piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Jack the Ripper (2018-08-12 05:49:04+00:00): Hi Jan, the earlier keys were my doing, and are likely the incorrect ones.  Georgia definitively puts a space in the name, so it is "Peach Pass" and not PeachPass (like Florida's SunPass without a space).  And since nothing else is capitalized in tag value fields (the credit card is written amerian_express in OSM and not American_Express), I switched to nc_quick_pass instead of using capital letters.  I documented these payment methods with the "new" spelling in the wiki, and will try to find and change the older ones.
BCNorwich (2018-08-10 05:56:38+00:00): Hi, the play area does not require a name as you used that name on the park. 

Regards Bernard
Hjart (2018-08-09 21:04:48+00:00): Jeg har tilladt mig at rette navnet ved at kopiere fra en adressenode her :-)
BCNorwich (2018-08-10 06:24:12+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
Erith is the English name of the Cemetery, please see here :- http://www.parksandgardens.org/places-and-people/site/7207

I wonder if you meant to add the tag the name in Spanish, if so the tag is name:sp=Erithà Cemetery.

Regards Bernard
ToniE (2018-08-10 08:00:14+00:00): Hi samguer,

I see your point here.
4 years ago, I tagged the service road that leads to and from the ligt_gate w/o access=no/private/....
Seems that your Navi tries to route you directly to the lift_gate (behind the gate it is motor_vehicle=private) on way 265849909. But isn't the access to this way restricted by the access of the service road "Schindlerplatz" (public service vehicles only).

Hmm, does your Navi respect/take into account motor_vehicle=private or not?

Best regards
Toni
samguer (2018-08-10 17:48:24+00:00): Hello Toni, 

I was following the openstreemap wiki:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dno

"a road tagged access=no and psv=yes generally withdraws any legal right of way but permits public service vehicles. A routing program in psv mode may use this way."

The Navi correctly avoids Schindlerplatz becuase it has "access=no and psv=yes", your tagging. But the roundabout is still detected because it lacks either of these two. 

"The access=no tag indicates that the object is not to be used by the general public, with stronger interdiction than the access=private tag."

Which is why i added access=no to all the round about segments, for our navi this enough to make it so routing does not try to navigate through here, or detect the roundabout.

Please let me know what you think, i'd really like your opinion. It could be nice to have round about as "access=no and psv=yes", but if this breaks something you have, then i'll change everything back. 

Question: in Germany is the moto_vehicle=private a widely used tag? 

Thanks for your time
Sam
ToniE (2018-08-10 19:45:53+00:00): Hi Sam,

You're welcome.

Let's separate the discussion about Schindlerplatz and the round about.

- Schindlerplatz is on public grounds and access is not allowed for motor vehicles by traffic signs.

- the round about is on private grounds owned by the real estate owner of the site.
access to the round about is therefore more or less 'private'.

- Yes, motor_vehicle=private is widely used for this reason, maybe also 'permissive' - but here at this spot, we have a lift_gate and at least there someone has to grant you  access to the round about (aka lift the gate).

- So the way before the lift_gate is either access=yes for all or maybe =permissive (you don't have to ask for permission), but after the lift_gate, it is 'private'.
foot may pass the lift_gate w/o asking to lift the gate - so either foot=yes or maybe foot=permissive 

- I just added a short strip from Carl-Wery-Straße towards the lift-gate (thus prolonging way 265849909 ). This way should theoretically be w/o access=no or any other limitation, it is on public grounds and you may use every inch of that.
Having connected this way now directly with Carl-Wery-Straße migth worsen the issue - no need to use Schindlerplatz any longer.

- Navis should consider "private" and other settings. OSMAND for instance has a config option to allow/disallow usage of private ways.

- Navis might also try to find the closest way to a destination/address - maybe routing you into a dead end way where you have to stop before a lift_gate, which no one will open for you.

- There are many other aspects why I split driveways/alleys at the border of the propperty - allowing full access on the part from street to propperty (public grounds) and access=private on the private propperty. 

- That's why there was no *=private/no on the way towards the lift_gate (way 265849909) - it is not physically impossible nor legally forbidden to use that way, at least until the landuse=commercial.

- Comming back to your Navi. The round about itself (way 265849859) and the connecting ways to/from the lift_gates were already tagged with access=no (but w/ motor_vehicle=private). So your Navi shouldn't route you on these ways. 

What was the original problem? Did it route you on way 265849909 or did it really route you on/through the round about (265849859)?

Sorry for being so exhaustive. I'm just trying to understand your problem and your intentions for the change, so that I can think about a propper solution for you whilst not breaking the "rules" at the same time.

Best regards
Toni
samguer (2018-08-10 21:30:51+00:00): Toni, 

-Wow, what an explanation. Thanks, so clear now, I see what happened. I see why it is tagged the way so, I will revert back my changes. I think we need to look at how we treat motor_vehicle=private tag internally.

-For more context, when we make deliveries, if a route is motor_vehicle=private, we do not want to drop this road from the map, sometimes someone orders a package and the only way to their facility is through a private route, we will route them through it if it is the only way to their facility.

-We drop a road if it is access=no. You're right, 265849909 is successfully dropped from the map and drivers will not be routed to there. but 265849859, 265849958, and 265849921 were still part of our map (they had access=yes). What this looks like is half a round about. You have a round about where the only way in is through an out bound one way road. There is no way into the round about because 265849909 is not considered. This confuses our routing engine.  

-This is why motor_vehicle=private was not enough, and why I made 265849859, 265849958, and 265849921 access=no. So that all segments will be not considered for routing. Better to have no roundabout than half and confuse the routing. There is a round about and no way to get to it, it loses its mind. 

-Solution: problem needs to be fixed on our end, osm should go back to the way it was before i changed it. 

Toni, this has been a pleasure, i'm grateful for you taking the time to explain the situation. Let me know if you'd like to change it back or don't mind if i do it. Please let me know your thoughts.

Best
Sam
ToniE (2018-08-11 10:48:57+00:00): Hi Sam,

sorry for the delay ... UTC+2 here and your time zone?

The pleasure was also on my side.
Please go ahead, I don't mind if you do the changes.

Best regards
Toni


BTW: way 265849958 should have full access for all - another aspect of splitting:
bicyclists comming from the north might then turn left here, cross Carl-Wery-Straße tiwce and head of for the southern part of the subway station (entrance 'G', 3 bicycle parking facilities).
Otherwise they would have to cycle to the south until the next crossing with Therese-Giese-Allee ...  and that detour includes an incline=up (not mapped though).

BTW2: This station in 3D based on OSM data?
http://demo.f4map.com/#lat=48.0883096&lon=11.6447442&zoom=20&camera.theta=46.768&camera.phi=76.308
BCNorwich (2018-08-10 06:06:49+00:00): Hi, does the path join the road at either end please?
Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2018-08-13 14:39:53+00:00): Unless you can join the path to the highway network it is of no value to OSM. As such it ought be removed.
Regards Bernard
Allison P (2019-06-02 06:40:19+00:00): Thanks for contributing to OSM! As a nearby resident I'm curious about this park. I cannot find evidence of this park existing, and when I last visited this location it was just a traffic island with grass. Is this an actual park, or just a lawn?
Allison P (2019-06-02 06:34:21+00:00): Thank you for contributing to OSM! Private driveways, even those leading to single family homes are considered acceptable to map on OpenStreetMap by most of the community. Can you explain why you deleted them? If the data was low quality, consider trying to improve the accuracy rather than removing it; usually low-resolution data is more desired than none at all.

Thank you,
        Reid Pelton
freebeer (2019-06-02 17:55:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 70862402 where the changeset comment is: private driveways are most welcome in osm, especially if added to comply with eu directives to guarantee a minimum wage to plebs who trudge said driveways in order to earn a scrap of mouldy bread after 32 hours daily barefoot uphill both ways in the snow
freebeer (2019-06-02 21:52:00+00:00): now that the original data is visible against aerials for a real comparison better than guessing from https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=61513974 , i can give my observations.

it was immediately obvious while making the above revert that these were untouched TIGER imports.  which is no justification for a mass deletion.

viewing a random one showed me it had the access=private key, the lack of which is the usual justification to delete driveways.  they also have highway=service due to TIGER limitations; the added service=driveway to distinguish from, say, business access, is an osm-ism that needs manual addition.

with the above achavi page, changing the base layer to OSM from the default dark i'm-going-blind-and-the-sun-is-directly-overhead, then disabling `old' on the overlays lets me see the restored drives and i checked that they all appear rendered private, so nothing wrong there.

with no significant difference between the three actually-different TMS imageries i can view here, i chose the archive bing clarity as i know it's reasonably aligned around the world even if old.  the other clear layer showed no major changes here.

the usual TIGER Barf criticism applies in that there are a couple howlers here, but many are Good Enough For OSM Work, and certainly do not merit deletion on that ground.

the biggest thing to strike me is how many unmapped driveways there are as this is far more densely populated than osm alone implies.  i've done detailed house and driveway mapping in random rural areas only to find long overnighter hours of work deleted later, so i find my motivation here to fill out all these private residences in detail to be lacking.

anyway, my approach here would be to improve what is lacking and add what is missing, obviously.  there was nothing here to merit a wholesale deletion, unlike some places where tiger bears (tiger-bears? oh my!  TIGER bears) no semblance to any reality i've experienced.
dvdhoven (2018-08-10 06:01:03+00:00): En ook hier weer wegen doorverbonden over routerelaties heen. Stop eenvoudig met het doorverbinden van wegen. Dat is nergens voor nodig
BikePC (2019-01-15 12:44:07+00:00): Kruising Derde Stationsstraat - Pigmentsingel is recent gerenoveerd. Er staat nog slechts 1 bollard en er zijn twee verlaagd aangelegde verkeersremmers (traffic_calming=double_dip). Om deze te taggen met een 'smoothness' key is niet de bedoeling. Van een 'bad' surface is hier nooit sprake geweest. Bron: survey / lokale kennis.
viloan (2018-08-09 22:08:42+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
Freek_ (2018-08-09 22:30:17+00:00): Ik zie dat ik die passage nog niet goed verbonden heb. Ga ik nog doen.
ToniE (2018-08-10 07:45:19+00:00): Hi samguer,

that's correct now. Bavaria DOP80 and BING are outdated. These ramps have been closed and replaced by the ramps in the west. During the rebuild of the bridge here, they have been temporarily reopened but are closed now again.
The two fly-overs and roundabouts of M3 and B471 (SE and N of here) are a mess and poeple usualy get lost and take wrong exits.
Cheers
Toni
samguer (2018-08-10 22:12:56+00:00): Yeah, sorry for the map noise, they should be back to how they were before I made the changes. I acted too soon before doing all the research. Thanks for the follow up.
dvdhoven (2018-08-10 06:12:36+00:00): Hetzelfde treurige verhaal doorverbinden over routerelaties heen. Weer routes kapot.
dvdhoven (2018-08-10 06:16:08+00:00): Idem hetzelfde treurige beeld doorverbinden over routerelaties heen. Nooit nooit doorverbinden!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
pitscheplatsch (2018-08-10 21:16:24+00:00): thanks for #revert #vandalism
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=61515018
literan (2018-08-10 10:45:59+00:00): please do tag such links with 'highest' road (cause there is no primary traffic on this link). Also, if you make separate link for the turn from Pluschiha street, you should make other link oneway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/615787693/history - I fixed it. Also, you should make the non-u-turn restriction on these links https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8519871/history PLEASE, do this work well, or simply do not touch it and do not make bad splitting of highways
literan (2018-08-10 10:46:36+00:00): first phrase - "please do not tag such links..."
moon_walker (2018-08-11 00:06:26+00:00): Thank you for the feedback
Leo Slager (2018-08-09 23:50:58+00:00): Je hebt de adresnode verwijderd en alle gegevens van het kadaster op het gebouw toegevoegd.
Dat is niet correct.
De naam van het gebouw moet wel op het gebouw staan maar alle andere gevens behoren op de adresnode te staan.
Verander je dat zelf ?
Leo Slager (2018-08-09 23:59:28+00:00): AUB niet de adresnodes verwijderen !
Die worden rechtstreeks geimporteerd uit het kadaster evenals de gebouwen.
Functionaliteiten die in een gebouw huizen , bij taggen op de adresnode en niet op het gebouw.
Leo Slager (2018-08-10 00:06:18+00:00): Graag alle adresnodes die je verwijderd hebt weer terugzetten, anders zijn de huisnummers van de kaart verwijderd.
Dat kan als vernieling van de kaart worden beschouwd. 
Gaarne een reactie.
prairiedogscircular (2018-08-10 08:41:57+00:00): Ga ik proberen. Ik had begrepen dat wanneer een adres een gebouw is ze samen konden worden gevoegd. Ik zal de changesets bekijken. Er is er een gemakkelijk manier om het terug te zetten?
Leo Slager (2018-08-10 20:32:55+00:00): Bijna goed, maar dat samenvoegen heeft dan vaak betrekking op de adresnode en een node met aanvullende gegevens zoals een bedrijfsnaam, openingstijden, etc. Die twee nodes kunnen dan samengevoegd worden. Op het gebouw zelf altijd building=* eventueel de naam van het gebouw en andere eigenschappen van het gebouw.
Alle andere gegevens op de adresnode bij taggen.
Met de editor JOSM kan een changeset worden teruggedraaid, maar dan zijn alle goede dingen die je hebt toegevoegd ook weer verloren
Leo Slager (2018-08-10 20:37:38+00:00): Met de editor JOSM kan een changeset worden teruggedraaid. Maar dan ben je alle goede toevoegingen ook weer kwijt.
Goede test voor mij. Ik ga kijken of ik alle gevallen kan verzamelen. Als ik er de tijd voor heb zal ik daarna de gegevens handmatig scheiden van het gebouw.
Het is geen ernstige fout dus maak je er niet te druk om.
viloan (2018-08-09 23:34:46+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
TheDutchMan13 (2018-08-10 04:17:56+00:00): Can you be more descriptive in future changesets then just "garbage in GA & Talent, OR" ?
dvdhoven (2018-08-10 06:34:43+00:00): En ook hier weer doorverbindingen over routerelaties heen. Niet doorverbinden!!!!!
Ik ben al met al ruim 1,5 uur bezig geweest alle routerelaties, die jij aan gort geholpen hebt, weer te herstellen.
viloan (2018-08-10 01:16:21+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
Glassman (2018-08-10 13:21:05+00:00): Don't forget to change the changeset comment with every upload/save.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61516527
GOwin (2018-08-10 02:51:21+00:00): Hello @Kolla 6. I noticed that you deleted another highway, and replaced the same with a new one.  Can you say why you did so?

This isn't considered good community practice, and we try our best to retain as many good contributions made by other mappers.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61516540
Kolla6 (2018-08-10 03:23:17+00:00): Hi Gowin,

Thanks for the feedback.

I will check the feedback mentioned and revert back with the findings.

Thanks,
kolla6.
Kolla6 (2018-08-10 03:41:29+00:00): Hi Gowin,

We are not exactly sure of the highway which you are referring to, as osmcha doesn't show any road segment as deleted.

If it is regarding way "615654838"  there is water way passing beneath the ground level. I have done partition on highway and assigned layer attribute to it.
Hence, the connected  segment is rendering as new creation.

Please suggest if i am on right understanding.

Thanks,
kolla6.
GOwin (2018-08-10 04:24:59+00:00): I'm referring to w615654837 which is a major highway and oddly just version 1. This is odd because this is a major area, and is quite unlikely to have a very new highway.

Apparently, the deletion was made by another mapper in Changeset: 60975464. 

What could've done here is to review the area before mapping. It's unusual to have a major highway missing in a busy area like this, and we could've rolled back the offending changeset. 

Thanks for responding to the feedback.
GOwin (2018-08-10 02:20:34+00:00): This is awesome! Thank you for adding details and helping improve the map of your favorite neighborhood. 

If you wish to keep in touch with local mappers, there are a number of  community channels you can try: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/channels
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61516972
Jorge Gutiérrez (2019-04-29 16:41:35+00:00): Palma Real quemada
GOwin (2018-08-10 02:18:52+00:00): This is awesome! Thank you for adding details and helping improve the map of your favorite neighborhood. 

If you wish to keep in touch with local mappers, there are a number of  community channels you can try: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/channels
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/61517031
Neela21 (2018-08-10 13:17:27+00:00): Hi Gowin,

Thanks for taking time to review the edits and give feedback.

Will ensure to continue the good work.

Thanks,
neela.
Nutchanon Wetchasit (2018-12-30 02:38:01+00:00): This edit has been partially reverted in changeset 65879573 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/65879573> in the IMPACT exhibition ground.

Reasons:

- It improperly retagged exhibition *buildings* into mere commercial _ground_.
- It introduced nested "buildings" on top of the correct ones.
- I have personally visited these exhibition halls in the past: I can confirm that their shape predating this edit are correct.
dktue (2018-08-10 07:43:55+00:00): Wahnsinn! Vielen Dank!

Ich hatte mich schon rangewagt, aber es nicht so konsequent wie Du zuende gebracht! :-)
Supaplex (2019-02-07 06:15:40+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/opestreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia  https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
US Woods (2018-08-16 17:55:12+00:00): Hi Yury,

when you don't want to map the individual panels inside a solar plant, please use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:generator:source=solar for the whole solar farm (without landuse=industrial)

Kind regards
Yury Yatsynovich (2018-08-16 18:37:21+00:00): Sure, thanks for the note!
Frans S (2020-12-28 12:00:06+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here.
A remark. Please map more accurate and square each rectangular building you map.
This document might be of some help
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit?usp=sharing
Best regards
Frans S (2020-12-28 12:01:18+00:00): According to the records you mapped from the Bing Imagery.
The Bing imagery is often loaded as standard Imagery in iDeditor. This is an issue which still has to be solved.
Please change to the Maxar Premium Imagery to map from the Imagery which is prescribed.
That is the most recent imagery.
(Bing is outdated and dates from  2009 - 2014)


See this document how to change the imagery
https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/#configuring-the-background-layer
(Often Bing select standard the Bing Imagery)

Best regards and keep mapping.