piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Jrachi (2021-09-18 19:53:39+00:00): Ciao.
C'è un motivo per cui utilizzi il tag note per lamentarti con gli sviluppatori di iD?
Innanzitutto il tag note richiede un valore in inglese. Tu dovresti usare il tag note:it.
Ma sopratutto. Il tag note serve per fornire informazioni agli altri mappatori e non per scrivere lamentele.
Ivo, Jrachi
SomeoneElse (2021-09-19 23:24:12+00:00): Hello Marty5550,
Was your rant in the "note" tag designed for the developers of openstreetmap.org or of the iD in-browser editor?  Whichever it was, I can guarantee that they don't go searching through address nodes in OSM data looking for feedback?
Best Regards, 
Andy
SomeoneElse (2021-09-19 23:24:17+00:00): 270 / 5000
Translation results
Ciao Marty5550,
Il tuo sfogo nel tag "note" è stato progettato per gli sviluppatori di openstreetmap.org o dell'editor iD nel browser? Qualunque cosa fosse, posso garantire che non cercheranno attraverso i nodi di indirizzi nei dati OSM in cerca di feedback?
Distinti saluti,
Andy
stefanct (2021-08-02 14:59:44+00:00): Du hast nur die Ways auf railway=disused geändert, aber die Relationen stehen gelassen. War das Absicht?
stefanct (2021-08-02 15:29:10+00:00): Das wurde jetzt nachgeholt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/109040672
quovadit (2021-08-02 18:30:52+00:00): danke, war keine Absicht
dval (2021-05-31 14:09:43+00:00): Здесь на детском садике, мне кажется, также правки были сделаны зря. Вы поставили на билдинг киндергаден, а эменити вообще убрали. ? То же самое на школе. ? Также вы пользуетесь космоснимками Bing. Возможно я отстал уже (хотя не думаю), но более качественные снимки предоставляет Maxar.
Aleksandr_Pa (2022-01-15 20:51:30+00:00): Тег amenity должен был перенести на территорию садика\школы. Совсем его не убираю, конечно. (Хотя техническая ошибка всегда возможна.)
wielandb (2021-06-02 20:34:48+00:00): Heyho :)
Ganz sicher, dass das ein Biergarten und nicht einfach nur Außengastronomie ist? 

Es vor einem Tag ein entsprechender anonymer Hinweis.
ubX6dtQlCK (2021-06-03 05:19:35+00:00): Moin,
ja, ein Biergarten. Gaststätte und Biergarten und Bedienung bzw. Selbstbedienung.
Scout Jens (2024-01-07 16:12:25+00:00): Servus,
Du hast die Ampeltaster als Ampel gemappt. Das ist unüblich und nicht sinnvoll. Wie kommst Du darauf, das so zu machen?
Viele Grüße, Jens
eggie (2021-05-30 18:44:37+00:00): Hi simn_s

Tanks for your contribution. 
In the Netherlands we get our buildings from import from the Dutch Cadastre.
I asked for import at the OSM forum.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=830965#p830965
Greetz,
eggie
LucaLiebtLandkarten (2021-05-30 19:00:30+00:00): Hi eggie,
thanks for the heads up! I read the discussion and I didn't know that you could abreviate Amsterdam with A'dam in Dutch. It's not that surprising since I'm not from the Netherlands, but good to know nonetheless. Have a nice evening!
simn_s
eggie (2021-05-30 20:59:07+00:00): Done... Your building in A'dam :)
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=105583812
dval (2021-05-31 13:56:35+00:00): Hi, Aleksandr_Pa! Вы здесь заменили на короткой дороге service на track. Делать этого не стоило, поскольку всё было правильно сделано ранее. Почитайте Вики по этим тегам, плз. В принципе эта дорога здесь вообще не нужна, поскольку она ничего не добавляет к реальности.
rthik007 (2021-05-31 05:09:56+00:00): Hi florescaacserolf,
Dragged the node and fix the alignment of residential road way 902646224.
Kindly check with 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105595452
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105578702
florescaacserolf (2021-05-31 16:15:01+00:00): will update this road.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105578702
SomeoneElse (2021-05-30 18:28:03+00:00): This follows on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105565855 also deals with other node change fails in there too, retracing from allowable imagery.
Arun Madhavan (2021-05-31 02:05:37+00:00): Thank you for making all the contributions.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105578932
willisturm (2021-06-07 06:56:39+00:00): Hi toygarlk,
for your information. It is not so good to use 2 expressions at the highway-key (highway=traffic_signals;speed_camera). The better way is mapping 2 different nodes: One Node with highway=traffic_signals and traffic_signals:direction=forward/backward. The second node with highway=speed_camera and maxspeed=*.
The best way mapping a speed camera ist creating a relation: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement
Have a nice day.
aweech (2021-06-04 18:15:57+00:00): Hi,
In this edit you replaced the Brigham City Family Fun Center with Takumi Japanese Grill, but in a comment on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105629299, local mapper Level said that the bowling alley is still open. Do you know where the Japanese restaurant should really go? Do they share a building?
!bm (2021-05-30 19:23:15+00:00): -"(resolve 32 conflicts)" – keine Konflikte entstanden/behoben
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105579304
rempshaener (2021-05-31 19:05:26+00:00): Der als Park angelegte Grünzug sollte auch als Park eingetragen sein. Ich habe daher https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/145487555 wieder auf Park gestellt. Vor Aufnahme des nächsten Bauabschnitts lasse ich hinsichtlich https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/820228564 gerne mit mir reden; als Kompromiss habe ich die Fläche aufgeteilt.
rempshaener (2021-05-31 18:55:32+00:00): Vergleichbar anderen Flächen in Neuss ist das hier mindestens parkähnlich. Zugegeben: Das OSM-Wiki lässt m.E. beides zu, park und recreation_ground. Dennoch passt hier m.E. park besser. Vor weiteren entsprechenden Änderungen würde ich das sehr gerne ausdiskutieren ;-)
Mordechai23 (2021-05-31 12:04:55+00:00): ta droga nie prowadzi do żadnej posesji - czemu zmieniasz na service?
olo81 (2021-11-05 22:22:21+00:00): Aceess=private na tych uliczkach parkingowych to błąd, dostęp do tych uliczek jest swobodny. 
Druga sprawa że nie nazywamy dróg które nie mają nazwy, jeśli nie ma tabliczek z nazwą na tych drogach usuwał bym.
Adam_Piszczek (2022-04-12 16:54:06+00:00): Tego automatu nie ma w terenie.
Adam_Piszczek (2022-04-12 16:55:47+00:00): Na ul. Oświęcimskiej jest ale zamknięty
fkv (2021-10-13 23:16:22+00:00): Die Abstraktion des Wasserfalls auf einen Node ist sicher keine Verbesserung. Aber das ist noch gar nichts im Vergleich zum vorigen Bearbeiter, der den Zugangsweg zur Höhle gelöscht hat.
SKald (2021-10-27 12:08:31+00:00): Wasserfall als Weg wirkt für mich ein bissl extravagant, stört mich aber nicht. Was ist da der konkrete Vorteil? Wichtig war mir da Höhleneingang und Wasserfall zu trennen, was dein Nachbearbeiter zusammen auf einen Node gelgegt hatte. Ich stell mal den Wasserfall-Way wieder her.
fkv (2021-10-27 13:10:52+00:00): Der Vorteil ist, dass es die Realität genauer abbildet. Ein Node wär eine genaue Abbildung im Falle eines Wasserfalls, der nur über eine einzige senkrechte (oder überhängende) Wandstufe geht. Der Wasserfall hier ist aber nicht senkrecht.
Wenn es nur darum geht, die Fehler meines Nachbearbeiters zu beheben, wär ein Revert seines Changesets einfacher gewesen.
SKald (2021-10-27 15:56:21+00:00): Dafür war mir das Changeset (94080207). ehrlich gesagt, zu groß.
SKald (2021-10-27 20:22:46+00:00): V.a. weil da am Flusslauf und am Waldpolycgon herumgetan wurde. Wenn Du mit dem Zugangsweg, den zum nördlichen Eingang meinst, den kann ich schon herauskitzeln. Im Süden gibt es keinen (mehr), oder? Davon kenn ich nur Erzählungen der Großeltern resp. alte Bilder.
fkv (2021-10-27 21:08:43+00:00): Nachdem die Änderungen an der Höhle und dem Zugang zu ihr keine Verbesserungen waren, gehe ich auch bei den Änderungen am Flusslauf und am Wald nicht von Verbesserungen aus. Wie auch immer. Der Zugang zum nördlichen Eingang gehört natürlich wiederhergestellt (denn soweit ich weiß, ist das immer noch der übliche Zugang), und von einem Eingang zum südlichen Eingang weiß ich nichts, darüber weißt du offenbar mehr.
JJJWegdam (2021-05-30 20:49:19+00:00): The only source you state is PDOK aerial, but your changeset deviates from the situation on those pictures. Can you please elaborate what you did and based on what sources?
Hb- (2021-08-28 11:58:00+00:00): Hallo, herzlich willkommen bei der OSM.  

Von dieser Änderung eines Waldweges waren neun Relationen betroffen, z.B. der PLZ-Bereich Hitzacker. Die Reihenfolge der Mitglieder in einer Relation ist wichtig. Ist sie falsch, so ist eine Grenz-Relation nicht mehr geschlossen und damit bedeutungslos. Die PLZ-Grenze hatte ein Loch.

Das Problem ist mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110377455 wieder behoben. Die Reihenfolge der Mitglieder 3 und 4 wurde korrigiert, siehe Verlauf in https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3386718/history

Für nachhaltiges Arbeiten empfiehlt sich JOSM.
Beste Grüße
DP24PH (2021-05-31 01:24:55+00:00): Unfortunately, this changeset is deemed erratic due to the following reason: The landuse multipolygon relation that you have recently edited into the mistagged "building=yes" may cause conflict to the existing buildings (especially the iD validator warning on building-building and building-highway crossing ways got ignored).

Hence, immediate reversion and validation have commenced thru the latest changeset 105589117.
Arun Madhavan (2021-05-31 02:03:16+00:00): Value of adding building as a point is very low. It is better if you can draw the outline. You can skip them too.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105580971
Jakka (2021-05-31 11:33:14+00:00): update done
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105581170
demon_box (2022-04-25 15:50:30+00:00): ciao, ti chiedo gentilmente di non cambiare i tags del percorso chiamato "Pistino" e preparato appositamente per le MTB, anche se non ufficiale e forse nemmeno è stato chiesto il permesso rimane comunque un percorso "di fatto" e nei tratti sistemati per la sola discesa in MTB è controproducente ed anche molto pericoloso taggare ad es. foot=yes nazichè foot=no in quanto l'ignaro escursionista che si avventurasse in salita a piedi su questo sentiero/pista rischierebbe di scontrarsi con i bikers in MTB mettendo seriamente a rischio la sua incolumità e quella dei bikers stessi!! ripeto, per favore, lascialo così come l'ho ritaggato oggi, GRAZIE ;-))
--enrico
nitram1234 (2021-06-01 08:33:31+00:00): Wow, this is pretty great!
DanGlover (2021-06-04 09:36:29+00:00): Hi skifans - you've entered reference HS3 154 for the post box but HG3 154 would be expected here. Sometimes Royal Mail get the labels wrong but are you able to confirm, please?

Dan
skifans (2021-06-04 10:10:46+00:00): Hi Dan,
To be honest it's probably more likely I just typed it wrong. I'll find the survey photo when I'm back from work this evening and check, thanks for letting me know.
skifans (2021-06-04 22:02:09+00:00): I've checked my photo and yes I had copied the reference wrong. Thanks for letting me know Dan. Its been fixed in: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105862445
jmty8 (2021-06-08 12:34:23+00:00): Hello. Sorry for bothering you. Can you tell me where did you find information about this roundabout?
Martj9 (2021-06-09 18:49:16+00:00): I go through that roundabout every weekend. Last time was 6 june

Anyway it's a new roundabout, didn't exist until this winter
Martj9 (2021-06-09 20:24:18+00:00): Here's an article from a local newspaper: 
https://www.lagendanews.com/susa-quasi-pronta-la-nuova-rotonda-sulla-strada-statale-24/
jmty8 (2021-06-10 08:37:14+00:00): Hey! Thank you so much for the information.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-05-30 19:45:46+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changeset 102614566.
Sanniu (2021-06-22 08:57:36+00:00): Hi
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/948828061 has no tags. Can you, please, add the appropriate tags?
eggie (2021-05-30 20:26:32+00:00): Dag a....
De info heb ik samengevoegd met adresnode..
MVG
eggie
dvdhoven (2021-05-31 15:08:27+00:00): De Heideweg kan geen path zijn.
De weg dient als ontsluiting van meerdere huizen en moet dus door motorvoertuigen bereden kunnen worden, verder moet het bos ook bereikt kunnen worden door bosbouwvoertuigen en hulpdiensten.
Een path kan normaliter niet door motorvoertuigen worden bereden
Ik heb hem naar track gezet.

Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
gabro00 (2021-07-02 11:40:53+00:00): Szia!
Ha tudod nagyjából a jövőbeli kerékpárút nyomvonalát, akkor a highway=proposed + proposed=cycleway címkével jelölheted.
A mostani állapotra nem tudnak tervezni az útvonaltervezők, mert nincs bekötve a két vége már meglévő útvonalba.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-05-30 20:07:38+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 84993700, 85739722, 86307642, 86308045, 86308212, 86324527, 86324653, 86337026, 86471277.
Polarbear-repair (2021-07-01 07:49:11+00:00): contains validated fiction
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105582642
stigar (2021-05-30 23:16:41+00:00): Wrong changeset comment, apologies. Should have been:

Tag footpath surface as appropriate. Some adjustments of alignment.
mueschel (2021-05-31 14:07:33+00:00): Hi,
all the "massgis:" tags you added here don't exist in any other place. Please fix or remove them.
Arun Madhavan (2021-05-31 02:02:24+00:00): Are you sure it is recreational ground ? to me it looks like a preparation for farm land. You may try other imageries. ALso you have brought some buildings into the area. I've corrected that
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105583120
mini-me (2021-05-31 00:03:36+00:00): Для редактирования маршрутов нужно использовать JOSM. Если в iD отсоединить "место остановки" от дороги, то точка без тегов всё равно остаётся в отношении. А при добавлении новой остановки она оказывается в конце маршрута, что ломает навигацию.
Qpl (2021-05-31 19:31:15+00:00): Ок, тогда маршруты больше ИДом не трогаю. Еще тут исправлял https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105583839
Это можно починить?
mini-me (2021-05-31 20:29:17+00:00): Да, уже починил
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-05-30 21:15:11+00:00): hello, can you justify this edit that does not comply with the portuguese community standards? waiting for a reply before reverting
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-05-30 21:22:16+00:00): reverted as does not comply with the community standards https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Portugal/Padroniza%C3%A7%C3%A3o#Estradas
eggie (2021-05-30 22:11:01+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback. Deze weg zou je beter als highway=track kunnen intekenen.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-05-30 22:15:23+00:00): Als voorbeeld even omgezet naar
highway=track
tracktype=grade2

Die specificatie hoort bij een graveltrack
Gr eggie
eggie (2021-05-30 22:13:14+00:00): Lijkt me oke.. Probeer bij je uploads aan te geven wat je toevoegt. Dus. bv 'highway=path toegevoegd'

Mapse
eggie
Anacho (2021-06-01 11:42:43+00:00): Dank voor je reactie. Momenteel ben ik druk aan het rondkijken hoe iets in elkaar zit. Ik wijzig nog even niets of minimaal. Zo heb ik ook dit reactie/overleg veld gevonden :-)
SomeoneElse (2021-05-31 10:57:01+00:00): Hello ridethehighway65, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
The comment that you've used on this changeset is just "smg5".  That doesn't really explain to other people what you were changing, why, or what the source was.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments has a bit more information.
Best Regards,
Andy
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-05-30 21:14:39+00:00): hello, can you justify this edit? waiting for a reply before reverting
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-05-30 21:21:45+00:00): reverted as you deleted ways. do not delete elements from the map.
JoeLynx (2021-05-30 21:44:44+00:00): ok, go there and fix it by yourself, I was there today very upset that the path were wrong.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-05-30 21:52:10+00:00): no, the path is correct, if you notice you have a bad visibility tag on it. And here's proof that the path does exist https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/vLlayU1ObJ5WXnnIvqIRaQ
JoeLynx (2021-05-31 07:08:22+00:00): Ok, this proof if 5 years old. Now it is much worse. And they built some new fences all around which destroy the last pieces of the path. Notice about visibility makes no sense, because a lot of services is using OSM as good source and there is no info about visibility, so people will trust that path has normal visibility. This path was almost invisible 5 years ago and now on many parts is not there anymore. Yes you can go through, but I would not send anybody to this invisible path. Because if you do not have gpx trace in your mobile, you will not find it.
I wanted only to help other people to avoid my experience yesterday.
Thats for my explanation.
Best regards.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-05-31 20:36:17+00:00): ok, but it's not our fault how others use our data. the tag of visibility existes and apps should used. also, deleting elements from map is wrong, you should only delete the tags as in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history

hope you enjoy your stay in Madeira
gileri (2021-05-31 19:02:36+00:00): Bonjour Hubert, merci pour cette mise à jour !

En plus de l'étiquette "maxspeed", il y a les étiquettes "maxspeed:type" et "source:maxspeed" qui servent à décrire les limites de vittesse.

Ici source:maxspeed a été laissé à la valeur FR:urban, qui signifie "en agglomération", donc 50 km/h.

Si c'est une zone 30, le mieux est à mon avis d'utiliser maxspeed:type=FR:zone30 et donc supprimer source:maxspeed=FR:urban.
Hubert Bécart (2021-06-03 07:49:05+00:00): Bonjour,
Merci pour les explications. J'ai apporté quelques corrections. Aujourd'hui j'ai l'impression que "maxspeed:type" est peu utilisé dans la métropole. Est-ce qu'on est sûr que cette notation fait consensus ?
gileri (2021-06-04 16:03:16+00:00): Si je me rappelle bien source:maxspeed a été utilisé par iD ou StreetComplete, donc la part d'usage n'est pas forcément représentative du consensus vu que les tags sont plutôt cachés sur ces outils.

Les tags source:* sont faits pour indiquer la source de l'information utilisée pour indiquer la valeur dans OSM :

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source

Du coup indiquer source:maxspeed=FR:urban (par exemple) va à l'encontre du consensus sur l'usage de source:* :)
gileri (2021-05-31 17:55:41+00:00): Bonjour,

Les pictos vélos sont visibles depuis l'imagerie Ortho HR 2020, est-ce qu'ils ont été retiré depuis ?

Merci,

Éric
Hubert Bécart (2021-06-03 07:03:46+00:00): Certains sont encore là mais progressivement effacés au fil des travaux. Par ailleurs, il vaut mieux ne pas cartographier ces "voies partagées" qui n'ont pas d'existence réglementaire en France. Ce sont juste des voies de circulation automobile avec un picto vélo.
gileri (2021-06-03 20:35:29+00:00): Bonjour, en effet ça ne donne pas de prescription ou autre mais ça reste un aménagement cyclable, que certains apprécient de voir apparaître sur OSM.
Hubert Bécart (2021-06-04 06:16:24+00:00): Bonjour.
Ce n'est pas un aménagement cyclable au sens de la loi et ces pictos n'ont pas d'existence réglementaire dans le code de la route. Je pense que les saisir induit les usagers en erreur en faisant croire à un aménagement dédié alors qu'il s'agit d'une route comme une autre. De plus, le cas est différent, par exemple, des "ciclocarriles" espagnols, qui sont des voies dédiées aux cyclistes, clairement signalées et où les véhicules sont tolérés limités à 30 km/h. Cet aménagement n'existant pas en France, il semble préférable de s'en tenir à ce qui existe chez nous...
gileri (2021-06-04 16:21:50+00:00): La page du tag présente pourtant exactement le cas français :

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dshared_lane

Used to identify roads which contain a shared lane marking, or sharrow, to indicate that the travel lane is shared by bicycles and other vehicles.

Quelle sont les erreurs induites avec ce tag ? Je ne vois pas de problème à l'utiliser, même si ce ne sont pas les aménagements les plus utiles.
redrace (2022-07-11 07:09:01+00:00): Hallo
Wie kommst Du darauf, das diese Gelandeabschnitte Dämme in diesem Sinne sind?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:embankment
francians (2021-05-31 16:35:34+00:00): Hello,

This is a mass-edit and it should have been discussed on Italian mailing list.
It doesn't change anything per se, as useless data can be simply ignored... Anyhow I am not against this 😉

Next time consider to ping talk-it 

Many thanks
Cheers
Francesco
gileri (2021-05-31 17:35:45+00:00): Hi Francesco, thank you for reviewing changesets and contacting me about this one !

Is there anything wrong with the changeset itself ? If I had any doubt that some aspects would be detrimental I would have talked about it with talk-it, but I can't see any potential downside to it. But I see multiple downsides to leaving such names.
gileri (2021-05-31 17:37:59+00:00): Also, I don't speak italian, and my time is limited. If I have to argue and translate in a foreign language to do such a trivial edit, I think I wouldn't have.

And I think that's why nobody did it before me. It's not worth the hassle. However, just improving the map make it worth it in my opinion.

Éric
SekeRob (2021-05-31 18:31:53+00:00): Actually someone did a set of 'fontanella' name erasing some months ago seemingly to make a point and then missed a few in the lat/lon block, a wide grin worth.
There's a website with almost all the drinkwater points in Italy and still every cycle tour I find 1 or more not mapped or invisible on the OSM based cyclers map, a few each week touring the country, I'll leave a map note and take a picture for the details, wheelchair, fee, bottle filling, potable. How many did you see with any of these feature tags?
BTW, Romans call them nasone. I've seen a few with that name tag too ;o)
gileri (2021-05-31 18:36:52+00:00): That's nice SekeRob ! On-the-ground survey and detailed OSM objects is always best !

I did focus on removing the descriptive name to avoid encouraging mappers to rely on names instead of "proper" tags. I did not pay particuliar attention to such details in this changeset, but they are really useful when travelling !
francians (2021-05-31 19:39:02+00:00): Please be aware of this page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

Your change IMHO matches the case:

Useful edit that would be tedious to do manually - approved by community and discussed

It's important to know the automated (or mechanical) changes mandate a discussion... I'm not against your change, it's something we generally need and the main advantage is that may avoid someone to copy a wrong example.
I don't want a revert and if you would have asked on ml I would have agreed on this. You can write in English on Italian mailing list and at very least attach also an automated translation with a warning you don't speak our language for whom would like reply.
Cheers
Francesco
aceman444 (2023-04-16 20:43:21+00:00): Zdravim, myslim, ze buildin=shrine tu bolo spravne. Nie je to kaplnka do ktorej by sa dalo vojst, pripadne tam robit omsu.
Illio (2023-04-17 15:28:46+00:00): Myslím, že táto kaplnka spĺňa definíciu "chapel" podľa OSM wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dchapel

"A chapel building is different from a wayside shrine in that it is possible to enter it, as it typically has a proper roof and either a door or a doorway without door. It's different from a church in that it is usually much smaller and there's typically usually only room for one person (or maybe a small group)."

Táto kaplnka má strechu, dvierka a priestor, kam sa zmestí jedna alebo dve osoby.