piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
flohoff (2021-05-06 15:13:17+00:00): Moin,
ich glaube hier auf den steps kann ganmz viel an tagging weg - mofa=no und bicycle=no ist wohl ziemlich offensichtlich bei steps. segregated macht auch keinen Sinn wenn das nur für Fußgänger ist oder?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/938606133
Glg11 (2021-05-10 02:51:11+00:00): Hi flohoff,
danke für den Hinweis.
Die Tags sind beim Editieren noch hängen geblieben. Sind nun weg.
Gruss
eggie (2021-05-04 07:28:02+00:00): boundery losgemaakt van landuse
eggie (2021-05-04 05:53:12+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
ovruni (2021-05-03 23:29:27+00:00): Hola, gracias por contribuir en OSM. He notado que en este conjunto de cambios se ha ingresado el texto "vivo en la zona y lo conozco", por favor revise la documentación sobre buenos comentarios en conjuntos de cambios[0]. Esto tampoco explica la eliminación de diferentes objetos, entre ellos edificios. Una vía amenity no remplaza a edificios internos building [1], la cual puede contener uno o varios edificios. Por otra parte, al eliminar el nodo 5478910763 [2] se pierden etiquetas que no existen en la vía 448044205 [3], por lo cual no se mantiene el historial [4]. Además, el uso de la etiqueta highway=unclassied [5] se encuentra destinado para vías que conectan pueblos. Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe 
Saludos

[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Buenos_comentarios_en_conjuntos_de_cambios
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Edificios
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5478910763
[3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448044205
[4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Mantener_el_historial
[5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
DaveF (2021-05-05 15:56:51+00:00): Hi
Could you take a look at your edit in this area? You appear to have a railway track crossing a platform & squashed a few buildings together.
xyzl (2021-05-05 19:09:49+00:00): Apologies - I did mean to move the cycle hub and main station building (there is meant to be a gap in the middle as per my edit and the satellite imagery).

I moved the rail line but did not mean to have it go over the platform. I'll try to move the platform now, would appreciate some help if I can't fix it.
ovruni (2021-05-03 23:48:12+00:00): Hola, gracias por contribuir en OSM. En este conjunto de cambios se ha agregado el nombre "cultivo", sin embargo el uso de nombres descriptivos es desaconsejado [0]. En este caso es suficiente el uso de landuse=farmland .[1]
Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Los_nombres_no_son_para_descripciones
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:landuse%3Dfarmland
Glassman (2021-05-04 02:10:42+00:00): Thanks for moving the node
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104083095
user_5359 (2021-05-27 04:35:44+00:00): Hello! Please notice this is a production database not a playground or testing database. I revert your entry. If this is a misunderstanding, you can answer with your arguments here.

The use of the key military is a violation of the rule "don't map for the renderer". A hatched marking of the area on the map is created without a reason for the key (at least recognisable). 
Likewise, it is not noted what a hazard arises from. In any case, these should be verifiable facts and should not concern personal or only individual groups of people.

Please have a look on the page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Ahazard.
Scharf Energy Systems (2021-05-27 14:20:59+00:00): Will do,  I can get it deleted.  I wasn't sure if there was a way to map that or if it was even practical to map on OSM.
LySioS (2021-05-04 15:57:25+00:00): Salut hoancat,
Meme s'ils ne sont pas sur le terrain, je trouve ça dommage que tu enlèves les noms catalans. Étant donné qu'on est en pays catalan, je trouve qu ils ont toutes leur pertinence. Il y avait eu un rendu de carte osm en catalan mais qui n'a plus l'air de fonctionner, c'est une idée de projet qui donne du sens aux noms catalans que tu avais rajoutés.
De plus, toutes les grandes villes ont leur nom dans des dizaines de langues sur osm, pourtant, ça m'étonnerait que ça apparaisse sur le terrain.
A+
hoancat (2021-05-04 16:51:58+00:00): Bon dia LySioS,
Je ne savais pas que ça se faisait pour les grandes villes. Je remettrai les noms en catalan bientôt.
Pour le rendu de carte, j'utilise l'outil de wikipédia qui met en avant les noms catalans : https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salses#/map/0
Je précise que les noms que j'avais ajoutés sont de simples traductions en catalan standard même si j'essaye de mettre quelques mots de roussillonnais.
Je fais attention mais si quelqu'un passe et voit des erreurs je serais ravi qu'il les corrige.
Je le ferai peut-être pour Cabestany, c'est dans un coin de ma tête depuis quelques mois.
Adiu.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-05-04 00:04:04+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 86287477, 86287558, 86942738.
slowtux (2021-06-04 18:49:19+00:00): Moin,

ist das eine falsche Adresse oder spam?
andrewwiseman (2021-05-11 20:52:49+00:00): hi, are these buildings all named "G"? how do you know?
ScottWalkerAU (2021-05-04 04:27:49+00:00): Hi, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
ScottWalkerAU (2021-05-04 04:29:51+00:00): Hi, OSM is not a playground for you to test your software. Please don't constantly change tags on a way.

The road itself has no access restrictions - it is the lift gate that has access restrictions.
rthik007 (2021-05-05 10:38:34+00:00): Hi jOSHUAoRTEGA629,
Fixed the alignment, as building polygons overlapping with residential road WAY: 29222017, WAY: 92653106.
Kindly check with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104178619
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104084056
user_5359 (2021-05-04 04:10:35+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don’t delete private ways, if the exists. You can mark them with access=private (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access). Also don't forget to add highway=service to road with service=driveway
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-20 10:29:47+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86155219/history has 2=Navidad key that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
What you intended to express by using this unusual key? Is this tag needed? Or maybe can it be expressed in a more typical way that would be easier to understand?
jptolosa (2024-02-21 05:57:57+00:00): Hello, thanks for advice, I have fixed it.
flohoff (2021-05-06 15:11:07+00:00): 
Moin,
warum ist hier ein access=yes drauf? Das sollte doch default sein oder?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/938628623
Violaine_Do (2021-05-04 17:53:44+00:00): j'ai corrigé, mais attention tu as embarqué la route sur le terrain de sport du Lycée Gauguin. Et le nom du Lycée La mennais était déjà inscrit sur l'emprise, je l'ai donc retiré. Attention donc à ne pas envoyer tant que tu n'es pas sur de ce que tu as fait.. Tu as du avoir un message d'erreur à l'envoi.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104085939
GOwin (2021-06-01 06:55:44+00:00): There are serious concerns about this changeset.  

You renamed a mature element on the map without bothering to verify about duplicate name features.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104086112
ovruni (2021-05-04 04:16:36+00:00): Hola, gracias por contribuir en OSM. He notado que en sus conjuntos de cambios ha ingresado los textos "2", lo cual no explica los cambios realizados, por favor revise la documentación sobre los buenos comentarios en conjuntos de cambios [0], de tal forma que otros usuarios puedan entender en que han consistido. Por otra parte la etiqueta con clave building [1] se encuentra destinada a edificios individuales, no para vías que contienen otros edificios, como lo es un estadio. [2]
Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe 
Saludos

[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Good_changeset_comments
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building 
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:leisure=stadium
Kovoschiz (2021-05-04 11:18:27+00:00): What's wrong with  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:exit to indicate it can be used to get out explicitly? Following https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entrance#Tagging `=home` , there are 11428 `=shop`, and 76 `=office=` instances.
opendcc (2021-05-04 12:07:42+00:00): Hello,

exit=yes and entrance on the same node makes no sense. Is it a place to enter or to exit a building?
Kovoschiz (2021-05-06 19:19:11+00:00): So why can't it be both? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:entrance#Entrance=exit seems to suggest this is possible.  The template on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:exit  has `entrance=` as "useful combination", not `entrance=exit` or requiring this. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/entrance=yes#combinations has 2236 `exit=yes` instances.
opendcc (2021-05-06 20:45:26+00:00): Hello,

when we consider routing: entrance is just a node, no decision about direction. Direction is given by tags on the highways connected to this node.
Example: consider a garden, you can leave the garden through a small building. Is this gate an entry point (to the building) oder an exit point (from the garden)?

Just my two cents; however, feel free to add an exit tag ...
keithonearth (2021-05-18 18:15:32+00:00): Hi Andrea, I wanted to let you know that I made some changes to how you mapped Sanford Apartments, and the Resource Centre. I work in the field, and have been inside both facilities, and have some knowledge about them. Here is a link to my changeset, let me know if you'd like more info about my edit. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104907827#map=19/49.26562/-123.14131
Reemuson (2021-05-18 14:03:13+00:00): Hello, the addition of extra tags is incorrect. The buildings are mapped with sub-buildings for detail. The tags of the building are included in the outer area, the sub-buildings should only include level, height, roof and other structural data, not names or address data.
user_5359 (2021-05-05 17:46:04+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on node https://www.osm.org/node/7487748424/history : What is the meaning of the tag meter=yes?
Elisabeth IRM-RV (2021-05-04 04:24:04+00:00): based on mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-7.677395&lng=109.057095&z=17&menu=true&focus=photo&pKey=cRqTztepKcxL8WV72MZxUg)
woodpeck (2021-05-04 12:52:50+00:00): While the buildings you have removed in this changeset may have been of low quality, a better approach than deleting them outright would have been to engage with the mapper who created them, and help them to do a better job. Also, please consider changing your user name to something that is less likely to cause offense with other mappers.
pitscheplatsch (2021-05-06 05:38:52+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

"Not bad", your mapping activity is only removing buildings, overall 1,000 ! See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious?uid=12571990#13/34.4599/69.1055

Please pay attention to the mentioned approach and stop just deleting elements which have been mapped by different contributors just a few a hours before! See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104216825

Thanks!

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
user_5359 (2021-05-05 18:11:38+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice your typo of landcover (see also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landcover or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Cobertura_del_suelo)
I correct this typo
Tomas Straupis (2021-05-05 04:47:29+00:00): Laba diena. Adresų info taškuose buvo pilnesnė, nubraižius pastatus reikėtų visas žymas perkelti, įskaitant ir addr:place bei addr:nostreet.
riysingh (2021-05-04 05:59:11+00:00): Hi,
I have made the edits in this changeset : 104095785 based on Driver Feedback.

Regards,
riysingh.
Glassman (2021-05-04 18:32:27+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104095948
Glassman (2021-05-04 18:32:48+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104096140
Glassman (2021-05-04 18:34:35+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

#TIP: if you know the building's name use that instead of the name of the complex, such as name="B", then draw a landuse=residential around the complex and name it for the apartment complex.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104096177
Glassman (2021-05-04 18:40:31+00:00): It looks like you added a node with no tags. Let me know if you need help adding a feature to OpenStreetMap. I'll send you more info in a message.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104096961
Carto'Cité (2022-01-05 12:20:40+00:00): Bonjour Thibault,
Merci pour l'ajout de ce chemin : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/938726097
Il semble qu'il s'agit d'une voie verte et non d'une piste. J'apporte quelques corrections, n'hésite pas à jeter un coup d'œil et me questionner si besoin.
À bientôt.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
Cascafico (2021-05-04 11:45:14+00:00): quindi il civico 14c non esiste?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104100881
AlbertoTrevi (2021-05-04 16:09:03+00:00): ho controllato ora io sui dati catastali sarei 14/d però sulla vostra mappa non lo vedo e sarebbe tra il 14b e il 22,proprio fronte strada
Cascafico (2021-05-04 17:17:47+00:00): Be' sei la persona più titolata per sistemare quei numeri civici :-)
lg188 (2021-05-05 06:19:32+00:00): Did I make a mistake here? Can you elaborate on it so I can prevent it in the future?
BCNorwich (2021-05-05 08:17:02+00:00): Hi, I'll try to explain the anomalies you inadvertently added. It was in your Changeset: 104000314

You drew the footway as a continuous line joining to the footways at north and south, tagged as highway=footway
layer=-1. The footway passed through a section of building. It seemed that only the section of footway under the building was actually layer=-1 so I sectioned up the footway. Tagging the section under the building as layer=-1, the rest with no layer tag. (The layer=-1 could be joined to the building.)

The second problem, the steps were added on top of the footpath making for duplication of a highway, one atop the other. Thus possibly messing with routing. I sectioned off and removed that section of the footway where the steps are.

I hope that's understandable if not ask away. Regards Bernard.
lg188 (2021-05-05 12:36:11+00:00): I think I understand. I think it happened because I do not know how to split up a road without deleting it and adding separate segments. Which seems counterintuitive to the iterative process.
BCNorwich (2021-05-05 13:27:21+00:00): Hi, yes it's not always easy to work out how to do things and the iD editor has very few instructions. 

To section up any way/line/outline in the iD editor. 

Zoom in sufficiently, double click at the point you want to split a way so that a new node is created. Right click the node, select/click the scissors icon to split the way. Do this again and you have two splits making three ways. (In the case of inserting your steps into a footpath). Select/highlight the center section of footpath (where the steps are to go) and change/add the tag from footpath to steps, adding any other relevant tags as well.
lg188 (2021-05-05 20:55:32+00:00): In changeset #104207451 I tried doing this. Is this the correct way?
BCNorwich (2021-05-06 06:39:18+00:00): Hi, Way: 939526205, yes that's perfect. You could also add tunnel=building_passage to the section under the building as that's what it looks like to me.

Regards Bernard.
Furdrien (2021-05-17 10:16:24+00:00): Bonjour Michel60 !
Vous avez ajouté la clé ref=D 909Z sur la voie :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48403195
Cette route est bien déclasser du réseau routier départementale du Val-d'Oise. 
Cela doit-être une erreur de votre part.

Bien a Vous !
Furdrien
rthik007 (2021-05-05 09:24:42+00:00): Hi minhduchung2k,
dragged the node and fix the alignment of residential roads node 7388699613, node 8700980849
kindly check with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104173713
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104102129
Dimacn (2021-05-05 17:58:11+00:00): Скажите пожалуйста, что вы отметили этой точкой? У вас получился водопад с выдуманным названием.
kartonage (2021-05-04 08:07:12+00:00): Hej mwasaka,

in several changesets you have added highway=trunk instead of (probably) highway=track. In case you did not know.

Best regards
zorglubu (2021-05-04 12:46:14+00:00): Bonjour,

Je me suis permis de remettre l'étiquette building qui est importante pour les outils qui doivent pouvoir faire la différence entre une emprise au sol (terrain) et un bâtiment.
Cordialement.
officedetourismeterresdechalosse (2021-05-04 13:06:14+00:00): Bonjour, 
Merci d'avoir apporter cette modification.
eggie (2021-05-04 08:04:03+00:00): JOSM heeft de hik want het commentaar blijft hangen van de voorgaande changeset.
Dit was een revert ivm verwijderen oneway:bicycle=no
DP24PH (2021-05-04 12:56:10+00:00): Unfortunately, you have overrun the changeset boundary that affecting the parts of CALABARZON, MIMAROPA in the Republic of the Philippines. Kindly reduce the changeset boundary to the area of responsibility.
Canal des Pangalanes (2021-05-08 20:01:36+00:00): Hi Adiatma,

do you know where all these nodes in https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=104105066 came from?
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-09 03:30:08+00:00): Hi Canal des Pangalanes .
Thank you for your message. It looks came from human editing specially from my colleagues to smoothing the road geometry.
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61700324)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104105066
eggie (2021-05-04 10:02:52+00:00): :)   Omdat je de tuin vast hebt geplakt aan de landuse=residential van Eindhoven is je editgebied zo groot geworden.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=104105225

Met die leisure=nature_reserve
boundary =protected_area bedoelde ik het grote gebied van het landgoed

De tuin kan beter leisure=garden blijven
landuse=village_green is een grasveld in het centrum van de Engels dorp... dus hier niet van toepassing. In Drenthe de Brink. 
De oude tagging dus beter terugzetten. Zie de link naar Achavi.
De tuin zal ik even loskopen van de landuse=residential.
het kloosterbos (2021-05-04 10:15:20+00:00): Je bent een engel, Eggie :-) Bedankt!
Mmm, tja, die Engelse termen en begrippen stroken niet per se met wat we hier hebben aan bestemmingen en landgebruik...
Ik koos voor "village green" omdat dit wordt geassocieerd met 'commons'. Dat is wel het bedoelde gebruik, meer dan de omschrijving van "garden" als gemanicuurd landschap. Vandaar. Misschien is dan leisure=nature_reserve meer van toepassing.

Ik zie dat dit karteren snel heel verslavend kan worden. Ik dus de rest van de dag lekker uitwaaien en uitregenen in Het Kloosterbos!

fijne dag !
l:-)
eggie (2021-05-04 08:49:18+00:00): Dag rkole..

Je vraagt feedback
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=104105816

bicycle=permissive wordt gebruikt op een landgoed.. de eigenaar van de grond geeft toestemming dat je er mag fietsen, maar kan je ten alle tijde de toegang ontzeggen. Denk niet van toepassing hier. . Dus gewoon bicycle=yes
vehicle=no houdt alles met wielen tegen.. Dus weghalen.
motor_vehicle=no hoeft niet op een pad. Het kan wel, want het houdt ook brommers tegen. 
Belangrijkste is om vehicle=no te verwjderen. 
Gr eggie
rkole (2021-05-04 09:36:09+00:00): eggie
dank ik kijk dat nog na
het probleem met het pad is dat het nu nog niet is afgewerkt. fietsen kan maar over losliggende betonnen platen en over zand en grind ondergrond voor het aan te leggen pad
groet rob
eggie (2021-05-04 09:52:57+00:00): Dag Rob.. Map what's on the ground is ons motto en dat is precies wat je hebt gedaan.
Het is weer actueel.
Mapse
eggie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:27:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
eggie (2021-05-04 08:41:47+00:00): Dag Leo,

'k Zit even mee te kijken.
access=no is algemeen.. dat geldt dus voor iederen.
foot=permissive is de uitzondering.
Die overruled de access=no
Wandelaars routeren dus wel.
Overbodig zijn dus de andere accesstags.. 
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=104106302
motor_vehicle, horse en bicycle kunnen dus weg. Kwaad kan het natuurlijk niet. 
MVG
eggie
het kloosterbos (2021-05-04 08:59:00+00:00): Hey, Eggie :-)

Reuze bedankt voor jouw geduldige uitleg :-) Action Learning!
Ik begrijp nu beter wat de relatie tussen algemeen en uitzonderingen is.

l:-)
eggie (2021-05-04 09:05:31+00:00): Lastig al die accesstags.
Het kan wel zo.. 
access=permissive geldt voor iedereen.
Iets met wielen mag niet naar binnen.
Dan is het simpelst vehicle=no
Dan vang je alle vliegen in één klap.
Het best kun je specifiek taggen.
Dus ...
foot=permissive
vehicle=no
horse=no

gr eggie
eggie (2021-05-04 09:07:39+00:00): Maar het ligt een beetje aan de bebording hoe je het aanpakt. het werkt wel zo als jij getagd hebt.
Dus landgoed is opengesteld
.. en dan de verschillende categorieën yes of no
osmviborg (2021-05-04 08:38:26+00:00): barrier=hedge er bedre
Punteado (2021-05-06 19:40:45+00:00): Tak for deling og støtte
Punteado (2021-05-06 19:42:55+00:00): Jeg er nybegynder, lær mig fejl $$ osmviborg
Marych_ (2021-05-05 19:50:15+00:00): Dear Uzbekistaan,
Could you please explan, why you set most road as highway=primary

Shuch highways should have connectivity with Primary our trunk highways
jafarbeek (2021-05-05 20:08:38+00:00): Hello.
There is Uzbekistan Automobile Roads Committee’s list. And in this list specified which roads are trunks (roads of international importance)  and primary roads (roads of state  importance) and etc. Also these roads which i have changed are more likely to be primary than secondary or tertiary roads in the case of connecting big towns, cities and the number of cars which run these roads. But this is secondary case to my editing, the first one is ,as i have mentioned already, all of these specified in government office’s list which.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:52:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al