piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
felipeeugenio (2021-03-31 11:29:50+00:00): Hola Xabier

qué significan estas ediciones borrando todo? ya no existe eso?
Las fotos son de octubre de 2020 y se ve todo perfecto.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102013500
zzptichka (2021-03-31 01:47:38+00:00): Hi,

Saw you tagging lots of pathways with `bicycle=no`. That's usually not the right tag, since it's supposed to be used on pathways where cycling is not allowed: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Dno

As an example, it could be used on sidewalks, or where there are specific signs that ban cycling.

If cycling is not convenient or desireable then it should be tagged with some other tag,  for example,
- `bicycle=dismount` if dismount is required
- `smoothness=bad`
- `surface=ground`
Or combination of those. Any good router or map will recognize that and won't recommend taking a route through it.

By tagging a path with `bicycle=no` you are making routing impossible, even if someone could simply walk the bike a few meters, so that's a very bad idea.

If you could revisit some of you recent changesets and make changes that would be great.

Thanks.
diginono (2021-03-31 10:27:46+00:00): Hi,

Thanks will do. Some trails are just dirt or 'desire' paths (unpaved).
Now I will need to figure out how to edit my recent changes.
Thanks and have a nice day !
zzptichka (2021-03-31 13:51:35+00:00): Yep, these desire paths should be tagged with "surface=ground/grass" and "path=desire" tags.

Have a look at our tagging guide for more details: https://github.com/BikeOttawa/OSM-Bike-Ottawa-Tagging-Guide#osm-bike-ottawa-tagging-guide
Trevor_1 (2022-02-19 23:35:15+00:00): Hola. Estás seguro que esto es correcto? La Mapa Digital de Mexico no muestra los limites así. http://gaia.inegi.org.mx/mdm6/?v=bGF0OjE4Ljg4NzIyLGxvbjotOTguNjk3MjAsejo5LGw6YzExMXNlcnZpY2lvc3x0YzExMXNlcnZpY2lvcw==
Minh Nguyen (2021-05-28 20:59:02+00:00): Hi, please don’t replace properly mapped roundabouts (even minor traffic calming roundabouts) with the traffic_calming=island tag. Oversimplifying the roundabout creates ambiguity about the relationship of the roadway to the objects inside the island, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6511629050 .
gauravjuvekar (2021-05-28 21:45:54+00:00): Hi, those are not roundabouts because the intersection has a stop sign in only 1 direction. 1 direction of the road has priority. 

Please see the examples table
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout#Examples
Minh Nguyen (2021-05-29 01:13:47+00:00): OK, changeset 105516179 replaces junction=roundabout with junction=circular, which is more general, but keeps the circular way to retain that level of detail.
AlaskaDave (2021-04-25 13:56:56+00:00): You forgot to add the tag
boundary=administrative to this object.
I added it yesterday,
MKnight (2024-01-21 15:44:01+00:00): Moin die Bank [1] befindet sich tatsächlich ein Stückchen versetzt im Wald, ich hab sie mal zurückgeschoben...

[https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/434811353]
user_7130456 (2021-04-05 15:23:20+00:00): 你把社区边界（osm.org/way/806445297）加上树列的标签干嘛
Viajero Perdido (2021-04-02 18:54:43+00:00): Hi KBM.

From the wiki, "Use the access=* key to describe a general access restriction that applies to all transport modes."

Since you've covered the various permitted access types (bicycle etc), "access=no" conflicts with that, and should be omitted.  Cheers.
Warin61 (2021-04-01 07:41:17+00:00): More corrections to be done ...

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=138.57076&lat=-35.00968&zoom=17
DeBigC (2021-10-06 21:35:49+00:00): I couldn't see why this was a relation. Osmose says this is a mistake in any case, so I just made it into a closed way
VictorIE (2021-10-07 08:34:02+00:00): Sorry, I can't see what you are referring to.
IanVG (2021-04-02 14:30:03+00:00): Hi Abbk! Thanks for making an edit on OSM and first off, we really appreciate your engagement in the project. OSM is 100% dependent on the activity of users to keep the map up-to-date and high-quality. However, please try to keep your edits close to each-other, the edit you made stretches across the continental U.S. and makes it hard to see where exactly you are making your edits and hard for users like me to find edits in my area. Thanks and hope to see more activity from you in the future!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102015621
ash_win (2021-04-05 03:07:40+00:00): Hi Chenpoyu,
Removing tertiary, based on the road quality as it does not support Higher Classification way 924000888
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102015654
blackboxlogic (2021-04-01 01:52:17+00:00): Hi! Welcome to OSM and thanks for adding this road/address. Heads up, I've adjusted the road name from 'Leah Ln' to 'Leah Lane', we try not to have anything abreviated.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102015766
marc__marc (2021-04-23 14:59:38+00:00): Hello,
I restored the private path and added the private access restriction. This is the only way to avoid that the next contributor adds again the visible path on the satellite imagery.
Have a nice day,
Marc
Warin61 (2021-04-02 07:05:59+00:00): Multipolygon relations outer ways cannot share segments. 

Relation 12513626 has been deleted and the 2 ways correctly tagged one as house the other as roof.
woodpeck (2021-03-31 22:45:43+00:00): What is your source for this massive bridge that you have added here?
Allison P (2021-03-31 15:17:27+00:00): All addresses have been added as nodes in Ada County. I respectfully request the housenumber quest be turned off in the county.
yadathot (2021-03-31 04:09:43+00:00): Edited Highway tag as per Private Maxar imagery.
mariotomo (2021-03-31 16:20:42+00:00): hola.  cuidado con borrar información añadida por el equipo Kaart.  por lo general es correcta.
mariotomo (2021-03-31 15:42:58+00:00): Hola aamayas209 y bienvenidə a OSM.  si te encuentras en el área, podrías validar el nombre de la farmacia? "Los Pinos", o "los pino" (como escribió Kielito1)?
también: el hospital es alto 12m y tiene un solo piso?
también puedes contribuir fotos, a través de la aplicación Street Complete, que encuentras en el Google Play Store.
disfruta del mapeo y a toda disposición para cualquier duda.

(te voy a mejorar un par de cosas: cambio el tipo de edificio de comercial a hospital, separo el edificio del área verde, cambio el tipo de área verde de natural a uso de tierra.)
SaraTencredi (2021-04-24 18:27:47+00:00): Do perform correct action on appropriate highways according to access
Ohiopyle (2021-04-27 01:10:04+00:00): Hi SaraTencredi, Thank you for reaching out about this. I’ve reviewed this area again and have made some classification downgrades to more accurately reflect the purpose of the roads in this area.
stephankn (2021-06-30 06:16:20+00:00): Please do not tag as highway, in case it is not there. This is a stub reserved for potential future extension. At most it is construction. I changed it. Please take care in the future. way 894844312
SaraTencredi (2021-04-24 18:24:57+00:00): As, this highway has no access to any residential community, hope this can be changed as track or service highways change this way classification according to farm yards
Ohiopyle (2021-04-27 01:12:20+00:00): Hi SaraTencredi, Thank you for reaching out about this. I’ve reviewed this area again and have made some classification downgrades to more accurately reflect the purpose of the roads in this area.
sannkc (2023-02-05 21:21:03+00:00): Hello, I am Scott, a local mapper from the Kansas City area.  While making updates to the city's bus routes in recent days, I'm seeing a large number of bus route edits from this account that are not consistent with the methods used for prior bus route edits in this area.  Specifically, it appears that you have used the older PTv1 transport mapping scheme rather than the newer PTv2 scheme when making edits to the bus routes in the Kansas City area.  I have no objections to using the PTv1 scheme in general, but it shouldn't be superimposed on bus routes that have already been mapped in the PTv2 scheme, as many KC area bus routes have been.  Doing so degrades the quality of the  data and creates redundancies and errors that now have to be sorted out and manually repaired.  If making additional bus route edits in the future, please use PTv2 methods when updating transit routes that have been mapped using PTv2 methods.
highflyer74 (2021-05-04 20:13:55+00:00): Hallo und willkommen bei OSM!

In diesem Änderungssatz wurde eine sich selbst überschneidende Linie ohne Attribute hinzugefügt, die mit Straßen und Grenzlinien verbunden war.

Da ich nicht sicher bin, was Deine Intention war, wollte ich Dich nur darauf hinweisen und Dich dafür sensibilisieren, dass sich OSM nicht für Versuche o.ä. eignet, da Du hier in einer wichtigen Geodatenbank editierst, und wir vermeiden wollen, dass die Daten beschädigt werden.

Wenn Du weiterhin bei OSM mitwirken möchtest, sei so nett, Dir einmal dieses Tutorial durchzulesen, um ein Verständnis zu bekommen, wie OSM funktioniert:

- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf

Wenn Du Hilfe brauchst, melde Dich gern!

Viele Grüße!
voschix (2024-02-20 14:47:30+00:00): Con questo changeset del 2021 hai messo un attributo sulla way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109804430 con source=survey . Questo roundabout già nel 2019 non c'era più.  Attenzione con StreetComplete, se non vai sul posto! Lo correggo adesso.
rooooob (2024-02-21 11:26:22+00:00): Ciao. Il mio changeset è relativo a cycleway:right, surface e lane_markings. Il roundabout era già presente nella versione 1 e 2.
voschix (2024-02-21 11:57:52+00:00): Lo so.il mio punto era proprio questo. Hai modificato una way che corrispondeva a un oggetto che non c'era più sul terreno. Quando si aggiorna un oggetto è anche una indicazione che esiste ancora. E' un rischio del armchair mapping. Tutto lì.
TravGW (2021-03-31 16:33:45+00:00): You and your mapping team need to take better care when deleting hotel nodes. Currently you are deleting them without copying over additional data to the hotel building. We are losing good data because of this. For example in this changeset when you deleted the hotel node we lost the phone number, website, and address for this hotel. You must copy this data over the new hotel building.

Please read the wiki for guidance when mapping hotels. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dhotel
AasmaK (2021-04-01 03:30:13+00:00): Appreciate the feedback. We are now working according to this feedback. The mistake won't be repeated again.
SomeoneElse (2021-04-02 22:57:19+00:00): Hello AasmaK,
Who is "we" here?  If you're editing as part of an oganised process then you need to follow https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines .  Please read through that document immediately and ensure that everything that needs to be updated (wiki pages, profiles, etc.) has been.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behaf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2021-04-05 09:04:23+00:00): Hello AasmaK,
It appears that you have completely ignored the comments above.  Lots of information was lost from https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8029345274/history , so it looks like we'll have to revert these changes.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group
GinaroZ (2021-05-12 21:36:05+00:00): Not sure if you are aware but there is now a OSMUK Cadastral Parcels overlay in iD/JOSM to help align Bing imagery.

Only mentioning it as I noticed this building and walls are slightly out of alignment with old Bing (Esri clarity) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/924067327#map=19/55.77896/-2.29845&layers=N 

Fortunately doesn't seem like the offset is that large though :-)
James Derrick (2021-05-13 07:59:14+00:00): Hi GinzroZ,
Yes - the discussion on talk-gb was very interesting (down to geoid transformations!).
The challenge (as ever) is the Borders have a lot of high-res detail mapped well by ctait to a different baseline. Better aligning one feature rapidly spreads into unpicking unusual building/ landuse/ highway area alignments.
'it's hard' isn't a reason not to do it though - I'll have another look!
Happy Mapping,
James
James Derrick (2021-05-13 08:10:24+00:00): Hi GinaroZ,
Looks like cadastral (likely RoS) data is available in Duns, but not around the estate example as it's likely never been sold.
Duns centre seems to be within 1-1.5m (OSM buildings - OSMUK Cadastral Parcels) with OSM about 1.2m NNW.
To compare notes, are you seeing the same please?
Thanks,
James
James Derrick (2021-05-13 08:18:26+00:00): (Bing offset = 0.97; -2.61)
GinaroZ (2021-05-17 18:32:44+00:00): Sorry for the delay. I think ctait's baseline of old Bing (which is now available as Esri clarity) seems to be fairly close to the cadastral parcels. See Allanton for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228795680 - needs about (1.0,-2.7) for Bing.

Your numbers for Duns seem about right, though it might be even less of an offset. At least it's not as large as some places I've seen (upwards of 3)! Just wanted to make sure you were aware :)
tux67 (2021-03-31 14:19:42+00:00): Semikolongetrennte shop entries sind nicht so klasse (wie auch semikoli an anderen Stellen, wo die auslesende Software einen eindeutigen Wert erwartet). Ich würde es eher generisch taggen und den Rest in die description packen.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102033431
jande75 (2021-03-31 16:34:39+00:00): Warum nicht? Laut Wikipedia (auch der Englischen, vgl. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator) ist das im vorliegenden Fall okay.
tux67 (2021-03-31 16:55:28+00:00): Das ist die generische Definition das semikolon separierte Werte grundsätzlich erlaubt sind. Aber im Einzelfall ergibt nicht alles was technisch möglich ist auch Sinn. 
Ich würde z.B. bei einem Schreibwaren laden mit DHL Shop immer 2 nodes setzen, sonst findest du bei einer Suche über POI Typen im Zweifel keines von beiden.
jande75 (2021-03-31 18:11:24+00:00): Bei letzterem stimme ich dir zu, so hab ich das hier im Ort bei DHL, Hermes und DPD auch gehandhabt. Hier ist das meines Erachtens aber etwas anderes, weil es eine Auflistung dessen ist, was man im Shop "kaufen" kann. Ich verstehe den verlinkten Wikipedia-Artikel so, dass mein Fall genau ein solcher Fall ist, in dem das Sinn macht.
tux67 (2021-03-31 20:25:39+00:00): Nur gut, das wir bei der Definition mit dem “was man da kaufen kann“ ein eigenes tag für Warenhaus haben 😉
Dann lass das mal so, die anderen Läden dieser Kette scheinen auch alle unterschiedlich getaggt zu sein.
aachso (2021-04-01 22:45:23+00:00): Did you intentionally move the fire hydrant (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3685072190) ?
karmsudi (2021-04-02 05:25:26+00:00): Hi aachso,
Thanks for checking into our edits. Apologies, I have accidentally moved the feature. Thanks for the heads up, please find the changeset (#102161788) for the suggested modification. Always happy to learn from the community
Thanks,
karmsudi
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-17 15:29:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103106631 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  In this case, they have been contacted several times previously and even the most recent building edits still have problems.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4919 etc.
maraf24 (2021-04-05 11:57:42+00:00): Cześć
Co to za tajemnicze punkty odbioru, które dodajesz do mapy?
user_5359 (2021-04-22 18:28:04+00:00): @maraf24 Does it make sense to delete these collection points, since the entrant does not respond?
maraf24 (2021-04-23 06:03:14+00:00): I think so.
JaroslawKleczynski (2021-04-23 07:56:58+00:00): Żadna tajemnica, na mapie są tylko nr. domów, natomiast dojazd do posesji jest jak widać w innym miejscu. Muszę to jakoś opisać aby było to w miarę czytelne. Ja wiesz jak to zrobić inaczej to możesz pomóc.
maraf24 (2021-04-23 09:38:48+00:00): Chodzi o takie punkty do skasowania: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8575030093
I one nadal są tajemnicą.
user_5359 (2021-04-24 05:55:16+00:00): Take the example of maraf24: there is house number 24 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3380453086) in the house on the street and a backyard with surrounding houses without addresses. The backyard has been labelled "number" 24195. How is one supposed to get from 24 to 24195? Who distributed this number? Or is this just a private agreement between a taxi company and the customers (just to show all the possibilities)?

Weźmy przykład maraf24: w domu przy ulicy jest dom nr 24 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3380453086), a na podwórku okoliczne domy bez adresów. Podwórko zostało oznaczone jako "numer" 24195. Jak masz się dostać z 24 do 24195? Kto nadał ten numer? A może jest to tylko prywatna umowa pomiędzy firmą taksówkarską a klientem (tylko po to, aby pokazać wszystkie możliwości)?
Przetłumaczone przez Deepl.com (nie znam polskiego)
user_5359 (2021-05-02 05:25:02+00:00): @JaroslawKleczynski> Please answer our questions, we try to write down your information for all to understand. Otherwise we have to delete this data because no one can use it.

@JaroslawKleczynski> Proszę odpowiedzieć na nasze pytania, staramy się zapisywać informacje dla wszystkich, aby były zrozumiałe. W przeciwnym razie musimy usunąć te dane, ponieważ nikt nie może z nich korzystać.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-17 15:29:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103106631 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  In this case, they have been contacted several times previously and even the most recent building edits still have problems.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4919 etc.
nevw (2021-03-31 10:18:24+00:00): Are you sure about changing the unit number from 12 to 5?
There are now two nodes with unit 5 in 195 McDowell Manors.
Joel Denning (2021-04-01 00:57:01+00:00): Hi - unfortunately, it appears majority of numbers in this McDowall Manors complex where I live are incorrect. What is showing at 12 is in fact unit 5 (my unit) hence I changed it. And by way of another example what is showing at unit 10 is in fact unit 22. Where it shows the original unit 5 is wrong. I do not want to change the other unit numbers, just the one I am sure of, which is mine.
nevw (2021-04-01 02:04:01+00:00): Thanks Joel
Next time I go into Brisbane I might detour through the area and try to fix them up.
Cheers
Nev
nevw (2021-04-01 02:54:41+00:00): Hi Joel
is it a gated community without public access? If so, I am unable to correct.
Joel Denning (2021-04-01 03:15:27+00:00): It is not gated mate. Free to drive on in!!
nevw (2021-05-27 03:34:51+00:00): Hi Joel
I have updated all the unit numbers in McDowall Manors today. Should be rendered on the osm in a few days.
Joel Denning (2021-05-27 04:23:25+00:00): Good man! Cheers. Now Uber will be able to find me :)
pio2_122 (2021-03-31 08:47:55+00:00): Wydaje mi się, że zamiast tagów building=designed i proposed=residential można dodać proposed:building=residential. Dzięki temu te budynki nie będą się jeszcze wyświetlać na domyślnej warstwie OSM, tak jak projektowane drogi :)
taxi301 (2021-03-31 17:19:23+00:00): Nie mogłem w wiki znaleźć jak oznaczyć żeby się nie wyświetlały i rano zmieniłem na building:designed=yes. Też się nie wyświetlają, a jak prawidłowo powinno być?  proposed:building=residential?
pio2_122 (2021-04-01 19:16:53+00:00): Wydaje mi się, że proposed:building=residential powinno być prawidłowe - sugerowałem się artykułem z wiki o "Lifecycle prefix" - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Jest tam też wspomniana metoda [tag]= proposed, ale stosuję ją tylko do dróg i kolei, ponieważ wydaje się, że jest to już ustalony schemat. W innych przypadkach używam prefixu "proposed:" dla pewności, że nie będzie się to renderowało (a jest tak nie tylko w przypadku budynków - na pewno jeszcze tag shop renderuje się dla dowolnej wartości).
taxi301 (2021-04-03 06:37:56+00:00): poprawiłem, 
Wesołych Świąt
pio2_122 (2021-04-03 18:46:40+00:00): Super.
Dzięki za życzenia i składam je wzajemnie - Wszystkiego dobrego ze Świętami :)
Josef73 (2022-03-27 05:29:23+00:00): Hello, can you check the value of the tag opening_hours for 8578246003, v1 ?
Qomac_R (2021-03-31 08:04:55+00:00): الجزء الذي يمر بالطارقية من طريق سميراء حائل
gileri (2021-03-31 18:27:12+00:00): Hi,

When looking at aerial photos, there seem to be loading spaces here. Did you find a more recent source that indicates that it's no longer the case ?
willisturm (2021-04-06 16:20:10+00:00): Hi,
I just see you have already corrected it. Thank you.
gileri (2021-04-06 16:22:31+00:00): No problem
Sanniu (2021-04-28 10:15:23+00:00): Hi
It seems that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385475353 now not connected to the other roads. Seems like this changeset is the last change in the area. Can you look at?
zstadler (2021-04-28 12:42:14+00:00): Done
Sanniu (2021-04-28 13:22:11+00:00): Thanks!
gscholz (2021-04-03 06:25:36+00:00): Hi ArisJacobo,
this changeset has added several errors to the OSM database regarding intersecting ways:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=102036498

As you can see in the changeset log there are some warnings ID showed you before you uploaded the new data.

Can you please fix this and please watch out for warnings the next time?
Kind Regards
Guido
rskedgell (2021-03-31 11:46:52+00:00): Thanks for updating these PROWs.

Is access=no really necessary here? A highway=bridleway should already exclude motor vehicles and everything "above" horse. I suspect this tag is here because iD presents a plethora of often redundant access tags where the most appropriate value would be to delete them or leave them unset.

Also, designation=public_bridleway might be a better fit than designation=public_right_of_way.

You can also find right of way information including the prow_ref (in this case, "Bobbingworth BR 20") using this site
https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/essex/epping-forest/bobbingworth/

These wiki articles might be helpful to decide which of iD's suggestions can be ignored:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom#England_and_Wales
Keima (2021-03-31 11:37:32+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue sur OpenStreetMap (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:France/bienvenue).

Pouvez-vous détailler vos modifications s'il vous plaît? Je n'arrive pas à comprendre ce que vous avez fait.

Il semble que vous avez rajouté des bâtiments en superposition d'autres bâtiments, c'est bien cela?
Dans un quartier résidentiel de Doué-La-Fontaine, et au vue de l'imagerie aérienne j'ai un doute sur le fait qu'il puisse y avoir réellement des bâtiments l'un sur l'autre.

Merci de vos précisions,
Keima (2021-04-10 08:15:58+00:00): Annulé par le changeset 102587971
SaraTencredi (2021-04-24 18:20:56+00:00): Hey!  Ohiopyle, try to avoid providing direct access to public in private land or yards by adding barriers, appropriate tags and classification. Here, residential way is really unnecessary change it to service by adding access as private, we noticed lot of changes and actions to do in this surrounding area and do not repeat this kind of actions in future
Ohiopyle (2021-04-27 01:14:55+00:00): Hi SaraTencredi, Thank you for reaching out about this. I’ve reviewed this area again and have made some classification downgrades to more accurately reflect the purpose of the roads in this area.
pitscheplatsch (2021-04-02 11:05:35+00:00): Mapping failed?

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
LySioS (2021-04-03 20:37:30+00:00): Bonjour fafaaaa et bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap,

Est-ce que tu peux en dire plus sur Zone 52 ? C'est un truc de loisir genre escape game ?

Et évite les blagues sur le commentaire de modifications, ça rend difficile de comprendre les changements ;)
A+
Marchante0 (2021-04-01 21:40:02+00:00): I think there's an error on way 694238549