piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
george1201 (2024-12-23 22:28:37+00:00): Hallo maction,
du hast hier einen neuen Knoten https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9780239029 für einen Imker hinzugefügt. Für die Imkerei gab es schon eine Fläche https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1064194237, die du ergänzt hast. 
Meine Frage: Braucht man hier tatsächlich zwei Objekte? Könnte man nicht alle Infos in einem unterbringen? So wie es jetzt ist, muss man doppelte Datenhaltung betreiben. (Website, Operator, Adresse usw. müsste man für beide Objekte gleich eintragen).
PS: shop=* scheint mir an dieser Stelle irreführend, hier wird ja nichts verkauft.
george1201 (2025-03-26 23:16:53+00:00): Stimmst du zu? Widersprichst du? Oder ist es dir egal?
maction (2025-03-27 07:01:07+00:00): Hallo george1201, 
nach meinem Verständnis geht es hier um zwei Objekte, den Imkereibetrieb und den Laden für die Produkte. Entgegen deinem P.S. scheint es auf dem Gelände auch den Laden zu geben (http://www.bienenhof-karlsruhe.com/Shop). Sofern dies nicht korrekt ist, kannst du es gerne korrigieren.
Gruß, Mac
george1201 (2025-03-27 09:53:52+00:00): Oh, da hätte ich die Website genauer anschauen sollen. Du hast recht, wenn es dort den Laden gibt, dann ist er ein separater Knoten. Es ist schon einige Zeit her, dass ich dort vorbeigeradelt bin. Damals konnte ich keinen Hinweis auf einen Verkauf finden. Vielleicht frag ich mal beim Imker nach, wann er dort geöffnet hat.
Sorry für meine Zweifel an deinen Änderungen.
george1201 (2025-06-24 12:28:12+00:00): Leider scheint der Imker auf Anfragen über das Kontaktformular der Website nicht zu reagieren. Da müsste man wohl doch eine Prüfung vor Ort vornehmen. Leider kommt man in das umzäunte Gebiet nicht rein.
muralito (2022-05-29 23:07:53+00:00): Hola Manuel.
leisure=park segun el wiki es:
Un parque es una zona de espacio abierto equipada para uso recreativo, normalmente diseñada y en estado semi-natural con áreas de césped, árboles y arbustos. 

Lo que mapeaste simplemente separa las calzadas.
ivanbranco (2022-06-03 19:07:16+00:00): Hi rimugu,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9780253336

I changed this place value to "hamlet", if it's not the correct fix feel free to edit it again, good mapping!
Senihtu (2024-12-22 19:10:54+00:00): Hi!
Der OSM-Inspektor (Adressen) findet in Martinhagen 2 Häuser mit addr:street=Schubertstraße aber keine Straße mit diesem Namen.
Da Du mit diesem changeset ziemlich viele Adressen in Martinhagen angefasst hast,
 nehme ich an, daß Du Dich - im Gegensatz zu mir - dort auskennst. Kannst Du mal nachsehen, was richtig ist: Straßenname oder addr:street?
weiter frohes Mappen!
KartoGrapHiti (2024-12-22 21:08:06+00:00): Ich habe es krrigiert
CurlingMan13 (2022-05-30 10:30:56+00:00): note #3202359


???  IDK.  something about this node?  Perhaps you can just remove the name, but keep the address and other details?
okwithmydecay (2022-08-03 14:04:11+00:00): When making these changes did you connect the path into Baxendale Street Open Space with Columbia Rd? The only entrance and exit for the park is on Baxendale Street and I've corrected this in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124438718
GinaroZ (2022-08-03 14:46:36+00:00): I did, sorry, saw the path wasn't connected to a road so thought I'd sort it, must've missed the noexit tag.
Thanks for fixing.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
Omegatherion (2022-06-07 17:18:32+00:00): Der REWE war an der richtigen Stelle mit den richtigen Tags eingetragen.
Ich hab den Änderungssatz zurückgesetzt.
canfe (2022-06-12 16:36:14+00:00): Hai tolto il tag di ospedale all'ospedale di Venaria.
Non funziona più da ospedale?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121682705
Fedurli (2022-06-20 17:45:58+00:00): No, da oltre un anno è completamente chiuso e sostituito dal Punto di Primo Intervento
canfe (2022-06-21 09:52:04+00:00): Ma è rimasto un nodo senza tag che specifici cos'è:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3538322174
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
Honey Fombuena (2022-06-08 11:47:37+00:00): Please square the buildings. Thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121682736
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
Aleksander Hugo (2022-05-30 07:19:04+00:00): Czy zmiana kategorii kilkudziesięciu ulic to "small fix"?
Yunkers (2022-05-31 13:03:06+00:00): Zmiany nieuzasadnione i prawdopodobnie błędne (Wyszyńskiego która ma ograniczenia do 30 i progi zwalniające jako secondary to chyba żart). Do wycofania.
Cristoffs (2022-06-11 14:22:44+00:00): No zdecydownie to nie jest small fix .....
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-05-31 22:24:53+00:00): ¿Por qué eliminaste este camino? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/627223050
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-06-18 14:31:24+00:00): undeleted it.
27sur26 (2022-06-09 17:07:19+00:00): Discúlpeme ¿En qué consistió este cambio?
Becky Candy (2022-06-07 08:00:17+00:00): Well mapped but please square your buildings after tagging them by pressing 'q' on your keyboard. Keep up the mapping - many thanks!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121683356
Becky Candy (2022-06-07 08:00:18+00:00): Well mapped but please square your buildings after tagging them by pressing 'q' on your keyboard. Keep up the mapping - many thanks!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121683356
CurlingMan13 (2022-05-30 09:49:52+00:00): Reviewed.  Adjusted some things.  Looks good.
Becky Candy (2022-06-06 15:59:41+00:00): Thank you for your mapping! To improve for next time, please zoom in close enough when tracing to hit each corner of the buildings and please square your buildings after tagging them by pressing 'q' on your keyboard. Keep up the mapping - many thanks!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121683646
MxxCon (2022-05-30 06:04:44+00:00): Hello.
Rather than deleting old POI node and creating a new one, it's better to update old node with the new information. That way you are preserving history of that object and making it possible to refer to if need arises.

If a business is gone and that location is vacant, you can use delete biz-specific info and leave only an address node. However, the best approach would be to use lifecycle prefixes as documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix 👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121685414
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2022-05-30 10:56:30+00:00): Hi! Please do not add library in the building itself, since it creates a duplicate. The library is already there as a node, and building=civic is quite right here. nodes are generally way easier to parse and analyze then buildings, which can have muitple functions. Thanks!
MxxCon (2022-05-30 06:07:51+00:00): Fire hydrant in the middle of a road?🤨
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121685719
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
Honey Fombuena (2022-06-04 14:47:14+00:00): Please correct the capitalization of names. Thank you!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121686341
Reza Babri (2022-05-30 06:44:08+00:00): سلام
لطفا ارتفاع قله رو در نام قله درج نکنید. نام قله و ارتفاع هر کدوم باید در تگهای خودشون ثبت بشوند.

تشکر
Honey Fombuena (2022-06-08 11:58:59+00:00): Please capitalize the names properly. Thank you!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121686654
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 12:50:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122248058 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some data from dubious sources.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6059 .
archpdx (2022-06-03 01:18:09+00:00): Hi,
It looks like this changeset marks this segment of Highway 26 as a bridge:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/996004220
MoiraPrime (2022-06-28 18:47:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122969997
user_5359 (2022-06-01 07:09:22+00:00): Hello! Please check my correction of http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1065016907/history. I changed the key / ti building.
Honey Fombuena (2022-06-08 12:04:36+00:00): Please capitalize the names properly. Thank you!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121688337
Honey Fombuena (2022-06-08 12:05:13+00:00): Please capitalize the names properly. Thank you!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121688733
mueschel (2022-06-15 11:20:37+00:00): Hi,
could you explain the meaning of the tag 'overpowered'? This is not used in any other place.

Thanks!
user4816003805 (2022-06-27 18:57:15+00:00): Hi mueschel!

Sorry for the delay in responding.
The tagging "overpowered=yes" was meant as a humorous, but truthful, description of the water pressure of this particular drinking fountain. The water pressure for this drinking fountain is way too high for a normal person to drink comfortably from it.

I've amended the drinking fountain with an explanatory "description" tag in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122923981.
Let me know what you think.

Thanks!
rhtb0 (2022-05-30 05:25:53+00:00): 안녕하세요
읽을 수 있는 몇 가지 정보가 있습니다.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

모든 변경 집합에 “고침, 덧보탬”보다 의미있는 바뀜 집합 댓글을 적을 수 있습니까?
CurlingMan13 (2022-05-30 09:50:52+00:00): Reviewed.  Adjusted some things.  Looks good.
CurlingMan13 (2022-05-30 09:50:54+00:00): Reviewed.  Adjusted some things.  Looks good.
David Boschwitz (2022-05-31 18:14:32+00:00): Got a message from @seattlefyi that I tagged the incorrect map object with the wikidata. Plan to remove the change
MxxCon (2022-05-30 06:35:32+00:00): Your edit is not exactly correct here.
You made existing tagged node part of the new solar panel shape, in essence you mapped the same feature twice, and that goes against the concept of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

A better approach would be to draw a shape of a solar panel, then shift-select existing solar panel node, right-click with both of them selected and select Merge(shortcut key C.) That way all the tags will get transferred to the new shape and old node cleaned up. 👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121690391
nevw (2022-05-31 03:00:53+00:00): You appear to have taken a guess at how the tagging scheme works in the OSM.
Please refer to the wiki guidance...
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses
nevw (2022-05-31 03:12:07+00:00): apologies, your tagging is correct...I was completely unaware of this tagging scheme...
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dletter_box
nevw (2022-05-31 03:19:36+00:00): Though if these houses are the usual house letter boxes served by the postal service, the addr scheme may be more suitable.
John Annon (2022-05-31 03:29:13+00:00): Hi
Yes i did take a bit of a guess.
We have developed a distribution App specifically for Newspaper home deliveries. We deliver to approx 50 thousand homes each day and hundreds of retirement villages, nursing homes and gated communitites.
We need to be able to put unit numbers on the map in these complexes so it is easier for us to deliver to them.
Are you able to offer the best way for us to label each unit so it shows on the map 
Regards
John
nevw (2022-05-31 04:31:00+00:00): I have not seen the the amenity=letterbox method before but it seems more suited to a group of letterboxes out the front of an area that services unit complexes.

This is an example of the usual residential house address where the outline of the house is mapped and the address tags are added to that ...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/371575977#map=19/-27.67730/153.18092
and here is a example where just a node is placed over the building location
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2122421434#map=17/-27.68124/153.17865
Sometimes duplexes have the outline of building mapped and two nodes inside with address of each unit on their own node.
Any of these methods are fine.

Examples of these methods can be seen nearby...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2122421114#map=19/-27.68272/153.17862
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/371575977#map=19/-27.67728/153.18058
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/986829586#map=19/-27.70605/153.16817
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9209142067#map=19/-27.22994/153.02838
nevw (2022-05-31 05:42:36+00:00): If you would like to discuss this further with the Australian OSM community, a good place to do this would be via the talk.au mailing list
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Diacritic (2022-05-31 10:40:48+00:00): To add to Nevw's comments, here is an example of a complete retirement village with unit numbers and building outlines: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370132468
John Annon (2022-05-31 21:10:34+00:00): Thankyou for your replies
I think I have it sorted
We have a massive job ahead as we deliver into nearly 500 complexes in South East Queensland and Townsville.
Can I ask how long does it take for the edits we make to show on the main OSM map and App ? 
John
John Annon (2022-06-01 04:19:35+00:00): Hi Diacritic
I open your link and can see the units in standard map layer but i can only see mine in CyclOSM layer.
Diacritic (2022-06-01 04:37:53+00:00): Hey John.

Updates to the map can sometimes take a bit of time to flow through and it varies a bit due to caching and other technical quirks.

Try clearing your browser's cache, and see if that helps: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Browser_cache.
John Annon (2022-06-01 04:51:50+00:00): Thank you Diacritic
antonr (2022-05-30 18:09:50+00:00): Hejsa osmviborg,

Vip med hatten herfra for at du ikke sletter det du synes er upræcist men tilpasser! (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/940177124)

Jeg har et spørgsmål og en korrektion:

Korrektion: I hvert fald nogle af de surface=paved du har lavet er ukorrekte, efter min mening. Paved er ikke det rette tag, da stierne i området er belagt med en slags stampet sand (<1mm? => ikke grus?), og paved, som jeg forstår wiki, kræver hård belægning. Eller du har måske en anden fortolkning af paved-tagget?

Spørgsmål: Hvorfor skal der være en bræmme rundt om den indtegnede have som ikke registreres som have? (jeg har forsøgt at illustrere med en landuse=residential som rammer nogenlunde hele haven++) Er det fordi du vurderer at nogle bestemte planter ikke er nok have-agtige, eller er er der en afstandsgrænse til det omgivende som ikke kan bør registreres som have? Jeg spørger i håbet om at vi kan nå til en slags konsensus, så vi slipper for dobbeltarbejde og retninger frem og tilbage. Hvis jeg skulle præcisere denne have, ville jeg nok lave multipolygon med udgangspunkt i v2 og med bygningerne som inner (som også foreslået af Mateusz Konieczny på https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dgarden#Loosen_Requirement_to_not_Include_Non-garden_Features)

Mvh
antonr
osmviborg (2022-05-31 06:01:41+00:00): Er det nødvendigt at diskutere om en sti er 'paved' eller noget andet? Jeg ville bare rette tagget til hvad der efter min mening er korrekt.
Hvad er grunden til at dine haver, i første omgang, bare skal kastes ind med en møggreb? Hvorfor skal dine haver ikke være præcise fra starten af? Du ved jo godt hvordan det skal gøres.
Du har et andet sted formuleret dig således: 'Alt på kortet starter jo i en eller anden grov form, og så forbedrer vi det i samarbejde'. Efter min mening, er det et meget dårligt udgangspunkt for redegering i OSM.
antonr (2022-05-31 16:19:19+00:00): Hej osmviborg,

Tak for svar :-)

Jeg kan ikke rigtig gennemskue hvordan vi kan undgå at kommunikere om hvilke tags der sættes på objekter (og hvad de betyder), hvis vi på nogen måde skal samarbejde om det hersens projekt... Hvis du fx kan forklare mig hvorfor surface="sand" er forkert at sætte på disse stier, så vil jeg jo gerne vide det, så jeg kan lade være med at sætte dét tag på dén slags slags stier i fremtiden... Af samme grund vil jeg gerne vide om jeg har misforstået "paved"... Mit udgangspunkt var at du også er interesseret i at få korrigeret de (givetvis meget få) misforståelser om tags du måtte have? (og om de virkelige objekter vi mapper for den sags skyld). Siden i går har jeg læst op på wiki og mener nu at fine_gravel er det rette tag her, så jeg er er i hvert fald blevet klogere. 

Hvordan ville du foretrække at jeg havde håndterede at du satte surface=paved, som jeg mener er ukorrekt? Jeg er åben for forslag, men tidligere når jeg har fjernet tags som jeg mente var forkerte uden diskussion (men med forklarende changeset kommentar), har jeg oplevet at du uden videre gendanner dem... 

Hvis vi hver især holder fast i vores egne definitioner af hvad der er korrekt og bare retter løs, kan jeg kun se at det ender med endeløse redigeringer frem og tilbage, hvilket virker både trættende og frugtesløst...

Jeg synes det er temmelig upassende at kalde andres bidrag for møggrebskasteri... Det devaluerer andres arbejde og er uhøfligt. Så det foreslår jeg du lader være med.

Jeg er ikke helt med på hvad du mener med at jeg godt ved "hvordan det skal gøres"... Hvordan skulle jeg (før vi begyndte at diskutere dette) kunne gætte dine holdning til hvornår en have (eller noget som helst) er registreret godt nok? Det er jo netop derfor jeg ovenfor spørger ind til hvorfor du har rettet haven til som du har... Hvis nu vi ender med en (mere) fælles forståelse tror jeg at osm-databasen bliver mere konsistent med mindre indsats. Det er vel godt?

Jeg er jævnt forvirret over at du synes grov->finere tilgangen er et dårligt udgangspunkt??? Måske misforstår vi hinanden fuldstændig, men jeg ser det nærmere som et faktum at det er sådan OSM skabes (eksempel der måske forklarer hvad jeg mener nedenfor). Jeg vil ret gerne høre hvilket udgangspunkt du mener vi skal gå frem efter?

mvh
antonr


Eksempel
Nogen har i tidernes morgen indtegnet en stor bunke skov nær Silkeborg og kaldt den Nordskoven. Den var ikke perfekt: Der var ikke lavet "huller" til alle lysninger og skovsøer, og vedkommende vidste måske ikke at nogle dele af den skov faktisk hedder noget andet, nogle steder fulgte skovgrænsen ikke præcis hver lille kvist. osv, osv. Men det var bedre at tilføje den grove version, end ikke at gøre noget! Jeg har nu delt den skov op, så Hårup Sande har fået sin egen skov. Det er stadig ikke perfekt, og bliver det aldrig, men enhver kan gå bananas med at få trægrænsen til at følge SDFE's lidarscanninger eller hvad de nu mener tilføjer information....
antonr (2022-05-31 16:26:48+00:00): Her er lidt tekst, sakset fra https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice, som jeg synes er meget godt formuleret. Den og https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map er i det hele taget fine...

"Your additions can be refined or reverted when needed, so do not hesitate to edit the map.

However, be respectful to the work done by other mappers and consider consulting them especially when existing data is just tagged with unclear or undocumented methods or tags; often there is more than one way to interpret situations and mapping guidelines. Also be mindful when you remove data, because finding or restoring removed data is harder than adjusting added data. "
antonr (2022-05-31 16:46:59+00:00): Der er også denne her, fra How We Map: "OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection."
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-06-06 19:52:38+00:00): You added a duplicate road.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121691222
aleonhard (2022-06-07 04:11:53+00:00): Sorry, I just added the name of the building "Ausbildungshalle Forstamt Ahrweiler". And that might be right.
CurlingMan13 (2022-05-30 09:51:00+00:00): Reviewed.  Adjusted some things.  Looks good.
Warin61 (2022-07-06 00:19:03+00:00): Hi,
Following your changes the Relation: Bankstown Line (9775430) a train route now has a gap See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=151.05959&lat=-33.90863&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=ptv2_routes_valid%2Cptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes%2Cptv2_routes_valid%2Cptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes
Warin61 (2022-07-06 00:21:00+00:00): Note: I made some changes to the Canberra/Sydney route .. and am now fixing up the problems that created ... mutter mutter...
Warin61 (2022-07-10 07:03:31+00:00): Apologies .. this was my error, now fixed. My changes made gaps in quite a few train routes unfortunately. Taken me this long to fix them ..all the PTv2 ones at lest.
danieldegroot2 (2022-05-30 14:23:46+00:00): Hey stadtvermesser,

In your twitter screenshot, I saw a vertical bar in front of the save message. Let me know if this is your mouse cursor and if you continue having your mouse cursor moved in front of the save message on your next edit. I have created a GitHub ticket just in case.
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/9137

Regards,

Daniel
mikko_tamura (2022-05-31 05:38:28+00:00): please capitalize your schools
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121692806
Pradeep Gyawali (2022-05-31 05:58:28+00:00): okay
Dodko (2022-05-31 08:20:44+00:00): Značkou
motor_vehicle=yes
ste povolili vjazd motorovým vozidlám.
Ak je tam zákaz použije sa
motor_vehicle=no
Dodko (2022-05-31 08:19:28+00:00): Pre upresnenie že je to WiFi namiesto
internet_access=yes
sa používa značka
internet_access=wlan
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:internet_access%3Dwlan
mvexel (2022-06-02 16:06:11+00:00): Hi NebSgird, thank you for contributing to OSM in the SLC area! Would you mind uploading your changes a little more often? This is a best practice in OSM and makes it easier for other mappers to review your edits. 

In case you are local, please also check out our meetup group for upcoming OSM meetups: https://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Utah/

Thanks,
mvexel
NebSgird (2022-06-03 17:26:37+00:00): Sure thing. I'm often working off a GPX track I generate on my bike explorations, so I try to get it all into one changeset. I know it can get a bit unwieldy. 

Thanks for the invite. I'm down in Utah County, so may not be able to join up often, but nice to have a plug into the community.
mvexel (2022-06-03 17:47:44+00:00): Great. I'm open to hosting somewhere convenient to Utah County mappers from time to time. I know there are quite a few of you :)