piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
bxl-forever (2021-06-03 21:50:47+00:00): Fixed by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105802104
ralley (2021-06-04 00:24:18+00:00): Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dretirement_home and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix#Stages_of_birth on how to properly tag retirement villages and planned developments
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105802127
Glassman (2021-06-04 00:05:29+00:00): I see the city owns the land but it's not designated a park on the city website. Can you provide some information why this should be shown as a park? See https://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/iMap/ and https://www.sammamish.us/parks-recreation-facilities/parks-trails/
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105802141
M222 (2021-06-04 01:40:58+00:00): Big Rock Park Central had its soft opening on 6/2. It will be fully open and advertised to the public on 6/9. I'm not sure when the city plans to update its website to reflect the new park, but I have visited and it is now open.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105802141
Glassman (2021-06-04 04:49:16+00:00): Thanks for the update.
airon90 (2021-08-29 07:55:12+00:00): Ciao! Perché hai cancellato la piazza che si trova in centro?
pianolente (2021-08-29 18:03:54+00:00): scusa ma guarda tutto l'intervento che avevo fatto a suo tempo:
1) ho messo nei punti giusti di inizio / fine Via San Bartolomeo e Via Risorgimento;
2) ho creato la highway resdiential Piazza Annita Bollati che prima non c'era (oggi ne ho approfittato anche per correggere il senso unico).
Quando una Piazza è una normale strada con il suo cartello stradale, come in questo caso, https://www.google.it/maps/@45.5780844,8.9799878,3a,75y,38.15h,78.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9uXBSxs5MvSQJBFvCd6bCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=it si deve anche creare l'area "Piazza" con  lo stesso nome?
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-04-23 14:01:08+00:00): De onde você tirou esse nome? Procurei na base do IBGE e não encontrei isto.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-04-29 17:51:24+00:00): edição revertida, usuario nao respondeu.
mariotomo (2021-06-03 23:22:46+00:00): hola. bienvenido a OSM. estás experimentando? quieres apoyo, ideas? tenemos un foro oficial (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=61) y canales informales de chateo (https://t.me/Comunidad_OSM_Panama, entre otros). gracias por limpiar el experimento!
Jakka (2021-06-04 05:50:31+00:00): Le nom "Fort fort lointain" Sont les noms propre des bâtiments ?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105802733
wkdgs (2021-06-04 08:38:21+00:00): Hallo,

ist "Spielplatz im Gairen" der offizielle Name des Spielplatzes oder nur eine Beschreibung?

LG
winkeldings
BjGo (2021-06-04 18:14:17+00:00): Moin, 
es ist nur eine Beschreibung
LG BjGo
dgitto (2021-06-06 10:37:48+00:00): benvenuto in OSM
dgitto (2021-06-06 10:39:12+00:00): il tag "natural=Punto di partenza" non esiste in OSM. Che cosa volevi rappresentare?
mariotomo (2021-06-04 18:51:54+00:00): hi. just btw: is it "montaña" or "montana"? and is the path really known as "common footpath", or are you using the name for describing it?
vkpanama (2021-06-05 20:03:34+00:00): it is the first one but I dont have that n on my keyboard. It is just a description name for common footpath.
mariotomo (2021-06-07 21:11:59+00:00): ah, ok, I will fix it.  what computer is it that you use?  on Linux (kde, gnome, or just plain X) you have several ways to "compose" non ASCII letters.
gscscnd (2021-06-04 11:31:38+00:00): Przystanki są skomplikowane. Niektóre w Rybniku są zrobione źle, inne — mniej lub bardziej dobrze. Zobacz <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:public_transport#Bus_stop_tagging_in_60_seconds> (również relację stop_area), na tym się opierałem w ostatnim czasie. Jeżeli przystanek w ogóle nie był narysowany, to rozważ pominięcie tagów public_transport i użycie tylko highway=bus_stop.
ThomasChurchman (2021-06-03 23:25:34+00:00): My first edit of such trails; feedback is welcome.
literan (2021-06-06 11:05:47+00:00): есть хитрость, тег highway=living_street - только для УЛИЦ со знаком "Жилая зона". А если это просто дворовый проезд, то на нем и так действуют правила жилой зоны, что со знаком, что без (это чиновники бюджеты осваивают, знаки вешают). И тег для него - highway=service + living_street=yes
DressyPear4 (2021-06-04 15:20:54+00:00): Olá, há tags específicas para objetos de energia, veja em  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dpole
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105804044
narceliodesa (2021-07-25 13:10:52+00:00): Olá Sérgio o que significa esse nome para a residência? RESIDÊNCIA_UGESF_4,5_kW
❤️‍🔥 (2021-06-05 07:50:16+00:00): looks good, thanks for your contributions!
ivanbranco (2021-12-02 18:25:07+00:00): Ola topolusitania,

I think you added the name as the place value by mistake here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/950230975/history
aharvey (2021-06-05 04:02:31+00:00): Thanks for confirming, when you say north of town hall, is that north of Market Street?
jakecopp (2021-08-23 12:30:17+00:00): Sorry I missed this. The cop said bicycles are allowed when no curb between light rail track and the "pedestrian street". North of Druitt St there is no barrier so I believe it is legal. I definitely find it confusing.
jleedev (2021-06-04 03:05:50+00:00): Note that layer=-1 doesn't mean "underground"
mariotomo (2021-06-04 14:05:50+00:00): hola jleedev! thanks for commenting. I checked the wiki regarding the 'underground' and my bad, you're right. 

the case in question is/was a highway=service marked as layer=-1, running under a roof, part of a larger building.

the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer) states: 

»With some exceptions, layer=* on way ways should be used only in combination with one of tunnel=*, bridge=*, highway=steps, highway=elevator, covered=* or indoor=yes. For area areas, it could be used in combination with tags such as man_made=bridge, special types of building=* and similar.«

so apart the wrong explanation 'underground', you do agree that my version is more consistent with the wiki? or should we revert it?

I have been trying to get in contact with the mapper Carlos Eduardo Rodríguez, because we live very close to each other and are interested in correctly mapping the same area.
jleedev (2021-06-04 15:53:59+00:00): Well, in this case it would be appropriate to add `covered=yes` to the highways (or just the covered portion), which is what the wiki page is hinting at.

This can be useful, for example it will prompt StreetComplete to ask for the maxheight.

I think the wiki page could be reworded, to indicate that a useful fix would be to add a missing tag, not just to swap a 0/1 for a -1/0.
mariotomo (2021-06-04 16:10:57+00:00): some time ago I authored the third change to this object: http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=241387973 (a service road with a short section going under a roof / porch in front of a building.)
having examples on which to rely, and good consistent documentation will allow us map uniformly. :-)
mariotomo (2021-06-04 16:15:40+00:00): possibly check the three ways included in this changeset: 810060918, 805801663, 613850311
ElliottPlack (2021-06-04 18:55:28+00:00): Hey there, remember what we just discussed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5081 about meaningful comments? In this case, perhaps you could say, 'removed service road due to new construction.' That'd be a great comment. And no one will second guess these edits :)
Minh Nguyen (2021-06-04 19:33:14+00:00): Also, you probably noticed that the access road was replaced by one just a couple yards over to the east. In the future, please consider adding the replacement road. After all, a missing road is worse than a misaligned one.
mariotomo (2021-06-04 17:00:52+00:00): :+1: :-)
mueschel (2021-06-05 13:51:02+00:00): Hi,
what does 'Agência=*' mean? This tag is not used in any other place.
mariotomo (2021-06-04 16:58:21+00:00): hola, bienvenido a OSM, si quieres revisa la página https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names.  quizás puedes indicar "local_name=Colegio Brader"?  o al revés, aprovechar del "official_name" si es que nadie lo usa normalmente?

oops, so sorry, I wrote in Spanish, I got distracted, anyhow, feel free to reply as you prefer.
i2004 (2021-06-12 21:04:34+00:00): pero cambiaste algun eocrrido
AgusQui (2021-06-12 21:30:04+00:00): Nop, agregué paradas que relevé por Munro, ordené miembros de las relaciones y corregí en algunas intersecciones que no habías cortado los ways.
Nithinat S (2021-06-04 06:26:34+00:00): ในพื้นที่จริงไม่ได้มีป้ายห้าม u-turn นะครับ ไม่ควรใส่ครับ
stevea (2021-06-04 05:40:55+00:00): tguen, "Metro" is not a de facto government and should not be tagged admin_level=7 (nor boundary=administrative).  In fact, it is described in Wikipedia as a "planning organization" and indeed, OSM had this discussion (and came to the same conclusion here:  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_admin_level#Consolidated_city-counties_beyond_a_single_county:_admin_level.3D5.3F over four years ago.

Such tagging on Metro needs at least far more discussion than a single person editing a "more friendly" wiki to include an MPO as admin_level=7 (I'll tell you straight up:  it isn't!) and then asserting this tag on "Metro" around Portland.

Please remove the wiki entry and this tag on "Metro."  You might tag it boundary=MPO but you can't tag it boundary=administrative (which is required for an admin_level tag), as it isn't a de facto administrative boundary, it is an MPO boundary.  This means that any admin_level tag in incorrect.
tguen (2021-06-05 02:32:50+00:00): If someone is tagging things incorrectly, you should inform them, and give them a chance to fix it themselves. You made it sound as if you would, but then edited both the wiki and the relation within 5 minutes. You've invented a new (undocumented) tag that is a non-obvious abbreviation. I'm sure there's a better way to handle this, so leaving it alone until there is an opportunity for a discussion would have been a better plan.

The discussion you linked is with only 2 other people, and neither of them agreed with you. Just because they stopped responding, that doesn't mean they conceded.

Metro refers to itself as a government as well as an MPO. You say that Metro "is not a de facto government", but how do you define government? There doesn't seem to be any description of the functions that an organization must perform in order to be considered a government. 

Additionally, I can't find a page on the wiki that even says only governments can be tagged as an administrative boundary. What it does say is the tag is for "jurisdictions recognized by governments for administrative purposes." An MPO is an administrative organization. A water district is an administrative organization. I don't see anything to indicate that it would be incorrect to map a water district as boundary=administrative.

As far as admin_level=*, the wiki says "It is also used with other types of objects that are associated with government entities." Neighborhood associations are commonly tagged admin_level=10, but they are also not "full governments". Unless you intend to remove boundary=administrative from all neighborhood boundaries across the country/world, perhaps you should reconsider what these tags mean.

If you pay attention to the specific (or rather, unspecific) language on the wiki, the tags are actually much more vague than you seem to think. The fact is the whole boundary=* and place=* schema is awkward and not well defined. I think we need more specific definitions before we start arguing over whether a tag fits a particular feature. The admin_level tag is used to attempt to indicate 2 different things at the same time. It shows the relative level in an administrative hierarchy. It also attempts to describe the type of administrative boundary, but since values have different meanings in different places, it utterly fails at doing so. Obviously software isn't going to parse wiki pages, and data consumers shouldn't have to write special rules for every region.

If we're making new tags, I'd like to propose administrative=(state, county, city, metropolitan_planning_organization, etc.) to be used in addition to boundary=administrative.
Minh Nguyen (2021-06-05 06:49:24+00:00): (Coming here from a brief discussion in OSMUS Slack.) The discussions about COGs on that wiki talk page may not be 100% applicable to this case, since the MPO function is only one of Metro’s functions. Unlike every other COG or MPO, Metro has at the very least an electoral boundary.

That said, I’d argue that Metro still fits neatly within the definition of a special district. Special districts defy boundary=administrative’s rigid admin_level hierarchy. For example, according to https://www.oregonmetro.gov/sites/default/files/2020/02/19/JurisdictionRegional.pdf, the Metro boundary has a complex relationship with the Hillsboro and Tigard city boundaries. Such complex relationships are also common with admin_level=7 townships in some Midwestern states, but they are the rule rather than the exception when it comes to special districts.

You’re right that boundary=administrative isn’t strictly limited to “full governments”, but data consumers have come to expect boundary=administrative relations to represent the principal political subdivisions of the containing boundary=administrative. While one may consider a given location in Portland to lie within the Metro boundary for some purposes, it would be a stretch to say that Portland is subordinate to Metro in general.

There have been some experiments with tagging other kinds of special districts, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9992727 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6534979 for school districts, but I’d hope it isn’t common to overload boundary=administrative for this purpose. I agree that boundary=MPO is an inadequate tag for this boundary. Since Metro serves multiple distinct purposes, perhaps it’s time to coin a new boundary=special_district tag. We could probably find enough existing special district experiments in OSM to justify a wiki page about them.
stevea (2021-06-05 06:56:54+00:00): I am very supportive of the tag boundary=special_district in this case.  I have postulated similar tagging before (using acronyms), though I like the "fully expressed" special_district value.  It is appropriate and unambiguous.
stevea (2021-06-06 18:42:14+00:00): It is also true that "someone might write some succinct wiki about this."

The value special_district fits into (what in the USA) are described as one of two "not-governments" by US Census bureau (which I've wiki-documented myself): true "governments" of state, county or county equivalent and city/town and two "others, not-governments" of "special district" and "school district."  While the Bureau should not be what defines OSM tags, in this case it is useful to make exactly these distinctions of government and non-government boundaries.  (In other cases where the US Census Bureau categorizes in specific ways, OSM is known to distinctly diverge).

Minh is being kind when he says "it would be a stretch:"  Metro and special districts like it clearly are not subordinate or superior to the cities they serve (if indeed they serve "cities").  They are a different animal than a government, being tasked with an often narrow list of responsibilities (even as they are funded to do so; I fund my water district when I pay my water bill).

OSM deserves some well-written wiki about how we mean "special district."  There indeed are special districts in the USA:  COGs, Special Districts, MPOs, MPOs which are also other (sometimes many other) things...this is rich in its implementation yet we have not well expressed what their commonalities are; it appears there are some.  Let's try to "categorize the special," as difficult a craft as that might seem — we certainly can do this.  I encourage well-written wiki on this topic.
iWowik (2021-06-04 14:39:15+00:00): Вы заполняете адресную информацию в совершенно неподобающем виде.

Изучите для начала документацию по проекту. А так же научитесь различать населенный пункт и субъект федерации.
В данном месте нет населенного пункта Москва.

Не вынуждайте ваши правки за вами исправлять или откатывать.

Могу предположить, что вы работаете в команде, про характерны ошибки обсуждение вы можете найти здесь.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105488734
tekim (2021-06-05 00:05:28+00:00): Hi Ryan! Many thanks for updating the access constraints for the Southeast Frontage Road, and thanks especially for a very good change set comment explaining how you came up with the information (first hand observation, cross referencing CDOT website).

I hope you are able to make more edits to OSM in the future.

Mike (Loveland)
user_2066394 (2021-06-04 09:02:01+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26011806
Das Teil geht doch noch runder?
Negreheb (2021-11-22 14:28:39+00:00): Ich hab ne Vermutung, dass das bald reverted ist, dann kann man das sowieso nen Blick drauf werfen...
Geofreund1 (2021-10-20 19:07:01+00:00): Hallo HRsparrow,
könntest du mal erläutern, was es mit dem Eintrag
mapillary=https://schach-ludwigsburg.de/logo_mit1919_banner/
auf sich hat?
Danke
aequator (2021-06-06 11:36:09+00:00): Hallo Bike_S, 

"village_green" beschreibt einen besonderen Raum in britischen Ortschaften, nicht gemeint sind die Grünflächen in unseren Städten. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:landuse=village%20green
innerstädtische Grünflächen 

Falls es sich um Rasen o. Ä. handelt böte sich z. B. "landuse=grass" an. 

Viele Grüße

Carsten
Bike_S (2021-06-06 14:55:18+00:00): Hallo Carsten,

vielen Dank für den Hinweis.
Ich werde das bei der nächsten Gelegenheit anpassen.
Wenn mit landuse=grass auch höheres Gras gemeint ist, trifft das auf die Flächen zu, die an dieser Straße liegen.

Viele Grüße
Stephan
aequator (2021-06-06 15:35:43+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:landuse=grass

Weiterhin viel Spaß beim Mappen. 

Carsten
Kovoschiz (2022-03-28 00:31:20+00:00): Descriptor labels in `description:zh=`, not `name=`.
Nordpfeil (2021-06-14 19:22:48+00:00): Hallo brianboru, I have seen that you mapped 59 felled trees using the  new tag "natural:felled=tree", which  was never used before. Maybe no renderer will honor your effort. May I suggest to consider "natural=tree_stump" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree_stump) which was used 1835 times if anything remains visible from the felled trees.
brianboru (2021-06-15 14:34:36+00:00): Thanks for the suggestion but my tag was chosen precisely so that there were would be no render and also serve to deter anyone else from recovering the trees from outdated aerial imagery Tree stump not appropriate - not visible in the piles of wood/branches left after felling
hsimpson (2021-11-23 13:33:41+00:00): Hi Raymond,

mir sind deine Änderungen zu den Fahrradwegen auf der Magnusstraße und weiteren aufgefallen. Auch, wenn es hier naheliegend ist, die Fahrradwege als lane in der Straße zu beschreiben (da hier ja eine Fahrspur dafür weggefallen ist), widerspricht das leider jeglicher Konvention zu Fahrradwegen bei OSM, was wiederum dazu führt, dass bspw. kein OSM-Layer diese Fahrradspuren anzeigt und vermutlich auch kein Router diese Straße als fahrradfreundlich erkennt.

Die Konvention besagt, dass Fahrradspuren immer als cycleway=lane in der Straße erfasst werden. Die Breite des Fahrradweges kann dann über cycleway:width=* genauer definiert werden.

Näheres dazu gibt es hier https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:cycleway

Viele Grüße,
hsimpson
Raymond (2021-11-24 19:13:19+00:00): Hallo hsimpson, danke für dein Review. Schaue ich mir gerne demnächst an. Die Konvention war mir leider so nicht bewusst.
Vinber (2021-06-07 09:23:23+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue,

Merci d'avoir contribué à OpenStreetMap.
Je vous invite à lire cette page où vous pourrez trouver de nombreuses informations utiles https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:France/bienvenue

Bonne continuation
G1asshouse (2021-06-08 05:40:46+00:00): Wouldn't these roads fall under the "forestry" usage for highway=track?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack

Has the definition for "track" changed? I know there was a lot of highway=track talk in Feb, Mar, and April. I don't know if you noticed that.
eggie (2021-06-04 09:20:18+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback:  Het Kadaster  (data wordt daaruit geïmporteerd) ziet het als één gebouw.
De losse onderdelen kun je beter als building:part=yes  intekenen met de juiste layer=
Zie ook in de wiki hoe 3D wordt ingevoerd.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/3D

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/3D_development

Voor ondergrondse gebouwen zie ook https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=831045#p831045

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-06-04 10:21:29+00:00): Klik op de tiles
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-tiles#16/51.4043/5.4087

Dan zie je wie hier bezig is geweest.
Voornamelijk de BAG importeurs.
Ben hier zelf ook wel eens bezig geweest met hulp aan een startende mapper.  
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-06-04 09:22:54+00:00): Wanneer je naar de daken kijkt zit je bij een schuingenomen foto altijd fout.
De noordelijke grens die je hebt ingetekend is niet de plek waar het gebouw staat.
gr eggie
fabiotofy (2021-06-07 07:05:03+00:00): sul divieto per le bici vi era già una discussione precedente in quanto il cartello è esposto solo lato obelisco. Come se fosse vietato il passaggio solo in discesa... lato prosecco non vi è scritto nulla
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105817984
fabiotofy (2021-06-07 07:06:28+00:00): in ogni caso la sbarra esiste da molto tempo e la si può aggirare dal lato destro. Andrebbe lasciata a cartografia
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105817984
eggie (2021-06-04 09:26:14+00:00): Hier klopt de vorm van de parkeergarage wel. Die van ASML 6K dus niet.
Je zult dus de noordelijke dakrand naar het zuiden moeten schuiven.
Nithinat S (2021-06-07 04:40:01+00:00): Gate อยู่บนถนนที่แยกออกไปจากถนนหลักแล้ว ควรจะขยับออกไปอยู่บนถนนที่แยก ตามตำแหน่งจริงครับ ถ้าวางไว้ตรงแยกนี้จะกลายเป็นว่ามันจะ block รถจากทุกทิศทางที่เข้ามาที่แยกนี้ครับ
skyper (2021-06-04 12:18:13+00:00): Hallo borramou
Jetzt hast Du einfach den Weg gekürzt. Bin mir auf Grund der Luftbilder aber ziemlich sicher, dass er hinter dem Vorderhaus noch entlang geht.

Warum hast Du nicht auch noch `access=*` und `service=*` verwendet?
Maps4BW scheint Ihr immer noch nicht als Hintergrund zu verwenden. Warum?

Grüße skyper
borramou (2021-06-08 05:55:10+00:00): Hi Skyper, 

Apologies for the miss. I have modified the geometry based on aerial imagery but have not added access as I was unsure about the entity type. But, as rightly pointed out it seems to be a private space. Hence, I have added Service = driveway. However, driveway itself represents a private road, do you still want us to add the additional access=*. Also, I would like to confirm if all the roads that are missing in Maps4BW are supposed to be tagged as Service = driveways? Would like to hear your thoughts on the same. 

Thanks,
borramou
skyper (2021-06-08 12:07:03+00:00): Salli borramou
access=permissive ist in den meisten Fällen nicht falsch. Bei einfachen Stichstraßen ist es jetzt aber nicht so wichtig. Sobald aber eine weiter Verbindung besteht und sei es auch nur ein Trampelpfad, sollten schon die richtigen Zugangsbestimmungen eingetragen werden.

Grundsätzlich beinhaltet Maps4BW  auch etliche Fehler und ist nicht immer aktuell. Daher auch immer nur im Zusammenhang mit anderen Quellen verwenden.
Einen direkten Bezug zwischen "driveway" und dem Fehlen bei Maps4BW gibt es leider nicht.

Ciao skyper