piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
nevw (2022-09-18 02:19:47+00:00): Hi, Esri imagery shows Momentum Way as complete and probably open to traffic. Are you able to confirm and update it?
MattJoy (2022-09-18 02:42:43+00:00): yes i can confirm, i work in that street.  there is a few streets missing too. but fornow you can open that street up
nevw (2022-09-18 02:50:20+00:00): thanks, open now
traveleditor (2022-09-18 18:11:10+00:00): Hey, if you're solving quests in different places, please do one changeset for each area. This will help other mappers.
jaxter184 (2022-09-19 16:02:31+00:00): oops, sorry about that. is there anything I can do to fix this entry? also, I'll bring this up to the StreetComplete developer, since i think it would make sense for it to automatically split changesets based on location if theyre this far apart. Until now, I was under the impression that each additional tag was uploaded as a separate changeset, which, in retrospect, would probably have been an equally annoying thing to do :P
traveleditor (2022-09-23 12:53:28+00:00): StreetComplete has an auto-upload feature where it will upload every quest you solve in their own changesets
gscholz (2022-09-20 05:54:50+00:00): Hi remimage,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-1.19712&lat=49.07278&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=126297776

I am wondering about how this could happen as you are using JOSM which typically shows error messages if you try to upload such data. Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
pitscheplatsch (2022-11-17 10:53:17+00:00): Hi,

may we know the source of your mapping? Thanks.
remimage (2022-11-17 11:32:25+00:00): Pascal, ich verstehe nicht, warum das nicht stimmt, ich habe nur an der marigny Biodiversitätsinsel gearbeitet. Ich habe auch gesehen, dass der Import des französischen Katasters in Frankreich katastrophal ist
pitscheplatsch (2022-11-17 10:53:28+00:00): Hi,
may we know the source of your mapping? Thanks.
remimage (2022-11-17 11:33:31+00:00): Pascal, ich verstehe nicht, warum das nicht stimmt, ich habe nur an der marigny Biodiversitätsinsel gearbeitet. Ich habe auch gesehen, dass der Import des französischen Katasters in Frankreich katastrophal ist
remimage (2022-11-18 10:22:16+00:00): Ich denke, ich musste die Gebäude orthogonalisieren und die Fehler kommen von dort. Ansonsten ist die Karte BD ortho IGN
pitscheplatsch (2022-11-19 08:48:01+00:00): remimage, danke für deine Antwort.

Seltsam. Wie wurden die 6,500 Nodes in diesem Changeset erstellt?
Frans S (2022-09-19 10:23:36+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
Please tag each building as building=yes. None of your mappings are tagged !



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126297904
eggie (2022-09-17 14:03:27+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback  Lijkt me oke.. 
Ben je bekend met Openseamap..  ?
Zie https://www.openseamap.org/index.php?id=openseamap&no_cache=1&L=1

en de kaart

https://map.openseamap.org/



MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
Warin61 (2022-09-17 23:05:41+00:00): Hi
The building multipolygon relation 14591280 is not correct. 

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=149.10084&lat=-35.22185&zoom=17&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways 

I would suggest you delete the relation and place  tag 'building=residential' on the remaining 3 ways. I'll leave it to you to correct the situation?
eggie (2022-09-17 14:49:14+00:00): pedestrian wordt meestal gebruikt in winkelgebieden. 
Ook kunnen op sommige tijden besteldiensten en /of fietsers gebruik maken van de voetgangersgebieden.
Bv in de binnenstad.
wandelpaden taggen met highway=footway

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-09-17 14:49:53+00:00): Wanneer een pad een ander pad kruist.. maak dan altijd een verbinding. Nu routeert het niet.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-09-17 15:01:57+00:00): Is de oversteek van de Onderdreef naar de Julianalaan niet ondertussen aangepast in werkelijkheid?
eggie (2022-09-17 15:13:57+00:00): Het laatste stuk pedestrian .. nu footway liep weer dezelfde weg terug.
Gedupliceerde wegen. 
Ook vespucci is een ideale editor. Kijk eens naar editor iD Die waarschuwt voor dit soort fouten.
editor josm stap voor stap 

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710
eggie (2022-09-17 16:43:47+00:00): Typo.. Ook vespucci is Geen ideale editor.
JeroenHoek (2022-09-17 15:01:42+00:00): Heb je dit gemeld/nagevraagd bij Tinq? Hun website noemt Middelzeelaan 2.
Hans Bieshaar (2022-09-17 15:17:48+00:00): Ik heb dit gedaan op basis van de BAG. Wanneer je in de BAG-viewer de postcode 8931BM die Tinq ook gebruikt invul, blijkt dat nummer 2 hoort bij de Uiterdijkstreweg. Nummer 1 is het enigste nummer op de Middelzeelaan horend bij dezepostcode.
JeroenHoek (2022-09-17 16:05:52+00:00): Niet alle adressen die in gebruik zijn, staan in de BAG. Omdat de website van Tinq nummer 2 hanteert zou ik het navragen bij ze. Dit kan best wel eens zo'n nummer zijn wat al jaren in gebruik is, maar niet BAG-waardig.

Zelfs het ziekenhuis in Leeuwarden gebruikt een huisnummer wat niet in de BAG staat: het komt voor.
Hans Bieshaar (2022-09-17 16:13:02+00:00): Tinq in niet consequent. Op https://www.tinq.nl/index.php/tankstations/leeuwarden-middelzeelaan kun je klikken op de druppel voor het TinQ station. De popup-box meldt "Middelzeelaan 1".
ivanbranco (2022-09-18 20:02:37+00:00): Ciao Badran,

benvenuto su OSM :)

C'è un problema però, stai disegnando edifici sovrapposti. Significa che l'edificio è già stato mappato e tu ne stai disegnando uno identico sopra, come mai?
aTarom (2023-01-10 18:57:17+00:00): Hi, VARVAR8
why a less descriptive
"artwork_type"="installation"
 than
"artwork_type"="boat"
?
at
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10017322115/history
Thanks for editing
VARVAR8 (2023-02-16 11:52:20+00:00): "artwork_type"="boat" more suitable for this object 37.9961826, -0.6849622
However, it is not regulated in the OSM. Thanks.
eggie (2022-09-17 14:07:42+00:00): Schuiven met de kaart in editmodus geeft vaak schade . In dit geval ook.
Bij Evides heb je een weg verschoven.
Dat komt omdatr je selecteert en dan gaat schuiven.
Je edits
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=126299860

Het gebied van je edits is dus veekl te groot.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-09-17 14:10:09+00:00): Schade hersteld
eggie (2022-09-17 14:20:51+00:00): Wat jij als breakwater tagt wordt meestal als man_made=groyne gemapt en dan met een gesloten lijn.
Let op..  Werken als startende mapper aan de coastline is tricky..  De rivier staat zo droog als je een polygoon onderbreekt.
Mort the 2nd (2022-09-17 15:25:00+00:00): Ok, bedankt voor de feedback. Zal kleinere gebieden oppakken in de toekomst, en zoveel mogelijk van de coastline afblijven.
eggie (2022-09-17 15:26:47+00:00): Top!  
Veel plezier met mappen..
Gr eggie
Myazyk (2022-09-17 14:12:07+00:00): Глянь, який крутий номер твоєї правки - 126300000
Shyshka (2022-09-17 15:34:14+00:00): Оу, не помітив)
mapper999 (2022-09-17 22:19:44+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OSM!
Irgendwas ist in diesem Changeset schief gelaufen: Du hast 5 neue Wege (1095395205 ff) erstellt, die alle übereinander liegen. Was wolltest du denn ändern? Die GIS ist die Fläche links vom Funkmast mit name="Philippsburg". Die große Baustellenfläche, die du verbunden hast, war die alte Schaltanlage. Die Masten wurden versetzt und neu verkabelt. Leider gibt es noch keine aktuellen Luftbilder, deshalb gibt es da aktuell Lücken in den Stromleitungen.
PfeLars (2022-09-18 09:19:55+00:00): Hallo mapper999,
Vielen Dank für deinen Hinweis! Die übereinander liegenden Leitungen sind versehentlich hineingekommen. Habe ich nach deinem Hinweis bereits entfernt. Die Position der GIS ist mir bekannt. Allerdings gibt es bei dem Dreibein aus Bruchsal nicht nur eine Lücke. Stattdessen ist die Leitung noch in das alte Freiluft-UW eingezeichnet und in der Relation war die GIS nicht enthalten, dafür aber die alte Station. Zum einen habe ich die alte Freiluft-Anlage gegen das GIS-UW in der Relation ausgetauscht. Zum anderen habe ich den letzten Leitungsabschnitt geteilt, damit die Leitung in der Relation nun vor der GIS endet und zumindest nicht mehr in die alte Anlage hineingeht.
eggie (2022-09-17 14:13:45+00:00): Beste Mort. Het gebied van je edits is veel te groot. Schuiven geeft dus vaak schade. Niet iets in Scheveningen aanpassen en vervolgens naar de Maasvlakte gaan.  Editor iD is berucht in het veroorzaken van schade door onbedoelde verplaatsingen.
Doe zo iets in meerder uploads. Dan ben je bij evt. reverts ook niet je goede aanpassingen kwijt.

MVG
eggie
ZLima12 (2022-12-10 21:18:01+00:00): Hi,

Overall this looks like a good changeset, but there were a couple things that caught my eye.

First of all, you should not add names like "NB Hutchinson Rvr Pkwy to WB Cross County Pkwy". The name tag is not a place to describe a feature, but rather it should be an objective, established name for it. Also, you used abbreviations in it, another thing that should not be done in name tags, barring very rare circumstances. Ideally, for features like this, it should have no name at all.

Also, it looks like you changed the value of "New York, Westchester and Boston Railway" from railway=razed to railway=abandoned. Why did you make this change? I don't think you'd be able to tell that there was a railroad there anymore, unless you had prior knowledge going in.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126300367
wardmuylaert (2022-10-16 15:35:20+00:00): Hey, I'm the person that had asked about the BEL-FRA-LUX bordermarkers in OSM Belgium chat a month ago. Is the path you added on the NW side of the stream the path you saw on satellite imagery? Or did you end up passing by to confirm, because if that is the case, then I am curious to hear about the walkability of it :)
SHARCRASH (2022-10-16 17:56:03+00:00): Hi! :)

Yeah I surveyed the path I told you about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1095397118 The access to the border LB001 (NW side of river) will be easy. The way is accessible and can now be considered as a track grade2, surface gravel (will retag it). There is a project in cooperation between the 3 countries to build a bicycle/foot network passing in that area, that's why i tagged it as construction. So the way is either an access way to the constructions or it will be part of the network, connecting to this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424050934 I haven't surveyed the border on the SE side. Very likely you will need to pass grasses and bushes but it seems easily doable. I bet there are a few people visiting the border time to time, every year there is a trail on the aerial photos.
wardmuylaert (2022-10-16 19:09:12+00:00): Thanks for the information! It's a bit of a train ride away from Brussels, so I wanted to be somewhat sure before making the trek over :P
SHARCRASH (2022-10-30 11:50:37+00:00): Hey! Extra info if you haven't yet visited the site: the border is supposed to have 3 markers, one for each country on their own territory, that's why there were already 2. BE and LU are obvious, apparently the FR border is different in shape/material, not many people have seen it, its position is not know... So if you want to rise up the challenge, maybe try to survey it while you are there. I've added it in OSM but with a fixme.
wardmuylaert (2022-12-17 14:44:10+00:00): I didn't end up trying to find the French marker as I visited the spot while on a run. It was a bit too chilly (and I have no extra clothes or anything) to also risk falling into one of the the little streams or puddles in the area. :P The BE and LU ones were indeed easy to get to though, thanks for the initial info!
user_6110846 (2022-09-17 14:07:03+00:00): https://myhaylivka-gromada.gov.ua/news/1662465798/
eggie (2022-09-17 14:25:04+00:00): Het gebied van je edits is veel te groot.
Beperk je svp tot een deel van een haven.
Ook is je bijdrage lastig te controleren.
skquinn (2022-09-28 18:33:19+00:00): Please use meaningful changeset comments on every changeset. I have no idea what this actually changes without opening it up and examining each item.

"Added trees", "Added details to trees", "Adjusted position of trees" would all be much more useful than just ".".
eggie (2022-09-17 14:38:39+00:00): Helaas negeer je elke aanwijzing..
Ben toch benieuwd waarom?
Mort the 2nd (2022-09-17 15:26:33+00:00): Ik was non-stop bezig, en las je commentaar net pas. Ik zal me in de toekomst tot kleinere gebieden beperken, en vaker kleinere edits uploaden. Bedankt voor je feedback.
eggie (2022-09-17 15:32:58+00:00): Ahh Zo...   
Je zou eens naar editor JOSM kunnen kijken. Dan schuif je met rechts en selecteer je met de linkermuisknop.
Die editor beschouwen we ook als de standaardeditor.
editor josm stap voor stap 

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710        

 

MVG
eggie
Mort the 2nd (2022-09-17 15:36:13+00:00): Top, ik ga me inlezen.
eggie (2022-09-17 15:38:56+00:00): Je hebt dan ook veel meer mogelijkheden voor recentere achtergronden..  PDOK actueel is ook al weer achterhaald. 
Er lopen diverse draadjes op het forum over.
Succes
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-01 14:00:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 174063813, 174063778, 174063039, 174063675, 174063839, 174063864, 174063733, 174063852, 174063722, 174063049, 174063081, 174063378, 174063746, 174063119, 174063802, 174063878 where the changeset comment is: Following a DWG complaint, reverting a dubious import.  See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311170850 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18848
SekeRob (2022-09-17 18:13:18+00:00): 
Are you sure about that roundabout tagging? FAICR there's at least 1 spot where traffic on the circle has to give way to traffic coming from the right and yup, that stop spot is still there and still there are no roundabout signs.
SekeRob (2022-09-18 07:27:27+00:00): Was there last night in passing to the airport, pertenently not a roundabout, 2 stop spots, even had attached a wiki link to the way explaining "A road junction where the traffic goes around a non-traversable island but does not always have right of way.
"A road junction where the traffic goes around a non-traversable island but does not always have right of way.". 2 stop spots, no yield/roundabout signs, 2022-09-18

Reverted to old state!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-01 14:01:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 174063813, 174063778, 174063039, 174063675, 174063839, 174063864, 174063733, 174063852, 174063722, 174063049, 174063081, 174063378, 174063746, 174063119, 174063802, 174063878 where the changeset comment is: Following a DWG complaint, reverting a dubious import.  See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311170850 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18848
user_2066394 (2022-09-17 19:56:29+00:00): Schnittpunkt?
Somberland (2022-09-18 06:59:07+00:00): Neue Knoten. Gute Frage wieso GoMaps da  Schnittpunkt als Message hinterlegt hat.
user_2066394 (2022-09-18 08:24:25+00:00): Grad mal in die Historie geschaut, "Schnittpunkt angepasst" war das erste Changeset, Go Map verwendet dann scheints den Text weiter.
VLD159 (2022-09-26 20:47:00+00:00): Hello Md Shahriar Abdullah,

Thank you for your contributions to OSM. I saw that you had applied several layer tags to building areas and road geometry. The best way to resolve these over lap issues between the building areas and road geometry would be to reshape and reposition those features to match imagery. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Anthony S.
SzymonH (2022-09-17 15:31:04+00:00): Takie rzeczy nie istnieją, do wycofania.
NieWnen (2022-09-17 15:38:42+00:00): Wycofane (126303766)
abakus_uploader (2022-09-17 22:31:02+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
Bobropiton (2022-09-18 08:44:06+00:00): Due to your not responding to comments on previous editpacks, in which I ask you not to remove any transport-related points, any editpack that affects public_transport : stop_position or public_transport : platform points will be rolled back in their entirety.
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2022-09-25 13:30:00+00:00): Hi, Bobropiton
What about changesets like this?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/344389900#map=19/59.48830/24.87074
Doesn't look correct. You didn't see it or is there a reason it's not rollbacked?

 Aulo keeps ignoring everyone's messages. I'd say now he's doing more harm than good. I think it's time he gets a blocking message from admins, but just wanted to make sure that this change is incorrect too.
micheleOSM3 (2022-09-17 20:08:16+00:00): Sbaglio, o questa modifica ha eliminato la parte di sentiero 358 che lo collega al 374?
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=140980&map=16.0/46.3303/12.4231
gpstracks (2022-09-18 06:43:49+00:00): Risolto.
Grazie.
BPTT (2022-10-26 04:10:30+00:00): What is your source that this trail is primarily for hiking/foot traffic? The cited website to waukesha.gov is broken. But Menomonee Falls' own pages clearly indicate the Bugline is equally for biking and hiking ( https://www.menomonee-falls.org/1168/Bugline-Trail ) and even refer to https://www.waukeshacounty.gov/biking/ Not tagging the Bugline Trail as a regional bike route is a collective loss for the users of CyclOSM.org and opencyclemap.org, and I hope I've made a strong case that the bike route be reinstated.
AHWP (2022-10-26 12:09:33+00:00): We cannot explain a broken link to waukesha.gov provided by the automated addition of the feature.  You would need to contact the original source of that link.

Reading the commentary on the changeset is not the correct way to determine designated usage.

The commentary does not change or remove the designated usages of the trail, which continue to indicate designated usage of hiking and bicycling.

By correctly providing usage designations, instead of changing the default trail type, avoids use of a personal preference about bicycling.
BPTT (2022-10-26 14:30:46+00:00): I'm not suggesting that a changeset commentary should determine usage, nor that this commentary should determine designations. But since this trail is currently designated for both foot and cycle traffic, and is an established bike trail, it deserves a regional Bike Route relation.

I'm simply asking for other users' sources for why the Bugline is no longer a Bike Route relation, and for why its type is Foot Path instead of Path, which maintains both Foot=designated and Cycle=designated.

I am not familiar with any rule or precedent that insists that footways cannot also be Cycle Route Relations, but I would argue that since the Bugline IS designated for both foot AND cycle traffic, a general Path type is warranted instead of Foot Path.
AHWP (2022-10-26 15:04:52+00:00): In-person observation of signage on the Bugline Trail indicates dual purpose with no expressed preference or priority, so a request to express a preference for the trail type would be inappropriate.

The referenced websites also express no preference or priority.

In every segment of the Bugline visible to us, on OpenStreetMap editor, it already shows that it is of type "Path" and not "Foot Path".  Both "Foot" and "Bicycles" are "designated" as you expect to see.

We will not attempt to answer questions about why the OpenStreetMap site no longer relates the Bugline to a Bike Route.

We will not answer about "rule or precedent" since none were mentioned, and since the type is already "Path" no change is required.
BPTT (2022-10-26 15:59:58+00:00): You wrote on changeset #126302997: "It is a hiking trail that allows bicycles, and not a bicycle trail that allows hiking." What is your source for this? This seems to contradict your last comment, that the signage and websites express no preference or priority, but yet (as of version 11 in changeset #122711936), this trail had a regional bicycle route and the correct highway=path, rather than only highway=footway from version 12. Why is this?
AHWP (2022-10-26 16:43:43+00:00): We will not participate in your desire to debate commentary.  As is obvious and already stated, "The commentary does not change or remove the designated usages of the trail".

Similar to how we stated that "Foot" and "Bicycles" are indicated as "designated", we also see "highway=path" on every segment of the Bugline with two exceptions at the corner of Waukesha Ave and Main St.

We cannot answer your question about "why".  Those two exceptions in changeset #122711936 were created by user 1998alexkane and you should take up your concerns with them.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/536758840

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/536758839
eggie (2022-09-17 15:42:55+00:00): Beste Quinya.. Maar als je dan met een node gaat schuiven komt alles wat er aan vast zit mee. Dus ook een woning.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=126303047

Het is dus zaak steeds te checken wat het resultaat is.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-09-17 15:44:03+00:00): Overigens Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-09-17 16:05:32+00:00): Je wijziging heb ik even teruggezet
.. reverted by changeset #126304666
Kijk even opnieuw hoe je het t beste kunt aanpassen. 

Succes,
eggie
Vincent de Phily (2022-09-19 09:18:14+00:00): The turning circle at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1149070240 doesn't make sense, I assume it's a missedit, reverted.

Also removed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1095419478 and associated gates, as these are just backyards with no vehicular use.
danieldegroot2 (2022-09-19 15:24:27+00:00): I added the turning circle because the alley is so narrow, and since there are cut corners which allows for making a three-point turn or similar there.

The gates are visible on Mapillary, or at least the large wooden one with the driveway.
I added the driveway since I can see what I assume is a white van in that backyard on Esri Clarity. Of course a backyard is usually a garden, not a driveway, but it does seem to be where they have their car.
danieldegroot2 (2022-09-19 15:27:26+00:00): Also, when you revert someone's changes, could you link to the changeset where you did so, please? This makes it easier to track the changes for other contributors.