piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
santamariense (2021-02-27 21:58:43+00:00): Oi Pedro,

Notei que você quebrou algumas relações de restrições de conversão, nesta e em algumas outras changesets. Foi proposital por essas restrições não existirem (mais) ou foi sem querer visto que o foco da edição era outro?

Exemplo. Havia esta restrição de conversão [1] (vide Versão 1), onde se proibia virar a esquerda desta rua [2], passando por esse ponto [3] em direção a esta rua [4].

[1] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5670475/history
[2] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/194210783
[3] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2047247806
[4] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/380698211

santamariense
Pedro Arthur (2021-02-27 22:14:51+00:00): Olá, passei pelo local e constatei que não há restrições de conversão neste trecho e que a maioria do fluxo por ali é sentido Rua Joaquim Murtinho, no entanto é proibido o retorno no ponto em questão.
santamariense (2021-02-28 03:11:22+00:00): Hm. Ok. Então dá para se dizer que toda a meia duzia de restrições que estão hoje incompletas após você ter editado não existem.
Obrigado pela ajuda, se puder confirme também as outras que estão quebradas na cidade. Se elas não existirem mais, apague-as:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11384652/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5659284/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5659288/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5659286/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5659287/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5670475/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11384653/history
BCNorwich (2020-08-09 07:20:24+00:00): Hi, I removed the duplicated section of highway, (part of path AKE 7/1 that was drawn on top of the service road). Also changed name tag to ref.
Regards Bernard.
skfd (2020-09-08 09:29:11+00:00): Привет! Мне кажется ето не правильно ставить точки place. Ето кварталы у которых есть точные границы и названия. Поменять quarter на neighborhood ето ок!
darkonus (2020-09-08 10:03:13+00:00): Пропоную name, landuse=residential, place=neighborhood, повернути на полігони. Взагалі, вважаю що landuse і place краще розділяти, тому так і  замапив. Ще було бажання квартали зробити оремо полігонами з тегом place, але тоді назва на більшості мапах не рендерилася.
skfd (2020-09-08 10:14:05+00:00): спасибо! я тогда так сделаю. landuse я со временем переделаю. хочется коттеджи отметить как rural или detached )
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-09-23 14:34:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 91371619, 91373494, 91364469, 91369701 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits in Penicuik that were made using an inappropriate source (at the request of the user)
h439fsd89 (2020-09-30 15:04:43+00:00): *Tram-Stop Langendreer*
Hi, ist das so richtig, dass die "stop_position" und die Zugehörigkeit zu den Relationen nun auf zwei verschiedenen Punkten liegen?
c3112n (2020-09-30 15:14:18+00:00): Nein, das ist nicht richtig. Habe es einfach übersehen, als ich den Halteknoten verschoben hatte.
Danke für den Hinweis; habe die richtigen Knoten wieder in die Haltestellenrelation hinzugefügt.
ACarlotti (2020-08-07 16:35:39+00:00): It looks like you're just blindly converting bus routes without making any effort to check that the existing data is up-to-date. The through bus service stopped almost four years ago. Also, your new westbound data shows a bus stop being served despite the mapped route not passing over the adjacent road.

On what basis are you making your changes? Are you adhering to the guidance on mechanical edits (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits)? Updating an entire bus route in this manner would suggest (to me, at least) that the data was accurate (or at least as accurate as could reasonably be determined) at this point in time.

Finally, if you're converting a bus route to PTv2, where that route is currently represented by a single relation, then I think that relation should become the route_master relation, and not just an arbitrary choice of the individual routings.
A Hall (2021-09-13 16:57:13+00:00): Is there any confirmation available on the name of this pond? I could not find anything.
CRCulver (2021-09-05 12:50:49+00:00): Please do not add camp sites to the map unless they are official camp sites. Places that are merely "nice place for camp" do not belong on OpenStreetMap. (You can add them on other maps, like iOverlander.)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-09-23 14:34:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 91371619, 91373494, 91364469, 91369701 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits in Penicuik that were made using an inappropriate source (at the request of the user)
nevw (2020-08-07 23:28:41+00:00): Hi
I reverted changeset 89052981 which added a casino to Thomas and Rose Woods Park in Redbank Plains, Qld
user_5359 (2021-12-03 07:11:03+00:00): Hello! Please check the way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/340882426/history. What is the meaning of the tag School=Education (have a look on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aschool, notice also the lowercase writing)
FransWillem (2020-08-19 09:29:40+00:00): Hello. 

Thank you for mapping on this project.

Most buildings here are rectangular. Please square each of them with the Q key in the editor
Be keen as well to not include courtyards in your mappings as a (a part of) building

Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT_4K-s7HItsGTDt4dx43C3iD7u5uHtUyvasd_eMUQIq9zWbwlMXQk90jDHcdq6OcOnMc6B1NHYG4cO/pub
Best regards and keep mapping
eggie (2020-09-26 14:31:18+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
MVG,
Eggie
ACarlotti (2020-08-07 17:14:51+00:00): Is there a reason why you deleted the detailed tagging of the crossing ways in this changeset?
DaveF (2020-08-08 10:58:38+00:00): Hi
Yes. They're duplicating Duplicating data leads to confusion & errors.There are already crossing nodes on the road centre-line.
The centre-line represents the full road width. Addition tags such as ref or the explicit 'width' indicate, to renderers, how wide the road should be displayed. The node on the way already represents the full width of the road.
DaveF (2020-08-08 11:25:04+00:00): Here's a simple  example: 
http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=20&lat=49.01049&lon=8.3876&layers=B0000000FFFFFF

Note it even rotates to align with the road.
ACarlotti (2020-08-08 12:15:53+00:00): You make a good point. However, I think there's also a competing argument - namely that the path at a crossing is somehow different to an ordinary way in that things like the width and surface aren't quite the same as on the path away from crossings.
There's an example on the wiki that seems to support the previous style of mapping
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dcrossing
Note that I didn't introduce the precise mapping in the first place - that was by CycleStreets in changeset 88795945. I think my opinion is that tagging separate ways across each carraigeway and island is too precise, but tagging a single way for the whole crossing as "footway=crossing" is probably better than just treating it as an ordinary footway running through the junction (in situations where the parallel footways are both mapped). This a particularly strong opinion though (and may well change in the future), hence why I chose to just preserve the mapping style that was already there.
ACarlotti (2020-08-08 12:16:33+00:00): Correction: that last sentence should have started "This isn't a particularly strong opinion"
DaveF (2020-08-13 16:40:47+00:00): Sorry for the delay.
Surface tags can be added to the crossing nodes.
If the highway was mapped as a polygon, showing explicit width, then the crossings should be mapped linearly & I'd have removed the nodes.
Morten Lange (2020-08-06 19:02:47+00:00): Frábært, takk fyrir að skrá á OSM !
Tómas Ingi (2020-08-06 20:42:44+00:00): Minnsta mál, alltaf gaman að sjá nýja hjólastíga :)
Morten Lange (2021-07-09 16:41:29+00:00): Kortið á ja.is sýnir nú stígurinn sem þú teiknaðir.  Ég er hins vegar nýbúinn að færa stíginn hinu meginn.  Sé móta fyrir stíginn á loftmyndum við Sandgerði.
sdfzxdgxfhdr (2020-08-12 09:35:30+00:00): The A629 is not a trunk road, it is a primary road, please change it back as it messing with cycle routing
trigpoint (2020-08-12 17:27:38+00:00): Hi sdfzxdgxfhdr
This changeset did noy change the A629 to a trunk road, it has always been mapped that way and does appear to be correct. Green signs?

If your router cannot route along a trunk road then it is not configured correctly, use one that works such as graphhopper or cycle.travel.

Cheers Phil
trigpoint (2020-08-12 17:31:58+00:00): They added bicycle=yes which will have improved routing, although it is tagging for the renderer.
opendcc (2020-08-06 19:49:42+00:00): Guten Abend,

bitte hänge auf Landuse keine Ortsnamen drauf. Dafür gibt es den place Node in der Mitte. Zudem sollte man den Landuse selbst nicht löschen.

Ich habs bereits korrigiert.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-04-05 10:46:06+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17126846/history - what you meant by surface=bad ?

Have you maybe tried to use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness ?
bradrh (2023-04-05 14:02:30+00:00): yes, should have been smoothness
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-04-05 21:40:59+00:00): And the same for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/132238572/history I guess - I will change surface to smoothness there
bradrh (2023-04-06 02:03:28+00:00): oops I guess I was sloppy that day. What tool are you using to find these?
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-04-06 07:44:08+00:00): Custom script. 

See say https://gitlab.com/matkoniecz/osm-automation/-/blob/master/detect_unhandled_invalid_surface_values.py (acts also as a TODO list) and https://gitlab.com/matkoniecz/osm-automation/-/blob/master/script_assisted_cleanup/tag_migrator_surface_fix_bad_values.py and https://gitlab.com/matkoniecz/osm-automation/-/blob/master/script_assisted_cleanup/tag_migrator_surface_delete_useless_values.py and so on.

I also run https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/fixing_malformed_shop_tags and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/fixing_malformed_surface_tags and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/migrating_rocks_from_surface_to_material for cases which were obvious, with https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2023-March/088125.html the next upcoming expansion.
nevw (2020-08-07 23:41:17+00:00): Hi
I reverted changeset 89055739 which added bicycle parking to a wooded area to the OSM
bhietsch (2020-08-08 01:01:20+00:00): Is there any harm in having the name on the path? This is pretty typical for other hiking and cycling relations, e.g. AT, and makes it easy for people to identify the trail if they're using an app like Strava
mbeyerle (2020-08-08 01:48:23+00:00): @ppjj I think this is a well-intentioned changeset but agree with bhietsch that paths should be named both on the path and in the relation. When downloading local sections of map on an app or to a GPS, some devices may only display trail names, not names of the route relation. Guidance on the OSM wiki suggests, ""One feature, one OSM element" is concerning nodes/relations/ways not tags." sourced from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

As such, I think there would be merit in reverting this changeset to restore the names on many trails. That said, I want to personally thank you both for contributing on all these trails. I find navigating based on trail information from OSM hugely useful.
user_6771650 (2020-08-08 03:41:52+00:00): The reason I removed the names from the ways was that the North Country Trail and Finger Lakes Trail overlap for a significant amount of time, and having only one of the names on the ways is potentially misleading.
user_6771650 (2020-08-08 03:47:58+00:00): Also, common practice in Europe, where there’s an extensive network of walking routes, is to exclude the name from the way, as far as I have seen. I do understand the concern of the name not appearing on renderers. Perhaps we could add a hyphenated name on the shared FLT/NCT segments? It’s not ideal in my opinion but it makes sense before a wider adoption of displaying names based on route relations.
mbeyerle (2020-08-08 03:52:47+00:00): Ahh gotcha that makes sense. I like the idea of a shared name. Local to me is the Mid-State Trail across Pennsylvania where the smaller trail is named next to "(MST)" for example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/14233900

Thank you for enlightening me about European practice here by the way. I think your idea of mapping a shared name may be the best; although not ideal I think that solution preserves the most data, particularly for unsophisticated renderers.
user_6771650 (2020-08-08 04:20:34+00:00): OK, I just added the name "Finger Lakes Trail - North Country Trail" to paths, footways, and tracks that were shared by the two trails.
mbeyerle (2020-08-08 04:23:28+00:00): That was quick! Looks fantastic.
bhietsch (2020-08-08 11:36:44+00:00): I'm glad we were able to agree on a solution, great work! I didn't know about that European standard either... I'll have to check that out sometime.
@ppjj there's a section of the FLT that isn't associated with the NCT east of the Onondaga, do you mind naming those paths/tracks/footways as well? Thanks!
FrankOverman (2020-08-09 13:53:46+00:00): AH, ik stond op punt de oude track langs de Oude Bosschebaan te verwijderen omdat het een breed fietspad is geworden. Ik heb er gisteren gefietst,
Ik zie nu deze recente changeset van jouw hand.
Ik kan me niet meteen herinneren dat er een breed genoeg pad noordelijk langs loopt dat als ruiterpad kan dienen: ik meen te kunnen zeggen dat er naast het fietspad niets meer loopt en dat er naast het fietsbord er ook geen bord 'ruiterpad' staat.
Wat zou je zeggen Marc?
Ik hoor het graag, groetjes weer!, Frank
marczoutendijk (2020-08-09 14:01:38+00:00): Er ligt een flink zandpad naast vol met paardenhoeven afdrukken. Ik heb ook mapillary beelden:
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.65006283666666&lng=5.211682151944444&z=17&tab=uploads&pKey=blCABvObPl9tHujKNjCjFJ&focus=photo

Ik denk dat de ruiter-info nog niet is aangebracht want het pad wordt pas volgende week officieel opgeleverd. Ik ga er zelf ook nog een keer langs, maar heb wel informatie op kleine (verborgen) paaltjes gezien. 
Wordt vervolgd!
FrankOverman (2020-08-09 14:23:26+00:00): OK, ik wacht zonder meer ook even af ;)
Bedankt voor de snelle reactie weer.
FrankOverman (2020-08-09 14:54:12+00:00): Trouwens, er mag nog wel een motor_vehicle = destination bij op de cycleway, want er staan borden met 'perceeleigenaren mogen wel'  ;)
marczoutendijk (2020-08-11 13:39:42+00:00): Vandaag opnieuw langsgefietst en er staan wel degelijk paaltjes voor de paarden (en een huifkar route). Het paardenpad loopt langs het gehele fietspad.
https://tinyurl.com/yy3ynx8c
https://tinyurl.com/y23do46s

Ook heb ik de hele route er nog een keer opgezet maar nu van west naar oost. Die zal morgen wel zichtbaar zijn.

Volgende week worden de markeringen aangebracht en is het pad klaar:
https://tinyurl.com/y66k22a2
FrankOverman (2020-08-12 14:58:00+00:00): Goed werk!
Bedankt namens allen
;)
arkhi (2022-10-08 07:24:48+00:00): Bonjour @Pistouf et @Tom42,

Je vois un héliport sur OSM (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1854709148/history) et je ne me souviens pas en avoir vu un, ni voir en quoi un héliport pourrait servir à cet endroit, ni imaginer qu’il puisse être réaliste qu’il y en ait un.

Vous sauriez confirmer ou infirmer à quoi correspond ce node ? Merci !
Pistouf (2022-10-08 11:29:31+00:00): Aucune idée mais je pense en effet qu'un héliport mis sur une route comme ça, c'est plutôt une erreur... Mais je ne peux non plus confirmer cela. J'ai l'impression que ma modif concernait plutôt la route et que ce point a été automatiquement mis en V2. Ce serait plutôt https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tom42 à contacter vu que c'est lui qui a mis la V1 héliport.
arkhi (2022-10-08 21:16:36+00:00): Je l’ai contacté en privé également, en pointant vers ce dernier changeset. Nous verrons s’il répond.

Merci pour la réponse !
Twenty Mile Bison (2025-12-17 20:38:37+00:00): What is "Greater Strathcona"? Is there any official source for this boundary? Couldn't find anything on maps.edmonton.ca, and as a former Edmontonian, I understand what the boundary is going for, but I have never heard anyone call it that.
Arctic gnome (2025-12-18 16:14:39+00:00): That edit was from years ago, so I don't remember what it's based on. When I lived in Edmonton, it was pretty common for people to refer to the entire area from Mill Creek to the North Saskatchewan (relation 9952237) as "Strathcona", ever moreso than the neighbourhood officially named "Strathcona" (relation 7820664).

But I don't know whether the larger Strathcona is official in any way. A quick web search mostly points to the riding with that name, which is roughly the same shape as larger Strathcona. Some also refer to the larger area as "Old Strathcona", although I thought that was just the commercial strip along Whyte Ave. Real estate websites call the larger Strathcona "Scona".

I agree that "Greater Strathcona" is not the right word, but the area is definitely thought of as a cohesive region, so I'd keep the relation under a different name if possible.
Viajero Perdido (2025-12-22 18:36:52+00:00): "Western/Northern Mature Area" also struck me as odd, and I recall a few years back, digging through the city's website for any mention of those names but not finding any.  And I recall mentioning it, but not going further because it's not really my specialty.
gscholz (2020-08-08 06:24:49+00:00): Hi DowntownAbby,
this changeset has created a big mess regarding the geometry of several ways:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=89057429
I have reverted it, so the original geometries are back now.

Please be carefull.
Guido
SomeoneElse (2020-08-06 21:23:31+00:00): Hello s5451927,
Please don't add fake park data to OpenStreetMap for "Pokemon" purposes.  The four fake parks that you added here have been removed now, but you can see them by looking at https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=89057450 .  Clearly https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834793543/history wasn't a vali park.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2020-08-06 21:25:19+00:00): For info - I've commented at I've commented at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89057450 saying "please don't add fake parks".  
Best Regards,
Andy
mariotomo (2020-12-10 22:34:09+00:00): hi, very simple question, how's this related to YouthMappers?  thank you.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mariotomo/diary/395025
SomeoneElse (2020-08-06 21:08:20+00:00): Hello,
in this changeset you deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834741500/history (it has since been restored).  Can you explain why you deleted it?  It's mapped as "natural=wood", and the imagery suggests that that is in fact the correct tagging for what is on the ground there.  Can you explain in more detail what is the problem and why you deleted it with a changeset comment of "Pokemon go spam locations"?
Best Regards,
Andy
gscscnd (2020-08-08 10:17:16+00:00): Lepiej zastosować tag <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dmonastery>. Poprawione w <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89123106>.
Jan'ek (2020-08-09 19:26:53+00:00): No tak biegły to ja nie jestem, to już wyższa szkoła jazdy :-). Nawigacja "Navigator" nie umiała znaleźć adresu, szukałem przyczyn i przy okazji dodałem nazwę (choć niepełną, tam jeszcze powinno być "pod wezwaniem").
gscscnd (2020-08-10 07:15:56+00:00): iD nawet posiada odpowiedni szablon: „Teren klasztoru”.

Zobacz <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things>. Jeśli znasz jakąś bardziej precyzyjną nazwę (niekoniecznie pełną), to możesz ją dodać. Samo „Klasztor” to trochę mało.
Jan'ek (2020-08-10 17:51:36+00:00): OK, dane mi się wykasowały. Jak będę miał znowu zlecenie w tym obiekcie to doprecyzuję pełną nazwę.
eggie (2020-08-07 05:52:51+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
MVG,
Eggie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-09-23 14:34:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 91371619, 91373494, 91364469, 91369701 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits in Penicuik that were made using an inappropriate source (at the request of the user)
ququruzka (2020-08-07 13:24:36+00:00): umnichka
PerplexingPenguins (2020-08-09 04:29:46+00:00): I would recommend against doing this, changesets over a large area are hard to review
SomeoneElse (2020-08-06 22:10:17+00:00): Hello,
Silly question - if you're adding something _for_ openhistoricalmap.org why don't you add it _to_ openhistoricalmap.org?
Apologies if I don't understand what's happening here?
Best Regards,
Andy
MitjaJez (2020-08-07 08:11:48+00:00): 'Border' is already added, but it's historical, does not exist anymore. I'm preparing to move it to OHM.
literan (2020-08-10 17:59:35+00:00): и зачем удалять тег здания?
literan (2020-08-10 18:00:17+00:00): еще и дубль АЗС поставили. Она уже стоит на полигоне заправки. Откатываю.
n9199087489 (2020-08-10 18:14:04+00:00): Окей. Я просто не до конца еще тут со всем разобрался
literan (2020-08-10 20:05:39+00:00): все нормально, бывает. Если будут вопросы - пишите мне в личку, подскажу
eggie (2020-08-06 22:28:17+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Het wandelpad bij Een heb je op bicycle=no gezet. Op een wandelpad (footway) is dat al default. Het hoeft niet. 
Paden over erven zullen inderdaad access=private zijn.
Wanneer er geen tweewielers mogen komen op een path tag ik vaak vehicle=no  Dan vang je alle vliegen in één klap.
Tip:  Niet schuiven met de kaart in editmodus. Dat geeft vaak schade door onbedoelde verplaatsingen van objecten. Houd je gebied kleiner en dan eerder uploaden.
review
MVG,
Eggie
MannoB (2020-08-07 08:46:37+00:00): Hey Eggie,
Bedankt voor de feedback. Zal het even grondig doornemen. Zal ook nog wat Vragen verzamelen Aangaande dingen als schouwpaden en overpad etc. Hier lokaal zie ik een aantal paden die op OSM staan aangegeven dan de praktijk hier doet vermoeden :)
Groeten,
Manno
eggie (2020-08-07 08:58:53+00:00): Oke Manno... Je kunt overigens ook op het forum van OSM je vragen kwijt. Je kunt jezelf evt. toevoegen in het draadje Wie wat waar..
Inlog identiek aan OSM account.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12
Veel plezier met mappen.
eggie
aixbrick (2020-08-09 11:54:56+00:00): Hallo,
er wird nicht gerendert, weil er mit covered=yes getaggt ist.
Es ist nicht sinnvoll, Tags zu ergänzen, nur um eine bestimmte Darstellung zu erreichen. Bitte entferne daher die layer-Tags wieder. 
Gruß
aixbrick (2020-08-21 19:32:21+00:00): Keine Reaktion, rückgängig gemacht mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89761448.
abakus_uploader (2020-08-07 22:35:16+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
BAK365 (2020-08-07 10:53:29+00:00): Hallo,
Ich vermute, du hast die Diskussion auf talk-ch nicht mitverfolgt. Die Orthofotos des Kantons Glarus dürfen in OSM nicht mehr verwendet werden.

http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/2020-August/thread.html