piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-11-09 07:52:04+00:00): @GoethesGarten: Da Du in einem anderen Änderungssatz erwähnst, dass Reitende den und Geh- und Radweg benutzen müssen: Das ist nicht richtig. Reitende (und geführte Pferde) müssen grundsätzlich die Straße benutzen. Auf Geh- und/oder Radwegen mit Zeichen 237, 239, 240, 241 ist die Benutzung verboten.
SomeoneElse (2021-03-19 10:19:36+00:00): The name for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/913901104 looks suspiciously like a made-up name.  Can you provide a source for it?
4004 (2021-03-08 00:41:43+00:00): начал искать, на чем основана ваша правка, и понял что краеведение в Лепеле живо. спасибо за правку
aceman444 (2021-04-25 21:42:27+00:00): Why are there 2 viewpoints at this spot?
hauke-stieler (2021-03-05 23:29:09+00:00): Moin,

ein Ort an dem SchülerInnen ihre Taschen abstellen gehört nicht in OpenStreetMap. Bitte nur relevante und ernst gemeinte Dinge eintragen!

Grüße
Hauke
eggie (2021-03-05 18:04:35+00:00): Dag P.. Tip .. Wanneer paden elkaar kruisen maak dan altijd een verbinding. De cirkel met de kruisende lijnen.

name=gebruiken we voor officiële straatnamen. Dat zal hier niet het geval zijn. Je kunt wel description gebruiken.
De siertuin kun je toevoegen als vlak met leisure=garden

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-03-05 18:21:12+00:00): Aan de noordzijde van dat siertuinpad heb je het pad weer teruggetekend.. Dus je potlood niet van het papier gehaald. Het ligt nu dus dubbel. je ziet dat niet direct, maar dat zou eigenlijk verbeterd kunnen worden.
eggie (2021-03-05 18:22:53+00:00): Korrom.. alles ligt dubbel zie ik nu.
Gr eggie
eggie (2021-03-05 20:35:27+00:00): Maar even iets aangepast, want het geeft een foutmelding in OSM.
Dubbele paden verwijderd.. naam op vlak gezet
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-03-05 20:43:59+00:00): Mijn edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=100513656
eggie (2021-03-06 10:56:12+00:00): na PB contact..  Zou geen witruimtes maken.. Zie als voorbeeld Het Loo.
Wan neerje heggen en paden intekent en de tuinvlakken als leisure=gardenerop legt krijg je al effect. 
Maar up to you! :)
Suucces,
eggie
eggie (2021-03-06 10:57:18+00:00): Het Loo https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.23458/5.94616
user_5359 (2021-03-05 18:22:38+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Bitte beachte dass bei OSM die Beschreibung von Objekten die höchste Priorität hat. Objekte, die nur aus einem Namen bestehen, haben wenig Sinn. Als deutsche Einstiegsseite für die Frage „Wie beschreibe ich was?“ empfehle ich https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a (Vorsicht: Viele Information damit lange Ladezeiten)
Bitte sieht Dir auch https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station an
Mouath Ibrahim (2021-03-05 16:30:32+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia/Admin_Boundaries_of_Regions_and_Governorates_Import
Mouath Ibrahim (2021-03-05 16:42:20+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia/Admin_Boundaries_of_Regions_and_Governorates_Import
eggie (2021-03-05 17:53:17+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 
namens de OSM Community
whb (2021-03-08 13:18:56+00:00): Guten Tag,

existiert der nordwestliche Gebäudeteil wirklich nicht mehr?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/101222952
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=100504291
Laut den aktuellen Bayern-Luftbildern vom 27.07.2020 wurde dieser erst neu gebaut.
Soweit mir bekannt stehen uns keine neueren Luftbilder zur Verfügung oder besitzt du aktuelle Ortskenntnisse?

Viele Grüße
whb
Mouath Ibrahim (2021-03-05 16:47:00+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia/Admin_Boundaries_of_Regions_and_Governorates_Import
eggie (2021-03-05 18:15:30+00:00): Dag Torenkraai.. Wanneer je meer wil weten hoe bomen te mappen zou je evt. contact kunnen opnemen met medemapper Infodisiac
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Infodisiac
Hij is bezig met een project in Leiden. 
Zie ook park Groenesteeg.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-03-05 18:16:29+00:00): typo...  Begraafplaats Groenesteeg
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 09:51:43+00:00): Ciao Valentino, grazie per la tua modifica.
Credo che sia più corretto segnalare la strada come unclassified e non residential poichè non è situata in una zona residenziale
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100504623
cytryn (2022-06-22 15:39:11+00:00): Czy landuse nie powinien być oznaczony industrial=mine zamiast quarry?
marco406 (2022-06-22 19:38:48+00:00): Masz rację. Powinno być: 
landuse=industrial
industrial=mine

quarry jest raczej związane z górnictwem odkrywkowym, kamieniołomem. Możesz zmienić lub ja jutro zmienię wszystkie place szybowe KGHM
Polarbear-repair (2021-05-28 15:45:00+00:00): "Privat, kein Durchgang" ist kein Name, und hat auf das Verhalten von Routern keinerlei Einfluss.
Waldläufer2021 (2021-06-08 17:17:05+00:00): Hallo Polarbear- Repair,

welchen Vorschlag haben Sie, wenn deklariert werden soll, dass das Grundstück „privat“ ist ?

Seiten wie Komoot lenken mit Hinweis auf open street maps permanent Wanderer auf unser Grundstück.

Wir bitten Sie, das zu beendigen.

Gruss,

Waldläufer21
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 09:57:34+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. I'm checking your changes and there is an error in the mapping of the greenhouses. You map them as landuse=farmland but this tag is associate with opensky field the greenhouses should be mapped as building=greenhouses https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dgreenhouse
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100504833
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:08:46+00:00): Hi, the mapping is good. However, remind to square the building :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100504908
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:10:31+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is good, however, remind to square the buildings also if in the images they do not appears so squared
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100504956
Laura Corti (2021-03-06 10:39:06+00:00): Hi, thank you for your comment. I'll bear in mind for next mapping sessions
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100504956
eggie (2021-03-05 17:56:22+00:00): Dag Terherne.. Graag wel commentaar bij de upload zodat andere mappers kunnen weten wat is toegevoegd.
MVG
eggie
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:20:39+00:00): Ciao grazie per le tue modifiche. Ho visto che hai cancellato il nome inglese della autostrada credo sia stato un errore, provvedo a reinserilo
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505227
Luca_Ferrari (2021-03-06 10:26:37+00:00): Chiedo scusa, l'ho fatto per sbaglio. Grazie per la correzione!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505227
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:27:21+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping, remind to square buildings
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505258
eggie (2021-03-08 07:34:02+00:00): Dag P.. Nog even gekeken.
Die slotgracht heb ik even losgemaakt van het gebouw. Je kunt ook gewoon de slotgracht aanpassen. Dan gaat de historie niet verloren.
Als achtergrond kun je de BGT omtrekgericht gebruiken die klopt precies. 
Ook bestaat er een hoogtefoto de AHN3 Dan zie je precies hoe het water loopt.
Bij opslaan kun je in josm het vakje aanvinken " Automatische bron uit huidige lagen halen"
Even rustig kijken dan zie je dat lege hokje.
Dan zien we ook welke achtergronden je gebruikt. Nu wrdt geen bron weergegeven. 
Lees eens dit draadje over de achtergronden.
BGT implementeren  

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=59021 

Forumdraadje ..  De beste imagery layers om NL OSM te mappen met JOSM. 

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64644 

Hier kun je zien hoe je de .jos file kunt gebruiken binnen JOSM.  
https://youtu.be/33EenoZezWg 

Wanneer je zaken eerst leegmaakt omdat echt alles veranderd is maak dan je edits eerst af voordat je upload.
Ook kun je in josm je werk eerst opslaan en pas later uploaden, maar dat geeft weer problemen als een andere mapper er tussen komt. Je upload lukt dan niet meer.
Maar gewoon beginnen lijkt me het beste.  :) 

Gr eggie
eggie (2021-03-08 07:35:58+00:00): Het hele gebied is import van achterhaalde 3dShapes.. aarzel niet dat allemaal te veranderen.
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:40:00+00:00): Ciao, grazie per le modifiche. La mappatura è corretta ma ricordati di squadrare gli edifici
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505491
Polarbear-repair (2021-05-28 15:37:07+00:00): Hallo Waldläufer2021, 
willkommen bei OpenStreetMap. 
Du hast hier, unter der Überschrift "privat", mehrere Bäume, einen Springbrunnen und einen Wendepunkt komplett gelöscht. Diese sind im Luftbild aber klar erkennbar. 
Weiterhin hast du auf einer Zufahrt, die bereits mit access=private gekennzeichnet war, weitere Verkehrsarten ausgeschlossen, obwohl in dem angefahrenen Gebiet Fahrzeuge erkennbar sind. 
Bitte erläutere, wie die Verhältnisse nun wirklich sind. 
Auf dem Gelände befindet sich das Orthodoxe Dreifaltigkeitskloster Buchhagen. Sollte dir bekannt sein, wie der Zugang dort geregelt ist, dann teile uns das mit und wir finden die passende Tagging-Lösung. 
Die willkürlichen Löschungen betrachten wir als Vandalismus, das wurde repariert. (cs 105500947)
Waldläufer2021 (2021-06-08 17:17:31+00:00): Hallo Polarbear-repair,

die Änderung erfolgte im Auftrag des Klosters.

-	Der Zugangsweg ist privat und führt über das Grundstück des Klosters.
-	Kein Durchgang heisst, es ist verboten über das Grundstücke hinaus den Weg zu betreten (nur der Weg zum Kloster selbst ist für angemeldete Gäste möglich), keine Besichtigung, orthodoxe Kleiderordnung, keine Haustiere !
-	Es handelt sich um keine Strasse, sondern um einen sehr steilen, unebenen und steinigen Weg
-	Es gibt keinen Springbrunnen, es handelt sich um ein Weihwasserbecken. Das ist ein sakraler Gegenstand und keinesfalls ein Gegenstand öffentlicher Besichtigung !
-	Die Fahrzeuge gelangen auf einer anderen Route zum Kloster.

Ihre „Reparatur“ ohne die Vorort- Kenntnis betrachten wir als „Vandalismus“. Stellen Sie die richtigen Verhältnisse dar und unterlassen Sie falsche Anschuldigungen.

Das miserable Datenmaterial von Open Street Maps sorgt regelmässig für Irritationen und Probleme rund um das Kloster.

Gruss,

Waldläufer21
Lokai (2021-06-08 20:27:25+00:00): Guten Abend.

Das „miserable“ Katenmaterial kann man verbessern und Irrtümer ausräumen. Sie haben vermutlich sehr gute Ortskenntnisse, die lassen sich prima zur Transformation von „miserabler“ zu exzellenter Qualität einsetzen.

Gruß 

W.
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:46:40+00:00): Hi, thanks for your changes. The mapping of streets is not requested and it is important to connect the road to the existing network. Also it is important to use the right tag, in this case living street is not correct is better to use highway=track
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505509
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:48:58+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505540
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:49:25+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505596
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:49:55+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505653
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:55:04+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. I checked that you used some wrong tags for buildings and roads. If you need help you can ask during the meeting :)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505654
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 10:59:06+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505658
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:00:25+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505659
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:07:29+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505728
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:08:07+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505734
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:10:16+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505755
faustopt (2021-03-26 14:29:26+00:00): Nome Incorreto/Utilização abusiva de marca Registada - A utilização da marca "Kónica" para identificar Centros de Cópias/Fotografia é incorreta. "Konica" é uma marca registada (Hoje Konica-Minolta) e a sua identificação em estabelecimentos que nada tem a ver com a referida marca não só é errado como induz em erro para quem procura serviços de venda/manutenção da referida marca. A utilização de nomes informais está bem documentada na wiki e deve ser consultada em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Key:name 
Neste caso específico deve ser incluida a Etiqueta Nome Local (loc_name=) pois essa designação representa um regionalismo ou nome local pelo qual estes estabelecimentos são conhecidos em Angola, tal como no Brasil são conhecidos por “Xerox”.
A Edição será alterada para:
name=Centro de Cópias/Fotografia
loc_name=Kónica
faustopt (2021-03-26 14:30:20+00:00): Se é iniciante no OSM Antes de editar consulte as Boas Práticas em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Boas_pr%C3%A1ticas
Vedrfolnir (2021-03-27 04:03:47+00:00): Hey Hans. Do you have a source showing this parcel was removed from the park? As far as I can tell this parcel is still part of Chugach State Park. See Township 14 North, Range 2 West, Section 13 listed under state statue here: http://www.akleg.gov/basis/statutes.asp#41.21.121

And parcel information here: http://gis.muni.org/ParcelRedirect/?parcel_num=050-871-01-000-01
Hans Thompson (2021-03-27 04:23:55+00:00): I'm on mobile only now but I'll take a look before tomorrow noon.
Hans Thompson (2021-03-27 14:40:29+00:00): First, let me state that I'm not skilled enough to say what I'm going to say with confidence so if you feel otherwise I will not stop you if you revert the change I made. 

However, I'm not convinced that this parcel is or should be mapped as Chugach State Park for two reasons. 

One, the legal description of the parcel is T14N R2W SEC 13 or

Township 14 North Range 2 West Section 13, as I read it.

The designation in the statute link I see is Township 14 North Range 1 West Section 13, as I read it.

So the Range is different. I don't know enough to say if that means it's different or not, only to say they are different on paper. 

Secondly, the area there is commonly recognized as the Lions Club park so it would be confusing to the general user to see a discontinuous Chugach State Park. This is also not a rock solid thought but to me it makes sense to label it as it is done physically.  

These are my thoughts and not hard arguments so please feel free to respond or make the change you can back up that you think is correct. 

Cheers!
Vedrfolnir (2021-03-27 16:48:57+00:00): I think you were looking at 41.21.121.(10), T14N R2W is 41.21.121.(5)

But I also agree its a weird "exclave". I'll shoot an email to my contact at DNR who has answered questions like this in the past. I'm also not sure where to find the authoritative source for this.
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:16:13+00:00): Ciao, ho visto che hai cambiato il tag associato alla strada, residential è utilizzato nelle zone prettamente circondate da case, track poteva andare meglio forse unclassified è la migliore. Il fatto che la maggior parte delle strade nella zona è residential credo sia frutto di un errore precedente
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505784
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:16:47+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505810
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:17:26+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505810
pio2_122 (2021-03-05 18:53:41+00:00): Drobna uwaga dot. tagu waterway=drain
Za wiki: „waterway=drain - stosowany do oznaczania położenia rowu wodnego, zwykle wyłożonego betonem lub elementami utwardzonymi, używanego do odpływu wody burzowej.” (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:waterway=drain?uselang=pl)
Wydaje mi się, że w większości te rowy nie są wybetonowane, więc prawidłowym tagiem byłby  waterway=ditch.
pio2_122 (2021-03-05 18:59:53+00:00): Przy okazji odradzam korzystać z podkładu w postaci zdjęć Bing, ponieważ z reguły są bardzo nieaktualne. Zdjęcia najlepszej jakości i aktualności to „Geoportal 2: Orthophotomap (aerial image)”
kzmrzzg (2021-03-05 19:09:08+00:00): Dzięki wielkie! Odnośnie różnicy między ditch a drain - jeśli wczytasz się w ich definicje w wiki.os - wprowadzają one zamieszanie tą okładziną betonową (w warunkach rzeczywistych, szczególnie polskich, mało który rów byłby melioracyjny...)
pio2_122 (2021-03-05 19:40:45+00:00): Faktycznie, zauważyłem, że zapisy na polskiej wersji wiki są mocno niespójne, a wręcz czasami wykluczają siebie nawzajem. Zamieszanie powodują również opisy obiektów w edytorze (powód podam poniżej).
Spojrzałem więc na angielską wersję bazową tych artykułów.
Znalazłem tam taki zapis: „Use waterway=ditch for simple narrow artificial waterways, mapped as way, used to drain nearby land, to remove storm-water or similar. Ditches are usually straight (as opposed to natural streams). Unlike a drain, they are not lined with concrete or other hard materials. They are often found along roads or on the edges of agricultural fields.” (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dditch)
Wynika z tego, że wiki sugeruje użycie waterway=ditch dla wszystkich rodzajów "nieutwardzonych” rowów, także tych melioracyjnych, a drain dla tych utwardzonych. Przynajmniej ja tak to rozumiem :)
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:23:53+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505829
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-07 09:23:34+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505838
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:26:17+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505839
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:27:42+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505876
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:27:43+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505876
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:36:21+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505925
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:36:30+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505930
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:38:01+00:00): Also, it is not needed to add something in the name field. It is information that we couldn't know from remote and for sure "Edificio" is not the name of the building
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505930
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 11:49:33+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100505943
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-07 09:24:42+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506050
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 20:13:39+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506478
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 20:12:26+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506509
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-07 09:28:27+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506557
tars4815 (2021-03-06 20:47:58+00:00): Great job! Everything is well-detailed and mapped :)
- Federica x PoliMappers
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506571
Snusmumriken (2021-03-06 07:11:17+00:00): Hej

Jag undrar vad du grundar dina förändringar av vägtypen på? Senast jag besökte området så var det ganska tydligt att hw=service var den mest korrekta. För att ta ett exempel så Färgarplan är/var en parkeringsplats. Har det förändrats?
HansWesterback (2021-03-06 21:13:55+00:00): Hmm, kan ha tänkt fel. Gör en revert och kollar upp
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-06 20:09:24+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506785
LorenzoStucchi (2021-03-07 09:35:17+00:00): Hi, thanks for your mapping. It is correct but reminds to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506787
tars4815 (2021-03-06 21:09:20+00:00): Great work! This is a great example of accurate and well-detailed mapping. Thanks for your contribution to this project! :D
- Federica x PoliMappers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100506788