piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
rfuegen (2024-08-23 18:35:44+00:00): hi, I'm pretty sure that this was a mistake I made when I added this node a long time ago. "RR" is a "Riechrohr", "KH" is a "Kugelhahn", this is shown on the marker plate. so it most likely needs to be tagged as "name=RR 250" or "id=RR 250". unfortunately can't reach OSM wiki right know. Maybe I'll look it up later (pipeline tagging scheme) or please check other marker nodes in the vicinity, how they are tagged.
eggie (2022-03-25 20:07:34+00:00): Dag Schepers...  Je vraagt feedback. 
name=... kan prima,  maar in OSM 'moet' er dan wel de aard van de instelling bij.
Bv amenity=social_facility
social_facility=??? 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social_facility

Kijk je nog even?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-03-25 20:08:34+00:00): en nog een tip..  Gebruik PDOK actueel 7cm als achtergrond. Dat is een recente luchtfoto. 
Gr eggie
eggie (2022-03-25 20:01:11+00:00): Dag Luc  Zie dezde foutmeldingen
warnings:crossing_ways:highway-highway 	1
warnings:disconnected_way:highway

Je pad?  kruist een ander pad zonder verbindingsnode 
Het pad was eerst een waterweg. Weet je zeker dat het een pad is. 
Verder zit het pad aan de zuidkant vast aan de sloot en niet aan de weg.  Aan de noordzijde heeft het pad ook geen verbinding.
Kijk je nog even?
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-03-25 20:01:22+00:00): Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=118924151
eggie (2022-03-25 20:34:55+00:00): Bovenstaande 'fouten' verwijderd.. Ook intermittend verwijderd. Dat zal geen tag zijn die bij een pad hoort.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-03-25 20:36:56+00:00): De voorgaande mapper heeft hier een sloot gezien
survey & Bing 20-11-15

Loopt hier dan geen sloot langs het pad en/of andersom?
Leo Slager (2022-03-28 11:25:52+00:00): review:
Dat is correct.
Ik zie dat Eggie de tag intermittent ook verwijderd heeft. Dat heeft betrekking op een slootje dat af en toe droog staat. En hoort dus niet op een highway te staan.
marc__marc (2023-03-14 15:09:24+00:00): Hello,
I have read that you are sure of the changes you have made.
but it's not clear :)
- it seems to me that there is a confusion between layer and level
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13965411 https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13965412 https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13965409 are listed as building, I guess they are levels of the same building
Regards,
Marc
marc__marc (2023-03-14 15:15:54+00:00): please also read what's a good changeset comment to help other to understand the goal of the change, not how sure you are https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
archpdx (2022-03-25 21:43:46+00:00): Hi,
Thanks for adding cycleway/sidewalk tags in this area! However, it looks like this changeset changes this overpass back to what it looked like during construction. A person from Lyft updated this overpass a couple months ago using newer imagery than Metro (https://osm.org/changeset/115553656). The completed overpass can also be seen in Maxar Premium Imagery.

I remember there being a concrete median when I drove through here a couple weeks ago so I believe the dual carriageway on the overpass was correct.
rothg (2022-03-25 22:25:30+00:00): Thanks archpdx- we're digitizing off an official schematic and some drone photos from Clackamas County and this median was just hard to see. We'll change it back to a divided road.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-03-25 19:27:13+00:00): Thank you. Good work
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-11-07 16:03:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128599619 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint to the DWG, reverting some changes made by osmose.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/128063226 .
wireguy (2022-03-27 22:02:15+00:00): Andres,
way 1043857949 seems to be missing from 
Dique relation 11341441
can you investigate?
AngocA (2022-03-28 01:56:16+00:00): Thank you for the notificaion, I already corrected. Can you validate?
frasty (2022-03-25 20:46:04+00:00): Ciao, per nomi di sentieri conosciuti prevalentemente in ambito mtb va usato il tag mtb:name. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Mountain_biking
width invece è la larghezza del sentiero che di certo non può essere 1260 (metri). Immagino che si tratti della lunghezza (distance). Sono errori che avevo corretto ieri..
ALu68 (2022-03-26 09:05:06+00:00): Please do not set stupid values like building:levels=234
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1043861707/history

Thanks.
ALu68 (2022-03-26 09:10:18+00:00): Please have a look at the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours
kartler175 (2022-04-07 09:52:32+00:00): Elemente von Multipolygonen müssen Polygone, also geschlossene Ringe bilden. Einfach Polylinien (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1043863583
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1043863582
sind keine gültige Elemente von Multipolygonen.
berndw (2022-04-10 09:43:59+00:00): Hi
Wenn die offenen Linien in der Relation enthalten sind, wird der Wald nicht gerendert. Schneisen werden nur als eigenes Wegobjekt erfasst außer sie sind geschlossenen Flächen. Habe das korrigiert. Außerdem habe ich zwei Flächenverdoppelungen behoben.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119528680#map=17/50.04877/6.66103&layers=N
ALu68 (2022-03-26 09:11:06+00:00): ?????? building:levels=234567
ivanbranco (2022-03-26 08:29:29+00:00): Hi Miroslav,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12410221/history

I'm not sure, but I think you added a place=* tag instead of a from=* one, could you check it out please?
ottwiz (2022-03-25 20:19:19+00:00): *CDP = like regarding in the metropolitan areas it doesn't appear, only Charleston appears to be in the metropolitan CDP map
ottwiz (2022-03-26 21:28:46+00:00): I mixed the term with the MSA so this is Metropolitan Statistical Area
eggie (2022-03-25 20:50:04+00:00): Oke.. Dat is de specificatie.. Nu nog amenity=social_facility erbij.
Dan zul je een symbool op de kaart zien
eggie
eggie (2022-03-26 06:44:25+00:00): In ieder geval amenity=social_facility toegevoegd. Dat geeft nog wel een foutmelding, want daar hoort dan weer een specificatie bij social_facility=.....  Zie wiki..
Maar nu zal er wel een symbool komen en de naam zichtbaar worden.
Paar keer ctrl-f5 toetsen. 
gr eggie
SchepersZelf (2022-03-26 10:50:48+00:00): Bedankt Eggie

social_facility:for mental_health had ik (volgens mij) al toegevoegd

Groet SchepersZelf
eggie (2022-03-26 10:54:26+00:00): Klopt...  Maar de tag die de aard van de instelling aangeeft hoort er ook bij. Die heb ik zelf toegevoegd. Nu zie je ook het symbool.
Wat je hebt toegevoegd is prima. 
Groet eggie
ZLima12 (2022-03-26 16:26:50+00:00): Overall looks good, just a couple things I wanted to point out.

First of all, I'd recommend using the "NYSDOP Orthoimagery - Latest" imagery source when editing in the state. It's the most consistent imagery source, although some other sources (Mapbox, Bing) can have higher resolution in some places. I've seen imagery glitches in both Bing and Mapbox in some places, so I tend to only use them if I need higher resolution in certain places. Even then, I offset those sources to match the NYS imagery.

Also, if some paths through parking lots are a sort of "main" path (even if there are parking spaces on both sides), you can omit the parking aisle tag, which conveys their significance. It will stand out on the map and be preferable to nagivation apps.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118926688
ALu68 (2022-03-26 09:13:24+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:denomination
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:religion
user_8101879 (2022-04-04 15:04:32+00:00): Error : I changed no address in this changeset
Sylvain 🌶 (2022-03-26 09:31:43+00:00): L'attribut ground me semble plus approprié que l'attribut earth. Je cite le Wiki : ground = Pas de revêtement spécifique, le sol lui-même montre des traces du passage humain ou animal. earth = Généralement naturelle mais peut s'appliquer à des préparations de sol. Doublon de dirt
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118927227
Sylvain 🌶 (2022-03-26 09:36:49+00:00): Le sentier à côté de la N6 est partiellement mud seulement 1 mois sur 12 mois. Attribut inexact il me semble.
Pour l'attribut earth vs ground, voir le Wiki. Ground est plus précis. earth pour se référer à un sol compacté par exemple ce qui n'est pas le cas ici
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118927227
petitdragon999 (2022-03-26 17:39:08+00:00): J'avoue avoir pas mal hésité sur cet attribut, ok ça marche
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118927227
rjgambrel (2022-04-13 22:27:49+00:00): You have made a number of changes to cycyle/foot paths by removing tags that I carefully put on the day before your change. Did you look at the history of the way before making the change? It is customary to not remove information that has been added without trying to have a dialog with the mapper that added the information. Please respond to this so we can have a discussion about why you made your changes (which I think are wrong). Your changeset comment is not terribly helpful in explaining why you did what you did. If you look at my changeset history you will see that I am making extensive changes in Washington County to improve the tagging of cyclable paths.
benxparr (2022-04-14 00:00:24+00:00): I live in this neighborhood. This path is used as a footpath by residents moving around the development and should be treated as such. I would advise cyclists to take the roads and leave the path to pedestrians
rjgambrel (2022-04-14 15:04:22+00:00): Thank you for the quick response. About the specific changeset: local knowledge certainly trumps less local knowledge (I live in Henn cty). I would say this particular set of "sidewalks" is marginal and could go either way. Since we both use ID, I will use ID terms ... Whenever I see an asphalt "path" I generally mark it as "Cycle & Foot Path" assuming that the developers or city intended (designated) it for both uses. Whenever I see a concrete "path" I use either Sidewalk or Footpath. The former if the path is parallel to a street, the latter if it is not. Since this is a small neighborhood and the path is relatively narrow, I can see it being considered a sidewalk (not footpath).  I don't know if you know about the ID tool called "Show History Panel". I always have that visible so when I click on a feature it shows me who last touched it. If you select PeWu you can see what the various changes were. I would encourage you to always do that so you can see how your change relates to other changes. Another good practice is to reach out to other mappers especially if you think the edit they made is questionable. This helps all of us collaborate better. One last thought -- use the changeset comment to better explain what your change is about. Your comment just says "foot path" which adds no context. On this particular changes a comment like: "Removed cycle from path in neighborhood where cycling not allowed on sidewalks" or some such goes a long way to indicate why you did what you did. Happy mapping! We need as many as possible to make this map better!
ملاك ساقط (2022-05-02 18:54:15+00:00): Please add footway=sidewalk to mark the street-associatedness of a path.
user_5359 (2022-03-26 04:58:36+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Du hat in name:de einen unterschiedlichen Wert zu name eingetragen. Was ist der korrekte Wert? Die Filiale Nummer gehört übrigens nicht zum Namen sondern gehört in den Schlüssel ref (kurz für Referenz)
dirk24st (2022-03-27 12:52:04+00:00): Deutsche Post
yasslay (2022-03-26 00:35:58+00:00): Regarding the name change, should it be kept as it is now or renamed potentially to the Dover Bypass?
Nathan_A_RF (2022-03-26 01:05:33+00:00): If you can find a source that refers to it as that, though I've never heard the A2 from Lydden Hill to the docks ever referred to as "Dover Bypass" despite bypassing Dover. The latter part already has the name Jubilee Way too.
rmikke (2022-04-07 15:33:57+00:00): Hej :)
Tym dwóm aptekom dałeś ten sam ref:csioz:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9607502567
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9607462857
yasslay (2022-03-26 00:29:25+00:00): Thanks lots for these changes. I was going to get around to changing them at some point as well!
nevw (2022-03-26 03:17:08+00:00): Hi
this seems an unlikely location for an atm, but possible in the pedestrian areas below the spaghetti of city roads.
Can you confirm it's presence thanks.
hoserab (2022-03-25 22:23:40+00:00): ... and deleted an overlapping sidewalk added in changeset 118377318.
user_5359 (2022-03-26 20:08:31+00:00): Hello! Please have look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1044061403. What is the meaning of the tag FrohenFeld = Rauchbock?
Marcos_Itba_Kaart (2022-03-27 14:49:06+00:00): It was my mistake, i fixed it.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-20 14:20:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 150265070, 150261530, 150261385, 150261427, 150261374, 150261398, 150261463, 150262164, 150264883, 150261443, 150265293, 150265518, 150263711, 150261692, 150263544, 150263148, 150264695, 150263349, 150262918, 150264472, 150264284, 150261551, 150264090, 150262527, 150262687, 150263890, 150261413, 150261488, 150261509 where the changeset comment is: No reply to https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15936 , so we've taken a guess at what was likely derived from Google Earth (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149290548 admits to that use)
user_5359 (2022-03-26 20:09:27+00:00): Hello (again)! Please have also a look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1044063356. What is the meaning of the tag FrohenFeld = Rauchbock?
Marcos_Itba_Kaart (2022-03-27 14:48:56+00:00): It was my mistake, i fixed it.
eggie (2022-03-27 19:16:41+00:00): even ctrl_f5 een paar keer voor het effect
BCNorwich (2022-03-30 08:25:59+00:00): Hi, I've squared up some of the buildings, squaring up is easy to do and makes for a neater map. Also tweaked lots of nodes, (joining and or removing).
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-10-14 12:08:56+00:00): Czemu dodałeś i bran:wikidata=Q7205598 i not:brand:wikidata=Q7205598 do https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2914749379/history ?
ptarac (2022-04-09 14:51:34+00:00): Usunąłeś błędna relację i cały, poprawnie narysowany obiekt. To co wrysowałeś na podstawie ortofoto ma się nijak do rzeczywistości. Wersja, którą usunąłeś, była wyklikana na podstawie danych z terenu i aktualnego zobrazowania z Landsata.
Przywróciłem poprawną geometrię obiektu.
B_KSL (2022-04-09 16:55:32+00:00): Chyba przesadzasz. Relację tak, bo była niepotrzebna. Jaki to "cały, poprawnie narysowany obiekt" niby usunąłem? Bajoro zostało. Fakt, że dorysowałem po lewej stronie kawałek bo wyglądało (na podstawie zdjęć z geoportalu, które między innymi w źródłach wspominasz) że jest większe. Nic nie zniknęło, raczej przybyło. Po prawej stronie Ci geometrii zupełnie nie zmieniłem i po ostatniej Twojej zmianie ciągle jest jak było. Całe Twoje "wyklikanie" zostało. A skoro tym razem dodajesz, że to na podstawie "danych z terenu" to nie zostaje mi nic innego niż uwierzyć. Detale geometrii są mi obojętne, ważne że nie ma niepotrzebnej relacji
ptarac (2022-04-09 17:35:43+00:00): Ok. Fakt, że została jakaś osierocona relacja. Dobrze, że ją wyrzuciłeś. 
A skoro "detale geometrii" są Ci obojętne to ich nie edytuj. Nie musisz mi w nic wierzyć, bo podaje też Landsat :D.
https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser/?zoom=17&lat=53.53993&lng=14.7889&themeId=DEFAULT-THEME&visualizationUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fservices.sentinel-hub.com%2Fogc%2Fwms%2Fbd86bcc0-f318-402b-a145-015f85b9427e&datasetId=S2L2A&fromTime=2022-04-01T00%3A00%3A00.000Z&toTime=2022-04-01T23%3A59%3A59.999Z&layerId=1_TRUE_COLOR
B_KSL (2022-04-09 18:40:29+00:00): I tylko o to mi chodziło. Wywalić coś co nie ma sensu. Pech chce, że akurat bardzo szczegółowo, z detalami zwykle edytuję. Obojętność wobec detali dotyczyła tego konkretnego przypadku. Większość z nas czepiając się drobiazgów użyje z reguły geoportalowych zdjęć wysokiej rozdzielczości. Landsat, jak sam widzisz, cudownie dokładny nie jest. Jeśli na jego podstawie dałeś radę to "wyklikać" to gratuluję. Nieważne. Zrobiłem w miarę przyzwoicie na podstawie (być może przestarzałych) zdjęć. Poprawiłeś zgodnie ze swoją wiedzą i to jest ok. Nie mam nic przeciwko Twoim detalom ani faktycznemu stanowi. Rób jak uważasz za najlepsze, trzymając się przy tym reguł. Ale nie uzasadniaj swoich racji czy pretensji wątpliwymi argumentami. Błędy zniknęły, staw jest taki jak chciałeś = mamy lepszą mapę. I o to nam wszystkim chodzi. Miłego wieczoru!
ptarac (2022-04-09 19:54:42+00:00): Ten teren to jeden wielki plac budowy. W tym przypadku korzystanie z ortofotomap nawet sprzed kilku miesięcy się nie sprawdza. Po prostu. I tutal edycje robione przez "lokalsów" zazwyczaj lepiej oddają rzeczywistość. Staw nie jest taki jak chcę.  Wolałem poprzedni, bardziej naturalny. Teraz oddaje stan na gruncie więc jest taki jaki być powinien. Tyle i tylko tyle. Za wątpliwą i nieuzasadnioną uważam Twoją edycję. Faktycznie. Cel osiagnięty. Miłego!
legofahrrad (2022-04-08 22:41:33+00:00): CS reverted due to vandalism – https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119016675
eggie (2022-03-26 06:09:00+00:00): Dag Datema.. Je bedoeling is natuurlijk goed..  Gebouwen worden tegenwoordig periodiek geïmpoteerd vanuit het Kadaster.  Beter nier zelf intekenen.
Je kunt een aanvraag doen via het forum van OSM middels het draadje Verzoek BAG import.
name Parking garage  beter onder name=  gebruiken.
Hier wat leesvoer https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-03-26 06:15:09+00:00): Even als voorbeeld aangevraagd
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=858928#p858928
eggie (2022-03-26 06:39:35+00:00): Typo geïmporteerd  :)
FrankOverman (2022-03-26 07:17:51+00:00): https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=858932#p858932
FrankOverman (2022-03-26 07:18:47+00:00): Ik heb er een multi-storey van gemaakt: pas aub aan als nodig.

Ik heb die historic ook moeten verwijderen trouwens want de garage staat er overheen.
eggie (2022-03-26 07:31:01+00:00): Bedankt Frank..

En even voor Datema.. 
M'n toetsenbord kon mijn snelheid van typen niet bijhouden
Nog een typo Parking garage beter onder name= gebruiken. ,,,, moet zijn 'NIET' gebruiken.. 
Gr eggie
FrankOverman (2022-03-26 07:34:00+00:00): Ja, die 'name' had ik ook verwijderd bij het samenvoegen. We markeren dmv de juiste tags:
amenity=parking
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-20 14:20:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 150265070, 150261530, 150261385, 150261427, 150261374, 150261398, 150261463, 150262164, 150264883, 150261443, 150265293, 150265518, 150263711, 150261692, 150263544, 150263148, 150264695, 150263349, 150262918, 150264472, 150264284, 150261551, 150264090, 150262527, 150262687, 150263890, 150261413, 150261488, 150261509 where the changeset comment is: No reply to https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15936 , so we've taken a guess at what was likely derived from Google Earth (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149290548 admits to that use)
adamh (2022-03-27 02:41:10+00:00): Isn't there a toilet block at the south of the carpark? Maybe this element should have been moved?
cody0902 (2022-03-27 03:15:32+00:00): Oh, sorry. I checked the spot and there was no toilet block there. Have not checked the south of the car park. Edit was made through street complete. Will check in 10 min and undo and move. Thanks for the hint.
cody0902 (2022-03-27 03:58:14+00:00): Yes you are right it is on the other side of the car park. Will undo the change, than move the node into the right spot.
cody0902 (2022-03-27 06:54:39+00:00): Added the toilets in the south under changeset: 118969911.
Did it on the phone, will check at home using JOSM.
adamh (2022-03-27 10:39:35+00:00): Thanks for checking.
The source on your changest is 'survey' - so I assumed you'd actually been there to verify. If you're mapping from imagery you should set the source appropriately.
cody0902 (2022-03-27 10:55:11+00:00): I was there. So the source was right I was in the northern part of the parking lot. Did not see the toilets 100m down. But thanks for pointing out the toilets south. How far left and right am I required to check so I can use survey as a source and what source would I use instead if I am there but did not check 100m further south?
user_5359 (2022-03-26 05:02:26+00:00): Welcoem to OSM! Is ELV motors a shop http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:shop or office http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:office or a craft http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:craft ?
EBerseth (2022-03-26 21:16:00+00:00): Sorry, a bit new to OSM.  It is shop:bicycle
Mashin (2022-03-26 03:01:04+00:00): Hi David,
is there any particular reason for deleting Williams Park? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/43435887

https://www.brookfieldct.gov/parks-recreation/slideshows/williams-park

https://www.brookfieldct.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif341/f/uploads/williams_gurski.pdf
David Reik (2022-03-26 14:54:38+00:00): I just attempted to put in the Williams-Gurski Open Space boundaries more accurately than they were previously shown.  I retained the Williams Park, School Park and Gurski Farm sub-sets of Williams-Gurski Open Space.
marczoutendijk (2022-03-27 18:56:48+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5848
user_14250389 (2022-03-29 09:17:10+00:00): 非常感謝DWG的工作！感謝封鎖了這個破壞者！
keithonearth (2022-04-01 17:58:31+00:00): As this tram does not exist, I would like to remove the tag from this roadway. Have you gotten the results from this test yet?
keithonearth (2022-06-02 22:14:16+00:00): I was looking over the OSM wiki on Demolished Railways, and see that this may be correct usage of the `razed` tag, although there seems to be some dispute about the use of such a tag, and assuming that there was indeed a tram here at one point. 

In any case, I'm ok leaving the tag, if there are no objections from other editors.
Warin61 (2025-10-14 10:03:58+00:00): HI,
place=farm on a node does not render, possibly with a name it will. 
My personal preference is to tag a way for the homestead as building=farm possibly with a name from DCS Base Map. The farm name is probably the same but as a node it contains not much information, the building at leasts indicates a place of contact.
bob3bob3 (2025-10-14 19:38:58+00:00): Interesting. You are unfortunately talking about thousands of nodes that I have mapped this way. I also remember a talk-au discussion ([talk-au] Country homesteads April 2022) on place vs landuse, where I enlisted the help of another OSM member to change all my landuse nodes to place. You actually made a similar comment to this one on that thread. This changeset is actually prior to the mass change as all the farm nodes are "landuse".

Named nodes do in fact render on the OSM GUI (and my mkgmap GPS) and it is unusual for me to leave a farm nameless as most have been gleaned from street imagery of access signs. Personally I like the vague location that gets displayed as it suggest a wider land use. Farm building type & location choices from overheads are also a bit risky IMO.

I am also quite wary of using DCS base farm names, nowadays really only using them as a spelling cross-check for a sign photo. So many are now just wrong. I also had an interesting discussion with a farmer about the "recent & unethical" practice of renaming a farm from the original that (he said) seems to happening more and more. For a while there I created some nodes with a fixme that were DCS name based mainly so my GPS would prompt me to record a note, but now I have a different mkgmap method. I suspect that the node you are referring to has in fact a missing name fixme.

So I guess thanks for your comment/ideas but I don't think there is a compelling reason to change my work method. 

Cheers
TheSwavu (2025-10-15 02:31:39+00:00): There's almost 8,000 place=farm in AU. It's probably a little to late to change.

By the way, just because something doesn't render, doesn't mean that you should tag it otherwise.