piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2018-07-01 10:18:19+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
I was just updating the map between Slingsby and Hovingham based on a GPS trace from about 3 weeks ago and noticed a bit of duplication north of Fryton.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/598188076 is a footpath, and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/168742990 is a track, and they're both on exactly the same alignment.  
What you'd want to add to OSM if a track is a public footpath is a "designation=public_footpath" tag.  Here's an example a bit to the south: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/142943888 .  On OSM's "standard" map it looks like a track, but on maps designed to show public footpaths it'll look like a public footpath: https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15&lat=54.1291&lon=-0.96054 .
I'll sort out the bit north of Fryton (I walked back that way on the way back from the pub in Hovingham that day).
Hope you don't mind me mentioning this - just trying to help, since initial edits to OSM can be really tricky.  If you've any other questions please don't hesitate to ask.
Best Regards,
Andy
eggie (2018-06-16 08:21:16+00:00): Gebouwen worden geïmporteerd door het BAG team vanuit het Kadaster. 
Je doet dan een verzoek op het forum in het draadje Verzoek BAG import en zet de url erbij. 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12

'k Kan het nu even niet checken op de site van het Kadaster, want dat heeft momenteel  een beveiligingsprobleem.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=703649#p703649
eggie (2018-06-16 08:01:49+00:00): review.. het zal niet  meer routeren. Mogen voetgangers hier niet meer komen?
praeteritum (2022-08-07 01:56:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124581617.
eggie (2018-06-16 07:59:43+00:00): review.. Wanneer je daar geen toegang hebt klopt access=private.. Het routeert nu niet meer. 

Wanneer je er wel mag komen, maar het beheer ligt bij de eigenaar van het terrein dan zou de tag access=permissive moeten zijn. 
Mogen voetgangers er niet meer komen?
Hjart (2018-06-15 20:41:09+00:00): Bemærk at f.eks. Grimhøjmoskeen i forvejen var angivet: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/118608593/history
literan (2018-06-16 13:29:58+00:00): не надо рисовать выдуманные парки, иначе получите блокировку. покемоны не придут.
eggie (2018-06-15 21:20:05+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
eggie (2018-06-15 21:24:12+00:00): Het Kadaster heeft het fout in hun systeem staan. Zou je dit willen doorgeven via hun site. gweoon op het potloodje klikken. https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=kwikstaart%2013%20baren&resultOffset=0&detailsObjectId=0489010000246630&objectId=0489100000217417&geometry.x=97169.299400512&geometry.y=430188.7465982&zoomlevel=7
eggie (2018-06-15 21:47:42+00:00): De BAG viewer geeft een veiligheidsmelding bij mij over een certificaat dat niet zou kloppen. Ik heb het probleem op het forum van OSM gezet. https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12
KaartDB (2018-06-16 09:06:38+00:00): Ik heb de fout doorgegeven aan het kadaster. Is de wijziging nu teruggedraaid?
eggie (2018-06-16 09:32:12+00:00): Nee hoor. , want je wijzigingen waren correct.
KaartDB (2018-06-18 19:24:25+00:00): De aangevraagde wijziging is inmiddels geaccepteerd!

https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?geometry.x=97167.842&geometry.y=430189.49&zoomlevel=7&objectId=0489100000217417&detailsObjectId=0489010000251582
eggie (2018-06-18 20:14:58+00:00): Mooi!
eggie (2018-06-15 21:24:33+00:00): idem https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=kwikstaart%2013%20baren&resultOffset=0&detailsObjectId=0489010000246630&objectId=0489100000217417&geometry.x=97169.299400512&geometry.y=430188.7465982&zoomlevel=7
frnck (2018-06-22 08:31:32+00:00): no_straight_on is not correct here for 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8384492

it should be only_straight_on
IK19 (2018-06-22 10:44:53+00:00): Mogelijk afhankelijk van het programma? Ik kan no_straight_on of only_straight_on niet vinden. Indien mogelijk dan graag deze "fout" van mij herstellen. Ik ga later nog eens zoeken wat ik over het hoofd heb gezien.
praeteritum (2022-08-07 01:43:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124581558.
rivermont (2018-06-15 20:43:27+00:00): Intended title: Resolved note 1421974.
eggie (2018-06-16 07:51:15+00:00): Dit is een veel te groot gebied voor een paar edits. Lees svp de tips in de welkomstmail. Wanneer je schuift met de kaart met editor iD krijg je geheid schade. Bv onbedoeld  adressen verplaatsen. Dat komt omdat je bewerkt met de linkermuis, maar ook schuift . Hier is dus schade.
http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=59883776 Beatrix laan 2a verplaatst.
eggie (2018-06-16 07:54:28+00:00): Adres hersteld... svp niet schuiven met de kaart in de editmodus... of nog beter  overstappen naar JOSM.
eggie (2018-06-16 08:18:05+00:00): Bij alle kerken nog de denomination=  erbij.. Zal voornamelijk protestant of reformed  zijn.. soms zie je de naam van het kerkgenootschap staan. Eenduidigheid is er niet. Kijk even bij andere kerken.
eggie (2018-06-16 07:41:32+00:00): Hier zit de landuse grass geplakt aan de weg. Het nieuwe pad zal daar ook op eindigen vermoed ik. Ik kijk even of het makkelijk los gaat.
eggie (2018-06-16 07:42:28+00:00): Ook zit het pad vast aan de residential van Ouddorp zelf.. Daarom is het gebied van de edit zo groot.
eggie (2018-06-16 07:45:44+00:00): los..
praeteritum (2022-08-07 01:25:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124581401.
cyton (2021-02-03 11:10:00+00:00): meinst in dem fixme an der kita mit "gelände" die ausmaße des flurstücks? das hab ich jetzt angepasst
Zanoza (2021-02-03 17:55:06+00:00): Ja, genau, das meinte ich. Vielen Dank!
praeteritum (2022-08-07 01:15:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124581330.
Hjart (2018-06-15 21:38:37+00:00): Det blev til en lille stavefejl i navnet
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2018-06-15 22:55:51+00:00): tak
praeteritum (2022-08-07 00:59:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124581138.
Bernhard W (2018-06-24 14:20:19+00:00): Mit diesem Änderungssatz wurden Teile der B 31 im Südschwarzwald geändert von highway = primary nach highway = trunk. Diese Straße hat aber auch Kreuzungen und Abzweige, bei denen man die Gegenfahrbahn kreuzen muss. Nach meiner Ansicht ist das keine trunk road, sondern eher eine primary raod.
eggie (2018-06-15 22:01:44+00:00): Svp geen adressen aan gebouwen toevoegen. Dit geeft verwarring in de database bij zoekopdrachten. Het adres is al aanweig op de adresnode. Ik heb het adres verwijderd. Wanneer je vragen hebt stel ze gerust.
KaartDB (2018-06-15 22:22:20+00:00): OK, bedankt voor de uitleg.
aiddy (2019-03-17 10:37:17+00:00): Way: 598204145 & Way: 598204144 created with this changeset are field boundaries rather than paths.

@indiguus can you confirm your source for this before I edit to fix? Thanks!
indiguus (2019-03-17 18:47:55+00:00): I go for walks there, most ppl walk their dogs using these paths.
aiddy (2019-05-05 13:44:59+00:00): Unfortunately they're not paths, the farmer ploughs to the field edge each year so they don't persist on the ground.
praeteritum (2022-08-07 00:39:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124581079.
DiahW IRM-ED (2022-12-01 02:48:13+00:00): Hi, Atlasphere, thank you for your mapping contribution!

Your edit looks awesome, but I need to delete buildings that did not exist on the imagery (https://maproulette.org/challenge/30233/task/142649398). If you have any other suggestions, please let me know.

Thank you
johnparis (2018-06-15 23:11:37+00:00): merci de demander un review !
johnparis (2018-06-16 00:06:15+00:00): way 580231089 et way 495655650 -- je crois qu'il n'y a pas un consensus pour ajouter le nom de la rue aux cycleways ou sidewalks. Moi je ne pas fait ça, mais probablement tu n'as pas tort.

le commentaire du changeset "J'ai fait quelque modifications" n'est pas trop précis. Mieux de dire "cycleways sur Avenue Laplace". Mais moi aussi je tombe dans ce trou. Particulairement pour un debutant, c'est bon de préciser.

NORMALEMENT, il ne faut pas créer un way sinon l'on trouve une separation physique entre les voies de circulation. Parfois je vois que une bande blanche suffit, mais normalement il faut être physique, pas juste de la peinture sur la rue. Alors, way 596563045, bravo. Way 598207379, je suppose OK, parce qu'il a un îlot au dernier moment. Mais fais attention.  Une voie normale pour tourner à gauche ne merite pas un way. 

Dans ce cas, normalement le way correspond soit à le way d'origine ou le destination. Alors, way 596563045 est OU highway=residential OU highway=secondary_link. L'exception est pour les ways de service (busways, par exemple), qui gardent leur valeur (highway=service). Pour ce way je choisirais highway=residential.

Pour le way 598207379 je choisirais highway=residential, mais highway=secondary_link est aussi correct. Il n'y a pas de consensus sur les links, si il faut utiliser le plus haut ou le plus bas. Si l'on utilise le plus bas, highway=residential. Le plus haut, highway=secondary_link. (Pas highway=secondary, parce que c'est seulement sur la route principale.)
kukułka (2018-06-16 07:58:27+00:00): Cześć.
Zauważyłem, że dokonałeś zmian w parku.
Niestety, Twoje zmiany, na podkładzie Geoportalu są błędne. 
Nie istnieją ścieżki - linie 598210605,  598210603, tak jak było pierwotnie było dobrze, użytkownik DreamBasta prawidłowo dodał linię 597763385, źle ją opisując. Chodnik w kierunku toalety jest ślepy.
Obecnie istniejący plan ścieżek odzwierciedla aktualny stan po remoncie parku na podstawie wytycznych konserwatorskich  - nie wszystkie ścieżki zostały odtworzone. Na razie nie ma tego na żadnym podkładzie, także podkład gis.gdansk jest nieaktualny.
Dlaczego uważasz, że ul. Księża jest lepsza jako path?
maraf24 (2018-06-16 10:57:18+00:00): Cześć
Moje edycje były reakcją na dziwne edycje DreamBasta i przyznaje, że nie zauważyłem Twoich wcześniejszych edycji z odpowiednim komentarzem.
Odtworzyłem poprzedni stan z drobnymi poprawkami, jak usunięcie duplikatu placu zabaw i zmiana obszaru z pedestrian na footway.
Dlaczego uważałem,  że lepszy path dla Ksieżej? Gdyż: 1. częsty błąd edytujących w iD to stosowanie pedestrian zamiast w path/footway w parkach. 2. Nie ma takiej ulicy jak Księża w Gdańsku (oficjalnie)
Wtedy jednak nie wiedziałem, że to odtworzenie historycznej ulicy widoczne w terenie. W tej sytuacji może być pedestrian.
eggie (2018-06-16 05:14:24+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
MCDA (2018-06-17 23:22:21+00:00): I really doubt the voltage is 110kV, as far as I know NIE only have 11 or maybe 33kV lines in this area. 

http://www.nienetworks.co.uk/documents/connections/11kv_network.aspx
MCDA (2018-06-17 23:34:14+00:00): http://www.nienetworks.co.uk/documents/connections/networkmap_33kv.aspx
MCDA (2018-06-17 23:42:04+00:00): Apologies

http://www.windwatchni.com/uploads/1/6/4/9/16490250/nie_grid-connection.pdf Slide 5 does show a 110kV Single CCT from Enniskillen to Aghyoule
nplath (2018-06-18 08:30:27+00:00): Apologies for not reporting my source:
http://www.iwea.com/contentFiles/Conference%20Documents/NI%20Workshop%2009/Presentations/1._Alistair_Brown_NIE.pdf
VictorIE (2018-09-22 22:53:09+00:00): voltage=medium is a tag I use where I don't know the voltage and I am presuming it to be 33kV (38kV in RoI), but it could be a step higher or lower.

The relation has a fixme="Should be 18 turbines, but more included in this area. Possible has separate name". I suspect the 3 in Co Cavan aren't included in that count. Where is the count from?

Can this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/494784854#map=13/54.1537/-7.6156 be added to the relation?
eggie (2018-06-16 05:18:40+00:00): Dag vanwelie.. Gebouwen zelf horen in OSM geen adressen te krijgen. Die bevinden zich al op de adresnodes. Nu staat een adres er dubble in en dat geeft verwarring bij zoekopdrachten.
eggie (2018-06-16 05:20:52+00:00): het adres heb ik weer verwijderd
viloan (2018-06-15 22:57:10+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
sorcrosc (2018-06-15 23:41:20+00:00): Ciao,
Per favore cerca di evitare di collegare le aree landuse con le strade, meglio tracciare dei poligoni indipendenti; è più corretto e la manutenzione è meno complicata
eggie (2018-06-16 08:42:11+00:00): Probeer svp met editor iD niet te schuiven in de editmodus, want dit levert nogal eens schade op door onbedoelde verplaatsingen.
Het gebied van een edit dus klein houden.

Of overstappen op JOSM daar schuif je met rechts.. 
editor josm stap voor stap
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710
Ewen Hill (2018-06-16 02:48:58+00:00): DM sent re adding lanes. Please keep insitu atm
ElliottPlack (2018-11-10 17:56:48+00:00): Hello there. What was incorrect about the data that you edited here? Please provide a longer changeset comment when you edit.
ElliottPlack (2018-11-10 18:02:50+00:00): This changeset is flagged for mass deletion. Please explain the "incorrect data" here.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/59885716
luiswoo (2018-06-16 03:16:06+00:00): так это частный дом или он принимает туристов?
luiswoo (2018-06-16 03:16:55+00:00): тег tourism=chalet говорит, грубо говоря, что это гостиница
Andrinator (2018-06-17 16:16:55+00:00): luiswoo, это частный дом, который будет применяться для приёма туристов.
Mike Baggaley (2018-06-21 12:28:26+00:00): Hi, on ways 598214848 and 598214850 you have specified access=designated. This is an invalid value - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access=designated . If this is a public footpath you need foot=designated and designation=public_footpath. Can you please review?

Thanks,
Mike
nilsph (2018-06-21 20:22:53+00:00): These parts aren't designated footpaths to my knowledge, one of them is undesignated and a footpath, the other one suitable for motor vehicles but AIUI private. I've changed these in 60055441. Mind that the paths connecting to the south of it (way 458317728 etc.) don't really match up with reality -- see the satellite imagery in the editor -- but we didn't got that route that day, so can't help fixing it.
MAKoprovski (2018-11-07 23:57:54+00:00): Todos os semáforas deste cruzamento possuem radares e fotosensores de velocidade.
adrianojbr (2019-01-13 14:19:04+00:00): a que cruzamento exatamente vc se refere?
Josef73 (2018-10-03 18:27:22+00:00): Hello, you add the tag *iata=forest* for the relation. And iata Indicates the IATA airport code. But *forest* is no iata code. What do you mine with that tag?
Skybunny (2018-10-04 00:43:48+00:00): It looks like I probably just mistakenly added that, maybe intending a different key for that value. I'll remove it now. Thanks!
user_5359 (2018-06-16 06:16:47+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful when editing the map data. You moved a node over 100 meters, so there were problems with the corresponding way. I reverted all five change sets.
andrewwiseman (2018-06-27 15:01:53+00:00): Hi, thanks for mapping! However it looks like two of the ways you added, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/598220756#map=13/-1.3712/10.6324 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/598220763#map=13/-1.0780/10.5578 are already mapped, so we are going to remove them. Don't forget to look for existing roads when mapping
viloan (2018-06-16 00:26:49+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
literan (2018-06-16 13:41:06+00:00): эта правка также полностью некорректная. Не надо придумывать фейковые парки, покемоны не придут
xRoo (2018-06-16 00:43:51+00:00): As of June 15, 2018.
literan (2018-06-16 13:39:45+00:00): Ваша правка полснотью некорректна: вы зачем-то перетегировали область деревьев в парк (внутри другого парка, которым уже отмечен Гоголевский). Также смотровая площадка должна быть общедоступной (очевидно, вид из квартиры или крыши в центре таковой не является). Откатываю.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2019-05-03 23:59:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 69863674 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME unnamed additions.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2739 .
Unggo99 (2018-06-16 03:58:32+00:00): This edit had cause so much issue with nodes "dragging" all over the surrounding area.
user_5359 (2018-06-16 06:12:18+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful when editing the map data. You moved a node over 100 meters, so there were problems with the corresponding way.
user_5359 (2018-06-16 06:19:23+00:00): I have reverted all five change sets. @Unggo99>Feel free to contact me, if there additional problems.
elotrojames (2018-12-27 01:27:05+00:00): Hola. Vi este conjunto de cambios y no me queda claro qué está mapeando pues no reconozco estos elementos en el lugar.
user_5359 (2018-06-16 06:07:11+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice: the minimum keys for an address is addr:street and addr:housenumber! Can you add the booth values, please? If there isn't an address there, please use the key is_in instead or let the key empty.
keithonearth (2018-06-16 02:26:34+00:00): As this edit changes both the coastline, and other objects, and the coastline rendering updates with a different frequency than other objects it may look a bit weird until the coastline rendering is updated too.
user_5359 (2018-06-16 06:04:43+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Note that in OSM description of the objects has the highest priority. Objects that have only one name, have little sense. As home page for the question "How do I describe you?" I recommend the web site http://wiki.openstreetmap.org.
Please read also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tank.
The tag area=yes without any more information is useless. What do you want to achieve with your entry?
chachafish (2018-06-17 12:54:43+00:00): Howdy :) Thank you for your additions to the map. A number of edits you created popped up as OSM Inspector-tagged errors. In the city of Silverthorne you named addresses as “duplex” or “triplex”. These are actually descriptions, not names. It would be similar to adding a tree and giving it a name of, “tree” or naming a sidewalk, “sidewalk”. A name of a bulding would be more like, “Monticello” or “Empire State Building”. To describe a structure as a duplex, triplex, etcetera is best tagged using the tag “description”.
chachafish (2018-06-17 12:54:56+00:00): Additionally, if you are going to use address nodes, the address nodes need to be attached to the building they describe. If you just drag each node to the edge of the building, it will attach itself. That way, OSM knows what the address shoud be linked to. OSM flags these addresses as errors because it doesn’t know what the address is associated with. Is it the address of a building? The address of park? The address of a mailbox?, etcetera. If you attach the address node to the building, then the meaning is clear. Alternatively, you could add a tag of “building” to each address, then the meaning is clear as well. But, of course, then the problem is that you are duplicating a building tag. One on the physical building and one on the address node.

Thank you for adding building levels and roof shapes. Most people don’t add so much detail. I think it’s great. 

One other thing about addresses, the state the address is located in should be in all upper-case letters. For example, “CO” or “KS” is correct. “Co” or “Ks” would be incorrect.
chachafish (2018-06-17 12:55:11+00:00): You can see every error that has been flagged by going to this link: https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=tagging&lon=-106.09619&lat=39.61836&zoom=17&overlays=nodes_with_empty_k,ways_with_empty_k,nodes_with_empty_v,ways_with_empty_v,node_tags_with_whitespace,way_tags_with_whitespace,node_with_unusual_char,way_with_unusual_char,node_with_short_or_long_key,way_with_short_or_long_key,nonop_confusion_on_nodes,nonop_confusion_on_ways,no_feature_tag_nodes,no_feature_tag_ways,ways_without_tags

Another option for creating duplexes and triplexes can be found here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/39.74216/-105.02839

Can you go back and correct the flagged errors?

Thanks again for your additions. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to ask. Cheers! :)
StackKorora (2018-06-17 16:58:51+00:00): Thanks for the clarifications. I didn't know about the address points. I can fix those. As for the State letters, I had wondered if that was correct but I was just being lazy and selecting what was in the drop down box. I will fix those too. :-)
Thanks again for clarifying.
StackKorora (2018-06-17 17:04:12+00:00): A follow up question. When I asked about how to do duplexes in IRC about a year ago, the advice I was given was how I was doing it. They also told me specifically to not break up the building as in the example you cited. I added the duplex name so that others would know why I associated so many addresses to a single building (I agree that should be in the description field). Since the advice for adding points was a bit incorrect, I'm curious about the breaking up of the building. Especially in some of these buildings where each address has the potential to be on a different level of the same structure. Does the breaking up of a building (eg a duplex) make sense only when the buildings are completely separate? Or is it just better to tag the points and attach them to the building? (this makes more sense to me, but I thought it worth asking since your example clashed with the original information I got). Thanks again!
chachafish (2018-06-17 22:40:25+00:00): Dividing the building, to me, makes sense if there is an obvious break between houses or townhomes, etc. It's simply a reflection of reality. For example, 3345 West 18th Avenue, Denver. If you go to the official website of https://www.denvergov.org/Maps/map/property# you will see each house is split. Many duplexes/triplexes are the same, as the split is clear if you are viewing the houses/apartments/townhomes from the street. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/39.74553/-105.03074