piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:03:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:49:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
ravali_78 (2021-09-08 07:58:15+00:00): Hi Grab_Yen,
I have fixed crossing service highways.Kindly check way 242334826,way 244146015, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110893667.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110853076
danieldegroot2 (2021-09-07 16:33:49+00:00): Hey Nad_Alley,

Are you sure this is a house? It's recommended to tag with building=yes if you do not have local knowledge / have not surveyed it.

Regards,

Daniel
Nad_Alley (2021-09-08 15:31:47+00:00): Hi Daniel, the building=house tag was already present on this node 9057032316, and was added by another mapper. So, l transferred the node information on to the untagged building polygon as a best practice for retaining the SOMETHING.
Nad_Alley (2021-09-08 15:43:14+00:00): I meant to say: I transferred the node information on to the untagged building polygon as a best practice for retaining the existing information. However, if you are local and suggest that it should be building=yes, I can make those edits.
danieldegroot2 (2021-09-08 18:23:32+00:00): Ok. Thanks for the explanation.
rthik007 (2021-09-08 09:18:55+00:00): "Hi alina_deac,
Kindly remove the residential road way 980535005. as it is not leading to any destinations.
Changeset:110853942
Thank you."
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110853942
nyampire (2021-09-29 12:53:31+00:00): こちらも、位置参照情報のインポート作業に伴い、内容をレビューしました。

修正内容は基本的に、唐津市と同様です。

* 地理院地図で2箇所以上に表示されてしまう地名については、集落に近いほう、という観点から1つに統合しました。
* 位置参照情報に存在しない地名については、place=hamletにしました。
* "波多津町古場"という地名なのですが、もしかして"波多津町木場"が正しいでしょうか？ 一応、2つともオブジェクトとして登録していますので、どちらか不要なほうを削除できると嬉しいです。
rthik007 (2021-09-08 08:06:04+00:00): "Hi alina_deac,
I have Removed extra roads as they are not leading to any destinations.
""way 980539628
way 980539627""
Kindly check with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110901207.
Thank you"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110854952
eggie (2021-09-10 11:21:31+00:00): Dag Tilburg 
Zie foutmelding

warnings:crossing_ways:highway-highway

Je voetpad heb ik een verbinding gegevens met de toevoerweg naar de parkeerplaats.
De crossings heb ik verwijderd. Gebruik die alleen voor aangegeven voetgangers en fiets oversteken.
MVG
eggie
hackthemap (2021-10-22 23:26:26+00:00): Hi Radler_Ffm :)

Danke für deine Änderungen!
Der name tag ist nicht für die Art des Baumes oder um mehrere Bäume gleichzeitig einzutragen gedacht. Könntest du hier auf der Wiki Seite mal schauen und deine Eintragungen anpassen? Das wäre super!
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=tree?uselang=en

Viele Grüße
hackthemap :)
nevw (2021-09-07 13:16:27+00:00): Hi
Are you able to correct the Peel Park boundary or the buildings as they are over-lapping.
JeroenvanderGun (2021-09-22 19:13:37+00:00): HERHALING:

De huidige conventie is dat de name-tag wordt ingevuld op basis van de officiële straatnaam (per woonplaats vastgesteld door de gemeente).

Als je dat wilt veranderen, lees dan dit forumtopic en doe een concreet voorstel: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=73369

Bron: 4 augustus https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107070283

1. Je past name-tags aan tegen de huidige conventie in.
2. Je neemt niet deel aan de forumdiscussie over de tagging van namen van snelwegen, ondanks uitnodiging daartoe.
3. Je gooit waardevolle informatie over officiële straatnamen weg uit OSM.
4. Je stelt name-tags in die niet overeenstemmen met de source:name-tags.

Ik heb ook je nieuwe wijzigingen teruggedraaid. Nogmaals, neem deel aan de forumdiscussie als je de name-tags van snelwegen anders wilt zien.
tonyf1 (2021-10-17 06:34:49+00:00): reverted #112599226
BCNorwich (2021-09-07 16:50:41+00:00): Hi.Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Motor vehicles can be clearly seen on aerial imagery on Stories Mews, there's also a 20mph speed limit. This suggests that there is motor vehicle access. I would say the tagging should be access=private and remove the tag motor_vehicle=no.  This would restrict vehicle access to private use.

Regards Bernard.
vulasala (2021-09-08 06:45:21+00:00): Hi alex_curcean,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the classification of way 980544465 from residential to service, as the way giving access to single rooftop.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110856221
vulasala (2021-09-08 06:29:39+00:00): Hi traian_cozmi,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the classification of way 980545343 from service to residential, as the road giving access to multiple rooftops.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110856411
vulasala (2021-09-08 06:05:48+00:00): Hi monica_panciu,
Trust you are doing well. I have removed way 980547027, as the way is creating duplicated ways.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110856690
vulasala (2021-09-08 06:03:31+00:00): Hi monica_panciu,
Trust you are doing well. I have removed way 980547482 and way 980547483, as these ways are duplicated ways.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110856837
vulasala (2021-09-08 06:01:40+00:00): Hi monica_panciu,
Trust you are doing well. I have removed way 980548042 and way 980548043, as these ways are duplicated ways.
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110856933
alessandrocarmeli (2021-10-09 12:18:56+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/980548378

90 kilometers per hour on a narrow, winding road between a dangerous intersection and a residential area?
jeka p (2021-10-11 19:23:09+00:00): Acc. to traffic signs there - yes (acc. to the local legislation: maxspeed=90).
For the conditions, you have mentioned ("narrow, winding road between a dangerous intersection and a residential area") the following tag should be used: 
maxspeed:practical=
BR,
Jeka
Martin Borsje (2021-09-07 19:48:01+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
literan (2021-09-07 17:04:06+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9070402022/history

странно как-то. То есть пешком через шлагбаум никого не пускают, а на машине въезд свободный для всех? так не бывает
literan (2021-09-07 17:05:52+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/52657943/history#map=19/55.82141/37.50427

и здесь вы зря задублировали номер гимназии - название этой школы уже стоит на территории (что более корректно, т.к. стадион и прочее тоже является частью школы). Это исправлю.
Victor Talanov (2021-09-07 17:20:30+00:00): 1. По поводу шлагбаума - не уследил, нужно исправить. Закрыто только для машин.
2. Гимназия сейчас расположена в доме 3к1 (севернее). Туда же и переехал музей Зои и Александра Космодемьянских. В здании южнее сейчас академия мэрии Москвы.
literan (2021-09-07 18:14:36+00:00): тогда это будет bicycle=yes
foot=yes
motor_vehicle=private. Поправлю!
Victor Talanov (2021-09-08 06:49:26+00:00): Да, совершенно верно.
literan (2021-09-07 17:02:46+00:00): капсом пишутся только аббревиатуры
booktiger (2022-08-12 03:45:45+00:00): 您好，以自然景观为主的旅游风景区，请使用leisure=nature_reserve，而不是leisure=park。
参见：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:Tag:leisure%3Dnature_reserve
iamMY (2021-10-16 23:02:55+00:00): Hey Richa, please don't add details only in Malayalam. Add details in appropriate format. In India we are following the 'name:' tag to show the common name of the place/ shop/ road in english. And add the Malayalam name with 'name:ml' tag.

Check these links for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names
And check the naming guideline in india for different languages here, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India#Naming_in_different_scripts_and_languages.

And if u need any help, please join in osm Kerala telegram group, https://telegram.me/osmkerala.
vulasala (2021-09-08 05:04:53+00:00): Hi CristinaDragomir,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the classification of way 980550623 from residential to service as the area seems like a POI.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110857663
wolfgang8741 (2022-08-23 20:30:32+00:00): Please make sure when adding roads that intersect with water to set tunnel, bridge, etc instead of linking the water and road via a node.
user_13870642 (2022-08-29 07:58:07+00:00):  Hi,

Thank you for reviewing my changeset and correcting the edit.

Apologies for incorrect node connection. It's an honest mistake from my end. Going forward, I'll ensure to not repeat such errors again.

Thanks once again for fixing the issue, I'm looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
thopavai
pitscheplatsch (2021-09-10 14:40:54+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110851703
vulasala (2021-09-08 04:41:35+00:00): Hi traian_cozmi,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the classification of way 980551748 from service to residential, as the road giving access to multiple rooftops.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110857895
vulasala (2021-09-08 04:11:59+00:00): Hi traian_cozmi,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the classification of way 980554564 from service to residential, as the road giving access to multiple rooftops.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110858521
NM$L (2021-09-12 08:17:54+00:00): 问阁下，既然在该区域在接受调查，那么您为什么要先做出更改？
Why did you make the change first when this area is under investigation?
FreedSky (2021-09-24 07:51:00+00:00): DWG你们是调查还是拖延时间？眼见为实的道路以及 https://www.sentinel-hub.com/explore/sentinel-playground 可以搜索到的最新卫星图都是实打实的证据。
user_5359 (2022-01-28 11:46:22+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/980556145. What is the meaning of the tag yes=yes?
dee_ksha (2021-09-08 10:08:47+00:00): Hi alina_deac,
Kindly change the classification from service to residential  way 980556702
way 980556705
way 980556704
way 980556703. as it is leading to many destinations.
refer to https://osmcha.org/changesets/110858820.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110858820
MirceaIenciu (2021-09-08 13:44:39+00:00): Thanks for your suggestions!
Warin61 (2021-09-08 07:26:19+00:00): Err no.

The relation for the building .. err does not work. 
The bridge .. layer=2 .. means it goes over the building? And then you have it as an inner in hte building relation .. clearly the building goes over the road... 

Questions
Does the road remain at 'ground level'? If so then the road can be left at level=o, no bridge. The building can be raised over the road as layer=1. No relation is required.
Diacritic (2021-09-08 07:52:35+00:00): Hey Warin!

I wish it was that simple :)

Firstly, Crown doesn't sit on a flat block of land. It's got multiple "street level" entrances that are at different heights and elevations. Yarra Promenade is much lower than Whiteman Street, for example, and lead to different levels of the complex.

On the physical Ground level on the Whiteman Street side, we have Whiteman Street, the entrances to the undergound carpark, and a casino level. For whatever reason, this existing way was labelled as 'Level 2'; I didn't want to change it and mess with the order of things. From what I can tell, it is level 2, because it sits on top of the Yarra Promenade walkway and the carpark entrances on the south side of Whiteman.

Now, immediately above the casino floor is another casino floor (believe it's a double height first level, and you have the nightclubs and crown towers above it). In between the two  'third levels', there is the bridge for Kings Way which cuts through the building. (fwiw, building was built around it, but that doesn't really matter) 

On top of the Kings way Bridge is the higest level of the building. 

This enclosed passage, within a building, is why I used the tunnel=building_passage tag.

I intended to, in effect, "cut" the tunnel from the lower level of the crown building, but leave the higher level above it. If I have tagged this incorrectly, or have missed anything, I am more than happy to amend it.
Warin61 (2021-09-09 12:54:30+00:00): The real world is complex. 

My simple thinking says;
bridge = over something
tunnel = through something.

So I think tunnel is better? No reason why the 'tunnel' cannot be on layer=2.

The building can be layer=0 'ground level' where ever that is for the building over all. 

The building roof can be mapped as building:part=roof, layer 4 so as the tunnel has something over it. Other building:parts can be added for other levels/layers. 

Think it through before you make any changes.
Warin61 (2021-09-09 12:55:34+00:00): Oh, the above would have no OSM relation for the building, just simple ways.
Diacritic (2021-09-12 07:36:30+00:00): Hey Warin,

I've just adjusted the tunnel layer, but I worked out why the building is level 2: The driveways at the east side of the building near Queens Bridge Street. Not sure the best way to resolve this, without adding more detail/separating the parts of the building?
Warin61 (2021-09-12 10:41:08+00:00): Ok,
I'll have a look at it later and see if I can make some form of sense out of it.
Warin61 (2021-09-14 07:40:25+00:00): A problem is that the inner touches the outer in the building relation.

As the road is in a 'tunnel' then there is no need to put a inner in the building. This actually works against the building as it does not have a vertical hole in it .. and that is what an inner would be a vertical hole .. not a horizontal one. 

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.95765&lat=-37.82244&zoom=16

Note that OSM only has 5 layers, for a 100 story building these layers have to cover lots of floors.
Diacritic (2021-09-16 08:01:12+00:00): Thanks for your help Warin. I've just removed the multipolygon in #111277326; I think that resolves the issue? (Correct me if I'm mistaken)
dee_ksha (2021-09-08 09:17:55+00:00): Hi monica_panciu,
Trust you are doing well. I have gave the classification of way 980559616 which is untagged. Kindly refer https://osmcha.org/changesets/110859290.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110859290
dee_ksha (2021-09-08 08:34:42+00:00): Hi sergiu_arciudean,
Trust you are doing well. I have changed the classification of way 980560033 from residential to service, as the path leading to place_of_worship. Kindly refer to https://osmcha.org/changesets/110859393
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110859393
sergiu_arciudean (2021-09-08 08:52:12+00:00): Hi dee_ksha,
 Thank you very much. 
 I wish you a good day.
King regards,
Arciudean Sergiu
SomeoneElse (2021-09-12 10:29:05+00:00): Just for info - the DWG had a report that the names used here (which included "privé") weren't accurate.  I had a long email discussion with https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bide2 resulting in https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5314 about https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only , but they remained unconvinced.  If you're sure that "Bois (privé) de la Garde" really is the name here, then fine - but I can't see how it can have come from OrthoHR?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2021-09-12 10:30:34+00:00): Juste pour info - le DWG avait un rapport selon lequel les noms utilisés ici (qui incluaient "privé") n'étaient pas exacts. J'ai eu une longue discussion par e-mail avec https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bide2 résultant en https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5314 à propos de https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Names#Name_est_juste_le_nom , mais ils sont restés sceptiques. Si vous êtes sûr que "Bois (privé) de la Garde" est vraiment le nom ici, alors très bien - mais je ne vois pas comment cela peut provenir d'OrthoHR ?
Meilleures salutations,
Andy
cquest (2021-09-12 15:40:28+00:00): Oups... I forgot to add "cadastre" for the name (without 'privé' of course).

That's an in-between solution which is not perfect.
We miss some rendering of private features that are not ways (points, polygons).
SomeoneElse (2021-09-12 15:46:19+00:00): If the name in real like doesn't include "privé" then it doesn't belong in OSM either...
LySioS (2021-09-09 20:04:43+00:00): Bonjour KB66,

Je fais suite à ta demande de véfification. Comment as-tu fais ton tracé de la nouvelle rue ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110859956
KB66 (2021-09-09 20:16:44+00:00): Bonsoir, comment ça ? Vous parlez de la souce de la donnée ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110859956
LySioS (2021-09-09 20:21:13+00:00): Oui, car sur votre changeset, il est écrit source: bd ortho ign mais elle n'est pas à jour. Sur les photos Esri, il y a un décalage par rapport à ce que vous avez fait. Donc je voulais savoir si votre source venait de trace GPS ou autre chose précis sinon je recale un peu mieux la rue à partir des photos Esri.
Cordialement
KB66 (2021-09-09 20:31:06+00:00): Ah oui je comprends mieux effectivement le tracé est fait à la main la donnée vient de l’IGN ma dernière bd Ortho date de 2018 et le lotissement n’est pas tracé. Du coup le placement des objets est approximatif.
Merci pour le calage.
LySioS (2021-09-09 20:37:18+00:00): De rien, j'en profite de vous avoir sous la main : d'après l'imagerie Esri (dans le menu sandwich de droite quand vous éditez) il y a une liaison entre la rue Pau Casals et Del la dû. Vous savez si c'est pieton uniquement ?
KB66 (2021-09-09 20:47:51+00:00): Il me semble que oui seulement piéton je confirmerai demain du bureau
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110859956
LySioS (2021-09-09 20:49:32+00:00): Merci, bonne soirée
KB66 (2021-09-10 05:08:50+00:00): Bonjour,
sur la BD_TOPO la jonction entre les deux rues a le champ ( Acces_VL) marqué physiquement impossible.
Bonne journée
LySioS (2021-09-10 11:49:44+00:00): Bonjour,
Je croyais que vous alliez sur les lieux :D
On laisse comme ça alors.
Bonne journée
dee_ksha (2021-09-08 07:45:57+00:00): Hi anda_reisnaor,
Trust you are doing well. I have gave the classification of way 980562962 which is untagged. Kindly refer https://osmcha.org/changesets/110860008.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110860008
jeslop (2021-09-07 15:00:28+00:00): Hola Morimaru. Sigues sin informar cuál es la fuente para los nombres que utilizas y si son nombres oficiales o solo conocidos por los usuarios de estos caminos por ejemplo. Te recomiendo leer esta página de la wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres
Saludos

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
Morimaru (2021-09-07 21:01:15+00:00): Muy buenas, perdona mi metedura de pata, debo eliminar los nombres oficiales y dejo solo los de aficionados con la etiqueta mtb:name, es correcto?
jeslop (2021-09-07 21:13:14+00:00): Hola Morimaru, gracias por colaborar y por responder. Efectivamente, la etiqueta name es para el nombre oficial. La etiqueta más correcta en este caso es de la de mtb:name si las sendas tienen nombres solo usados por los ciclistas y no son nombres oficiales. 

Saludos.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
Morimaru (2021-09-07 21:32:52+00:00): Tomo nota y mil gracias por la información.
danieldegroot2 (2021-09-07 13:09:36+00:00): *source=Maxar Premium Imagery (Beta);Japan GSI aerial imagery;Japan GSI seamless aerial imagery
ToniE (2021-09-07 13:27:53+00:00): Servus Carto-Students,

und willkommen zurück bei OSM.

Ich habe hier mal korrigiert:

Zwei Firmen im selben Gebäude?
Dann zwei Punkte in OSM mit den entsprechenden Angaben.

Zwei übereinanderliegende Gebäude ist nicht korrekt.

BTW: beide haben Hausnummer 11, wer oder was ist in Hausnummer 13?

Viele Grüße,
Toni
Carto-Students (2021-09-07 15:03:37+00:00): Hallo Toni,

Hampelt und Eckstein sind im Tiefgeschoß und KTH im Erdgeschoß. Beide im gleichen Gebäude mit „Am Schammacher Feld 11“
Was in der Nummer 13 ist kann ich nicht sagen. Aber ich schau mal vorbei.

Grüße
Holger
ToniE (2021-09-07 16:22:12+00:00): Danke Holger,

dann werde jeweils passende level=-1 und 0 (nicht layer) dran packen.

Viele Grüß,
Toni
Rainero (2021-09-10 16:07:15+00:00): Hallo toxinu,

willkommen bei OSM und danke, dass du mithilfst die Daten zu verbessern!
Bei dieser Änderung hast du aber ein Postleitzahl, die ich schon korrigiert hatte, wieder auf einen falschen Wert geändert. Die ganze Gegend hat die PLZ 81543, eine PLZ 81553 gibt es nicht.
Viele Grüße,
Rainer
toxinu (2021-09-10 16:38:19+00:00): Hi,
Perfect! Thanks you 😊
dee_ksha (2021-09-08 05:16:02+00:00): Hi bosotchinicolae,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the classification of way 980567845 from residential to service as the area seems like a service. Kindly refer https://osmcha.org/changesets/110860936.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110860936
11daf (2022-02-22 11:58:14+00:00): Приветствую!
После этой правки с карты на главной странице пропал домик. Вот этот: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40880524

Не могли бы Вы исправить?
literan (2021-09-07 16:58:25+00:00): на односторонних дорогах direction не нужен - он по умолчанию форвард
Minh Nguyen (2022-09-07 01:17:10+00:00): access=private private=employees is a more accurate way to express the restriction than access=no, which means that no one (other than perhaps emergency personnel) can access the facility. If a routing engine is sending users onto the tarmac, the routing engine should be given a more specific waypoint than the middle of the airfield, such as a terminal or terminal door.