piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
OSM_RogerWilco (2022-05-05 20:15:50+00:00): Hallo oddplatypus,

bitte Achterbahnen nicht als Eisenbahngleise taggen! Die Schienen der Achterbahnen sind schon richtig als solche getaggt (roller_coaster=track). 

Leider zeigt die OSM Standardkarte (osm carto) die nicht an.

Aber: Nur damit etwas auf der Karte von openstreetmap.org (die nur als Beispiel/Demo dient!) angezeigt wird ist nicht erwünscht. "Don't tag for the renderer!" Siehe: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Ich werde daher Deine Änderung wieder rückgängig machen, sorry!

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
oddplatypus (2022-05-05 20:23:11+00:00): Hallo Roger,

sorry, mein Fehler dann. Habe gesehen, dass Flug der Dämonen und die Bobbahn als solche getaggt wurden, weswegen ich angenommen habe, dass dies erlaubt sei.

Grüße
Nico
OSM_RogerWilco (2022-05-05 20:32:42+00:00): Moin Nico,

das macht nix. :-)

Erstmal herzlich willkommen bei OSM! Und vielen Dank für Deine Unterstützung!

Es kommt leider sehr häufig vor, dass für eine bestimmte Kartendarstellung nicht passende Tags vergeben werden. Man muss sich bei OSM immer vor Augen führen, dass wir nur Daten sammeln. Die Darstellung in Karten ist nur ein Anwendungsfall für unsere Daten. Ein Programm, dass z.B. das Schienennetz in Deutschland auswerten möchte, müsste dann erstmal alle Achterbahnen heraus filtern. So als Beispiel.

Die Standardkarte auf openstreetmap.org darf man auch nur als einfache Demo verstehen. Sie zeigt lange nicht alles an und ist in manchen Punkten sicherlich auch verbesserungswürdig. Es gibt aber viele andere Anbieter, die Karten aufs den OSM-Daten erzeugen. Ob davon eine auch die Achterbahn-Strecken anzeigen, weiß ich aber nicht.

Ein Mapper hatte hier vor ein paar Monaten bereits angefangen aufzuräumen. Leider hat er nur ein paar Eisbahnschienen abgerissen. Daher dieses Durcheinander hier.

Viele Grüße und happy Mapping!
ZeLonewolf (2022-05-06 21:13:14+00:00): Hi again.  I've just gone through and bulk downloaded all the the objects that you've tagged as shop=yes to either add the correct shop tag or to restore it to its previous value.  Please do not change valid shop tags to shop=yes, this makes the map worse.  We want to make nice clean maps that EVERYONE can use, and that includes having valid shop tags :)
theMETAVERSr (2022-05-07 13:40:54+00:00): Some of these specific tags do not show up in apps like BlindSquare for the visual and hearing impaired. Some specific tags. Thank you for helping me clean the map up. Some of the OSM mods seem way too protective of this map for the terrible job of updating or including current tags.
clay_c (2022-05-07 15:11:15+00:00): According to BlindSquare's own website, they do not use OpenStreetMap for points of interest at all. None of the changes you are making to points of interest will show up on BlindSquare:

"Although BlindSquare does currently use both Foursquare and Open Street Map data, it only downloads street map data and no information about other points of interest from Open Street Map."

As for the comment about "OSM mods", OSM does not have a concept of a moderator. There is a Data Working Group that is empowered to temporarily block users when they have done significant damage or refuse to communicate with the local community.

But nobody you have talked to so far is a representative of the DWG. We are all just regular mappers who care about OSM being an accurate reflection of reality. I would recommend you not berate other mappers for their perceived lack of maintenance of an area, especially since many of us have been volunteering this effort in our free time for years, and you are new to this project.
theMETAVERSr (2022-05-07 15:19:25+00:00): I am sorry if my fristration with OSM shows, as I have been getting nasty messages from mappers, even when the tags are valid, current, and relevant. I don't understand what the fight is if all info expect specificity of tag is the problem. I've been threatened with a ban for vandalism when as you can easily check in my history that ALL of my tags are valid.  WTF is DWG?
clay_c (2022-05-07 15:46:17+00:00): No, you haven't been threatened with a ban.

Here are details on the Data Working Group: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group
theMETAVERSr (2022-05-07 15:57:05+00:00): not from you... but the NYC mappers are rude and aggressive. I have had almost no confrontation about my tags outside of NYC. I appreciate your smooth, patient vibe. As you can see in my history nothing i have done can be considered vandalism.
ZeLonewolf (2022-05-07 16:01:47+00:00): The reason that users are complaining of vandalism is because you removed tree objects and changed more specific shop tags (example, shop=tattoo) to shop=yes.  This removes data from the database for data consumers that use it and that's why users are upset.

Remember that there are many data consumers, so if you remove a piece of information to satisfy one data consumer, it removes it from all data consumers.

OpenStreetMap aims to create a database of geographic facts.  If a particular application or service is not using OpenStreetMap data in a way that you think they should be, the correct course of action is to notify the developers of that application or service so that it can be corrected.
clay_c (2022-05-07 16:02:28+00:00): I'm aware that you've had a personal dispute with an one mapper in NYC. I don't think they've done anything wrong.
clay_c (2022-05-07 19:02:59+00:00): Hello again theMETAVERSr.

In the Upland Discord server, you've mentioned that "i honestly don't want this fight in OSM but will continue it if the tags we're spending time adding will be blocked on the upland side". This indicates that your ulterior motive in mapping is to get things to show up in Upland, and you were lying about the map your sister uses, who you can't seem to decide is hard of hearing or visually impaired. Why were you lying about this?

Elsewhere, you mention that your "team of 8 mappers have strict instructions to be as through as possible". Who is this team? Please read the Organized Editing Guidelines and ensure that you and your team are following them:

https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines
Leo Slager (2022-05-06 19:37:48+00:00): Dag Maarten,
Helaas, de editor iD waar je mee werkt kan niet omgaan met het bewerken van routerelaties. De nieuwe wegen die je toevoegt worden altijd achteraan de route toegevoegd. En dus blijft de route onderbroken.
Ik heb de routes weer gerepareerd.
Als je serieus vaker met routerelaties aan de gang wilt gaan, dan adviseer ik je om over te stappen naar de editor JOSM. Met die editor kun je wegen en bushaltes invoegen op de juiste plaats in de route.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710
MaartenTheMapper (2022-05-07 11:01:58+00:00): Dankjewel! Inderdaad niet opgemerkt dat de nieuwe ways aan het eind komen te staan.
user_5359 (2022-05-09 06:43:31+00:00): Hello! Please check the cleanup! Also some key are misspelled, see https://www.osm.org/way/1050206829, https://www.osm.org/way/1050206822
MxxCon (2022-05-06 02:05:51+00:00): Hello.
Both of these features are already mapped, so your additions go against "One feature - one OSM element" concept as documented here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
Rather than adding these features as new nodes, you should add German names to the already mapped ones.👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120604301
pio2_122 (2022-05-06 18:58:53+00:00): Why did you delete 10 addresses in Malżewko (https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=120604549)?
Shimmy1 (2022-05-06 19:13:57+00:00): Oh my gosh, i am so sorry i didn't realise i hadn't put those back!
pio2_122 (2022-05-06 19:21:59+00:00): Mistakes happen. Good thing it wasn't intentional.
I'll restore them right away and the issue will be resolved.

BTW, a similar situation occurred at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120622995. I have already restored those addresses.
eggie (2022-05-05 20:50:18+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback Het eetcafe hier al getagd. Svp niet dubbel taggen. 
De info op het gebouw heb ik verwijderd.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
sektov (2022-05-29 15:51:03+00:00): Please use less cocky changeset comments.
eggie (2022-05-05 20:57:25+00:00): Hier is iets niet helemaal goed gegaan. Het water heb ik weer losgemaakt van de steiger. Is het gebouw wellicht een woonboot? Wat was je bedoeling met je wijziging onder commentaar 'yes'? 

MVG
eggie
jmsbert (2022-05-05 20:39:54+00:00): zusätzliche Quelle war: "Maxar Premium Imagery" (in diesem Fall das aktuellste Satellitenbild)
mgpx (2022-05-08 20:11:10+00:00): Több poligonról törölted a landuse=forest-et, és csak a leaf_type=needleleaved jelölés maradt. A leaf_type csak kiegészítő címke, önmagában nem áll meg. Kell mellé egy ún top-level címke, pl landuse=forest, natural=wood stb. Enélkül a legtöbb térkép nem fogja a poligont erdős területként felismerni.
Több más poligont felrajzoltál, amelyek közül számosról lemaradt a jelölés. Ezeket pótolni kellene
ottwiz (2022-05-08 20:14:43+00:00): Megtudnád légyszíves mutatni melyik érintett polygonokról van szó? Én ilyenre nem emlékeznék, hogy landuse=forest címkéket töröltem volna valahonnan.
ottwiz (2022-05-08 20:16:03+00:00): Lehet JOSM-ből majd csinálok egy query-t rá a changesetem alapján, mert tényleg érdekel hol ronthattam el. :)
ottwiz (2022-05-08 20:29:00+00:00): Á ja. Megvan. a JOSM kissé szemét volt velem, amikor a Mátra multipolygonját frissítettem, a JOSM képes az ugyanolyan tagjű polygonokról leszedni ugyanazt tehát landuse=foresten belüli landuse=forest tageket mind kukázta. ezt máris orvosolom, csak "lukasztgattam" a Mátrát ahol tényleg nem voltak fák.
ottwiz (2022-05-08 20:43:46+00:00): Javítva a nagy része. Ha még találsz valahol hibát, légyszi szólj.
mgpx (2022-05-08 21:10:18+00:00): Köszi a gyors javítást. Ha a JOSM azt hiszi, hogy egy poligon egy multipoligon outer részévé válik, akkor valóban leszedi a landuse tageket, valahol ez a logikája hibázhatott. Én általában kiválasztom az outer polygont, és annak űrlapján kézzel adom hozzá az inner polygonokat, akkor nem szokott ilyet csinálni
archpdx (2022-05-06 18:21:20+00:00): Hi,
Thanks for updating this business. It looks like you removed the building tags from this way: has this been demolished? If so I would use `demolished:building=*` since aerial imagery still shows this building. If not, make sure to keep building tags (`building:`, `ele`, `height`, etc.) when updating businesses.
TimbyT (2022-05-06 18:43:06+00:00): Definitely an oversight there.
archpdx (2022-05-06 18:22:46+00:00): I have the same question as (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120605655) regarding the removal of building tags
Allison P (2022-05-06 02:18:07+00:00): In a previous comment, I explained not to do this. Not only did you not respond, you did this to many other apartments. Unless you can give a good reason for doing this, I will have to revert your changes.
eggie (2022-05-06 05:14:21+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
Leo Slager (2022-05-08 16:38:14+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3170566#map=18/51.93760/4.47095
emvee (2022-05-08 20:38:45+00:00): Zoals geschreven in de note:

Nee, dit is een foutje doordat de Verkeersbordenkaart, https://smoothefiets.ddns.net/html/verkeersbordenkaart/index.php?lat=51.937556632&lng=4.471829862&z=19 aan gaf dat er een C3 bord aan het begin stond.

De informatie over dat bord is echter bij nader inzien verkeerd en hoort bij de Ackersdijkstraat.

Opgelost met https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120718633
eggie (2022-05-06 05:17:09+00:00): Tip.. Alle gebouwen zijn directe import vanuit het kadaster en prcies ingemeten. Beter niets aan veranderen. Niet naar de daken kijken met een schuin genomen luchtfoto. Overkappingen staan niet in de BAG . Die teken je apart in met building=roof. Ik zal het weer aanpassen. 
MVG
eggie
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:24:04+00:00): Idem, on peut enlever le suffixe :fr
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:23:42+00:00): Idem, on peut enlever le suffixe :fr
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:23:25+00:00): Idem, on peut enlever le suffixe :fr
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:22:47+00:00): Idem, suffixe :fr en trop
Lejun (2022-05-09 09:08:00+00:00): Merci de la contribution, je note l’adresse. Attention cependant aux horaires qui doivent utiliser : et pas h. Je te laisse remplacer avec :

opening_hours=Mo-Th 11:00-23:30;Fr-Sa 11:00-00:00;Su 11:00-23:30

En cas de doute il existe des outils pour s’aider et/ou vérifier[1].

[1] https://projets.pavie.info/yohours/
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:22:19+00:00): Ici aussi on pourra enlever le suffixe :fr.
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:21:27+00:00): Hum, à priori on peut enlever le suffixe :fr à street et city. D’ailleurs, c’est la rue de la Chapelle ou du Général de Gaulle ?
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:19:57+00:00): Vu et validé (la description du groupe de modifications inspirait pas confiance)
marczoutendijk (2022-05-06 08:04:39+00:00): Hi dufekin,
May I remind you to this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5445
You still are not very active when it comes to answering questions from others.
In addition, your changeset comments could be more specific than just an indication of where you are making your edits.
We would like to know "what" you are editing!
Please read this (and act accordingly):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
literan (2022-05-08 10:58:21+00:00): буферная зона не входит в список Всемирного наследия ЮНЕСКО.

В соответствии с § 104 Руководства по выполнению Конвенции об охране всемирного наследия 2013 г. (далее — Руководство) буферная зона определяется как территория, окружающая номинированный объект, которая имеет дополнительные юридические и/или общепринятые ограничения на ее использование и развитие, создающие дополнительный уровень защиты объекта.
Источник: https://www.eg-online.ru/article/383730/
BodhidharmaI (2022-05-08 17:00:16+00:00): При чем тут, входит или не входит. В версии 8 Вы оставили саму буферную зону, но удалили ссылки на её определение. Это и было восстановлено
literan (2022-05-08 17:23:08+00:00): нет, вы восстановили также ошибочный 
protect_class=22, а также
heritage:operator=whc (а World Heritage Centre не является её оператором)
literan (2022-05-12 09:17:12+00:00): раз не отвечаете, верну корректные теги. тег ссылки сохраню
fititnt (2023-12-09 22:01:00+00:00): Olá.

Essa nota aqui diz que o sentido da rua está invertido https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3993149
suchAnight (2023-12-11 22:27:48+00:00): Hello fititnt, the user MappingMaiden is no longer on our team so I will be handling this on their behalf. Unfortunately we do not have any updated resources available to verify this change. If you have local knowledge of the area and can confirm the directionality of this feature has changed you are welcome to make an update. Thank you and have a nice day!

Olá fititnt, o usuário MappingMaiden não está mais em nossa equipe, então cuidarei disso em nome dele. Infelizmente não temos recursos atualizados disponíveis para verificar essa alteração. Se você tiver conhecimento local da área e puder confirmar que a direcionalidade desse recurso mudou, fique à vontade para fazer uma atualização. Obrigado e tenha um bom dia!
fititnt (2023-12-11 22:48:31+00:00): Thank you for the response, suchAnight.

If your team do not have any additional data, I will leave at it is (no change), because the note/3993149 is anonymous. So is complicated make changes based only on that note.

I do not have local knowledge on this street. I just made a quick comment because I was looking at the notes.

thank you.
syntex (2022-05-15 11:33:51+00:00): Ścieżka pieszo rowerowa to nie jest footway!
Cardiff_Electric (2022-05-15 11:39:29+00:00): Na którym fragmencie? Użyłem tego szablonu. highway=path + surface=paved + segregated=yes + bicycle=designated + foot=designated + cycleway:surface=asphalt + footway:surface=paving_stones
syntex (2022-05-15 12:18:27+00:00): Np tutaj https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1057770581
syntex (2022-05-15 12:18:54+00:00): + wszystkie pozostałe przejścia
Cardiff_Electric (2022-05-15 12:21:03+00:00): Ok. Dzięki za info.
Kalepom (2022-07-10 21:19:39+00:00): Bonjour, 
Merci pour votre première contribution à OpenStreetMap. OSM est un projet de cartographie mondial, libre et collaboratif. On y renseigne des éléments réel, tangibles et permanents. 
Des éléments comme un événement ou des panneaux d'indication temporaire n'ont donc normalement pas leur place dans la carte générale. 
Pour créer des cartes personnalisées, je vous invite à utiliser des outils comme uMap https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/ dont c'est l'objet. 

Pour toute question, aide à la contribution ou autre, n'hésitez pas à prendre contact avec la communauté https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Canaux_de_contact
impiaaa (2022-05-08 19:44:18+00:00): Welcome to OSM! To help your fellow mappers know what changed, we'd appreciate it if you saved your changes in one local area before moving to another area. Thanks!
bikingaround244 (2022-05-06 14:52:08+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bikingaround244/traces/4319046
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-07-17 00:12:52+00:00): isso é um ponto de informação turistica mesmo?
ovruni (2022-05-06 01:52:34+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se menciona "cambiando tipo de elemento de urbanizacion", sin embargo se han retirado etiquetas de lugar. Por otra parte, de algunos de sus conjuntos de cambios sugieren que hay una confusión entre el uso de la etiqueta landuse y la etiqueta place. Poner algún objeto con "landuse=residencial" + "name=Algo" no esta indicando que ahí hay un barrio, sino que es un suelo residencial al que le ha agregado la etiqueta "name=Algo". La etiqueta landuse [0] se utiliza para indicar el tipo de suelo de un área, este suelo puede abarcar parte de un barrio, un barrio entero o varios barrios juntos, mientras que la etiqueta place [1] es para indicar algún lugar, puede ser un barrio (neighbourhood) u otro centro poblado. Una no reemplaza a la otra.
Para cualquier consulta sobre el mapeo de OSM en Perú, tenemos un canal de telegram https://t.me de la comunidad peruana.
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:landuse
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:place
ElliottPlack (2022-07-20 16:57:14+00:00): bgo_eiu, I don't think that we should remove the ref for US 40 Truck and US 1 due to BCDOT's lackluster sign shop alone. The designations for these routes are still signed prominently on I-83 at their exits and at the begin point for US 40 Truck on Erdman Ave. Official maps from the state and city still use these designations. I think it would be unfair to truck routing users of OSM to hide these standard refs into an obscure tag. For all we know, BCDOT standard might just be to sign these at the begin and end.
عثمان ਉਸਮਾਨ bgo_eiu (2022-07-20 21:51:05+00:00): I'm not sure about this to be honest - as I understand it, part of the intent behind `official_ref` is that on a 'typical' highway route, the highway route number(s) carry more significance than the street name and routers/renders tend to treat it as such when that number is in `ref`. To that end, North Avenue is definitely primarily North Avenue and secondarily anything else.

Information about truck routing is also duplicated elsewhere in the schema - for signage at exits, the destination sign relations and schema for motorway junctions are explicitly designed to allow for these kind of specific route guidance at those points without necessarily relying on tags on the length of the way. Then, truck route relations themselves can contain this information, and these relations serve data users better in that they can better handle route concurrencies than putting them all in an unordered semicolon list. It's generally discouraged to tag bus route details on ways themselves for this reason and those have a greater relevance to the public than truck routes. My main concern is just that the truck route designation ends up over-emphasizing information that is not relevant to the general public, and potentially confusing if/when it is favored as a name over North Avenue. A savvy truck router should have no problem accessing the necessary details from the relation(s) without needing it to be in the ref on the ways.
عثمان ਉਸਮਾਨ bgo_eiu (2022-07-20 21:52:38+00:00): I have intentionally left the truck designations in the `ref` tag on Erdman Avenue where the signage starts as that becomes an access restricted road where the relevance is more weighted towards truck drivers.
ElliottPlack (2022-07-23 02:29:58+00:00): I understand your point but this is not the appropriate way to approach the issue. Speaking as DWG here… the standard for shielded routes, however sparsely signed, is that the regular ref tag is used. This is understood all over the world. Data users of OSM data rely on a standard set of tags that are backed by open consensus. In the last decade of OSM highway tagging, an agreed standard for destination tagging, routes, and designations have been set and are well agreed upon. This process has allowed big companies like Lyft and Amazon to adopt OSM. They are not without controversy but they do typically adopt what the community defines.  The “official_ref” tag is not well defined and from what I’ve read, this isn’t the appropriate application. It is for route IDs similar to unsigned ref, where there may be a small sign in places that is not meant for public use. The US 40 signs, though few and far between, are meant for public use. Ref:penndot would be a better use for that tag. 

The fact is that there are many ref’d routes that are not well signed and still a part of OSM. Take the USBR system for instance. States like Maryland have officially designated USBR 1 and 50 but there is no signage. However, AASHTO releases those bike route designations public domain and they’re dutifully added to the map by a lot of volunteers. 

Road refs are no different. Just because the city does a bad job at sign maintenance doesn’t mean the route is nil. You could report the missing shields on 311 and the city would put them up. They just don’t do things proactively. If someone doesn’t maintain their house, would we stop calling it a house? “Significance” has nothing to do with the way OSM data works. I understand you come from a perspective of carless and urbanism which I applaud. However, this edit appears to show bias to the local road user that could be oblivious to the fact that North Ave is also US40 truck or US 1. That fact remains that the designation of those routes remains on the books and that is enough for them to be tagged in OSM.

The proper way to approach this lack of signage would be to propose a change on the talk-us and tagging lists (NOT Slack!!) While I am among the biggest proponents of slack, I think it is important that major/fundamental changes to the way things are standardized on the map should go to a larger audience. Perhaps there can be a new tag around signage density, or maybe visibility. That is a larger discussion. Baltimore can’t be a special edge case for routing mapping. Routers could use those tags, sure, but they won’t unless it is standard. 

Until some agreement can be reached, I’ll ask that you revert this and all “official_ref” changes in Baltimore. If you will not, I will, but I don’t want it to come to that. I appreciate your work in Baltimore but there are certain areas where things need to be discussed with a wider audience. Also, I don’t always have time to chime in on slack conversations, but please don’t interpret radio silence there as permission to proceed. There are others that are concerned. 

Thanks,

Elliott Plack
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
ElliottPlack (2022-07-26 13:55:17+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/124053349. Ref: DWG Ticket: 2022072610000085