piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
datendelphin (2022-03-27 18:15:08+00:00): Oh. Just saw that. Intersection Alte Baarerstrasse and Göblistrasse is indeed that complicated. But most importantly, you crippled the restrictions, and they are crutial. They are new and prohibit through traffic through Aarbach. Please look out. The aerial imagery is not yet reflecting the situation on the ground.
datendelphin (2022-03-27 18:38:53+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118991392
Frans S (2021-12-21 12:00:18+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions)
E: Rectangular Buildings  always squared.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115198471
rthik007 (2021-12-22 08:04:21+00:00): "Hi StephanyAng
I have removed the hanging roads which are not necessary
way 1013999939
Kindly check with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115240372.
Thank you"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115198720
tsp15 (2021-12-21 21:52:35+00:00): Przy ulicy Leśnej nie ma ciągu pieszo-rowerowego.
sep (2021-12-22 07:54:35+00:00): ok, dzięki za poprawę - nie byłem pewien ale głowę bym dał, że kiedyś był.
eggie (2021-12-21 09:55:48+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
Frans S (2021-12-21 11:57:12+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions)
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared.


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115199240
Frans S (2021-12-21 11:58:38+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
See my previous points on your other changeset
here also 
C: multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115199442
Larmax (2021-12-21 09:30:40+00:00):  Added natural and buildings near Böle, Siuntio
Larmax (2021-12-21 09:31:00+00:00): merged address nodes to buildings
NiLaKol (2021-12-27 16:01:30+00:00): Hi, that seems to be an automated edit. Where can i find the discussion as required in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
illogict (2021-12-28 05:41:20+00:00): Hi.
I manually checked and changed each and every one of the paths. It wasn’t automated at all.
NiLaKol (2021-12-28 21:54:44+00:00): Taginfo says parking_space=parent has 895 occurences today. I asume that in all changesets with the comment 'Use the correct “parent” tag for parking spaces.' you change the tag from 'parent_and_child' to 'parent'.
That gives the following stats before your change:

68% 613 parking_space=parent
32% 282 parking_space=parent_and_child

Both was common. Why do change it?
NiLaKol (2021-12-28 22:11:27+00:00): It is impossible to do this without automation, like searching with a script for the tags. I have concerns, even if you did a short review of each case, because you redefine the tagging of parking_space, without discussion. Cite:  "This policy also applies to substantial changes made using 'find and replace' or similar functions within standard editors such as JOSM.", "Using a tool to asserting a policy, or your own interpretation of policy, when there may be justifiable reasons for other interpretations or where the policy does not reflect common practice. "
xronos (2021-12-21 14:48:27+00:00): погодите, погодите. А на чем основано утверждение "Дорожных знаков 4.12 и подобных, на местности нет (именно они нужны для bicycle=yes) " ???
Ведь на территории Российской Федерации не существует прямого запрета на движение велосипеда по "тротуарам"?
xronos (2021-12-21 14:49:34+00:00): Прошу не начинать "войну правок". Если не ответите мне здесь в течении суток, я напишу жалобу на "неподобающее поведение"
xkillah (2021-12-21 17:06:58+00:00): @xronos ознакомьтесь https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%92%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4#.D0.9E.D0.B3.D1.80.D0.B0.D0.BD.D0.B8.D1.87.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D1.8F_.D0.B4.D0.BB.D1.8F_.D0.B2.D0.B5.D0.BB.D0.BE.D1.81.D0.B8.D0.BF.D0.B5.D0.B4.D0.BE.D0.B2
xronos (2021-12-21 17:47:21+00:00): ну, всё верно там написано. почему тег не должен стоят там где он был поставлен?
xkillah (2021-12-21 18:37:31+00:00): "Там, где движение на велосипедах разрешено, несмотря на ограничения по умолчанию" Этот тротуар не имеет специальных знаков/разметок, а значит он "по умолчанию" без всяких "несмотря на". Иначе нужно было бы все тротуары страны этим тегом разметить.
xronos (2021-12-21 19:05:30+00:00): Вы всё пишите совершенно верно, с чем я полностью согласен, но спор несколько не об этом, а о том, что этот вот Константин не просто удаляет bicycle=yes, но ещё и оставляет комментарий "note=ДВИЖЕНИЕ ПО ТРОТУАРУ ЗАПРЕЩЕНО, 24.2 ПДД РФ"
см https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114188024
xkillah (2021-12-21 20:27:18+00:00): Просто вы спрашивали на чем основано "Дорожных знаков 4.12 и подобных, на местности нет (именно они нужны для bicycle=yes)", вот и выяснили
xronos (2021-12-21 20:42:46+00:00): это то было понятно и мне и вам, а вот тому кто закрывал ченжсет с такими комментариями , боюсь не всё ясно (если судить и по предыдущей его деятельности и текущей: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115205742)
rthik007 (2021-12-22 07:40:09+00:00): "Hi Orla Nimmo,
I have removed unnecessary hanging roads and also changed the classification of roads which are not leading to any destinations
way 1014008718
way 1014008726
WAY: 1014008717
WAY: 1014008725
Kindly check with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115239397.
Thank you."
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115200753
SafetyIng (2021-12-26 09:45:49+00:00): Warum hast du die Parkflächen mit den Straßen-Ways "verschmolzen"?
xronos (2021-12-21 22:04:19+00:00): здесь также удалены важные уточняющие теги. почему Вы , Константин, игнорируете комментарии и не отвечаете? Теги bicycle=* вы удаляете а horse=* оставляете? По какому принципу Вы выстраиваете свою работу?
Константин Гам (2022-01-04 12:39:08+00:00): Добрый день!
Согласно wiki теги horse, bicycle, foot и пр. - это теги семейства access=* - там всё достаточно просто и ясно написано, для чего они используются. Для маркировки административного доступа.
Никаких особых ограничений/разрешений, в данной местности нет.
xronos (2022-01-04 14:35:20+00:00): см обсуждение здесь: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115205742
Frans S (2021-12-21 11:49:15+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please follow the rooflines and map L shaped buildings not as a rectangular building.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115201898
fabiotofy (2021-12-23 11:59:51+00:00): Ciao e benvenuto!  il civico 2a c'era già in OSM e lo avevi creato proprio tu il 2 ottobre 2021. Non serve aggiungere doppioni. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/9138945005
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115201982
Christian Fontana (2021-12-24 00:07:14+00:00): Ciao! Tutte le altre modifiche le vedo, ma questa no. per quello credevo di aver sbagliato qualcosa e ho rifatto la modifica.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115201982
Frans S (2021-12-21 11:47:23+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. (the big building should be mapped alongside the walls.)



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115203434
legofahrrad (2021-12-22 13:27:27+00:00): Hallo und willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!
Wie kommt es, dass du von diesem Gebäude den Tag "building:levels" bei deiner letzten Bearbeitung gelöscht hast?
Viele Grüße!
Falsernet (2021-12-22 02:19:48+00:00): Why do you still delete cycleways in favour of cycleway=track. It's not better in any way. And can you please use relevant changeset comments.
Falsernet (2021-12-22 02:25:10+00:00): OK after further investigation this was the fault of TomJeffs and his destructive mapping practices. Apologies, didn't mean to accuse you of deleting cycleways when you haven't here. You can see how I might have come to that conclusion with the history and vague changeset comments, but nonetheless, sorry mate.
XnL (2022-01-05 20:26:13+00:00): Прошу уточнить откуда вы взяли "административные" границы этого "неофициального" микрорайона?
vspodolyak1989 (2022-01-05 21:23:27+00:00): Вы правы вместо, инструмента линия и категории - "административные границы" необходимо применить инструмент полигон и категорию - "жилой район". А границы были взяты в 2ГИС и Яндекс-картах.
XnL (2022-01-06 07:50:06+00:00): К сожалению, копировать данные с других карт запрещено правилами OSM без явного согласия владельца этих карт или данных. Граница будет удалена, точка оставлена.
ravali_78 (2021-12-22 05:09:35+00:00): Hi เรื่องของเล็บ,
I have fixed the alignment of dragged node as per ground truth.Kindly check with node 9357118344,https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115234421.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115204180
eggie (2021-12-21 12:33:20+00:00): Hi iBrabble
Please decrease your editing area.
Shifting the map in editmodus may harm the map. 
Please add at a company name
office=company or something else for rendering.
Your edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=115204660
Greetz, eggie
eggie (2021-12-21 12:35:51+00:00): Dag local host.
Met je actie heb je de wandelroute onderbroken. Waarom is er geen verbinding meer tussen de Noordweg Noord en de Kromme Rijnlaan. Je hebt een wegdeel (inl. wandelrouterelatie verwijderd?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-12-21 12:38:52+00:00): Volgens mij heeft deze wijk nog steeds een verbinding met de Kromme Rijnlaan.
eggie (2021-12-21 12:45:56+00:00): In de Staatscourant zou een verkeersbesluit moeten staan. Ik kan het vooralsnog niet vinden. 
Wat is je bron in deze? 
Het fietspad heeft inderdaad geen verbinding meer met de hoofdrijbaan, maar de Noordwegnoord???
Dat ziet er wonderlijk uit zo. Hoe gaat dan al het verkeer naar het Sportpark?
eggie
eggie (2021-12-21 12:59:27+00:00): De wandelroute heb ik hersteld door deze via het voetpad te laten lopen.
eggie (2021-12-21 13:05:55+00:00): Op de kaart van de BGT/Kadster bestaat de verbinding gewoon.
Ik zal deze herstellen. Het is gewoon mogelijk met een 'auto' van de Noord-weg Noord op de Kromme-Rijnlaan te komen.
https://www.verbeterdekaart.nl/#?geometry.x=142974.56&geometry.y=455760.27&zoomlevel=14.62

Wanneer je het kunt onderbouwen dan hoor ik dat graag, maar ik heb het idee dat je iets te veel hebt verwijderd

MVG
eggie
localhost (2021-12-22 11:59:40+00:00): Ik ga een nieuwe poging doen. De link die je aanhaalt toont trouwens de nieuwe situatie. Dus de oversteek voor fietsers/voetgangers die niet meer in een rechte lijn van de Noordweg naar de Noordweg-Noord gaat.
eggie (2021-12-22 12:06:28+00:00): Oke.. Dat klopt. Ik gebruik zelf een meer recentere luchtfoto PDOK 2021 7cm
Ook in de transparant van de BGT staat het allemaal goed. 
Dat heb je ook goed gedaan.. Alleen de verbinding met de wijk voor auto's richting sportvelden en PGGM had je ook verwijderd. Dat heb ik hersteld. 
De wandelroute heb ik ook over je ingetekende voetpad gelegd.
Volgens mij is alles nu goed.
Ik heb het dus aangepast naar de nieuwe situatie. 
Mapse
eggie
eggie (2021-12-22 12:10:27+00:00): Hier kun je zien wat je had verwijderd
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=115205064
localhost (2021-12-24 08:03:27+00:00): Thanks!
eggie (2021-12-21 12:51:03+00:00): Tip Gebruik de PDOK actueel en niet de BING als achtergrond (achterhaald en verschoven)

In de BAG staat het grote gebouw. 
Het beste kun je daarom een terugmelding doen naar het Kadaster via deze site
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=noordweg-noord%209200%20zeist&resultOffset=0&objectId=0355100000719825&geometry.x=142918.743&geometry.y=455750.34100042&zoomlevel=7&detailsObjectId=0355010000823115
Doe je dat zelf? 
Het gebouw komt anders met de zelfde vaart weer terug in OSM bij periodieke import.

In de BGT staat inderdaad een kleiner gebouw. Ik zal het aanpassen.
MVG
eggie
BeKri (2021-12-21 15:42:32+00:00): Servus,
nur um Kollissionen zu vermeiden:
Machst Du Haidlfing "von links" fertig
dann mach ich in Wallersdorf "von rechts" weiter

In der Mitte treffen wir uns dann ;-))
Gruss derBeKri
Recker7 (2021-12-21 11:32:17+00:00): ZONE MISE A JOUR VIA NOUVELLE IMAGERIE
rthik007 (2021-12-22 07:20:42+00:00): "Hi Hasan Hussaini,
Fixed the overlapping ways
""way 1014031900
way 1014031901
way 1014031902""
Kindly check with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/rthik007.
Thank you."
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115205693
xronos (2021-12-21 15:04:35+00:00): Ну вот опять. Зачем вы удалили access=no с ворот?
Это опять прямое вредительсво. Если не объяснитесь, известно что последует...
Константин Гам (2022-01-04 12:40:08+00:00): Добрый день! Укажите пожалуйста конкретный пример, где был удалён access по вашему мнению ошибочно.
К сожалению, в данной местности имеется некоторая неразбериха с тегами. Возможна случайность, в виду выбора по фильтру. Давайте разберёмся.
xronos (2022-01-04 14:34:15+00:00): дело в том, что теги bicycle foot удалены спорадически, что вызывает ощущение неаккуратно проделанной работы или даже вредительства. На одних линиях удалены только bicycle, на других bicycle и foot, а horse не тронут нигде (или почти нигде).

Ваш фильтр затронул по крайней мере одну точку barrier=gate. Поэтому я предлагаю вам использовать конструкции вида bicycle=* foot=* -barrier=* (речь ведь идёт о поиске в josm?). Хотя любой mass edit вызывет недоверие.

Прошу прощения за риторический вопрос, но не могу его не задать: а откуда информация что там нет (или есть) административных запретов/разрешений?

в связи со всем этим предлагаю вам доделать работу, а если у вас сейчас нет на неё времени, то я могу за вас откатить (сделать revert) и вы сможете вернуться к этому когда будете располагать временем.

Отсутствие ответа в течении суток-двух буду считать молчаливым согласием и руководством к действию.
SHARCRASH (2021-12-21 11:39:22+00:00): + surface added
user_5359 (2021-12-25 19:25:58+00:00): Hello! What ist the meaning of the prefix test:* see http://www.osm.org/way/539634857
SHARCRASH (2021-12-25 21:15:17+00:00): Hi! I did it as a means of deactivation of the area i had added few years ago because on site there is no real infrastructure as area like the Boy Konen Bike Park. Only the track in woods. I didn't want to delete it, only leave it on standby because I'm not sure the alternative i did (as a relation) is enough for the visibility on the map. So for now waiting if the rendering on all zoom levels is satisfying. Should be i guess...
user_1566574 (2021-12-21 23:16:45+00:00): ??
bagage (2021-12-22 08:00:08+00:00): What's the question?
user_1566574 (2021-12-22 08:12:44+00:00): You made one modification here, that I have reverted, you added a building:part=yes tag, which is technically inappropriate.

I have some issues to understand "why" this edit, so I consider it a a degradation.
bagage (2021-12-22 12:15:03+00:00): Before ask before revert, don't you think?

Anyway, the idea here is to specify the type of place of worship, with can be at least of three types:
- a full, separate building (building=church)
- a part of a building (building:part=chapel)
- cave entrance (natural=cave_entrance)
- can be anything else but these are the most common ones

Here the mosque is part of the building, so tagging building:part=mosque. I know that building:part should be a polygon, but:
1. adding this info does not degrade anything
2. this IMHO improves OSM quality 
3. this is an iterative process: someone with local knowledge can then draw the actual polygon

If you think the overall idea is wrong, feel free to explain your vision, I won't revert your revert anyway but this can always be improved.
user_1566574 (2021-12-22 13:49:24+00:00): I'm monitoring this area, I know OSM, I read Wiki. I know when a good contrib is good, bad, or when I have a doubt. In this case, I consider it bad so I prefer to revert it, discuss with you to ensure it wasn't a mistake or if I've misunderstood something, if I did that will be corrected.

I don't agree with the use of a building:part, mainly on a node. Tho, in this case, in would be more relevant to do indoor mapping than using building:part.
If I follow your way of thinking, then, every amenity, shop, club, craft, or anything else must have explicitly building:part tags if inside a building. I disagree with that, as long as it's set inside a building, it's ofc a part of the building, it's not relevant to mention it again...
To me, it's a minor degradation, it, yes, kind off improve OSM, and I am the one with the local knowledge and if I was able to draw it I would.
But I don't like this way of thinking like "I add that approximately, others will correct". There's lot of open data that could be brutaly added to OSM, because "someone with local knowledge can"... Deal with that.
Would you please share me a link where you discussed those edits with the community who approved them ?

There's lot of "little" things I disagreed with your edit, reason why I reverted.
Thanks for explaining !
bagage (2021-12-22 17:57:56+00:00): There isn't any community discussion open, I don't plan to but I'll consider your position as the dominant one. 

I won't add building:part anymore and only consider the other use cases, I can live with that.

Happy mapping :)
user_1566574 (2021-12-22 21:08:22+00:00): Alright.
Well, feel free to discuss with the community before doing some edits. Your energy for those contributions are really useful, and talks will help to find ideas that are good, bad, and you'll hear suggestions. You may find that interesting !

Tho, I just want add 2 things :
1. The Wiki for building:part says that the use on nodes is forbidden https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part (there's 4 icons, 3 are striked)
2. Consider reverting your edits. You're using JOSM, by using Overpass you can find all your last edits related to place of worship. As if you need help ! (Yeah might be a little bit humiliating... I also have to revert some of my edits too. Necessary to continue providing good data's !)

No hard feelings I hope ! Thanks for this talk, happy mapping and holidays season ! :)
wielandb (2021-12-21 12:38:00+00:00): Extrem cool! 👍
Danke für die Arbeit!
eggie (2021-12-21 13:34:09+00:00): Beste John..
Is de weg volgens een wettelijke procedure officieel onttrokken aan de openbaarheid?
Os dat niet het geval dan access=private weer verwijderen.
Wanneer een pad over iemand terrein loopt kan access=permissive natuurlijk wel.
Welk bord staat hier vooraan.
Geen bord dan access=private svp verwijderen uit OSM.
MVG
eggie
John van Kemenade (2021-12-21 14:04:28+00:00): Zie commentaar bij ander deel Hoekmansweg. Er staat een bord "Verboden Toegang ..." en de eigenaar was toevallig aanwezig en die sprak me aan.
eggie (2021-12-21 14:28:31+00:00): In dat geval heb je het correct gedaan..
Mvg
Eggie
eggie (2021-12-21 13:31:44+00:00): Beste John

Je kunt een weg niet zomaar onttrekken aan de openbaarheid. Dat gaat volgens bepaalde regels. Wat een eigenaar wil is niet zomaar een uitgemaakte zaak. 
Staat hier een bord art 461 wvs.
Zo ja dan heb je het goed getagd.. Zo nee.. dan svp access=private weer verwijderen.

MVG
eggie
John van Kemenade (2021-12-21 14:03:10+00:00): Er staat een bord "Verboden toegang ...". Ik was vandaag aan het hardlopen en per toeval kwam de eigenaar aanrijden en die sprak me aan.
GinaroZ (2021-12-21 17:45:09+00:00): Hi, not sure if you are aware but Bing imagery is slightly out of alignment here. If you turn on the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels overlay it will help you to fix the offset.
Edelsalami (2021-12-22 17:48:43+00:00): Oh, that's a bummer. Thanks for the heads-up. Is there a way to display the layer in iD or do I need JSOM for that?
GinaroZ (2021-12-22 20:19:56+00:00): You can turn it on in the background settings > overlays and then adjust the offset for Bing.
Edelsalami (2021-12-23 10:05:19+00:00): Thanks, but which offset would I need to use to correct Bing imagery?
GinaroZ (2021-12-23 12:30:16+00:00): Zoom in and adjust the offset so the blue lines match up with the garden boundaries etc.
In this area it seems the offset is about 1.5,-3.5
Friendly_Ghost (2023-07-24 10:16:21+00:00): Hello. The tag car=yes is deprecated in favour of motorcar=yes. Could you use this tag instead for your future edits, please?