piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
d1g (2015-04-02 15:59:53+00:00): Я был здесь 4 часа назад. Через гаражи проехать нельзя. Пройти нельзя. Там тупик и стена высотой 2 метра.
Майк Лазовски (2015-04-02 17:09:51+00:00): Был проезд, поставили забор. Что делать - Россия!
d1g (2015-04-02 17:20:34+00:00): Понятно: Bing здесь за 2012-06-06, но даже по нему видно что проезд уже ограничили. 

Я понимаю что вы в какой-то период времени знали местность хорошо. Детская поликлиника №4 это моя детская  поликлиника. Я тоже много знаю о этой местности, но сейчас эти знания менее актуальны.

Обратите внимание на это:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3431805851#map=19/51.56285/45.98819
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3431805911#map=19/51.56307/45.98805
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336101422#map=19/51.56183/45.98868
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3431805753#map=19/51.56178/45.98847
Майк Лазовски (2015-04-02 17:39:10+00:00): Хорошо. Исправлю. Возможно есть неточность.
Я так 12 лет работал в Кировском районе, а сейчас по всему городу.
imagico (2015-04-03 13:41:12+00:00): If it is correct to tag this as coastline is of course a question of how exactly the definition of natural=coastline is interpreted.

Arguments against this are:

* It would be the only artificial channel tagged this way -  the Corinth Canal for example (which has no locks either) is mapped differently.
* With this mapping there is no easy way to determine from the data that this is an artificial channel and not a natural strait.  With a polygon tagged natural=water + water=canal this would be easier.
* While there is in principle free water flow along the channel there is actually no significant water exchange across the entire length - it is way too long and too shallow for that.  In other words the whole situation would not be much different if there were locks.
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-04-02 22:09:01+00:00): Zachęcam do lektury: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632
lyx (2015-05-06 23:12:45+00:00): Hi, you merged names from a POI to this islet recently. My question is: are you sure this island actually exists? On current Bing imagery (2014-08-20) it is not visible; older Mapbox imagery shows something that COULD be an island but to me looks more like a ship grounded on a sandbar.
4rch (2015-05-07 13:13:00+00:00): Hello, no, I'm not sure that this island actually exists. I just merged the name from the POI to the area. Maybe I've used the mapnik layer therefore. I didn't notice that there's no island anymore. I think there was an island in the past: http://www.bibleorigins.net/CaptureWiz549_op_640x494.jpg

I'd propose to remove the area completely as it seems that there isn't a sandbar anymore. Maybe they've used the sand there for the expansion of the port.
SomeoneElse (2015-04-22 15:18:33+00:00): You've removed a tag from http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/47438462/history ; was that deliberate?  It looks like the previous mapper was trying to indicate a pedestrian area that the name referred to (or perhaps a group of features).  Perhaps local mappers would be better placed to decide how to map that fact rather than you?  Maybe add a note if you want to draw their attention to it?
R0bst3r (2015-04-22 18:43:15+00:00): Hi SomeoneElse. No it wasn't deliberated in this case because it was only a small change. The german name doesn't refer to a pedestrian (and it is obviously not as a little recherche shows), thats why I was not using "highway=pedestrian". The tag "Plaza" should not be used, the wiki page was deleted therefor. The tagging area is not so far away as it may look, OSMR says 284km. Thanks for review.
GerdP (2017-10-14 09:29:57+00:00): Hi!
Please review position of this highway=secondary:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336091538
Current Bing shows a road next to this roughly drawn way.
GerdP (2017-10-14 09:32:54+00:00): .. at least in the northern part ;-)
Maybe you also know what this is?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/335875843
carciofo (2017-10-15 09:03:53+00:00): Hello, there was no high resolution imagery available at the time the way was created, thus the rough alignment. Regarding the northern part (i.e. north of Barbacoas), if you're referring to the weird highway=pendiente tag, I was not the author: I had added it as highway=unclassified but it was changed in changeset 41894893. There is definitely a road visible on the new BIng imagery, at least up to Magüí in the north. There seems to be no road west from Magüí to Paloseco (node 703481189). Unfortunately I don't have time at the moment to align the roughly aligned secondary road to the newer imagery. I will add a fixmetag and perhaps someone will get to it eventually, or I will come back to it when time permits. Cheers
GerdP (2017-10-15 09:20:35+00:00): OK, thanks, Will have a look at it later.
d1g (2015-04-03 15:50:38+00:00): Спасибо! В 1ом Пугачёвском тоже где-то есть ступеньки, но я не местный совсем здесь :)
Майк Лазовски (2015-04-03 15:59:24+00:00): Есть, нарисую, я там всё пешком исходил. Времени просто пока маловато.
Есть много информации.
user_5359 (2015-04-03 05:47:31+00:00): Hallo Ekkle,

ich habe diese Rundung des Gebäude soeben rückgängig gemacht. Ich melde mich später noch einmal mit einem Willkommensgruss.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen           Georg V. (OSM=user_53539)
Luzandro (2019-08-19 04:54:56+00:00): Hallo Volker,

du hast hier bei der Gaadner Straße 1 das fixme gesetzt, "Das kann nicht auch die Gaadnerstraße sein!"
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336094645

Ich bin mir nicht ganz sicher, was du damit sagen wolltest, was die Adressen betrifft ist hier direkt östlich davon die Gemeindegrenze zu Mödling, wo die Adressen noch auf "Brühler Straße" lauten, während die andere Straßenseite schon zur Hinterbrühl gehört, wo die Adressen entsprechend auf "Gaadner Straße" lauten, was auch mit name:left/right erfasst ist
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/637268378

LG Andreas
Volker Fröhlich (2019-08-19 17:09:48+00:00): Ja, so dürfte ich das gemeint haben. Mir ist entgangen, dass da die Gemeindegrenze ist. Danke fürs Überprüfen. Das Fixme kann damit wohl weg.
d1g (2015-04-03 11:47:12+00:00): Ни за что бы в жизни не разглядел эту тропу по Bing, спасибо!
Майк Лазовски (2015-04-03 14:24:13+00:00): Привет!
Постараюсь ошибок не делать. Много пустых мест на карте. Даже улиц не нанесено много, не говоря о домах.
То что вижу и знаю постепенно буду вносить.
maraf24 (2015-04-02 18:19:58+00:00): Prosżę tagować prawidłowo.
Lombard to nie bank. Na niego jest osobny tag, shop=pawnbroker.
shop=greengrocer to warzywniak, a nie spożywczy.
Prosżę również o wypełnianie komentarzy. To jest wymagane.
muralito (2015-10-24 02:12:12+00:00): Hello imagico.
Your coastline has been moved and/or deleted. Lots of changes that i'm not sure how to fix. 
¿Can you help?
imagico (2015-10-24 10:24:50+00:00): ulil removed the coastline tags here and left the coastline unconnected.  See:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34822310

Geometry looks unchanged so you should be able to add it back without problems.
Alexandrecw (2015-04-03 08:13:23+00:00): Oi wille, a edição que vc fez da transamazonica passando por cima do canteiro de BeloMonte não condiz com a realidade. A edição anterior foi feita por mim e corresponde ao traçado atual da estrada. Desta forma, recomendo estudar o  assunto e não considerar as imagens Bing altamente defasadas. 

https://fernandonogueiracosta.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/epopeia-da-construcao-da-terceira-maior-usina-hidreletrica-do-mundo-na-amazonia-belo-monte/
wille (2015-04-04 01:11:57+00:00): oi, Alexandre

Li toda a matéria. O problema com sua edição era o fato de que o trecho da rodovia estava marcado como em construção. Com isso, o roteamento da rodovia não funciona: http://osrm.at/bDS

Imagino que a rodovia não esteja bloqueada por conta da construção do reservatório e da ponte. Caso você tenha uma informação concreta do contrário, me passe que faço a correção.
wille (2015-04-05 23:59:22+00:00): Oi, Alexandre

Me lembrei de um outro recurso conciliador. Adicionei a parte da Transamazônica que está em construção, assim ficam os dois caminhos e não perdemos o roteamento na rodovia. Se quiser pode ajeitar o traçado da parte em construção. http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/30004069
d1g (2016-07-10 04:57:19+00:00): Старые дома в новостройках быстро сносятся, на местности указателей не нашёл, поэтому name решил спрятать: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/622329
d1g (2016-07-10 04:59:03+00:00): Поиск по old_name=* должен работать на osm.org сайте как минимум.
Weide (2015-04-03 12:20:17+00:00): In Master-Routen können nur Routen Mitglieder sein.
GerdP (2015-10-19 08:16:38+00:00): please review:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/43475450
The tag highway=collapsed is rarely used.
Please check http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
to find a documented value.
See also http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/how-to-tag-a-quot-highway-quot-that-doesn-t-exist-tt5857111.html
dchiles (2015-04-02 18:07:49+00:00): This doesn't look like something that should be on OpenStreetmap. Maybe map out the whole parking lot?
Glassman (2015-04-02 22:29:06+00:00): I removed the node. It clearly does not belong in OSM.
will_p (2015-04-02 18:40:25+00:00): I have reverted this changeset. This area has already been surveyed in detail on the ground and if two ways don't join it is usually deliberate. Nidderdale and Fylingdale Way are separated by a brick wall. These sort of remote changes show contempt for people who have spent time surveying their local area on the ground. PLEASE BE MORE CAREFUL.
George Silva (2015-04-02 18:42:41+00:00): Hello Will. I was experimenting with to-fix, a new application developed by MapBox that checks for errors on MapBox.

On this particular case, I really thought it was an error. On the other error instances, I've cancelled the to-fix indication of errors.

I'm sorry about the disturbance.
maraf24 (2015-04-03 22:25:03+00:00): Po co majstrujesz ludziom w ich drogach?
Kaziu Kisiel (2015-04-04 17:55:26+00:00): Ja tylko dobrze robię. To nie jest droga ekspresowa, więc "zdegradowałem" ją do drogi krajowej. Polski już DTŚ też źle jest zaznaczony. To nie DK, to droga wojewódzka!
maraf24 (2015-04-04 23:10:43+00:00): To bardzo dziwne co piszesz, bo w OSM nie ma takiej kategorii jak droga krajowa ani droga wojewódzka. Chyba pomyliły Ci się projekty.
Kaziu Kisiel (2015-04-05 08:50:48+00:00): Nie obrażaj mnie, bo to nie jest dziwne. Przecież wiadomo, że droga krajowa u nas to "primary", a droga wojewódzka to "secondary". Może po prostu mnie jakoś automatycznie co najmniej nie lubisz.
maraf24 (2015-04-05 09:30:19+00:00): Nie, nie wiadomo. Posługujemy się klasami dróg publicznych: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klasy_i_kategorie_dr%C3%B3g_publicznych_w_Polsce
Przywołana przez ciebie DTŚ jest klasy GP, stąd primary.
Hjart (2015-04-04 09:41:24+00:00): Hej

Jeg har ryddet lidt op i skoven her. Har blandt tilladt mig at forsimple de spor du har tegnet, da der med almindelige forbruger gps'er overhovedet ikke er grundlag for at tegne så nøjagtig som du har gjort. Desuden har jeg "klikket" dine spor korrekt på de andre veje/stier i skoven (se pkt 5 i http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.3.1).

Iøvrigt velkommen til vores projekt og god fornøjelse med det.
smaprs (2015-04-02 20:27:10+00:00): In iD you can click in "+" in "All tags" tab, it shows "building" (or type "bu.." it will complete), click in the next tab (it shows "yes") and done ;)
mweper (2015-04-02 22:57:44+00:00): Hola serock. 
¿Por qué fusionaste lo que sería el techo y el comercio de la gasolinera, ya que no refleja la realidad?
Yo los había puesto separados identificandolos como techo al techo y comercio al comercio.
Por favor, corrige eso.
Saludos.
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-04-05 15:30:40+00:00): Jeśli się dodaje numerki to jeszcze wypadałoby miejscowość dodać :-)
ToeBee (2015-04-02 22:47:23+00:00): Hi. Thanks for your interest in OpenStreetMap. This looks like a test edit for something. What are you trying to accomplish? I notice you put a webstie=google.com tag on the node you added. I'm guessing that was just a placeholder for an example website. But please note that we can not copy information from google maps or other places without explicit permission.
Polarbear (2015-05-03 13:10:24+00:00): Please do not use landuse=residential for the boundaries of the town, as it collides with other landuses within the town. Instead, please just keep place=town, or use boundary=administrative and the appropriate admin_level, which for UK would be 8 for districts/metropolitan boroughs, or 10 for parishes/communities.
Supaplex (2015-04-03 12:21:49+00:00): 好像新增新的萬榮鄉關係了，變成有兩個萬榮鄉關係了
gosausee (2015-04-04 11:37:20+00:00): Wäre cool, wenn du die Hausnummern miteinträgst.
gzin (2015-04-04 17:36:26+00:00): Ja, habe ich eh auch vor, wo geht. Sofern die PLZ eindeutig ist, trage ich die kompletten Adressdateien dann meistens später mal ein.
TreeTracks (2023-03-15 02:06:01+00:00): Hi Cleary, can you give me some feedback pls on way: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336185313
You've tagged this as a private driveway that runs through the Mt Carl property and then continues W, then S, and then E to an unnamed farm. My reading of imagery is that the far western segment, which runs N-S is within the reserve boundary and is potentially public (or maybe management vehicles only). Do you have any objections to me splitting the way and re-tagging this section to a track? Thanks again, Ian
cleary (2023-03-15 06:31:21+00:00): If you look closely at the NSW Base Map, I think it shows that the track is just beyond the boundary of the Conservation Area and is therefore on private land and probably a private road. The road runs through a wooded area but does not enter the conservation area, as far as I can see. I do not recall surveying this area. From what I mapped at the time, it looks as though I drove up to the entrance to 241 Tonninges Road, made some notes, and later added the private road and farms from satellite imagery.  Look again and, if you still consider it to be open to the public, then feel free to make any changes you think appropriate.  Thanks for the contact.
TreeTracks (2023-03-15 07:12:36+00:00): Hi again, yes, the road status is ambiguous on the Base Map. It's shown on an easement (which may or may not exist on the ground) but outside the park shading. I interpreted the parallel roads / tracks at the property (one clearly in the property and one in the easement) to suggest that the western easement track was public (or at least MVO) and the eastern one on private land. I'd tagged the boundary/easement track just south of this section as access=unknown as it's not clear what exists on the ground. It does appear to be the major eastern boundary track on the east side of the forest which the other reserve tracks run into. Given your feedback, I'll leave this section as private, which will prevent through traffic on routers. Hopefully someone will confirm the rest of the boundary track one day too. Thanks again Ian
jeffintaipei (2015-04-03 05:13:55+00:00): the map says 大針山 but the local signage all says 大尖山
GerdP (2015-10-29 18:02:22+00:00): please review node 431399814:
What does the tag highway=ru:Зигоска-1
mean? Is it a typo?
I found a similar one (highway=ru:Зигоска-2) on node 2976221312
iWowik (2015-10-29 18:52:13+00:00): it should be wikipedia
GerdP (2015-10-29 18:57:55+00:00): okay, thanks for the feedback. I found more
like them, I guess it is safe to change them all? See http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/highway?filter=nodes#values, type ru: in the search field.
iWowik (2015-10-30 10:52:28+00:00): OK 
but ru:деревня should be in officilal_status key
GerdP (2015-10-30 10:55:29+00:00): would be great if you could change them, as I can't read russian
Hjart (2015-04-04 06:28:28+00:00): Hvad har du forsøgt at lave her?
Nakaner (2015-04-04 11:47:51+00:00): 29946645 bis 29967129 revertiert
Hjart (2015-04-04 07:04:27+00:00): Hvorfor slettede du vejnavnet her?
Kenneth Popp (2015-04-04 07:09:19+00:00): Troede rent faktisk det var privat under min profil jeg slettede det, så var på ingen måde opmærksom på at det var alle der kunne se det.
Kenneth Popp (2015-04-04 07:10:11+00:00): Beklager fejlen :(
Hjart (2015-04-04 07:54:49+00:00): Ok :) Nej, det var ikke privat. Du har arbejdet direkte i vores fælles database.
Men iøvrigt, velkommen til vores projekt :)
rab (2015-04-03 12:25:41+00:00): Wenn du das Routing verbessern willst dann solltest du 
1. einen richtigen Editor verwenden (Josm).
2. Keine Wege einzeichnen die in Wahrheit nicht vorhanden sind. (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336307640 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336307852)
3. Im Wiki die Artikel zu Abbiegebeschränkungen und Abbiegespuren lesen.
4. Keine sich kreuzende Wege erzeugen
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3433605519)
Gruß
rab
Nakaner (2015-04-04 11:27:58+00:00): Lieber KaiserFranz, ich habe schon eine Vielzahl deiner Änderungen revertiert und werde auch künftige Änderungen von dir revertieren, wenn sie diversen Regeln nicht genügen, die beim Mappen gelten.  ############ 1. Separate Fahrbahnen und Abbiegespuren werden in OSM nur eingetragen, wenn sie von anderen Fahrbahnen baulich getrennt sind. Dazu muss eine Leitplanke, Mauer, ein hoher Bordstein, Graben, Verkehrsinsel o.ä. dazwischen sein. ######### 2. Wenn man baulich getrennte Fahrbahnen einträgt, muss man dafür sorgen, dass unerwünschte Abbiegevorgänge verhindert werden. oneway=yes ist hierfür nicht ausreichend. Auch Abbiegebeschränkungs-Relationen sind erforderlich (die kann man sogar mit iD erstellen, hab ich mir sagen lassen). ################# 3. Wenn man Kreuzungen verändert, muss man sicherstellen, dass alle Routenrelationen (Bus, touristische Straßen, Landesstraßen usw.) auch nach der Änderung, die richtige Wege benutzen und nicht defekt sind. Bei einige Relationstypen (u.a. ÖPNV-Routenrelationen) ist die Relation schon invalide (d.h. kaputt), wenn die Mitglieder in der falschen Reihenfolge enthalten sind. iD kann nicht die Reihenfolge von Relationsmitgliedschaften korrigieren, das geht nur mit JOSM.  ######### Ich habe dich schon mehrfach darauf hingewiesen, dass von dir erwartet wird, deine Änderungen zu begründen (in Form von Änderungssatz-Kommentaren). Da das nicht geschehen ist, werde ich diesen Änderungssatz und alle anderen Änderungssätze, im Rahmen derer du die K 93 von secondary in tertiary herabgestuft hast, revertieren. Die rechtliche Widmung (als Kreis- oder Landes- oder Bundesstraße) ist nur eine grobe Richtschnur, ob eine Straße als highway=tertiary oder highway=secondary zu taggen ist. Siehe dazu auch das OSM-Wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attributierung_von_Stra%C3%9Fen_in_Deutschland
Nakaner (2015-04-04 12:52:39+00:00): @rab: Ich habe KaiserFranz gerade eine PN gesendet. Wenn das nicht fruchtet, geht die Mail an die DWG raus.
Nakaner (2015-04-04 11:44:42+00:00): Im Raum Mayen/Koblenz ist seit drei bis vier Wochen ein noch nicht gezähmter Newbie unterwegs, der mit iD meint seine Ansicht des Straßen und Spurtaggings durchsetzen zu müssen. Bitte schau, wenn du auf Routingprobleme in der Gegend triffst, in die History bzw. die einschlägigen Tools und reverte lieber gleich ganze Changesets als nur die Spitze des Eisbergs anzukratzen. Danke. (reduziert die Anzahl der Konflikte :-) )
Xmypblu (2015-04-04 18:14:52+00:00): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Отношения_-_мультиполигон
maraf24 (2015-04-03 12:25:17+00:00): Lepiej, ale dalej za mało. Żadna nawigacji nie użyje tych chodników, bo nie ma do nich dojścia. One muszą się łączyć z ulicą Życzliwą. Jeśli nie ma wyznaczonego przejścia dla pieszych to połączenia można zrobić gdziekowliek. Popatrz na inne ulice z chodnikami, jak tam jest to zrobione.
maraf24 (2015-04-03 12:22:57+00:00): Ty sobie jaja robisz? Co to za głupoty były na tej wysepce? Gdzie tam jest przejście dla pieszych?
Rodrigo Rega (2015-11-05 20:11:35+00:00): Según recuerdo, la vía [1] era de sentido único hasta llegar al puente. Supongo que habría cambios en la zona, la rotonda de acceso no la conozco. ¿Podrías confirmar si es de doble sentido? 

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336338157
gryphon (2015-04-03 19:18:27+00:00): Если у улицы есть название, то это уже residential, а не service. 
Ну и про имена есть такая штука http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:ВикиПроект_Россия/Соглашение_об_именовании_дорог
d1g (2015-04-03 12:23:18+00:00): Ошибся в комментарии к пакету правок: я  уточнял по Bing, на местности не был.
intschutschuna (2015-04-03 18:10:10+00:00): Bei ausgeschilderten Fuß- und Radwegen ist highway=path richtig!
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dpath#Verwendung_als_Universal-Tag
jotpe (2015-04-03 19:32:06+00:00): Die Bäckerei George liegt außerhalb von einem Gebäude, ist wahrscheinlich aber nicht richtig an dem Ort, oder? Gruß Johannes
user_6110846 (2017-10-18 06:16:23+00:00): у зв'язку з великою кількістю вандалізму над назвами вулиць правку скасовано.
uname (2017-10-18 09:45:32+00:00): эм. в пакете 430 объектов и больше 2000 точек. из 430 объектов 10 улиц!!! 10 Карл!! какой вандализм? пакету 2 года. по нему прошлись уже больше 1500 раз! откатите себе мозг
user_6110846 (2017-10-18 13:39:07+00:00): Русское сообщество и их приверженцы в неуважухе к украинцам доиграется. М ы необращаем внимание до поры д о времени .
Saeidjan (2015-04-05 09:13:24+00:00): اصلاح بزرگراه علامه جعفری
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-04-27 01:35:50+00:00): To nie jest Świdnik tylko Kazimierzówka: http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=336370310
TheFish (2015-04-07 08:14:25+00:00): Ist der Name "to Wachfels" der offizielle Name dieses Wegs? Hört sich eher nicht so an. Daher sollte entweder eine Relation für den Wanderweg oder "to Wachfels" in das Notiz-Tag eingetragen werden.
Otourly (2015-04-15 18:40:25+00:00): Salut, j'ai corrigé les positions des deux stations caladoises.
ika-chan! UK-USA (2015-04-10 09:56:06+00:00): GionUait, there is nothing wrong about using ΕΠ because the Greek alphabet is the country's main writing system.
lubosb (2015-04-04 12:33:05+00:00): Hi,

looks like you are mapping whole town :)

I updated this your edit with bridge over highway. And I do recommend you to use JOSM to edit map, it is easier to use for large or more complex edits and also it contains validator (tool to warn you about possible errors like missing bridge, overlapping roads etc.)

Also while tracing streets from Bing or another imagery, you should be aware of imagery offset:
http://learnosm.org/en/editing/correcting-imagery-offset/

If you have any questions, there is OSM forum:
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/index.php 
or:
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=61

Have a nice day!
Copernicus529 (2019-02-25 16:14:29+00:00): Hey there СМРТ ЗА ШИПТАРИ,

This is Copernicus529 and I am part of the Kaart Group editing team (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kaart). Our company contributes to OSM in several countries by adding data that will help improve the map. We understand that connecting and collaborating with the community is an essential part of the process to increase the integrity of the data in OSM. I am writing you because I see that you are an active editor in Serbia. I recognize your efforts and appreciate your contributions to the map. I recently came across one of your edits, (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336402645#map=18/42.23524/21.70402)
 south east of Belgrade. From the data we gathered on the ground, it appears that this tollway would be better represented as one highway with 5 lanes that run to the south east and 14 lanes that run to the north west. I’d appreciate any information you might have that is relevant to this area. 

I look forward to working with you!

Best regards,

Copernicus529
Xevi (2016-08-05 05:51:53+00:00): Podies haver afegit l'area de les piscines i posar el tag acces=private per indicar que es una piscina privada
Weide (2015-04-04 10:50:18+00:00): Bitte ein Yogastudio nicht als Haltestelle in eine Buslinie eintragen.
yogaya (2015-04-04 11:16:37+00:00): Sorry, das war ein versehen. Kann ich das wieder rausnehmen?
Gruß
MW
Weide (2015-04-04 12:30:43+00:00): Hatte ich schon gemacht. Kein Problem.
frohes Mappen und schöne Feiertage