" Sackgassen, wo es auch kein Weiterkommen zu Fuß gibt. (ausserdem muss es am Endnode gesetzt werden, nicht auf den Weg)
Ich habe es hier entfernt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/72729871

Siehe auch: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:noexit
MKnight (2016-09-24 12:18:53+00:00): Nachtrag: an den angrenzenden Wegen habe ich es auch entfernt.
muralito (2016-03-19 04:27:09+00:00): Please explain why have you changed a lot of road classifications.
Nakaner (2016-03-16 08:34:52+00:00): Hallo FFwOberhain,

herzlich willkommen bei OSM.

So wie du den Hydranten eingetragen hast, ist er leider nutzlos. Es genügt nicht einfach, nur einen Namen (name=*) dranzuklatschen. Einen Hydranten taggt man mit emergency=fire_hydrant. In iD gibt man dazu in der Suchfunktion Hydrant ein und wählt dann die Hydrant aus (klick auf "Hydrant").

Welche Tags ein Objekt hat, kannst du unter "Alle Eigenschaften" sehen, wenn du das Objekt markiert hast.

Viele Grüße

Michael
esja1195 (2016-03-26 04:49:10+00:00): こんにちは。
この地点ですが地形としての峠（乗越、鞍部、コル、等）を表現したいのであれば、タグは
natural=saddle
が適切ではないかと思います。
（参考Key:mountain_pass）
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:natural%3Dsaddle

一方、道路の山越え最高地点を表現したいのであれば、ウェイ（国道439号線）上の一番高い地点のノードに
mountain_pass=yes
のタグが適切だと思います。
※ここの右上、国道と林道の交差点のノードに入力がすでにあります。
（参考Key:mountain_pass）
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Key:mountain_pass

いずれにしても、ここは山のてっぺんではないですのでnatural=peakのタグはまちがいです。
（参考Tag:natural=peak）
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:natural%3Dpeak

同様に四国の峠でnatural=peakタグが入力されていらっしゃる地点が他にもありましたので、
mountain_pass=yesタグに修正する前にご連絡致しました;)
apm-wa (2016-05-05 16:04:04+00:00): Айгуля, прошу Вас переназначить эти строения как House а не Apartments.  Иначе я начну их удалять с карты.  Спасибо.  Aygulya, please redesignate these structures as House and not Apartments.  Otherwise I will begin to delete them from the map. Thank you.
apm-wa (2016-05-05 16:05:15+00:00): Это относится к строениям в Köşi.  This pertains to the structures in Kösi.
user_5359 (2016-03-16 09:47:34+00:00): Thanks for the complement of the OSM dataset. But I don't think you company lives on the street. Please try it again. If you need help: You are welcome.