piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mariotomo (2023-01-08 08:25:31+00:00): here you deleted (in this burst of deletion/merging) the original "1st Street", making it more difficult to follow history, looking up the place where the name came from.
maybe you should consider review all your road-merging actions and revert them.
Amegaz (2020-12-29 16:42:28+00:00): Hi GSPfriend,
Ich bezweifele mal, dass hier auf dem Parkplatz reine Fußwege ausgeschildert sind. Nur wenn ein Schild da ist, dann wird ein Weg entsprechend gekennzeichnet.
Überprüfe Deine Angaben bitte nochmal.
Viele Grüße 
Amegaz
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92426626
Sowa1980 (2020-10-16 10:14:46+00:00): С чего такие изменения вдруг и почему удалены отношения? Это пакет будет откачен за вандализм.
Sowa1980 (2020-10-16 10:18:41+00:00): Поясни свои коментарии к пакету правок, что значит отношения старого стиля? С чего вдруг они устарели, ссылку дай но это.
Sowa1980 (2020-10-16 10:20:00+00:00): Жду ответа твоего и пояснений пока занес в пакеты на откат.
NunoCaldiera (2020-10-19 10:03:47+00:00): В зависимости от типа здания нет необходимости в нескольких отношениях, и я работаю над добавлением уровней, поэтому в любом случае он не подвергнется вандализму.
Если вы хотите, чтобы он откатился. То сделайте
 я разрабатываю аэропорт целиком, и это влияет на использование в прямом эфире
NunoCaldiera (2020-10-19 10:08:49+00:00): Я уважаю каждое редактирование в моей области, но окончательный способ использования должен быть за нами. Я новичок в OSM, но знаю несколько концепций. если вы настолько точны в osm, тогда постарайтесь помочь редакторам не защищать ваши правки
ftrebien (2020-12-31 15:46:30+00:00): Use "área de negócios" (landuse=commercial) só nas áreas onde essa é a atividade predominante. As áreas que você marcou assim são áreas mistas predominantemente residenciais. Para elas, use "área residencial" (landuse=residential). Idealmente, copie de alguma lei municipal (plano diretor, lei de uso do solo, lei de zoneamento, etc.) para que a informação esteja a mais correta possível. Não mapeie áreas de uso do solo (landuse) tão grandes: divida em pequenas áreas, idealmente ao longo das principais avenidas, para que o mapa fique mais fácil de manter por outros colegas. Não precisa dividir para cada quadra, podem ser áreas um pouco maiores. Em algumas cidades, certas zonas comerciais não ocupam quadras completas, nesse caso faz sentido a área não acompanhar as avenidas principais. E não grude áreas em vias, porque isso também dificulta a manutenção do mapa. O contorno dessas áreas deve acompanhar o limite entre os lotes e a área das calçadas (calçadas ficam fora do polígono, lotes ficam dentro).
Vitória223 (2021-01-13 20:09:35+00:00): Muito obrigada pelos comentários!
Para o trabalho que estou realizando, precisaria da área urbana com polígonos maiores devido a escala de representação (1:25000/1:50000) neste caso, haveria alguma outra forma? Verifiquei que há uma etiqueta Place=city, mas não encontrei nenhuma área que utilizasse, seria possível cobrir áreas maiores utilizando esta etiqueta?
ftrebien (2021-01-14 01:49:45+00:00): Existem discussões de longa data sobre esse assunto, mas nenhum consenso entre os mapeadores da comunidade brasileira. O que eu lhe disse antes é a prática mais comum. O limite da mancha urbana geralmente não é mapeado por dificuldades de verificabilidade (cada mapeador acha que a mancha começa ou termina um pouco mais pra lá ou um pouco mais pra cá, levando a guerras de edição). Talvez seria possível mapear o perímetro urbano definido em lei usando boundary=urban, mas não é uma prática comum. Você precisa da geometria da área urbana ou apenas do desenho dela? Se você mapear como eu descrevi antes, o mapa do site vai mostrar a área urbana numa cor diferenciada, quase do mesmo jeito que seria com um polígono grande.
Vitória223 (2021-01-14 19:44:34+00:00): No caso, eu preciso da geometria da área em polígonos, mas sem a riqueza de detalhes fornecida pelo Open Street Map, somente o polígono do contorno já era suficiente. Hoje eu utilizo os outros recursos do Open Street Map, mas como recebi muitos comentários divergentes da área urbana, optei por mapear no Qgis e buscar uma solução junto aos mapeadores mais experientes.
VictorIE (2023-06-11 04:05:59+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/842758952

Has the emergency department re-opened?
NickMillerUK (2023-06-11 10:04:08+00:00): Yes it has, although emergency surgery was relocated to Craigavon apparently permanently. I will update the comment on the object.
aceman444 (2020-10-16 07:07:43+00:00): Hi, where is "openstreetmap saying" any issues? If it is your editor iD flagging some problems, then you can ignore them, as that editor is known to have incorrect warnings and suggestions of fixes. Have you ever been to the places you have changed? Many of the changes are outright wrong, some are maybe OK, if you visited the place (e.g. asphalt surface). You provide no source for your changes and data.

Sadly, there are so many errors mixed, that I will revert all the changes, including the good ones, I can't weed through them. individually. STOP with further such mass changes immediately, because they add nothing to OSM and causes more harm.
MSavoritias (2020-10-16 17:43:34+00:00): Can you please be more specific about what is wrong exactly? Because I live here and I have personally visited these places as you can see from my other changesets. On what grounds is it wrong the warnings because they dont seem to worong on my side just changes of a tag that is outdated sometimes and others a brand in a store.

As information for me, do you want me to write next time the source ie me or some app? Because I thought that unless you add a specific platform to use it is known that you went there yourself.

Third, the mass changes are due to the fact that I see a lot of surface problems, missing addresses and missing information in general. Do you want me to break them down further by type or number of changes?
aceman444 (2020-11-18 21:50:12+00:00): Yes, breaking by type of changes would be good, but I suggest you do not make automated changes suggested by the iD editor, as its suggestions are often wrong.
Only change places you have visited or can see on imagery. Please do not use Bing, but "Ortofotomozaika SR" imagery. Or Maxar is currently a bit newer in Bratislava than Ortofotomozaika, but lower resolution.
Yes, you have quoted 10 sources (some questionable like openrailwaymap, which is created from OSM data so what information could it add?), but not that you visited the places. So next time also add source=survey when uploading the changeset, or even better or individual objects that you have seen (and can't be seen on imagery).

Some examples of the errors:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/443260055 - what allows bicycles here? Why did you add bicycle=yes? Also, if it is layer=-1 (unneded, layer=0 was fine), then it must NOT have a common node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8004062937 with the way that goes above it on the terrace.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/443103825 - addr:city=Petrzalka? Really? So this will be single address in Bratislava having this in the city tag. We currenly use addr:city=Bratislava, even though maybe Bratislava-Petrzalka would be better.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3823629479 - adding just street name and no number to a closed shop? What is the use for such and incomplete address?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3823629475 - you changed opening hours starting at 9am, I have seen recently it is startin 8am as it was before. So why the change?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/858611498 - why splitting this road from the other part in the school grounds, when you didn't put any differing tags there? Maybe the school segment is behind a fence and should have access=private, but you didn't add that.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/127501262 - this way does not represent a bus stop so adding public_transport=platform and departures_board to it is wrong and actually duplicates the bus stop causing confusion to users.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8004062926 - colour=Yellow-Red ? Please use valid colors from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:colour.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/680624605 - the way really does below the VUB building here so cutting it off and ending it at the building edge (as if there was an entrance) is completely wrong. You weren't there and just blindly fixed some incorrect suggestion from iD editor, causing the footway now be totally wrong. You can visualize your changes here: https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=92428014
mdelatorre (2020-10-17 04:24:32+00:00): I reviewed your changeset and determined is BAD.

The way you draw is not a park. Please delete it.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92428258
mdelatorre (2020-10-17 04:25:37+00:00): I reviewed your changeset and determined is BAD.

What you draw is not a park. Please delete it.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92428258
RicoElectrico (2020-10-13 20:37:35+00:00): Hej, to chyba pozwala zamknąć tę uwagę? https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2384274
kubzon7 (2020-10-13 20:40:34+00:00): Tak, zaznaczyłem już za rozwiązaną
philippec (2024-09-29 16:26:40+00:00): zendmast Baarle
Er zijn 2 links die niet werken.
Jakob48 (2020-10-15 09:21:22+00:00): Hallo opasto,

bist Du Dir da sicher, dass der Hildegardring unbenannt wird? Im Netz finde ich da keine Infos. Wenn es so wäre, dann müssten alle Häuser dort neue Adressen bekommen.

Ich gehe hier davon aus, dass diese Änderung ein Versehen von Dir war.

Auf dem Sentinel Satbild sieht man eine neue Straße, die von der Nellenbachstraße abzweigt, ein Neubaugebiet nordöstlich von den Häusern Hildegardring 42, 48, 54 ist dort auch zu sehen.

Auf Seite https://m67-architekten.de/portfolio/schaettlisberg-ueberlingen/ siehst Du auch die Lage des Neubaugebiets aus der Vogelperpektive.

Gruß
Jakob48
opasto (2020-10-15 11:12:50+00:00): Siehe
https://www.ueberlingen.de/site/Ueberlingen/node/16618143?QUERYSTRING=hildegardring
dort die Bildunterschrift
aceman444 (2020-11-18 22:38:42+00:00): Examples what is wrong here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1954645882 - the road isn't really noexit here, pedestrians can go to the adjacent footway, just pass a kerb (curb), but nobody bothered to draw the 1-meter long highway=footway from the parking aisle to the footway. So adding all those noexit=yes tags (and only randomly to some aisles) is factually wrong. Some form of transport can continue. I know you get a warning there, but your solution was wrong for it.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8004094847 - invalid colour again.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/858617615 - what? A bus platform in the middle of the street? You even knew the bus stop is at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1450136167 (you touched it).
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3257221360 - you do not need to put address on every shop if it is inside a building that already has an address.
You do not need to add drive-through=no to everything (even post_boxes), more uncommon and interesting would be when a facility is drive-through=yes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/601793530 - why layer=2? The bridge is layer=2, this building is below it. Actually I think 0 would be correct here and would solve all problems (your fix doesn't, now you have another footway with layer=1 in this building, which is actually above it in reality). So again you are just randomly trying to make iD happy, without being at the place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/430860854 - we do not use 'usage' tag on tram tracks in th whole city, so adding it tu this single segment is just bogus.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/858617616 - again, needless, duplicating platform (at least on the sidewalk now).
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5364647060 - direction unneded on a oneway road. But not really wrong, just needless and clutters the objects where there are too many needless and default tags.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1334878102 - why moving this node to make the buildings not rectangular?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/118751385 - why removing this terrace? The surrounding buildings have it too.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/186014335 - layer=-1? Is this way underground or what? As it is on top of the surrounding small buildings (the terrace), layer=1 could work.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5457830395 - why this footway need to be moved farther from the building? You can't see the footway on Bing (that you claim as source), not Mapillary (there are no images on Mapillary on this street so aren't you lying here a bit?) so how do you know where it has to be? Did you visit it? I don't know, but I see the footway on better imagery and have moved it back to where it was.

So as you can see, again a mostly pointless and even damaging changeset.
Only adding the 2 ticket vending machines and waste baskets seem useful.
eggie (2020-10-13 16:58:02+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
MVG,
Eggie
wegisweg (2020-10-13 21:26:21+00:00): Dank je ((-:
Jacques Lavignotte (2020-10-14 18:45:29+00:00): Bonsoir Diablo (l'Incroyable)

Tu as coché la case demandant la vérification de ta contribution. 

Et tu mentionnes avoir un doute sur la façon de cartographier un parking. 

Tu as raison de douter de certains des parkings récemment cartographiés, par exemple :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/656839354
est signalé par Osmose comme :
« Voie d’accès au parking manquante »

Autrement dit "on ne peut pas accéder au parking »

Il faudra donc connecter le parking à la route en utilisant un petit bout de route d'accès au parking. Il suffit dans ce cas de faire une ligne entre un point du parking et un point de la route.

Pour les parkings futurs ou passés.

Bonne carto !

Jacques
RicoElectrico (2020-10-14 09:27:52+00:00): Hej, to chyba nie do końca tak powinno być (tu jest mapowanie 3D).

Każda z części powinna mieć building:part=yes, a building=yes na obrysie całego budynku.

Patrz https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part ew. spytaj ekspertów od 3D na polskim forum :)
Mister_of_America (2020-10-15 20:47:02+00:00): Tak, zapewne źle zrobiłem, ale chodziło o to, aby budynek był widoczny w ogóle, bo nie było niczego :)
Cascafico (2020-10-14 07:00:11+00:00): Benvenuto in OSM. Ho visto che l'area del Parco ha assegnato il numero civico "6". Non è propriamente un errore, ma se conosci la posizione della taghetta, meglio addegnare i tag "addr" ad un nodo.
Antonio Giacomini (2020-10-14 11:54:05+00:00): Non c'è una targhetta ma controllando da un altra mappa mi dava il parco come civico 6 e visto che dalla parte opposta della strada c sono i civici dispari ho pensato fosse il civico del parco. Meglio rimuovere?
Cascafico (2020-10-14 12:27:29+00:00): Non so che altra mappa hai consultato, ma probabilmente è protetta di copyright. Meglio togliere oltretutto percheè il civico 6 di via Tolmezzo è già assegnato:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3784380646#map=19/46.12750/13.21825
Antonio Giacomini (2020-10-14 17:57:40+00:00): modificato
Polarbear (2024-06-05 20:27:44+00:00): Hi kartograph,
ich grüble grade über die Beleuchtung an den Beachvolleyballplätzen.
Wie gross sind denn die Lampen dort? 
Rechtfertigt das das Tagging als 'mast'? Oder wäre highway=street_lamp besser?
Viele Grüsse
kartograph (2024-06-05 21:07:01+00:00): Puh, gute Frage. Von den Luftaufnahmen her könnten es auch Straßenlaternen einer größeren Straße sein. Scheinbar zwei Lampen je Mast.

Ich würde beides in Ordnung finden. Wenn du meinst, dass `highway=street_lamp` hier besser passt, würde ich es OK finden. Der Übergang ist vielleicht fließend. Also semantisch passt vielleicht Mast besser (weil eher keine Art von Straße oder Weg), aber von der Anzahl und der Art passt vielleicht technisch `highway=street_lamp` besser.

Wie kamst du darauf? Arbeitest du an einer Auswertung oder Renderings? :)

Viele Grüße zurück.
Polarbear (2024-06-07 08:59:49+00:00): Klingt so, als sollte man sich das mal vor Ort ansehen. Viele der Nodes könnten auch einfach die Aufhängungen für die Netze sein. 
Mir ware nur die vielen Masten in der Standard-Kartenansicht aufgefallen.
francians (2020-10-13 17:32:45+00:00): This is completely wrong. Please re revert!
SecretOfSence (2020-10-17 16:14:16+00:00): Please check your data IN LIFE before Draw!
mosstreet (2020-10-13 23:14:49+00:00): For non-Russians I decipher the concept of a word combination, exit from the road. This is when you move from one place in the direction of another, and not vice versa. Although with rainbows it probably happens in another way. Remember trunk_link and don't make me redo something anymore, otherwise they will be fired from your apple when DWG is banned.
Tri_Hugger (2020-10-14 23:18:11+00:00): This area's link usage differs from that in other parts of Russia. It is our goal to improve the map in the spirit of the local community, and as documented on the OSM Wiki.
Best regards,
Tri_Hugger
naveenpf (2020-10-30 10:51:12+00:00): Welcome to OSM India. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India

To join OSM India Telegram click on. https://t.me/OSMIndia
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92431048
naveenpf (2020-10-14 09:58:46+00:00): Welcome to OSM Kerala.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kerala/Members

To join OSM Kerala Telegram click on. 
https://t.me/osmkerala

Please see tagging guidelines for kindergarten/school/college mapping https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India/Tags/Education
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92431288
gurglypipe (2020-10-14 08:39:08+00:00): What do you think about using man_made=clearcut for the recently-logged areas, if they still have tree stumps in place? See the discussion page on the wiki though — there’s some controversy, and it seems that people prefer combining man_made=clearcut with (e.g.) natural=scrub to better describe what the clearcut area has become. What do you think? :)
Artasen (2020-10-14 14:40:08+00:00): Thanks it seems a much better way of describing whats actually happening on the ground. I'll try it out and see how it looks.
Artasen (2020-10-14 14:53:47+00:00): Combining the tag natural=scrub with the clear cut gives a better colour in the standard carto, I think, what are your thoughts?
gurglypipe (2020-10-14 14:59:40+00:00): I agree, it does manage to distinguish the clearcut area from the remaining forest. I think that’s all coming from the natural=scrub tag, though, and not man_made=clearcut. See the wiki discussion for a link to the carto discussion where they rejected rendering changes for man_made=clearcut (wrongly, I think).

One other thing to think about might be to turn the remaining wood into a multipolygon and add the clearcut area as a hole in it. That would make it render purely as natural=scrub, without the mixture of tree and grass symbols in carto. Don’t know if that’s the right thing to do or not.
Artasen (2020-10-14 18:40:42+00:00): Having read through the discussion on man_made=clearcut my thoughts are that logged areas need to be mapped, somehow. Unlike pasture crops which can change annually, clear cut areas last quite a long time, but they do need to be updated over several years. A good example is Kirkby Park Wood near Grizebeck   which I will be updating again soon.https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/54.2676/-3.1708.  See the difference between this years Bing aerial and the older Esri images.
Artasen (2020-10-14 21:27:20+00:00): I think the easiest / simplest way is is just map the area tag as clearcut and scrub or heath, then when its replanted and the trees start to grow in a few years remove the area.
Richū (2020-10-14 10:58:04+00:00): Dear Yury,
if a pond seems to be of natural origin, may you please add water=lake?
Yury Yatsynovich (2020-10-14 13:16:44+00:00): Sure, no problem
MKnight (2020-11-04 10:08:27+00:00): Moin,
Du hast an der B 300 diverse Wendeverbote gemappt. Dazu sollte man wissen, dass auf Kraftfahrstrassen per se Wendeverbot gilt, diese also überflüssig sind. 
Meiner Meinung nach ist es sinnvoller im Bereich von "Kreuzungen" stattdessen change:lanes zu setzen, die quasi das selbe bewirken, aber in der Wartung einfacher sind.
kartler175 (2021-07-01 08:34:00+00:00): "Tags describing the multipolygon (e.g., landuse=forest) always go on the relation. The outer way(s) must be left untagged"
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon#Usage)
Trevor_1 (2022-01-25 23:37:05+00:00): Hola amigo! Este poligono tiene una forma muy rara. Estás seguro que es correcto? Y qué es AMG?
Trevor_1 (2022-02-05 17:54:27+00:00): Creo que voy a tener que eliminarlo.
Alex_457 (2020-11-07 13:52:42+00:00): source: bustimes.org
Hjart (2020-10-13 23:04:28+00:00): I think the bicycle=no tag on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/604248788 is kind of more likely to be the culpit here
Nitsan Vardi (2020-10-14 04:44:24+00:00): Thanks, Hjart - this could be the problem, and I corrected that on the short span down to the tunnel. Must be leftover from the period when the road was temporarily blocked.
Velox (2020-12-09 16:48:18+00:00): trigeo, could you please add more information about what data source you had used while deleted relation 6207114?
trigeo (2020-12-09 17:28:54+00:00): Velox, 

Thank you for your feedback regarding this changeset. I would have 
used Mapillary to make the change which I can now see the relation should have been changed to "only_straight_on" which you have applied to node 4929457328. 

Thanks, 
trigeo
jaap de vries (2020-10-14 06:31:27+00:00): Je hebt een tuin toegevoegd bij de appartementen aan de Edeseweg. Meestal taggen we dit soort stroken met een bloemenborder en verder gras niet. Tenzij het een showtuin is dan tag je deze wel met garden.
Friendly_Ghost (2020-10-14 07:51:29+00:00): Daarom heb ik er garden:type=residential & access=private aan toegevoegd. Naar mijn kennis zijn dat correcte tags. Heel Edinburgh is daar ook mee getagd.
jaap de vries (2020-10-14 08:04:18+00:00): In Tilburg is ook iemand zo bezig geweest, zag er niet uit, lees ook de berichten op het forum. Ik ken het hier. Hier is een kleine bloemenborder en de rest is gras. Dus als je garden wil weergeven dan enkel dat kleine stukje border en de rest is dus gras, en geen tuin  zoals dat ook aan de achterkant is waar de grasmaaier moet maaien 8x per jaar.
Friendly_Ghost (2020-10-14 08:30:35+00:00): Een tuin kan toch prima uit gras bestaan? En over welke forumberichten heb je het?
jaap de vries (2020-10-14 08:58:55+00:00): Je kan het zelf opzoeken op het forum via de zoekfunctie.
Hierbij alvast de link Zie hier het forum bericht https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=67834
Friendly_Ghost (2020-10-14 09:13:07+00:00): Dat bericht gaat over een import. Ik heb wel deze gevonden: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=66660 Daar schijnt er geen consensus te zijn, en ik ben het zelf eens met Pieter - Ede (tweede reactie). Tuinen als deze zijn waar de tag garden:type=residential voor is bedoeld.
mdelatorre (2020-10-14 05:09:58+00:00): I reviewed your changeset and determined is BAD. The road type is CAMINO not STREET
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92433454
Ikohl (2020-10-14 21:12:40+00:00): Thank you for reaching out. I added names to this area using INEGI data. Which road are you specifically referring to? Several streets in this area and changeset include Camino in their name.

Gracias por comunicarse. Agregué nombres a esta área usando datos del INEGI. ¿A qué carretera se refiere específicamente? Varias calles en esta área y el conjunto de cambios incluyen Camino en el nombre.