piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
user_125718 (2022-08-30 00:51:31+00:00): Wenn es für das "nicht mögen", sachliche Gründe gibt, die diese Einstellung rechtfertigen, dann hätte ich die gerne gewußt. Wenn man keine Gründe hat, dann kann man ja gerne für eigenen Erfassungen nehmen, was einem gefällt, aber dann bitte auch die Tags anderer Mapper in Ruhe lassen.
Den bestehen lassen ist dann aber Doppelerfassung der gleichen Eigenschaften, bei der mir niemand garantiert, daß nicht der nächste Mapper den "falschen", weniger bekannten, doppelten Key löscht. Das löst das Problem also nicht.

Nur mal eines von vielen, neueren Beispielen, das nicht mit doppeltem Tag gemappt wurde:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/100876660
In der deutschen Locale, hat auch schon jemand eine passende Weiterleitung für building:use:residential auf building:use=* erstellt.
mueschel (2022-08-30 17:28:52+00:00): Diese Weiterleitung macht wohl keinen Sinn, da building:use dieses Tag überhaupt nicht erwähnt.

Die Gründe für und gegen Werte im Schlüssel findest du in den diversen Diskussionen im Forum und der Mailingliste. Sehr viele der Tags (allen vorran "service:vehicle:*" wurden nie durch die Community besprochen, sondern wurden einfach vom Entwickler des iD-Editors eingebaut.

Für weitere Diskussionen, starte bitte einen Thread auf einer der Plattformen, aber nutze nicht die Changeset-Kommentare.
user_125718 (2022-08-30 21:01:02+00:00): Die Weiterleitung reicht aber aus, um die Bedeutung des Tags zu klaren!

Irgendwo im Forum und auf den Mailinglisten wird schon mal jemand was geschrieben haben, warum ihm dieses Tagging nicht gefällt, warum das so ist, weiß ich aber auch nicht, weil sonst hätte ich ja mal kurz die ein paar Gründe nennen können... ....echt hilfreich, besonders, wenn von dir diese Ansicht vertreten wird!

Außerdem gibt es schon lange die Regel "Any Tags you like", die du eigetlich kennen solltest: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like
Insofern erübrigt sich diese Diskussion eigentlich. Einbau in Vorlagen von Editoren ist auch noch mal was anderes als die bloße Verwendung von Tags bei Objekten, die man selbst erfasst.
mueschel (2022-08-30 21:16:32+00:00): U.a. aus den Gründen die du auch anführst: Resourcenbedarf bei der Suche in der Datenbank. 
Und wenn ich dein "any tags" zitieren darf: "it is recommended to use the tagging given [in the wiki]. Otherwise other users might eventually convert your contributions to fit that scheme."
user_125718 (2022-08-31 17:21:05+00:00): Das Zitat bezieht sich auf unstrittige, lang etablierte Tags, wie sie auf der Map Features-Seite zu finden sind. Wenn man jeden Tag mit 1 Benutzung dokumentieren würde, würde das Wiki nur noch unübersichtlich sein, bevor nicht klar ist, daß der Tag entweder schon vom Konzept her sinnvoll und nützlich ist oder schon nennenswerte Nutzungen hat, sollte man nicht unbedingt jeden Tag sofort dokumentieren.

Der Ressourcenverbrauch steigt generell eher bei der Variante mit Semikolon, weil man da keinen festen Key für die Auswahl der betreffenden Objekte hat und die Werte aller gefundenen Objekte nach den benötigten Werten durchwühlen darf.
Nur weil das einige Anwender, wohl eher notgedrungen, machen, heißt das nicht, daß es toll ist.
mueschel (2022-08-31 17:35:57+00:00): Wie schon gesagt: Bitte führe Diskussionen in den dafür vorgesehen Foren und Mailinglisten, nicht in Changeset-Kommentaren.
E de Wit (2022-08-19 10:23:29+00:00): Why remove all the 'aeroway=holding_position' across the world?
As far is I know this is a valid tag with proper documentation.
This is damaging the map.

wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway=holding%20position

-E de Wit
phd0 (2022-08-19 10:34:54+00:00): hello, i'm french.
yes and no
I remplace the lines with points.
in ID lines will encure errors. 

but in wiki, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Dholding_position it will not a really error. 
Who is right ?
phd0 (2022-08-19 10:46:35+00:00): and no, my work a not realy "damage" the map. simply simplify 

Philippe
E de Wit (2022-08-19 10:50:38+00:00): ID errors are indicative, certainly not wrong in all cases.
It's possible that ID errors lag behind, are incomplete or contain a bug.

I'm no aeroway expert by any means, but according to the wiki under 'How to Map' mapping this with a line is allowed or even preferred.

It's probably less time consuming to follow the wiki and suggest this as a validation bug on the ID github without replacing everybody their lines to nodes.
phd0 (2022-08-19 10:57:09+00:00): you are right. it's true.
In any case, OSM's "stanrad" display does not show breakpoints, either point or line.
personally, I prefer the points which have the advantage of being associated with a direction, which is important for the readability of the diagram, and the direction of circulation.
it's true that I don't think to report bugs of this kind on GitHub, I'll try to think about it in the future.
So I'm not continuing?
Philippe
E de Wit (2022-08-19 11:29:17+00:00): There has been some testing to improve aeroways for the standard carto.
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/4346
This experiment didn't contain the holding position though.

Lines have direction as well like with a retaining wall, unfortunatly at the time of writing something like this is missing for the holding position tag.

Thanks for keeping in mind the Github, just like you I just try to improve the database we call OpenStreetMap :-)
It would be a bit pointless to replace people their lines with points when lines themselves are allowed or even preferred according to the wiki

-E de Wit
JeroenHoek (2022-08-19 17:04:53+00:00): Mapping holding points as lines is valid, and more accurate than points. If you have been replacing lines by points, you have been removing the work of fellow mappers, including me.

Have you removed many ways in favour of nodes in other changesets?

Restore these please!

You've removed a couple I've mapped in BER as well, and you've been removing other mappers' work too, like here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125060643

Never start global editing actions based solely on mapping tools feedback without understanding the issue at hand! Always consult the wiki, and when in doubt, consult the community. You can either ask the mappers who choose some approach, or the Tagging Mailing List.
phd0 (2022-08-19 17:16:23+00:00): hello, 
Indeed, the previous discussion has clarified the situation.
I use iD, so no backtracking possible for me. The point makes it possible to define the direction of the marking, contrary to the line. In any case, as said before, the standard OSM display does not show these elements. a ticket is open on GitHub but not on this item.
In any case I suspended my mass modifications.
Philip
JeroenHoek (2022-08-19 17:26:06+00:00): Will you ask the DWG to revert your edits? You cannot leave the damage undone.

I don't mind using the reverter plugin in JOSM for you if you supply me with a list of changeset IDs that removed ways and replaced them with nodes, but you have to take responsibility for the mistake you made.
phd0 (2022-08-20 15:58:42+00:00): bonjour,
voici la liste des 4 WAY supprimés lors de ce changement :
919141261, v2
919135962, v2
919135954, v2
919135952, v2

les 4 NODE créés :
    8536623472, v2
    8536585853, v2
    8536584575, v2
    8536584570, v2

merci de votre aide.
JeroenHoek (2022-08-20 16:07:30+00:00): A slight misunderstanding; I need the changeset IDs of all the changesets (not just here in Leeuwarden, but across the globe) where you replaced ways with nodes. If we don't fix this, you'll get angry mappers in your inbox from time to time wondering why their detailed mapping was replaced with a less detailed one.

For example, this changeset here is 125099079, but there are many other changesets where you did the same, like this one:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125059349
phd0 (2022-08-20 16:39:28+00:00): OK, I'd like to put things straight:
As you said, both solutions are acceptable. I have not "deleted" anything, in any case, on these objects.
Just transformed a line into points with sometimes additional elements such as name and/or direction. So in the end I didn't do anything "big stupidity".

I modified more than a hundred points. iD is not flexible enough to easily allow me to answer you, without spending a week there.

On https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/aeroway%3Dholding_position we see that there are more than 20,000 NODEs and only 600 WAYs.
hence my initial misunderstanding of iD's false positive.
It also shows that finally the community uses the NODEs in a more natural way.

on https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/aeroway%3Dholding_position#projects we also see some correspondence between the JOSM USER PRESET and iD. you should therefore also have an alert message on a WAY. (I don't know how to use JOSM. I tried: not at all flexible to use)

if other contributors are like you (a bit annoyed), which I understand, because it sometimes happens to see inexperienced or uninformed users make mistakes, please let them come to me, I'll tell them would explain the situation.
I sincerely regret having annoyed you, but we must put the gravity of things back on their scale.

And this is the 1st time in 10 years of OSM that I've had such a lively conversation with an open-source contributor. (16 years old on Wikipedia)

Collaboratively, Philippe
phd0 (2022-09-01 06:05:16+00:00): hi everyone, a new feature is proposed on the wiki :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/aeroway%3Dholding_position_line
SomeoneElse (2022-11-09 14:44:09+00:00): Maybe my memory is failing me, but is there really a shoulder on the westbound carriageway here?  I don't remember one.  As far as I can remember, there's the separate cycleway on the other side of the road, and maybe a bit of a gap between the white line at the left of lane 1 and the verge, but I don't rememember anything wide enough to be called a shoulder.
Or am I misremembering?
Myazyk (2022-09-16 21:55:29+00:00): Прошу вказати причини видалення назви потічка Баньківка
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-09-15 15:32:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 126228183, 126229776, 126229784 where the changeset comment is: Reverting edits; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6330 ; subsequent actions by that user suggest this data is likely fantasy.
mtmail (2022-08-23 21:32:33+00:00): Die Postleitzahl bei diesen Gebäuden ist 6 stellig. Ist die korrekte 5 stellige bekannt? https://nominatim.org/qa/#map=15.71/49.96/6.52&layer=postcode_bad_format
OSM_RogerWilco (2022-08-19 16:25:21+00:00): Da ich das auch gerade in Walsrode hatte: Die Sperrung kannst Du mit access:conditional angeben:

Beispiel:
access:conditional=no @ (2022 Apr 19-2022 Aug 26)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1081624601

Viele Grüße
syntex (2022-09-29 10:44:44+00:00): WTP nic nie napisało w zmianach komunikacji o przemianowaniu przystanku Św. Wincentego 01. On faktycznie istnieje?
Adam Klocusky (2022-09-29 15:19:22+00:00): Istnieje, pozostaje zawieszony od 2 marca 2019 r. Niestety jakość komunikatów spada i nie przekłada się na rzeczywistość (patrz przystanek METRO BRÓDNO 08, o którym w komunikacie napisano, że jest to nowy przystanek
user_6471069 (2022-08-22 15:40:24+00:00): Ścieżkę rowerową (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1087449476) wypadałoby z dwóch stron połączyć do istniejących dróg, inaczej to nie ma sensu.
bkil (2022-08-19 12:50:16+00:00): Köszönjük a közreműködést. Viszont a jövőben szeretnénk kérni, hogy legyen egy objektumnak funkciója is, ne csak nevek, különben nem lehet rátalálni. https://osm.org/changeset/125105997 http://openstreetbrowser.org/
大山かなめ (2024-09-21 10:34:02+00:00): 本川越駅の　node:9911299480　ですが、実際にはその地点に駅への出入口は存在しないかと思います。
現地に行ったことがないならば、街路写真を確認することを勧めます
user_5359 (2022-08-19 11:57:38+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Warum hast Du bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/251088305/history die beiden Tags
amenity=events_venue
building=yes
gelöscht und mit area ersetzt?
Ist das Gebäude nicht mehr vorhanden?
CrazyKim117 (2022-08-19 13:07:54+00:00): Hi Yoyoman44444,
Using the RapID which is AI map tool is pretty cool. However, can you mention what you have added or updated for the future reference? 

cheers
Yoyoman44444 (2022-08-19 13:48:32+00:00): Yes I will do it in future
nevw (2022-08-20 00:19:02+00:00): Hi
you have added natural=tree_row to a couple of the ways that form part of multipolygon wooded areas here.
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=125101385
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7192178#map=13/-42.9831/147.2308
Was this intended?
Yoyoman44444 (2022-08-20 03:49:10+00:00): no i dont know how to change it
nevw (2022-08-20 03:52:57+00:00): Thanks for the quick reply, I'll fix it today sometime.
cheers
nevw (2022-08-20 05:42:57+00:00): fixed now
peculiar theater (2022-09-17 15:38:30+00:00): The buildings that you're adding in this and your other changesets are not supported by any of the available imagery.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125101454
rskedgell (2023-05-07 06:43:55+00:00): Hi Sworrs,

Thanks for editing the map with StreetComplete.

You have marked the northbound carriageway of Blyth Road (A1) where it crosses the Chesterfield Canal as being prohibited for pedestrians. I cannot find any signage indicating that a prohibition exists in the available streetside imagery, either here, or on the slip roads from Retford Road (A620). Is this a newly signed restriction, or is there some other reason to believe that a prohibition exists?

Please ensure that if you are marking a road as prohibited for pedestrians, that there is actually a restriction on pedestrians. The vast majority of roads in the UK do not prohibit pedestrians, although they may be unsuitable for pedestrians. Many sections of roads, particularly on dual carriageways and parts of complex junctions may be unsuitable for pedestrians, but that does not extinguish the legal right to use them.

Where pedestrians are prohibited, there will usually be a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1) on a public highway, or the equivalent health and safety sign on private land.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/3/made#tgp1-tbl1-tbd1-tr22
https://www.hse.gov.uk/workplacetransport/safetysigns/prohibitorypedestrians.htm

The StreetComplete AddProhibitedForPedestrians Quest ("Add whether roads are prohibited for pedestrians") adds a foot=no or foot=yes access tag to the road, based on the user's answer. The OSM wiki's description of access tagging states that "Access values describe legal permissions/restrictions and should follow ground truth; e.g., signage or legal ruling and not introduce guesswork. It does not describe common or typical use, even if signage is generally ignored."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
rskedgell (2023-05-15 08:51:51+00:00): foot=no removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136115495
Sworrs (2023-05-23 19:23:31+00:00): Sorry, I thought I saw a sign telling that pedestrians prohibited, but maybe I looked wrong. 
Thank you for your correction
user_6110846 (2022-08-25 10:51:49+00:00): in the previous change https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125028701?way_page=11 , I asked you to stop spreading fakes in Western Ukraine (Western Ukraine is the provinces (oblasts) of Rivne Oblast, Khmelnytskyi Oblast , Volhyn Oblast, Lviv Oblast , Zakarpattia Oblast, Chernivtsi Oblast)

I remind you again that the streets of Western Ukraine do not have official Russian names at all, there are no signs in Russian on the houses at all, Russian is not a local language 

EVERYTHING YOU WRITE IN NAME:RU IS FAKE INFORMATION
STOP ADDING NAME RU IN WESTERN UKRAINE BECAUSE IT'S FAKE


у прошлой правКе https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125028701?way_page=11 я тебя просил прекратить распространять  фейки  в Западной Украине (Западная Украина це провинции (области ) Ровенская, Хмельницкая, Волынская Львовская Закарпатская Черновецкая) 

Я тебе повторно напоминаю что  улицы Западной Украины вообще не имеют официальных русских названий , табличек русским языком на домах  не существует вообще , русский язык вообще не есть местным языком . 

ВСЕ ЧТО ТЫ ПИШЕШЬ В NAME:RU ЭТО ФЕЙКОВАЯ ИНФОРМАЦИЯ
ПРЕКРАТИ ДОБАВЛЯТЬ NAME RU В ЗАПАДНОЙ УКРАИНЕ ПОТОМУ ЧТО ЭТО ФЕЙК
silversurfer83 (2022-08-20 09:59:14+00:00): Hi
Schön, dass du mit StreetComplete an der Verbesserung der Datenlage mitarbeitest :)
Eine Bitte dazu:
Regelmäßig auf Upload klicken, damit die Änderungssätze lokal begrenzt bleiben um anderen Nutzern die Überwachung ihrer Umgebung nicht unnötig zu erschweren.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125102286
user_5359 (2022-08-20 13:09:21+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have revert your SEO SPAM (mostly no standard keys, no verifiable data, not positive verifiable address data, destroying data). If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data. For the most information in the description we have own keys. Please have look on the website http://wiki.openstreetmap.org.
martinst (2022-08-19 17:23:11+00:00): Shouldn't way 1087465300 also get natural=wood?
settler_ (2022-08-19 17:47:30+00:00): thanks, fixed it :)
archie (2022-08-19 11:52:28+00:00): Varför gjorde du detta? Enl NVDB - trafikverkets databas över vägar i Sverige är detta en gemensam gång- och cykelväg. Vilken divergerande källa har du?
HenrikKarlstad PostNord (2022-08-19 12:01:36+00:00): Hej Archie. Jag tittade på eniro och  därefter ändrade jag till serviceväg. Verkar som jag agerat lite snabbt.
archie (2022-08-19 12:12:51+00:00): Kopierar du från eniro? eniros kartor är upphovsrättsskyddade. Är det PostNords officiella policy eller har PostNord erhållit eniros medgivande? 
Rättar du till det här?
HenrikKarlstad PostNord (2022-08-19 12:20:18+00:00): Nej jag kopierar inte från Eniro. Det är jag som uttrycker mig slarvigt. Jag har ändrat tillbaka.
Eslam_Elsayed (2022-08-21 07:52:04+00:00): Hello commune echrayaa-machrek echames;
I noticed you removed the "highway" tag and added unofficial tags that didn't match the Wiki OpenStreetMap.
Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/550324062
Could you verify it and fix it, please? If you want any help please let me know
Regards
Eslam_Elsayed
GabrielOGDC (2022-08-19 16:40:48+00:00): Hi, that lane in the middle of the junction is not two way nor does it have two lanes at that point. it is one way going from The Ridge to Old London Road. Traffic going in the opposite direction takes the slipway to the left which is separated by an island.
(Also just fyi, it’s Bachelor’s Bump, not Batchelor’s Bump:) (apologies if this sounds petty, didn’t mean for it to)).
Nathan_A_RF (2022-08-19 20:13:21+00:00): I'm sorry you are mistaken, vehicles are allowed to turn right from Rye Road onto Old London Road.
GabrielOGDC (2022-08-19 21:46:17+00:00): My bad, sorry for some reason I forgot that you can turn right🤦‍♂️
JhowieNitnek (2022-11-13 18:24:29+00:00): Hi, what did you base on using name:bru as the language code of Brusselian?
JhowieNitnek (2022-11-13 19:17:58+00:00): bru should not be used as the language code as it is the language code of Eastern Bru 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bru_language
bxl-forever (2022-11-13 19:29:05+00:00): You are not trolling, right?

The reason is: We had to make *choices*.
There is no ISO-639-* for this dialect.

The most legitimate choice was to create a new value.  "name:bru" was entirely free because there was no single use of it in the entire OSM database.

The wiki says this: "Many languages, including widely spoken or written ones, are defined inaccurately or uncoded for in the existing ISO codes, so the tagging necessarily deviates from them where appropriate."

The risk of collision with a legitimate name in Eastern Bru in this part of the world is close to zero.

If you can find a suitable replacement for "bru" which will satisfy all those criteria, I’d be happy to embrace the new value, update the wiki and the existing data.  But I don’t think it is worth the effort.
JhowieNitnek (2022-11-13 19:32:01+00:00): I think bxl would be a suitable replacement but you are maybe right it's not worth it
marczoutendijk (2022-08-19 12:23:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125105055 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism.
archie (2022-08-19 12:19:42+00:00): Varför har du ritat in denna väg med layer=-1 utan tillhörande tunnel=yes? Går vägen verkligen under jorden här?
marczoutendijk (2022-08-19 12:23:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125105055 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-08-20 22:27:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125164453 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed/unsourced imports - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6271 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2398645 .
marczoutendijk (2022-08-19 12:23:47+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 125104460, 125104495, 125104536, 125104582, 125104626.
hfs (2022-12-18 15:46:16+00:00): Hallo, bist Du sicher, dass dies die Hausnummer Rosenthaler Straße 40–41 ist? Das müsste eigentlich die Sophienstraße 8 sein.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-08-20 22:27:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125164453 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed/unsourced imports - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6271 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2398645 .
user_3022894 (2022-12-07 19:07:18+00:00): Hallo Sammelmuetze,

sorry erstmal, dass ich hier so reingrätsche, aber nach meinem Verständnis benötigen Gebäude, unter denen sich noch ein Tunnel befindet, normalerweise überhaupt keinen Layer-Tag.

Layer ist dazu da, um quasi "in 2D" die Lagebeziehungen zwischen Objekten darzustellen. Der Standardwert, wenn keiner gesetzt ist, ist layer=0. Nun ist es hier ja so, dass Tunnel in aller Regel bereits layer=-1 haben, hier hat der Burgholztunnel sogar layer=-4. Somit liegt dessen layer automatisch unterhalb des Default-Layer (0) der Gebäude. Die Gebäude brauchen keinen Extra Layer-Tag. Zugegeben wird das auf der Hauptkarte blöd dargestellt, sprich falsch gerendert. Das lässt sich allerdings durch setzen eines zusätzlichen Layertags auch nicht ändern, da die Rendering-Regeln von OSM-Carto Tunnel grundsätzlich immer über Gebäuden darstellen.

Da müsste man ggf. mit diesem Anliegen an OSM-Carto herantreten.

Viele Grüße
Lukas
eggie (2022-08-19 13:09:22+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback..  Het komt zo wel in de data en is vindbaar, maar renderen op de standaardkaart zal de naam (nog) niet. De postcode heb ik aangepast aan de osm format. Geen spatie

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
user_5359 (2022-08-20 13:44:29+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please use building=house instead something like name=house.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-08-20 22:27:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125164453 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed/unsourced imports - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6271 and http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2398645 .
user_5359 (2022-08-20 13:20:10+00:00): Hello! Please don't use Google as source (for painting and confirmation)
tastrax (2022-08-20 11:47:58+00:00): Please add meaningful comments to your changesets. Its better for everyone who may be watching data in particular areas  - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-09-15 15:33:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 126228183, 126229776, 126229784 where the changeset comment is: Reverting edits; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6330 ; subsequent actions by that user suggest this data is likely fantasy.