piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NorthCrab (2023-01-27 14:58:26+00:00): Pytanie czy do placu zabaw jest jakieś ograniczenie dostępu, jak nie ma to uważam że jeden tag do całości wystarcza. Jak jest to lewa strona jako landuse commercial (podobnie jak w przypadku budynkow administracji publicznej/ uwazam ze swietlica to taki budynek publiczny), prawa jako amenity. Ale tutaj nie widzę oczywistego rozdzielenie na orto więc chyba będzie lepiej tego nie rozdzielać.
abakus_uploader (2022-09-11 22:31:04+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
armitageone (2022-09-12 04:26:09+00:00): Неплохо бы делать более ясные описания правок - для людей же это, а не роботов.
kubahahaha (2022-09-20 22:54:44+00:00): Wycofałem ten zestaw zmian - we wszystkich swoich edycjach usunąłeś kilka ważnych informacji:
access=yes
building=yes
fee=no
operator=Nadleśnictwo Komańcza
reservation=no
tourism=wilderness_hut

Jakie jest źródło informacji że ten obiekt ma "numer 2"?
Nie zmieniaj tego na alpine_hut, w tym miejscu nie ma stałej obsługi, więc poprawny tag to wilderness_hut.
Wojtek Pysz (2022-09-21 04:08:38+00:00): Źródło informacji - pobyt osobisty. Szczegóły: http://forum.bieszczady.info.pl/showthread.php/10565
kubahahaha (2022-09-21 06:41:37+00:00): Dzięki za linka.
Dodam go do source:access=* jeśli nie masz nic przeciwko.
No i Access=no chyba trzeba dodać (o ile nie usunąć całkiem tagu tourism=wilderness_hut jeśli to już zamknięte na stałe.
Wojtek Pysz (2022-09-21 06:50:32+00:00): Tak, to miejsce dla wędrowców jest już stracone. Ja trochę nieporadnie obchodzę się z techniką mapowania, ale miałem dobre chęci:-)
kubahahaha (2022-09-29 20:37:48+00:00): Usunąłem ostatecznie to miejsce. Dzięki za odpowiedź - no i dobrze że zapytałem, bo akurat wybierałem się w tamte okolice i chciałem zahaczyć o chatkę.
Dzięki i pozdrawiam!
Carto'Cité (2022-10-10 14:14:56+00:00): Bonjour Astridt,
Merci pour tes contributions sur les aménagements cyclables. Je me suis permis d'ajouter quelques informations à partir de la BD Ortho. J'ai mis cette piste https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093624623 à sens unique et j'ai modifié l'absence de jonction sur la partie nord-ouest et j'ai déplacé la jonction sur la partie sud -est. J'ai ajouté la bande cyclable de l'autre côté de la rue. N’hésite pas si tu as des questions ou des remarques.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
kukułka (2022-09-11 19:45:26+00:00): This road  have a sidewalk, and it's mapped actually on OpenStreetMaps on right side of this part of road- your tag  is wrong - please fix it
mama we (2022-09-15 09:50:26+00:00): My understanding is a bit different to this point. If a street has a tag 'sidewalk' then there is no additional sidewalk draw. Hence, in this situation the sidewalk is drawn separate and is about 1m (or it was even more) separated from the street. So the correct tag is 'no sidewalk'
kukułka (2022-09-15 13:23:20+00:00): A sidewalk may be separated from the carriageway by only a kerb (or curb), by a road verge or alternatively may be at some distance from the road (but still associated with it). It also may be separated from the road by some form of barrier, for example bushes or a line of trees. A road may have a sidewalk on only one side of the carriageway, or both side or have no sidewalks. - it's from: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalks
mama we (2022-09-16 14:57:51+00:00): I totally agree with this definition. As already mentioned the street tag 'sidewalk' means that the street has a sidewalk and that is not extra drawn in the map! 
In this particular case we have a sidewalk and a street. Hence, that tag of the street should be 'no sidewalk'. Otherwise we have two! That's my understanding. If you have the feeling that this is wrong its up to you to change this. I'm not living Gdansk and so I would not be confused to find two sidewalks on this place. :-)
clay_c (2022-09-17 01:57:52+00:00): Hi Karzdan,

Sunset Station is not currently a train station. Amtrak operations have moved to the neighboring building to the south. The link in the website tag leads to a redirect, indicating that Sunset Station is now an event venue called The Espee: https://www.theespee.com/

Reverted and updated here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126282897

-Clay
mavl (2022-09-14 03:34:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 126158907 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets.  Reason: poog mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125948947].
pio2_122 (2022-09-12 10:13:27+00:00): Wygląda to na mapowanie na ilość, a nie na jakość.

1. Trawnik przy katedrze nie pokrywa się ze stanem faktycznym (widać to na ortofotomapie).
2. Na tej tablicy https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10016537351/history w rzeczywistości jest napis „Szczecińscy kapitanowie żeglugi jachtowej...”, a nie „Szczecińskim kpt. ż. jachtowej...”.
3. Na tej tablicy https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10016537352/history w ogóle nie występuje fraza „60 lat rodła”.
4. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093629726/history - oznaczenie niskiego krawężnika jako muru jest sporym nadużyciem.

Do prawidłowego oznaczenia ww. rzeczy nie potrzeba było wizji lokalnej, w sieci jest mnóstwo materiałów źródłowych.

Poprawiłem to.
impiaaa (2022-09-12 15:12:26+00:00): Please save your changes in one area before moving on to another, to keep the changeset bounding box to a reasonable size.
armitageone (2022-09-12 04:25:39+00:00): Неплохо бы делать более ясные описания правок - для людей же это, а не роботов.
silversurfer83 (2023-12-06 13:10:12+00:00): Moin :)

du hast hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31414467 eine Straße als verkehrsberuhigten Bereich mit maxspeed=30 getaggt. Beides geht aber nicht. Wie ist es denn richtig?

Grüße
silversurfer83
mavl (2022-09-14 03:34:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 126158907 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets.  Reason: poog mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125948947].
SafetyIng (2022-09-12 09:38:50+00:00): Hey, this changeset is very huge (area). I would please you to reduce the size of the areas
iWowik (2022-09-13 06:55:17+00:00): Hi, what application do you use?
 I would please you to write message to its authors to fix this issue.
silversurfer83 (2022-09-14 17:48:27+00:00): These huge area change sets are not because of the application. The user (you) has to save and upload the changes of a region before moving on to the next region.
micha_k (2022-09-11 18:42:32+00:00): I committed the changeset before completing metadata: Metro and railway at Rotterdam Blaak station were seperated at different layers; other small corrections. Surce beside Aerial Imagery: survey.
Glassman (2022-09-13 17:06:37+00:00): unclassified doesn't mean what you think. Because OSM started in England we use their road classifications. Unclassified is basically a rural residential street. They look more like service roads to me. Also access=no prevents any use of the road. It's more likely that access=private would be more accurate, especially if the road is marked with no trespassing signs. Also ownership of the road doesn't make it private.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126061243
GakToid (2022-09-14 02:49:55+00:00): Hey, thank you for the feedback.

Way: 467022225 - This "road" doesn't exist. I'm not sure why it still shows up on maps.

Way: 626283425 - This is a personal driveway barricaded with a gate.

Way: 626283460 - This one, I'm not sure how to classify. I guess shared driveway? It's not a public or private road.

What's the best way to make these changes?
SHARCRASH (2022-10-15 12:29:36+00:00): On this example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/382051979/history it is actually the tag sidewalk on the road introduced in v5 that is stating so. Adding foot=no and leaving the sidewalk doesn't clarify the situation and creates a conflict. The end user still doesn't know which is true. It's contributor GeTewho  added many erroneous sidewalks. I've warned him https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119599284
gscholz (2022-10-02 06:42:41+00:00): Hi simlio,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines and landuse/natural areas like "wood" and "farmland" do not match any longer background images:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-2.63882&lat=47.97890&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=126061482

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
simlio (2022-10-03 18:44:18+00:00): Hi Guido,
Thank you for reporting it to me. I fixed it.
Kind regards.
Lionel
silversurfer83 (2023-04-05 09:08:27+00:00): Moin,

ich bin gerade über diese "Wiese" gestolpert...
Meinst du nicht, dass es etwas übertrieben ist so ein komplexes Multipolygon für landuse=meadow anzulegen? Einzelne Flächen wären meiner Meinung nach wesentlich angebrachter. Diese lassen sich viel schneller mal von Wiese zu Acker ändern und sind auch in der allgemeinen bearbeitbarkeit viel einfacher zu händeln als so ein Monster.

Grüße
silversurfer83
zitta (2023-04-10 06:18:09+00:00): Moin

Ich habe versucht, den aktuellen Zustand in der Karte wiederzugeben. Bei großen zusammenhängenden Flächen erscheint es mir angemessen, ein Multipolygon zu verwenden. Das wird anderswo oft ebenso gehandhabt. 

Die Gesamtfläche in Teilflächen aufzuteilen erscheint mir nicht sinnvoll. Das würde Grenzen zwischen den Flächen implizieren, wo vor Ort keine zu sehen sind. Wenn sich die Nutzung in Zukunft ändert, muss die Karte mit der dann aktuellen Situation aktualisiert werden. Hast du da konkrete Beobachtungen gemacht, die ich übersehen habe?

Grüße, Zitta
silversurfer83 (2023-04-10 07:21:14+00:00): Hi
Beispiel 1: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2745710813
An dieser Stelle zerteilt eine Straße die "Wiese". Die Teile nördlich und südlich haben möglicherweise nichtmal etwas miteinander zu tun.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093645019
Hat mit dem Rest auch nichts zu tun. Warum sollte diese "Insel" Teil einer großen Wiesenrelation sein?

Nur zwei kleine Beispiele, die ich am Handy mal eben herausgesucht habe. Wenn man deiner Argumentation folgt müsste man ja quasi für jeden Landkreis in dem Grasflächen für die Landwirtschaft genutzt werden eine riesen Relation anlegen.

Ich bin jetzt nicht der Meinung, dass diese hier unbedingt und sofort zerlegt werden muss, aber ich wäre großer Freund davon in Zukunft einfach wieder einfache Flächen für Felder und Wiesen zu verwenden.

Schönen Sonntag :)
Silversurfer83
Emilius123 (2023-08-16 18:36:42+00:00): Kontrovers. Siehe bitte:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139872999
TheAlyxGreen (2022-10-28 00:08:09+00:00): You are marking paths incorrectly. By marking paths as cycleways, you are applying the "highway=cycleway" tag and, implicitly, the "bicycles=designated" tag. This combination is intended for paths that have signage posted along the path indicating that the path is intended for bicyclists. No such signage exists on most (if not all) of the paths you're marking as cycleways.

The correct way to mark these thoroughfares is as normal paths using the "highway=path" tag. If you wish to indicate that the path is bicycle friendly, the appropriate way to do so is by adding the "bicycle=yes" tag to the path. It's worth noting, however, that this is the default value and all paths are assumed to be bicycle safe by default.

For more information, see:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle=designated?uselang=en
Robert Kania (2022-10-28 01:26:14+00:00): Ok. I suppose you're right. one of the exceptions, however, is the path on the south side of grand ave. There is a sign that specifically states that it is for bicycles only and that pedestrians are prohibited. This is also supported by the official carbondale bike map https://explorecarbondale.com/DocumentCenter/View/2707/City-of-Carbondale-Bikeway-Map-PDF
TheAlyxGreen (2022-10-28 22:38:19+00:00): That's good to know, and thanks for the link. It wouldn't surprise me if there are a few other examples, too. I can look at that link later and try and update the map. I just knew that most of the paths aren't marked and that the labelling was wrong, so I changed them all back to default paths and we can mark just the correct ones.

I'll try and take a look at it later tonight
zalf (2022-09-12 16:50:00+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thank you for your contributions! However, in future, try to restrict the geographic scope of your edits. Ideally, the edits made in the Vancouver area and those in Ukraine should have been separate commits. This is because combining them will create a globe-spanning change that will create a lot of visual noise for other editors working in areas outside of your changes.
Liam Bradley (2022-09-12 16:59:02+00:00): 👍
zstadler (2022-09-27 19:23:54+00:00): Hello herdelkuz,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093649123
and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093649119
were added in this edit, but they have no tags. Is this a mistake or an incomplete mapping?

Regards,
zstadler
ASchon (2022-09-11 19:43:30+00:00): accidentally put aerial imagery as the source, source is local knowledge
ruugie (2022-09-14 19:01:57+00:00): Warum kam denn https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9633385100/history weg?
eggie (2022-09-11 20:23:05+00:00): Dag Warzel,
Al die tags die je toevoegt zijn al default. 


Assume that this kind of barrier implies motor_vehicle=no. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dcycle_barrier#Access_for_motor_vehicles

Groet
eggie
eggie (2022-09-11 20:26:19+00:00): Voorzover ik weet staat hier geen slingerhek maar een paaltje.
barrier=bollard
moped=yes
mofa=yes
horse=yes
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-09-11 20:36:56+00:00): De cycle_barrier heb ik verwijderd.
Er staat een paaltje. Aangepast aan bovenstaande tagging.
Bron Obliek Slagboom en Peeters
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Tag:barrier%3Dbollard
Groet
eggie
Famlam (2022-09-18 12:25:33+00:00): Hi evl5, wees je ervan bewust dat door het toevoegen van access=no, je brommers en snorfietsers de toegang ontzegt. Anderzijds hoef je fietsers en voetgangers niet te taggen, want die hebben al standaard 'toegang' tot paaltjes.
vng_me (2022-09-12 11:58:59+00:00): This coastline https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/878746566 is broken or waste.
user_2066394 (2022-09-13 11:18:44+00:00): War als Schuh-/Altkleider-Container erfasst, in der Nähe steht da nichts Entsprechendes?
beflow (2022-09-28 15:52:15+00:00): Nein, war extra nochmal dort. Dort ist nichts ausser dem hauseigenen Müll und einer Hecke (Begrünung).
beflow (2022-10-06 10:32:14+00:00): Hallo wurzelast, ich habe heute nochmal geschaut und bemerkt, dass ich an der falschen Ecke (eine weiter nördlich) den Container gesucht habe. Tatsächlich steht an der markierten Position einer etwas versteckt in der Hecke, aber benutzbar da, ich füge ihn wieder in einem separaten Edit dort ein und füge gleich die richtigen Eigenschaften hinzu.
beflow (2022-10-06 10:36:39+00:00): Änderungs-ID, in der er wieder hinzugefügt wurde: 127094794
user_2066394 (2022-10-06 12:37:15+00:00): Einwandfrei
arichnad (2022-11-28 05:03:10+00:00): Hello,

Can we please undo this edit?  Many of the old nodes are in correct locations and their new nodes are in incorrect locations.

Example:  https://i.imgur.com/4ulEftf.png

Thank you,

arichnad
whammo (2022-11-29 01:39:55+00:00): Hi, I'm happy to revert any ways you think are now misplaced. However, given the only ways I see that are now a little off are in this one residential complex, I don't think it makes much sense to revert everything.
arichnad (2022-11-29 22:31:08+00:00): You're right, it's just the one complex.  I'll move it back manually, thanks!
arichnad (2022-11-29 22:35:22+00:00): Hello,

It looks like you already moved it back.

Thanks again!

arichnad
philippec (2022-09-12 10:08:47+00:00): Schriek Spar.  ZO punt.
Gewoonlijk zet ik de voorgevel naar het      GRB als ik een AED plaats.
Daarom heb ik nog even gekeken.
Waarom hebt u het GRB niet gebruikt ?
user_17222985 (2023-08-26 03:48:36+00:00): Il n’existe pas de terme de traduction officielle en français, vous l’avez imaginé. Dans ce projet, le nom sur le terrain est le plus important. kYIV est le nom sur le terrain/
Si vous souhaitez une traduction de Kiev, écrivez une lettre en DWG.
user_17222985 (2023-08-26 03:49:42+00:00): ce qui est écrit dans le wikipédia français n'a pas d'importance. Pour les Français, Wikipédia n’est pas une source d’information faisant autorité pour la prise de décision
user_17222985 (2023-08-26 03:58:10+00:00): ne faites pas de guerres d'édition
Polarbear (2022-10-29 21:06:28+00:00): Hallo P1Madsen,
entscheidend ist, dass die Nummer in der Datenbank ist. 
Was Renderer, z.B. die Standardkarte daraus machen, ist deren Sache. Im konkreten Fall verhindert ("blockiert") das Icon die Anzeige der Hausnummer. 
 
Ich habe as Fixme daher wieder entfernt.
Mazda05 (2022-09-12 20:00:12+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war
Mazda05 (2022-09-12 20:09:50+00:00): https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-14#n725
Константин Гам (2022-10-17 18:37:23+00:00): Пожалуйста не меняйте названия супермаркетов!
Mazda05 (2022-09-12 19:59:15+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war
Mazda05 (2022-09-12 20:09:32+00:00): https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-14#n725
woodpeck (2022-09-13 09:04:44+00:00): Both of you, Carto_Graph and Mazda05, please be more careful with using the word "vandalism". The word is appropriate when someone deliberately damages OSM, not when two mappers have different opinions on how the current situation on the ground should be mapped. Accusing one another of "vandalism" in such situations is disrespectful.
Mazda05 (2022-09-13 11:52:58+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism
Mazda05 (2022-09-13 11:58:23+00:00): Mapping by Carto_Graph doesn't match the consensus norms of the OpenStreetMap community: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian–Ukrainian_war
Mashin (2022-09-11 22:03:42+00:00): Looks good, thanks!

One tip for you, you can press Q to force all angles  to 90˚. Buildings then look nicer.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-10-21 17:38:18+00:00): Zerkniesz na https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3408149 ?
edc22 (2022-11-01 22:57:32+00:00): Rozwiązałem.
keithonearth (2022-09-12 05:20:05+00:00): I failed to update the source tag, and this is not based on Esri imagery, but based on my survey of the addresses.
aceman444 (2022-12-26 18:50:38+00:00): Hi, how can you see the extent of the Nitrianska dieceza on aerial imagery??? Please provide real source of your data. Also the name seems wrong in Slovak language, so please provide your source.
SekeRob (2022-09-12 22:02:29+00:00): Can't have alt_name, short_name, full_name, loc_name tags without name= you just removed. Whatever the sign says today, It's still Via Mahatma Ghandi in full. Kindly restore or move this to full__name and short to name and while there add the name:etymology:wikipedia=it:Mahatma Gandhi tag, for those interested in reading up and the origins.
damianeue (2022-09-13 07:43:07+00:00): Ok, I'll put it back when I can
felipeeugenio (2022-09-14 17:08:16+00:00): Hola
Puedes cuadrar las estructuras usando la letra Q. Estás dejándolas chuecas.
saludos
rodrigovb (2022-09-14 17:18:07+00:00): Corregido

Saludos
phidauex (2022-10-03 19:11:45+00:00): Hi, I see you dropped a part of Shields and Harmony to secondary, can you explain a bit more about why? For Shields, I might agree, but we are left with an odd stub of "primary" to the north, which doesn't seem right. For Harmony, I do think of it as one of the larger primary roads in Fort Collins.
adrianojbr (2022-09-28 13:48:15+00:00): Olá, 0liveiraTiag0! Essa ponte ficou sem ligação com as demais vias. Você poderia completar o caminho para chegar até ela?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126066893
0liveiraTiag0 (2022-09-28 23:00:52+00:00): Com certeza vou estar publicando as vias próximas
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126066893
ZLima12 (2022-09-25 22:57:54+00:00): Hi,

Unfortunately, I've had to revert this changeset. Highway classifications in New York now follow the ACC codes provided by NYSDOT. The code for this road would make it highway=trunk.

highway=trunk (in this region, at least) no longer is used to denote that a road is limited-access, or higher performance in any way. highway=motorway and highway=trunk together form a network of the most important roads, suitable for long distance travel. highway=motorway on top of that implies that it is a controlled-access road.

If you wish to convey that a road is an "expressway" (high performance, but still some intersections, stop lights, etc.), please use the expressway=yes tag.

Sorry again that I had to revert this, but the new classification system has many benefits, and the state is more unified than it has been before.

Thanks for your understanding,

-John
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126066951
ZLima12 (2022-09-25 22:59:17+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126631410 for the changeset in which this was reverted.
IlBano (2022-09-12 15:44:01+00:00): Ciao StefanoBachi.

Qual'è la fonte dei nomi che stai dando ai vari fossi e canali in questo e altri changeset della zona ?

E' importante che la licenza di questi dati  sia compatibile con OSM.

Grazie
IlBano
StefanoBachi (2022-09-12 18:36:40+00:00): Ciao, ho lavorato per molti anni in un Consorzio di Bonifica e Irrigazione, mi occupavo della parte GIS. I nomi dei corsi d'acqua derivano dall'elenco fornito dal Consorzio. I nomi e i tracciati sono stati forniti a suo tempo sia a Regione Piemonte che a Regione Lombardia. Non credo esistano licenze. StefanoBachi
StefanoBachi (2022-09-14 18:13:01+00:00): Ciao, seguirò sicuramente i tuoi consigli, purtroppo se ho commesso degli errori è perché è la prima volta che mi accingo in un'impresa del genere. Come in tutte le cose devo imparare anche queste regole, comunque si può dire che per me è la seconda volta che faccio questo lavoro in quanto il file shape dal quale attingo i dati l'ho creato io :)
ZLima12 (2022-09-25 22:58:41+00:00): Unfortunately I've had to revert this; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126066951
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126067087
skyper (2022-12-14 23:22:57+00:00): Hallo michttch,
sind das alles Ampel für den Straßenverkehr und Übergänge (`highway=traffic_signal` + `crossing=traffic_signals`) oder sind an manchen Stellen die Ampeln vorgelagert und die Übergänge nur `highway=crossing` + `crossing=traffic_signals`?
Insbesondere https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2701958368
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10017013561
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10017013560
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1301154613 halte ich für merkwürdig.

Fragende Grüße,
skyper
michttch (2022-12-28 14:37:17+00:00): Hallo skyper,
vielen Dank für den Hinweis und die Prüfung. Du liegst absolut korrekt und ich habe die Punkte im CS https://www.osm.org/changeset/130605081 korrigiert.