piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
davidearl (2016-07-06 16:59:19+00:00): Not at all: tagging for the renderer is where you tag something to make it appear the way you want on some particular renderer. These really are parts of the University, and the rest (almost all) the hospital isn't; grouping them together is just wrong, it makes them indistinguishable. In any case changing the tagging on a whim under our feet isn't helpful.
EoghanM (2016-07-11 09:40:21+00:00): The tag `operator=University of Cambridge` is the correct way to indicate that a node is part of another institution. `amenity=university` is a much more major thing to signify that there is (the centre of) a significant university here. E.g. The tags on node 1642015081 are saying 'There is a University called "Department of Radiology" here'. Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=university
EoghanM (2016-07-11 09:51:03+00:00): By 'online map' are you referring to the blue squares here?
http://map.cam.ac.uk/#52.175363,0.141020,17
The correct fix is to key them off `operator=University of Cambridge` instead of `amenity=university`
I appreciate that my changeset messed the map up for you so won't revert the incorrect amenity=university tags but please do so after updating that mapping stylesheet.
davidearl (2016-07-11 10:00:43+00:00): Not just those. This area is not a university campus, but some parts of it are University. Not is it a hospital completely. And some of it is private commercial. There is already a boundary for the campus, but it's a diverse place.

Operator is completely insufficient to represent the data here or elsewhere in Cambridge. University of Cambridge "operates" many things that aren't "university". building=university might be sufficient, though some of these locations aren't actually separate buildings. I think amenity=university expresses the intent here. There are tens of thousands of such instances across Cambridge that have been used in this way for five years or more. It would be a mammoth job to change these, simply because you disagree with the way the tag has been used.
EoghanM (2016-07-11 11:31:04+00:00): There are 1,249 nodes or ways within 20km of Cambridge that are tagged with amenity=university. 1,237 of these (i.e. almost all) have an operator=*  tag on them.
Across the UK there are only 2,391 nodes or ways tagged with amenity=university.
It's great that Cambridge is so well mapped, but I think it's safe to say that amenity=university is grossly overused around Cambridge and that can and should be fixed.
This is supported by 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Duniversity
"Individual elements of the university should not be tagged with amenity=university but can be mapped with operator=* and the name of the university"

Query to come up with those figures:
https://gist.github.com/eoghanmurray/4f0aa7debed9ade8a85d50cbe06b972d
EoghanM (2016-07-11 11:42:36+00:00): In my original changeset I incorrectly said "We should have one enclosing way to represent this hospital university campus."
This is because the presence of operator=university misled me into believing that this was a "University Hospital". (If ways were used instead of nodes I might not have made this mistake, as a node can be used to roughly indicate the centre of something, i.e. it doesn't necessarily delineate a separate area)
SomeoneElse (2016-07-11 13:01:50+00:00): Link to previous discussion for completeness: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017455.html .
EoghanM (2016-07-11 14:08:13+00:00): I suggest bulk changing all `amenity=university` within 20km of Cambridge to `map.cam.ac.uk=university` or similar so that there is minimal update/disruption required to that 3rd party software. @davidearl is that acceptable? I can execute that part of it if you like.
We can then go about using `amenity=university` tag for the very few major named colleges and campuses in this area, on nodes, ways or relations as appropriate.
This isn't on a whim; as an OSM user and data consumer not living in the UK but trying to understand universities there, it's frustrating and misleading to have minor things tagged with amenity=university.
EoghanM (2016-07-11 16:03:20+00:00): It's clear that your usage of `amenity=university` is different from the rest of the UK, and I respect that you thought about the tagging scheme thoroughly in 2011. I'm proposing `map.cam.ac.uk=university` to show that the tag has a specific usage (in terms of meaning, not just rendering) outside of OSM, and additionally to provide a new means of discovery of a useful external map, similarly to how we link to wikipedia articles.
Note: I didn't originally accuse you of tagging for the renderer.
davidearl (2016-07-11 16:12:05+00:00): This just seems like a hack, and it'll all end up going round the same circle again in future.

But also, it effectively means University of Cambridge as an entity effectively disappears off the map completely (except for the University's own map) because it would be represented as a non-standard tag, including in the application you seem to be envisaging. Operator simply doesn't encapsulate "university-ness".

It was "trigpoint" who said tagging for the renderer.
EoghanM (2016-07-11 16:21:12+00:00): A good rule of thumb about 'what is a university' i.e. what should be tagged with `amenity=university` would be to look at the list of campuses/sites/colleges at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Cambridge
So less than 1,000, but more than 1.
So for Douglas House, it should be tagged if it is indeed it's own site/college on a par with one of the 31 major colleges. But at the moment, if this is true, it's lost amongst all the other 1,000+ `amenity=university` tags on minor buildings or sections of hospitals etc.
The 'amenity=university;name=University of Cambridge' tag if required will almost certainly be on a relation (at the moment there is no entity tagged like that that I can see).
From living outside the UK, I've heard of the 'University of Cambridge', but not (until recently) of the fact that individual colleges are basically as important institutions as other major Universities elsewhere.  What I'm proposing is that the tagging system reserves amenity=university for the 31 colleges, and major campuses, so that I can learn this info from the map. This is pretty much how Oxford is tagged I believe.
At any rate, that doesn't have to be all decided at once with a change to `map.cam.ac.uk=university` but can continue to evolve as other people contribute to OSM.
EoghanM (2016-07-11 16:23:55+00:00): > Whatever else, just locally changing some blobs in the hospital area inconsistently with the rest is surely the worst possible answer.

Yes! This is the problem! I was only examining a local area without knowledge of  how the wider Cambridge area is currently tagged, and I made changes consistent with how universities are tagged in the rest of the UK. Future mappers will surely do the same, so lets change it to be consistent with the rest of the UK and move on!
SK53 (2016-07-12 20:20:16+00:00): EoghanM: I dont think the usage in Cambridge is drastically different from usage elsewhere. For Nottingham University there are 3 major amenity=university campuses, but also a number of discrete buildings or part of buildings (notably the Medical School & Postgraduate Medical Centre located within NHS Hospital campuses). One of these campuses, Kings Meadow, is purely an administrative site. Nottingham has additional campuses: one 10 miles away (Sutton Bonington), the other two about 6000 miles away, and the latter two are branded University of Nottingham but are actually joint venture enterprises. So a single relation isn't going to work here even to just cover the 6 campuses. The buildings not in or conveniently close enough to be mapped as exclaves of a campus are treated in ways analogous to the Cambridge situation, but buildings within campuses are not so treated; but then Cambridge doesn't really have true campuses.

I would suggest changing the tagging to break a widely used application which can be cited as an example of OSM's real-world utility is not a good idea. Particularly as the University of Cambridge spend good money in developing that app, this would primarily send a message that we care not a fig for people who use the data.
EoghanM (2016-07-17 19:11:37+00:00): I'm not suggesting a relation to join geographically remote campuses; the `operator=University of Nottingham` tag already does this effectively.
Fauzan IRM-ED (2022-12-13 04:30:23+00:00): Hi, Herdi Firdaus
Your edit looks awesome,but I'd like to inform you that I have to split the highway (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/421467043) due to crossing with water body and has tagged as a bridge.
Thanks and happy mapping.
saintam1 (2016-05-30 22:49:28+00:00): Сигурен ли сте, че това е точното местоположение? Ул. Сава Михайлов е 250 м на изток.
fkv (2020-12-17 02:07:04+00:00): Das sind keine Straßen-, sondern Ortsnamen.
Jacob's-Staff (2016-05-28 15:54:23+00:00): Was ist das mit diesem Changeset hinzugefügte Objekt nun? ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4214695 20 ) Der spartanische Kommentar sag "Schwimmbecken", eingetragen wurde aber ein "building=yes" ### Sollte es sich um einen Pool handeln, würde ich noch - wie im englischen OSM-Wiki empfohlen - ein access=private hinzufügen oder kann diesen Pool jeder mit einem Handtuch nutzen? :)
msevilla00 (2016-05-29 20:26:41+00:00): Hola Juan02, he observado que llevas timepo editandoen OpenStreetMap y eso está genial pero observando tus ediciones creo que te estas "fiando" en exceso del editor que viene embebido en la página de OSM (iD) y creo que por ello cometes algunos errores en la introducción de los datos. Por ejemplo, en este caso has incluido un etiquetado de un punto que es building=ruinas lo que es una etiqueta incorrecta ya que los valores de cada clave han de estar en inglés y, en concreto, para poner unas ruinas, has de usar la clave "historic" y el valor "ruins" y en ningún caso la clave "building". Por otro lado, y en otras ediciones he observado que has editado y movido algunos nodos fiándote de la imagen de fondo que te muestra el editor. OJO! esa imagen de satélite muchas veces no está bien corregida y es por ello que recomendamos usar la ortofotografía del PNOA. Tienes más info en este hilo de la lista de correos de la comunidad: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-es/2015-November/013555.html Un saludo Miguel. Recuerda que somos mucha gente en la comunidad y puedes preguntar si te surgen dudas.
Alecs01 (2016-06-02 18:47:42+00:00): ciao, sei sicuro che si trovi lì e non qui? http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2510267042
stephan75 (2017-08-10 17:20:57+00:00): Hallo smarties,

mit diesem changeset hast du u.a. für das Finanzamt Buchholz einen weiteren Punkt erstellt, welchen du später dann auch noch als "townhall" getaggt hast.

Townhall ist meiner Meinung nach falsch, und der POI ist nun doppelt.

Magst du das wieder vereinfachen auf einen POI?

Gruß, Stephan
smarties (2017-08-11 09:22:26+00:00): Du hast eine E-Mail.
Gruß smarties
Paul_012 (2016-10-12 05:22:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted. Please do not add fake POIs to OpenStreetMap.
Barrocas (2016-07-01 12:49:14+00:00): Boas,
esse troço ja havia sido corrigido por mim, porque as imagens aéreas estao desactualizadas.
O traçado actual é o que esta marcado nos traços GPS, ainda ha alguns antigos, mas o actual é o composto pelas linhas mais suaves.
Voltei a corrigir hoje, para o que corresponde à realidade actual.
Convem ter algum cuidado ao modificar o mapa baseado apenas nas imagens aereas, sem ter conhecimento real do local ou passar por la para verificar.
Cumprimentos e continuação de bom trabalho.
djhorn18 (2016-05-28 13:44:53+00:00): I always get them confused.  I meant Lincoln Speedway
user_5359 (2016-05-28 14:38:07+00:00): Welcome to OSM! The shop is on the street? The suite F2 isn't part of the add:house number it is the value of addr:unit. And you can add the website http://www.diveandphoto.com and cleanup the name (without the address)
Constable (2018-02-07 15:24:53+00:00): hi there Lile, you added a shop in the middle of a road, why don't you move to a more appropriate location?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4212375395
Thanks
user_5359 (2016-05-28 16:04:22+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice: You have forgot to add any information to your node.
user_5359 (2016-06-13 08:11:34+00:00): If you need help: You are welcome!
Commodoortje (2016-05-28 18:31:25+00:00): kleine aanvulling verricht
maraf24 (2016-06-04 10:00:46+00:00): Kilka budynków było już poza granicami Opoczna.
Poprawiłęm adresy.
Sanniu (2017-02-08 10:38:54+00:00): Way: 421491738 is it footway?
zstadler (2017-03-26 13:15:55+00:00): Ways 380785433, 421491738 have no tags. What are they?
zstadler (2017-03-26 13:33:26+00:00): Correction: Way
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/380785433
has no tags. what is it?
zstadler (2017-03-27 13:32:15+00:00): Correction (again...): Way
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/421491738
has no tags. What is it?
zstadler (2021-07-11 13:49:21+00:00): Removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49135936
Commodoortje (2016-05-28 18:37:54+00:00): Diverse toevoegingen aangevuld aan het nieuwe Restaurant.
Nakaner (2019-10-08 22:52:04+00:00): Hallo c-l,

in diesem und vielen anderen Änderungssätzen hast du rund um Schönecken die Landnutzung in OSM eingetragen. Das war sicherlich ein Haufen Arbeit, diesen Detailgrad zu erreichen, aber leider hast du ihn nicht konsequent umgesetzt. Während die Landnutzungsgrenzen recht fein sind, sind die Wege in der Gegend oft noch recht grob. Sie stammen aus Zeiten, als uns nur schlechtere Luftbilder sowie GPS-Geräte zur Verfügung standen. Daher finden sich hier viele Straßen und Wege, entlang deren Ränder Landnutzungsgrenzen sind, die aber zigzag über die Wege laufen. Beispiel: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39626678#map=18/50.15011/6.39634

Da du anscheinend gern Landnutzung mappst, möchte ich dich bitten, dir die Zeit zu nehmen und diese Altlast aufzuräumen. Mit dem W-Modus in JOSM geht das relativ flott.

Viele Grüße

Michael
user_5359 (2016-05-29 03:41:47+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please note: The name is part of the relation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/367473) not from the outerline.
tordor (2016-05-29 04:11:39+00:00): observed, will review the wiki and avoid repeating mistake.
MCDA (2016-06-02 13:10:31+00:00): Why did you capitalise the name from Lisburn to LISBURN?
Alleykat (2016-06-02 13:13:44+00:00): Just thought nit would make it more easily to see
MCDA (2016-06-02 13:23:54+00:00): Ah, please understand that the OpenStreetMap is a database and has standards on how we input data.  If you are confused there is information in the wiki.  (ie http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names )

What you see on the OSM website is only a sample render of the database.  Other people render the map in many, many different ways.  For example you might be more comfortable with a map render on http://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=14&lat=54.5097&lon=-6.04676&layers=B0000  which capitalises placenames.

But for input into the database, please try and stick to the established standards.  This makes the data usable for anyone who wants to use it for whatever purpose they want :)
MCDA (2016-06-02 13:26:07+00:00): This render is quite nice too - http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/54.5092/-6.0408&layers=H
elefn (2016-09-29 18:00:04+00:00): Hallo, bitte solche temporären Baustelleneinschränkungen  (Schild "Fahrradfahrer absteigen" für 10m) nicht mit Bicycle=no taggen. Das Routing ist so total im Eimer. Im Falle der Bubenreuther Unterführung in der Nähe des Kreisels, wollte Basecamp über das Mausloch routen.
user_5359 (2016-05-29 03:45:59+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Did you notice the node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4206089890 nearby? Please discuss with Pille85 for the right value of tourism: attraction or viewpoint.
user_5359 (2016-05-29 03:50:05+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please describe, why "Gmas house is a place which match the definition of viewpoint ("A place where tourists, visitors, hikers might like to visit and take photographs. A place, often high, with a good view of surrounding countryside or notable buildings.", see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dviewpoint).
RobertoVilches (2016-05-28 17:28:21+00:00): It is not a house. Added Parking Space
Владимир К (2016-08-18 11:28:19+00:00): адрес мкад 32 километр если только в addr:full, никак не в addr:street
malenki (2016-06-05 19:14:38+00:00): Hallo Ulifan,
du hast "Am Spritzenhaus" nach "Widdelswehrster Warf" umbenannt.¹ Nun gibt aber das an dieser Straße liegende Hotel Gulfhof an, dass seine Adresse "Am Spritzenhaus 7" ist: http://gulfhof-emden.de/
Wie passt das zusammen?
¹ https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/10853811/history

Viele Grüße
malenki
Ulifan (2016-06-06 16:34:48+00:00): Moin Malenki,
danke, dass Du mal etwas genauer nachschaust.
Den Straßennamen habe ich direkt vor Ort von einem Straßenschild abgelesen.
Ich weiß, dass es durchaus aus historischen Gründen möglich ist, dass ein Haus, obwohl es keinerlei
Zuwegung zu einer bestimmten Straße hat, trotzdem genau diesen Straßennamen als postalische Adresse
angibt. Dann ist die Straße aber in der näheren Umgebung zu finden.
In diesem Fall allerdings kann es natürlich auch sein, das die Stadt Emden für eine Umbenennung gesorgt hat, der Internetauftritt des Hotels jedoch nicht gepflegt wird.
Beste Grüße
Ulifan
malenki (2016-06-06 17:12:50+00:00): Ortskunde hat auf jeden Fall Vorrang. Vielleicht kannst du bei Gelegenheit in dem Hotel dinieren und weitere Erkundigungen einziehen. ;)
Danke für die ausführliche Antwort.
malenki
AMDmi3 (2016-06-06 11:47:08+00:00): Большая просьба называть улицы в соответствии с http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:ВикиПроект_Россия/Соглашение_об_именовании_дорог
PT-53 (2016-05-29 06:58:41+00:00): Hallo Nzara,
Du hast in diesem CS leider auch ein Gebäude überarbeitet / an das Bing-Luftbild angepaßt.
Dir ist sicher bekannt, daß Gebäude nach Möglichkeit anhand des EG-Umrißes und nicht nach dem Luftbild in OSM dargestellt werden sollen. so hatte ich es auch bei diesem Gebäude anhand Maps4BW (siehe Wiki) gemacht.
Ich habe Deine Änderungen wieder zurückgesetzt.
PT-53
PT-53 (2016-05-30 12:02:54+00:00): Siehe auch Kommentar zu CS # 39654935
( https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39654935 )
dbf_ (2016-05-28 19:29:06+00:00): source should be: Mapbox, survey
altim59 (2016-05-29 18:19:35+00:00): Моя ошибка. На карте - остановка. А не аптека собственно, как я подумал вначале.
dbf_ (2016-05-28 19:29:23+00:00): source should be: Mapbox, survey
dbf_ (2016-05-28 19:28:47+00:00): source should be: Mapbox, survey
naoliv (2018-08-11 03:07:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61556585 where the changeset comment is: Reverting vandalism
BushmanK (2016-05-28 20:04:37+00:00): Это что?
literan (2016-05-30 12:28:50+00:00): удаляю, это тыканье пальцем
Elizaveta Smirnova (2016-05-30 15:17:08+00:00): Это была смотровая площадка около церкви, но я думала что это только моя метка, которую будет видно только мне
literan (2016-05-31 21:06:05+00:00): нет, это заметки для картографов. А что, там общедоступная смотровая площадка? можно ее и обозначить
Elizaveta Smirnova (2016-05-31 21:20:54+00:00): да, общедоступная около церкви, вечером возможно закрывают ворота
RicoElectrico (2017-01-22 12:51:27+00:00): Kolega się pyta co się stało z adresem: http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/858522
user_5359 (2016-05-29 04:03:03+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please double check the house number of your office. The suite number isn't a part of the house number, it is a part of add:unit.

If you need help: You are welcome.
5m4u9 (2016-05-30 16:10:47+00:00): Este y otros cambios como alpine_hunt que hiciste son privados. Vamos a borrarlos.

Utiliza uMap para lograr este mismo efecto visual.
muralito (2016-05-30 00:00:36+00:00): Fernando: esto es alojamiento turistico o casa particular?
Gumeg (2017-11-15 14:56:30+00:00): Вы на нём, 502 автобусом ездили? Ни разу не видел его останавливающимся на этой остановке..
и в поле name такую информацию (не используется!) вносить не правильно.
neo-plan (2017-11-15 19:44:39+00:00): Исправьте, как считаете нужным!
Gumeg (2017-11-16 07:24:48+00:00): Да я поправлю, вопрос мой главный в том действительно ли я смогу высадиться на этой остановке с 502-ого?
neo-plan (2017-11-16 10:23:09+00:00): Не знаю. Посмотрел паспорт маршрута: сейчас этой остановки не значится.
http://www.avtoline.ru/content/regular_route/route/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=1417
Думаю, вполне можно выйти на "Вешняки-Владычино" и пройти пешком 10 минут.
Jojo4u (2016-08-18 20:59:21+00:00): Minifrage: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/421557813 ist der nicht auch private?
Anabelia Correale (2016-05-29 17:54:47+00:00): Es parte del Cementerio de La plata
AgusQui (2016-05-30 00:07:12+00:00): El cementerio ya esta mapeado, si quiere mostrarlo en algun trabajo use la opcion compartir, o use la herramienta umap.openstreetmap.fr/es/ que le permitira dibujar lo que quiera sobre el mapa OSM
highflyer74 (2016-05-30 09:40:13+00:00): Hei til Norge!

Can you check if the key "HoldeplassID"=* is required? The key does not really fit into the OSM tagging scheme. I would rather take ref=* if it is an official bus stop numbering. If not, we could just delete that tag...

Takk skal du ha!
FredrikLindseth_import (2016-05-30 10:01:35+00:00): I just forgot to remove the tag. I will remove it now :-). Thanks for notifying me
highflyer74 (2016-05-30 10:16:58+00:00): You're welcome! :-)
GerdP (2017-08-24 05:56:11+00:00): Hi!
Please review typo highway=ыук
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/119276457
Is this the name?
Batareikin (2017-08-24 10:21:43+00:00): No. Its misprint.
Must be =services
Zbigniew_Cz (2016-05-29 07:18:01+00:00): Ale czy to jest powód by usuwać węzeł z osiedlem: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3009724006/history
Hm?
Mateusz Konieczny (2016-11-06 19:56:06+00:00): Hej - czy możesz sprawdzić czy jest tam rozdzielenie na część pieszą i rowerową -drogę dla rowerów + chodnik) czy też cała szerokość jest wspólna?
Mateusz Konieczny (2016-11-06 19:56:38+00:00): Jeśli tak, to po poprawce można zamknąc https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/774957
Mateusz Konieczny (2016-11-06 19:56:58+00:00): Przy okazji - dzięki za zmapowanie, nawet nie wiedziałem że coś tu zbudowali.
Tomek Darda (2016-11-06 19:59:30+00:00): Nie ma sprawy mistrzu ;)
Mateusz Konieczny (2016-11-08 05:26:47+00:00): Co ciekawe nieoczekiwanie byłem wczoraj w pobliżu więc obejrzałem.

Bardzo łądne, szkoda tylko że jest tylko część północna.

Zmienione w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43469384#map=17/50.03446/19.92833
AndresDuhour (2022-09-03 18:08:18+00:00): Buenas tardes! Corregí la dirección del  nodo etiquetado "Mi casa". Andrés
altim59 (2016-05-29 18:22:40+00:00): The point of Verners DE is not correct. It showed in the house #34, but really the shop placed near, into the house #32.
DD1GJ (2016-05-29 06:05:15+00:00): Hallo Madeddy, willkommen bei OSM. Bei der "genaueren Definierung" der Neubaublöcke hast du die bereits vorhandenen Hausnummern zerstört. Diese sind für das tägliche Leben viel wichtiger als irgendwelche Block-Nummern.

Wieso brauchst Du die Block-Nummern?
keithonearth (2018-08-24 23:21:32+00:00): Hi mccaus, I'm wondering where you got the name "Park & Metro" for the construction area at W32nd and Yukon. Is it the name of the now completed housing development, or does it refer to something else?
mccaus (2018-08-24 23:33:53+00:00): Hi keithonearth, yes, Park & Metro is the name of the now completed condo & townhouse development on that site. I just haven't been keeping up with the completion!  I can remove the label and change the land use to residential.