piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
geri-oc (2020-09-16 09:30:23+00:00): https://www.keepright.at/report_map.php?lang=it&ch30=1&ch40=1&ch50=1&ch70=1&ch90=1&ch100=1&ch110=1&ch120=1&ch130=1&ch150=1&ch160=1&ch180=1&ch191=1&ch192=1&ch193=1&ch194=1&ch195=1&ch196=1&ch197=1&ch198=1&ch201=1&ch202=1&ch203=1&ch204=1&ch205=1&ch206=1&ch207=1&ch208=1&ch210=1&ch220=1&ch231=1&ch232=1&ch270=1&ch281=1&ch282=1&ch283=1&ch284=1&ch285=1&ch291=1&ch292=1&ch293=1&ch294=1&ch295=1&ch296=1&ch297=1&ch298=1&ch311=1&ch312=1&ch313=1&ch320=1&ch350=1&ch370=1&ch380=1&ch401=1&ch402=1&ch411=1&ch20=1&ch60=1&ch300=1&number_of_tristate_checkboxes=8&highlight_error_id=111297269&highlight_schema=101&lat=43.6187&lon=11.4505&zoom=16&layers=B0T&ch=0%2C30%2C40%2C50%2C70%2C90%2C100%2C110%2C120%2C130%2C150%2C160%2C180%2C191%2C192%2C193%2C194%2C195%2C196%2C197%2C198%2C201%2C202%2C203%2C204%2C205%2C206%2C207%2C208%2C210%2C220%2C231%2C232%2C270%2C281%2C282%2C283%2C284%2C285%2C291%2C292%2C293%2C294%2C295%2C296%2C297%2C298%2C311%2C312%2C313%2C320%2C350%2C370%2C380%2C401%2C402%2C411&show_ign=1&show_tmpign=1

Grettings Gerd
Britzz (2020-04-17 21:16:13+00:00): Bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap.
Vous avez "souhaité que quelqu'un vérifie vos modifications" : c'est ok

Pour bien démarrer : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_France/bienvenue
N'hésitez pas à poser des questions à la suite de ce commentaires ou rejoindre les autres canaux de discussion (cf. lien supra).
Bonne poursuite, prenez plaisir à contribuer à OSM !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83703507
zstadler (2020-06-21 08:03:18+00:00): Hi,

In this edit you have added an osmc:symbol" tag to a way. It does not have an itc relation, and its kkl relation does not have an osmc:symbol tag.

Did you intend to put this tag on the kkl relation?
zstadler (2020-08-27 05:14:20+00:00): I removed the osmc:symbol tag from the way
TagaSanPedroAko (2020-04-17 23:36:50+00:00): Considering the unknown status of the route=share_taxi tag, and lack of renderer support for it, I think the route=bus+share_taxi=yes tagging for PUJs should remain, and that's also what we're using for modern PUJ routes.
DP24PH (2020-04-18 02:00:00+00:00): Hopefully, the render for route=share_taxi tag will be supported for the OSM Main Transport Map in the future. Right now, OsmAnd is currently supporting the render with the violet color.
TagaSanPedroAko (2020-04-18 03:26:23+00:00): I see, but I still prefer tagging "traditional" jeepney routes with route=bus plus the optional share taxi tag. 

I think we can keep the route=bus tag for modern PUJ routes, and prefix the "traditional" services with J (and express routes with JE).
DP24PH (2020-04-18 03:54:35+00:00): I'll consider those suggestions in the further edits for all traditional "J" to prevent further confusion with the "L" for modern PUJ/light bus format.
TagaSanPedroAko (2020-04-18 07:21:09+00:00): Fine to me, since the new jeepneys are somewhat close to a minibus. So, some possible PUV route tagging conventions (not yet final) are:

- Bus: route=bus. ref tag with prefix dependent on service type, P(provincial)/C(city)/P2P(P2P/express bus)-[abbreviation of route name], otherwise use posted ones or simple form of route name if route name is not in the usual format). Can add departure time (in 24-hour/military clock format) for once-daily services.
- Modern PUJ: route=bus, share_taxi=yes, ref tag with L prefix (LE if express, such as those using the expressways), otherwise use posted reference or simple form of name (if route name is not in the usual format, such as on loop routes).
- Traditional PUJ: route=share_taxi, ref tag with J prefix (JE if express, such as those using the expressways), otherwise use posted reference or simple form of name (if route name is not in the usual format, such as on loop routes).
- UV Express: route=share_taxi, ref tag with UV prefix.
- Multicab/Filcab services: no standardized scheme yet (I'm seeing some of such routes tagged as express routes, with E prefix on ref tag, ex. CATRASCO PITX-GenTri via Centennial Road, and Baclaran/PITX-MOA).
- Route names normally follow those painted on the sides of the vehicle, and is formatted as "Point A-Point B" (can add "via points C" if marked). Operator name (can be abbreviated) and/or vehicle/service type (optional or necessary, especially to avoid confusion) is placed before the route name, separated by colon. If operator name (company, co-op or driver's association) is not known or route is run by too many operators, just use the service type for name prefix. If there is a signed reference, use service type/network name and reference (ex. Jeepney 09-M, Green Frog Route 001) as name prefix.

Stay home, stay safe, and happy mapping. Ingat!
Stereo (2020-05-04 18:19:11+00:00): Really nice level of detail. Happy mapping!
Mbabani Allan (2020-04-21 08:51:40+00:00): Tag issue resolved
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705005
!bm (2020-04-17 13:50:07+00:00): Grundsätzliche Diskussion/Kommentare zu Änderungen s.: https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/83652529 sowie https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/81784512
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705126
!bm (2020-04-18 22:23:35+00:00): revert in Cs 83757114
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705126
!bm (2020-04-17 13:50:12+00:00): Grundsätzliche Diskussion/Kommentare zu Änderungen s.: https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/83652529 sowie https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/81784512
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705521
!bm (2020-04-18 22:23:44+00:00): revert in Cs 83757114
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705521
user_5359 (2020-06-04 03:52:03+00:00): Hello! Please use in OSM for the keys explicitly British English. What ist the meaning of the tags
Цвет=зеленый
цвет=зеленый
?
Sowa1980 (2020-05-20 18:00:50+00:00): Привет, сделайте свои правки пожалуйста, более компактными, что бы другие участники могли их просмотреть, доступными средствами, для контроля правок в OSM, по чему они накрывают весь земной шар?  Надеюсь в преть Ваши правки будут менее глобальными. Спасибо за понимание.
GerdP (2020-05-02 05:26:10+00:00): Hi! Please review. I see lots of ways tagged with building="yes," instead of building="yes"
All have the tag mapwithai:source=MapWithAI
!bm (2020-04-17 13:51:19+00:00): Grundsätzliche Diskussion/Kommentare zu Änderungen s.: https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/83652529 sowie https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/81784512
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705925
!bm (2020-04-18 22:24:02+00:00): revert in Cs 83757114
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705925
Mbabani Allan (2020-04-21 10:07:27+00:00): Double mapping. please review and revert
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83705935
!bm (2020-04-17 13:50:32+00:00): Grundsätzliche Diskussion/Kommentare zu Änderungen s.: https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/83652529 sowie https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/81784512
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83706296
!bm (2020-04-18 22:24:12+00:00): revert in Cs 83757114
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83706296
maraf24 (2020-04-18 17:02:07+00:00): Ledwo widoczna górka.
maraf24 (2020-04-18 17:01:27+00:00): Tu nic nie ma.
maraf24 (2020-04-18 17:01:14+00:00): Tu też nic nie ma.
maraf24 (2020-04-18 17:01:00+00:00): Tu nic nie ma.
Baloo Uriza (2020-04-17 16:52:35+00:00): I've gone through and updated the tracing a bit to better reflect what's on the ground in changeset 792906022.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83706854
mvviveka (2020-04-20 05:49:59+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for correcting the road. I shall be watchful about matching my edits with the ground hereafter.  

Regards,
mvviveka.
user_11166885 (2020-05-14 12:08:08+00:00): Non credo che si chiami Piazzetta Borgolauro, ma Via Borgolauro
Sowa1980 (2020-05-20 18:00:20+00:00): Привет, сделайте свои правки пожалуйста, более компактными, что бы другие участники могли их просмотреть, доступными средствами, для контроля правок в OSM, по чему они накрывают весь земной шар?  Надеюсь в преть Ваши правки будут менее глобальными. Спасибо за понимание.
BCNorwich (2020-04-18 08:41:27+00:00): Hi, 
Could you please show that this is actually a formal shared use cycleway rather that a footpath? I can find no reference to it being a cycleway.

Secondly, whatever it's designation/use there are problems with the mapping. At the north end there is a self-intersection of the way. Then for most of it's length it criss crosses over Ifield Avenue, sometimes joining onto it sometimes not. At the south end near a mini roundabout you've made a self-intersection  to Ifield Avenue. The footpath is actually set back from the road in places substantially.
 
Looking at the Crawley Council cycleway map the official cycleway route from the south ends near this mini roundabout.

So whether the cycleway is official or not there are several problems that need addressing.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2020-04-27 18:51:32+00:00): OK no response so I've tagged as footpath, removed the fictional name and joined all cross over points.
AMWS (2020-04-28 08:05:19+00:00): Hello Bernard, sorry I'm still a bit of a novice user (as you can probably tell). This is a new shared cycleway footway opened last month. I've therefore changed the footpath on the northern side to shared cycle track.
BCNorwich (2020-04-28 08:15:18+00:00): Hello AMWS,
My apologies, (some folk do just change things for their own purposes and one can't tell genuine changes).  I did wait awhile before making amendments. 
Can I just add when you draw a new path please join it to all other highways it crosses over, thus completing the network.

Regards Bernard.
Britzz (2020-04-17 21:14:43+00:00): Bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap.
Vous avez "souhaité que quelqu'un vérifie vos modifications" : c'est ok

Pour bien démarrer : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_France/bienvenue
N'hésitez pas à poser des questions à la suite de ce commentaires ou rejoindre les autres canaux de discussion (cf. lien supra).
Bonne poursuite, prenez plaisir à contribuer à OSM !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83707750
!bm (2020-04-17 13:50:39+00:00): Grundsätzliche Diskussion/Kommentare zu Änderungen s.: https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/83652529 sowie https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/81784512
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83708379
!bm (2020-04-18 22:24:19+00:00): revert in Cs 83757114
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83708379
eggie (2020-04-17 14:11:28+00:00): Dag Lisanne... 
Je vraagt om een review.. 
Wanneer het een olifantenpaadje betreft kun je de tag path=desire toevoegen.

MVG,
Eggie
lisannekraal (2020-04-17 17:37:13+00:00): Hoi Eggie, bedankt voor je input. Goede toevoeging. Ik heb uiteindelijk voor 'informal' gekozen in plaats van 'desire'. Dat leek me toch iets passender. Zie https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:path%3Ddesire
Britzz (2020-04-17 21:13:44+00:00): Bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap.
Vous avez "souhaité que quelqu'un vérifie vos modifications" : c'est ok

Pour bien démarrer : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_France/bienvenue
N'hésitez pas à poser des questions à la suite de ce commentaires ou rejoindre les autres canaux de discussion (cf. lien supra).
Bonne poursuite, prenez plaisir à contribuer à OSM !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83709556
lmagreault (2020-04-18 20:28:53+00:00): Merci pour les commerces. Sur les adresses, l'usage majoritaire sur Lons (et en France en général) veut qu'on utilise des points plutôt que taguer les immeubles. J'ai remis les adresses aux entrées (approximatives) des immeubles.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83710038
tbarthelet (2020-04-18 21:00:26+00:00): Bonsoir Laurent,
L'idéal c'est un noeud sur l'entrée du bâtiment, mais c'est plus rapide pour moi de taguer le bâtiment.
J'ai bien compris qu'il n'y a pas vraiment de consensus à ce sujet (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Adresses).
Mais quel est le problème avec les adresses sur le bâtiment ? Le rendu ?

Thomas.
tbarthelet (2020-04-24 10:01:51+00:00): Bonjour Laurent,
Comment peut-on trancher ce débat au moins localement ?
J'ai également eu un échange à ce sujet avec pyrog.
Est-ce une discussion à avoir sur talk-fr ?
Une discussion audio avec quelques mappers locaux ?
addr:* et building=* sont mes 2 plus gros tags sur OSM et Lons est clairement mon principal lieu de contribution.
Du coup j'ai besoin d'un consensus pour avancer car j'ai déjà couvert 25% des adresses de la ville sur les 2 dernières années.
Thomas.
InfosReseaux (2020-06-25 21:58:13+00:00): Bonsoir Eric,

Merci d'avoir complété la carto dans ce coin.
Il est possible de compléter les lignes et les poteaux par operator=Geredis.
Ils ont fait un peu d'opendata
https://www.geredis.fr/Cartographie-et-reseaux

Si la tension n'est pas indiquée avec voltage=(souvent 20000), les lignes n'apparaissent qu'à un zoom élevé ici : https://openinframap.org/#12.55/46.55709/-0.25561

J'essaie de donner un coup de main mais difficile d'être partout
Merci par avance, bonne soirée
François
eggie (2020-04-17 14:37:38+00:00): Dag mmdlvw,
Ahh JOSM... !
Wanneer je transparant van de BGT omtrekgericht als achtergrond zou toevoegenaan josm  dan kun je precies zien hoe die steiger loopt.
Die is ingemeten door de landmeetkundige dienst.
BGT implementeren 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=59021
Volgens mij moet er op het vlak man_made=pier nog area=yes bij anders zie je op sommige kaarten gewoon de polygoon lopen zonder dat die is ingevuld. 
Gr eggie
mmdlvw (2020-04-17 14:41:36+00:00): Dag Eggie. Dank voor de info. Ik ga me er in verdiepen en dan mee aan de slag.
Gr. Meeuwis
laurent-38 (2020-04-22 13:43:52+00:00): Bonjour Nathandco,

Je vois que tu as supprimé 2 parkings : le parking à l’arrière du casino, et le parking privé en terrasse (son entrée est situé sur la droite de l’entrée du parking Casino, et est fermé par un portail basculant), ainsi que plusieurs voies d’accès. Or, à ma connaissance, ces parkings existent réellement. Est-ce une erreur, ou est-ce délibéré ?

Par ailleurs, tu as rajouté des voies de parking. S’agit-il du parking souterrain ? Dans ce cas, il convient de rajouter "level=-1" sur ces voies.
À noter qu’il est possible d’accéder à ce parking à parking de l’avenue Steeve Biko en empruntant la voie de service https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/522192743 que tu as effacé.

Voici un lien permettant de visualiser les modifications : https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=83710488

Cordialement
~~
laurent
laurent-38 (2020-04-28 09:07:22+00:00): Bonjour,
J’ai restauré les éléments supprimés :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84249994

et j’ai essayé de modéliser le parking souterrain : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84251380

Cordialement
~~
laurent-38
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-04-17 14:09:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 83711627 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some political edits in the south China Sea.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3637
user_5359 (2020-04-17 15:05:01+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have revert your SEO SPAM because your business is not the street. If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data. Please try again to mark the main place of your business (and not the street) to add your business information.
mueschel (2020-04-18 09:51:03+00:00): Hi,
I found hundreds of ways you added in this region, but all of them don't have any tags. Could you check this again and add the appropriate highway = track/path/unclassified tags?
UNGSC_Alessia13 (2020-04-18 22:26:20+00:00): Hi,
Yes I know, thanks. But don't worry, I'll add the tags for all ways that I uploaded. 😊
Mbabani Allan (2020-04-21 11:46:07+00:00): Updated the tags. Please be kin on them before upload next time
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83711554
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-04-17 14:09:50+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 83711038, 83711256.
Warin61 (2020-04-22 11:48:01+00:00): Hi,
Multipolygon relation outer members cannot share segments. So the 'Bolck A is generating errors. 

What I would do is simply have one outer way on the outside and one inner way.
DavidLiu5059 (2020-04-27 15:00:46+00:00): Thanks for reaching out, I already corrected as you suggested. I appreciate your advice!
Hjart (2020-04-17 21:13:45+00:00): Bemærk at shelters (som vi i DK forstår dem) tagges "lean-to"
Hjart (2020-04-17 21:15:35+00:00): Se også https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Lean-tos_in_Denmark
mikini (2020-04-18 22:03:20+00:00): Anvender også "lean_to" (med underscore) som udgangspunkt på shelters, men her synede konstruktionen mere af en egentlig hytte (https://images.jfmedier.dk/images/e/ed/ed3/ed3b7328-323c-4168-8fcb-db28afe5bbb6_0_90_0_0_3543_2365_1440_961_f1e48709.jpg) derfor brugte jeg "basic_hut".
Ved nærmere studie af både hytte og "shelter_type"-dokumentationen (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shelter_type) er "lean_to" dog også mest korrekt her, da disse stadig har én åben væg, og dermed ikke er en hytte.

Fin Commons-kategori, har vist nogle billeder  jeg kan smide derpå også ;).
DiahW IRM-ED (2023-01-12 05:51:30+00:00): Hi, nitinatsangsit.

Thank you for mapping contribution! Currently, I'm doing remote mapping to validate the existing rail network. I need your help, especially with this railway (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/792946560)

I saw in the changeset history, you added tag "layer=-1" to this railway. Do you actually realize the railway is underneath the road segment? I'm not sure if this rail has a different layer or not, so I need to confirm. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions or have good local knowledge of the area.

I really appreciate any information and advice you provide. Thank you

Regards,
Diah
Nithinat S (2023-01-12 07:23:37+00:00): It is split from way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/783601324/ , so the tag is created automatically.
I agree that the layer=-1 should be removed in this case, thank you.
DiahW IRM-ED (2023-01-12 09:19:12+00:00): Okay nitinatsangsit, thanks for your response. It was very helpful, thank you
IgnoredAmbience (2020-06-04 13:59:04+00:00): Renaming the entirety of relief lines along the Great Western Main Line to "Elizabeth Line" is not correct, the infrastructure name has not changed, and mixed services both Elizabeth Line, GWR local services and freight services still use them.
DaveF (2020-06-04 16:55:47+00:00): OK; what should it be called? 
What are "relief lines"
Doesn't the Great Western Main Line also carry freight & other services? 
How should that be renamed?
IgnoredAmbience (2020-06-04 17:26:03+00:00): The route as a whole is Great Western Main Line. The two pairs of lines are known in turn as the Main Lines and Relief Lines (instead of the usual Fast and Slow). Indeed, the Great Western Main Line also carries freight and other services, but it was named after the original company that built the line, and not the present company that operates some of the trains over it.
HansWürstchen (2020-05-24 16:13:53+00:00): Hallo techtimo,
hatte es einen bestimmten Grund, das Du das Kästehaus als"abandoned:building" mit sämtlichen Details gelöscht hast und als Gebäude neu eingetragen hast, obwohl vor Ort nur ein abgedeckter Keller ohne Gebäude ist?
MfG!
BCNorwich (2020-04-17 18:01:22+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
Your cafe is situated in the middle of a grass area. Your changeset comment mentions a test. I think what you've actually done is inadvertently add fiction to our live worldwide database, thus I'll remove the cafe POI. If I'm wrong I apologise and will put it back.

If you need help mapping genuine features please just ask.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2020-04-17 18:03:07+00:00): Remove in my Changeset: 83720578
bxl-forever (2020-11-26 10:19:00+00:00): Hello,
Just of curiosity, a question about Norway’s embassy.
country=NO
You changed it into NO;SJ
(Is it for Svalbard and Jan Mayen?)
A quick check showed that Norwegian embassies in neighbouring countries only use NO for the country.  I don’t see why some territories should be mentioned specifically.

Same for Finland (you added AX, for Åland).

Perhaps I am missing something.
Thanks in advance.
DressyPear4 (2020-04-17 18:14:39+00:00): Olá, não é correto adicionar árvores dessa maneira, ao invés disso crie um polígono e defina como natural=wood.
Corrigi suas edições.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83714814
Hightide10 (2020-04-17 15:31:04+00:00): Maxar Premium Imagery (-3.76, -4.51); Strava
!bm (2020-04-18 21:57:59+00:00): fixed/revert in Cs 83756750
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83714863
camelCaseNick (2020-04-23 22:11:24+00:00): Hey,
your wikidata tag for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/542912359 is wrong. Should it have been Q90905424?
CamelCaseNick
Jay May (2020-04-24 06:02:04+00:00): Hi Nick!
Let me check
Jay May (2020-04-24 06:04:04+00:00): Yes, you are right. Thanks a lot for contacting me regarding that! Sometimes I have to write the Wikidata number manually, and which gives more room for mistakes!
mapman44 (2020-04-17 19:29:34+00:00): Thanks for your contributions. Is it a driveway fo that building? Could it have been tagged as a service road or a driveway instead of deleting it?
TriguyTim (2020-04-20 13:20:25+00:00): its a paved area behind a shopping plaza. i suppose it could have been reclassified, but with the rest of the parking area not mapped it didnt seem to make sense keeping it. and it definitely didnt need the fictitious name someone assigned it.
Britzz (2020-04-17 21:12:51+00:00): Pareil manquait opening_hours:covid19.
Plus d'infos : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:opening_hours:covid19
Ou, plus simple, utilisez : https://www.caresteouvert.fr
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83715419
Britzz (2020-04-17 21:03:59+00:00): Bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap.
Pour bien démarrer : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_France/bienvenue
N'hésitez pas à poser des questions à la suite de ce commentaires ou rejoindre les autres canaux de discussion (cf. lien supra).

Par ailleurs, vous avez "souhaité que quelqu'un vérifie vos modifications" : c'est fait, c'est bien.

Bonne poursuite, prenez plaisir à contribuer à OSM !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83715506
Britzz (2020-04-17 21:07:23+00:00): En fait, non.
Il manquait : opening_hours:covid19 = open, j'ai ajouté
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83715506
aharvey (2020-04-19 07:00:25+00:00): I've made a few changes, see https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=-cAmRjhSGlVIYsIbZxyAlg&lat=-33.750527777777776&lng=151.23233055555556&z=17&x=0.9297334205115395&y=0.5080898438599728&zoom=0 the building doesn't extend out like you've mapped it, it's just a roof and not part of the building, so I've removed that. Same of the covered footway on the north. Also I've marked the inside part of the building as building:part=yes.