piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Hufkratzer (2022-08-18 08:56:03+00:00): Hi, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1087094564 seems to be the indoor of arena (a building) of Moorlands Equestrian Centre (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6783641323), but it has no building tag. The tag leisure=horse_riding should be used only once for the whole riding centre (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=horse_riding) and we already have the node for that. An alternative tag for the building may be https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building=riding_hall
user_5359 (2022-08-22 06:28:53+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1087096271 and https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key%3Acrossing%3Amarking. Please use crossing:marking = zebra instead of crossing:markings = zebra.

If you need help of correction: You are welcome!
mapper377 (2022-08-18 00:17:24+00:00): The destination substation is south of "Berlin Center, OH", not "Berlin, OH"
pitscheplatsch (2022-08-18 06:20:13+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

Could you use the comment field of your created changeset for describing your map edits? Thanks. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspiciou
carpiediem (2022-09-08 20:26:00+00:00): Private land does not mean that trail names are secret. Please stop removing them.
KCR Trails (2022-09-08 20:39:33+00:00): Publishing trail names for private land encourages use by non-residents. What other options would you suggest?
carpiediem (2022-09-08 20:43:16+00:00): I don't see how a trail marked private does anything more to encourage outside use than publishing an entire website dedicated to the open space. 

Well documented-trails will encourage better users than having satellite imagery that shows obvious trails with no details.
KCR Trails (2022-09-08 20:47:04+00:00): But third party apps like Strava leverage this data to create routes advertising private trails. All of these trails are well documented for resident owners and din't need to be communicated to non-residents.
carpiediem (2022-09-08 21:00:43+00:00): I'm sorry that Strava is not displaying data correctly, but that's something you should fix with them. It doesn't mean the trails names are secret.
KCR Trails (2022-09-08 21:12:42+00:00): OpenStreetMap is their source data. Removing names from private trails corrects the problem. Again...these are private trails and the public doesn't have a right or need to know information  about them. What is a good use case for data on private trails to exist in OpenStreetMap?
carpiediem (2022-09-08 22:18:36+00:00): So that residents can see where they are while they're hiking. So that anyone looking at a saltine I map can interpret what they're looking at.

Whether or not you can think of a good reason, OSM is here to document what is actually there, not what you'd like people to see.
5m4u9 (2022-08-18 01:35:05+00:00): Hola,

la etiqueta ref sirve para registrar el código de la calle, en este caso la plazuela y la avenida oquendo no tienen código 1.
Allison P (2022-08-18 02:00:58+00:00): Apologies for the error. I likely misclicked when trying to select an address node.
kornad (2022-11-06 11:49:35+00:00): Cześć, 
proponuję nadać tym drogom kategorię highway=unclassified, ponieważ w mojej ocenie mają jednak trochę większe znaczenie w sieci drogowej Gdańska niż zwykła droga lokalna. Co o tym sądzisz? 
Pozdrawiam
czebureks (2022-11-06 20:05:18+00:00): Cześć. Jako mieszkaniec Oliwy mogę posłużyć się tylko dowodem anegdotycznym, że bardzo rzadko korzystam z tych dróg używając samochodu, gdyż nie obsługują prawie żadnych relacji o znaczeniu ponadlokalnym. Jeżeli już, do podniesienia kategorii typowałbym ul. Derdowskiego, która może być alternatywą dla Bażyńskiego i Rybińskiego. Ale może powinniśmy założyć na forum jakiś trójmiejski wątek, gdzie w szerszym gronie będziemy rozważać takie kwestie.
kornad (2022-11-08 06:59:45+00:00): Jeśli chodzi o wątek na forum - bardzo chętnie, super pomysł!
czebureks (2025-10-23 01:42:16+00:00): Zajęło mi to trochę czasu, ale przekonałem się do użycia "unclassified" również w kontekście miejskim: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173628857. Pozdrawiam z nadzieją, że wrócisz kiedyś do częstszego mapowania. :)
ovruni (2022-08-18 01:10:57+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se han cambiado áreas de peatones a plaza, ademas de agregar edificios no visibles.
Saludos
5m4u9 (2022-08-19 03:50:37+00:00): Hola, gracias por mejorar el mapa de la zona.

Como sugerencia, es preferible no escribir S/N o Sin Nombre en los campos si el negocio no tiene nombre que se vea, seguro tiene, pero habría que preguntar personalmente.
Cy R (2022-08-19 15:41:37+00:00): Hello! Seattle has not implemented request buttons and sound signals at every signalized crossing. No need to add these tags unless you're sure. I've fixed a few of these, but it's easier to keep track of what needs to be resurveyed when the tags are not already present.

In a similar vein, I think it's worth keeping crossing=traffic_signals on highway=crossing nodes instead of changing these to crossing=marked. On-the-ground surveying tools like StreetComplete will ask mappers to confirm buttons, sound signals, and vibration feedback for crossing=traffic_signals only. We don't get that tagging assistance for crossing=marked, so changing these may increase the difficulty of maintaining those crossing details.

Thanks for the edits, and let me know what you think!
UW Maddie (2022-08-30 14:05:11+00:00): But those were not sound signal tags, they're foot signals tags I was told to input for when visual pedestrian signals are present. If I add that or add button operated tags, it's always after verifying that the signals and buttons exist with street level imagery, so I am sure about those. But I'll go ahead and let them know about the StreetComplete issue and ask for further instructions, thanks for bringing it up.
UW Maddie (2022-08-30 14:32:47+00:00): Wait a minute, I see what you mean. Yeah it appears that there are some sound tags still from here from last year. I don't add those anymore, but some still remain, and should be removed if they're inaccurate. But it looks like some of my "traffic_signals:foot=yes" tags are being deleted too and I want to know why?
Cy R (2022-08-30 20:38:35+00:00): I apologize--I didn't notice that you stopped using the traffic_signals:sound tag. I must have clicked on an older element while reviewing this changeset (which looks good to me). Sorry for the confusion!

I removed some traffic_signals:foot tags when converting a few crossings to the crossing=traffic_signals scheme since it looks like both tags imply the same thing, and crossing=traffic_signals is much more widely used. If traffic_signals:foot has a different meaning or use, you may want to document the tag in the wiki so that others don't accidentally remove it as well.

By the way, the city is currently tearing up and rebuilding many of the sidewalks, curb bulbs/ramps, and signals along Greenwood Ave N. Unfortunately, I see that you already mapped most of the road, but I will try to capture some new street level imagery if you want to update those details.

Thanks again for the edits!
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2022-09-01 14:37:53+00:00): Hi txemt!
My name is Yuliya and I am a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. We've come across your massive update on I 95 related to the addition of the proposed Express lanes. Along with the mapping of proposed highways you removed destination:lanes tags applied by the Lyft team and hov tags.
It seems to us it would be more correct to leave these tags as long as the express lanes are tagged as ‘highway=proposed’. We have partly returned the destination:lanes tags because this reflects the current situation on I 95.
Here is a list with examples of ways where our edits were removed. I have provided these ways along with Lyft proprietary street level images dated August 2022 below:

way 40668240 https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/40668240 - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZBm71q4PEwOnaT-4VX1w7R5eExZHaTuE/view?usp=sharing	
way 416519400 https://pewu.github.iOSM history/osm-history/#/way/416519400 - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1v9_FD2Kr5OIuClkcJHuucTG-J7Wbz9Ws/view?usp=sharing	
way 87384147 https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/87384147 - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_5uXhVvoOsNlPKN634aHyqhmones3d5W/view?usp=sharing	
way 40668257 https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/40668257 - https://drive.google.com/file/d/145dqTnmsSxDAs5d1zfSiGiq2N-2_49vO/view?usp=sharing	
way 40671311 https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/40671311 - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lDsJxhcGCQM6uhXCupkncW4yjeAnytNV/view?usp=sharing	
way 40705802 https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/40705802 - https://drive.google.com/file/d/19m7RZF2cdgqohi3npp90pgr6FoN-GPIO/view?usp=sharing
way 41076169 https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/41076169 - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zm-sZRHO1HofVlXYwbMJ_Ewao46YbVpq/view?usp=sharing		
We would be very grateful if you share your point of view on working with the proposed lanes and on the removal of the destination lanes tag.
Thank you for your contribution!

Best regards,
Yuliya
txemt (2022-09-01 15:24:43+00:00): I’ve seen these pop up all over the place. I would the exit not already serve the purpose of the “destination lane“ that y’all are putting into OSM? Also, in regards to the S entry, I have seen some that have gone on for miles. There was one in Louisiana which extended 10 miles for a “destination lane“ What is the purpose of adding this to a exit ramp off of a highway or interstate?
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2022-09-02 12:58:42+00:00): According to OSM wiki there are two different concepts to support the announcement of signposted destinations. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination. The OSM team at Lyft uses both of them. We add ‘destination’ on the motorway_link after the exit and add ‘destination:lanes’ tag on the segment before the exit. The concept with ‘destination’ tag is more widespread. Nevertheless, these concepts do not conflict, both approaches can co-exist on a particular road. 

We add a ‘destination:lanes’ tag on the closest to the junction segment. If initially the number of lanes changes on such segment, we split it at the place where the lanes count changes and apply a ‘destination:lanes’ only to the closest to the exit part. 

Sometimes a segment can be very long with the same number of lanes. I can understand why you pay attention to such cases, especially if the segment extends for several miles. As for now, we consider it is the best solution to add “destination:lanes’ tag to the entire segment, because we strive to avoid unnecessary way splits.

As for an exit ramp off of a highway or interstate, along them there are destination signs as well, so we map it according to both concepts mentioned above.

I hope this explanation will help you understand our approach to working with destination signs. Please let me know if you have any further questions or insights that could help me to understand your point in this case.

Best regards,
Yuliya
txemt (2022-09-02 17:14:50+00:00): It is my understanding that the way y’all are doing this presents a twofold problem. The first problem is one set instructions will never be read. Either the instructions off of the lane guidance will override the next set of instructions and that will never be relayed to the end-user. The other issue which I have seen happened multiple times, is the second set of  instructions will completely override the first set of instructions. The lane guidance will never finish out what it is supposed to say because the next set of instructions will cut it off to start to tell the end-user to take whatever exit. I have seen some long lane guidance for points of interest that y’all have put in, in New Orleans. There were 5 POIs on a surface street that were put in place by a Lyft team member. 

It is also my understanding that lane guidance is used for forks and where the road splits when there are no signs. I can think of several roads in Texas that fit into this category, as there is no exit sign for a split highway. US 90 out near Fort Stockton is a good example that comes to mind.
txemt (2022-09-02 18:44:29+00:00): The link that you sent me is exactly what I was referring to. The destination lane isn't designed for freeway exits. It's designed for when a road splits into multiple directions. If you look at that link, there's a photo of a road in NYC where 4 lanes go into different directions. That is where the destination:lanes comes into play, not on every single off-ramp in the country. The existing motorway_link for the exit negates the destination:lane guidance (or may make it redundant).
txemt (2022-09-05 15:50:51+00:00): The other problem with this is......those aren't dedicated lanes for exiting, they're also lanes for entering the interstate from the previous road. By putting a destination lane there, you're now instructing someone coming from the previous exit onto the interstate to an instruction they may not need.
txemt (2022-09-05 15:57:51+00:00): The image of Lantana Blvd exit is a prime example of what I'm talking about. That far right lane is a dual purpose lane, where those who are coming onto the interstate from Hypoluxo Rd have the right lane to gain speed and merge to the left to get onto the main lanes of 95.
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2022-09-05 16:24:53+00:00): Hi txemt!

Thank you very much for your response.

Since there is no specific information about the usage of the destination:lanes tag in lane guidance, it is difficult to say what problems it may cause. Our decision to apply this tag is based on the description in OSM Wiki.

The point you have described earlier, that the ‘destination:lanes’ tag should be added only in cases where the highway is divided into several links, correlates with the example in the images here – https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination. But also there is an article https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes, containing an example of the ‘destination:lanes’ tag applying to the freeway exit. At the same time we couldn't find any information specifically stating that  ‘destination:lanes’ is not recommended to imply near exits. It may seem that forks are the most obvious example where destination:lanes can be used. However, we see that this tag might be set both in cases of motorways with exits and in the cases of forks. 

There is little information about the ‘destination:lanes’ tag and it can really be interpreted in different ways. Thank you very much for raising this issue in the relevant slack channel https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1662146417171679.
You are absolutely right regarding the cases with turn:lanes added straight from the onramp. We will be sure to dig into all the responses and, if necessary, reconsider our approach of applying the ‘destination:lanes’ and 'turn:lanes' tags.

Best regards,
Yuliya
txemt (2022-09-06 01:38:27+00:00): This is the example I'm also referring to. This is an almost 2 mile stretch of highway with the destination lanes https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/48616998. I'm sure it would be longer if the bridge wasn't there. Also, you said earlier that you don't want to split segments, but I've seen where "_Lyft" editors have split segments to add turn lanes and other things, so either some team members aren't following the set guidelines have for Lyft, or y'all are picking and choosing where to split segments.
txemt (2022-09-06 02:22:11+00:00): A member of Lyft splitting a road. https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1001093162

This actually makes more sense than the current way y'all are adding the destination lanes and split lanes.
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2022-09-06 14:41:37+00:00): Hi txemt!

As mentioned earlier, we add a ‘destination:lanes’ tag on the closest to the junction segment. If initially the number of lanes changes on such a segment, we split it at the place where the lanes count changes and apply a ‘destination:lanes’ only to the closest to the exit part.
We also split the segment at the nearest intersection.

https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/48616998 - here along the entire segment there are two lanes.
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1001093162 -  here the south part of the segment had 2 lanes, the north part of the segment had 3 lanes. So that it was split and destination:lanes tag was applied only on the initially north part. 

In OSMwiki there is a description that destination:lanes are typically in conjunction with turn:lanes. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination. So these edits were done according to our current flow based on OSMwiki.    

After examining the discussion of your post in slack, it was decided to supplement our policy, including our approach of splitting. https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1662146417171679.


Thank you for your contribution!

Best regards,
Yuliya
txemt (2022-09-06 14:47:45+00:00): I still stand by my original argument of either double instruction or skipping instructions altogether.
yorados (2022-08-18 19:44:54+00:00): Hi GG, 
could you try to write your changeset comment in english? (Maybe w/ google translate?)

Cheers
user_8101879 (2022-08-21 15:46:33+00:00): Hi,

the relations 6157086 and 14236314 have no tags so are now useless because of your changeset : could you fix that ?

Best regards
5m4u9 (2022-08-19 04:03:08+00:00): Hola, al editar en el mapa evitamos escribir en el nombre comillas, paréntesis, punto y comas, abreviaturas y nombres en mayúsculas.
JJIglesias (2022-08-18 04:56:47+00:00): Saludos
Un place=city_block es un area urbana delimitada por 4 calles, NO abarca varias areas iguales.

Los city_blocks NO se colocan en Bolivia a NO ser q tengan una identificacion catastral, y el Mapa NO es un catastro es un mapa logico, para conseguir algo debe tener una identificacion especifica.

Favor leer: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dcity_block
y
https://learnosm.org

Gracias
JJ
JJIglesias (2022-08-18 04:46:16+00:00): Saludos
Un place=city_block es un area urbana delimitada por 4 calles, NO abarca varias areas iguales. 

Los city_blocks NO se colocan en Bolivia a NO ser q tengan una identificacion catastral, y el Mapa NO es un catastro es un mapa logico, para conseguir algo debe tener una identificacion especifica.

Favor leer: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dcity_block
y
https://learnosm.org

Gracias
JJ
JJIglesias (2022-08-18 04:35:23+00:00): Saludos. Los Nombres NO van Ni completos en Mayuscula, ni completos en Miniscula. Sino Capitalizados, osea va en Mayuscula la primera letra para cada palabra, en este caso seria: Hospital Viedma

Gracias
JJ
JJIglesias (2022-08-18 04:37:24+00:00): El campo description se llena con informacion Complementario de algun elemento, si no hay NADA q colocar NUNCA se pone S/N simplemente se queda en blanco

Gracias
JJ
pitscheplatsch (2022-08-18 06:23:35+00:00): Just a test?

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspiciou
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:40:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:07:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:58:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:36:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:19:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
JJIglesias (2022-08-18 04:31:58+00:00): Saludos.

Al crear edificaciones se requiere q las escuadres (Ortogonalices) para eso se marca la figura y se toca la letra Q, o con el click derecho del Mouse tocas la figurita q muestra un cuadrado.

Por favor visita https://learnosm.org
y
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Edificios

Gracias
JJ
mariotomo (2022-10-14 22:32:58+00:00): le acabo de comentar lo mismo en otro conjunto de cambios, que los ángulos obtusos que dibujó no son reales sino debidos a que el techo de dos aguas es visto de un punto de vista no perpendicular. veo que sigue mapeando, así que seguramente querrá volver a mirar sus primeras contribuciones, y mejorarlas.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125040751
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:55:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
JJIglesias (2022-08-18 04:31:10+00:00): Saludos.

Al crear edificaciones se requiere q las escuadres (Ortogonalices) para eso se marca la figura y se toca la letra Q, o con el click derecho del Mouse tocas la figurita q muestra un cuadrado.

Por favor visita https://learnosm.org
y
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Edificios

Gracias
JJ
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:38:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
JJIglesias (2022-08-18 04:30:43+00:00): Saludos.

Al crear edificaciones se requiere q las escuadres (Ortogonalices) para eso se marca la figura y se toca la letra Q, o con el click derecho del Mouse tocas la figurita q muestra un cuadrado.

Por favor visita https://learnosm.org
y
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Edificios

Gracias
JJ
b-holdet (2022-08-18 04:23:54+00:00): Why have you created two big buildings over whole Europe and Africa?

Pls. revert these.
silversurfer83 (2022-08-18 13:47:41+00:00): Hi
There's sandboxes to test editors in. Please don't upload wrong data to the database.
Thanks
joost schouppe (2022-08-18 17:11:56+00:00): Reverted here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125041968
marczoutendijk (2022-08-18 18:15:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6261