piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
maraf24 (2021-10-30 18:39:16+00:00): Skonsultowałem się z danymi dsdika i poprzednie oznakowanie było z nim zgodne, a to nie jest.
Poczekam jeszcze do północy na źródła, bo może od października się coś zmieniło.
maraf24 (2021-10-30 19:37:49+00:00): Widzę, że wiadomości dotarły.
DressyPear4 (2021-10-31 05:16:30+00:00): Olá, em pequenas áreas o ideal é usar um ponto com 'natural=tree'
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113170816
BCNorwich (2021-10-30 18:31:14+00:00): Sorry, the comment should have been square up houses.
gscholz (2021-11-01 07:53:40+00:00): Hi Velu M,
thsi changeset as created errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-57.29092&lat=-25.56620&zoom=14&overlays=self_intersection_ways,self_intersection_points,single_node_in_way,duplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=113170977

Can you please fix this?
Kind Regards
Guido
Tomas Straupis (2021-10-31 06:39:27+00:00): grade1 - asfaltuotas
oba510 (2021-10-31 02:17:24+00:00): Do you know anything more about this?  I can't find any evidence that the alley has actually been abandoned by the city.  There's nothing in the permit/planning/parcel history for the adjacent properties about adding a gate or closing the alley - the gate just appeared a year or two ago.  As far as I can tell there is still a public right of way here named "Cooper Alley" and the gate is probably illegal.  There are a couple of properties that can only be accessed from the alley and have "Cooper Alley" addresses.
pancakedrawer001 (2021-10-31 05:12:49+00:00): I walked by it this morning and they’ve built a storefront where the alley used to be. I looked for a gate but there wasn’t one. Matbe there’s some back door to the alley through one of the shops but it’s definitely not a street anymore.
pancakedrawer001 (2021-10-31 15:55:26+00:00): I went back just now. You’re totally right. I’ll undo my change later today. Thanks for your help!
pancakedrawer001 (2021-10-31 21:44:21+00:00): @oba510 - I think I did this correctly, but would you mind taking a look if you can? Many thanks!

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113209896
oba510 (2021-11-01 05:59:00+00:00): Looks good.  I re-tagged it as a footway since it's so narrow and added the gate.
maraf24 (2021-10-30 19:11:23+00:00): Brak źródeł.
TheNet1996 (2021-10-31 05:02:22+00:00): Hallo JeeArAux_79,

wurden die Wege neu ausgeschildert?

Ausgenommen vom Weg über den Hochablass selbst sind die Wege mit Zeichen 240 beschildert.

Siehe hierzu in der Wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren

Des Weiteren macht die Kombination von highway=footway & bicycle=designated wenig Sinn.

Auch gehen über diese Wege etliche Radrouten...

VG
Mike
user_12625593 (2021-11-02 08:21:54+00:00): Tikkie terug: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2918522
Dit kindcentrum wordt voor 0-15 jaar. Combinatie van 'school' en 'childcare' volgens mij, geen 'kindergarten' (kleuterschool).
arvdk (2021-11-02 10:12:31+00:00): Ha, bedankt. Geen kindergarten dan? Volgens de website is 'childcare' een alternatief voor 'kindergarten': https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dkindergarten#Alternative_tags dus toevoegen van 'school' zou dan de situatie kloppend maken?
user_12625593 (2021-11-02 10:45:20+00:00): Kindergarten omzetten naar childcare, en school toevoegen. Maar ik zou zeggen: nu eerst weghalen, en pas na de kerstvakantie weer toevoegen, als ze verhuisd zijn (zit nu nog in KC de Hoven). Of eventueel een proposed tag?
ovruni (2021-10-30 20:24:07+00:00): Hola "José RA", gracias por contribuir a OSM. En este conjunto de cambios que contiene el texto " Corregir calle" se ha cambiando vías a "highway=residential", sin embargo estas vías sirven para dar accesos a estacionamientos y además son vías internas dentro de una empresa, por lo que la etiqueta era "highway=service".
Si tienes alguna duda sobre el mapeo de OSM en Perú te invito a unirte al canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dresidential
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservice
Sandal man (2021-11-01 11:19:07+00:00): Hola, gracias por los cambios pero olvidaste las etiquetas.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/997760525
AntonioLago (2021-11-02 07:34:36+00:00): Hola.
Si solo es esa vía ya está resuelto.
Gracias.
maraf24 (2021-10-30 19:36:25+00:00): Wycofałem.
Proszę nie wprowadzać fikcyjnych numerów bez podania aktualnych źródeł.
DSDiK twierdzi, że numeracja dróg pozostała tu bez zmian.
xxxVroCxxxVroCxxxVroCxxx (2021-10-31 18:30:28+00:00): Jestem z okolic i znaki wskazują na to że to obejście to droga wojewódzka...
maraf24 (2021-10-31 23:05:37+00:00): Nie twierdzę, że takich znaków nie ma, ale DSDiK tego nie potwierdza, więc trzeba by jakieś źródło. Np. zdjecie czy np. filmik z przejazdu.
xxxVroCxxxVroCxxxVroCxxx (2021-11-01 06:25:37+00:00): dobra jak tam będe jechać to zrobie
maraf24 (2021-11-02 17:22:49+00:00): Upewnij się przy okazji, czy oznakowanie drogi przez miejscowość zdjęto, bo różnie z tym bywa.
W OSM wartości z ref używa się w nawigacji, dlatego istotne jest, by zgadzała się z tym, co widać przy drodze.
Numery niewidoczne przy drodze dajemy w tagu unsigned_ref.
gscholz (2021-11-01 07:52:12+00:00): Hi Velu M,
thsi changeset as created errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-57.29092&lat=-25.56620&zoom=14&overlays=self_intersection_ways,self_intersection_points,single_node_in_way,duplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=113172214

Can you please fix this?
Kind Regards
Guido
Famlam (2021-10-30 19:48:07+00:00): Bron: zonder RCE en survey, met Mapillary...

(Mocht iemand weten hoe je JOSM zegt dat hij de bronnen niet moet herinneren van de vorige sessie......?)
dvdhoven (2021-10-31 07:09:54+00:00): In het upload venster vrijwel onderaan net boven de regel met de sources staat een vinkvakje met de titel Automatically obtain source from current layers
Dat heb ik altijd aangevinkt staan, dan pakt JOSM alleen de lagen, die dan aanstaan.
Famlam (2021-10-31 10:44:01+00:00): Dankjewel voor je reactie! En handmatige bronnen (zoals "survey", "Mapillary", "BAG") voeg je dan wel handmatig toe?
dvdhoven (2021-10-31 11:24:40+00:00): Ja, die kun je toevoegen, je kunt gewoon de regel wijzigen.
Als je een gpx track geladen hebt, bijv. na een survey tocht, wordt die automatisch toegevoegd als survey
Lee Carré (2021-10-30 20:11:17+00:00): Related to http://www.osm.org/changeset/113170026 .
Mex (2021-11-01 16:59:33+00:00): Looks like there is already a node for this, but I think this should probably be on a relationship not a node.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113173094
chris66 (2024-06-05 13:29:22+00:00): Hi,
vor Ort habe ich hier "Media Markt" gelesen, hat der Saturn eventuell umfirmiert?
Alvarado2510 (2022-08-14 23:44:31+00:00): Mario la calle C Sur no se hace alto desde su cruce con avenida 3 de noviembre y la interamericana, voy a proceder a corregir ese error, que detecte usando OSMand, si tiene duda con los altos en el corregimiento de David, con mucho gusto te puedo aclarar cualquier duda.
literan (2021-10-31 16:49:29+00:00): "24 табак" это не название. Я же уже кидал вам, кажется, ссылку на вики.

Исправлю на тег inscription
Travieso (2021-10-31 18:51:01+00:00): Да, я прочёл. Думал, что добавление "24" делает вывеску названием.
mueschel (2021-10-31 09:31:43+00:00): Hi,
you used the new tag "sector:name" here. Usually the name of a cemetery sector is put to the simple "name" tag.
Could you change that?
Władysław Komorek (2021-11-03 18:53:00+00:00): "sector: name" is a valid cemetery sector name tag used multiple times. See Wiki. This was established a long time ago as a valid string from "cemetery = sector" to "sector: name =". "addr: sector" and "name" are an invalid tag.
mueschel (2021-11-03 19:56:42+00:00): The wiki page is just 3 days old and wasn't indexed when I wrote the comment. The tag didn't exist either before this edit.
Until 4 days ago only 'name' was used on cemetery=sector objects, 11000 times.

So, it's fine to invent new tags, but it is not "established long time ago".
Władysław Komorek (2021-11-04 16:13:38+00:00): It was my mistake that I forgot to update on the Wiki a long time ago. There has been little interest in this topic so you are the first to remind me. Thank you.
aachso (2023-06-19 17:05:47+00:00): Hey, you added a memorial with the name "Ding". That's not the actual name, is it?

See https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3742419.

You also added a tree of species Ulmus minor (German Feldulme) with the name "Feldulme", but that's just the species, not the given name of this specific tree, right?
Leo Slager (2021-10-30 22:19:04+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
gurglypipe (2021-10-31 23:35:00+00:00): Hi. Do you have local knowledge of the changes you’ve made here to fix the warnings from ID? The tagging changes you’ve made to delete a bird hide, change a transformer and change a sundial don’t look correct to me. (I have local knowledge of this area.)
lakedistrict (2021-11-03 22:54:04+00:00): I agree with gurglypipe, the only useful change appears to be the fountain at Standen Park. Please revert the errors identified, or even the whole changeset if easier.
user_8101879 (2021-11-06 18:07:01+00:00): Hi,
sorry for that.
For the birds hide, I didn't understand how works this building : how a feeding place for birds can be a bird hide ? I think I have understand and I 've made a change compatible with ID.
For the transformer, I improved what I have done the other day after I read wikipedia page, look at "how to map" : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dtransformer.
For the sundial, now it is just a node in the middle of a square, part of the relations grass and park : now you can see on openstreetmap the shape and the name of the sundial :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/54.04641/-2.78135 so it's better than before I think.
And I've changed the amphitheather to an aera (just a node was an error I didn't see the first time, sorry for that) : but with the trees impossible to know the real shape, change it if you want to improve.
Best regards
lakedistrict (2021-11-06 23:48:07+00:00): Thanks for your fixes. The bird feeding area has a screen on its west side with gaps in so that people can see the birds whilst being 'hidden', like a bird hide. This 'bird hide' is not covered and is not a building. iD does sometimes complain about tagging, but that doesn't always mean that the existing tagging is incorrect.

I'm not sure about the amphitheatre  and sundial (which doesn't need a descriptive name) being inners as this excludes them from being in the park, when they are actually within and part of the park.
user_8101879 (2021-11-13 17:13:58+00:00): Hi,

thanks for your explanations about the hide_bird.

The name 'Sundial" was on the version #2, the version before my first changes, that explains why I put it back. I think it is better to have a name because nothing is drawn on the map for the clock, but do as you wish. I change the "square" to a pedestrian area, not a false information (people may walk in this area) and better to have a grey color than a green one.
For the amphitheatre, I propose to add building=yes. Here we have no wall and no roof but we have concrete, benchs, a scene, it looks like a building, an open-air building and on the map it is better.
Best regards
NieWnen (2021-10-31 14:40:25+00:00): Jak w budowie to budynek też mógłby mieć construction :P chyba, że budynek już skończony.
adamsc (2021-10-31 19:30:04+00:00): Poprawiłem :)
Supaplex030 (2021-10-31 09:57:18+00:00): Hey, hier ist mir noch aufgefallen, dass du oft "surface=paving_stones" benutzt, obwohl dort kleine Pflastersteine sind, was in OSM "sett" wäre (z.B. in der Finowstraße). Lass es also lieber frei, wenn du nicht vor Ort geschaut hast, was dort tatsächlich für eine Oberfläche ist - lässt sich später ja immer noch nachtragen.
Gnurpsnewoel (2021-11-16 00:22:50+00:00): Ein unnötiger Copy-Paste-Fehler war das. Vielen Dank fürs genaue Hinschauen und das Vier-Augen-Prinzip.
NieWnen (2021-10-30 23:24:51+00:00): Czy tutaj jest ścieżka rowerowa?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/838600058

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/997790821

Bo jak nie, to zmiana jest niepoprawna i jest to do wycofania.

A nawet jak jest to i tak jest to niepoprawne oznaczenie.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Rowery
adamsc (2021-10-31 19:56:27+00:00): Poprawiłem tagowanie.
Sam podjazd na kładkę to rampa dla niepełnosprawnych, a nie droga rowerowa, poza tym po wschodniej stronie ma zupełnie inny kształt niż był na mapie.
pittrichimica (2025-04-05 17:13:52+00:00): This charging station is a 4-schuko pole at a guarded public bicycle parking. I can not believe that these 4 schukos have an output of 300kW, which is typical for fast chargers for motor vehicles. I have added a fixme and would advise you to also check your edits not relating to Tesla superchargers, as your changeset comment mentions a Tesla supercharger Maproulette project. Should there be a script in the background, beware that it seems to convert previously dimensionless quantities into kW automatically (the original output had no unit). Thanks for checking and happy mapping.
Supaplex030 (2021-10-31 09:40:38+00:00): Hey, schön dass du wieder so aktiv bist :)

Den "Gehweg" hier zwischen Radweg und Park hab ich wieder herausgenommen, denn inzwischen sind da neue Zäune, sodass da eigentlich keine sinnvolle Passage mehr möglich ist (abgesehen davon, dass es ja auch kein "Gehweg" wäre sondern höchstens ein Trampelpfad: der könnte mit highway=path + informal=yes + surface=ground getaggt werden -- aber durch den Zaun wird der vermutlich wieder zuwachsen). Oder wie siehst du das?

lg, Alex

P.S. "is_sidepath:of" auf der anderen Seite hab ich außerdem von "residential" zu "cycleway" geändert - da ist ja keine residential-Straße sondern nur der Radweg ;)
Gnurpsnewoel (2021-11-16 00:21:32+00:00): Vielen Dank!
NieWnen (2021-10-30 23:39:30+00:00): Trzy sprawy:
1. Dlaczego został złączony parking rowerowy z ławką? Poprzednio było poprawne. Teraz straciło to sens.
Wycofałem to.

2. Proszę nie ignoruj ostrzeżeń edytora. Jest tu trochę ostrzeżeń, które zostały pominięte. Głównie nowe narysowane przez Ciebie drogi przecinają się z ciekami wodnymi. Tak nie powinno być.W takim przypadku powinny być tam przepusty. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:tunnel%3Dculvert

3. Nie jestem przekonany do zrobienia tam wszędzie highway=service. W części pewnie powinno być highway=path, bo raczej to nie są "ścieżki" po których samochód przejedzie, proszę popraw to jeśli możesz.

Jeśli coś jest niejasne śmiało pytaj (nie musi być tutaj, może być też na pw/forum/dc/fb/telegramie).
JassKurn (2021-10-31 12:42:34+00:00): Hi, you've made a significant change to access but have not provided a source.  Just want to confirm you meant the changes you made.
Mike Baggaley (2021-10-31 13:09:31+00:00): Hi, yes, the road has a footway/cycleway alongside so by definition must allow pedestrians and cyclists. No entry signs should not map to access=no, they should map to vehicle=no (or motor_vehicle=no if bicycles are allowed).
JassKurn (2021-10-31 14:18:57+00:00): Not sure sure of what you mean "by definition", what definition are you referring to? Is this something in the OSM wiki, or mailing lists?

Last time I was there the "cycle track" and  adjacent roads are separate ways. 

Has there been a change to highways layout? Or has there been a change to signs/ what signs did you see there?
JassKurn (2021-11-02 13:06:20+00:00): Hi, I've assumed the edit was made with with presumption that the shared route cycleway had not been mapped as a separate way. The "shared route" cycle track has been mapped in OSM as seperate way.  Below is a link  to an image I captured in August 2021

https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZUyDhG2iJyZootBZ7

I've changed the access to access=no , changeset 113282900
Mike Baggaley (2021-11-02 14:33:40+00:00): Hi, access=no is incorrect. As previously stated, a no entry sign does not mean access=no, it means vehicle=no or motor_vehicle=no if cycling is allowed. It is perfectly legal to walk in the road unless there is a no pedestrians sign (your picture only shows a no entry sign). Cycleways are not mandatory in the UK, hence the assumption should be that they can also cycle in the road. I accept that the case for cycling may be debatable, but there is no question at all about the legality of walking. Mapping the sidewalk cycleway as a separate way has no impact on the access for the road.
JassKurn (2021-11-02 16:36:15+00:00): The carriageway has a prohibition limiting access to only buses.  Any pedal cycle moving past the signs (either end of road) on the carriageway would be committing an offence. Correctly stating that cycle tracks are not "mandatory", does not change the prohibition affecting the carriageway. 

Pedestrian access along the carriageway is not prohibited by the sign, but I followed tagging guidance from the wiki here (arguably incorrectly). It is inconsistent with how I've tagged other limited access carriageways and I would have no issue with access tagging being changed to motor_vehicle=no.

Maybe this is something we should have discussed on the talk_UK mailing list? I'm surprised by your opinions regarding cycle access and would like to hear other views.
JassKurn (2021-11-02 16:38:10+00:00): I made a mistake in previous comment. I should have stated I would have no issue with the tag being changed to vehicle=no

But now thinking about it that would allow horse access, which I assume would be prohibited
Mike Baggaley (2021-11-02 16:47:32+00:00): Horses are not prohibited by a no entry sign unless they are pulling a carriage or cart, in which case they are vehicles.
NieWnen (2021-10-30 23:51:24+00:00): Tag service=driveway był w porządku, niepotrzebnie usunięty(997795234).

Nowy kawałek drogi wewnątrz (997795237) również powinien mieć ten sam access co reszta access=private.

Parkingi powinno się jeszcze uszczegółowić. 
W tym przypadku wrzuciłbym parking=street_side najlepiej z odpowiednim accessem (access=private).

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparking

Proszę nie łącz ich z budynkami.

Nie łącz niczego z granicami administracyjnymi. Ich najlepiej nie dotykać.

Zmiana częściowo lub w całości do wycofania niestety.
mariotomo (2021-10-31 22:16:49+00:00): Hola Ariel! que bien que sigas mapeando con OSM. 
te comento al conjunto de cambios pues en el área hay varios landuse/natural en conflicto, por ejemplo áreas residenciales con bosque, pero también "overlapping identical natural areas" (con nombres diferentes).
el área protegida, sabes exactamente de cuál nivel de protección goza? "national park" equivaldría al nivel 2.
sugiero no especificar el "natural=*" para toda la extensión del área protegida, sino representar la protección en un polígono y la cobertura en otros: nos evita conflictos.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=61
https://t.me/Comunidad_OSM_Panama
Mex (2021-11-01 17:01:55+00:00): Thanks for the fix.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113177025
literan (2021-10-31 16:39:27+00:00): наверное, ни одна стройка дороги не обновляется в осме так оперативно 8-)
Erelen (2021-10-31 22:33:08+00:00): Одно из  не надоедающих занятий, когда надо вечером чуть потупить :)
NieWnen (2021-10-31 15:18:47+00:00): Zmiana jest niepoprawna, zacznij proszę czytać wiki. Mylisz tagi barrier z entrance.
DressyPear4 (2021-10-31 05:13:16+00:00): Olá, tente corrigir os avisos antes de enviar dados.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113177182
Kiss_Karoly (2021-10-31 00:16:09+00:00): A módosításcsomag tartalma: a 4805/802 autóbuszvonal felvitele.
NieWnen (2021-10-31 15:24:26+00:00): Nie umieszczaj niczego na granicach administracyjnych! Wycofane.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113177287
Cafetom (2021-10-31 05:52:04+00:00): Hola! Cuál es la dirección correcta?
HolaTelCol (2021-10-31 19:13:15+00:00): La dirección de nuestro establecimiento es Cl. 30A # 82 a - 26 Piso 3  Barrio Belén (C.C Los Molinos) Medellín Antioquia.
Cafetom (2021-11-01 03:22:02+00:00): Hecho! Gracias por contribuir
HolaTelCol (2021-12-15 21:04:49+00:00): Muchas gracias agradezco su ayuda, le pido si es posible de realizar el cambio del nombre ya que se encuentra HolaTelCo y es HolaTelCol. 
Saludos.
adamh (2021-11-06 04:24:52+00:00): Welcome to OSM.
The version of the running track that you've drawn does seem much nicer than what was before.
However it is recommended to modify the existing ways rather than to delete and redraw. This history of changes is useful for knowing the source of contributions and respecting the work of those previous mappers.  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
NieWnen (2021-10-31 15:38:16+00:00): Błędne zmiany stacji benzynowej. Duplikowanie amenity=fuel, gdzie już było to dodane jako obszar.
Wycofałem częściowo.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113177788
OddlyAngled (2021-11-04 19:34:39+00:00): I've heard this also goes but Secor (and a few others) describe the route to Ice Lake Pass as going around Ice Lake to the east... which hits the eastern saddle (the currently named one). I've also read trip reports using the western saddle. I've generally gone with Secor around here. Thoughts? is there a solid use trail up the western side?
Condog9000 (2021-11-05 05:14:37+00:00): There isn't a defined use trail, but there's a very logical and easy to follow route that's passable with backpacks.  It is also slightly more direct when traveling to Mule Pass.  I did not explore the east side of Ice Lake, however it is very easy to get from the south end of the lake to the western saddle.
skquinn (2021-10-31 12:38:29+00:00): Egregious and reckless vandalism, reverted in full in changeset 113190982 and added to the existing report to the DWG.
Kiss_Karoly (2021-10-31 01:48:06+00:00): A módosításcsomag tartalma: a 4805/816 autóbuszvonal felvitele.
skquinn (2021-10-31 12:38:20+00:00): Egregious and reckless vandalism, reverted in full in changeset 113190982 and added to the existing report to the DWG.
Kiss_Karoly (2021-10-31 02:05:54+00:00): A módosítócsomag tartalma helyesen: hibajavítás névben.
vulasala (2021-11-01 04:52:29+00:00): Hi ducpham97,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the geometry of way 800263525 and way 998066261
as per the ground truth.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113178329
felipeeugenio (2021-10-31 12:56:32+00:00): Hola.
Por favor los caminos privados siempre con access=private. Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113178403
felipeeugenio (2021-10-31 12:56:56+00:00): Hola. El tag building es para las estructuras particulares. No para el recinto completo. Lo voy a Corregir
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113178496
TECHDEV GPS (2021-10-31 15:05:07+00:00): Corregido a landuse=building, se cargaron las estructuras ya en operación no obstante se mantiene en construcción segunda etapa paneles solares
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113178496
felipeeugenio (2021-10-31 15:08:38+00:00): buenisimo. gracias
opendcc (2021-10-31 07:10:08+00:00): Hello,
large changeset area, however only some changes near Maastricht and lots of changes on phillipines. Please split up in future and use smaller changeset areas. Thanks
HikeAndMap (2021-11-01 20:06:57+00:00): the reason is simple:"I live in PH but have a home near Maastricht" LOL