piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
kreuzschnabel (2017-01-09 08:45:24+00:00): Note: One of these CS appears to have damaged the boundary of the National Park and put some wrong members into it. Fixed.
letihu (2016-12-25 12:45:41+00:00): Beginnt die Einbahnstr. wirklich hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4545479263/history#map=19/52.55382/13.29656 ?
Wie kommt man denn zu dem Punkt?
SomeoneElse (2016-12-09 10:46:32+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
As you can see from the orange line around this change on the map at the right when you view the changeset on the OpenStreetMap website, it goes well into the Atlantic because some data was accidentally added at latitude 0, longitude 0.
It's been deleted now, but have you any idea how incorrect latitude and longitude values could have got into the data that you added?
Best Regards,
Andy
Offenbacher_ (2016-12-18 01:48:13+00:00): Can you please undo this?
Offenbacher_ (2016-12-18 01:35:58+00:00): Why did you delete all the landuse in this area? Can you please undo this edit.
zx6r ninja (2016-12-09 08:02:43+00:00): no right turn from the A7
zx6r ninja (2016-12-09 07:59:03+00:00): road does not exist
zx6r ninja (2016-12-09 08:01:19+00:00): correct exit off the A7 onto avenida benamara
surveyor54 (2016-12-14 16:46:21+00:00): Hi greecemapper,

on what source did you perform the refinements. There is also an unclosed multipolygon (59470).

Greetings
surveyor54
greecemapper (2016-12-14 21:19:07+00:00): only on Bing maps. Thank you for reporting. I fixed the multipolygon relations.
Athemis (2016-12-13 18:15:25+00:00): Hallo muesli13,

erst einmal herzlich willkommen bei OSM! Die neue Spurführung an der Kreuzung Ickerswarder/Münchener Str. war bereit mit Hilfe des lane-Taggings (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:lanes und https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:turn) abgebildet. Insofern habe ich den von Dir separat eingezeichneten Beschleunigungsstreifen ausgehend von der Abbiegespur Ickerswarder Str. auf die Münchener Str. (aus Richtung NE) wieder entfernt um hier eine Datenduplikation zu vermeiden.

Ein weitgehend akzeptierter Konsens innerhalb der Community zur Entscheidung, ob eine Straße/Spur separat gemappt wird, bezieht sich auf den Zustand der baulichen Trennung (also Bordstein, Mauer, Leitplanke, etc.). Ist eine bauliche Trennung nicht vorhanden wird dann normalerweise auf ein Mappen als separater Weg verzichtet und ggf. das lane-Tagging angewandt.

An dieser Stelle der Hinweis auf den Düsseldorfer OSM-Stammtisch (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/D%C3%BCsseldorf/Stammtisch), falls der Wunsch nach Austausch mit anderen Mappern in gemütlicher Runde besteht :-)

Ich hoffe, Du hast auch weiterhin viel Freunde an OSM und bleibst uns lange als aktiver Beitragender erhalten!

Beste Grüße

Alex (Athemis)
muesli13 (2016-12-13 21:10:57+00:00): Hallo Alex,

Danke für die Hinweise. Auf Lanes und Turns habe ich in der Tat nicht geachtet. Die Kreuzung sah unbearbeitet aus, da die Fußwege noch die alten waren, die aber verschoben und ergänzt wurden.
Sorry für die Mehrarbeit.

Christoph
Rom1 (2016-12-09 10:12:57+00:00): Bonjour, plus précisément ce ne serait pas plutôt un distributeur de titre de transport ?
Commodoortje (2016-12-09 03:46:32+00:00): Allereerst welkom op OSM.
.
MAPS.ME is helaas niet de optimale editor voor OpenStreetMap. Waardoor vervuiling kan ontstaan.
.
Lees hier hoe je OSM het beste kunt gebruiken en hoe je kunt bijdragen aan een betere kaart: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/help 
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM

Mocht je vragen hebben, kun je altijd contact met me opnemen, ik ben bereid om je te helpen.
Commodoortje (2016-12-09 03:48:28+00:00): tourism=information gewijzigd naar tourism=chalet
Ajie Soeryo Prayogo (2016-12-08 23:42:13+00:00): Sawah
5m4u9 (2016-12-09 07:48:23+00:00): comentar que no es necesario especificar la ciudad en la dirección ya que es un dato redundante, que se puede obtener por la ciudad más cercana.

ahorra tiempo al editar :D
Supaplex (2016-12-09 18:06:52+00:00): 有名字嗎？
TagaSanPedroAko (2016-12-16 04:26:35+00:00): This looks like some edits here are unproductive, like edits on PNR tracks. Where do you source this edits? Please use proper changeset comments that describe your edits, not like the comment you added here.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-25 23:09:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44671830 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
5m4u9 (2016-12-09 07:57:18+00:00): jajaja, JJ (otro contribuidor) está mapeando a nivel nacional las estaciones de servicio y dice el "todas las estaciones" deben ir con eso porque así lo dice en la AHN (que norma venta combustible)

en OSM no se pone la categoría "estación de servicio/gasolinera/etc" ya que es redundante y en todas las aplicaciones saldrá "Estación de servicio Estación de Servicio Cristo Auto Gas Srl". mal

también mal añadir el tipo de negocio en el nombre, eso está en clave "operator=<nombre registro funde empresa>", el único proposito sería para obtener todos los negocios de una empresa (tipo cadena farmacorp).

aqui debería estar limpio "Cristo Auto Gas", voy a mejorar fuel:GNV ya que no existe es fuel:cng (en inglés)
FTA (2017-09-24 00:29:09+00:00): Hi AHeneen,
This changeset is a little bit old, but I recently came across it and noticed that you listed a copyrighted source as the reference for the name of this road. It looks like it has been changed back to what it was before, but please be aware that we cannot use this source for naming or any other purposes in OpenStreetMap. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to reach out!
Best Wishes,
Ethan aka FTA with the OSMF Data Working Group
5m4u9 (2016-12-09 08:02:15+00:00): continua existiendo las rieles? las levantaron? se convirtió en camino sendero?

si hay sendero podríamos marcarlo como vía y asignar valores para sugerir ruteo para bicis.
Cristian Conitzer (2016-12-09 14:02:43+00:00): En algunos lugares se ven todavía la rieles, en algunos pocos se han levantado y en muchos está cubierto de tierra. Para bici ideal. Por eso, ultimamente la utilzan mucho los autos. Como va por el bosque no está bien mantenida. En un lugar se convirtió en zona militar y la continuación está bloqueda por una reja. La ruta es pues mucho más larga, desde Alto Lima y sigue hasta... Viacha, Oruro, claro. :)
Cristian Conitzer (2016-12-09 14:36:28+00:00): Ps. Ruta para nostálgicos.
user_5359 (2017-01-04 17:52:04+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-04 17:52:11+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
tux67 (2019-05-31 08:37:40+00:00): Hi,
hier hat ein Amazon Mitarbeiter was geändert.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/70791075
Kann das korrekt sein?

Gruß
Stephan
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/44273703
physi_retired (2019-05-31 11:40:47+00:00): Es fehlt teilweise der track type (aber der fehlte ja vorher schon) und das motor_vehicle = yes würde ich für überflüssig halten (vorher fehlte es und das bedeutet doch yes) Oder beziehst du dich auf etwas anderes?
Gruß
physi
tux67 (2019-05-31 12:13:11+00:00): ich meinte das motor_vehicle=yes. Wenn nix dran steht wird der Weg beim KfZ Routing ignoriert. (Wirtschaftsweg)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/44273703
physi_retired (2019-05-31 13:51:29+00:00): ach so, das war mir nicht klar. Dann muss ich aber sagen: ich weiß leider nicht, ob das an dieser Stelle richtig ist...
Geography Canada (2016-12-23 15:32:28+00:00): Palolo, is "Hawassa" in English or Sidamo? If it isn't in Sidamo, or Oromo, maybe it should be left out?
Palolo (2016-12-28 06:33:43+00:00): Hawassa is the way the name of the city is written in Latin script and it is the way the name is pronounced by speakers of all languages here, and it is how the signs are written.
Supaplex (2016-12-24 09:23:28+00:00): 恭喜您透過 Maps.Me 完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。Maps.Me App 採用開放街圖的地理資料，由社群而非商業公司建置的地理資料庫。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features

由於Maps.Me隨著軟體更新更新最新地圖，App裡的地圖資料版本可能略舊，透過Maps.Me增添商家等資料時有可能開放街圖上已經有了，請到http://www.osm.org 網站看是否要加的商家有沒有人加上去了。

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/opestreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
user_5359 (2017-01-04 17:52:19+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
Hjart (2016-12-09 08:28:03+00:00): Der var engang jeg konverterede alle cykelstier til highway=path;bicycle=designated etc, sådan som du har gjort det her. Siden er jeg vendt på en tallerken og har konverteret alle cykelstier jeg er stødt på til highway=cycleway.
mikkolukas (2016-12-11 22:23:46+00:00): Jeg plejer at gøre forskel på om det er en cykelsti med eget forløb, hvor fodgængere implicit iflg. loven har ret til at bevæge sig [highway=cycleway, foot=yes] eller om der er skiltet med at stien faktisk er en fællessti [ highway=path, foot=designated, bicycle=designated, oneway=no, segregated=yes|no]. Giver det mening? :)
mikkolukas (2016-12-11 22:24:42+00:00): Ligeledes plejer jeg at tegne stien seperat, selvom den løber langs anden vej, hvis den er dobbeltrettet, da den så kan ses som værende sig egen vej.
Hjart (2016-12-11 23:04:08+00:00): For mange år siden tænkte jeg på samme måde som du med hensyn til skiltning. Nu er jeg gået over til at tagge efter den primære anvendelse (cykelsti eller gangsti) og så se lidt stort på skiltningen. Der har været en del kontroverser over anvendelsen af highway=path og der er en del der ligefrem forbander opfindelsen af det tag og derfor forsøger jeg at begrænse det.
Dobbeltrettede stier tegner jeg generelt også separat.
Hjart (2016-12-11 23:22:02+00:00): Hvis du f.eks. studerer https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/46114365/history vil du kunne se at jeg på et tidspunkt tagger stien om som du har gjort her, fordi dengang (jeg kan ikke se dem på mine Mapillary sekvenser) var der sådan nogle skilte som du beskriver, og så et par år senere retter tilbage til highway=cycleway, fordi jeg fandt ud af at det alligevel var bedre.
Hjart (2016-12-11 23:26:37+00:00): Det vil være smart lige at blive enige om hvad vi gør, så det ikke går op i alt for meget edit war ;-/
mikkolukas (2016-12-12 21:13:40+00:00): Uuuh, edit war på tag'ning af dobbeltrettede fællesstier ville da være enormt morsomt :D

Nej, spøg til side.
Jeg er åben for en hvilken som helst af måderne, så længe der blot opstår enighed og det kan argumenteres at den ene måde er bedre end den anden.

Du skriver at highway=cycleway var bedre. Kan du prøve at beskrive hvorfor du mener det er bedre?

Du beskriver at nogle mennesker ligefrem forbander highway=path. Hvad har de imod det tag, eller hvad er problemstillingen ved det?

Jeg tog udgangspunkt i at highway=path netop var til brug hvor stien er en multibrugssti pr. skiltning (ie. den er ikke mere en cykelsti end den er en gangsti eller omvendt).

Jeg er meget nysgerrig efter argumentationen og synes det er en interessant debat :)

(sidder i mellemtiden og læser op på diskussionen om highway=path på http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dpath )
mikkolukas (2016-12-12 21:14:44+00:00): ... og fandt link videre til http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Path_controversy, hvor jeg læser videre :)
mikkolukas (2016-12-13 00:18:27+00:00): Ingen steder finder jeg noget skrevet om at den ene eller den anden måde per definition er bedre end den anden.

Som jeg læser det er det bare et renderspørgsmål, og at begge dele for den sags skyld kan eksistere ved siden af hinanden - og resten er op til den "konsensus" der eventuelt eksisterer i det pågældende land.
mikkolukas (2016-12-13 00:19:47+00:00): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated bruger også highway=path i sine eksempler
Hjart (2016-12-13 12:12:20+00:00): Du har fuldstændig ret i at der i OSM ikke er tags der per definition er "rigtige"  eller "forkerte" eller "bedre" og man skal også være opmærksom på at selv det der står i diverse artikler på vores wiki ikke er autoritativt og derfor bør tages med et gran salt.
Det der i sin tid endeligt fik mig "omvendt" var https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333.
Siden er jeg også blevet opmærksom på https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle og gradvist blevet mere og mere fan af det. Hvorfor bruge 3 tags på at beskrive noget, som i praksis lige så godt kan beskrives med et enkelt "highway=cycleway"?
 På nogle veje (specielt i det indre Kbh) f.eks. er der så mange tags at de er på kanten til at være helt uoverskuelige og bl.a. derfor bruger jeg en del krudt på at simplificere vores data (hvor det giver mening) og så vidt muligt sørge for at de ikke bliver så komplicerede at kun eksperter kan hitte rede på dem.
mikkolukas (2018-09-02 18:48:08+00:00): Nogle gange skal der bare lidt tid til før man ser lyset. Dine argumenter fandt vægt i måden jeg så på redigeringen og undervejs skiftede jeg til at bruge highway=cycleway, da det, som du siger, giver en lagt enklere tagging.
Tak fordi du giver dig tiden til at forklare tingene ordentligt og på en altid respektfuld måde :)
user_5359 (2017-01-04 17:52:27+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-04 17:52:35+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
glglgl (2016-12-09 09:54:59+00:00): I do not think that a corner in Mint Street in Loindon is called "jalan merpati", so I'll revert http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1155201563.
glglgl (2016-12-09 10:00:51+00:00): See http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274168.
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:05:07+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-04 18:05:12+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2017-10-21 06:00:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
user_5359 (2016-12-11 17:21:41+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:02:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
anu_bala (2019-04-05 02:04:33+00:00): Hi  Velmyshanovnyi,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Aceh, I have come across 
"way 458630291
way 459240367" classified as 'Unclassified'. However, going by the aerial imagery these seems to be non derivable . Please look into this and share your thoughts on this.

Thanks in advance.
mavl (2017-10-21 06:02:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:02:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
user_5359 (2016-12-11 16:25:03+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
user_5359 (2016-12-11 16:23:50+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2016-12-11 16:22:19+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:01:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].
mavl (2017-10-21 06:00:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 53119165 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted (an incompatible source) [http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44274326].