piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
aixbrick (2021-10-03 13:10:38+00:00): Das ging ja schnell, danke :-). Fehlt noch die erwähnte Korrektur der Höhenangaben.
tonyf1 (2021-10-04 01:27:10+00:00): Hi, this and the previous 2 changesets are about adding access =private
What is your source? I doubt you went there considering Covid. In the previous 2 you mention signage. I cant find any legible signs in street level imagery. Please give details  with if possible URL's
HighRouleur (2021-10-04 06:37:04+00:00): Hi,
I verified this during a ride. 
The two service roads in questions are thoroughfares within a private premises (factory) with gates at each end.
tonyf1 (2021-10-04 06:50:10+00:00): thanks
Ser9ei (2021-10-04 12:44:52+00:00): Вы добавили пробел в "ЦЕХ85", но они сами пишут наименование без пробела: https://tseh85.ru/info/about
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112029780
adamh (2021-10-03 22:25:30+00:00): How did you source these changes? It's impossible to tell from Bing maps if a path is a cycle path, shared path, or walking only path.
The path 31659577 is now walking only, and yet it forms part of a LCN cycling relation, and for years has been mapped as a cycle path.
A small amount of searching gives us this map, which shows Hallam Road having a "Other Path Link" type with a bicycle and pedestrian illustrated.  https://www.casey.vic.gov.au/hallam-valley-trail
The more northern part of this path was changed from cycling to foot only by you some 30 days earlier.
MatthewSeale (2021-10-03 23:08:43+00:00): The path along Hallam Rd is signed as as shared cycleway from Pound Rd to Ormond Road as shown on Mapilliary.  Way 31659577 should be reverted to a shared cycleway or reinstate the bicycle=yes.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=144954007603964
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=2031215400361053
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=851076202144993
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=497400694795407
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=566530107645541
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1410241922644656
osmviborg (2021-10-03 12:27:43+00:00): Hvis du har kørt på vejen må du vide hvad underlaget er. At kalde det 'unpaved' er useriøst, og forkert.
darkonus (2021-10-03 14:20:57+00:00): Вітаю! Помітив вашу правку. Шар Ukraine - Cherkasy 2015 зміщений. Будь ласка, встановіть у налаштуваннях шару зміщення 8.36; 6.57. Якщо щось не зрозуміло, можна спитати в телеґрам-групі української спільноти ОСМ https://t.me/osmUA
Frans S (2021-10-03 12:34:37+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
PLease be more accurate in your mappings. Buildings are oversized. You overlooked also small buildings

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112031249
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:17:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work
Anonymous_x (2022-05-18 05:10:57+00:00): 请问花石岩的海拔来源，搜了一遍没找到。
Ze0zohk1 (2021-10-03 12:58:34+00:00): Hallo benni620,

was genau hast du korrigiert? Solche generischen Kommentare sind für andere Mapper nicht besonders hilfreich. Kannst du bei denen nächsten Änderungen etwas "bessere" Kommentare schreiben? Ich empfehle dir folgenden Artikel: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments 

Viele Grüße
Ze0zohk1
treestryder (2022-12-07 05:16:04+00:00): Should a yearly race really be mapped as a bicycle route?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features
c0nsumer (2022-12-07 11:45:24+00:00): Hey there! In this case the route of the race is listed on permanent road signs so it can be ridden by anyone, any time of year. It's a cycling route.

Detail about that is available here:

https://barry-roubaix.com/news/2019/1/25/faq-are-the-courses-marked-do-you-have-gps-files-and-maps-for-the-courses

To quote: "Our 22, 36 and 62 mile courses are permanently marked with street signs starting and ending at the City of Hastings."

If you search Google Images for Barry-Roubaix Road Signs you'll find photos of the signs as well.
c0nsumer (2022-12-07 15:59:26+00:00): Here's a photo of one of the road signs: https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/5bd316b993a63221b90b5210/1543124476554-EX942BDVFENVIN6GGR0O/IMG_3421.jpg?format=2500w&content-type=image%2Fjpeg
treestryder (2022-12-09 03:34:42+00:00): Very good. Just wanted to make sure.

If you were not already aware of this, Michigan mappers have been meeting each month. We would be glad to have you join us.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Michigan#Events

We could talk about that "mapping multi-use paths as only cycleways" problem. 😉 

Personally, I point people to the common tagging scheme section of Michigan's Wiki page.
c0nsumer (2022-12-09 11:10:37+00:00): I'd definitely like to make one of those; I'll keep an eye on the calendar.

Regarding the tagging, there's a bit of a disparity with how to tag mountain bike trails. That'd be good to get worked out and something I can probably help quite a bit with.
eggie (2021-10-03 13:37:57+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
nmombo12 (2021-10-10 14:58:22+00:00): Hello,

What happened to the Southfield High School building? Is it possible you deleted the way when you mean to delete some of the tags?

-Noah
Malý hajzl (2022-06-12 18:27:27+00:00): Přechod u školy není.
eggie (2021-10-03 18:38:18+00:00): De muziektent zou je ook als vlak kunnen taggen met building=roof.
amenity=theatre zie je wel meer.
Dat geeft ook een symbool.
Eigenlijk hoort op een muziektent
 leisure=bandstand 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dbandstand

Gr eggie
eggie (2021-10-03 18:17:05+00:00): Dag Bledder..
Is hier dan nog steeds Rk basisschool St Sebastianus gevestigd?
Gr eggie
eggie (2021-10-03 18:23:10+00:00): Maar even import van de nieuwbouw aangevraagd. 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=842817#p842817

mvg
eggie
eggie (2021-10-04 14:38:30+00:00): Het schoolterrein en meester Hansplein met speeltuin heb ik verwijderd. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-10-03 17:55:20+00:00): Dag Bledder 
Eigenlijk geen idee of het werkt met ; met meerdere telefoonnummers.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone#Spacing_and_separators

Je zou het evt hier kunnen vragen. 

Eggie
eggie (2021-10-03 18:14:23+00:00): https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=73762
!i! (2021-10-07 17:20:04+00:00): Can you please undo your deletion of my previous entered cycleway tags?

Here was a construction and the cycleway is now on the road but no more the separated path (pedestrians only) https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2808740
emvee (2021-10-07 17:47:38+00:00): If I undo the deletion of the cycleway tags, I should also delete bicycle=use_sidepath, right?
!i! (2021-10-07 18:18:34+00:00): Yes, sorry I guess I just missed to replace this tag before
emvee (2021-10-08 21:11:55+00:00): Done, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/112282901
eggie (2021-10-03 17:39:36+00:00): Je edits..
Al die accesstags kunnen gewoon weg. allemaal default
access=yes geeft vaak problemen icm met =no tags. Niet doen dus.
Een weg heeft een straatnaam. dat zal zijn De Noord. 
De naam van de brug geef je aan met bridge:name= 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge:name

Ik haal even die accesstags weg.

Gr eggie
eggie (2021-10-03 17:41:07+00:00): Kijk even hioe het er nu uitziet ter leering ende vermaeck
eggie
burrscurr (2025-06-14 11:38:53+00:00): Hi wielandb, ich bin beim Retagging von Straßen mit cycleway=opposite über den Eisenweg gestolpert. Dieses Changeset fügt oneway:bicycle=yes hinzu, ohne dass die Straße generell als Einbahnstraße getaggt wäre. D.h. hier würde dann eine Einbahnstraßenregelung nur für Radfahrer gelten? Das erscheint ziemlich unwahrscheinlich, vielleicht kennst du die Lage vor Ort besser?

VG burrscurr
wielandb (2025-06-15 09:57:06+00:00): Hi, ich bin nochmal vorbeigefahren und habe mir die Situation angeschaut. 

Ich hab das damals so getagged, da von der einen Seite die Beschilderung 250,Anlieger frei, und von der anderen Seite 250,Radverkehr und Anlieger frei dran steht. 
Da dachte ich damals oneway:bicycle wäre ein guter Tag, aber das ist natürlich nicht ganz richtig. Habs mal auf vehicle=destination + bicycle:forward=yes geändert.
burrscurr (2025-06-15 10:53:12+00:00): Ah, das macht Sinn. Danke fürs Nachschauen!
DUGA (2022-02-16 21:14:03+00:00): Would you please properly set directions and cleanup everything else after adding a roundabout here? Without the direction your edit just made it even worse.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/989138992#map=19/40.31964/-77.16506
DUGA (2022-02-16 21:17:04+00:00): Also can you read our wiki on how to edit things so that nothing will be broken in the future?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout
eggie (2021-10-03 17:35:47+00:00): feedback .. foot=designated hoeft niet op een wandelpad.
bicycle=no ook niet (default)

Gr eggie
eggie (2021-10-03 17:29:06+00:00): Feedback  
Je zou evt. eens kunnen kijken welke accesstags je kunt verwijderen.
De meeste zijn nl ingebakken.
Deze accesstags horen op de verschillende fietspaden afhankelijk van de bebording..
G11: mofa=yes, moped=no, traffic_sign=NL:G11 
G12a: moped=designated, mofa=designated, traffic_sign=NL:G12a 
G13: moped=no, mofa=no, traffic_sign=NL:G13 
incline up zou dan voor de hele brug gelden? 
Even om rekening te hoduen. Wegen met routerelaties kun je niet splitsen met een simpele editor als iD.
Dat kan wel met editor JOSM.
Ik zie dat de wandelroute gaten vertoont. Zal wel even kijken of het simpel is op te lossen.
Een aanrader.
editor josm stap voor stap 

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710        

Mapse,
eggie

 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway
eggie (2021-10-03 17:33:24+00:00): Wandelroute hersteld. efen geen ideen of het met jouw edits te maken had.
De volgorde klopt weer.
gr eggie
eggie (2021-10-04 21:07:21+00:00): typo efen? >even
eggie (2021-10-05 08:12:32+00:00): De tagging heb ik aangepast naar een G11 fietspad.
De 'Monnickerdammerweg' aan de noordzijde van de ringvaart heb ik omgetagd naar Purmerdijk.
Bron https://verbeterdekaart.kadaster.nl/#?geometry.x=125979.61&geometry.y=497022.95&zoomlevel=12.07
MVG
eggie
aceman444 (2021-10-04 09:54:30+00:00): Zdravim, zase ziadny popis zmien, ziadny zdroj.

Ako ste prisli na to, ze na ceste https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32876396 nesmu ist ziadne motorove vozidla, ani vlastnik? A uz ani bicykle?
aixbrick (2021-10-03 19:11:34+00:00): Danke
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:17:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work
eggie (2021-10-03 17:47:51+00:00): Tip.. Je amenity=parking zijn geen parkeerterrein in de zin van..
Je kunt dan het beste parking=street_side toevoegen. Dan rendert de P  minder prominent.
MVG
eggie
jmapb (2021-10-03 16:03:19+00:00): Hi SH17, I've noticed you're working on road alignment in NYC.

As a longtime NYC mapper, I'd encourage you to align to the "NYS Orthos Online" imagery instead of Bing's. NYS Orthos is consistently the best aligned across the city, while Bing's alignment drifts.

The NYS Orthos imagery is from last autumn so it's also the most recent at the moment, though Bing is a close second in most parts of the city.

Thanks, J
snake21 (2021-10-03 16:10:52+00:00): Thanks, I’ll definitely do that going forward!
MxxCon (2021-10-27 03:16:06+00:00): This is not always the case and it must always be evaluated in each individual area.
In a number of chasesets I've seen SH17 blindly make edits which made the map LESS accurate because nys orthos is outdated compared to other imagery, and SH17's edits to road geometry don't represent the real world layout.
Furthermore, if 4 different satellite images pixel-match in alignment with each other but not nys orthos, nys orthos is misaligned.
I've requested SH17 to doublecheck other imagery before "realigning" roads, but they are ignoring my requests. If this continues I'll either mass-revert their edits or forward it to DWG.
snake21 (2021-10-27 03:33:15+00:00): I'm sorry I didn't see your earlier messages until, but I do think calling my contributions "vandalism" is a bit of a stretch. I will certainly keep your feedback in mind when making future edits.
jmapb (2021-10-27 23:29:46+00:00): Mea culpa, it appears that the current NYS Orthos imagery is *not* from last autumn, it's from autumn 2018. This was a clerical error on my part and I apologize for the confusion and any subsequent damage to the map. Bing has been continuing to add fresh imagery and is now more up to date (2020) in most places.

But I'm still vouching for the alignment of NYS Orthos. I've done extensive comparison of the various imagery providers around here to my own GPS surveys, Strava, and the road traces we used to have from Juno. 

(The claim that "4 different satellite images pixel-match in alignment with each other" doesn't jibe with my observation. At stock alignment, the only two current imagery layers that match in this way are "Esri World Imagery" and" Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta", and because they're both from the same provider I don't give that any additional weight.)
MxxCon (2021-10-27 23:47:13+00:00): Compare imagery alignment around this exit that SH17 "realigned" https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/448112308
Bing, both ERSI and Mapbox all match, while nys orthos is off.

Luckily in NYC from what I've seen, all imagery is pretty close and accurately aligned, and the differences between them are within your mouse movement's margin of error. Short of lane reconfiguration, I'm not sure if there's anything that need such extensive "realignment".

(I'm not talking about Maxar, that thing is completely off).
jmapb (2021-10-28 20:42:15+00:00): It's worth noting that *all* of these imagery layers have alignments variations at different locations, and sometimes also at different zoom levels. (Not to mention changes over time, of course, when photography is updated.)

The example you've given in Staten Island certainly shows Mapbox and Bing close, ESRI a little less so. In my experience Mapbox is the least-consistently aligned layer in NYC, jumping around considerably across the city.

Back in this changeset (lower Manhattan), there are visible differences in alignment in all 3: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmTUXnh5eFgwXEv8sNEuNRaVF7YMZff2nVJxFCzkYhsxfp?filename=layerloop.gif

The NYS Orthos layer is a little south of all of these, indeed the outlier. That doesn't mean it's wrong, but returning to my source data I can't actually swear that it's better than the others, at least not here. My conclusion that it was best-aligned was based on older comparisons, and the current observations sew enough doubt that I'll eschew further evangelization on NYS Orthos' behalf. (OTOH NYC's orthos *were* in fact updated in 2020, so I'm not entirely delusional: https://gis.ny.gov/gateway/orthoprogram/lot20/index.html )

I haven't done enough analysis to have an opinion regarding the quality of, or need for, SH17's alignment changes. In general I agree that there's not a particularly pressing need for much road realignment in the city, except as required due to physical changes on the ground.
Aerond (2021-10-03 15:46:49+00:00): Uddnäsvägen menade jag.
TrickyFoxy (2021-10-26 16:32:00+00:00): 👋 
выбирайте тип дороги точнее. Кажется вы разобрались, но на всякий случай оставлю ссылку с объяснением
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Highway_classification
A67-A67 (2021-10-05 19:23:46+00:00): Het Zonnepark Lungendonk ligt een paar honderd meter noordelijker en staat al in OSM. Dit is waarschijnlijk een aspergeveld.
A67-A67 (2021-10-05 19:25:26+00:00): Ik heb de akker hersteld.
A67-A67 (2021-10-06 12:47:13+00:00): Er blijken toch twee gelijknamige zonneparken te zijn, van verschillende eigenaren. Ik heb het weer toegevoegd, met een opmerking op beide parken voor de duidelijkheid.
treestryder (2021-11-28 21:49:01+00:00): Is this concrete pathway (which is currently closed for construction) really part of the Lansing River Trail Relation?
treestryder (2023-02-13 02:49:35+00:00): Sorry. Wrong change set.
user_5359 (2021-10-20 09:08:16+00:00): Hwllo! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/989156832. Why does this path have the tag layer=-1? At the node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9142565029 layer=0 and layer-1 are merged, which is technically not possible.
mapper32468 (2021-10-27 17:35:20+00:00): Hello, I tagged it using layer=-1 due to it being kinda under the building, but also not being a tunnel and ID annoyed me because of it. I don't have any images myself right now, but here is one from Mapillary https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=49.766244444444&lng=9.9439972222222&z=17&pKey=188426059683647&focus=photo

I'm sorry if my tagging was incorrect, I'll correct it if needed.
user_5359 (2021-10-27 19:41:36+00:00): Okay, you mean the part of the way which is under the building marked with Neubert? Please divide the way and set the tag layer=-1 only this way part. If you need support: You are welcome!
mapper32468 (2021-10-29 17:51:55+00:00): Alright, I have done that now.
pantufla (2023-03-09 19:03:01+00:00): Qué se supone que sería esto? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9142544236
pantufla (2023-10-16 08:06:09+00:00): Hola amigo, me podrías decir para actualizarlo bien? Lo voy a tener que borrar de lo contrario
rirausquin (2023-10-16 12:38:41+00:00): Buen dia Borrado..
pantufla (2023-10-16 12:55:13+00:00): Muchas gracias!! :) Si fuera información para la data, quizás podría haber alguna forma de representarlo.
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:17:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work
gunnar1m (2021-10-08 07:38:17+00:00): kann ich leider nicht mehr nachvollziehen.

sorry. gruß gunnar
Lukas615 (2021-10-07 19:22:07+00:00): Hallo,
welchen Sinn hat diese Änderung?
Du hast den von mir eingetragenen Bahnsteig gelöscht und neu eingezeichnet!?
Warum?
Viele Grüße
Lukas
lyctkel (2021-10-04 07:36:18+00:00): Hi preuscf,
while checking some houses in delft using https://demo.f4map.com I saw some houses you improved yesterday. 
There seems to have been a small misunderstanding with roof:levels.
roof:levels refers to the levels of the roof and not to the total height of the house. So it should by roof:levels=1.
The houses look great anyway:
https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=52.0011700&lon=4.3600990&zoom=18&camera.theta=62.238&camera.phi=-109.696
Regards,
lyctkel
preuscf (2021-10-04 07:54:07+00:00): Hi lyctkel,
Most houses here have a flat roof. Isn't the roof:levels=0 because there are no attic rooms?
Sry I am a newbie and in Streetcomplete the form asks for attic levels and normal house levels. So if there is a flat roof you do not have a proper attic right?
Best,
preuscf
lyctkel (2021-10-04 10:47:08+00:00): Hi preuscf,
OK, I hadn't check the shape of the roof. In case its flat you don't have to do anything, but you can set roof:shape=flat.
Normally you don't map attics as well. You just count the levels (incl. attic) of the house and that's it. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:levels?uselang=en
Furthermore I found the houses including https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/753766413#map=19/52.00123/4.36138&layers=N needed some improvement.
You had mapped a roof:level of 1, that's fine, but in that case the orientation of the roof would be away from the street and the shape would be roof:shape=hipped.
I corrected the direction using roof:orientation=across and 
roof:shape=gabled (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings#Roof).
Building https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/253724447 is more complicated. One part has 2 levels and a roof while the other has 3 levels and a roof.
You have to use building:part for that. I added that (hopefully right).

BTW, we all had been newbies once. I still get corrections from other mappers after 10 years. 
This helps us to make the map better.
regards,
lyctkel
A67-A67 (2022-02-04 13:42:39+00:00): Je verwijderd hier de tag Wikidata=Q19522367 van de Smits van Oyenlaan. Dit is het Wikidata-item dat naar deze straat verwijst, dus dit tag was correct.

Zie: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q19522367
jmsbert (2021-10-15 18:21:12+00:00): Hi Yopaseooi+catastro,
I am wondering about your edits. 
You have added suffixes "2021-09-19" to buildings and highways - but in fact in this area the objects still exist until today. 
Which source did you use to decide about affected objects?

[1] https://datos-lapalma.opendata.arcgis.com/maps/3adea79716a640198903580631659a50/explore?location=28.615388%2C-17.891161%2C18.80
yopaseopor (2021-10-16 09:00:42+00:00): The suffixes mark data. The buildings are destroyed, not razed, as you can read in a lot of media like Telecinco

https://www.telecinco.es/informativos/nacional/casas-milagro-salvadas-volcan-la-palma_18_3206975783.html

These houses will not be habitable ever , and are destroyed. It could be possible to do a map with the destruction every day...if you don't revert my job!! Please speak to the Spanish Community before reverting works and recover it, thanks.
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-14 04:56:08+00:00): Don't duplicate water features.

Don't use descriptive names such as "Build label..." or "Water Hazard for TGC2019"
CjMalone (2021-11-02 08:53:08+00:00): Are you sure this is an Aldi?
FHRS Open Data has it as a Lidl.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/853037363
https://ratings.food.gov.uk/business/en-GB/1029115
GranTurismo364 (2021-11-02 11:37:32+00:00): You're right, I mixed up Aldi and Lidl. Thanks for letting me know, I've fixed it now.
ma-rt-in (2021-10-08 07:17:46+00:00): Hallo,

was genau meinst du mit deiner Beschreibung bei dem Wirtschaftsweg mit surface:note="Fels und Asphal" ?

vg
Vojaĝanto (2021-10-08 10:07:13+00:00): Teilweise läuft man quasi direkt auf dem Fels, stellenweise (nicht Abschnitte, eher Flecken) ist dieser mit Asphalt oder Kies bedeckt, mir war unklar, was ich da angeben soll …
vulasala (2021-10-04 04:39:58+00:00): Hi V_pon,
Trust you are doing well. I have created the way 989273964, as there is a missing road.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112041340
Komadinovic Vanja (2022-10-09 19:18:01+00:00): Pozdrav,

Prilično sam siguran da se toponim Paljba odnosi na vidikovac koji se nalazi dalje niz put prema Kaoni, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/422766558 ?
LuleWalker (2022-10-09 19:34:36+00:00): Paljba je vrh iznad samog vidikovca, preko ulice pa par metara dalje. Vidikovac se takođe zove Paljba, po vrhu. Rastojanje između vrha i vidikovca je 10-20m (slobodna procena). Takođe se i cela ta lokacija (od Lučića ograda do Tulimirskog podruma i Rosića strana i Narcis polja) naziva Paljba.