piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
AlwynWellington (2019-06-25 08:03:59+00:00): Richard, I have looked at the point that Phil (@trigpoint) makes.  It seems his point has been corrected.  But there are still many pre-existing discontinuities in the ordering of the elements elsewhere in this route.
kind regards, Alan
Richard (2019-06-25 08:10:45+00:00): Route ordering is not particularly significant. Any client that makes major use of ordered routes will reorder the data before consuming it.

A really good principle for OSM is "be liberal in what you add, cautious in what you change". People have been mapping cycle routes in Britain for 11 years now - many UK cycle route mappers are actually volunteers for the charity that maintains the National Cycle Network. It is very unlikely that you have suddenly come up with some great insight as to why they've been doing it wrong all these years. Even if you think you have, you should run it past the community first before making sweeping changes.
AlwynWellington (2019-06-26 03:43:41+00:00): Richard.
I use WayMarkedTrails.org and that normally gets eveything in order.  But there was one route relation that not even josm's sort function would resolve.  So did this manually so as to use all the features that 'Trails' offers.

I understand the principle you refer to, but within the bounds offered by relevant OSM wiki.  One such is on naming things.

But here is the thing.  

About 10 or so years ago and earlier there was a tag "highway=cycle and foot way" and its colour was blue.  It was clear to me that this tag was meant to be inclusive of both means of getting about.  Some route elements still have that tag.  See Thames Path just west of the confluence of the Kennet with the Thames.

Then, about 10 years ago that (joint) tag was removed and replaced by "=footway",   "=cycleway" and "=path".  

In the current wiki it is only "=footway" that has the admonition to apply when the use is "mainly or exclusively" for walking.  I think that admonition should apply to "=cycleway" also

What I suspect (guess) has happened (knowing human nature about change) is that some mappers have continued to use "cycleway" instead of "=path" as I believe was intended.

I have that belief as when saving additions to the OSM database recently I was asked to change "=cycle and foot way" tags that were proximate to my additions to ="path .

I have attempted to find the time line for these changes, without success.  As I say based on that experience and what I can see and based on my understanding of human nature (I have had to introduce so much of it in my professional career) I come to these preliminary conclusions.  It may be helpful in someone can give an authoritative chronology, but that may just be a rabbit hole.

I am happy to enter into a open discussion.  But where the response is simply "that (cycleway) is just how we do it in the UK, then no thank you.

I am indebted to your information the focus of many cycle route mappers have a primary focus on that means of getting about.  That may explain many of what I see as "funny" instances.  For example: where a perfectly adequate suburban sidewalk without any signage about shared use is tagged as "=cycleway".  I have no difficulty with the sidewalk elements being included in a cycling route relation (if that is actually appropriate) so it can be properly rendered in, say, cycling,waymarkedtrails.org.  But it seems to me tagging a not very wide sidewalk as something else, I thinks, suggests a step too far.

I would be pleased to continue the discussion.
DaveF (2019-07-05 14:43:18+00:00): >To tag them 'cycleway' seems to not only an appropriation and, to an international reader, saying do not go here.
>But to rely on UK customary use is not helpful. 

I think you're misunderstanding 'cycleway' which can be used to map shared ways

Having a cycle route relation attached to a way doesn't not make that way accessible to bike riders. It requires cycle specific tags on the actual ways.

Changing cycleway to path but not adding tags allowing cycling prevents accessibility to bikes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/129444879

Deleting foot=* on ways where walking is designated is wrong
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/667952161/history

"Kennet and Avon Canal towpath" is not the name of the path. There is a route relation titled "Kennet and Avon Canal towpath" 

>But where the response is simply "that (cycleway) is just how we do it in the UK, then no thank you.

This is a tad hypocritical as you're clearly assuming it should be to suit the perspective of "an international reader," & "where I live"

For the above reasons I believe this, & other changesets of Alwyns has reduced the quality of the database & should be reverted
AlwynWellington (2019-07-11 05:54:21+00:00): @DaveF, thank you for your comments.
OSM is an international publication.  This partly explains, from the Wiki, why "highway=sidewalk" is the preferred tag in suburban areas at least for what I, and I suspect you also, would be happier to tag as "=footpath".
You are correct for all "highway=*" tags "cycle=yes" must be present for a CycleRoute relation to be effective. In the same way as "foot=yes" is also required for HikingRoute relations, and so on.
It is my practice to note what access and route relations were marked before and ensure they are continued after any changes.  If I have missed some, that is regretted but is not not intentional.

regards
DaveF (2019-07-11 14:21:40+00:00): "highway=sidewalk" is the preferred tag 
Not true. There's no such tag
SomeoneElse (2019-07-11 14:36:55+00:00): For completeness:
> for all "highway=*" tags "cycle=yes" must be present for a CycleRoute relation to be effective. In the same way as "foot=yes" is also required for HikingRoute relations
Strictly speaking neither of those is true either - there are plenty of examples of cycle and hiking routes where there is permissive access only.
SomeoneElse (2019-07-11 14:39:36+00:00): More generally I'd suggest that https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb is probably the better forum for general GB-related tagging discussions - more people will see the messages and will be able to chip in.
AlwynWellington (2019-07-11 21:44:31+00:00): @DaveF, your response is the more complete than mine.  
Plus also "*=designated".
In my defence, I was trying for an uncluttered response.
regards, Alan
AlwynWellington (2019-07-11 22:22:00+00:00): @DaveF, re sidewalk.
My response is both yes and no.
In a sandbox (using the browser editor) I drew a line.
The prompts for me to map the nature of the line included "Sidewalk"
Selecting that put in two tags.
So, yes, one can select "Sidewalk" up front and, yes, the editor does the work behind the scenes.
In a practical sense I have selected "highway=...sidewalk".

kind regards, Alan
AlwynWellington (2019-07-11 23:51:27+00:00): @DaveF, thanks for the probably better forum link.  I think this is the one from which I looked at the July to date archive a few days ago.
I would want to read my way in before making any talking-points.

regards, Alan
regards
AlwynWellington (2019-07-12 00:08:53+00:00): @DaveF, re sidewalk again.
The Wiki (at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalks and the section Terminology discusses why this is the preferred tag for space identified in some way as part of a road but not for motor vehicles.
It is my understanding that have right of way (unless specifically removed, eg motorways, under legislation) on paths and roads.
That being the case it follows that those on foot on a sidewalk have priority over other designated users (eg cyclists) on the same sidewalk.
The designation comes from the local authority (not a ramblers, harriers or cycling group) and is shown on official road side signage, or painted on the sidewalk.  

It is my clear understanding the shared use signage does not set aside the common law right of way (and primacy) for those on foot.

Kind regards
iriman (2019-06-15 17:09:39+00:00): با سلام،
• منبع ویرایش‌های شما چیست؟ لطفاً شفاف‌سازی بفرمایید که منظور از 20142014 در تگ منبع چیست؟
• بر چه اساسی
way 696558789
و راه‌های متصل به آن رسم شده‌اند؟
• دلیل رسم 
way 696558785
چیست؟
• آیا
way 696558793
هم‌اکنون وجود دارد؟

با تشکر
TravGW (2019-06-12 17:21:22+00:00): What are you doing? I've look at your edit history and it feels like you are playing around making 
nonsensical edits. Texas' 36th congressional district is not in Washington.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/71165694
streckenkundler (2019-06-12 06:15:13+00:00): Bitte halte dich an das vereinbarte Taggining. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area

Das Kürzel "NSG" ist bei diesen Gebieten NICHT Bestandteil des Namens!

streckenkundler
streckenkundler (2019-06-12 06:21:12+00:00): Beispiel Dürrenhofer Moor: 
http://bravors.brandenburg.de/verordnungen/nsg_duerrenhofer_moor/2

Zitat: 
§ 1
Erklärung zum Schutzgebiet

Die in § 2 näher bezeichnete Fläche im Landkreis Dahme-Spreewald wird als Naturschutzgebiet festgesetzt. Das Naturschutzgebiet trägt die Bezeichnung „Dürrenhofer Moor“.
geozeisig (2019-06-12 06:41:50+00:00): Es ist in Deutschland großenteils üblich das NSG oder Naturschutzgebiet davorzustellen. Ein NSG könnte sonst nicht von einem LSG, Naturpark, Nationalpark usw unterschieden werden. Auch in anderen Ländern wird entsprechend getagged. Es spielt keine Rolle was in einem Gesetzt steht, OSM kann andere Richtlinien haben.
streckenkundler (2019-06-12 07:03:27+00:00): Wir haben uns letztes Jahr im Forum eindeutig dazu entschlossen, als Name für das jeweilige Schutzgebiet ausschließlich nur den Namen zu verwenden und nicht zugleich den Rechtszustand!

Vergleiche auch https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=63111

Bitte beachte das und weiche nicht davon ab!
geozeisig (2019-06-12 09:45:47+00:00): Es gibt immerhin 2638 Fälle in denen der Name mit NSG beginnt (mit Overpass ermittelt). Es handelt sich also um keine Ausnahme. Solange es auf der Standardkarte nicht mit "NSG" bei dem short_protection_title=NSG dargestellt wird, sollte es möglich sein dies selbst bei name hinzuzufügen.
streckenkundler (2019-06-12 10:02:58+00:00): Wieviel hast du davon eigenmächtig editiert, entgegen der Wiki-Doku?

Wenn du jetzt die Entscheidung und Dokumentation nebst Wikiänderung anders siehst/ ändern möchtest, spreche/ schreibe das auf den einschlägigen Informationskanälen. Erst mit einer einheitlichen Sichtweise und abgestimmten Doku kann man vielleicht umtaggen.
Ich warne aber bereits jetzt davor, eigenmächtig das Wiki dazu zu ändern...

Ich sehe es aber als Fehler an, den Rechtszustand des Gebietes in den Namenstag mit aufzunehmen. der gehört da nicht hinein! 
Rechtverodnungen sind hier die einzigste und verlässlichste Quelle einerseits der Geometrien und andererseits der Namen. Ich sehe es nicht ein, daß man sich einfach das beste raussucht und das, was einem nicht gefällt rauslässt. 

Die Folge deiner Sichtweise wäre, daß man bei allen anderen Schutzgebietsklassen auch den Rechtszustand des Gebietes mit in den Namen aufnehmen müsste... viel Spaß :(
streckenkundler_revert (2019-06-12 20:22:43+00:00): Revert wegen Vandalismus. 

Halte sich an das im Forum abgesprochene und im Wiki dokumentierte Tagging.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=63111
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area
MerlinPendragon (2019-06-12 16:13:47+00:00): Hello,

These areas were recently (within the last two weeks) converted into a garden, so the original tagging was correct.
Frans S (2019-07-25 08:16:49+00:00): Hello. I review mappings and noticed that you tag settlements as farmland. This is wrong. There is no need to map area tags. Just buildings. If you want to tag an area like this anyhow, tag it landuse=residential
Best regards and keep mapping
user_5359 (2019-06-12 14:39:39+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I must deleted you node, because you aren’t a church and the node isn’t well placed. Don’t use the geocoder from Google (Google don’t allow this), look on the aerial image and mark the right building!
stephankn (2020-09-06 08:43:30+00:00): way 696594467 is certainly not a 182 meter height building.
Also: they key to tag house-numbers is "addr:housenumber". Please use the right tags and not abuse the name tag. Please revisit this area and fix your tagging.
mavl (2019-12-04 09:00:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 77913960, 77919406, 77910048, 77905960 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: an incompatible source].
Constable (2019-06-12 08:53:43+00:00): Hi there Nathan.
There's already a park area here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109817543 , there's no need to have a second one overlapping the first one.
Please remove this one you just added https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/696606747
Thanks
Constable (2019-06-12 08:56:13+00:00): This one also seems a bit suspicious as a tag combination.
Shelters have to be tagged as shelters, not as natural=wood, since it means there's a forest here, which is named "Back Shelter"
Supaplex (2019-08-09 16:41:15+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

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

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

Happy Mapping!
jxpsert (2023-05-26 06:58:24+00:00): Hi there Britzz,
"indoor=room" is a tag for indoor mapping of rooms. If an AED is inside, "indoor=yes" should be used.
CRCulver (2021-08-16 16:42:18+00:00): What is your source for this apartments you added in Pejä. Are these actually holiday apartments that tourists can rent?
Ale_Zena_IT (2019-10-09 18:58:32+00:00): Ciao,
non è un ospedale https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:amenity=hospital?uselang=it
ma bensì un ambulance_station https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dambulance_station
MikeN (2019-06-12 11:46:51+00:00): Hi, thank you for this edit.  It looks like the Graceland East multi-polygon was broken.
BCNorwich (2019-06-15 08:12:37+00:00): Hi, just a name on a linear feature, (possibly an unenclosed area has no meaning to OSM. These ought be corrected or removed.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2019-06-15 08:20:51+00:00): Hi, I now see that you continue to add fiction so I've reverted this changeset.

If you need help contributing to OSM please just ask.

Regards Bernard.
SomeoneElse (2019-07-03 18:05:38+00:00): @BCNorwich - does anything left behind by thsi mapper still need tidying up?
BCNorwich (2019-07-03 18:22:57+00:00): Hi SomeoneElse, I've been through all the editing of the last year and corrected everything I could see. I commented/edited about 10 changesets but never had a response from the mapper. All OK now thanks.

Regards Bernard.
SomeoneElse (2019-07-03 19:55:34+00:00): Great - thanks.
surveyor54 (2019-06-12 16:43:17+00:00): Why do you ignore the advice of the user aquarix https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71129462#map=3/60.66/13.86 and put a lot of useless and wrong objects into the map?
Please comment on this changeset, otherwise I am forced to delete your entries.

Regards
surveyor54
woodpeck (2019-06-12 09:28:55+00:00): I am not sure if you saw my previous message, just to be safe I'm adding a pointer here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2855
Mateusz Konieczny (2019-06-12 12:35:05+00:00): Dzięki za poprawienie tego przejścia pod budynkiem w hucie!
eggie (2019-06-12 09:14:11+00:00): Hoi Mulaj.. De surface=ground op de brug zal denk ik niet kloppen.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71171574

MVG,
Eggie
Mulaj2000 (2019-06-12 09:24:51+00:00): Dank voor het meekijken! Ik zie toch snel iets over het hoofd :-)
HSL_HRT (2019-06-12 09:19:49+00:00): What's the idea with this route? I would claim that the port location is wrong in Helsinki. Is this possibly a duplicate with one of these ...

Tallink : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/140673970 

Linda Line : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/122734430
kirma (2019-06-12 10:07:35+00:00): A side note: Linda Line has ceased operations almost two years ago.
ebraplmap (2019-06-17 22:04:35+00:00): Thank you for contributing to OpenStreetMap. When you say in your change set comments that you are correcting the map of Marivan according the Municipality Map, you're basically saying that you are importing data from a source that may need a permit, please make sure that you are familiar with:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
and please join the community chat group at:
tg://join?invite=JxCkvlFRmCyg_FdshS6keQ
to share our experiences.
letihu (2019-06-26 20:45:47+00:00): Hier werden Gebäude über Gebäude gemappt. Das geht betimmt auch besser ;-)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/696626109/history#map=19/47.86834/10.59296&layers=N
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/696626117/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/515940862/history
und hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/696626110/history
und hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/696626114/history
und hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/696626107/history
Wenn die alten Gebäude abgerissen sind, sollten sie auch so gemappt werden.
user_70413 (2019-07-02 10:15:39+00:00): Hallo, ich versuche sowas eigentlich immer auch zu vermeiden. Aber als ich das letzte Mal dort war stand das abzureißende Gebäude eben auch noch. Daher habe ich den geplanten Neubau darübergezeichnet. Irgendwann steht dieser und dann wird das ganze "richtig" gemappt. Ansonsten tu dir keinen Zwang an und mache es so, wie du es für richtig hälst.
Carlos Brys (2019-09-07 21:58:37+00:00): Estimado, agradecemos tu colaboración para completar los datos en OpenStreetMap.
Al respecto quisiera comentarte que por convención, no se escriben los nombres de los objetos todo en mayúsculas. Es ese sentido, esta calle debería llamarse: Juan Pablo Paredes.
Te invito a revisar tus ediciones y corregirlas para adecuar los nombres a las reglas de edición.
Además, aquellos objetos que no tienen nombre, simplemente se dejan en blanco.
Muchas gracias.
eggie (2019-06-12 10:14:48+00:00): Dag Sjenkie.. Schuiven met de kaart in editmodus levert vaak schade op. Nu ook Je hebt een adresnode parklaan 38 verplaatst naar een ander gebied.
Hier kun je dat zien.. https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71172858
Eerst dus uit d editmodus en dan naar een ander plekje schuiven.
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2019-06-12 10:17:22+00:00): adresnode parklaan 38 hersteld
eggie (2019-06-12 10:18:57+00:00): Beter is het nog om over te schakelen naar editor JOSM. daar schuif je met de rechtermuis en je hebt veel meer mogelijkheden.
editor josm stap voor stap
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710       
Eggie
szydzio (2019-06-13 06:14:32+00:00): Hej! Fajnie że dołączyłeś do społeczności OSM :) Przy dodawaniu budynków staraj się jednak nie rysować na „oko” a korzystaj raczej z dostępnych podkładów w edytorze ID. Obrysy budynków znajdziesz na podkładzie „polska.e-mapa.net: Buildings”. Nie dubluj też niepotrzebnie punktów adresowych, jeśli adres jest już na obrysie budynku. Pozdr!
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-14 14:43:22+00:00): Please don't add test data to the live OSM Server. 
If you want a test server, perhaps http://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org/ would work for you? 

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
cguyenot (2019-06-14 14:53:18+00:00): Sorry about that I removed my polygon, thanks for the advice.
iHandy (2019-06-12 09:46:00+00:00): Sorry, incorrect comment.
Supaplex (2019-08-09 16:42:07+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

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

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

Happy Mapping!
ma-rt-in (2019-06-13 09:42:07+00:00): Hallo,
das mit den Rollen löschen ist zwar schick, aber bitte tu das wenn man gleich die ganze Relation vernünftig fertigstellen kann, da es jetzt immer nur halb fertig ist.
vg
GerdHH (2019-06-13 23:13:27+00:00): Es geht nicht um "schick", sondern forward/backward ist bei ptv2 einfach falsch, siehe z.B. https://ptna.openstreetmap.de/results/DE/HH/DE-HH-HVV-Analysis.html. Aber wenn Du die Linien nach Sterley aufräumen willst, halte ich mich da fern
sander79 (2019-06-12 10:23:38+00:00): access=permit does not exist?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
DemoLogin (2019-10-29 19:39:47+00:00): Судя по заметке "Note", оператор указан некорректно
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1579969613/history
Пивун (2019-11-08 22:03:15+00:00): На мой взгляд, содержание заметки не соответствует действительности: даже если и существует такая вещь, как "несетевые Пятёрочки", это никак не относится ни к одной и точек в данной правке. В этом можно удостовериться на официальном сайте сети.
bielebog (2019-06-12 18:26:35+00:00): Sorry, your changeset only contains bogus data that doesn't make sense. I had to revert your changeset. Please be aware that this is live data. Please consider the documentation before editing.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org is always a good starting point.

cheers,

 bielebog
frosm (2021-02-10 17:13:54+00:00): Bonjour,
pour le nombre de marche, c'est step_count et non step :)
Bonne continuation
maraf24 (2019-06-18 14:21:17+00:00): To nie jest droga residential a droga na Ramiszów.
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-12 20:01:41+00:00): Please don't add test data to the live OSM Server. 
If you want a test server, perhaps http://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org/ would work for you? Furthermore, can you revert your edits?

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-12 20:01:49+00:00): Please don't add test data to the live OSM Server. 
If you want a test server, perhaps http://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org/ would work for you? Furthermore, can you revert your edits?

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
eggie (2019-06-12 10:48:30+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht
Niet simpelweg iets omzetten in een park. 
Je verwijdert de details en vervangt deze door een transparant. 
Een park is een (uitgestrekt) terrein, omvattende stukken grasveld, bos en bosschages, vijvers, paden etc. Het is een soort deken over al het andere heen. Bovendien heeft het meestal een naam. 
Leisure=park is de functie en die moet je los zien van wat je ziet de landuse. Je edits zullen worden teruggezet. 
Hier een voorbeeld van een park met landuse en een losse cover leisure= park er helemaal los overheen. http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.80552/4.66665

Ik heb deze wijzigingen teruggezet.
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2019-06-12 10:56:28+00:00): reverted by my changeset #71175381

Wanneer je vragen hebt stel ze gerust.
De namen van de parken zullen op de losse transparanten moeten die over het hele gebied liggen voor zover ze nog niet gemapt zijn. Met editor iD is dat al een hele klus om te ontwaren.
Maaak ook het gebied van je edits niet te groot en doe één park tegelijk. Dan opslaan.
Per leisure=park ook één naam. 
De losse leisure kun je gewoon over alle heen leggen zonder te plakken aan andere objecten. 

MVG,
Eggie