piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
gyotoku810 (2021-02-23 04:18:25+00:00): ご返信ありがとうございました。リンク先資料を拝見し、あなた様の編集の意図も理解いたしました。こちらこそお手間を取らせてしまい申し訳ありません。今後とも宜しくお願いいたします。
mueschel (2021-02-26 12:50:43+00:00): Hi,
what does 'arriva:id' mean? This tag is not used in other places. Reference numbers are usually tagged with a 'ref:XYZ' tag.
aceman444 (2021-03-01 01:03:27+00:00): Hi, it is my own note about the variant of the route as e.g. Bus 20 can have different variant routes (they correspond to the numbers in the top row of the timetable at https://arriva.sk/files/tt/cp/mhd/piestany/2021/204120.pdf). I think ref:XYZ would mean a different number for the bus line itself, just for a different operator. Or can you link to which meaning exactly you refer to on the wiki? I would love if there is a standardized tag for this as I already used it in multiple cities in Slovakia where I manage the public transport network.
Note_Fixer (2021-02-22 01:12:10+00:00): note #1116701
Note_Fixer (2021-02-22 01:14:08+00:00): Note 2273732
blackboxlogic (2021-03-16 01:52:50+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I see you added the tag name="Former Right Aid" but I'm sure that's not the name of this place. I've updated it to old_name="Right Aid" which is what I think you were trying to communicate.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99705825
mweper (2021-02-22 13:18:28+00:00): What is the reason for this massive change of labels?
Before adding edits like this, please discuss with the community about it. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
Personally I prefer "contact:" to the old tags, but not everyone will agree and several applications that use this data will no longer represent it correctly.
Mxdanger (2021-02-24 17:50:59+00:00): Simply the reason for this change is to reduce tag fragmentation and improves data compatibility with applications that only use the far more common prefixed social media. Additionally, as no one else has seemed to tackle it yet, I may write up a proposal to formally deprecate the use of the non-prefixed social media keys along with a discussion for systematically updating the keys. Until then, the cleanup of the fragmented keys is halted.
Note_Fixer (2021-02-22 02:14:44+00:00): Note 2157539
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-02-22 03:32:27+00:00): reverti todas suas úlimas edições que continham deleções de elementos que foram criados por outros usários e que existem de fato.
aweech (2021-02-22 17:42:46+00:00): Hi, 
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Do you know much about this bridge? The last document I could find online said that the NHDOT would be salvaging the old bridge and the town would be building a new one. Is that process complete?
jollyprez (2021-02-22 19:36:21+00:00): Hi - yes, I live in this town. There was an old truss bridge there 15 years ago, that was torn down, and a new covered pedestrian bridge is there now, using the old piers. Really nice.
aweech (2021-02-22 21:22:42+00:00): Thank you for your response! I'll fix the access tags on it to make sure that pedestrian and cycling routers know what to think of it. Happy mapping :)
SekeRob (2021-02-26 06:34:08+00:00): Hi
I corrected a typo on your suburb code line and OSM now wants to know what the point really is. If it is to mark a suburb, a key like place=suburb is needed as well.
Let me know. 
ciao
aharvey (2021-06-10 02:38:35+00:00): I'll remove this node because the shopping centre is already mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/115809851 and per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#One_feature.2C_one_OSM_element there should only be one element in OSM for this.
aharvey (2021-06-10 02:41:01+00:00): On second look, I've left the node which has an address and just removed the tags for shop=mall and name since these are already mapped. If the address here is for the whole shopping centre then add it to the existing Westfield outline, otherwise if the address is just for this location here it can remain.
clay_c (2021-08-23 19:53:00+00:00): Hi Tom Hogan,

Thanks for contributing your local knowledge. Unfortunately I've reverted this changeset because railway=station is only appropriate for passenger stations. Crew change points, as employee stations, should be tagged railway=service_station.

Reverted here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110135380
ElliottPlack (2021-03-15 03:29:05+00:00): Hello there. Please explain your reasoning for upgrading these roads to trunk, especially Charles Street. It is well established that only partial access control highways are trunks. You've also broken some of the relations here along the bridges over the beltway. Please be more careful editing. We'll have to roll back this changeset, as well as some others that are causing routing troubles. Please consider reaching out to the community in a comment before making drastic edits to existing roads.
Ludhiana (2021-04-02 20:10:17+00:00): Hi Arthur,
IMHO the current data inside OSM is already better than the generalized Large Scale International Boundaries (LSIB) dataset.
WoodWoseWulf (2021-02-22 20:28:48+00:00): Hi Ben1511,
Welcome to OSM!
I'm curious as to what are you trying to do here? 
You've got two parks intersecting each other, as well as covering a fire department and passing through roads.
Would you like some help?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99707326
iandees (2021-02-22 14:28:28+00:00): Thanks for adding these names and addresses to OSM. Looks good!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99707544
user_5359 (2021-02-22 05:38:13+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please move your node from the street to main building!
yadathot (2021-02-22 03:44:57+00:00): Edited Highway tag as per Private Maxar imagery.
pio2_122 (2021-02-22 11:39:18+00:00): Uwaga była zasadna: W jakiś sposób zmieniłeś tag source:maxspeed na building - https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/228962946
Poprawiłem
mariotomo (2021-02-22 19:10:20+00:00): Hi YouthMapper corrector!  I've been following this activity from a distance.  I'm positively impressed by amount and quality of the correction of your team.  I do wonder how come all those "duplicated buildings" were not noticed by the initial QA team.  It would be highly useful to have an evaluation, to avoid making the same mistakes in the future, possibly aiming at reducing the amount of errors reaching the final QA check.
mariotomo (2021-02-22 19:17:02+00:00): (one important mistake you have made as a team, that you haven't yet fixed: all your buildings follow the current Maxar alignment, and you did not previously move the roads to match that.  you can still to it now quite easily with JOSM, simply displacing all nodes attached to roads, that haven't been touched after your mapathon.)
mariotomo (2021-02-22 19:20:11+00:00): (although Via Dr. Belisario Porras is already aligned to Maxar. you will need to play a bit with the Ctrl-F tool in JOSM.)
amymack (2021-02-23 03:34:25+00:00): Hi @mariotomo, thank you for your feedback! I will make sure to point out these issues/suggestions to the rest of the team.
Carnildo (2021-02-22 05:10:04+00:00): There are a number of major errors here:

1) You added a group of roads, but failed to connect them to the larger road network.
2) You tagged them as "living street", but two of them are residential roads and the third is a driveway.
3) You added three parks that aren't parks, they're fragments of a golf course.
4) You tagged a number of houses as having four levels, when they have either one or two levels.
5) You tagged several garages and sheds as "residential buildings".
6) The quality of the building outlines are quite low, bearing only a vague resemblance to what's actually present.

Please be more careful in your mapping.
Glassman (2021-02-22 19:16:32+00:00): landuse=greenfield is for future construction. The park is already named including with wikipedia tags. I removed your edits. If this area is going to be developed in the near future then landuse=greenfield would be appropriate.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99710049
Irma IRM-ED (2021-07-18 23:48:59+00:00): Xin chào dee_ksha,
Hãy tin rằng những gì bạn đang làm là đúng.
Tuy nhiên, có một số điều tôi muốn hỏi.
Phân loại đường này https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/909482400 có phù hợp không?
Làm thế nào về phân loại đường "chưa được phân loại"
cảm ơn bạn
dee_ksha (2022-04-18 12:22:50+00:00): Hi Irma IRM-ED,
Trusting you are doing well.
Someone has created the way with the correct classification as Unclassified and the data looks fine now. Thanks for reviewing the data.
Glassman (2021-02-22 19:18:07+00:00): #TIP: I believe you want amenity=parking. I don't recall any car pooling in the ID but could be wrong. Can you fix this?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99710539
Glassman (2021-02-22 19:20:28+00:00): The building is already tagged as an association. I removed the duplicate node.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99711057
Glassman (2021-02-22 19:22:27+00:00): The area is already tagged as paking.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99711208
Glassman (2021-02-22 19:23:46+00:00): #TIP: individual trees are tagged as nodes with the tag natural=tree. I changed this one. natural=wood is tagged as an area.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99711289
Glassman (2021-02-22 19:25:18+00:00): There already is a crosswalk here. I removed your footway.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99711445
ina_humeniuc (2021-03-16 12:54:23+00:00): Hello,
Just wanted to ask what source did you use to do the dual carriage. Is it possible you have local knowledge? Because on Bing imagery there is no way to see clearly if the road is dual or not.
Thanks
Glassman (2021-02-22 19:27:02+00:00): There already is a restaurant, Boiling Point, in this building. Is this another restaurant? If not can you remove your node. If there is can you add the detail of the restaurant?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99711736
GerdP (2023-07-19 12:53:39+00:00): Moin aus Wildeshausen!
Ich bin vor ein paar Wochen u.a. auf der 3-Seen-Route unterwegs gewesen und habe dabei diverse Knotenpunkte im Ammerland "gesammelt". Wieder zu Hause erfasse ich jetzt den Verlauf in OSM.
Beim Mappen fällt mir auf, dass am Knotenpunkt 75 https://www.osm.org/node/367363050 eine Route zum KP 83 ausgewiesen ist, aber eine entsprechende Relation gibt es nicht, statt dessen gibt es die direkte Verbindung zum nächsten KP 79. Ich vermute, dass es am Bahnhof in Bad Zwischenahn einen getrennten Knotenpunkt gibt oder sonst was nicht stimmt. Hast Du evtl. mehr Infos? Bin dort selber nicht vorbeigekommen.
MxxCon (2021-02-22 07:28:13+00:00): Hello.
Can you explain what exactly are you cleaning up here? You are deleting over 700 ways and nodes here...
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99715234
boopington (2021-02-23 01:17:14+00:00): old bridges that have been replaced on the tpike and land cover thats not true anymore
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99715234
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:27:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:28:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
abakus_uploader (2021-02-22 23:31:39+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
clay_c (2021-03-08 21:28:23+00:00): Reverted in changeset 100662307.

Why did you undo my revert? This is not the agreed-upon way to tag temporally restricted railroads. The Escondido Subdivision is already mapped thoroughly and correctly. The source for this is derived from the California Rail Schematics document [1].

Please do not change any more tags along the Escondido Subdivision without first consulting the talk-us@ mailing list [2], the tagging@ mailing list [3], or the #rail channel in the OSMUS Slack [4].

Best regards,

Clay

[1] PDF download: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/rail-mass-transportation/documents/f0009927-ca-rail-schematics-a11y.pdf

[2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[3] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[4] https://slack.openstreetmap.us/
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:26:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:25:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
pitscheplatsch (2021-02-22 15:37:33+00:00): I guess something went wrong here.

Could you describe your map edits?

Full changeset information: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=99718779#17/-20.89535/55.55925

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:28:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
Map-Peter (2021-02-22 21:40:03+00:00): Hallo duxterrae, 
 
willkommen zurück! Du hast ja eine lange OSM-Pause eingelegt.
 
Imho passt hier durch diesen Änderungssatz nun etwas nicht mehr. 
Was ist mit den anderen Wegen? 
 
Mindestens alle Wege die _nur_ von diesem, von dir bearbeiteten, Weg abzweigen (z.B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/53.34952/12.74988 ). 
 
Und was ist mit den Wegen etwas südlich davon ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.3415/12.7495 ) - sind diese gar nicht betroffen? 
 
Darf da wirklich Niemand mehr entlang - was ist z.B. mit Land- und Forstwirtschaft? 
 
Gruß Peter
duxterrae (2021-02-22 22:16:03+00:00): Hallo Peter, zu den anderen Wegen südlich der Boeker Landstr. kann ich nichts sagen aber direkt an der Boeker Landstr. beginnt das Militärgebiet. Wie weit es sich südlich zieht, weiss ich nicht. An der Boeker Landstr. stehen aller 50 Meter Schilder, die auf das Gebiet hinweisen und mit Lebensgefahr drohen. Ich denke, man sollte diese Wege generell entfernen. Bei Komoot gibt es mehrere Fahrradtouren durch das Gebiet. Das ist sehr gefährlich. Ich bin vielleicht zu Ostern wieder vor Ort, da schaue ich mal, wie weit das Militärgebiet sich südlich zieht.
Map-Peter (2021-02-24 00:16:36+00:00): Bitte nichts entfernen - lass alles erst einmal so. 
 
(Ausführliche Antwort morgen - ist spät geworden heute ... muss bald zur Arbeit und vorher noch ein paar Stunden schlafen.)
Map-Peter (2021-02-24 23:08:26+00:00): Hallo duxterrae, 
 
ich habe mir das Ganze auf diversen Luftbildern angeschaut und in OSM u.a. dies ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5186254#map=15/53.3471/12.7541 ) gefunden. 
Das scheint alles noch von den Russen zu sein. So etwas gibt es in der Region nicht gerade selten - auch mit Schildern wegen Lebensgefahr bei betreten (Bsp.: großer Schießplatz, um den Papenberg, für u.a. Panzer https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/53.4031/13.0215 ). 
 
Alle diese Schilder, die ich, auf das Thema bezogen, in der Region gesehen habe, verbieten nicht das Betreten, sondern weisen nur auf die Lebensgefahr bei betreten hin, wegen alter Munition im Boden. 
 
Zumindest der Weg, den du hier bearbeitet hast, wird mindestens noch von Land- und Forstwirtschaft regelmäßig befahren, sonst wäre der gar nicht mehr richtig auf den Luftbildern zu sehen. 
Der Weg ist auch eine alte Bahnstrecke wie man in den Daten sehen kann und somit entsprechend verdichtet und wuchert nicht einfach mal so schnell zu. 
 
Bevor du ein OSM-Objekt entfernst prüfe bitte immer erst ob du es nach dem Lifecycleprefix ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lifecycle_prefix ) entsprechend umtaggen kannst. Dann tauchen die nicht mehr in Karten auf, sind aber noch in der Datenbank für andere Mapper zu sehen. So kommt dann z.B. nicht ein Mapper vorbei und malt einfach einen entfernten Weg wieder vom Luftbild ab, weil er denkt der fehlt noch in OSM. 
 
Hier mal ein paar Bsp. zum Lifecycleprefix: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/783423838/history 
oder 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2509824471/history 
oder 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/883565217 
 
Somit ist imho access=no hier falsch und sollte korrigiert werden. (So etwas kenne ich nur von aktiven Militärgebieten (z.B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.5317/13.2890 ) die generell für die Öffentlichkeit gesperrt sind und es sich nicht einfach nur um Privatgelände handelt. 
 
Gruß Peter
duxterrae (2021-02-25 12:57:46+00:00): Hallo Peter,  
was du schreibst klingt plausibel. Ich möchte nur nicht, dass diese Wege bei verschiedenen Routenplaner, die openstreetmap nutzen, als normaler Fahrradweg auftauchen. Wenn das aber zu Problemen führt, dann nehme ich meine Änderung zurück. Ich kenne die Gefahr und kann den Bereich umfahren. Es ist halt nur ärgerlich wenn man als Familie eine Route plant und dann dort die Wahl hat zwischen Lebensgefahr oder weitläufig umfahren.

Beste Grüße Mathias
kapazao (2021-02-22 09:31:06+00:00): Aquí ha habido algún fallo al subir conjuntos de cambios en Osmose y se han juntado 2 distintos, uno sobre corrección de direcciones y otro sobre añadido de información de etiquetas brand y otras.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/99720016
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-13 17:44:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 106288172, 106291668 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5046 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:26:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
Polarbear-repair (2021-03-21 22:23:06+00:00): Did you realise that the road you connected does not exist in reality?
Not on bing, which you claim you have used, nor on any other imagery?
 
It was fiction created by another user. You just made the revert more difficult.
YaStratospheric (2021-03-21 22:48:43+00:00): Yes indeed, thank you very much for your comment and edits.
This happened by chance, now I will be even more careful when making edits and saving changes!
Polarbear-repair (2021-03-22 10:37:30+00:00): Thanks!
!bm (2021-02-23 18:40:30+00:00): Hallo friedrichshainer,

das Tagging als amenity=kindergarten war korrekt – die deutsche Version des OSM-Wiki verweist darauf, dass *=childcare als Proposal abgelehnt wurde und dieses Tagging unerwünscht ist. [1]

Aus genannten Gründen Cs 99720810,99720860,99721992 revertiert in [2]

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dchildcare
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99848381

--besteGrüße!bm
!bm (2021-02-23 18:41:58+00:00): s Anm zu / analog https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99720810 – aus dort genannten Gründen Cs 99720810, 99720860, 99721992 revertiert in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99848381
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-05 13:26:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 105882167, 105878073 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5047 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
abakus_uploader (2021-02-22 23:31:38+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
aweech (2021-02-22 17:45:18+00:00): Hello,
Can you please help me understand why you keep changing properly-tagged roads to highway=residential in Nashua?
wambag (2021-03-06 12:14:37+00:00): Sorry, I am used to a convention that tags all highways between “service” and “tertiary” as “residential”, regardless of setting. I will eventually revert what I can to "unclassified". Feel free to change what you want
!bm (2021-02-23 18:43:06+00:00): s Anm zu / analog https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99720810 – aus dort genannten Gründen Cs 99720810, 99720860, 99721992 revertiert in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99848381
tonyf1 (2021-10-30 06:25:00+00:00): reverted  Changeset #113149059
OddlyAngled (2025-04-17 22:20:32+00:00): should the Mokelumn Coast to Crest Trail relation in here https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12346593/ be combined with the existing one https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4139386/ ?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-06-13 17:41:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 106288172, 106291668 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some road merge edits in South Africa.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5046 and https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-za/2021-May/thread.html#1295 .
SidusMap (2021-03-25 03:10:40+00:00): Hi! Could you please fine tune your AI tool to not generate too many nodes? Too many nodes can make ways way difficult to edit.