piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Commodoortje (2016-08-05 06:38:08+00:00): Gecontroleerd,
.
Bestaat dit cafe met deze naam op deze locatie?
. 
Heb je een webadres van het cafe?
Gelieve niet toevoegen omdat het kan, dit schaadt de OSM kaart in ernstige vorm. MAPS.ME is helaas niet de optimale editor voor OpenStreetMap. Waardoor vervuiling kan ontstaan.
aceman444 (2016-08-03 23:31:29+00:00): Dobry den, co je SPP?
mavl (2019-04-22 16:35:15+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
iWowik (2016-09-08 15:22:53+00:00): А зачем второе МВидео поставили?
iWowik (2016-09-08 15:25:21+00:00): вот же https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3898430997
adiatmad (2021-03-06 09:19:18+00:00): Hello Goena_mista. Hope you are doing well.
Which one the correct name, Jalan Pusri or Jalan Sojar?
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/435418497

Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/41209048
SomeoneElse (2016-08-19 17:26:43+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
I see that you've given https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/435428570 a name of "Bridle Path".  This might be it's name (I can think of a couple of paths near me called things like "Bridle Road") but it might be just that it's a public bridleway (with a "public bridleway" sign at each end).  If that's the case then you can add a "designation" tag to say "designation=public_bridleway".  that way maps that display public bridleways differently can know that this really is a public bridleway.  If it is a public bridleway, then I'd also add the tags "foot=yes" and "horse=yes" to make it clear that it's accessable by those modes of transport.
Anyway, hope you don't mind me mentioning this, just trying to help - if you've got any questions please don't hesitate to ask.
Best Regards,
Andy
Bob Hodgetts (2016-08-20 09:56:08+00:00): Hi Andy,
No problem, it's better to say something and get these things right. I've named it Bridle Path as that is the local name for it - I do not know of any official name. The OS maps show it as a public footpath and not a bridlewaqy. I hope I have entered the details correctly. Regards
Bob
SomeoneElse (2016-08-21 09:05:31+00:00): If people call it "Bridle Path" then I guess that's as good a name as any.  :)
There's also a "loc_name" tag (see for example http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/loc_name=Ring%20Road ) that might be useful to indicate that a name is a local name, but not an official one.
Radek Dobiáš (2016-08-10 23:07:41+00:00): Dobrý den,
jste si jistý, že prohlášení o dráze je open source dokument? na stránce http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Czech_Republic/railway_tagging
je napsáno, že z map, které jsou součástí prohlášení o dráze se nemá kopírovat. Sám nevím a tak mne zajímá z čeho jste usoudil, že je to správný postup.

Také je tu psáno, že jako usage=main se tagují tratě s osobní dopravou, ale na odstavné nádraží není žádná osobní doprava, jen přistavování prázdných vozů.

Snad poslední drobná poznámka, že na cestách  97825899 a 97825929 je nyní nastaveno usage=main a service=crossover, což je proti tagovaímu schématu.

Předem děkuju za vysvětlení a opravu.
Supaplex (2016-08-03 08:58:43+00:00): 養正中學是學校吧，類別放錯囉
literan (2016-08-03 13:08:59+00:00): Вы сломали мультик https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3031845/history - почИните?
MosKartograf (2016-08-04 09:58:56+00:00): Проверьте пожалуйста. Надеюсь вовремя заметил.
literan (2016-08-04 11:15:05+00:00): Теперь все хорошо!
Self-Perfection (2016-08-04 15:43:29+00:00): У меня другой комментарий к этой правке. Я сомневаюсь в адекватности применения tourism=attraction к нескольким gate в этой правке.

Ворота сами по себе аттракционом не являются.
literan (2016-08-04 21:23:40+00:00): attraction это не аттракцион, а достопримечательность
Self-Perfection (2016-08-04 21:27:19+00:00): >attraction это не аттракцион, а достопримечательность

Уточнение принято, но моё сомнение остаётся в силе: ворота/входы сами по себе достопримечательностью не являются. Только территория, которая за ними расположена.
MosKartograf (2016-08-05 13:41:56+00:00): Это отдельные архитектурные объекты, которые скорее всего имеют отдельные коды Минкульта как в случае с пристанями и воротами в Павловске. Если у кого то будет желание приделать эти коды, то к чему как не к tourism=attraction?
MosKartograf (2016-08-05 13:45:50+00:00): Чтобы было ясно что за коды, вот пример http://old.kulturnoe-nasledie.ru/monuments.php?id=7810339075
literan (2016-08-05 13:49:38+00:00): Мне кажется, достопримечательностями скорее являются отдельные объекты, а не весь парк в целом. Хотя, понятие это размытое (а в вики так вообще). Можно попробовать вынести на форум.
Self-Perfection (2016-08-05 14:30:33+00:00): Дворцово-парковый ансамбль точно выделяется (воспринимается человеком) как отдельный объект и звания "достопримечательность" заслуживает.

А вообще критерием (ИМХО) должна служить значимость/уникальность. Если вдоль живописной аллеи стоят 10 одинаковых необычных фонарных столбов, каждый столб не будет tourism=attraction, а вот алея в целом будет. Ворота, обозначенные в этой правке, одинаковы и ничего особо выдающегося собой не прадставляют. В отличие от давно обозначенных [фигурных ворот](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/105134127), которые явно выделяются ( https://yandex.ru/maps/213/moscow/?ll=37.683006%2C55.615086&z=18&l=stv%2Csta&panorama%5Bpoint%5D=37.680787%2C55.614184&panorama%5Bdirection%5D=6.053679%2C12.664536&panorama%5Bspan%5D=123.666667%2C80.000000 ), при этом фигурные ворота не отмечены как tourism=attraction. А по-моему достойны. Кстати в упомянутом выше реестре культурного наследия для Царицынского ансамбля как отдельные объекты хранятся только здания, пруды и мост http://old.kulturnoe-nasledie.ru/monuments.php?id=7710115000 (смотрю в "показать список элементов")
MosKartograf (2016-08-08 07:34:07+00:00): Да, Царицыно описано куда хуже Павловска в смысле детальности.
Ворота отмечены, хотя их нет в списке.
В условиях неопределенности предлагаю ориентироваться на историческую достоверность. Как минимум одни ворота у Хлебного дома подлинные, у Малого дворца чистый новодел.
https://pastvu.com/p/99632
https://pastvu.com/p/251382
Self-Perfection (2016-08-08 10:03:04+00:00): Ок, с расстановкой tourism=attraction, полученной после сегодняшней правки 41317725 согласен.
mavl (2019-04-22 16:35:19+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-04-22 16:35:22+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
mavl (2019-04-22 16:35:26+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
joost schouppe (2016-08-16 15:07:22+00:00): Hey Rik, ik had de weg zo goed mogelijk gelegd op wat toe ik er was de eenvoudigste manier was om ze te nemen. Maar het officiële tracé is misschien beter. Alleszins een bizar stukje, los door het veld moeten lopen op een weg die zelfs officieel aangeduid staat.
Overigens kan je zo'n weg nu gewoon overtekenen vanuit het wegenregister als je aan het bewerken ben. Ik leg het uit in dit nogal lange artikel: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/diary/39250
(zoek naar "URLs for mapping", er staat kort uitgelegd hoe je de url dan als achtergrond in ID kunt toevoegen)
user_5359 (2016-10-09 16:22:43+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
SomeoneElse (2016-08-04 22:03:10+00:00): Hi,
First of all, thanks for mentioning the problems here over at https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Chetan_Gowda/diary/39149 in a diary entry.
However, I notice that you've done a bit of "fixing" of the resulting mess in this and a few other changesets.  I'm sure that this is well intentioned, but (based on cleaning up previous similar messes) I suspect that it might make the overall fixing harder.  From looking at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41096427 it's quite likely that a full revert of that might be needed, and if the data edited there has changed subsequently it makes that revert more difficult.
Best Regards,
Andy
Chetan_Gowda (2016-08-08 06:40:45+00:00): Hi Andy,

Thanks for this note! I intended on doing some fixing of issues I noted, I'd be happy to revert my changesets if this will make a full revert easier. I had a total of 15 changeset:

41161029
41161095
41161133
41162082
41164343
41189249
41189664
41190249
41190560
41190852
41191192
41192137
41198740
41210640
41211203
Again, thanks for flagging my edits, and do let me know how you'd like me to go forward.

Cheers,

Chetan
SomeoneElse (2016-08-08 08:15:48+00:00): Hi Chetan - Thanks for the list!
iwhs (2017-06-14 14:02:21+00:00): I would have called The Duver 'heath' rather than 'scrub', which is a bit ugly for grassed dunes with occasional bushes
user_4081914 (2017-06-14 15:20:24+00:00): not fussed - i have changed it
PlaneMad (2016-09-07 11:36:18+00:00): Hi, can you explain what the curve_geometry=yes tag means? There are over 6,000 nodes with this tag added by you 

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/curve_geometry
richlv (2016-10-24 23:12:19+00:00): other changesets with questions about this tag :
* http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42080251
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41953577
user_5359 (2016-10-09 16:22:25+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
literan (2016-08-03 13:17:33+00:00): От балды проставляете точки! Ну какая к черту Инвитро - аптека?
SomeoneElse (2016-08-04 00:15:43+00:00): Hi Aboudrar Said,
Could you please use meaningful changeset comments?  Most on http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Aboudrar Said/history have just a comment of "mapping", which doesn't tell anyone what you changed, where you changed it or what the source was.
OSM is a collabrative project; we need to work together to create the best map.  Please do use meaningful changeset comments in the future; it will help other mappers greatly.
Best Regards, Andy Townsend (SomeoneElse) on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
user_5359 (2016-08-04 18:50:19+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please describe better, why this is a attraction. Please see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dattraction
user_5359 (2016-08-04 17:42:05+00:00): Willkommen zu OSM! Ist Deine Krankenhaus ein anderes Krankenhaus als dieses https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1987280 ? Wenn nicht bitte Deinen Eintrag als Dublette wieder löschen.

Falls Du Hilfe brauchst: Melde Dich einfach.
Mateusz Konieczny (2018-04-15 14:50:03+00:00): Note - I reverted part of the edit as address on street ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/151209594#map=17/48.10319/15.52563&layers=N ) makes no sense at all
Oberaffe (2016-08-04 07:05:33+00:00): Is Malikpur the name of the village? Who owns this telefon number?
DemoLogin (2019-04-12 12:18:35+00:00): Что значит аббревиатура "Ур."?
Не используйте аббревиатуры в названиях
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29
trigpoint (2016-11-25 13:48:02+00:00): Hi, something has gone very wrong here. The A442, and Kidderminster are nowhere Llangollen. I am reverting this change.
John Grubb (2016-11-25 14:49:53+00:00): Well spotted! Heaven only knows what happened there - probably had that section selected and then, after a distraction of some sort, went and held down CTRL to pick other edits having panned the map to another area of interest. Oops...
user_5359 (2016-10-09 16:22:08+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
species (2016-08-03 19:04:42+00:00): Hallo,
Gibt es das Pub nicht mehr oder warum habt ihr das Objekt überschrieben?
Laut Webseite des "Das Eggenberg" gibt es das Pub noch.
Wenn, dann bitte wiederherstellen und für den Verein ein neues Objekt eintragen!
Danke,
lg Michael
Vive_Diem (2016-08-03 19:34:49+00:00): hallo michael, 
danke für deine information. Irgendwie ist mir da unabsichtlich etwas passiert. Wir haben die selbe Adresse und jetzt weis ich nicht wie ich dies korrigieren kann - die eingaben sind nicht ganz einfach als erstnutzer. Vielleicht könntest du mir einen hinweis geben. Danke, lg. theo
species (2016-08-03 20:42:35+00:00): Am besten du gehst direkt bei OSM.org auf das Objekt und dann Editieren:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=332349946#map=19/47.07035/15.40138

Hier kannst du jede Eigenschaft einzeln bearbeiten.

Zum Hinzufügen eines 2. Objektes klickst du oben auf "Point", und setzt die Eigenschaften eures POIs.

Als Haupttag für euch würde ich club=disabled vorschlagen.

lg,
Michi
d1g (2016-08-07 09:20:37+00:00): 1. есть замечание что тег crop=* это для "возделываемых культур"

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:crop

его следует использовать с полями: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/435775735

2. 
для ботанического вида растений есть отдельные теги genus=* и species=* 

Можно поляну лаванды нарисовать natural=grassland + genus=lavandula

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavandula - как genus пишется я в Википедии подсмотрел
drolbr_mdv (2016-08-03 13:24:34+00:00): Achtung: Am Dreieck fehlen zwei Paare Weichenverbindungen. Das habe ich in Kauf genommen und werde es bis morgen früh flicken. Eine Übergangslösung hätte zuviele Wege zerstückelt.
Polarbear (2017-03-18 21:36:36+00:00): Hallo, 

wenn die Neuapostolische Kirche Wangersen als Andachtsstätte genutzt wird, füge bitte auch amenity=place_of_worship, religion=* und denomination=* hinzu.
AndiOlli (2017-03-19 00:24:45+00:00): Erledigt
Polarbear (2017-03-19 07:00:37+00:00): Danke, aber mit dem '*' war gemeint, du sollst dort die passenden Werte einsetzen. 
Offenbar sind das dann hier:
  religion = christian
  denomination = new_apostolic
Ich habe das mal erledigt.
sorcrosc (2016-08-03 20:11:43+00:00): Mi sembra che tu stia forzando la mappatura al tuo scopo. Molti percorsi che hai etichettato come track sono senza dubbio vere e proprie strade con tanto di case lungo la strada.
Inoltre che significa la sigla G.A.B. che hai assegnato  come nome? Sicuro che sia il nome delle singole strade? In ogni caso i nomi vanno scritti per esteso e non abbreviati.
Dino Michelini (2016-08-04 07:10:23+00:00): Intanto grazie per aver aperto una discussione a riguardo perché anche io ho alcuni dubbi a riguardo. Andando con ordine. 1) il lavoro è provvisorio e si basa sull'ultimo trekking del 2013, in particolare la riclassificazione delle strade per cui se hai conoscenze aggiornate dei luoghi ben venga una riclassificazione; ci sono strade sterrate come quella che conduce ad Altino che andrebbero forse con tag tertiary mentre altre, anche se con edifici (speso ruderi, piccole aziende agricole o edifici non più utilizzati) non essendo centri residenziali le lascerei come track. Inoltre, il Parco Nazionale dei Sibillini classifica come sentieri e mulattiere le strade con fondo naturale e ampiezza media della carreggiata inferiore a 2 m valutata in ragione di almeno 100 metri di lunghezza della stessa strada. 2) G.A:B. è l'acronimo di Grande Anello in Bicicletta (vedi http://www.sibillini.net/Chiedi_sibilla/gab/index.php). Ho scelto la traccia ufficiale, sebbene esistano numerosi anelli per le mtb fatti da altri soggetti, perché questi anelli sono "illegali". Il Parco Nazionale dei Sibillini ha disciplinato mediante regolamenti e circolari l'attività escursionistica (vedi la nota http://www.sibillini.net/comunicazione/comunicati/2013/2013_03_14.pdf e il  Disciplinare per lo svolgimento di attività sportive ed escursionistiche e di manifestazioni motoristiche nel territorio del Parco Nazionale dei Monti Sibillini art.4 comma 2 a) zona B), mettendo a disposizione sul proprio sito la relativa cartografia di sintesi per i bivacchi ed i percorsi fruibili per le mtb (http://www.sibillini.net/il_parco/gps/index.php) ed infatti la traccia ufficiale evita da Altino gran parte del sentiero dei Mietitori. Ho messo il tag name G.A.B. solo sulle strade dove manca una etichetta con lo scopo di indicare l'anello quindi se si conosce il nome della strada il tag va aggiornato.
sorcrosc (2016-08-04 20:20:20+00:00): Non conosco il posto e non voglio entrare nei particolari però saltano sicuramente all'occhio certe strade che hai modificato da unclassified a track tipo questa e quelle attorno che servono a raggiungere le abitazioni:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/435468731
Ricordo che la pavimentazione non deve influire sulla scelta del tag highway che invece dipende dalla importanza/destinazione d'uso. Le track sono tracce spesso senza alcuna manutenzione che servono solo a raggiungere io campi o i boschi. Anche quello che dice l'ente non ci interessa gran che e comunque denominazioni come "sentiero", "mulattiera" non sono direttamente traducibili nei nostri tag.

Il name=G.A.B. lo toglierei senz'altro dalle way perché non è il nome delle vie ma di un itinerario ed è già mappato con la relazione.

Ciao
Dino Michelini (2016-08-05 07:52:48+00:00): D'accordo per togliere l'etichetta G.A.B. dove mancava il nome della strada (la lascerei solo per track e path come si usa sulle carte topografiche del CAI); non sono molto convinto circa la classificazione in quanto ad es. la zona che hai indicato intorno a Norcia è agricola e gli edifici che vedi sono case agricole, ovvero abitazioni e al tempo stesso fattorie o allevamenti di maiali. Queste strade sono ambivalenti: utilizzate per scopi agricoli/allevamento ma anche da quelle poche persone che vi abitano. Anche il tag unclassified non risolve il problema e sarebbe inappropriato. Su questi casi "ibridi" OSM non mi sembra sufficientemente chiaro ed infatti è uno degli argomenti che torna spesso in discussione. In questi casi, preferisco dare maggiore importanza all'attività economica (agricola, forestale, allevamento) che insiste sulla strada rispetto alla residenza di persone che altro non sono gli agricoltori/allevatori del luogo. Viceversa nel caso di Altino (fraz. di Montemonaco) https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1331775466/history anche se  abitata tutto l'anno solo dai gestori del rifugio la strada sterrata non è stata da me riclassificata. Comunque, appena finita la relazione dell'anello, cercherò di fare un controllo del lavoro, ovviamente se noti imprecisioni opera le dovute correzioni.
sorcrosc (2016-08-06 13:30:31+00:00): No, mi spiace ma io vedo strade che la gente usa per andare a lavorare e per raggiungere le proprie case, anche asfaltate e sembra ben tenute. Non sono i centri abitati ma anche le zone agricole e le foreste sono attraversate da strade vere e proprie.
Considera che in genere le track non sono considerate come parte della rete stradale. Per esempio da quello che ho visto gran parte dei navigatori le snobba completamente a meno che non abbiano altri tag che la qualifichino come tracce percorribili senza problemi:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=mapzen_car&route=42.7837%2C13.1172%3B42.7800%2C13.1360#map=14/42.7803/13.1291
Quando farai il tuo controllo, qualunque cosa sceglierai considera l'utilizzo anche di altri tag utili, tipo:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype

Ciao
Polarbear (2017-03-18 21:35:01+00:00): Hallo AndiOlli,

was passiert im HeimatHaus Wangersen? Ist es eher ein Museum oder ein Gemeinschaftszentrum?
AndiOlli (2017-03-19 00:20:03+00:00): Keine Ahnung, ich war persönlich nicht drin. Es steht nur draußen so dran.
Polarbear (2017-03-19 07:08:18+00:00): Hm, es wird verschiedenlich für Veranstaltungen erwähnt, hat eine Gebührenordnung und Geschirr. Ich habe das dann mal als 
  amenity = community_centre
  community_centre = village_hall
gekennzeichnet.
tuxayo (2018-06-25 11:33:51+00:00): Hi! :) there was a mistake the on following ways. level was used instead of admin_level.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/285340935/history
wambacher (2016-08-04 22:06:36+00:00): something very special in canada ;)
user_870861 (2016-08-07 19:01:24+00:00): bonjour,
il y a plus de 100 ways duplqués dans certains de vos changesets. Majoritairement 41012893, 41229636, 40736588 et 41215506 (cours d'eau, chemin et batiments)
wmyrda (2016-08-30 19:55:59+00:00): Cześć,
Fajnie, że wprowadziłeś cały przebieg niebieskiego szlaku http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6455428, ale niepotrzebnie przez to pokrywa się on z odcinkiem który kiedyś wprowadziłem http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6030861 Pasowało by teraz połączyć je w jeden gdyż średnio to wygląda http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=15!49.8909!21.5531 Natomiast należało by użyć przebiegu dodanego przeze mnie, gdyż w rejonie Góry Chełm przeszedłem go osobiście kilka miesięcy temu i wiem, że ten ze strony http://podkarpacie.szlaki.pttk.pl/ jest w tym miejscu po prostu błędny i niedokładny
ElliottPlack (2016-08-03 14:46:45+00:00): Source should have been "Bing"
literan (2016-10-21 12:14:38+00:00): wrong key in this and other similar objects. Instead of "ticket:public_transport=yes" should use "ticketS:public_transport=yes" Look taginfo http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=ticket - If you agree, I'll correct it.
inaktiv (2016-10-31 13:56:12+00:00): You are right. I corrected all of them. Thank you!
user_870861 (2016-08-22 12:21:28+00:00): hi,
there is more tha 250 exactly duplicated ways in this changeset (2 ways with exactly same geometry and exactly same tags

issues can be see at
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=17&lat=7.79466&lon=-8.47067&item=0

fixed in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41613342
freeExec (2016-08-05 09:22:51+00:00): Так а что там с жд переездом?
Ну и track к гаражам не должны вести - это дороги для с/х техники в поле. А подъездные дороги это service.
gtnh1201 (2016-08-05 18:39:37+00:00): Переезда в той точке нет - от асфальтированной дороги со стороны Красного Гуляйчика есть асфальтированный съезд, он доходит почти до жд путей и упирается в гору земли, при этом через железку переезда нет.
naoliv (2016-08-03 14:59:53+00:00): Rodrigo, o que seria isso que você quis representar no mapa?
Rodrigo Tiago da Silva (2016-08-03 15:01:37+00:00): Uma empresa.
naoliv (2016-08-03 15:09:50+00:00): Você tem mais informações sobre ela?
É uma empresa do que?
Hjart (2016-08-03 16:06:31+00:00): Hvad handler alle disse "Fri camping" om ?
MichaelVL (2016-08-03 16:06:51+00:00): Hej. Du har ikke sat nogen kilde på dine rettelser og der er svært at se nogen camp_site på luftfotos. Hvor har du informationen fra?

Jeg mistænker også, at dit brug af name='Fri camping' i virkeligheden burde være 'fee=no', se evt. her:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dcamp_site

'name' er noget stedet hedder og som kan opseveres i den virkelige verden hvorimod en camp_site til fri afbenyttelse skal bruge 'fee=no'
Hjart (2016-08-03 16:12:08+00:00): Jeg har en mistanke om at det er et forsøg på at markere de skovområder hvor vandrere og lign frit må slå telt op, men i så fald vil jeg mene det bør gøres på en mere hensightsmæssig måde, idet denne nemt misforstås.
Niels Beck (2016-08-03 20:01:09+00:00): Tak for responce! De markerede områder er Naturstyrelsens navngivne og nøje markerede områder. Min markering er anbragt under skovvnavnene og disse navne optræder på Naturstyrelsens liste. Skovene er ganske godt defineret ved navneangivelserne. F.eks. Klosterris Hegn som er et klart afgrænset område. Der er ikke stor mulighed for misforståelser, men hvis der er forslag til anden markering så, gerne? Tak for oplysningen om `fee=no´, den får jeg lige rettet.