piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2014-12-24 15:13:27+00:00): There is (and has been for many years) debate about tagging of woodland - whether "natural=wood" means "there are trees" or "this is a primeval forest".  The problem is even documented on the wiki page:

http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwood

What about http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/76823138/history - did you survey that yourself to see that the trees were indeed broad-leaved?  The mapped trees don't really match the imagery, so I suspect that more surveying might be needed here in any case.
iWowik (2014-12-25 06:07:06+00:00): Test360: I siad what I exactly wanted to say
 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism#Types_of_vandalism
> Inappropriate use of Bots
> Purposeful removal or degregation of data that is known to be correct 

You should coordinate you mass worldwide editing with the community (country local communities where you edit)
Test360 (2015-01-08 21:59:11+00:00): The data was not correct, because "landuse=wood" is a mistaken tag, as the OSM wiki states : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dwood_%28Don%27t_use%29

Thus, this edit was not  vandalism.

 iWowik, you seem to not understand the difference between "natural=wood" and "landuse=wood".

Thanks SomeoneElse to explain how deciduous tree is not necessarily broadleaved. The JOSM warning don't explain that.
skquinn (2014-12-24 16:26:10+00:00): Good first edits. However, barrier=fence isn't valid on a node, only on ways. I fixed this for you: I drew in the fence and changed the tag on the node to noexit=yes.
tyr_asd (2014-12-30 16:55:32+00:00): Danke für deine vielen Maproulette Ausbesserungen!
Hier war aber das von dir eingefügte tunnel=culvert leider fehl am Platz, denn man sieht am Bing-Bild recht eindeutig, dass der Bach nur etwas ungenau eingezeichnet war, und 20m daneben die Straße über eine recht markante Brücke führt, welche in OSM auch noch nicht drin war. Das nächste mal vielleicht bitte ein wenig mehr Sorgfalt walten lassen beim Armchair-Mapping. ;-)
Trotzdem nochmal danke für deine Mühen. LG, Martin!
SomeoneElse (2014-12-28 16:37:46+00:00): Hi, I notice that you've changed a tag on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/113047270/history#map=15/53.1333/-1.0581 .  Upon what basis have you chosen landuse=forest rather than natural=wood here?  I'm familiar with the area - it's part of the old extent of Sherwood Forest - some bits are actively managed nearby but some bits are not.  Did you actually visit the area to see what would be the most appropriate tag?  If not, I cannot see any value in the edit that you've performed there.
SomeoneElse (2014-12-24 12:21:14+00:00): In http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/176939271/history you seem to have removed all indication that there was a grassy area between the hotel buildings and the car park.  Was this deliberate?
iWowik (2014-12-24 14:50:10+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/45662539/history

You just delete infomation!
I think your changesets should be just reverted.
uk_jay (2015-01-01 13:23:30+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/295248884

You have automatically removed not only the natural:grass tag, but also a leisure: recreation_ground tag. Your script must be faulty, and your changes should be reverted.
XaMi (2014-12-28 21:27:50+00:00): It seems within this changeset objects with tags like natural/landuse=grass/grassland have been changed randomly or even deleted. 
E.g. in one case natural=grass has been changed to natural=grassland (which is quite ok IMHO), in other cases the whole way with tag natural=grass has been deleted completely.
Due to the affected area it looks like an automated mass edit without any local knowledge.
DWG has been informed already.
zool (2014-12-29 02:18:13+00:00): On behalf of the DWG; we have been asking for comments on this and a some related changesets where mappers have raised concern about mechanical edits. As it stands we plan to go ahead and revert these changes.
f00bar (2015-03-10 15:40:06+00:00): Moinsen, gibt es einen Grund warum du dieses Stück der L53 zu highway=unclassified gemacht hast?
Gruss,
f
user_53559 (2015-03-10 16:44:23+00:00): Hallo f00bar,
danke für den Hinweis, das war offensichtlich ein Fehler von mir, ich habe das wieder korrigiert.
Gruß Miple
SomeoneElse (2014-12-28 16:52:31+00:00): I notice that you've changed the tags on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38482991/history - did you discuss with the previous mapper (SK53) whether your change was actually correct?  They've already reverted one mechanical edit there (by Rovastar).
Zbigniew_Cz (2014-12-24 14:19:24+00:00): Przychodzi taki nowy i zaczyna od kasowania rzeczy, których istnienia nie rozumie.
Proszę się zapoznać: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 a tymczasem wycofuję te zmiany.
WdC_DE (2016-09-27 20:50:21+00:00): Verein ist ausgezogen stimmt, aber trotz der Ankündigung durch die Stadt wurde das Gebäude bislang nicht abgerissen.
Keypunch (2014-12-29 13:41:43+00:00): Hey MuzikMachine! I'm going to revert this edit since it is not quite accurate. North Hilll Drive Curves around the corner and continues along the hilltop here. There are houses lining that "link" who have North Hill Drive as their address. It's a weird intersection to be sure! I'll send this message to you directly as well in case you don't get notified of this one.
Keypunch (2014-12-29 13:43:58+00:00): Actually, I'm going to just restore the name! It might be more accurate to still use the link.
escada (2015-01-06 08:51:36+00:00): Beste,

ik heb deze wijziging moeten terugdraaien. Er was iets misgelopen met de lijn die de adressen 157-169 voorstelt. Deze lijn mag geen tag highway=living_street krijgen. Bovendien zat er een vreemde bocht in.

Misschien kan ik u verder helpen, als u hier als commentaar zou schrijven wat u wilde bekomen.

Mocht u nog vragen hebben, aarzel dan niet ook om hier een extra commentaar te schrijven
aharvey (2015-09-23 12:21:59+00:00): It seems leisure=nature_reserve was changed to leisure=park in this changeset. This isn't appropriate for the Heathcote National Park as it's not consistant with the usage of leisure=park at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark (See also the note at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark#National_Parks)
Hjart (2015-02-03 22:06:06+00:00): Hej. I henhold til http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines er det et krav at enhver form for import tages op på mindst den lokale mailingliste (i vores tilfælde http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk) før de udføres. Tak
joern povlsen (2015-02-04 00:25:45+00:00): Krav findes ikke på osm.
Det hedder Openstreetmap!

Hvad er det for en import, du snakker om?
Selvfølgelig vil jeg gerne sammenarbejde, 

Men hvad er det der er galt her?
Jeg kan lyde lidt sur ovst. men vil gerne rette ind. Jeg fatter bare ikke lige, hvor jeg har brudt  osm-filosofien om at osm-databasen skal fyldes  med valide geodata.

Meb du ha

mvh.
Jørn
joern povlsen (2015-02-04 00:40:21+00:00): Beklager, at ovst. blev sendt mens jeg redigerede. Men hvad er det egentligt, jeg har lavet galt?
Vid  venligst at jeg er anarkist. Ord som "krav" giver mig gåsehud.
Fornuft forstår jeg, Hvad gik der galt her?
Hjart (2015-02-04 00:46:51+00:00): Før jeg forklarer yderligere: Har du læst http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines?
GS25 (2015-11-15 04:56:30+00:00): Hi there,

Have you been moving the roads to match the aerial photographs?  Please don't do that.  The aerial photographs are not accurate.

You must use GPS tracks and aerial photographs together.

Step one: Move the aerial photograph to match the GPS tracks.
Step two: Draw the roads and other features you can see.
Step three: Adjust the position of the aerial photographs when you move to different areas of the map.

In JOSM the menu option is this:
Imagery | Imagery Offset | New Offset

I will fix highway 12 (88 Olympic Expressway).  Construction is almost finished.
Константин Гам (2019-08-07 16:38:47+00:00): Зачем это здесь?
Chris Fleming (2015-01-06 15:42:42+00:00): I think you're going to have to try MUCH harder to get into WorstofOSM :)
flohoff (2014-12-27 17:30:29+00:00): Hi,
es wäre schön wenn du Changeset kommentare setzen würdest. Dann könnte man nachvollziehen was du vor hast oder gemacht hast.

Flo
Warin61 (2016-06-16 09:32:25+00:00): Way: 318676779 looks like animal quarters ... certainly not a hanger? Unless it is a guilder or two. But I'd think there would be vehicle tracks then.
cadsauxk (2014-12-24 16:40:46+00:00): Porque tantos nós apagados? Quais foram as modificações introduzidas?
Vítor Dias (2014-12-24 19:29:16+00:00): Deve ser porque eu uni limites de bairros com o córrego da Av. Tancredo Neves, porque são coincidentes. Além disso desenhei com detalhes alguns lugares, como a sede do PROPAM e a academia Alta Energia.
cadsauxk (2014-12-24 19:47:46+00:00): Legal, obrigado.
Plop76 (2014-12-24 13:03:25+00:00): Les voies vertes sont plutôt mappées en highway=path en ajoutant bicycle=designated et foot=designated plutôt qu'en highway=cycleway vu qu'il n'y a pas d'usage privilégié entre piétons et vélos.
miarnaud (2014-12-24 15:49:58+00:00): J'ai hésité , mais il y a une voie piétonne en contre bas ...
Plop76 (2014-12-24 17:32:04+00:00): En effet :) Je laisse en cycleway, de toute façon ça change pas grand chose ;)
d1g (2014-12-25 08:51:23+00:00): Радищевская геллерея (это художественный музей) была уже отмечена: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4097356

Сейчас здесь затроение POI, 2 названия на зданиях с которыми я не согласен.

Двух одинаково называемых зданий "Радищевский музей" нет. Как минимум это "старый" и "новый".

С редактором JOSM таких ошибок будет меньше http://josm.ru/
Thilina (2014-12-24 11:54:14+00:00): yes
limes11 (2024-03-13 20:58:43+00:00): Moin

du hattest hier vermutlich versehentlich durch copy&paste überall das gleiche Image gesetzt. Siehe 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4151657

Magst du mal schauen und korrigiern ? 

Vielen Dank
dforsi (2014-12-24 16:16:55+00:00): Anche qui c'è il problema di opening_hours e poi l'hai messo in mezzo alla strada.
dforsi (2014-12-24 16:15:36+00:00): Il tag opening_hours deve essere scritto in inglese, non in italiano, perché venga interpretato e tradotto dai programmi o dalla OpenLinkMap, guarda qui per la documentazione del tag
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours
BCNorwich (2014-12-25 08:25:11+00:00): Hi, is the proper name/title for the toilets really "Sparhawk park toilets" or is this your description? If not a proper name then it should not be name= tagged such, rather put in a note. Regards.
species (2014-12-26 22:42:19+00:00): Hi,
Das "Restaurant" hier ist glaub ich eine Satire, da steht auf der "Karte" vorn heraußen: Mariniertes Hemd, Gefülltes Plastikrohr, Ventilatorinnereien, Schaumstoffcrepes
;-)
lg
Geomapper69 (2015-01-22 10:22:31+00:00): This way:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/318707715
What is it? Road? footpath?
d1g (2014-12-24 14:49:21+00:00): И как понимать эти правки? Что значит удаление тегов soure=*?

Если написано source=ПРАВИТЕЛЬСТВО САРАТОВСКОЙ ОБЛАСТИ ПОСТАНОВЛЕНИЕ от 18 марта 2009 г. N 101-П ОБ УТВЕРЖДЕНИИ ПОЛОЖЕНИЯ О ПРИРОДНОМ ПАРКЕ "КУМЫСНАЯ ПОЛЯНА"

То это именно то, что имеется ввиду

http://saratov.gov.ru/government/structure/compresenvir/Podvedom/GUSOKum/PolKum.rtf
Nid (2014-12-24 15:00:38+00:00): КУМЫСНАЯ ПОЛЯНА находится в другом месте.
d1g (2014-12-24 16:50:43+00:00): Это природный парк и его границы устанавливает постановление. У вас есть более новое постановление?

Специально для вас было отмечено что это только часть границ.

Погодите-ка, вы просто удалили это замечание не связавшись с её автором. Браво.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3866635#map=12/51.5406/46.0511
eBin (2015-12-11 14:16:07+00:00): Przy zmienianiu line -> minor_line proszę pamiętać także o słupach tower -> pole. Słupy tower wyświetlają się od poziomu 14 a minor_line dopiero od 16. Zaznaczyć wszystkie węzły można po wybraniu linii i wyszukaniu "child selected" lub za pomocą wtyczki utilsplugin2 i skrótu e.
andygol (2014-12-24 14:34:50+00:00): is it right comment?
Rub21 (2014-12-24 14:36:04+00:00): no, sorry, the right comment is , align the roads.
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-10-04 16:10:21+00:00): Zerkniesz na https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1128826 ?

Według tej notki budowa dodana w tej edycji nie została zealizowana.
*Martin* (2014-12-29 11:06:30+00:00): Hello Adam

You've probably by accidend changed protected area multipolygon to pedestrian zone. That caused large mountain range to be covered by pedestrian zone.

I've just fixed this.

Please next time be more careful when editing maps so you don't do any damage. I recomment you to stop using web editor iD and migrate to more proffesional tool JOSM.
Talitha IRM-ED (2022-12-01 08:11:11+00:00): Hi, Russ McD. Hope you're doing great. Due to connectivity issue on https://maproulette.org/challenge/30155/task/142667695, I have to delete the highway (Way 318732560). 
Thank you and happy mapping!
LivingWithDragons (2015-01-06 11:31:24+00:00): I hope your goose was good. (yes I'm testing the changeset notes -woo!)
Harry Wood (2015-01-06 11:51:49+00:00): Yep. Good goose. Nom nom nom
GerdP (2015-10-23 15:49:35+00:00): Most of these roads where duplicates to existing roads and later removed. 
highway=Voie communale
should have been
highway=residential or maybe
highway=unclassified ?
eggie (2018-12-16 12:34:59+00:00): Dag Maarten.. Je hebt hier ooit de "shape" van de kerk aangepast. Alle gebouwen zijn directe import van het Kadaster en precies ingemeten. Weet je zeker dat deze kerk nu de goede vorm heeft. Hij komt niet meer overeen met de import. 
MVG,
eggie
eggie (2018-12-16 12:35:19+00:00): Dit was je edit https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=27676225
eggie (2018-12-16 12:42:46+00:00): De vorm van de kerk heb ik conform de BGT omtrekgericht hersteld. 
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2018-12-16 12:50:49+00:00): Je hebt hier naar het dak gekeken en maar je hoort uit te gaan van het maaiveld. De oorspronkelijke import klopte dus wel. De kerk als gebouw  zelf heeft dezelfde tags als de node. Verder staat er nog een node met tags. Het geheel is dus 2x getagd als kerk. Het beste is er een weg te halen. In dit geval zou ik de nodes weghalen, maar het adres in tact laten. 
De extra node: De protestantse gemeente Arnhem is dat een aparte gemeente? Best ingewikkeld hier.
SomeoneElse (2014-12-28 17:57:29+00:00): I'm guessing that "bridge:movable 	transporter" is probably not correct for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/52722313 as it's disused; presumably the "disused:bridge:movable=transporter" tag from 4 months ago does the job?
choess (2014-12-29 22:50:14+00:00): Good point. We don't really have a good standardized scheme for disused/dismantled/collapsed bridges, but that's as good an interim measure as any. I removed the bridge:movable tag and slapped on access=no.
cadsauxk (2014-12-24 18:44:05+00:00): Qual foi a alteração e a fonte? "Editing road"  não quer dizer nada ;)
trigpoint (2020-01-17 15:29:47+00:00): Hi, I realise you mapped this a long time ago but just wondering what you meant by electrified=yes. Did you mean there is lighting, which I would expect in a train shelter or did you mean there are 13A sockets to charge your phone?
Cheers Phil
DLaffan (2020-01-25 15:24:53+00:00): Hello, my apologies as my edits done at this time were naively done. There are sockets and it is electrified as it's part of the Edinburgh Waverly-Queen St. (via Falkirk High) link
trigpoint (2014-12-24 21:07:47+00:00): Please can you explain this changeset, you seem to have removed footbridge tags from node on rights of way, have you physically surveyed these paths to ensure there is no footbridges?
Whilst nodes for a bridge is unusual, this probably needs surveying and not deletion. Matt is competant mapper of PROWs and I would suggest a survey, or ask him before simply deleting valuable information.
trigpoint (2014-12-24 21:34:31+00:00): Sorry, can see you have added a bridge. First look this appeared as a deletion.
choess (2014-12-25 00:48:16+00:00): Sorry about this. "Footbridge" is kind of a weird tag. I'm not sure my bridge is exactly accurate but I don't know that it's any worse in accuracy than the node. Thanks for the comments.
Zbigniew_Cz (2014-12-25 00:05:07+00:00): Proszę o właściwe adresowanie budynków w miejscowościach bez nazwanych ulic. Temat jest omówiony tutaj: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=210760#p210760 
Niewłaściwie otagowany adres: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3251104899
Dodatkowo, landuse=farmyard powinien być obszarem, a nie węzłem.
chillly (2014-12-24 20:02:58+00:00): Welcome to OSM. 
Is the path really called 'Through the Forest'? 
Most routes in the UK that are accessible to bikes are also accessible on foot. Is this one really not?
Is the path really one way? How is that enforced?
useruuu (2014-12-24 19:31:00+00:00): лесная дорога
mavl (2014-12-25 18:02:12+00:00): Здравствуйте.
По каким данным вы проставляете теги name и operator?

Дело в том, что, например, на заправке в Заводоуковске (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2044162710) написано «Лукойл», но лукойловские скидки на ней не действуют. Похоже, что компания Лукойл не владеет этой заправкой (построила, но потом продала).
Тег operator не был указан на этой заправке именно потому, что точно неизвестен её владелец, а тег name не был указан, чтобы не вводить водителей, которые могут рассчитывать на лукойловские скидки, в заблуждение.
dododont (2014-12-24 20:59:30+00:00): Lähteenä Lempäälän kunnan Birgitan polun esite.
Supaplex (2014-12-25 04:40:43+00:00): 可以跟開放資料平台抱怨村里界WMS「開放資料集」回報有錯誤
ajithkarunaratne (2014-12-26 03:40:52+00:00): Thanks..
CloCkWeRX (2015-04-17 19:24:30+00:00): You might be interested in seeing the impact of your work with addresses - http://qa.poole.ch/ ; click the 'no address' tickbox.
dudka (2014-12-25 10:11:55+00:00): removed stress symbols
Sandal man (2016-09-22 21:16:38+00:00): Why the "m" behind the ele?
trigpoint (2014-12-26 13:02:37+00:00): Are you sure www.openstreetmap.org/way/318802094/ is a golf course, it looks more like a park/farmland from bing imagery.
Also you have mapped several areas as meadow, again are you sure, they look like arable pasture rather than meadow.
aceman444 (2014-12-27 00:08:20+00:00): Dobry den, prosim ked zadavate maximalne rychlosti, uvedte na tu cestu aj zdroj tejto rychlosti (ani len na sade zmien ste neuviedli ziadny zdroj). Ak je tam znacka 50km/h potom dajte "source:maxspeed=sign". Ak to vyplyva z toho, ze je to v obci, dajte "source:maxspeed=SK:urban". Aby bolo jasne, ci sa to ma zmenit, keby sa zrazu zmenila max. rychlost v obci zo zakona. Dakujem. A na cesty typu "residential" 50-ku ani davat nemusite, tam je to ako "default".
flohoff (2014-12-27 17:29:59+00:00): Hi,
es wäre schön wenn du einen changeset kommentar setzen würdest. Dann wäre es einfach nachzuvollziehen was du gemacht hast oder vor hattest.

Flo
ypid (2015-04-30 12:38:40+00:00): Du hast die opening_hours als „Mo-Sa +20:00“ eingetragen. Das wird so leider nicht vestanden. Ich habe es korrigiert in: „Mo-Fr,Sa 08:00-20:00 unknown "Begin der Öffungszeiten ungewiss. 20 Uhr Schließung"“. Die geben auf der Webseite leider nichts vernünftiges an. Sollte man eventuell Vorort mal nachfragen.
Hjart (2014-12-30 14:55:42+00:00): I Uhre skov har du lagt et lille stykke sti dobbelt over et andet lille stykke sti, hvilket medførte en lille blå streg på OSMI's routinglag. Jeg har rettet dette. Du havde også navngivet denne og en anden stump sti "Rød rute". Jeg har slettet navnene og i stedet lavet en ruterelation, der indtil videre kun indeholder disse to stumper sti. I Gauerslund skov har jeg gjort noget tilsvarende.
streckenkundler (2014-12-25 22:54:49+00:00): Hallo Peter, bezüglich des von Dir eintetragenen Blitzers existiert auch eine Note:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/288310

kann die dann geschlossen werden?

fragt Sven
Peter Maiwald (2014-12-26 10:57:03+00:00): Der Ersteller der Note hat 3 Minuten nach Erstellung der Note, den Blitzer selbst hinzugefügt. Ich hab die Relation hinzugefügt und jetzt die Note als erledigt markiert.
mavl (2014-12-25 18:44:00+00:00): Здравствуйте.
Суд в самом деле полностью занимает пятиэтажный дом?
Если нет, то его нужно обозначить отдельной точкой на контуре здания или внутри здания.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/85565575
mavl (2014-12-25 18:38:01+00:00): Здравствуйте.
Что означает тег shop=yes?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/85560559
tms13 (2017-07-04 13:12:18+00:00): Please resurrect Way 246892527 - deleting that broke Relation 3332503.  Thanks.
tms13 (2019-01-30 09:47:20+00:00): Actually, both the relations you've edited here have lost their outer ways - please fix them.
frasty (2015-01-05 17:40:06+00:00): Perchè sono state apportate queste modifiche al sentiero "I Cavalli"?
Non seguono le linee guida del wiki in quanto:
1. mancano i commenti alle modifiche apportate.
2. aggiunto campo "ref", già presente nella relazione di tipo "route" cui fa parte l'oggetto.
3. modifica del nome del sentiero con aggiunta del valore del campo "ref".
4. Segmenti del sentiero unificati in uno solo con conseguente perdita di dettagli.
5. mtb:value=2 errato in quanto il sentiero non presenta alcuna difficoltà, tranne che in alcuni punti. (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:mtb:scale)
frasty (2015-01-05 20:40:46+00:00): ho controllato meglio e il punto 4 in effetti non è da considerare dato che il tracciato non era diviso in segmenti.. gli altri punti però rimangono.
surftrader (2015-01-06 09:59:49+00:00): Ciao,l'unica cosa che ho fatto è mettere nel nome anche il numero sentiero perchè ho visto che il numero è l'unica indicazione reale presente sul posto e quindi mi sembra utile che ci sia corrispondenza fra OSM e quello che si trova effettivamente indicato nei sentieri.Riguardo la difficoltà,che precedentemente se nn ricordo male non era indicata,ho considerato i pochi punti più complessi e direi che la scala 2 può essere attinente (anche perchè 2 su 6 indica cmq un sentiero facile con la presenza però di qualche ripido che effettivamente c'è).  PS:hai ragione sul fatto che le indicazioni di wiki sono di mettere "mtb:nome"  (e quindi mancherebbe cmq "mtb") ma poi nei sentieri l'unica indicazione presente è il numero quindi mi chiedo:non è meglio che compaia anche quello?Nn mi sembra che si perda alcun dettaglio ma ammetto di essere un neo mappatore quindi tutt'altro che esperto (il pto 2,ovvero l'aggiunta del ref, è proprio dovuto a questo).
frasty (2015-01-07 02:23:11+00:00): Per quanto riguarda l'aggiunta del ref al nome, non credo sia corretto perchè appunto il nome che si dà all'oggetto dovrebbe corrispondere esattamente al nome reale dello stesso, senza aggiunte (anche se in questo caso, come hai notato, sarebbe meglio usare "mtb:name", ma lasciamo perdere:). Il fatto che l'identificativo del sentiero non sia visibile nella mappa di default di osm non giustifica la sua aggiunta al nome: agire così rientra nel caso di "tagging for the renderer" (http://goo.gl/IGc2Fp); e` infatti compito del renderer (la mappa) visualizzare i dati immessi ma non ci si può aspettare che la mappa di base renderizzi tutto ciò che viene immesso. Ci sono mappe specifiche che visualizzano il campo "ref" come waymarkedtrails.org o il progetto di mappe offline openandromaps (http://goo.gl/tMDQsE), ad esempio.
Quindi come buona pratica generica sarebbe meglio taggare seguendo le linee guida senza dare troppa importanza a come osm.org visualizza i dati inseriti.
Per quanto riguarda la difficoltà mtb, qui in effetti si rientra in un campo un po' più soggettivo.. Personalmente sarei più indirizzato a usare mtb:scale=0 per un lungo sentiero che non presenta difficoltà alcuna se non in due o tre punti come in questo caso, magari taggando quei punti con un valore maggiore. Comunque, apparte questo, ormai in tutta la zona e anche nelle zone limitrofe sono presenti dei valori di mtb:scale piuttosto bassi e raramente si vedono mtb:scale maggiori di 2 se non per indicare trail piuttosto tecnici dal quasi trialistico in su. Utilizzando mtb:scale=2 ci ritroveremmo con altri sentieri molto più tecnici ma con mtb:scale uguale o minore a questo e si dovrebbe così cambiare la scala di riferimento un po' per tutti i sentieri.. magari si potrebbe usare mtb:scale=0+ per questo, prima mi pare fosse 0.