piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Владимир К (2018-04-05 09:23:24+00:00): что значит узко? насколько узко? вы так называете дорогу эту: я поехал по узко?
_al (2015-01-09 11:54:12+00:00): Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!

Zur Info: Ein Haus wird nur gerendert, wenn man den Umriss zeichnet (und dann mit dem Tag building= usw. ergänzt; und bitte nicht name=Zuhause). Ich habe ein paar Gebäude eingezeichnet (http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/46.82443/14.57264).

Kannst Du bitte noch die Adressen sagen/eintragen?

Danke und weiterhin viel Spaß mit OpenStreetMap!

lg
Andreas
_al (2015-01-09 12:13:19+00:00): Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!

Danke für die Korrektur der Straßen(Namen)

Weiterhin viel Spaß mit OSM.

Servus, Andreas
open_Opi (2015-01-08 15:53:06+00:00): Ich habe die Bahnhofsapotheke gelöscht (gibt es schon lange nicht mehr) und den Weltladen hinzugefügt (gibt es schon seit 2009 dort)
Hjart (2015-03-16 20:39:19+00:00): Hej
Vær venligst opmærksom på at forbinde stier og veje korrekt til hinanden jævnfør pkt 5 i http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.3.1. Jeg har brugt en del tid på at rydde op i hvad du tidligere har lavet og nu vil det være rart om du selv er opmærksom på det.
Hjart (2015-03-16 20:45:22+00:00): Desuden er det specielt i skove og nær bygninger en rigtig god ide at lave mindst 3-4 gps-spor per vej. De færreste gps-spor er så akkurate at man kan forlade sig på et enkelt.
Jon Nygaard Rahr (2015-04-05 09:12:11+00:00): Hej med dig.
Tak for at gøre mig opmærksom på dette. 
Venligst, 

Jon
Mike Baggaley (2015-01-13 14:59:38+00:00): Hi, can you check the drain, way number 320997262 added in this change? I can't see anything there in Bing (I'm not a local) - if this is a narrow channel, can you add area=no or if it is all water, please change to natural=water with water=drain instead of waterway=drain.

Cheers,
Mike
Josef73 (2022-09-18 18:42:12+00:00): Hello can you check the value of the tag opening_hours? Thanks.
SomeoneElse (2015-01-09 23:51:27+00:00): I notice that you've got Vicarage Lane http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/2430164/history and http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/220117216 down as a tertiary now.  The last time that I was there, it most definitely didn't look tertiary - it was a stretch to describe it as unclassified (which previous mappers had had it as).  Is the access restriction still in place?  That seems somewhat unlikely on a tertiary road.

Also, it would be really helpful to other mappers if you used changeset comments explaining what you've changed and what the source of that change was.  Currently there's simply no clue where these changes are coming from (in the case of this particular change it's really difficult to imagine where it could be coming from, unless there's been a substantial redevelopment in the village - in which case saying so in the changeset comment would be really helpful).
_al (2015-01-09 12:16:56+00:00): Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!

Danke für die Updates!

Bitte nur in kurzen Stichwörtern im Changeset-Kommentar dazuschreiben, was gemacht wurde. Das hilft den anderen, den Überblick zu behalten.

Weiterhin viel Spaß mit OSM!

Servus, Andreas
SomeoneElse (2015-01-09 22:20:04+00:00): You've changed a couple of the east-west roads in Navenby to tertiary (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40230699/history and http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/142418281/history).  What evidence was this based on?
user_72483 (2015-01-09 19:23:39+00:00): Ehrlich gesagt finde ich die Art und Weise mit der dieser und die weiteren Edits an der B 27 und B 84 durchgeführt wurden ziemlich unerfreulich.
Erstens sind durch das Löschen und Neuzeichen die orginalen Beitragenden aus der History geflogen und zweitens sind massig neue Fehler entstanden, die vorher nicht da waren. Zum Teil sind gar Daten verlorengegangen. Diese müssen nun korrigiert und nachgetragen werden.

Ich wäre dir daher sehr verbunden, wenn du zukünftig bei deinen Edits auf der vorhandenen Datenbasis aufbaust, statt diese einfach zu ersetzen. Das macht unter Umständen mehr Arbeit sorgt aber bei den lokalen Mappern für weniger Frust. Danke!
Smiljan_02 (2015-01-10 10:53:50+00:00): Hallo DerUnsichtbare, die Behauptung "massig Fehler" gemacht zu haben ist nicht zielführend sollange wie du sie nicht hier benennts und um Änderung bittest. "Massig" ist ein unbestimmtes Zahlwort und kann schon mit 2 (in Worten zwei ) gleichgestellt werden.
Im übrigen danke ich dir, dass du in Bad Hersfeld den von mir gemeldeten Fehler an der "Hainstraße" so schnell bearbeitet hast, es wäre noch gut gewesen den Note zu schließen.
salix01 (2015-01-12 08:01:30+00:00): Im Bereich des Way 321023131 ist die Wedemarkstr. doppelt gemappt.
Wer räumt's auf?
neuhausr (2015-01-20 16:41:48+00:00): Hi, noticed this change when it was flagged in OSM Inspector. You appear to have created a new relation for the Helena National Forest (http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4470349) and broken the old relation (http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4436658)? In addition, the way you added with this changeset includes only the source data attributes (no OSM tagging at all) which doesn't appear to  conform to the import guidelines http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines. Please try to harmonize the data with OSM.
lampropeltis (2015-01-20 16:51:57+00:00): Hello and thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will add OSM tagging for the changes to the Helena National Forest. The data added are accurate representations of public lands around Helena and will add to the usefulness of the maps for everyone hiking and biking around town. Thank you!
bgirardot (2015-01-08 20:54:49+00:00): Just testing changeset discussions.
emacsen (2015-01-09 12:32:41+00:00): If you're copying data from Strava Global Heat maps, can you show the license for those maps that allow us to copy from them?
jumbanho (2015-01-09 12:47:15+00:00): Strictly speaking I'm not "copying data" as the data are a set of points that I or the Strava-produced slide tool interpolates.  I assume that since Strava hosts this version of iD that uses this tool that they permit this use of their data.

There also is the wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Strava which links to this: https://twitter.com/paulmach/status/455182880306905088
as sufficient proof, but I'm not a lawyer.
_al (2015-01-09 12:23:54+00:00): Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!

Danke für Deine Updates!

Weiterhin viel Spaß mit OSM!

Servus, Andreas
Polarbear (2017-02-24 18:54:58+00:00): Du hast https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/188078730 von 'grass' auf 'meadow' geändert, ist das tatsächlich Weideland?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:landuse%3Dmeadow
SomeoneElse (2015-01-09 18:33:53+00:00): Hi - there are a few untagged ways that look like buildings in this changeset - http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/321036882 is an example.  I think that it's worth checking to see if any need tagging as some sort of buildings.
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-01-22 01:13:18+00:00): Spejson: Proszę nie dublować numerów domów - taka robota nie ma sensu.
Spejson (2015-01-22 06:37:51+00:00): Proszę wybaczyć, mała pomyłka, która się juz więcej nie powtórzy
oini (2016-02-04 05:47:20+00:00): Hi! I just noticed that you have a tagged a building in this changeset as `name=demolished` which suggests that the name of the building is 'demolished' and not that the building has been demolished. If the building indeed has been demolished it would be great if you could correct the tag info according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix and add the tag `demolished:building=yes`. Thanks! Happy mapping.
MKnight (2016-05-14 11:20:55+00:00): was hats denn hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/321039830 mit bridge am Hut?

Nebenbei: wozu ist das Relationskonstrukt gut?
ulmtuelp (2016-05-14 17:11:38+00:00): Das ist natürlich Quark und soll building sein.
Danke für den Hinweis, ist korrigiert.
Relationskonstrukt für 3D.
muralito (2015-01-09 22:49:04+00:00): Hay que tener mas cuidado con los cambios que involucran limites. Habian quedado mal los de Cerro Chato, pero tambien los departamentales de Durazno y Florida.
neluy1611 (2015-01-10 00:48:17+00:00): Es la unión que hice tal vez?
Aprovecho a avisar (porque no sé como hacerlo) que si se hace la búsqueda de Cerro Chato como que no está marcada la parte de Treinta y Tres (como sí aparece Durazno o Florida)
Saludos
MKnight (2015-09-22 14:28:42+00:00): Was soll denn hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41601167 d=1 bedeuten?
t2425b (2015-09-25 12:09:06+00:00): lanes=*. Hat sich wohl aus Versehen geändert...
muralito (2015-01-09 12:58:52+00:00): La clasificacion de vias cruzando el Rio Yaguaron no es correcta. Por lo menos no parece posible cruzarlo en un vehiculo normal.
Creo que habria que revisarlo mejor.

En cuanto al resto, no importa que sea un camino que una dos paises, por eso no se le sube la categoria. Ademas es la categozacion convenida vigente
por el Proyecto Uruguay.
smaprs (2015-01-09 13:18:57+00:00): Ola Muralito, no Brasil estamos usando uma classificação para vias rurais que leva em conta também a importância sócio-economica (no link que citei no comentário; ligações principais entre cidades, a princípio, como "terciary"; "unclassified" se for muito ruim, não compactada; tem sido usada também na África, e se revela mais adequada em áreas rurais vastas). Uma sugestão apenas, se julgarem conveniente no Uruguay rural. Se tu perceberes algum erro meu na área que afecta Uruguay, me desculpe, fique à vontade em corrigir ou contatar. Neste trecho de todo modo há um nitidamente um "paso" para 4x4 (marquei os que encontrei nas fronteiras), ou de modo geral para quando o rio está baixo (um "ford"). Mas sem problemas, se preferes deixamos o trecho do "ford" como "track". Que te parece? Saludos
muralito (2015-01-09 13:35:25+00:00): OK Sergio. Lo importante funcionalmente es que hay que dejar bien claro que el cruce del rio no es un tramo ruteable para un vehiculo normal. Como minimo, etiquetar 4wd_only=yes y evaluar si eso es suficiente para que los softwares de ruteo interpreten que por ahi no puede circular un vehiculo normal. 
¿Entiendes mi opinion?
smaprs (2015-01-09 13:49:37+00:00): Sim, ok. Não sabia deste 4wd_only, obrigado. De todo modo, considerar também (a princípio) mapear como é o uso real, não prioridade para o roteador (mas ok).
Roger C Soares (2015-01-09 02:43:26+00:00): Reverti este changeset por ter movido uma rua incorretamente em Ribeirão Preto.
Roger C Soares (2015-01-09 02:40:00+00:00): Reverti este changeset por ter apagado uma interpolação e conter caminhos sem tag.
cMartin (2015-01-09 14:23:44+00:00): Die Strecke hat mehrere Fußgängerampeln. Damit ist sie für mich eigentlich nicht mehr "Kreuzungsfrei"...
gnlpfth (2015-01-13 22:30:23+00:00): Zitat Wiki: [Eine autobahnähnliche Straße muss] eine Fahrt ohne Anhalten sicherstellen. Die Ampeln sind auf den Luftbildern gut zu sehen und auch eingetragen. Keine Frage, das muss revertiert werden.
jc86035 (2015-01-12 15:21:53+00:00): I notice you tagged the Airport Express tracks as service=siding... They're actually the fast line tracks. Will fix now
Noen (2015-01-11 19:12:26+00:00): Why did you removed almost all railway=platform tags from Oslo's metro system?
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-01-22 13:36:25+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/321060659 - a ulica? a miejscowość? sam numer to trochę za mało.
emacsen (2015-01-09 12:38:32+00:00): Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap! I see this is your first edit.

What it looks like you did was to modify the geometry of this building such that there's a big wedge in it. I'm fairly sure you didn't mean to do that, so I've gone ahead and reverted it.

It can be a bit confusing to edit OSM in the beginning. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask.
5m4u9 (2015-01-09 08:03:23+00:00): si el nombre de un lugar no es conocido dejarlo vacío así sabremos que lugares nos falta preguntar el nombre
rickmastfan67 (2015-01-09 04:35:30+00:00): I would have left the channelized section right lane of Fifth as secondary since it still connects directly to the secondary part.  They only split it there to prevent idiots from trying to turn left onto the Blvd of the Allies from the right lane.
mavl (2015-01-14 13:50:43+00:00): Здравствуйте.
У этого дома точно адрес 6-й Посадский проезд, 58? Может быть 6-й Слободской проезд?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144572249
emacsen (2015-01-09 13:01:21+00:00): This changeset is vandlism and spam. The traffic light has nothing to do with this business, and the changeset comment is unrelated to the changeset, instead it advertises a product or service. Reverting.
mavl (2015-01-09 12:59:41+00:00): Здравствуйте.

Не нужно создавать дубликаты точек интереса (например, для школ и детских садов). В этом пакете правок вы добавили точки интереса для школ и детских садов внутрь зданий, которые уже имеют тег amenity.
user_599436 (2015-01-09 15:19:06+00:00): Thanks for the edit. To prevent duplicate features I merged the existing Skaneateles Library node with the building you traced and created a new node for the John D Barrow Gallery with its own opening hours.
SomeoneElse (2015-01-10 19:10:40+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OpenStreetMap.  I think that something has gone a bit wrong with this changeset - lots of untagged nodes got added, most or all of them where there are electricity pylons or other electricity cables.  I've no idea what "Angle Towers PHG, PW and PWG Routes" means, but I'm guessing that it's related to electricity infrastructure.  If you look at http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3278087407 (one of your new nodes) and http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1974912400/history (an existing electricity pylon) you'll see that they're in exactly the same place.  Things in OpenStreetMap need a "tag" to indicate what they represent in the real world - have a look at http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Beginners%27_guide and http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Elements#Tag for more information.  If you're trying to do something with existing pylons then you'll want to do something with the existing node on that spot, not create a new one.  If it would help, I can undo this change that created the duplicates - would you like me to do that?  Or are these nodes actually representing something else somewhere else and you're going to move them?

Anyway - hope you don't mind me mentioning this - just trying to help.  Drop me a message (either here or via "send message") if there's anything that I can do.

Cheers,
Andy
James Suttill (2015-01-12 08:44:07+00:00): Hi Andy,

as you can tell, I am new to this! I was simply wanting to get hold of a map showing some particular power lines. The trouble I had was that as soon as I zoomed out, they disappeared! I had an idea that if I looked at each angle - change of direction. I could then join them and create a map. I think they are probably best deleted! thanks, James
SomeoneElse (2015-01-12 08:58:10+00:00): No problem - I've deleted the extra points.  If you want a map showing power lines at lower zoom levels I'm sure someone's already done one somewhere (or you could try something like umap.openstreetmap.fr, or trying your own version of the OSM standard style).
SomeoneElse (2016-01-30 00:09:56+00:00): Can you remember what sort of shops http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3278263024 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3278247063 were?  They're currently "shop=survey"
SK53 (2016-01-30 12:02:26+00:00): Yes easy enough as it was a photo survey: clothes & shoes.
SomeoneElse (2015-01-09 21:00:31+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3278169348 has been added in the middle of the road - this seems unlikely?
GerdP (2017-08-29 06:27:13+00:00): Hi!
Please review typo type=destinationsign
on relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/183544
When I changed it to destination_sign JOSM complained "too many roles"
I assume one has to create one relation for each sign?
alv (2017-08-29 14:11:33+00:00): It's intentionally different type.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destinationsign
GerdP (2017-08-29 14:59:18+00:00): Ah, thanks. JOSM doesn't seem to know this one.
simone (2015-01-09 12:30:26+00:00): bravo!
NaSH (2015-01-09 15:09:37+00:00): utilisé bing oui, mais en ayant décalé le fond par rapport aux batiments, qui viennent du cadastre, et qui sont censé être plus précis
nfrery (2015-01-09 15:14:08+00:00): En regardant les traces GPS dispo sur OSM, j'en ai conclu que c'est le cadastre qui est décalé.
NaSH (2015-01-09 20:27:20+00:00): je ne fais pas confiance aux traces , car les miennes etaient parfois largement décalées.
et pas a bing non plus..
dforsi (2015-01-10 09:43:53+00:00): Una strada privata si indica con access=private sulla way. Se è senza sfondo puoi aggiungere noexit=yes sull'ultimo nodo.
SomeoneElse (2015-01-09 13:23:55+00:00): Are you sure that the surface on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/314569029 is asphalt rather than dirt (which was presumably what the original mapper was trying to say)?  I'm not convinced that you can always tell surface type from an aerial picture - in this situation surely the best solution is to contact the original mapper (it was only a month ago; they should still be active) and ask them, and then if that works add an OSM note?
RM87 (2015-01-09 14:16:27+00:00): In this case I am fairly certain that this part is paved by now.  At least I have not seen a centerline painted on a dirt. In some places the asphalt seems quite new also. So even if the imagery is some years old, there should be no need to upgrade (temporarily remove) the asphalt in the next 5 or so years.
SomeoneElse (2015-01-09 16:24:32+00:00): Are you sure that the imagery matches the current situation?  It was only edited a month ago.  One bad winter was enough to virtually destroy http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/99553670 near me, for example.
RM87 (2015-01-11 18:07:28+00:00): Just in case asked from the last editor what surface=dirt ment. It came out that he only splitted the ways to add tunnels. The surface tag was added 4 years ago.
SomeoneElse (2015-01-12 09:05:35+00:00): Hehe - so situation normal in the US (struggling to find a local mapper)!
ThalesVB (2015-01-31 11:01:11+00:00): Jovem, não querendo dar más notícias mas precisando, acredito que você confundiu um pouco a essência do conceito da tag "building"..
Ela deve ser usada somente para delimitar quando realmente o que o caminho fechado cerca é uma construção.
Neste Changeset, especificamente, aplicou esta tag em dois caminhos que delimitavam a área do lote (lote não é construção, nestes por exemplo os lotes também tem área de estacionamento) do Habibs e da Araújo. Notei este equívoco pois ia complementar estes dois estabelecimentos agora.

A primeira versão destes dois que você criou estavam corretos em relação ao guia de mapeamento do OSM, só esse 'building' da segunda modificação que num ficou joia.

Não posso dizer dos outros objetos que você modificou pois não passei perto deles, mas se for possível você revisá-los para que caso esteja delimitando o lote seja removido a tag building, a comunidade agradece.
mavl (2015-01-09 13:49:54+00:00): Здравствуйте.
Про магазин имелось в виду другое.
Сейчас магазин обозначен как территория landuse=retail, хотя на снимке видно, что это здание.
Поэтому, если этот магазин действительно существует:
1. Обозначить его как building=retail (здание, в котором находится магазин).
2. Добавить тег shop, который обозначает сам магазин (например, если это обычный продуктовый магазин, то  shop=convenience).
3. Слово «магазин» из тега name убрать (оставить только «Юбилейный» без кавычек, как было у вас раньше.
cadsauxk (2015-01-09 17:53:59+00:00): Você diz que alterou o tipo de building, no entanto toda a Avenida Cristiano Machado foi mexida. O que exatamente foi feito aqui?
artarts (2015-01-09 21:34:56+00:00): Sir Gerald, mais uma falta de atenção minha. 
Esse changeset não era para ter comentário. Eu iria comentar depois.  Deveria ter apagado o comentário que havia usado no anterior.

Eu não tenho tempo de ficar por conta do OSM obviamente, logo as vezes começo a consertar algo e vejo mais coisas erradas e saio ajustando. Normalmente alinhamento.

A avenida estsva muito desalimhada, só isso.
Como andamos sempre na pressa, as vezes o comentário não sairá bom.

Não sei qual a sua função em relação ao OSM, caso esse detalhe dos comentários ruins seja um problema, vou parar de fazer modificações em horários de pequenos intervalos que tenho ou estou aguardado algo, e vou tentar separar um tempo só pra isso, para assim poder gerar comentários de qualidade.

Sinalise.
Obrigado.
cadsauxk (2015-01-09 23:37:10+00:00): Assim como você, sou apenas um voluntário ajudando a manter o mapa. A diferença é que tenho 3 anos de experiência.

Minha pergunta foi apenas de curiosidade, mas também sei que você começou recentemente a mapear no OSM e portanto tem pouca experiência (o que não é nenhum demérito, mas é uma constatação de um fato). Por isto procuro ficar atento pois às vezes os usuários novatos assumem que tudo que não entendem deve estar necessariamente errado. 

Você diz que a avenida está muito desalinhada. Deaslinhada em relação a que? Se for em relação à imagem do satélite você está perdendo seu tempo. Sempre que a imagem é atualizada ela aparece levemente deslocada. Se formos realinhar as avenidas toda vez que mudam as imagens não faríamos mais nada. Se é em relação a outras ruas, uma variação de poucos metros é normal e não compensa mexer. 

Aparentemente, ao realinhar as ruas você acabou superpondo uma sobre a outra, o que vai causar problemas no roteamento e precisará ser consertado.

Como disse em minha mensagem inicial a você, procure não mexer no que está pronto, especialmente sem conhecimento. Temos muita coisa para mapear, se precisar de sugestões me contate em privado que terei prazer em ajudar.
mavl (2015-01-09 13:52:24+00:00): Спасибо.
Ещ
mavl (2015-01-09 13:53:20+00:00): Ещё обычно для зданий добавляется тег building:levels (количество этажей в здании). Например, building:levels=1.
muralito (2015-01-09 22:38:30+00:00): NOOOOOOO!!!!! Esto esta directamente equivocado. De ninguna manera se puede usar datos o imagenes de Google para agregarlos a OSM porque Google no lo permite.
neluy1611 (2015-01-10 00:40:33+00:00): Ok, no lo menciono pero el pasaje existe tal como lo dibujé, con solo mirar la foto aérea, te lo digo de otra forma, la imagen es de Bing (la base del mapa de fondo de OpenStreet) y el dato de que es Pasaje los Ceibos es de la Intendencia
RobJN (2015-01-09 20:26:37+00:00): Hi Dudley,
In the council data the track from Riddings lane is classed as a public bridleway - are you sure it only had yellow marker posts (i.e. footpath), or could they have been blue?
eggie (2022-02-14 08:06:50+00:00): Na jaren weer een bijdrage, maar nog geen welkomstmail ontvangen.. Bij deze Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
itineris (2019-01-05 18:58:09+00:00): Egészen biztosan a távvezeték végéből akartál körforgalmat csinálni?
muralito (2015-01-09 22:35:50+00:00): Tendrias que revisar expresamente la compatibilidad de agregar datos de MOTVMA a OSM. Lo que dice en http://sit.mvotma.gub.uy/shapefiles.htm (especificamente los puntos 2 y 4) parecen ser no compatibles. La resolucion ministerial puede verse en http://sit.mvotma.gub.uy/recursos/rm902-2011.pdf

Te invito a discutir el asunto en la lista talk-uy antes de seguir usando esta fuente de informacion.
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-09-01 19:48:47+00:00): Masz źródła na te warianty trasy balickiej? Podejrzewam że są one już nieaktualne.
Majki_Obbi (2017-09-01 19:59:33+00:00): Przebieg wariantu północnego został przeze mnie zaznaczony na podstawie warstwy "ochrona korytarzy transportowych" na urzędowej mapie Krakowa (http://krakow.pl/plan). Wariant południowy nie jest mojego autorstwa (zmieniłem mu tylko nazwę) i nie wiem, jakie jest jego źródło.
skyper (2015-03-09 13:42:38+00:00): Die gemeinsamen Fuß+Radwege von path auf cycleway zu ändern ist falsch, bitte wieder rückgängig machen.

highway=cycleway sind nur Wege mit blauem Fahrradschild und maximal "Fußgänger frei", alles andere ist path.
Minh Nguyen (2015-01-16 11:07:58+00:00): How recent was the change? When Wilmington got its bypass, I think it took a little while for ODOT to take all the signs down and hand the road over to the city and township.