piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Pilou@nowhere (2021-11-11 15:28:03+00:00): Dear DataKop,
You question seem to be rhetorical, ;-)  = If I spend time for this, that mean that it’s worth the time spend, isn’t? …
To respond to the question “ Why maping ‘landuse=residential’ like this ? “ 
 I think the two last words in you first question are the more important
-	“Later” : on a large part of the map where I contribute, later is close to never…
During this time, the map shows NO indication about populated area.
When somebody will refine it later, the population growth will probably void a current “refined” mapping.
And if somebody has time to spend on it, my “fastmaping” will help to show him where is the populated Area
The use of  tag ‘place: village’ or ‘ place: hamlet’ without name is not visible on the map so not very useful.

-	“refined” : on this area, there is no clear border to land ownership, or clear border between the house area, the backyard crop garden, and the fields. So using a circle is not a bad way to show the information. 

I hope that have respond to you implicit question, and begin to convince you to the interest of this kind of premaping / fastmaping.
PS: for my sector (humanitarian), OSM is the main reference for cartography, and the information I map is useful for our team on the field, to priories the main populated area impacted by a disaster, aiming objective choice.
Datakop (2021-11-12 08:06:10+00:00): OSM is about truth (what's on the ground). Please give me evidence that your lazy mapping has really helped any child from Tchad.
Pilou@nowhere (2021-11-12 10:02:46+00:00): The area I map as ‘Landuse=residential ‘ is based on evidence of inhabitation : houses, farmyard, livestock Shed, fences,…   but with no clear border. Even my work seem to be rough, you will have the same issue at lower scale. 
A heavy work  on tree mapping or house to house mapping in that kind of context, will not be more “true” with the next  satellite imagery available.
You can make the same comment for every landuse mapped on African countryside.  
OSM is a great tool, well adapted for western country context. Using it on this kind of place need to manage with inconstancy and blurred border. 
What is better: a true proxy or a data lack (and lack is à kind of information, could be interpreted as there is no people/nothing here… what is largely wronged). The perfect circle y use for this proxy is the same level of true than official mapping of large scale map.
For evidence of usefulness, I currently work with Red Cross, on flood preparness on the area. 
(https://unocha.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=547a787708d32a96a42c77746&id=01c5dee01f&e=be2e3f9de8)
Because of lack of easy access Data, available on mobile support, our team focused on a wrong area for 2 years, working near Bongor. Thanks to my work ( and the other few OSM contributor), they are now focusing  in the  most vulnerable area to flood, and more exposed people.
Lazzy is a tought judgment for what I doo, covering large area with essential information take time. 
For myself I do not emit judgment for people “wasting” time on useless overdetailed data while the map is steel virgin on the whole huge area around. 
I spend time to response in detail to you 2 sentences in a foreign language for me. If you are steel skeptical, please take time to understand the specific context I map before charging my work as useless. Thanks and have a nice day
woodpeck (2022-07-24 19:41:42+00:00): Dear Pilou@nowhere, while it is generally acceptable to "approximate" when mapping, drawing guesswork micro-circles across the landscape helps no-one and makes our map the laughing stock of users. I looked at the circles you created and found them more or less random - some circles had no buildings in them, lots of other buildings were outside any circles you drew. If you have some specialist use case for which such guesswork mapping is useful, please find a way to execute the guesswork mapping inside your own toolchain, and not in OSM. 

Here is a screenshot of your random residential circles and their problems: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/landuse-circles.jpg

You've had 8 months to clean this up and haven't found it worth doing, so I'll now revert these circles.
woodpeck (2022-07-24 20:18:14+00:00): Here is another example where a residential landuse area stretched along a road - which could have been correctly approximated by a rectangular way using four nodes - has instead been approximated by three circles, two of them overlapping, and two others leaving a gap that does very well have buildings in it: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/landuse-circles2.jpg - this is indeed lazy and careless, and wa waste of resources on top of everything (using 60 nodes instead of 4 and still giving a worse approximation). I have identified about 10,000 such residential landuses added by Pilou@nowhere which have not been improved since they were added, and will remove them now.
woodpeck (2022-07-24 20:27:38+00:00): Just in case someone looks at this later, here's an example of how the map was looking with these circular land uses in place: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/landuse-circles3.jpg - it's like you let your 3-year-old play with GIMP...
Pilou@nowhere (2022-07-25 07:11:35+00:00): Waouh! Many thanks. You juste withdrow a lot of houres of '' lassy'' work... 
If you dont see the interest of this, in tout mind, what is the interest of a blank map?
For the local civil socity, that is very important to see where are the most populated area on the Map. And no of them Can affords spending ressources and time on dedicated shared mapping . A mater of live... 
Yes, a few part of this work is probably wrong ( dis you check with the whole satimagery before ?) . You cant withdrow all juste because there is feew mistakes. Unless you have to delete the whole map.
What is the interest of a particiativ mapping if you dont care of the motivation of the mapper?
Deleting this informations is largely lassyer than trying improving it.
This Is A Display Name Desu (2022-07-29 11:07:06+00:00): It would be more appropriate to have a node instead of area if your only purpose is to tag something residential exists at the place you see them on satellite images.
Pilou@nowhere (2022-07-29 11:38:48+00:00): You are true. It would be more appropiate following the osm way of dooing. But as i say to datakoop, the nodle will note apear on the Map and common user '' osm consummer'' will not see the information that is an inhabited area...
6dmndUwtBJW8 (2021-11-10 17:10:32+00:00): Nice work

Before & After this changeset
https://imgur.com/a/oImCWJt

Difference between  this changeset
https://osmcha.org/changesets/113617053/
flohoff (2021-11-11 08:51:20+00:00): 
Ich hab mit dem change hier echt meine Probleme. Das ist erstmal eine Kreisstraße die besser ausgebaut ist als viele wege ausserhalb geschlossener Ortschaften - Willst du die dann alle runterstufen ? Auf was denn dann noch - Unclassified ist das kleinste was es ausserhalb gibt und das ist hier definitiv nicht gegeben. Demnach müssten wir 2/3 der Kreisstraßen im Kreis runterstufen.

Flo
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:00:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:58:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
Marcussacapuces91 (2022-02-01 22:10:12+00:00): Faudrait vérifier l'Allée des Cheveches, parce que je trouve rien sur le cadastre.
Merci
Olyon (2022-02-04 19:15:23+00:00): Dans la Base adresse nationale,  il semble y avoir 2 adresses, le 22 et 25 Allée des Cheveches à cet endroit. 
https://bano.openstreetmap.fr/fantoir/index.html#insee=69138&tab=1
(on peut cliqué sur "2 points" ou "relation" de la bonne ligne pour les importer dans josm)

Pas sûr que ce soit ce bout de bitume qui porte ce nom mais ça colle avec les numéros.

(par contre c'est peut être Chevêches avec accent ^)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:59:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:06:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:03:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SekeRob (2021-11-10 18:16:27+00:00): Many thanks, I've closed the map note on the Pescara runway referencing your CS.

ciao
SekeRob (2021-11-19 16:48:44+00:00): Hi Jan,

here's the 3rd case i was talking about, actual just a stone throw away so to speak, stumbled on it while fixing some waterways. Same Osmose flagging.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/350423875
Airport tagging wrong value: icao=IT-0309 way 350423875 josm iD edit
Would you please do the honors.

MTIA
Rob
martien-176 (2021-11-26 17:01:54+00:00): Hi Elisia, there is an issue here to buildings partly covered by trees not traced completely.

See also my comment on https://tasks.hotosm.org/projects/10426/tasks/?search=141
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113620051
tstuver (2021-11-13 01:00:07+00:00): Awesome! Was wondering when someone would do this, but I didn't have the exact location / couldn't find aerial imagery.
mvexel (2021-11-13 16:13:20+00:00): Same, I was going to take the train to check it out and do the mapping! Which I may still do just because I am curious, but thanks for adding the new station!
TheConductor (2021-11-13 20:10:53+00:00): Thanks guys! Happy to help. It is just an approximation based on my latest trip to the airport. Unfortunately, the aerial isn't up-to-date just yet. Hopefully soon (fingers crossed). Feel free to make improvements/adjustments as imagery becomes available or you have the chance to survey. I just took my best guess since it is operational now.
mvexel (2021-11-13 23:21:08+00:00): Totally the spirit of OSM, isn't it? Someone else will come around and do another survey and add more detail... Perhaps it will be one of us..?
tstuver (2021-11-14 00:41:02+00:00): I might, soon! I work for UTA and even our internal tools use either Google or OSM for their maps. Just from what I know about the location and the route now, this looks pretty accurate. Although I think that little leg of the 3700 West road is probably gone now and in the active construction area.
mvexel (2021-11-14 15:44:58+00:00): Oh cool! You may be interested to know that over the past few months I have been adding all UTA bus stops (manually) from the UTA dataset that is made available through the UGRC data portal. My next move was to incorporate all these stops into full bus route relations. The relations for the routes mostly already exist, but the stops can be added to the route relation as well. This will be a lot of work so please help if you can! In the process, I have also moved stop nodes to the correct location (as observed via aerials or street view images from Mapillary or Kartaview) where the original data was wrong. So this may be useful data to bring back to UTA as well.
TheConductor (2021-11-14 17:13:48+00:00): Very neat that you work for UTA. I also work for the State of Utah (not UGRC, although I have some friends there). We don't rely on OSM as much as we do ArcGIS Pro and other Esri resources so a lot of what I do is as a hobby. Like Mvexel, I've been focused on making fixes to the TRAX relations as well as better aligning the UVX route through Provo-Orem. I'm also interested in future TRAX projects, particularly where the thought is to expand the network next!
tstuver (2021-11-16 16:49:42+00:00): I saw the UVX improvements, thanks! I was wondering how the bus-only lanes would be handled on OSM. I have no idea what the standard approach is.

Regarding this changeset, I do think the curve is actually a little different in real life (it has more of a 45 degree elbow rather than turning the full 90 degrees at once) but don't have any traces or data for it (only personal knowledge). I do think that the station itself is fairly close the actual position, which is most important. I may have a trace in the future.
TheConductor (2021-11-16 17:11:31+00:00): Bus-only lanes are usually tagged as highway=service with an access=no tag and bus=designated tag. Oneway=yes tags are included when the opposing bus lanes are segregated (like sections of the UVX on 700 North and University Ave). There are additional tags that can be found on the OSM Wiki but to the best of my knowledge, those tags are the standard scheme for designated bus lanes. 

A 45 degree elbow would make a lot more sense now that I think about it. I'm hoping to have access to aerial photography that my organization had flown in September. That will hopefully shed some light on the final alignment from the sky.
maraf24 (2021-11-16 11:53:28+00:00): To nadal powinna być primary.
literan (2021-11-10 18:47:10+00:00): вот только я не понял, зачем вы больницу в больнице создали. Отменил в этой части.
Glassman (2021-11-10 19:37:13+00:00): I don't know if you did, but you might ask both of the prior mappers why they added opening hours. Both Adam Schneider and skquinn are current active mappers with a good reputation.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113621062
TJ_B (2021-11-10 23:46:11+00:00): thanks for your help again Glassman. I do know why one would map the open hours that way. It is signed by the private land holder on which the trail starts as such. so these dates do pertain to the private land segments of the trail. However, there is no seasonal closure order on the public land segments. I would like to segment the ways separately for the private land trail segments and tag them accurately, I just don't know how to do this yet.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113621062
Glassman (2021-11-10 23:55:58+00:00): To split the way, just create a node where you want the break, then right click and use the scissors to split the way. 

Questions - even though this is private land, how do you know the owner didn't give permission for the path?
TJ_B (2021-11-16 22:35:05+00:00): Thanks for the tip.

The history of the Sauer's Mtn. Trail is interesting. This recent article about Mr. Sauer after his passing talks a little about it: https://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/local/sauers-mountain-loses-its-namesake/article_11b28b64-59c4-11eb-8793-e3219fb2dd50.html
Glassman (2021-11-17 00:19:09+00:00): That was an amazing man. We need more like him.
eggie (2021-11-10 20:15:27+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
TheBestIdea (2022-05-31 17:39:04+00:00): Hey Mxx,

Been meaning to check with you about the sharrows you added to Ocean Ave south of Ave H. That didn't seem right to me so I biked that way at the end of April and did not see them and they don't appear on the 2022 NYC bike map (nyc.gov/bikemap). But I wanted to ping you before I removed them.

Brandon
MxxCon (2022-05-31 17:46:21+00:00): I was waiting at a bus stop on ocean ave just south of ave H and I think I saw sharrows on both sides of the road? They were pretty worn out from traffic🤔 But I could've been mistaken with some other random road paint there so I'll defer to your decision.
RunningGoofy (2021-11-28 10:38:27+00:00): Hi,
Ben even benieuwd naar deze wijziging, de Prometheusstraat is nu weer openbaar toegankelijk, echter dit is een bedrijven terrein.
Wat is de reden, ik wil deze straat weer aanpassen.
Groet John
A67-A67 (2021-11-29 23:59:42+00:00): De Prometheusstraat stond voor mijn wijziging als Aresstraat op de kaart, wat niet overeen kwam met de adressen. Die straatnaam heb ik daarom aangepast.
frankemg (2021-11-13 03:37:52+00:00): bro why'd you have to kill nafo like that 😔😔😔😔😔😔
Mike Baggaley (2021-11-17 23:45:54+00:00): Hi, if this road has been downgraded, please remove the A ref and add its new B ref. If it is still the A3026, please revert back to primary.

Thanks,
Mike
swinetown (2024-02-19 13:13:53+00:00): I can't find any evidence that the A3026 has been re-routed so I've reverted Windmill Drive back to tertiary and Tidworth Road back to primary.

Then again, I haven't done a ground survey so I'll open a note requesting one.
MxxCon (2021-11-11 06:30:56+00:00): Hello.
In this edit you tagged a road segment with 'layer=-1'. Layer means at ground 0, with positive numbers above ground, while negative numbers below.
So did you mean to indicate that this driveway duck under the building or is the driveway at ground level and there's roof over it?👍
This article explains layer tag in more details https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113622176
larryv (2021-11-11 06:50:51+00:00): I meant the latter; the protruding section of building is a porte-cochère.

My understanding from that page is that "layer" only has meaning with respect to any intersected objects. It explicitly states that "[n]egative values do not imply that object is underground". Is that assertion false? Am I missing a guideline from elsewhere on the wiki?

In any case, I'm not attached to the current state. I can certainly set "layer=1" for the roof instead.
MxxCon (2021-11-11 07:22:58+00:00): I didn't mean "underground" as in covered up, perhaps "below grade" is a more accurate terminology. :)
It'd be useful to update the tags to more accurately represent what's there.
larryv (2021-11-11 16:11:28+00:00): Having layer=0 correspond to grade does make a lot of sense, and I've made the update (<https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113637552>). If that convention is very prevalent, then it would be helpful if the wiki mentioned it explicitly. It only seems to be obliquely implied.
letihu (2022-01-01 19:54:59+00:00): Ist hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1001187617/history
die Hausnummer 4 richtig?
Vielleicht die Nr. 2?
sabas88 (2021-11-11 12:46:37+00:00): Ciao,
questa modifica non è corretta.
user_10901495 (2021-11-10 21:43:26+00:00): Se vuole cancellare delle modifiche che ho fatto con cui non è d'accordo lo faccia da persona adulta, oggetto per oggetto, senza cancellare delle modifiche utili in maniera collaterale.
user_10901495 (2021-11-10 21:44:42+00:00): E il modo in cui ha usato il campo source è abbastanza ridicolo.
ygcgjp5 (2021-11-10 22:59:38+00:00): Ar nereiktų perkeliant school ir hospital žymes ant sklypo palikti adresą ant pastato? Adresas vis tiek priskirtas pastatui... Gal geriau adresą dėti ant abiejų, o ant sklypo dar prirašyti addr:contact=yes?
PovilasDew (2021-11-11 11:09:08+00:00): Ok, kadangi nežinojau dėl addr:contact sklypui, ir jo neuždėjus, kiek pamenu, meta klaidą. Patikrinau, kai kurie turi amenity sklypai šią savybę. Ačiū už info.
user_10901495 (2021-11-10 21:47:47+00:00): Nessuno ha detto che sono picchi montuosi.
Se non le piace vederli sulla mappa venga ad Arese e li tiri giù con una ruspa.
ivanbranco (2021-11-11 05:29:35+00:00): Martino, il tag peak IMPLICA siano picchi montuosi o AL MINIMO colline, quasi sempre identificati con un nome proprio. Dalla Wiki (che dovresti consultare ogni tanto) a cui tutti ci atteniamo: "The top ( summit) of a hill or mountain".

Queste non sono né colline né montagne. Se dovessimo mappare ogni minima sporgenza il database di OSM sarebbe costellato di natural=peak.
user_10901495 (2021-11-11 07:59:52+00:00): Ho già risposto. NON CI SONO ALTERNATIVE. Anche a me non piace usare il tag peak, ma dato che è l'unica alternativa e io (e immagino non solo io) queste collinette (quindi sì sono colline) le vorrei vedere, bisogna fare così. Cosa ci sarebbe di male se una pianura costellata di colllinette fosse indicata sulla mappa come costellata di collinette? La potresti facilmente distinguere per esempio da una pianura che invece costellata di collinette non è. 
Si chiama cartografia.
Non ha nessun senso e riscontro che un rilievo esista solo se qualcuno gli dà un nome.
user_10901495 (2021-11-11 08:02:47+00:00): "Ogni minima sporgenza" qui mi.sembra che si parli senza sapere di cosa si parlando. Le ha viste la collinette, magari su Mapillary o dal vivo? Se la risposta è no mi faccia il favore di non parlare a vanvera.
user_10901495 (2021-11-11 08:04:59+00:00): Ce ne sono tante di sporgenze di un metro ad Arese, se volessi mapparle ce le avrei da mappare. Ma non lo faccio perché me ne rendo conto benissimo da solo che non avrebbe senso e sarebbe un misuse del tag peak.
user_10901495 (2021-11-11 08:14:16+00:00): Qui si sta parlando di collinette. La wiki la leggo, a volte anche capendo quello che c'è scritto meglio di te o altri (vedi commento di Alecs01 sul mapping for the renderer), a volte non capendolo facendo la figura del deficiente (vedi l'idea che mi era venuta a settembre di mettere i municipi come admin_centre).
Alecs01 (2021-11-11 11:37:30+00:00): Martino, tu non cerchi la discussione con gli altri mappatori, li tratti a pesci in faccia dalle prime volte che hai risposto con sarcasmo a dei commenti che erano civili e cortesi. Non sei cambiato, fai sempre quello che ti pare e basta, non importa quante o quali obiezioni ricevi. Se vuoi fare parte di un progetto collaborativo con altre persone, devi tenere conto che dovrai seguire le regole che queste persone si sono date, anche se non ti piacciono. A me non piace granchè il criterio di come scrivere i nomi delle vie con date ad esempio, ma lo seguo lo stesso e cerco perfino di farlo rispettare. Guardati attorno: nessun altro usa natural=peak come vuoi fare tu, quindi sei tu a doverti adeguare.
SomeoneElse (2021-11-13 11:21:39+00:00): For info: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5447 .
Alecs01 (2021-11-13 12:56:37+00:00): Thanks!
flohoff (2021-11-17 11:26:08+00:00): Moin,
wege auf Campingplätzen sind keine tracks. Das hat ja mit Landwirtschaft nix zu tun.

Wenn die unbefestigt sind wäre das service/surface=gravel oder so

Flo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113623266
DeFra85 (2021-11-17 12:14:05+00:00): Die waren schon vorher hier so getaggt. Kann sie aber ggf. ändern wenn nötig
marczoutendijk (2021-11-14 18:52:25+00:00): Hello Map47,

I have contacted you on your personal account page, regarding your lack of contact with other OSM users. Are you aware of the fact that everytime someone is commenting here (on your changeset), you should get an e-mail notification of that! 
Do you ever check your mail for OSM messages?
 
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
marczoutendijk (2021-11-14 19:07:16+00:00): Hello Map47,

I have contacted you on your personal account page, regarding your lack of contact with other OSM users. Are you aware of the fact that everytime someone is commenting here (on your changeset), you should get an e-mail notification of that!
Do you ever check your mail for OSM messages?

Marc Zoutendijk
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group