piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
phidauex (2019-01-03 23:31:18+00:00): I think I understand now, in that case, the Medicine Bow relation should indeed be "type=multipolygon" (I see Adam just changed it!). Clearly it worked both ways, but I suppose this is the better long-term path.

To the issue of "holes" for wilderness areas, I'd be interested in the consensus on that (and maybe an update to the wiki?). Medicine Bow has a few of those as well, in both "forms" of a complete "hole", as well as a "notch" cut out of the side.
stevea (2019-01-03 23:36:17+00:00): phidauex:  the topic is richly documented at https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon .  Should you continue to have questions, you might missive me or Adam directly, or use the Talk page on that wiki.
Adam Schneider (2019-01-03 23:40:58+00:00): As for the issue of wilderness "holes," Steve and I are debating it via direct message!
stevea (2019-01-03 23:47:05+00:00): Well, discussing, perhaps "debating" is a bit strong.  It's a long-time discussion in OSM, at least nine years old, and I've been pushing and pulling at this saw for various reasons and in various directions for much of that time.

Simply put, is a Wilderness "in" (enclosed by) a National Forest?  Or is it "a thing unto itself."  Historically a W might have been "carved out" of a NF, but as the landuses are now different, a strong argument (not debate) can be made for saying "thing unto itself."  Round and round we go.
phidauex (2019-01-03 23:53:32+00:00): Thanks, I think I understand the technical implications in the data model now. I think the issue is really just one of semantic representation of the real world (which requires us to figure out what is going on there).

I don't think anyone would argue that if I was standing in Medicine Bow National Forest that I would be simultaneously "inside of" Medicine Bow, the State of Wyoming, and the United States of America, all at the same time. Likewise (insofar as US law is concerned), if you are standing in the Navajo Nation you are inside of the Navajo Nation, the state of Arizona, and the United States.

I suppose a quick way to find out would be to break a law in the Encampment River Wilderness Area and see how many organizations ticket you. ;)

I'll follow the discussions from the sidelines, and then can help with any required modifications in the mountain west.
phidauex (2019-01-04 00:01:34+00:00): From the Dept. of the Interior: "Wilderness areas can be part of national parks, national wildlife refuges, national forests or public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management." https://www.doi.gov/blog/americas-public-lands-explained

Unfortunately, that results in just an "it depends" answer - some wildernesses are part of and managed by a national park or forest, and others are not.
Adam Schneider (2019-01-04 00:03:34+00:00): Well, I just think Steve is wrong. :D  If I download the USFS boundary shapefiles from their Web site, I get complete shapes that include the wilderness areas. Seems to me that would be gospel. (Dramatic animated example: https://i.imgur.com/o6ftnOF.gif )
Adam Schneider (2019-01-04 00:06:58+00:00): Oh, and by the way, add this layer to JOSM if you know how; it's super-duper useful: wms:https://apps.fs.usda.gov/arcx/services/EDW/EDW_BasicOwnership_01/MapServer/WmsServer?FORMAT=image/jpeg&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=0&STYLES=&SRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}
stevea (2019-01-04 01:23:07+00:00): Look, I've been trying to sort this out amidst misunderstandings, changes between Standard and Carto, updated (and updated and updated...) official USDA GIS data, whether or not Silver Peak Wilderness is or isn't part of LPNF, people misunderstanding "shared polygon boundaries" (and misusing the "reltoolbox" JOSM plugin...) and on and on for almost a decade in this project.

If you really believe you know what you are doing, go nuts.  Edit National Forests and Wilderness boundaries to your heart's content.  The "rules" or "OSM conventions" (of that day in the future when some upstart who knows better) comes along and challenges what you do today, and then it'll be your turn.  I'm done here.
phidauex (2019-01-04 06:11:11+00:00): Apologies for frustrating you. I agree that consistency is important, especially over time. I'm just watching and learning so I can best maintain the resources in my area.
Adam Schneider (2019-01-04 07:02:39+00:00): phidauex, I think the most important thing is to (1) be consistent, and (2) create well-constructed relations. The individual tags can always be adjusted later.
stevea (2019-01-04 20:45:19+00:00): Both of you/everybody:  overlapping vs. "glommed together" (multi)polygons w.r.t. national forest lands and wilderness areas is at least a decade-old dialog in OSM.  The bottom line is "these topic are complex" and "often, it depends."

There are various ways to enter these data into OSM (simple polygons, multipolygons, overlapping, shared edges, distinct...) and while it may be more true in some cases and less so in others that "these DO overlap!" (vs. "no, they don't") the important thing is to enter the data in as straightforward and clearly correct method that you can.  In short, "map your best" remains true.

(As does, "stay civil in dialog," and "dialog with your fellow mappers civilly").  We're doing fine here, complex as these (old, somewhat difficult, often bifurcating/dividing) topics can be.

Let's not be frustrated, let's be good mappers.  Sometimes that takes hashing things out with civil dialog, sometimes that takes a fair bit of time and effort.  So it goes.
mikkolukas (2021-10-02 12:42:20+00:00): "This segments appears to be bidirectional in SDFE. Is any other ground-truth available for further review?"

Why should it not be?

Vehicles from west could perfectly make a left turn (going north) from here.

Ground truth from Mapillary also confirms this.
berms (2021-10-04 19:34:01+00:00): Thank for the helpful feedback.
ajf3934221 (2019-01-02 18:39:57+00:00): Aus versehen alten Kommentar verwendet. korrekter Kommentar: Wegattribute angepasst.
Jakka (2019-01-03 15:13:11+00:00): de footway heeft geen beginconnectie en ook geen eindconnectie ??? Dus niemand kan erop ? Ook de tag motor_vehicle=no is overbodig standaard op een footway/eerder path in bos mogen er nooit auto's rijden.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/659985704#map=19/51.06117/4.47815
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-02 19:09:20+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/659905138/history has shop = car_wash that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
shop=car_wash ? Is it simply https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcar_wash ? Or are they selling some producs for washing car and you cannot wash car there?
freebeer (2019-01-06 10:03:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 66065825 where the changeset comment is: delete Yet Another bogus maps.me wilderness hut with personal private information that should not appear in osm
ali majd (2019-01-07 17:45:10+00:00): سلام چرا مسیرها را حذف میکنید و دوباره رسم میکنید با این کارتون تاریخچه مسیر را حذف میکنید.
ebraplmap (2019-01-07 19:38:03+00:00): سلام، خیلی ممنون از پیامتون، من
Changeset: 65968058
رو اینجا چک کردم:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=65968058
ولی نتونستم «مسی حذف شده» ای رو پیدا کنم، ممکنه لطفاً اشاره بفرمایید به آی دی مربوطه؟
aseerel4c26 (2019-02-09 10:57:20+00:00): Hast du hier eine spezielle Frage? Du hattest um Drüberschauen gebeten.

Weißt du, was mit den Radrouten passiert ist, die über diese Brücke gingen? Werden sie über eine nahe andere Brücke umgeleitet? Die Brücke https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51572694 ist tatsächlich nicht jedermann zugänglich?
zeflo (2019-02-10 00:46:23+00:00): Dies (way/51572694) ist eigentlich keine Brücke sondern eine Staustufe. Ich werde morgen mal vorbeigehen und schauen ob es eine offensichtliche oder ausgeschilderte Umleitung gibt.
zeflo (2019-02-10 00:48:04+00:00): Achso, was meine Frage angeht. Ich wusste nicht ob ich die Brücke einfach löschen sollte, oder als abgerissen/gesperrt markieren. Und auch was mit der Radroute passiert wusste ich nicht.
aseerel4c26 (2019-02-10 11:54:10+00:00): Danke! bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51572694 habe ich die Staustufe in einer Notiz erwähnt und außerdem die Staustufe mal als Linie [gezeichnet](https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67069727). An dem Weg war/ist ja markiert, dass Fahrräder rüberdürfen  - alle anderen aber nur privat?! Das ist doch sehr ungewöhnlich. Vielleicht weißt du ja bald mehr. :)

Das einfache Löschen ist okay, besser ist aber den Weg zu belassen und nur die Tags zu entfernen bzw zu ändern. Dann wissen z.B. Leute Bescheid was da los ist, wenn sie nur auf das Luftbild gucken, aber den Ort selbst nicht kennen. Zudem kann man so vermerken, dass man in der Zukunuft dran denken sollte, die neue Brücke einzutragen, sobald sie fertig ist. Habe ich entsprechend [geändert](https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67069727), kannst du dir nun anschauen.

Übrigens, wenn der Brückenabriss und -Neubau innerhalb sehr weniger Wochen passiert, dann würden die meisten Leute die Brücke wohl erst ändern, wenn die neue Brücke steht und in der Zwischenzeit höchstens eine Notiz anfügen. Das kommt nämlich den OSM-Datennutzern entgegen, die ihren Datenbestand z.B. nur monatlich oder gar jährlich updaten (z.B. Karten auf Garmin-GPS-Geräten).

Die Radroute kann man entweder mit Lücke darstellen (was auch durch dein Löschen passiert ist) oder man stellt sie weiterhin so dar, wie sie war, ich glaube, da gibt es keine Bevorzugung des einen oder des anderen. Wenn möglich sollte man aber nach Umleitungen gucken.
user_6110846 (2019-02-19 15:52:29+00:00): Доброго дня тц Базар на Лісовій треба вертати 

правилами тегування передбачено заначати шо обєкт розташовано у певному торгівельному центрі читайте про  addr 

Окрім того Попудренка 65 це не тілько ТЦ Базар на лісовій це і   значна територія 

тому рьбовязково треба підкреслити  шо шукаати треба саме ТЦ Базар на лісовій


і чому ви коли грохаете теги не повідомляєте
я там регулярно роблю закупи тому я  то добре знаю 

тому частково ви зробили дічь
user_6110846 (2019-02-19 16:00:53+00:00): забирали пред"яву назад

якась чуш нема тегу який уточнює шо якшо територія з адресобю велика то треба шукати саме якийсб будинок 

може колись в пропозалі найду
SimonPoole (2019-01-02 19:23:33+00:00): Upps .. clicked too fast, ignore the changeset comment: this was a revert of #64344980 on request of the contributor.
maraf24 (2019-01-02 20:57:54+00:00): Słyszałem, że tylko teoretycznie. W terenie nadal są stare numery.
viloan (2019-01-02 19:33:04+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!
mueschel (2019-01-03 12:19:01+00:00): Hi,
please don't add shops as "man_made 	= survey_point". There are plenty of preset options available in the editor to choose from. Only if a shop is properly tagged, it can be shown on the map and found.
abrensch (2019-01-07 19:52:11+00:00): Hallo Winfried,

ich habe diesen Änderungssatz hier zurückgesetzt, Du hattest das highway=secondary tag entfernt, aber nichts am maxspeed tag geändert.

Gruss, Arndt
Akkurator (2019-01-22 00:05:35+00:00): Hallo Aufräumer,
hier ist beim Aufräumen etwas schiefgegangen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6179331240
Kann es sein, dass du eigentlich die Tags aus dieser gelöschten Relation auf den Node übertragen wolltest? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7914335/history
"Martin-Luther-Gemeindehaus" steht groß auf dem Gebäude, Kindergarten weiß ich nicht
Aufräumer (2019-02-05 08:42:52+00:00): Hallo
Dank für deinen Hinweis (und sorry für meine Reaktioszeit, ich war ein paar Tage offline). 

Mein Ziel war es, das Multipolygon-Problem zu lösen ohne dabei Information zu verlieren. Das MP war mit name="Ev. Martin-Luther-Gemeindehaus und Martin-Luther-Kindergarten" gekennzeichnet. Mein Sprachverständis legte nahe, das war nicht der Name des Gebäudes sondern eine Beschreibung der Institutionen, die es beherbergt. Ich habe versucht, dies mit amenty=comunity_center zu realsiesen. Leider ist der Name und der Kindergarten verloren gegangen. 

Das habe ich jetzt nachgeholt. 

Ich freue über deine Aufmerksamkeit und dein Engagement für OSM. 

Gruss
Akkurator (2019-02-05 23:30:15+00:00): 1 Gebäude, 2 POIs, kein unnötiger MP-Schnickschnack. Passt! Danke!
SHARCRASH (2019-04-17 10:46:20+00:00): landuse=civic_admin is still just a drafted proposed feature. We should stick to the adopted consensuses .
Stereo (2019-04-17 13:33:42+00:00): We should, but there's currently no other way of describing this, no? What do you think we should use instead?

Drafted proposals don't mean much - wayside crosses or smoking are proposals that happen to be widely adopted.
SHARCRASH (2019-04-17 14:35:03+00:00): It does mean something. It helps community to decide on how to use certain elements. :) 

For Wayside crosses, the tag exists since 2009, there are 104573 elements, hence adopted "de facto". For Smoking_area, the tag is fairly new, only 969+207 elements, not really widely adopted (only 1 in Luxembourg). 

Well, there are indeed some big areas where there are only governmental offices but it happens often also that they are mixed with business offices... The node or building help already to identify where the office is. I would just keep it simple and use  "landuse=commercial" and make sure there is something to identify the location of governmental office. The "commercial" terminology doesn't seem fitting, albeit... all governments have also commercial affairs...
SHARCRASH (2019-04-17 14:38:25+00:00): Even in our Quartier Européen, there are mixed in hotels, concert hall, swimming pool....
skyper (2020-01-04 12:22:05+00:00): Woher die Information ?
Teiron (2019-01-02 20:26:30+00:00): Oczywiście chodziło o Chrząstów
viloan (2019-01-02 20:34:25+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!
Rhabarbara17 (2019-01-02 20:39:24+00:00): Sorry, selected „review_requested“ accidentally. Review is not necessary.
Alecs01 (2019-01-03 15:07:01+00:00): And you forgot to add back the leisure tag to the building, btw: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/15808330/history
skyper (2020-01-04 12:10:03+00:00): Das ist weiterhin ein Telefon und keine Notrufsäule !
mueschel (2019-01-03 09:19:17+00:00): Hi,
you added strange tags to several objects like the ones listed below. When importing data to OSM, please make sure that you only use those tags that are documented in the Wiki or are available as presets in your mapping tool. Everything else should not be uploaded.

Cheers, Jan

    CREATEDWHE=2017-08-14
    EDITEDBY=MIGUELTO
    EDITEDWHEN=2018-08-29
    FACILITYID=19275
    GlobalID={24B7CAA9-65E3-4136-B9F3-EF13FD635185}
    INSTALLYEA=2007
    LEGACYID=10131
    ROTATION=0.0
    SOURCE=Geotek Mapping
SomeoneElse (2021-03-21 00:15:39+00:00): I've added "foot=yes" back to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/450052642 because it's pretty important to know that there's a legal right of access here.  That's why I added a "source:foot" tag explicitly here as well.
Vuntzam (2019-01-02 21:52:52+00:00): Falscher Kommentar! Ergänzung des Spazierweges entlang des Fegenbergbaches zum Friedhof
eggie (2019-01-03 06:46:23+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
mueschel (2019-01-03 09:18:40+00:00): Hi,
you added strange tags to several objects like the ones listed below. When importing data to OSM, please make sure that you only use those tags that are documented in the Wiki or are available as presets in your mapping tool. Everything else should not be uploaded.

Cheers, Jan

CREATEDWHE=2005-12-23
EDITEDBY=MIGUELTO
EDITEDWHEN=2017-09-06
FACILITYID=14119
FUNCCLASS=Collector
GlobalID={F56F7BDC-C3D7-4AF9-87A6-BCFB77770550}
INSTALLYEA=2007
LEGACYID=4381
LOCATION=WASHINGTON ST
MAINTENANC=Public-City
MATERIAL=Concrete
OWNER=Public-City
SHAPE_STLe=1214.60012025
SOURCE=Geotek
WIDTH=Variable
M!dgard (2019-01-03 14:42:12+00:00): Hoi Chris

Waar heb je de postcode van Rib'n'Kip gezien? Op hun site vermelden ze namelijk 8820 terwijl jij 8200 toevoegt, de postcode van Sint-Andries en Sint-Michiels, dat lijkt me nogal onwaarschijnlijk.

De postcodegrenzen in Vlaanderen zijn overigens compleet, het heeft dus geen zin om postcodes op elk adres te zetten. Je kan ze visualiseren met een Overpass-query zoals op https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:M!dgard/Overpass_queries#Map_of_post_code_areas

Vriendelijke groeten, Midgard
Chris Clemson (2019-01-03 20:29:11+00:00): Thank you! You are correct, the postcode is wrong. I will correct it now.
I include it as some offline maps aren't clever enough to use post codes that aren't on a node, but you can delete it if you like.
Thanks for the information!

Chris
szydzio (2019-05-08 16:36:16+00:00): Hej!Dlaczego od pewnego czasu dodajesz przejścia dla pieszych poza jezdniami ? Przykłady: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/IOQ
szydzio (2019-05-24 12:19:28+00:00): Obiekty usunięte.
eggie (2019-01-03 06:48:20+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
eggie (2019-01-03 06:52:23+00:00): Tip: Tegenwoordig taggen we de winkels bij op de bestaande BAG adresnodes. Dan is de winkel gekoppeld aan het juiste adres. Wellicht ligt hier nog een uitdaging?
Het is dan soms even zoeken.
MVG,
Eggie
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-01-03 02:44:50+00:00): Olá, este conjunto de alerações será revertido. você eliminou elementos e voltou a criá-los. por favor leia a conduta quanto a eliminar dados.
zermes (2019-02-13 15:03:46+00:00): Não entendi a parte “eliminei elementos e voltei a criá-los”. Pelo que parece apenas eliminei 5 nós que estavam a mais numa linha que representa uma rua reta. A reta continuava lá, apenas era definida com menos nós. Estou enganado?
Pavelfantik (2019-04-08 15:23:15+00:00): вроде как нет сквозного проезда. мешает забор судя по снимкам https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/660042244
4004 (2019-04-14 21:50:21+00:00): да, шото не заметил, спасибо
CloCkWeRX (2019-01-12 04:39:25+00:00): Oh, nicely timed - was doing some survey on the ground, couldn't work out why Street Complete wasn't prompting me about addresses
Константин Гам (2019-07-04 14:25:31+00:00): Убедительная просьба не выдумывать несуществующие ограничения!
Знаков "Движение на велосипеде запрещено", тут нет
mapper999 (2019-01-03 14:37:20+00:00): Could you please explain, where this "more reasonable" format was discussed. It seems to have been added into the wiki only today, while the "phantasy format" is used more than 1000 times and has been used in a similar way for bicycle shops.
You also deleted some information in this edit!
ti-lo (2019-01-03 15:05:39+00:00): The only "discussed" service tags are those 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbicycle#Additional_keys
Unless these exist since 2010
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:shop%3Dmotorcycle&diff=548821&oldid=517671#Services_tags
The "new one" has been introduced in May 2018 (undiscussed)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service:vehicle
There has also been a short discussion (but no action) on the "tagging mailing list"
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036119.html
mapper999 (2019-01-03 16:02:01+00:00): I don't see the point of replacing an undiscussed but established tagging with a new undiscussed tagging.
If you want to change the tagging you should discuss this tagging, start a proposal and voting and document it afterwards so that it can be implemented into the editors.
ti-lo (2019-01-03 16:03:36+00:00): You didn't get the point, did you ?
ti-lo (2019-01-03 16:08:55+00:00): Please check
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036119.html
and
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-January/041773.html
an take part in the discussion yourself
tux67 (2019-01-03 07:53:00+00:00): Hier auch: parking_aisle nur AUF dem Parkplatz
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/65974517
tux67 (2019-01-03 07:51:46+00:00): Du solltest die Verbindung vom Parkplatz zur Straße nicht mit einem highway=parking_aisle herstellen, sondern diesen nur AUF dem Parkplatz nutzen. Verbindung zur Straße mit highway=service
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/65974542
tux67 (2019-01-22 13:27:25+00:00): Wie siehts mit dem Parkplatz Update aus?
This Value Is Blank (2026-05-09 02:34:59+00:00): Is 9 Rohini St ment to be in the middle of the station? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6179833029
nevw (2019-01-03 09:07:29+00:00): Hi Leun
Osmi has spotted a duplicate way in this relation.
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=146.83475&lat=-19.11693&zoom=13
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon/validity
Warin61 (2019-01-03 21:54:36+00:00): Base Map appears to be in copyright contradiction?!
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue

"Basemap 	CC BY 4.0 - waiver rejected "
Luen Warneke (2019-01-03 23:12:40+00:00): @nevw I wasn't sure how to fix the "duplicate segment in relation" so I deleted the two areas and remade them. See #66004589

@Warin61 I used mostly local knowledge (lived here all my life) and bing aerial imagery. I used the QldMap just to double check a few things to see if I was correct. I will cease using it as a custom basemap source.
Warin61 (2019-01-03 23:45:04+00:00): The best source is local knowledge! While a confidence check might be useful from time to time, 'we' cannot use copyright sources as 'sources' unless they agree.
Luen Warneke (2019-01-04 00:11:20+00:00): Understood. Thanks