piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
DENelson83 (2022-02-28 21:27:54+00:00): You are putting me in an uncomfortable situation.  You are now the second person to have challenged my personal "one point, one name" guideline.
DENelson83 (2022-02-28 21:39:14+00:00): I will have to remove "Chenal du Nord" and "Chenal du Sud" in order to re-extend the Middle St. Lawrence Estuary area.
eggie (2021-12-04 07:40:44+00:00): Dag terual.  Je fietspad zat vast aan de landuse grass.
Ik het het even losgemaakt.
Hoe komen fietsers naar het oosten . Is er een uitzondering op de oneway=yes?
Dan toevoegen oneway:bicycle=no
Nu routeert het niet voor fietsers.
MVG
eggie
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-12-04 07:44:16+00:00): Je kunt hier als fietser de wijk alleen maar uit, maar nergens in. Ook niet vanaf fietspad M L Kingweg.
Je loopt hier vast op eenrichtingverkeer. 
Em hoe zit het met moped en mofa?
eggie (2021-12-04 07:47:19+00:00): De verbinding van fietspad ML Kingweg naar het H Dunabtplein staat ingetekend als voetpad (footway)
Moet dit geen highway=path met surface=paved zijn.
Het routeert nu niet voor fietsers.
terual (2021-12-04 07:52:54+00:00): Het stuk tussen de knik in de Asserweg bij de rotonde (waar het fietspad afsplitst) en de Alfred Nobellaan is voor fietsers/bromfietsers tweerichting. Kan ik deze changeset nog bewerken of maak ik een nieuwe aan?
terual (2021-12-04 07:54:07+00:00): Je mag als fietser niet naar H. Dunantplein vanaf de shared space, dat deel is een voetpad (zie ook https://www.debilt.nl/nieuwsoverzicht/doorgang-prof-dr-t-mc-asserweg-voor-fietsverkeer-opengesteld)
eggie (2021-12-04 07:56:31+00:00): Nee gewoon opnieuw bewerken. Je krijgt dan een nieuw changeset. dat maakt niet uit.
Dan dus toevoegen 
oneway:bicycle=no
oneway:moped=no
oneway:mofa=no
en dat korte stukje parallel richting rotonde
bicycle=use_sidepath

Het stukje naar het H Dunantplein zal denk ik path moet worden met paved=?
Maar dat zul je zelf het beste weten of daar gefietst mag worden.
Succes
eggie
eggie (2021-12-04 07:57:03+00:00): Oke.. even kruisend bericht. Dat dus footway laten
terual (2021-12-04 08:03:18+00:00): Aangepast. Dank voor de hulp!
eggie (2021-12-04 08:11:00+00:00): Oke.. Nu nog dat kleine stukje vanaf de knik richting Biltse Rading op 
bicycle=use_sidepath
En op het nieuwe stukje fietspad even oneway=no voor de zekerheid voordat iemand oneway=yes gaat toevoegen.
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 10:56:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114550822 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
Kovoschiz (2021-12-12 19:17:17+00:00): You removed the sidewalk on Tuen Mun Rd.
eggie (2021-12-04 08:17:33+00:00): Hier ging even iets fout.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=114546756

Ik heb het hersteld.
bicycle=use_sidepath hoort dus op de hoofdrijbaan. Niet op het fietspad. Het betekent .. Niet op de hoofdrijbaan, maar pak het verplichte fietspad.
Nu staat use_sidepath op het autogedeelte.
Bij een fietsverbod (met bebording) gebruiken we bicycle=no
Geen bord dan bicycle=use_sidepath
eggie (2021-12-04 08:21:04+00:00): Even ter Leering ende Vermaeck..  Kijk ook even hoe ik de klasse van de fietspaden in de tagging heb aangepast.
G11: mofa=yes, moped=no, traffic_sign=NL:G11 
G12a: moped=designated, mofa=designated, traffic_sign=NL:G12a 
G13: moped=no, mofa=no, traffic_sign=NL:G13 

 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway
terual (2021-12-04 08:26:48+00:00): Dank je! Ik denk dat we zo dan rond zijn of moet ik nog iets aanpassen?
eggie (2021-12-04 08:31:46+00:00): Het is zo allemaal oke.  
Er zal vast nog wel het e.e.a. veranderen hier in de toekomst.
Je kunt altijd het vinkje aanklikken voor een review request zodat een ervaren mapper even meekijkt.
Mapse,
eggie
miurahr (2021-12-05 07:38:42+00:00): はじめての編集おめでとうございます。
残念ながら、お宿指定のタグ、
tourism=hotel などがついていないため、不完全です。
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:tourism%3Dhotel

修正にトライいただければとおもいます。
trigpoint (2021-12-05 00:51:34+00:00): Why have you changed this?

It was accurately surveyed and mapped describing the building type along with its current usage. The type is obvious to anyone who surveys it.

By armchairing away those tags, you have lost important surveyed information and left it as it may as well be a modern concrete monstrosity.

I am reverting this change.
InsertUser (2021-12-04 18:38:20+00:00): Hello. Where possible please try to modify existing ways rather than deleting and re-creating them. It helps make it easier to see the histories of current features.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114547826
MrMoehritz (2022-02-08 21:12:36+00:00): Hi Julian, willkommen bei OSM. Ich hab die Firma mal in ein POI überführt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117177385
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:38:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
MoistTangerine2 (2021-12-04 11:47:37+00:00): Yunque Road Is Not "highway=trunk"
云雀路不是干线道路
Russ McD (2022-01-10 11:53:13+00:00): Dave - is the 1102 really all one way here ? I know its a narrowish road, but I have not been down of late.  Doesn't make sense if they changed this bit !
AlaskaDave (2022-01-10 12:26:53+00:00): I don't recall changing it but if I did it was probably unintentional. However, there is a lot of construction going on at the intersection of the 114 and the Superhighway so maybe those "minor edits" I did were bad. I haven't directly edited the 1102 for a long while.

Let me have a look. I'm tied up planning my next day's lodging for a big trip I'm on down south so I can't get to it right away.
Russ McD (2022-01-10 13:12:39+00:00): No worries...I'll check out that new overpass when I'm passing next, but doubt if its finished yet.
AlaskaDave (2022-01-11 00:58:31+00:00): I removed the oneway. I recall (faintly) that the last section of road was closed or oneway due to the heavy construction last time I was there about a month ago but at this point, I'm not sure
NM$L (2021-12-04 10:13:48+00:00): 回退的变更集有114499432、114500078、114500078、114501240、114502264、114502553、114505626、114506422。以上变更集，由于用户 @隔壁老王头 将班公湖多边形关系（multipolygon relation）西部的外部（outer）成员合并成为了一条直线，切将东西两部分分开，导致了大量其他相关多边形关系边界出现缺口，故回退。
NM$L (2021-12-04 10:16:24+00:00): 还有114500249。
4004 (2021-12-05 01:59:11+00:00): a ne man_made=pumping_station?
Pavelfantik (2021-12-05 15:00:18+00:00): исправил. Waste_transfer_station в ID называется кнс. неверный перевод получается
4004 (2021-12-05 15:26:44+00:00): да, там с переведом все печально, я перешел на англ версию, и то проще синонимы найти. поправил кнс хотя бы.
может, название тоже указать? если кнс северного раёна это название конечно
GinaroZ (2021-12-07 17:57:41+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the edits. Just to let you know I've removed the bridge tag you added on this track https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/114039019 - feel free to let me know if you need any help.
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 11:24:18+00:00): Please read this Amanda:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donauversinkung
amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️‍⚧️ (2021-12-04 11:28:41+00:00): Es tut mir leid. Ich hab ein Fehler gemacht. ich habe es zuruckgesetzt
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114551665
eteb3 (2021-12-21 19:11:50+00:00): Hi FortQuake

Thanks for your edits, especially clearing up many of my queries around Bourne.

I notice you "made a church into a church" at St John the Baptist Stamford.

I wonder if you meant to do this? The church is disused by the CofE, though it's still consecrated and you can often go in for silent prayer. But there are no services and (afaik) no consecrated host in the tabernacle. It's managed by the Churches Conservation Trust as a sort of museum. 

After I described the situation to user smb1001, he changed the tag to disused:amenity=place_of_worship. As he's catalogued almost every Anglican church in England, I'm inclined to stick with his judgement. 

That said, no one mapper gets to dictate, so the discussion could be had!

Let us know your thoughts.
eteb3 (2021-12-21 19:13:33+00:00): Oh and in case you're not aware of the (rather awkward) tagging convention, see here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Church

Ceci n'est pas une church!
SK53 (2021-12-21 22:44:40+00:00): Hi eteb3, 

I think if it's still consecrated it may still be a church, albeit with no regular services (at least that was my decision regarding St Mary the Virgin in Shrewsbury - perhaps because a service was about to happen when I visited). However, when I visited this church, quite some time ago (~15 years) it did not have the same aspect, but the website of the parish does say services occur from time to time (https://www.stamfordallsaints.org.uk/stjohnschurch.htm). Therefore choice of disused:amenity vs amenity may need to reflect local knowledge wrt churches looked after by the Conservation Trust.

I think references to to keeping the host in a tabernacle to not reflect regular practice across the Church of England.

@FortQuake: this is definitely an anglican church not a baptist one.

Jerry
OnwardTravel (2021-12-22 08:38:40+00:00): Ok, thanks for pointing it out
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 10:57:07+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 114133389, 114133458, 114133666, 114133828, 114134078, 114134505, 114143481, 114143704, 114143968, 114144059, 114144510, 114144527, 114162629, 114162772, 114162827, 114162889, 114162955, 114163139, 114163186, 114164027, 114164080, 114164206, 114164256, 114542487, 114542516, 114542780, 114542877, 114542926, 114542991, 114543079, 114543416, 114543436, 114543485, 114543896, 114543993, 114544044, 114544080, 114544145, 114544194, 114544349, 114544425, 114544495, 114544544, 114544765, 114544831, 114546369, 114546455, 114546466, 114546522, 114546571, 114546709.
mueschel (2021-12-07 13:13:13+00:00): Hi,
could you check this way, it got no proper tags: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1009066220
Lee Carré (2021-12-04 20:31:19+00:00): Smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
jeslop (2022-05-17 16:54:05+00:00): Hola frontesp.

Aparte de lo que te comenta el compañero sobre el tamaño del conjunto de cambios, ¿porqué has eliminado las etiquetas de wikipedia y wikidata de Xinzo de Limia?

He vuelto a incluirlas porque eran correctas.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
ivanbranco (2021-12-17 20:31:09+00:00): Ciao Martino,

con questo changeset hai creato un nuovo tag "certified_email" (1 uso) per la pec, precedentemente hai anche creato il tag "pec" (3 usi). Per le pec c'è già un tag contact:pec (61 usi), eviterei di crearne altri.

Se hai proposte per migliorare il tagging delle PEC ti segnalo la discussione in ML: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2021-March/072033.html
user_10901495 (2021-12-17 21:06:50+00:00): Sì sì avevi già menzionato il problema e avevo intenzione di risolverlo.
Mi ero dimenticato dei tag pec che avevo usato quando ho creato il tag certified_email.
Tra parentesi quest'ultima mi sembra una buona soluzione, ma nel caso ne discuterò sulla mailing list come hai suggerito.
Saluti
ChrissW-R1 (2023-08-04 21:32:43+00:00): Please check https://osm.org/note/3816907
frbg (2022-04-26 09:28:47+00:00): Hallo Lumpilumps.
Du schreibst "Korrektur Datenbestand" ohne eine ausreichende Quelle zu nennen. Local knowledge haben sicher alle Pulsnitzer und die, die es sein wollen. Als Quelle sind Oma und Opa dann genannt bzw. ein "Es war einmal...". Meine Quellen sind Karten von 1783 und 1803, wenn es also spätere belegbare nachvollziehbare Änderungen gab und sich historisch fehlerfrei und logisch einfügen, dann mag das in Ordnung sein. Anderfalls ist es reiner wüster Vandalismus und zerstört die zeitlich intensive Recherche von Daten- und Quellensuche einhergehend mit gelegentlicher Schriftanalyse der Kartenwerke.
Grüße FRBG
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 13:17:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114554550 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
Patr1k_P (2021-12-19 15:26:55+00:00): ahoj, ta pozorovatelna, to je kryty pristresok? Pripadne nie je tam nieco ako veza? Oznacene to je dobre,ale mapa to bohuzial nevykresluje...inak nie je zle pridavat aj fotky na freemap
Dodko (2021-12-19 20:21:45+00:00): Ak je to veža značí sa ako je v popise "Pozorovací věž se značí takto:"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:leisure%3Dwildlife_hide
jansokoly (2021-12-19 20:34:49+00:00): Ahoj. Nie je to veža. Je to prízemná wildlife_hide. Že ju renderery (zatiaľ) nevykresľujú je v poriadku. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_for_the_renderer
hackthemap (2021-12-06 19:34:01+00:00): Hi kjon :)

Vielen Dank für deine Änderungen.
Du hast den Kleidercontainer hier mit name=Deutsches Rotes Kreuz gemappt.
Ein Hinweis: Der name Tag ist nur für Eigennamen, die so als (Haupt)name auf dem Objekt stehen und nicht für eine Beschreibung des Objekts, besondern wenn diese Daten schon durch andere Tags erfasst sind. Zur Beschreibung sollten möglichst durch im Wiki dokumentierte und standardisierte Tags verwendet werden, da diese maschinell auswertbar sind (diese können auch bei fehlendem Namensschild auf einer Karte erscheinen).
Falls damit nicht alle Informationen angegeben werden können, gibt es noch den description key für eine weitere Beschreibung.
Siehe Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions
Deutsches Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Names#name_ist_nur_der_Name

Frohes Mappen weiter :)
VG
hackthemap
hackthemap (2021-12-06 19:37:43+00:00): Ich sehe dass der ID web editor hier leider einige Sachen vorschlägt die so keinen Sinn machen :/
Bei einem recycling container (im allgemeinen) gibt es einen operator, vllt noch operator:short_name und operator:wikidata etc. aber kein brand und auch kein short_name, da das ja wieder der name des Objektes selbst wäre und dieser spezielle Container hat ja keinen Namen.
kjon (2021-12-07 19:25:41+00:00): Hey hackthemap!
Danke für deinen Hinweis. Ich habe deinen Vorschlag direkt mal in den name-suggestion-index übernommen, siehe hier: https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/commit/2aa1ca540ead48467dffb812f816c21814584308

name=* und short_name=* sollten hierdurch zukünftig nicht mehr hinzugefügt werden, sondern nur noch brand:*=* tags. operator=* tags würde ich erstmal nicht anfassen, da hierin häufig die lokalen Ortsverbände des DRK genannt werden und diese nicht überschrieben werden sollten. Hoffe das passt soweit. Es dauert ein paar Tage, bis die Änderung den Weg in iD findet, siehe auch hier: https://nsi.guide/index.html?t=brands&k=amenity&v=recycling#deutschesroteskreuz-f6fab4

lg kjon
kjon (2021-12-07 19:28:51+00:00): Achso, wenn dir noch ähnliche Kleinigkeiten bei meinen Änderungen auffallen, schreibe mich gerne im entsprechenden Änderungssatz nochmal an. Ich passe Änderungsvorschläge im name-suggestion-index gerne an. lg kjon
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-12-06 11:22:51+00:00): Czemu podniosłeś Regucką do highway=secondary?

Celestynów nie jest jakimś wielkim miastem by nawet główny dojazd do niego miał od razu highway=secondary
ravali_78 (2021-12-06 09:17:53+00:00): Hi Zimeone Dwisanggalaya Appa,
I have fixed the alignment,as building polygons overlapping with highways.Kindly check with w297927832, w707019910, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114609888.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114553322
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 13:17:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114554550 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
Carto'Cité (2021-12-22 11:58:46+00:00): Bonjour Lanzadonii,
Je pense que tu as supprimé un double sens cyclable par erreur. On voit ici en 2017 qu'il existait :
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=3018757015073651
Et sur d'autres sources plus récentes on le voit encore. Je pense qu'il n'a pas été supprimé. N'hésite pas à me dire si tu as observé qu'il avait été supprimé récemment.
Merci d'avance pour ton aide.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
lanzadonii (2021-12-22 12:34:18+00:00): Bonjour,
Merci pour le message. Je pense que tu as raison, car je n'ai dû faire attention qu'aux voitures garées à droite.
Si tu peux n'hésite pas à le remettre.
Cordialement et bonnes fêtes.
Carto'Cité (2021-12-22 13:52:46+00:00): Merci beaucoup pour ton retour !
Bonnes fêtes également :)
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 13:17:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114554550 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 13:17:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114554550 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 13:17:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114554550 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of user adding new highways on top of existing ones.
felipeeugenio (2021-12-04 20:02:14+00:00): En este caso está bien porque si uno viene por RF, puede ser que pare dos veces.
Saludos
felipeeugenio (2021-12-04 19:58:36+00:00): Hola
Gracias por sus ediciones
En el cruce de Bilbao con Ignacio Zenteno hay un problema. Los semáforos se ponen en el lugar donde se detienen los autos para los casos de cruces 2x1 y 2x2. Porque si los pone en el cruce está diciendo que hay dos semáforos en vez de uno para el caso de Bilbao. Ya lo corregí.
mirar el caso de Manuel Rodríguez, ahí están bien.
saludos
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 13:19:19+00:00): User blocked:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5491
  
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
reigi (2021-12-05 10:34:59+00:00): Hallo Stephan1978,
du hast gestern einen neuen Weg angelegt und ihn mit dem Tag "footway" versehen. Lt. Wiki sollen Wege aber nur mit "footway" getaggt werden, wenn sie mit einem entsprechenden Schild gekennzeichnet sind. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114554322#map=17/51.00172/6.05647
Das ist in diesem Fall aber nicht so. Änderst du bitte den tag auf "path"? Und wenn du einmal dabei bist bitte noch surface=paving_stones und width=1 setzen. Danke dir.
viele Grüße
Reigi
stephan1978 (2021-12-05 14:38:15+00:00): Moin Reigi,

danke für den Hinweis - ist entsprechend angepasst:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114583966#map=19/51.00359/6.05684

Kannst du mir hier noch einen Tipp geben?
Die Ersterschließung des Neubaugebietes ist abgeschlossen und die Straßen sind als "Baustraßen" für den Verkehr freigegeben:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104639692#map=17/51.00074/6.05592

Kann ich die als "für den Verkehr freigegeben taggen"?
Die Straße sieht etwa wie auf diesem Bild aus:
https://www.nordwalde.de/gv_nordwalde/Aktuelles/Magazin/2019/HJ01/Stra%C3%9Fenausbau%20Am%20Speicher/Am%20Speicher1%20(Copy).jpg?resize=500x500

Grüße,
Stephan
reigi (2021-12-05 18:27:17+00:00): Hallo Stephan, zuerst mal vielen Dank. Deine Frage kann ich dir leider auch nicht beantworten. Frag' doch mal im Forum, da habe ich bisher immer eine Antwort bekommen.
marczoutendijk (2021-12-04 13:17:32+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 114552809, 114553500, 114553607, 114553617, 114553645, 114553704, 114553794, 114553963, 114554131, 114554174, 114554238, 114554287.
Andrea Musuruane (2021-12-04 16:08:20+00:00): Ciao. Per favore, inserisci dei commenti significativi ai changeset. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Good_changeset_comments Grazie, Andrea
ivanbranco (2021-12-04 16:14:09+00:00): Il tag place=state è già presente dal 2012 come nodo per tutte le regioni italiane, come mai stai duplicando l'informazione anche sulle relazioni boundary?
user_10901495 (2021-12-04 17:49:04+00:00): @ivanbranco Ho sostituito place=region con place=state.
Non ho duplicato niente, ho risolto un'incongruenza.
@Andrea Ciao. Purtroppo scrivere dei commenti significativi non è il mio forte ^^, ma cercherò di fare del mio meglio.
Saluti,

Martino
user_10901495 (2021-12-04 17:54:56+00:00): @ivan E poi ho modificato il tag place solo per la Lombardia, perché scrivi al plurale?
ivanbranco (2021-12-04 18:11:22+00:00): Duplicato perché il tag è già presente come nodo: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1781917324

E uso il plurale perché hai aggiunto place=state anche al FVG con questo changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113421412

Che al momento risultano infatti le uniche due regioni italiane con un tag place=* nel boundary (anche in Lombardia il precedente place=region era stato inserito da te).
user_10901495 (2021-12-04 18:27:57+00:00): Vabè un mese fa, non mi ricordavo. Ma comunque perché è un problema?
ivanbranco (2021-12-04 18:33:38+00:00): Perché è una pratica non discussa, sei l'unico in tutta Italia a farlo, così come sei l'unico ad aggiungere place=municipality ai boundary dei comuni: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1dLy

O l'unico a creare relazioni site per accorpare tutti i comuni con lo stesso codice postale: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13486043/

In generale mi sembra solo si stia creando una grande confusione sui confini. Non sarebbe meglio stabilire uno standard prima?
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 09:30:14+00:00): Sì ma non capisco qual'è il problema con queste modifiche. In che mondo di preciso crea confusione organizzare le informazioni del database meglio?
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 09:31:19+00:00): Fammi capire meglio dove si creerebbe una grande confusione.
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 09:32:36+00:00): Ovvio è un work in progress
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 09:34:54+00:00): Non puoi limitarti a sollevare questioni solo quando una cosa non discussa che introduco io effettivamente crei un problema?
Andrea Musuruane (2021-12-05 11:22:58+00:00): Ciao Martino, quanto suggerisce Ivan è assolutamente corretto. OpenStreetMap è una comunità, per tanto le regole di tagging vengono decise tutte insieme. Non puoi arrogarti il diritto di decidere in autonomia come si inserisce una feature. Pertanto, ti consiglio di revertare queste modifiche e di continuare la discussione nel canale appropriato, ovvero sulla mailing list talk-it. Ciao, Andrea
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 12:00:09+00:00): @ivan (risposta al commento sull'altro changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114577827 ma attinente a questo) Sì ma non riesco a capire perché questo debba essere un problema. Un tag in più che fastidio dà? Parli di duplicazione quando l'unica duplicazione è avere ancora le label delle regioni con tutti i dati ricopiati dai boundary quando queste non servono a niente perché il nome sulla mappa è già riportato di default con la relazione.
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 12:01:26+00:00): Guarda il nodo delle label dove si trova rispetto alla scritta viola delle regioni.
ivanbranco (2021-12-05 12:16:36+00:00): Martino, non voglio avere l'ennesima discussione infinita.  La questione è semplice: questa è una modifica che impatta il tagging di tutta l'Italia, tutte le regioni e tutti i comuni, che sono un'enormità. Se pensi che la modifica sia giusta apri un thread sulla mailing list, se ci sarà consenso sarò il primo ad aiutarti nello standardizzare i dati. Dato che questo consenso non c'è, come consigliato da Andrea io reverterei e aspetterei che il consenso ci sia.

Non capisco perché dobbiamo avere di nuovo questa conversazione quando ne avevamo già parlato quella volta che avevi inserito il numero di battezzati come population=* delle chiese.
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 12:26:01+00:00): Ma l'ho già modificato
user_10901495 (2021-12-05 12:27:33+00:00): Anche lì non si capiva quale fosse il problema, ma avevo ubbidito per non continuare a perdere tempo rispondendo ai vostri messaggi.