piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
pmailkeey (2016-06-24 20:17:42+00:00): I don't agree with place nodes. The 'centre' of a place has no real significance. The placing of place nodes tend to be rather arbitrary too. In this case, there appears to be a few villages grouped together erroneously - and would be best for someone local to correct.
One generally doesn't need to see place names when zoomed in as generally you know where you are. Whether the names are displayed or not are up to the renderers and not map editors.
SomeoneElse (2016-06-24 22:39:02+00:00): @pmailkeey , while you "may not agree" with place nodes, they're a longstanding feature of OSM, and people have (on the mailing lists and elsewhere) argued for their retention.  If you think that that's a policy that should be changed then I'd suggest discussing it on either the tagging mailing list or the talk-gb one.

Among the reasons put forward in the past are:
1) The reasons listed on https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/28140/cities-is-a-placecity-node-always-needed (that's a question that I asked because I wasn't sure what the answer was).
2) The geographical centre of an area may not be the city centre.  In the case of coastal towns, the "geographical centre" may be in the sea.
3) Often it's useful to ask for directions to the centre of a city - and you can do that with a location chosen by a person but not with an arbitary "geographical centre".
pmailkeey (2016-06-24 23:51:15+00:00): It's not a case of mapping what people think or want but mapping what's there. A place is an area, not a node. If the name appears in the sea for a coastal location, that's fine. I find village names placed in nearby fields rather than in the village or hamlet - to stop the name cluttering the map. This kind of positioning is perfectly acceptable - since OS has done it for years; amongst other reasons.

I agree there's often a hub to a place such as a market square - although for drivers, a central car park would be a good point. Some places are so big, the 'town centre' covers a large area and a node would be pretty arbitrary within that area. It's like trying to decide where people want to be without knowing where there destination actually is.

I suspect if you can come up with what you consider to be a valid reason to mark a 'centre point', won't in fact be valid.
SomeoneElse (2016-06-24 23:55:41+00:00): Places do have centres though - hence my initial question about Sheffield.  I'd definitely leave admin_centre nodes in place unless you've actually persuaded the majority of mappers that it's a good idea to delete them.
It's not just about what you think, or what I think - it's about what the majority of mappers think and currently that seems to be in favour of place nodes.
EoghanM (2016-06-27 13:13:13+00:00): @pmailkeey I hear your position and agree that there might be some cases (including this one) where a central node is misleading/arbitrary and/or redundant. I also agree that rendering is up to the renderer; however if you are going to make more of these sorts of changes please lobby to have the default OSM renderer display the town way the same as it currently displays town nodes.
EoghanM (2016-06-27 13:15:22+00:00): One other -0 for not having a central node, is that it makes it much more difficult for someone to find and edit the tags of the town. I guess this is an editor problem and applies to editing of all large ways, but still, a single central node is very convenient for editing.
pmailkeey (2016-06-27 22:21:31+00:00): "please lobby to have the default OSM renderer display the town way the same as it currently displays town nodes."

Is not an issue for me !

Settlement tags are not hard to find - no harder than the residential area tags. Searching OSM will find them very easily too. Again this issue is no different for the many larger area objects such as lakes.
EoghanM (2016-06-28 08:34:26+00:00): Dorchester is a nearby town with a town node. The name 'Dorchester' is clearly visible on the default OSM map at zoom levels 9-15. For Bridport, the name is only visible at zoom level 12, and then just barely so. I'm not from this area, so would not be aware that Bridport exists from looking at the current rendering of the map. Of course it's possible to search the map, but this only works if you know there's somewhere called 'Bridport' in the first place!
Lakes names are displayed at wide zoom levels, 10-14 and have a nice open blue space to display the name so are currently much better handled by the renderer.
I'm not saying it's your responsibility to fix the renderer, but I'm just pointing out that OSM is currently not set up to properly display town ways, so either we need to fix the renderer or agree to continue to have at least one central node for a town (of which there are other advantages apart from the current support in the renderer).
SomeoneElse (2016-06-28 19:00:18+00:00): For info, I've re-added the node and made it the admin centre of the relation again in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40350455 .
EoghanM (2016-06-29 08:51:18+00:00): This could be the relevant bug report for the rendering:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/103
Richard Mann (2017-02-13 18:02:20+00:00): Well I've put them back because they are a feature of the road, just as much of the pavement (and it broke my rendering). How did it break your use case (and is it really impossible to fix at your end)?
hadw (2017-02-13 19:37:34+00:00): Although I can't identify exactly what has been changed back here, I'm concerned that the reversion is mapping for the renderer.  "It doesn't render right" is not generally a valid reason to change something, and I would not expect to have a cycle path mapped in two places.
Richard Mann (2017-02-13 19:51:55+00:00): Perhaps let Richard explain why he couldn't use the data as it stood.
Richard (2017-02-14 11:06:50+00:00): One feature, one OSM object is a well-established principle: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

In this case, if you have two representations of the same object (a cycleway), one with a less accurate geometry than the other (i.e. on the road centreline rather than on the actual cycleway), then the user has a 50% chance that the polyline in their turn-by-turn directions will send them up the inaccurate geometry (a busy A road) rather than the accurate one. Which is clearly not a good thing!

By and large you should not expect OSM data (or, indeed, any detailed geodatabase) to be directly consumable for small-scale mapping, but should expect to have to do some generalisation. OSM tends towards completeness and that means the data gets more detailed and less directly consumable for small-scale maps as time goes on.

If you were to create some proprietary tags to represent this scenario in a format more readily consumable by your rendering rules (a la network=xcn in Oxford) then I wouldn't object. I wouldn't even go to the barricades against an _additional_ tag accompanying cycleway=track, to express "the track is mapped separately", though it would be suboptimal and contrary to mapping practice the world over. But having the same feature represented by two different geometries, without any indication that they are the same feature, is not sustainable.
Richard (2017-02-14 12:51:05+00:00): SK53 has pointed out that sidewalk=separate is frequently used (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/sidewalk=separate, https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/712, etc.) to indicate "road has a sidewalk, mapped as separate way".

By analogy, cycleway=separate would be good tagging to use in this case.
Richard Mann (2017-02-17 12:17:05+00:00): I'm happy to change the cycleway:left|right=track|footway|service tags to something else (perhaps cycleway:left|right=separate+cycleway:left|right:separate=track|footway|service), though since the cycleway tag is quite well established in meaning - a tag to describe the nature of the cycle facility available on that road - it feels like it might break someone else's use-case unnecessarily.

So I'd probably prefer to add sidewalk=separate as a flag to routers to use separate geometry instead of inferring geometry (and will start doing so unless you really want the other option).
Richard (2017-02-20 15:15:13+00:00): I'd certainly prefer cycleway=separate. But I can take it to the tagging@ list if you think that'd help.
user_5359 (2016-03-07 05:10:17+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have reverted all your three change sets. To build your private maps, doesn't need to enter this information into the OSM database
maraf24 (2016-03-07 20:17:23+00:00): Proszę o dowód na istnienie takich nazw.
rohieb (2016-03-07 01:27:46+00:00): Ach, wo geb ich denn in iD jetzt wieder source=knowledge an…
Nakaner (2016-03-07 09:46:56+00:00): iD hat kein derartiges Feld, um das eingeben zu können. (Ich traue den Entwicklern zu, dass sie sich eines solchen Features verweigern würden)

Du kannst solche Angaben jedoch ersatzweise einfach in den Änderungssatz-Kommentar einbauen.
rohieb (2016-03-07 12:10:03+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis!
JosueFilipinohomes (2016-03-07 06:15:44+00:00): commonly name Ramona village
JosueFilipinohomes (2016-03-07 06:06:05+00:00): no such road like that
Kartograf_udm (2016-03-14 07:07:54+00:00): Переместил тэги автомойки "Котэ" на точку внутри здания. Если организация не занимает всё здание (как в данном случае), её всегда следует обозначать точкой внутри полигона здания.
mavl (2019-03-12 16:13:09+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-03-14 16:20:48+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
glglgl (2016-04-04 21:25:30+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35310741 wurde in diesem Änderungssatz verändert, leider nicht zum Guten: der Tag ref=L 253 wurde entfernt.

Dies bemerkt habend war ich vor ein paar Tage vor Ort und stellte fest, die Straße hat weiterhin Stationszeichen, die sie als L 253 ausweisen.

Ist Dir da Näheres über eine Änderung bekannt?

Bis auf Weiteres stelle ich die Bezeichnung mal wieder her.
FahRadler (2016-04-09 16:30:18+00:00): Wieso hast du die Scherbachstraße umbenannt in Scheerbachstraße?
Woher hast du die Info?
Quellen gibst du bei deinen CS ja generell nicht an :-(
FahRadler (2016-04-09 16:41:55+00:00): Ja der Bach wird mit zwei e geschrieben.
Nur die Straße halt nicht.
(Telefonbuch, Gemeinde Klbd etc)
mavl (2019-03-14 16:20:52+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2016-03-15 14:52:24+00:00): Здравствуйте. Прошу прощения за вторжение.  
  
Хотел проехать на автомобиле по проездам, которые вы добавили в этом пакете правок, но не получилось этого сделать, так как проезды обозначены неправильно. Например, мне не удалось выехать по этому проезду [http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402098445] на Янтарную улицу. Сквозного проезда в этом месте нет [http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/57.10148/65.59244]. Мой трек можно посмотреть здесь [http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mavl/traces/2127082].  
  
Сообщите, пожалуйста, источник ваших данных.
KubikRubik (2016-03-17 18:13:42+00:00): Добрый день. Источником моих данных была отправка человека в данный район для разведки местности. Мне были предоставлены дороги. Ранее этот человек не ошибался. Я перепроверю.
mavl (2016-03-17 18:54:40+00:00): Понятно. Спасибо. Я пока сдвинул дома и проезды под треки [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37903885]. Возможно, какие-то дома не попали на свои места.
Warin61 (2018-12-28 03:26:23+00:00): Hi,
Six maps is NOT allowed as a source! 

LPI Base Map/Topo maps are...
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:07+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:10+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
GOwin (2016-03-07 10:36:01+00:00): use tag:
sport=multi

to describe facilities for multiple sports.
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:14+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:18+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
Myazyk (2016-03-07 14:27:14+00:00): Крейзі мапер нарешті переконався, що там є вулиці)
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:21+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
chillly (2016-03-08 15:51:18+00:00): Welcome to OSM.

Your edit is pretty good for a first edit, but you have added a landuse tag to the building which is not the way it gets used.

If you need any help, feel free to ask by replying.
GinaroZ (2016-10-05 15:47:32+00:00): Is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402128834 really named Strathairly? OS Street View says Keirs.
Red Kobold (2016-10-05 17:42:18+00:00): Well spotted. OS 6" had Strathairly - presumably it originally belonged to Strathairly House. But current OS and Royal Mail have Keirs although no sign is visible.
Josef73 (2018-11-09 19:38:23+00:00): Hello, when is here open?
blackadder (2018-11-10 10:25:35+00:00): Sorry, I only visited once. I see I added some opening times when I edited it.
Josef73 (2023-01-11 18:39:38+00:00): I will remove the opening_hours
Totor (2016-03-08 05:08:29+00:00): This should probably be :
landuse=industrial

and not
building=industrial
I cant imagine that is one big building
SHARCRASH (2016-04-06 20:27:37+00:00): Bonjour, pourriez rectifier les erreurs signalés par OSMi que l'import à généré, SVP? A force d'imports sans correction, la carte française commence sérieusmeent à devenir un vrai foutoir sur OSMi. Merci pour votre compréhension! :)
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:25+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
Hjart (2016-03-07 12:10:32+00:00): Pas på ikke at rykke ved adressenoder (i dette tilfælde Præstevænget 27, som er endt oppe ved nr 35)
Hjart (2016-03-07 12:13:09+00:00): Jeg følger med på http://osm.expandable.dk :-)
Hjart (2016-03-07 12:16:24+00:00): Bemærk også at Geodatastyrelsens billeder fra foråret 2015 (som du kan vælge ved at trykke 'B') er nyere end dem du har brugt indtil nu. Visse steder er der forskel på de to sæt.
ErikBreum (2016-03-07 12:32:18+00:00): Tak
shura0 (2016-03-07 17:47:21+00:00): Чтобы выровнять углы у здания нажимай S, так дома не будут кривыми!

Поправил обозначение детского сада.
Thomas8122 (2016-03-07 17:07:04+00:00): reverted
shura0 (2016-03-07 17:38:13+00:00): Привет!
Я за тобой подправил детскую площадку и гостиницу, они не так обозначаются, как ты указал.
Thomas8122 (2016-03-07 17:06:42+00:00): hab ich rückgängig gemacht
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:29+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:33+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:36+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
Peda (2016-04-24 10:49:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38830605 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets of user Дмитрий-Одесса due to vandalism: duplicated nodes, removal of nodes,... (See http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=588679#p588679 or contact the DWG)
user_5359 (2016-03-07 18:03:59+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Thanks for the complement of the OSM dataset. Note that in OSM description of the objects has the highest priority. Objects that have only one name, have little sense. As home page for the question "How do I describe you?" I recommend the page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a.
Hjart (2016-03-07 13:23:04+00:00): Jeg sætter stor pris på at man så vidt muligt holder vejnet (highway=*) og diverse landuse polygoner adskilte. Jeg har set nogle frygtelige uheld opstå på grund af vejnet og landuse der har delt noder.
ErikBreum (2016-03-07 13:30:17+00:00): Ok, forstået. Du lyder meget erfaren.
Men det giver nogle grimme linier i kortene. Men kan godt se problemet hvis man uden at tænke over det flytter lidt på en ting og det andet følger med.
Kan man koble automatisk "nodedeling" fra?
Men er det så i orden at landuse-polygoner deler noder med hinanden, for at dække arealet helt og undgå linier?
ErikBreum (2016-03-07 13:36:22+00:00): Og er der en vejledning til god skik og brug?
Hjart (2016-03-07 13:53:10+00:00): Det kan give nogle knap så pæne hvide linier på kortet, men jeg vil mene det er at foretrække over unødige skader på vejnettet. Jeg anbefaler at landuse-polygoner hvor det giver mening deler noder.
I JOSM kan jeg let koble "nodedeling" fra når jeg har brug for det, men jeg kan desværre ikke lige få øje på hvordan i iD (webeditoren). Jeg er ikke sikker på man kan (Jeg har kun brugt iD ganske få gange)
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions er ikke helt dækkende, men kommer tæt på. Der var noget snak på IRC for noget tid siden om at lave noget mere, men det ser ikke ud til være blevet til noget endnu.
Peda (2016-04-24 10:49:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38830605 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets of user Дмитрий-Одесса due to vandalism: duplicated nodes, removal of nodes,... (See http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=588679#p588679 or contact the DWG)
Peda (2016-04-24 10:50:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38830605 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets of user Дмитрий-Одесса due to vandalism: duplicated nodes, removal of nodes,... (See http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=588679#p588679 or contact the DWG)
Thomas8122 (2016-03-08 15:27:38+00:00): Ich hab dein CS mal reverted https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37688385 . Es wäre besser gewesen das genannte CS zu revertieren. So hatte ich einen Haufen seltsamer Konflikte und musste nun deine Änderungen auch rückgängig machen. Gruß Thomas
Gehrke (2016-03-08 15:35:56+00:00): Bei mir blinkt auf, wenn Grenzen beschädigt sind. Das korrigiere ich. Wenn ich mir dann immer noch anschaue, ob noch weitere Dinge kaputt sind und die Changesets analysiere, hat mein Tag 34 Stunden.
Thomas8122 (2016-03-08 16:01:24+00:00): Alles klar. Kann ich nachvollziehen. Ich hoffe ich hab nix gravierendes geändert.
mavl (2017-09-22 16:49:26+00:00): Hello. The copyrighted data are deleted.  
  
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52152481
eggie (2022-03-03 22:46:32+00:00): Ha Ad....

Zou jij eens kunnen kijken naar deze changeset.. Haventje bij Andijk 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118070331#map=14/52.7478/5.2824

en
https://map.openseamap.org/?zoom=16&lat=52.74707&lon=5.26744&layers=BFTFFFTFFTF0TFFFFFFFFF

Moeten dat geen groene stuurboord tonnen zijn.
Een startende mapper veranderde wat maar zette het IJsselmeer geheel leeg. 
Ik heb toen alles teruggedraaid.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-03-04 12:33:49+00:00): Dag Ad..
Inmiddels heb ik het aangepast.

Mvg
Eggie
d3d9 (2016-03-07 14:33:29+00:00): Ups ich meinte natuerlich HST :P
Hjart (2016-03-07 18:31:35+00:00): Det er strengt forbudt at kopiere noget som helst fra Google maps og deres satellitbilleder, så jeg håber ikke det er det du har gjort. Ellers bliver vi nødt at rulle det her tilbage.
przemas75 (2016-03-14 13:00:22+00:00): No tak się nie dzieli zjazdów, to nie są dwie odrębne drogi. Niestety błędnie to robisz.
Dlaczego poprawiasz coś, co istnieje od dawna, a Ty zacząłeś edytować od paru miesięcy. Sądzisz, że do tej pory wszyscy źle robili?
naoliv (2016-03-07 17:31:58+00:00): Kewen, você obteve os nomes das ruas de onde?
Kewen (2016-03-07 17:46:48+00:00): ibge !
naoliv (2016-03-07 17:51:00+00:00): Mas os nomes não batem com o IBGE.
Estão iguais ao Google...
boneco (2016-03-08 12:45:16+00:00): Kewen, não pode copiar brow, colabore com o projeto cara.
Assim enfraquece a amizade saca?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-09-24 20:24:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52338424 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some names copied from Google in Brazil
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-30 03:13:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44771579 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
Jean-Marc Liotier (2016-06-13 15:54:11+00:00): "MAISON" est une description - et non le nom du lieu. Pour un building=yes qui est une maison, tu peux utiliser building=house à la place - il est très répandu: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=house

Et dans tous les cas, la valeur d'un attribut name= ne doit pas être "TOUT EN MAJUSCULES".
Jean-Marc Liotier (2016-06-13 15:52:59+00:00): "maison" (que tu as mis en name= du way 402167851) est une description - et non le nom du lieu. Pour un building=yes qui est une maison, tu peux utiliser building=house à la place - il est très répandu: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=house

Et penses à capitaliser le premier mot d'une valeur d'un attribut name=
Nakaner (2016-04-21 08:25:03+00:00): Warum hast du denn bei den Haltepositionen im EBO-Bereich railway=tram_stop ergänzt? Das sind keine Straßenbahnhaltestellen, sondern Haltepunkte bzw. Bahnhöfe. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1365461632
hsimpson (2016-04-21 08:51:00+00:00): Hi, die Haltestellen im EBO-Bereich unterscheiden sich weder von der Bauart noch von der Ausstattung her von den innerstädtischen Haltestellen. So ist der Lichtraumbereich beispielsweise zu klein für EBO. Und da die einzige Linie, die hier hält, eine route=tram ist, habe ich die Haltestellen ebenfalls damit getaggt.
Nakaner (2016-04-21 12:11:10+00:00): Da es zu deiner Überarbeitung des Kölner Netzes gehört, bitte ich um eine Diskussion im dazu gehörigen Forums-Thread. http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=589536#p589536
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:39+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-03-14 16:21:44+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
Mateusz Konieczny (2016-03-28 09:23:39+00:00): Rue D19 seems to be a victim of "drag node by accident" error

See www.openstreetmap.org/note/534272#map=18/5.35133/-3.97405
Jean-Marc Liotier (2016-06-13 15:50:48+00:00): Bonjour, pense s'il te plaît à corriger l'orthographe et la capitalisation des noms: "maténité de pire" devrait être "Maternité de Pire"
ohligser (2016-03-30 20:22:27+00:00): Hallo Nemax,
der Begriff Gallier-Dorf war mir neu. Ich habe eine Node in der betreffenden Siedlung angelegt gem. der Quelle www.gallier-leverkusen.de . Das ganze Multipolygon war etwas zu reichlich...

Hinweis: Habe den Namen nur als loc_name eingetragen, da es der Bedeutung entspricht. Leider wird der nicht gerendert. Mir passt der Standard hier auch nicht, wollte ihn aber auch nicht übergehen.

VG ohligser

Mein Changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/38180301
user_5359 (2016-03-07 18:00:40+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Can please add more information to your point as your name? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4045940342
neuhausr (2016-03-24 21:30:33+00:00): Hi, US road classification in OSM does not go strictly by what road network it is in, like county or state highway. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
user_5359 (2016-06-26 07:11:44+00:00): Hello! Can you tell me the interpretation of the one element relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6033164 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6033165 ? No one has standard key (without type=multipolygon and this key ist wrong).
jpmartin1977 (2016-06-27 14:31:23+00:00): I deleted both. Sorry for that. Neither one was supposed to be imported.
manings (2016-03-10 09:13:07+00:00): This road should be straight: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402177344/history

You mark this as landuse which a I think should be highway=residential. I've fixed it now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/352816908/history
TourenbikerFKB (2016-03-07 18:46:35+00:00): Hallo Miple,

singletrail ist gaz sicher kein offizileller Name des Weges (Schild etc.). Du bist ja ein alter OSM-Hase und weißt sicher, dass es für die Beschreibung von Wegen offizielle tags gibt.
user_53559 (2016-03-08 12:46:02+00:00): Danke für den freundlichen Hinweis, dieser und die anderen MTB-Pfade in Gilserberg sind jetzt (hoffentlich) etwas offizieller getaggt.
naoliv (2016-03-08 13:50:27+00:00): Elias, por favor, evite realinhar os dados toda vez que há mudanças no Bing.
O Bing também apresenta erros de alinhamento e deslocamentos diferentes a cada nova atualização.
É necessário verificar o real alinhamento do local, através de trilhas de GPS, para ver se os dados atuais estão corretos ou a imagem de satélite.
Em geral é necessário reajustar o alinhamento da imagem de satélite, e não o contrário.
wille (2016-03-08 13:52:41+00:00): Oi, Elias

Tudo bem? Que imagem de satélite do Bing você utilizou para fazer esse realinhamento? Foi a mesma disponível no JOSM por padrão?

Chequei aqui e há uma diferença de mais de 100m entre seu alinhamento novo e a imagem do bing...

Abraços,
wille