piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Allison P (2021-02-17 02:02:11+00:00): I hadn't heard of damn before! It's really cool. It would be perfect for adding all the new houses that have sprung up and conflating addresses.
trigpoint (2021-03-07 15:13:09+00:00): Hi, this edit has added names to objects that are not named. The names of long distance routes belong on the relation and not on the individual way. The individual ways can very well have their own name or quite probably no name.

Cheers Phil
Tomas Straupis (2021-02-17 06:23:17+00:00): Čia yra įvažiavimas į kiemą (highway=service). Jis neturi pavadinimo.
BCNorwich (2021-02-16 20:05:14+00:00): Bridge added to a path that you joined to a stream.

Duplications have started again, I just removed part of the footpath Way: 8121427 which you placed on top of an existing highway. Please stop doing this
*Martin* (2021-04-13 13:55:40+00:00): Prosím opravte name na https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8429653617
Goffredo (2021-02-16 20:08:44+00:00): Ciao Daniele, benvenuto in OSM!
Scusa la franchezza, ma sei sicuro delle geometrie degli edifici e dei sentieri che hai inserito nei tuoi ultimi changeset? Da quanto mi ricordo l'ultima volta che sono stato da queste parti non mi ricordo di un sentiero che taglia giù per il dirupo, e la chiesa aveva un portico che ora è stato cancellato...
user_2066394 (2021-02-16 19:59:35+00:00): Ist das eine Skulptur?
OPerivar (2022-12-06 22:28:29+00:00): In Plumbohm gibt es keine Straßennamen, damit darf kein addr:street verwendet werden, wenn schon ein addr:place vorhanden ist.
TomPar (2021-02-18 02:18:12+00:00): Hello.  Per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions and general practice I observe locally the "name" key should not duplicate tagging captured elsewhere e.g. "access=private".  Unless the trail's name is "private", which I doubt, I think it best to leave "name" blank if it doesn't have one.  Thanks.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99400707
N Rasmussen (2021-02-18 03:02:45+00:00): There are many maps that derive from OSM that do not carry the access tag for trails.  Some owners will only allow their trails to be included if they are marked plainly private.  The alternative is deletion.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99400707
TomPar (2021-02-18 14:53:41+00:00): I sympathize.  These third-party apps, with their divergent rendering conventions, are a big issue.  I reached out on an OSM message board and it seems "access=no" is a more commonly respected tag to indicate "private".  I heretofore never used the seemingly redundant access=no but will likely start now.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99400707
Jakka (2021-02-17 09:08:35+00:00): Il ne faut pas enlever des sentier chemin. Si il existe vraiment.
En ajouter le barrier gate et sur les sentier access private.
geo++ (2021-02-17 10:35:54+00:00): Bonjour Jakka,

Le sentier n'a pas d'utilité vu qu'il y a une clôture qui a été installé récemment et qui empêche de passer. Je vais essayer de placer la clôture sur le plan. Merci pour votre aide.
Jakka (2021-02-17 10:43:35+00:00): "Le sentier n'a pas d'utilité même pour service secours il utilise nos data dans leur applications"?
Il faut pas mettre clôture mais petit morceau chemin et dessus barrier gate/fence
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dgate
geo++ (2021-02-17 11:04:38+00:00): Le sentier n'apparaît plus dans mon éditeur car je l'avais supprimé, donc je n'arrive pas à mettre une barrière dessus. Comment faire pour que le sentier réapparaisse dans mon éditeur (sur la carte en ligne il est bien toujours là car la publication de la suppression du sentier n'a pas été acceptée) ? Merci pour votre aide.
Jakka (2021-02-17 11:08:19+00:00): J'ai remis votre sentier.
Peut-etre fermer editor en re ouvrir pour voir.
NM$L (2021-02-26 19:45:47+00:00): 😅😅😅
74523978 (2021-02-20 12:46:06+00:00): Makkelijk hé. Uit wanrespect en treiterzucht geniepig zaken krom en scheef trekken en dan omschrijven als "detaillering"
Josbert Lonnee (2021-02-21 00:32:20+00:00): Ok, dat het uit "wanrespect en treiterzucht geniepig" gedaan is zijn jouw woorden, maar waar ligt er nu iets "krom en scheef"?
john4891 (2021-02-16 19:16:04+00:00): The description is wrong. This is just the town's square, there isn't a clinic
karson_ (2021-02-16 20:08:34+00:00): It looks like you accidentally dragged a node at the intersection of 1st Avenue and 1st Street and attached it to the IC admin boundary. I went ahead and corrected the positioning of the node. I would recommend disabling map features you don't plan on editing, like boundaries. You can do this in iD by going to the Map Data tab and then enabling/disabling what you need in the Map Features section.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99401215
mueschel (2021-02-21 12:17:11+00:00): Hi,
welcome to OSM!

could you explain the meaning of "étage = r+4"? This tag is not used in any other place, did you mean building:levels?

And, these seem to be buildings, so they should have a 'building' tag, but not a 'landuse' (which is for larger areas like city blocks)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-02-24 03:43:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 99862876 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of complaints, reverting some Facebook tagfiddling.  See https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/99736842 et al.
PT-53 (2022-09-05 06:42:48+00:00): Hallo bigbug21,
für diesen Gleisabschnitt
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/907843416/history
wird im OSM-Inspector ein Hinweis "Hidden non-operational tagging" angezeigt:
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=tagging&lon=7.83570&lat=48.01156&zoom=18&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.34&overlays=nonop_confusion_on_nodes%2Cnonop_confusion_on_ways%2Cways_without_tags

Grund ist die falsche Merkmal-Kombination
- railway=rail
- construction=yes

Gem. Wiki  sollte dafür 
- railway=construction
- construction=rail
verwendet werden:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:construction?uselang=de

Schaust Du Dir das nochmal an?
Grüße
PT-53 (2022-10-14 06:46:17+00:00): Hallo bigbug21,
für diesen Gleisabschnitt
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/907843416/history
wird im OSM-Inspector ein Hinweis "Hidden non-operational tagging" angezeigt:
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=tagging&lon=7.83570&lat=48.01156&zoom=18&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.34&overlays=nonop_confusion_on_nodes%2Cnonop_confusion_on_ways%2Cways_without_tags

Grund ist die falsche Merkmal-Kombination
- railway=rail
- construction=yes

Gem. Wiki sollte dafür
- railway=construction
- construction=rail
verwendet werden:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:construction?uselang=de

Schaust Du Dir das nochmal an?
Grüße
bigbug21 (2022-10-16 21:06:22+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis. Ist erledigt.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-02-24 03:42:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 99862876 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of complaints, reverting some Facebook tagfiddling.  See https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/99736842 et al.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-02-24 03:43:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 99862876 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of complaints, reverting some Facebook tagfiddling.  See https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/99736842 et al.
Geofreund1 (2021-04-09 07:22:50+00:00): Hallo cacher01sv
Auf welcher Kenntnis basiert, das du die Rheinstraße auf Rheinsträßle umgetauft hast? Lt. Maps4BW ist das nicht korrekt.
Bitte um Aufklärung
Gruß
Geofreund1
gileri (2021-02-16 20:49:42+00:00): Hi, what is the purpose of this change please ?
amuppidi (2021-02-16 19:44:39+00:00): also fixed placement of proposed section of Dulles West Blvd at Stone Springs Blvd. added residential area for  Lenah Mill Community. other minor fixes.
Imaginashun (2021-02-16 20:02:50+00:00): Comment should be "Road adjustments in the Jardim Alpino area", and source should be from "Bing Aerial Imagery"
rowcherryrow (2021-02-17 19:07:46+00:00): I updated the road network alignment near Muntinlupa #adt ; Source Esri World Imagery
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99403142
mariotomo (2021-03-06 16:15:12+00:00): hola, gracias por mejorar el mapa.  una sugerencia sobre las "amenity" dentro de edificios.  cuando el edificio se identifica con la amenity, como en este caso la iglesia, o el centro comunitario, puedes mover la información anteriormente presente en el nuevo edificio que has añadido.
mariotomo (2021-04-18 14:24:42+00:00): sigues mapeando? volví a encontrar esta edición en relación a un horario de misas, que habías indicado en Castellano, en vez de según la gramática correspondiente, lo voy a mejorar, pero si sigues mapeando ten en cuenta la página wiki siguiente.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours/specification
user_10241830 (2021-02-19 23:06:51+00:00): Hallo,

der Parkplatz des Friedhofs Wolfgang gehört nicht zum Industriepark, der ist öffentlich und dort darf auch jeder parken. Ich habe deshalb diese Änderung zurückgesetzt.
user_12356191 (2021-02-20 10:46:16+00:00): gut aufgepasst, danke!
limes11 (2021-02-16 20:27:24+00:00): Hi und willkommen zu OSM, 

bitte nicht den highway Key vollstaendig loeschen sondern abandoned:highway=path setzen. Wenn eines Tages gar nichts mehr erkennbar ist, kann man auch den Weg komplett entfernen.

VG, Limes
sgr (2021-02-18 15:28:26+00:00): Hallo BoilerUp218 und willkommen bei OSM!

Ich kenne diesen Weg und er ist nicht mit einem "Nur Fußgänger" beschildert; im Gegenteil wird er von den Schrebergarten-Nutzern befahren und darauf geparkt.

Die Definition highway=footway wie auf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=footway?uselang=de beschrieben (u.a.: Autos verboten + entsprechend beschildert) trifft also nicht zu.

Die ursprüngliche Kennzeichnung mit highway=service als Zufahrtsweg entsprach m.E. schon der Wirklichkeit; s. auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dservice

Ich schau gerne bei einem Spaziergang demnächst nochmal dort vorbei und achte auf die Beschilderung (ich kenne v.a. nicht das nördliche Ende) - für den Moment würde ich vorschlagen, das wieder auf highway=service zu setzen?

Viele Grüße,
sgr
sgr (2021-02-23 16:47:48+00:00): Hallo nochmal,

ich bin die Straße heute mit dem Fahrrad abgefahren: meiner Meinung nach klar highway=service, aber wohl mit motor_vehicle=private (die Schilder sind aber nicht ganz klar).

Changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25325970

Fotos von heute: https://abload.de/img/auerbachstrasse7uju7.jpg

Beste Grüße!
sgr
Vinber-Pro (2021-02-17 17:18:10+00:00): C'est parti JOSM :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99404379
Bobos-Seven (2021-02-18 15:03:51+00:00): Très facile pour la création de chemins ;-)
Reste maintenant à créer les relations
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99404379
wireguy (2021-02-16 23:04:48+00:00): hi Talianw18, welcome to OSM!
Generic things don't need to have a name tag, like 'barn'.   Can you make the corrections?   If you have any q's, just ask  Keep on mapping!
wireguy (2021-02-16 23:10:26+00:00): The driveway shouldn't have a name either.   It should be highway=service    service=driveway
Dino Michelini (2021-02-17 14:28:21+00:00): Ciao, ho visto che stai inserendo il tag name in molti sentieri, ma i nomi dati sembrano di fantasia mentre altri sono i nomi di località ad es. Monte Cavo - Madonnella. Poiché in OSN il name ad una highway si inserisce solo se effettivamente esiste ed è universalmente approvato/conosciuto ad es. Via Roma, ti chiedo di rimuovere i name che non rispondono a tale convenzione. La ragione è molto semplice: se tutto di sentissimo liberi di dare nomi simili sarebbe il caos! Grazie
PS. Ti prego di fare riferimento nella mappatura alle seguenti pagine della wiki: mappatura hiking https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hiking, mappatura strade https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway, mappatura sentieri https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath e mappatura MTB https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mountain_biking
ALu68 (2021-02-17 17:14:43+00:00): Hello boototter,

Please check syntax !(heigth) https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/13Mm
"height" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height

Regards. Andre
boototter (2021-02-17 17:23:32+00:00): thanks Andre, 
got a warning (not an error) on height for fences, gates and hedges.
Since that is an important (privacy) issue on these spots, I thought I'd better leave and see what happens. 
You made that clear, I'll erase those keys ASAP.
boototter (2021-02-17 21:07:21+00:00): done #99475467
SomeoneElse (2021-02-16 20:52:51+00:00): Hello,
In this change you deleted the admin level 4 region https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3807617/history .
Can you explain what you are trying to do?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2021-02-16 20:53:24+00:00): Merhaba,
Bu değişiklikte, yönetici düzeyi 4 bölgesini https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3807617/history sildiniz.
Ne yapmaya çalıştığını açıklayabilir misin?
Saygılarımla,
Andy
vorpalblade (2021-02-24 01:52:36+00:00): As an FYI, these solar panels no longer exist (I was surprised when I saw that, but what can you do?). 

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

JOSM also has access to the 2019 and 2020 aerial photos with the names starting as "Mesa County GIS".

Thank you for your contributions,
vorpalblade
confusedbuffalo (2021-02-16 21:55:13+00:00): Hi, you requested a review of this and it all looks good to me.
CoyKoi (2021-02-16 22:14:28+00:00): Hi Spyname, I see a review was requested. I think that what you've done with the multipolygon is better achieved by wrapping the station up in an area tagged amenity=fire_station. This is the approach described in the wiki pages for amenity=fire_station and building=fire_station

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dfire_station

I've gone ahead and made this change, with changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99407497
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-02-16 21:07:53+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 98774369, 98774635, 98774733, 98774846, 98774891, 98775049, 98814463, 98815719, 98816113, 98816446, 98816551, 98816807, 98817152, 98817600, 98817643, 99038958, 99039297, 99039422, 99039505, 99039794, 99040041, 99040219, 99040293, 99040479, 99040582, 99040667, 99040861, 99040968, 99041163, 99041238, 99041259, 99041354, 99041435, 99041462, 99041505, 99041977, 99042045, 99042080, 99042157, 99042312, 99042431, 99046196, 99046286, 99046320, 99046372, 99046445, 99046564, 99046804, 99047012, 99047079, 99047164, 99047184, 99047244, 99047454, 99047710, 99047732, 99047772, 99047814, 99047836, 99047934, 99047966, 99047994, 99048062, 99048177, 99048224, 99048264, 99048308, 99048365, 99048432, 99048503, 99048528, 99048555, 99048600, 99048659, 99048690, 99048730, 99048776, 99048801, 99048840, 99048878, 99048987, 99049010, 99049038, 99049052, 99049111, 99049163, 99049203, 99049233, 99049259, 99049312, 99049350, 99049400, 99049430, 99049533, 99049565, 99049598, 99049625, 99049645, 99049689, 99049740, 99049784, 99049844, 99049884, 99049950, 99049963, 99049975, 99050008, 99050028, 99050053, 99050068, 99050083, 99050095, 99050107, 99050178, 99050225, 99050252, 99050283, 99050303, 99050332, 99050343, 99050386, 99050523, 99050621, 99050819, 99050854, 99050887, 99050912, 99050948, 99050964, 99050986, 99051007, 99051041, 99051074, 99118215, 99118311, 99118385, 99118418, 99118678, 99118759, 99119131, 99119804, 99119847, 99119932, 99119956, 99120329, 99120510, 99120602, 99120685, 99120824, 99121295, 99121439, 99121818, 99124071, 99124221, 99124293, 99124315, 99124436, 99124476, 99124505, 99124696, 99124778, 99124833, 99124884, 99124977, 99125033, 99125115, 99125257, 99125353, 99125548, 99125630, 99125856, 99126017, 99126358, 99126877, 99127019, 99127064, 99127171, 99127230, 99127278, 99127330, 99127365, 99127406, 99127467, 99127642, 99127726, 99127836, 99127916, 99127960, 99127980, 99128058, 99128124, 99128164, 99128341, 99128395, 99128449, 99128499, 99128580, 99128648, 99253377, 99253566, 99253595, 99253685, 99253772, 99260692, 99260823, 99260851, 99260881, 99260930, 99260958, 99260970, 99260987, 99261015, 99262044, 99262131, 99262202, 99262299, 99262338, 99262397, 99262444, 99262503, 99262620, 99262660, 99262682, 99262718, 99262739, 99262782, 99262814, 99262907, 99262997, 99263063, 99263111, 99263189, 99263206, 99263278, 99263304, 99263341, 99263468, 99263589, 99401398, 99401511, 99401533, 99401551, 99401569, 99401582, 99401616, 99401678, 99401719, 99401764, 99401785, 99401826, 99401857, 99401955, 99401977, 99402020, 99402114, 99402179, 99402256, 99402272, 99402293, 99402336, 99402370, 99402392, 99402453, 99402505, 99402544, 99402582, 99402645, 99402666, 99402688, 99402755, 99402807, 99402858, 99402925, 99403045, 99403127, 99403570, 99403751, 99404259, 99404298, 99404338, 99404467, 99404663, 99404705, 99404742, 99404828, 99404889, 99404945, 99404991, 99405031.
AndersAndersson (2021-02-18 20:28:00+00:00): Det är fortfarande en väg även om man inte kan åka bil där. Taggarna var rätt så jag återställer.
Magnus S 2015 (2021-02-18 20:38:57+00:00): I wikin för highway=unclassified står det "The tag highway=unclassified is used for minor public roads" Det här är inte en public road, det är en bussgata. Problemet är att i alla kartor jag har sett ritas bussgatan som en vanlig väg, dvs alla som använder kartan tror att man kan åka bil där. Hittar ingen bra tagg för bussgator, har du något förslag?
AndersAndersson (2021-02-18 20:57:03+00:00): Ok, då kanske highway=service passar bättre.
För en väg är det oavsett om det finns olika typer av restriktioner på den.
AndersAndersson (2021-02-18 20:58:30+00:00): Jag har ändrat till highway=service nu.
AndersAndersson (2021-02-18 20:30:37+00:00): Det är fortfarande en väg även om man inte får åka bil där. Jag återställer.
Reza_koulivand (2021-02-17 07:11:30+00:00): سلام، لطفن دلیل حذف فضای سبز وسط میدان رو میفرمایید؟؟
seif63 (2021-02-17 08:04:14+00:00): سلام 
ناخواسته بوده دلیل خاصی نداره.چون تغییرات زیادی توی اسامی خیابان و کوچه ها داده شده اشتباها این اتفاق افتاده
Reza_koulivand (2021-02-17 11:01:45+00:00): ممنون از پاسخگویتون،خسته نباشید
ralley (2021-07-06 23:26:52+00:00): Please don't put descriptions like "only by boat" in the name tag, there is a dedicated description tag for this
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99405963
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-03 08:35:25+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/76337446/history has shop = matériaux_de_construction that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
shop=matériaux_de_construction ? Is it https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=doityourself or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=trade + https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:trade%3Dbuilding_supplies ? If not, how it differs?
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:34:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725333 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:43:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725542 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:34:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725333 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:43:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725542 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:34:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725333 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:42:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725542 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:34:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725333 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:43:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725542 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:34:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725333 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
IranReverts (2021-11-13 10:42:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113725542 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed building import
UKChris (2021-02-27 23:35:53+00:00): Hi CjMalone,

I would have thought that "Hungry Horse" would be the brand data for this pub / Inn, as Wacky Warehouse is a play area within the pub itself?
CjMalone (2021-02-28 08:08:21+00:00): Yeah, you're probably right, and Wacky Warehouse should be a separate POI or a child tag of the pub.
InsertUser (2021-02-17 15:07:35+00:00): Connectivity looks OK to me.
mweper (2021-02-17 11:21:57+00:00): Mati, cuando pones los edificios o las vías como layer=-1 les das a entender al mapa y a los demás editores que esos elementos se encuentran bajo tierra, cuando muchas veces eso no es cierto.
Por favor, revisa bien esa etiqueta en las ediciones que hiciste, ya que genera confusión.

* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer
* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:level
mueschel (2025-01-02 13:45:39+00:00): Hi,
it seems you are the only user of "vertical_sign=no" and "vertical_signs=no" tags. Can these two be replaced by
traffic_sign = no
?
voschix (2025-01-04 15:37:42+00:00): Thank you for reminding me of this possibility. I am discussing the issue of how to tag the missing vertical crossing signs in the forum.
JriSv250 (2021-02-16 23:31:20+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap. It seems to be that you added ways out of nowhere, such as big triangles tagged as swimming pools and a segment of motorway. Also, not everything needs a name. Please do not make test edits on OpenStreetMap. Your changeset may be reverted.
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-02-17 12:48:31+00:00): @brimck

Is https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8430150807 actually existing or is it also test edit like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/907886582 motorway?
joost schouppe (2021-11-02 11:15:04+00:00): Dit pad is verdwenen. Recent gepasseerd, en niets meer zichtbaar. Buurtbewoner gaf aan dit pad eerder ook al geprobeerd te hebben, maar niets gevonden te hebben dat indiceert dat het bestaat. Jij lijkt het nochtans wel al meermaals te hebben kunnen gebruiken?
OsmAnd_Pieter (2021-11-02 13:01:11+00:00): Dit is geen officieel pad, wel een dat langs de bosrand/veldrand gaat. Maar dus nooit een officieel pad geweest op oude kaarten. Maar niet alle omgeploegde paden van oude kaarten zijn ook door de gemeente geschrapt.   Een andere lijn is op de kaart als notitie gezet dat aantoont dat er wel degelijk een doorsteek was vroeger meer zuidelijk. De Huysseweg. Of de gemeente deze heeft afgeschaft weet ik niet. Dit kan een wandelaar van de gemeente bevragen. Dat boeren niet rouwig zijn over het verdwijnen van deze paden is gekend.  Er zou centaal overheidsregister moeten opgesteld worden van toegevoegde en geschrapte banen dat iedereen simpelweg kan bekijken.
OsmAnd_Pieter (2021-11-02 13:05:57+00:00): Liekerkepad is een toevoeging bvb en dus een alternatief voor Huysseweg. Geen echt probleem dus voor mensen die de buurt kennen.