piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
emvee (2020-02-29 19:09:04+00:00): Bonjour,

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:bicycle%3Duse_sidepath, "bicycle=use_sidepath", "bicycle=use_sidepath" est interprété par les routeurs comme "bicycle=no" donc s'il n'y a pas de piste cyclable séparée mappée, aucun cycliste n'est autorisé. Cela signifie que la combinaison de "vélo = use_sidepath" avec "cycleway = *" n'a pas de sense.

NB: I use google translate to translate to French, this is the original text:

"bicycle=use_sidepath" is interpreted as by routers as "bicycle=no" so if there is no separate cycle track mapped, no cyclist are allowed. That means the combination of "bicycle=use_sidepath" with "cycleway=*" does not make sense.
Al Harawi (2020-03-03 02:43:32+00:00): I corrected tags but now we are in a funny situation of aving a road forbidden to cyclists with a bike lane on both sides.
emvee (2020-03-03 23:16:27+00:00): > but now we are in a funny situation of having a road forbidden to cyclists with a bike lane on both sides

Can you give an example? Maybe I can help to clean up the situation.

Greetings
Al Harawi (2020-03-05 20:00:11+00:00): This road (N1) :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30581636
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30581770

This is a dual carriage way. It's normally forbidden to cyclists by French traffic law but... there is a mandatory cycle lane painted on both sides : cyclists are not allowed to used that road... but... they can use (and only use) the cycle lanes on both side. It's the same for the south end roundabout (Crique Fouillée), there is a cycle path on the side and a cycle lane painted on the right side of the roundabout (normally forbidden to cyclists 'cause dual carriage way, but cyclists are allowed on the cycle lane by traffic law).

Going southward, there is cycle lanes painted on both side of the N1, up to the D198 (normally forbidden to cyclists 'cause dual carriage way, but cyclists are allowed on the cycle lane by traffic law).

I decided not to map the Crique Fouillée roundabout and N1 lanes because there is a more secure path, on the west side : a bidirectionnal cycle/footpath to the D198.

It's a very peculiar case. No where else they would have done that... But it's the main cyclist way between Matoury and Cayenne. And it is really used by cyclists. I prefer to use "side roads" like D198, Route du Larivot, Rue Gilles Behary Laul Sirder, Rue Raoul Tanon de Pelissier
emvee (2020-03-05 20:52:28+00:00): For a cycleway that is part of the way the should not have "bicycle=no" as that would make also the cycleway not accessible. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Cycle_lanes_in_oneway_motor_car_roads

So I think "bicycle=no" and "foot=no" should be removed from both ways.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#France, by default the dual carriage ways tagged as "highway=primary" are still allowed for cycling and walking.

If you like to indicate a road is not preferred for cycling, use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:class:bicycle
Al Harawi (2020-03-12 12:19:34+00:00): I passed by this road on monday. There is no bicycles forbidden sign. I will update it accordingly.
emvee (2020-03-12 22:03:54+00:00): Nice, always good to check it on the ground!
user_11166885 (2020-05-25 11:15:07+00:00): Why have yougot reverted? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Friuli-Venezia_Giulia/Strade_Provinciali#Provincia_di_Udine
user_11166885 (2020-06-15 13:29:00+00:00): Rispondi
Rom1 (2020-03-03 09:35:20+00:00): Hi, I've reverted this changeset and also this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81561605 because population is described on relations. Thanks
Kovoschiz (2020-02-27 19:33:45+00:00): Can you explain what and by what standards you are doing? A lot of them are not "stub ends", and provide useful information.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/81561425
GeoJess (2020-02-28 00:22:52+00:00): Hi Kovoschiz,

Thank you for bringing this up. We've recognized this error and have reverted the changes:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81565535#map=15/22.4331/114.0048&layers=H
Firefishy (2020-02-27 20:39:46+00:00): Awesome edit! Thank you for your great local knowledge.
HermanCTA (2020-02-27 21:04:01+00:00): Greatest of pleasure.  Will add some more to get the map as complete as possible.
user_242798 (2020-02-27 19:47:57+00:00): BAD sequence...
(3/11/09):
highway=cycleway
(4/17/16):
highway=path
bicycle=designated
foot=designated
(3/30/18)
highway=path (INCORRECT DELETING NOT NEEDLESS TAGGING!)
(8/3/19)
highway=service (complete and utter nonsense!)
segregated=no (complete and utter nonsense!)
surface=asphalt (complete and utter nonsense, VERY Unlikely, UNLESS Changed recently)
AnkEric (2/27/20)
highway is AND Hiking route AND access to Restaurant AND delivery (restaurant)
AND - most likely - ALSO bicycle=yes
- highway=track
- tracktype=grade2
- surface=fine_gravel
(Schiermonnikoog: NO MOTOR_VEHICLE UNLESS EXEMPTION)
trigpoint (2020-02-29 13:08:48+00:00): Hi, the video you have used for this section is rather old. For example the line still has semaphore signalling. At least on conditional speed limit sign, just south of Wem station, is not shown on this video.

The continuation of the video you were using south of Shrewsbury is much more recent.

Cheers Phil
JJJWegdam (2020-03-01 21:16:59+00:00): Good evening, for all sections I try to use the best quality videos. If you know a better video for the section, could you perhaps provide me with the YouTube link? I'll use it to improve the tags. Thank you in advance.
Best regards,
Jeroen
trigpoint (2020-03-02 07:11:34+00:00): For this line https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttS7a20MR7E and its follow on, are much more recent.

Cheers Phil
aixbrick (2020-02-28 15:45:28+00:00): Danke, ein paar Korrekturen habe ich noch vorgenommen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81597114 (hier sind auch Anpassungen drin, die mit deinem Mapping nichts zu tun haben).
Die Adresse bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7245993346 habe ich komplett entfernt. Metzgerstraße 4 kann nicht stimmen. Die Adresse gibt es nämlich bereits hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/168358706.
DaveF (2020-02-27 22:56:21+00:00): Hi Mark
Why have you deleted this landuse polygon?
If it's owned/used by a railway company for 'railway' purposes then it's a valid addition to OSM.
if the area demarcated is inaccurate then it should be amended, not removed.
Mark Goodge (2020-02-28 07:30:13+00:00): Hi Dave,

I deleted it for the reasons mentioned in the submission comment: landuse=railway isn't appropriate for an entire passenger station area (as per the wiki), and other stations (particularly parkway stations, such as Oxford Parkway) aren't mapped in this way. The land use isn't railway, it's parking, verges, paved areas, grass, etc.

The polygon was originally added to demarcate the construction zone for the station, and was tagged accordingly, and then when construction ended I retagged is as commercial rather than construction. But now the station is fully open it needs to be tagged in the same way as other stations, and that polygon wasn't really appropriate any longer.

I''m working my way through a series of updates to Worcestershire Parkway, and adding some more appropriate polygons to demarcate the station frontage is part of that. But it's difficult at the moment as it's not yet on the aerial imagery so I'm having to go by my own visits to the station, which is time-consuming. This is a work in progress.

Hope that answers your questions.

Mark
FraukeLeo (2022-07-14 09:26:17+00:00): Hallo Camazoz, ist die Mühlengrundhütte eine während der Saison bewirtschaftete Unterkunft mit Übernachtungsmöglichkeit fernab jeder Zivilisation? Wenn nicht, bitte amenity=shelter benutzen, nicht tourism=alpine_hut. Siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:tourism%3Dalpine_hut
mariotomo (2020-02-27 20:11:49+00:00): (East of … )  ;-)
woodpeck (2020-07-07 12:12:49+00:00): Hallo Andreas, Du hast das Tempolimit von https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48453714 von "60;50" auf "50" geändert. Ein Mitarbeiter der Allianz-Versicherung hat dem FOSSGIS geschrieben, das Limit sei aber 60. War Deine Änderung eher "geraten", oder hast Du tatsächlich eine 50 beobachtet?
Andreas Binder (2020-07-07 17:12:02+00:00): Geraten zwar nicht, habe aber anscheinend ein Maxspeed-Schild  übersehen (habe gerade meine damalige Videoaufnahme nochmal durchgesehen und auch mit mapillary verglichen) und zwar wechselt die Straße ab der Querung vom Rosenbach auf 60 km bis kurz vor der nächsten westlichen Kreuzung. Habs mal so gemappt https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/823902396 und werde in die Meldung https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2249246 noch eine Info ergänzen.
szydzio (2020-03-05 08:46:45+00:00): Hej warmia123! Zwróć prosze uwagę żeby nie tworzyć budynków z obszarów, jak np. tutaj: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/776848695/history
szydzio (2020-03-05 08:53:33+00:00): Hej warmia123! Zwróć proszę uwagę na swoje komentarze do zmian w kontekście https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Komentarze_zestawu_zmian
alphensebezorger (2020-02-28 10:27:09+00:00): Hallo Sander,
zijn de velden die je hier toevoegt, gebaseerd op recente waarnemingen? In verband met de aanleg van de Zanderij is het sportpark op de schop gegaan. Vijf maanden geleden zijn hier juist sportvelden verwijderd, zie bv. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29105922/history.
Vriendelijke groet, Alphensebezorger.
sander79 (2020-02-28 10:41:37+00:00): Mijn satelietbeeld was inderdaad te oud (de nieuwe weg was al wel zichtbaar)

Ik zal er voortaan beter op letten, bedankt voor je opmerking. Ik heb de wijziging aangepast.
szydzio (2020-03-05 08:48:29+00:00): Hej warmia123! Zwróć prosze uwagę na swoje komentarze do zmian => https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Komentarze_zestawu_zmian
LockOnGuy (2022-09-03 23:39:10+00:00): Why did you change the name of this node to Kurdish from Arabic? this area is all Arabs why the Kurdish name?           
Anyway, I deleted it as its wrong..
Frans S (2020-03-05 11:20:10+00:00): Hello Rob. Thanks for mapping on this test project.
A remark. You mapped quite a lot of highways as residential. fyi. This tag is to be used in residential areas lig hamlets, villages etc. Here  unclassified, path or track should be preferred., I will change the taggings
best regards
Frans S (2020-03-05 11:25:58+00:00): further info. Most of the paths you tagged as residential are < 2 mtr wide and should be tagged as path.Zoom  in as far as possible (maxar 10 mtr zoom)
How to measure the width of a highway. Use the building tool and start creating a round building between the sidings of that road. In the info bar at the bottom you can read the width.
Best regards
Rob- (2020-03-15 14:07:44+00:00): Hi Frans,
Thanks for your feedback, and sorry for the delay in coming back.  This probably warrants a little discussion.  Though the highways are clearly residential in nature I’m happy with the value path.  I wouldn’t be happy with track (leading only to fields or similar) or unclassified (neither residential streets or tracks).
I accept that in this region the local requirement for highway=residential is that it must be wide enough for a two-track vehicle and not just a motorcycle, and I will take this on board.
At least the highways are now marked, enabling someone to get to a particular location quickly.  If they turned up in a two-track vehicle which couldn’t get through, they’d have to walk the last few hundred metres anyway.
I’m open to any comments you may have on the above.  Thanks again for your feedback.
Kind regards,
Rob
Frans S (2020-03-15 14:45:36+00:00): Hello Rob. Thanks for your reaction.
I Think it is important to forget our (european) view how  highways are situated, In  this part of Tanzania good quality highways are rare ( only main routes) Most of them are earth. 
As a matter of fact quite a lot of people travel by foot and use (when they can afford it ) motorcyle taxi's to the more remote areas. That's  why  I changed the taggings. I might be wrong, but I've been there  (Masaai country)  and have seen the local situation how they live and move around. I mapped them in line with other projects I helped mapping /validating in northern Tanzania.
Best regards
Rob- (2020-03-15 20:17:23+00:00): Hi Frans,
I don't want to overly prolong this dialogue but I think we’re agreeing on a lot here.
It’s precisely for the reasons you give that I regarded the highways as residential, being wide enough for the often-used vehicles in this part of the world, even though they are too narrow for some two-track vehicles.
I look at the function of the highway, not the quality.
If it’s useful to know the width, it can be explicitly tagged width=* rather than rely on some implied property.
I’m not going to get excited over whether the highways I mapped are tagged residential or path.
Incidentally, I forgot to thank you for letting me know about the changes you made.
With best wishes,
Rob
user_5359 (2020-02-28 05:34:27+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful when editing the map data. You moved the node https://www.osm.org/node/6521816243/history over 100 meters, so there were problems with the corresponding way.I move the node back to the original position.
Polarbear-repair (2020-02-29 02:46:59+00:00): This changeset has been fully reverted for the following reasons (DWG Ticket#2020022910000011):
- malicious deletion of river segment
- needless splitting of rivers
- removal of existing water bodies
- speculative landuse assignments and removals
- mechanical tag regression and removal of amenity tags
- armchair removals of small features such as barrier=wall tags
Glassman (2020-02-28 16:58:35+00:00): Tip: instead of using a descriptive name= tag, just use an appropriate tag. Based on your description tag, you could use landcover=ground. For a more complete list see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landcover
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/81564835
Tom van Dijk (2024-09-01 13:32:53+00:00): Beste Robin, waarom staat er telkens bij de winkels level=1? Ze staan toch op de begane grond en moeten dus level=0 krijgen?
Mvg
Tom van Dijk
literan (2020-02-29 12:59:36+00:00): кривая правка (касательно части дома в Москве). Это именно часть дома. Откачу.
user_5359 (2020-02-28 05:29:12+00:00): Hello! The causing changeset is https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=81052209. In my opinion you have corrected the error very well, but there are better tools than necessarily iD . Thanks for taking the trouble anyway.
Dr Kludge (2020-03-04 12:59:58+00:00): I don't understand your changes.  You have doubled up crossing information at major intersections on Scottsdale Road and removed traffic lights.  Please stop these changes.
TheEditor101 (2020-02-28 13:00:30+00:00): I don't think this building should be tagged as a sports centre, I thought it was just changing and storage facilities.

However, it may be appropriate to map the area around the building + sports pitches as a sports centre.
Polarbear-repair (2020-02-29 01:50:22+00:00): Dear cuchufleta,
why did you delete the shop node 6571876052 ?
Polarbear-repair (2020-03-01 21:37:09+00:00): Restored, no explanation given why it could not be in one of the factory halls.
Irma IRM-ED (2023-01-13 01:00:19+00:00): Hi InnerPace
Thanks for your contribution to OSM. I came across this area https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/776872923. I found some issue but am not sure as armchair mapper. 
Please come a look this coordinate (3.1776634, 101.6866381)
There’s an intersection between two railway rail in the same layer (layer -1). I do check various satellite imagery, it doesn’t clear. But after check you did survey in this area. Based on mappilary (https://rb.gy/vqbgey) the rail crossing west - west (seremban line) is more lower than main highway. The tunnel caused an issue with underground train in rail north - south (putra jaya line) route. Would you mind to recheck this location. I do believe you have knowledge about this area. Please feel free to discuss if you have any other suggestion?

Thank you
(https://maproulette.org/challenge/30169/task/145051597)
OuterPace (2023-01-13 15:37:05+00:00): I'll take a look at it
Irma IRM-ED (2023-01-15 23:06:07+00:00): Ok InnerPace, Thank you very much.
rab (2020-02-27 23:43:18+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7248744495/history
 It connects the road with the district border. You should unglue the node (shortcut g) and extent the road until here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4777471100
Please consider to tag this small unmaintained roads as track
skorpion62 (2020-03-05 12:00:26+00:00): Hallo NGL-engel,

ich habe gesehen, dass Du in letzter Zeit sehr viel nach Osmose korrigiert hast.
Nur konnte ich leider nicht feststellen, was Du korrigiert hast. Du hast oft nicht nur hier, sondern noch an anderen Stellen Fehler dieser Art dazu gemacht.

Hier hast Du eine Änderung in der Fußgängerzone vorgenommen, die überflüssig ist, denn Fußgänger dürfen immer in einer Fußgängerzone gehen. Jetzt meckert Osmose diesen Fehler an. Ob hier Radfahrer fahren dürfen weiß ich nicht, das ist aber fraglich, ist auch in jedem Ort anders geregelt.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81566566

In diesem Änderungssatz hast Du nur Punkte verschoben, gelöscht oder dazu gemacht, aber das sind  keine Korrekturen nach der Osmose-Karte.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81794832 

Ich glaube Du hast den Sinn der Osmose - Karte nicht verstanden.

Viele Grüße skorpion62
Warin61 (2020-02-29 02:37:35+00:00): Validator warnings in JOSM are merely an indicator that something might be wrong – but the validator may very well be mistaken.

In the case of land cover overlapping land use it is perfectly valid to have them overlap! Take all the validator warnings as just that an indication that something MAY be wrong and it should be checked. The validator in this case is mistaken. 

Why is the validator not more precise? Because of all the exceptions! Example.

Overlapping of land cover with another land cover is an error.

Overlapping of a land cover with another land use is fine, unless the land use includes a surface tag (and is therefore both a land use and a land cover). 

And so on...
ucMatt (2020-03-02 03:04:04+00:00): spruce cliff*
ralley (2020-02-28 07:03:58+00:00): Thanks for the edit but please don't repeat the object description/attribute in the name field: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/81568735
pantufla (2023-03-27 14:59:59+00:00): Hola Alberto, hoy estuve investigando en la wiki y estos nodos van al final de la calle ciega: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1905650236

Son para que los sistemas sepan que esa calle no continúa y está bien así. No sé si querías representar si era un acceso cerrado?
Allison P (2021-02-12 18:08:10+00:00): Some of the service roads added incorrectly capitalized the value of access=* to Customers. This is not recognized by most data consumers.  Would you mind fixing the value? Thank you!
naaitha (2021-02-15 10:59:32+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for looking into the edit. I have made necessary changes under changeset #99302867. Looking forward to learn more from you.
Regards,
naaitha.
DUGA (2021-05-06 14:24:16+00:00): The quality of these building you added may need improvement.
DUGA (2021-05-06 14:25:08+00:00): Also please check multiple imagery sources before drawing anything here. Bing is mostly unreliable in rural PA.
geow (2020-02-29 16:09:29+00:00): Namaste osmPathway, you have added more than 60 schools here. May I ask for the source of your additions?
I ask because some are probably misplaced, like here https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7249302286 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7249302287

In addition, amenity=school should preferably be mapped on the school grounds and not as individual nodes or buildings.

Thanks for your feedback!
osmPathway (2020-03-01 06:08:09+00:00): Namaste Geow, The source of our schools addition is OSMTracker based field data collection. We will recheck the misplaced POI in the links you shared. Also, we will go through each POIs before uploading. Thank you very much for your feedback.
!bm (2020-02-28 13:23:14+00:00): Hello KraD_Berlin, welcome to OSM! The name you added had already been tagged on the property, way 51869993. Therefore, I have fully reverted your changes in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81592065 – if you have any questions concerning this, please feel free to ask. Happy mapping! --bestregards!bm
aceman444 (2020-10-10 00:25:24+00:00): Zdravim, zial tie polne cesty kreslite podla dost zastaralych snimok Bingu.
A podla akej dopravnej znacky napr. na ceste https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/776918651 maju motorove vozidla aj bicykle explicitne vjazd povoleny? Pokial viem zo zakona bezne na polnych/lesnych cestach nie su povolene.
eggie (2020-02-28 08:06:17+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
MVG,
Eggie
BCNorwich (2020-02-28 14:21:32+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
The recognised tagging the condemned building would be disused:amenity=townhall and remove the townhall:type=village tag. The name isn't (condemned) so that tag should also be removed.

Regards Bernard.
Myk Dowling (2020-02-28 16:16:44+00:00): Thanks, I'll fix that up.
Myk Dowling (2020-02-28 16:20:44+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81598552#map=19/-34.72214/149.18072
eggie (2020-02-28 08:08:14+00:00): dag Vrij John.. Geef svp aan wat je tags inhouden. Dus surfacetag en maxspeed toegevoegd.
oneway=no hoeft niet op reguliere wegen .
MVG,
Eggie
VRIJ-John (2020-02-28 08:15:32+00:00): surfacetag en maxspeed toegevoegd dit geld eigenlijk voor de hele Beilervaart.
eggie (2020-02-28 08:53:34+00:00): Oke.. bedankt voor je reactie.
Lokale mappers kijken in je commentaar wat je hebt bijgedragen. Daar staat "locale bekendheid".   dat zegt niets... Vandaar mijn opmerking.

mapse verder,
Eggie
VRIJ-John (2020-02-28 08:54:58+00:00): Prima, hou ik daar voortaan rekening mee.
bedankt !
user_5359 (2020-02-28 15:12:52+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have delete your SEO SPAM (mostly no standard keys, no verifiable data or not positive verifiable address data). If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data. For the most information in the description we have own keys. Please have look on the website http://wiki.openstreetmap.org.
dieterdreist (2020-06-22 15:31:35+00:00): Hi, I have seen you have added the tags "brand:en=Popular Bank of Sandrio" to a bank of "Banca populare di Sondrio". Can you please explain what your sources are? I did not find a brand of this name.
dieterdreist (2020-06-25 19:58:32+00:00): Hi bvivi, as you have not replied and the people that contributed to the discussion on the Itailan mailing list proposed to remove the superfluous tags, I have now done so. Please be careful when adding stuff semiautomatically. The reason it is not done automatically is that we are relying on the local knowledge of the people who perform the edit. If you do not know the situation, do not change it. You had added a brand:en="Popular Bank of Sandrio", but "Sandrio" does not exist, the city is "Sondrio", nor is the translated brand in use anywhere in the world.
h_i_ (2020-03-01 21:06:57+00:00): Hallo steamroller,
vielen Dank für deine Änderungen. Du hast versehentlich das Wartehäuschen der Hugo-Bürkner-Straße mit dem Park verbunden . Das das zwei ganz getrennte Objekte sind, ist es besser das auch getrennt zu halten, was ich auch gleich korrigiert habe.
Viele Grüße h_i_
eggie (2020-02-28 08:59:38+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.


review : eigenlijk hoorde name=ROTEB ook niet op alle gebouwen.
Beter Gemeente Rotterdam verwijderen. Die is waarschijnlijk de operator=

Het Gemeentebedrijf kan dan getagd worden op de adresnode. Dus maar één keer.
Kijk je nog even?

MVG,
Eggie