piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Longhorn256 (2020-08-30 01:10:45+00:00): Could you please restore the missing buildings, parking lots, aisles, and more from this area? I also noticed various areas around Meadville have been deleted as well.
Thank you.
user_3216889 (2020-08-05 11:05:36+00:00): Dat waren 9 tijdelijke wisselwoningen, dus kan kloppen dat ze weer weg zijn.
Zie: https://groningen.nieuws.nl/nieuws/560807/aardbevingsbestendige-werkzaamheden-woningen-woudbloem-gestart/
smootheFiets (2020-08-05 20:46:36+00:00): Dankjewel, Henk! Ben wel opgelucht dat je de oplossing van dit raadsel heeft gevonden. De woningen hadden een BAG-datum van ergens 2017 of 2018, dat vond ik best wel raar. Maar nu snap ik het.
De 'echte' woningen op de foto hebben ook een raar verhaaltje: dat brievenbusje links staat pal achter een hek + artikel-461 bordje (op de foto niet te zien). Het brievenbusje is dus in principe niet toegankelijk. Ik heb het hoofdschuddend getagd...
user_3216889 (2020-08-05 22:33:12+00:00): Ja, dat is een bijzonder stukje.
Volgens mij is de weg eigendom van de verderop gelegen jachtwerf. Vroeger was daar een aardappelmeelfabriek, en het rijtje huizen was voor de fabrieksarbeiders.
Zie: https://www.dewoudbloem.com/geschiedenis

Groeten, Henk
CoyKoi (2020-11-22 20:43:27+00:00): Names should not be used for descriptions, eg "path between Epsom Ave and gillies Ave".

If a path doesn't have a name, it doesn't have a name.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88952921
AlwynWellington (2020-11-23 22:01:13+00:00): @CoyKoi, I fully understand the point you are trying to make.
The bigger question what motivates whoever to name a highway?
And what signage is sufficient to constitute a name?
And a bigger picture here is where any of this fits into giving users directions.
In this case the various bits between Epsom Ave and Gillies Ave are part of Te Araoa, a 3,000 km route from Cape Reinga to The Bluff.  Having walked Te Araroa through Auckland in April 2019, I had great difficulty wayfinding.
But to be consistent have you considered the name given to the cycle way either side of Carlton Gore Road east from Park Road .  I can see signage for a cycle way.  I could not see and name given to the path itself.  As it is already tagged as a cycle way the addition of Cycleway is possibly redundant.  To use your explanation "if it has a name ... " and in this case the name is simply "Carlton Gore Road".
You may also want to consider whether the mapping adequately reflects what is on the ground.
Kia ora
ralley (2020-11-29 19:02:15+00:00): Concur with coykoi, these are descriptions not names: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
myfanwy (2021-01-10 09:37:52+00:00): yeah, i agree with coykoi too. This is low-grade vandalism. And any amount of "whataboutism" will not change that. I've found about 20 of these across auckland, which probably means 100s over the country. That's not OK, continue and I will ask OSM to block your account and IP address from editing.
CoyKoi (2021-01-10 22:59:17+00:00): It was done in good faith I so I would not call it vandalism.
There is an ongoing conversation about naming parallel ways (eg footpaths and cycleways alongside named roads), but the consensus is quite clear about not using descriptions as names.
AlwynWellington (2021-01-11 01:03:50+00:00): Kia ora

I think there is a need to look very carefully at each and every instance.

I am a long distance walker and names of highways came up in route lists.  

Names of highways tie back to online tools. such as WayMarkedTrails and OSMand.

Where a highway doesn't have a name the name "highway" is instead.  This is not helpful to users.

On the Auckland's north shore, for example, many street signs point the way for Te Araroa.

I invite you to consider the example I gave, where cycleway was added, in OSM, to a street name.  I have removed that descriptive addition along the lines mentioned by others above.

On the Gillies Avenue, there is sign for "Coast to Coast" point west.  I would argue that signs has currency to Saint Andres Avenue, at the least.

Some mappers take an extreme view that says a (foot)path that is physically alongside and forms part of a road cannot take the name of the road.  

So, in my view:
1) each instance need to be examined either on the ground or from mapillary or similar
2) there is the need for us all to have an agreed position on all of these aspects drawn from the OSM wiki

I think, @myfanwy, you should identify yourself and your role in OSM.

Be very happy to continue a moderate discussion.

nga mihi
AlwynWellington (2021-01-11 08:23:02+00:00): Kia ora
Since my post above I have found two more signs for the Coast to Coast Walkway in the driveway beyond the northern end of Saint Andrews Road. 
These are official signs and, in my view comply with the wiki in respect of name giving.

I could not see any other identifying signs.

I continue to be ready to have a moderate discussion about how the advice in the wiki applies.

Kia kaha
CoyKoi (2021-01-11 10:14:05+00:00): In my opinion, it doesn't make sense for a minor urban path through a park to share the name of the long walking route which passes over it. The Coast to Coast Walk route is already well represented by the relation 30023: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/30023

The issue is well articulated by the answer on this post: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/59782/name-ways-belonging-to-walking-networks-or-not
AlwynWellington (2021-01-23 23:33:30+00:00): CoyKoi, kia ora
My concern is not about Coast to Coast or Te Araroa or any (walking) route.

Rather my concern is that, so far as possible each element in any route is named.  My concern springs from the directions that comes from apps.
For example, when driving, you might be perplexed if the instruction came up "turn left onto 'highway' " rather than "turn left onto Khyber Pass Road".
The former is quite common in walking and cycling route instructions where the element is for the footpath making up, say, Kyber Pass Road, and that footpath has not been named.
I have thoughtfully read the post you have put forward.  The responder, with a generalisation, concludes "Obviously it can sometimes get confusing - sometimes the "name of a road or path" really is the same as the name of the long-distance path that runs along it (and I bet that there are parts of the Ridgeway LDP where people would say "that path there is named The Ridgeway") but more often than not, and especially with newer LDPs, it isn't."
The discussion in the wiki on "Names" is a bit more helpful.
There I accept the points made about descriptions.  
I accept the moderately made observation that my original "name" was crying out for suggestions as to how to name this 100 metres or so.
AlwynWellington (2021-01-23 23:49:53+00:00): Continuing the discussion:
The question still arise as to where any name comes from.
There are several signs saying Carlton Gore Road posted by Auckland Council.  
I assume we can be quite safe from criticism if we name elements within that road reserve that are highways tagged as highway=cycleway and/or footpath as well as the elements tagged highway=road.
Nearby is the well signed Auckland Domain. Within this Domain there are a number of paths marked in OSM.
In my view these paths can be named Auckland Domain, unless some other name is signed for a particular element.
On the other side of the Waitematā, I have encountered roadside signs "Te Araroa". There is a name (of the 3,000 km route certainly) that can be applied where no other name already exists.
The purpose of any map is to help the user.  When that user is reading a list extracted from the (electronic) map the help must continue.
AlwynWellington (2021-01-23 23:56:10+00:00): Coming back to the section between Epsom Avenue and Gillies Avenue:
So the user knows where, and guided by the wiki, and the Q&A you referred to, I propose the names:
a) "Melville Park" for the elements from Saint Andrew's Road to Gillies Avenue;
b) "Auckland University" for the section from Epson Avenue down to Saint Andrew's Road;
there being quite a lot of signage for both these names.
AlwynWellington (2021-01-23 23:58:14+00:00): I would appreciate your thoughtful consideration that assists all users, as I understand this to be the purpose of OSM.
olo81 (2020-09-19 17:33:52+00:00): Przydało by się dopracować tagowanie ścieżek rowerowych. Nie wystarczy dać tagu bicycle=yes

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle
iriman (2020-08-05 16:43:15+00:00): سلام دوست عزیز. در این ویرایش سه پارک در شهر علویجه حذف شده و مشخصات یک مسجد نیز پاک شده در حالی که در تصاویر ماهواره‌ای این عارضه‌ها دیده می‌شود. آیا اشتباه شده؟
{"_𝓑𝓻𝓪𝓿𝓮 𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓸_"} (2021-01-24 14:38:34+00:00): سلام. من چون اول کار اشنایی با این برنامه نداشتم نمی دونم چیکار کردم یه تعدادی مکان حذف کردم.باتشکر از یاداوریتون
iriman (2020-08-05 16:54:05+00:00): سلام دوست عزیز. این فلکه را «درود بر دهق» و همچنین فلکهٔ انتهایی شهر علویجه را «دهق» نام‌گذاری کرده‌اید در حالی که شهر دهق با این شهر فاصله دارد و کلا این نام منطقی به نظر نمی‌رسد. از آن جایی که به این نام‌گذاری اصرار دارید ممکن است توضیح بیشتری بدهید؟
user_5359 (2020-08-07 04:58:19+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building. 

see also https://www.osm.org/changeset/88995816
felipeeugenio (2020-08-05 13:03:20+00:00): parque ficticio añadido por usuario para sacar provecho de aplicaciones como PokemonGO
skquinn (2020-08-05 12:04:06+00:00): Re: Brash Brewing -- Per my reading of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours/specification it would appear 25:00 is valid as a closing time to make it explicit that it's the following day. In fact I think JOSM's validator will flag 01:00 used as a closing time as being before the start time (and will not fix it automatically despite having a "fix" option). Is Osmose really flagging 25:00 as not valid?
HubMiner (2020-08-05 21:28:33+00:00): Hi skquinn,
I participated in implementation of that change, see one of disussions - https://github.com/osm-fr/osmose-backend/issues/526
The problem is due to the fact that OSM documentation supports both interpretations ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening%20hours and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours/specification ).   For Osmose we settled that 24:00 is the allowed as closing specifier, but anything greater (starting with 24:01) would get reduced by 24:00.

Please let me know if you are planning to submit this issue to Osmose, so I know not to use it for now.
skquinn (2020-08-05 23:13:42+00:00): Do we know if there are any data users that have issues handling times past 24:00? This has been part of the spec for at least a couple of years if not since the very beginning.

I think maybe it's best not to use this particular "correction" for now since at best we have two QA tools that disagree on what's allowable.
HubMiner (2020-08-06 02:44:41+00:00): Ok, I will pause making this change "for now" (for a week ;)

My main argument against going over 24:00 - this notation is not used in real life, why do we need a new geeky notation that will confuse end users?
skquinn (2020-08-06 03:00:06+00:00): A lot of the rest of opening_hours syntax is going to be confusing the first time someone sees it, too (we still have people just chucking freeform rubbish into the tag value, not realizing there's an agreed-upon machine parsable syntax). It's only confusing or counter-intuitive until you realize what it means, then it makes perfect sense.
abakus_uploader (2020-08-05 22:31:20+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
Anisa IRM-ED (2020-10-22 03:25:01+00:00): Hi, The Than. I changed the classification and geometry of this way (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/834077672) based on Maxar Premium Imagery. I also made some changes around this changeset. Thank you
Diseret (2020-08-13 21:43:16+00:00): J'ai remplacé le lien par le vrai site internet de Torgny, parce celui-là n'est pas vraiment à sa place ici.
s0mik (2020-08-13 11:28:22+00:00): И чего не так? Причина исправления?
П3тр0виЧъ (2020-08-13 11:36:07+00:00): 1. Гоночная трасса. Это ты так типа спуск с горы обозначил?
2. Унклассифайд в никуда ведущий.
П3тр0виЧъ (2020-08-13 11:36:58+00:00): Служебная дорога до Швейцарии тоже неправильно. Но это мой косяк был.
s0mik (2020-08-13 16:14:15+00:00): ну пусть будет так... хотя все же я не согласен, что дорога в никуда
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-07-26 07:26:47+00:00): surface=pier ? What you wanted to express by that at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834086585/history ?
eggie (2020-08-05 12:56:49+00:00): Beste dhoek
Neem svp de moeite op de adresnodes bij te taggen. Wanneer dat met OsmAnd niet lukt loop dan je edits nog een keer af met een reguliere editor als iD of Josm.
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2020-08-05 12:55:16+00:00): Goed om zaken aan te vullen, maar wel graag op de adresnodes. Niet zelf adressen aanmaken. Het geeft vervuiling van de database van OSM.
MVG,
Eggie
keithonearth (2020-08-05 19:23:41+00:00): I'm unclear what this "route 1" is. At present, are you actively developing it with a group on facebook?
Bike Across Canada Route Network (2020-08-06 00:53:17+00:00): Route 1 is 1 of 3 primary routes across Canada that most people take; Route 1 being the most popular route across the country.   It goes to Cape Spear, NL 
Available on https://www.trailforks.com/route/1010000-mainline-1-victoria-bc-to-cape-spear-nl-7-212km-6-594-8km-cycling-and-617-2km-ferries/  and https://www.routeyou.com/en-ca/route/view/6876869/cycle-route/1010000-mainline-1-victoria-bc-to-cape-spear-nl-7-212km-6-594-8km-cycling-and-617-2km-ferries and 6 other track sharing websites.  It could be a few months before it all gets added it.  It's being added in slowly to get more local feedback.
keithonearth (2020-08-06 17:39:18+00:00): So they are crowd sourced routes of convention, not officially defined ones? Would it be fair to call them recommended routes?
Bike Across Canada Route Network (2020-08-06 18:33:58+00:00): The tag 'state=proposed' indicates that it's not officially defined.  

Instead of a small group of beaurocrats defining a National Cycling Route Network, this Network is designed by those who have actually done the trip.     
Once the whole network is shown here on Openstreetmap cyclemap (and other renderings) the people who would actually use the network can provide feedback, and only after its community accepted, then it makes sense to approach each municipality along route to get official designation.   

Doing otherwise, the same mistake of the Great Trail/Trans Canada Trail would happen where it's just a mixmash of random 'things' with many user types mixed together.   This was because the entire network wasn't made public at the proposal stage, only a few people saw it and there was no clear definition as to what it was.    There still to this day, many people from around the world who look at the Great Trail and think it's a National Cycling Route Network only to be disappointed.  


Also note that I am working with the Canada Bikes association, while this isn't part of the push for a National Cycling strategy yet, once this proposed network becomes more widely known, it could be part of it and political will solicited for it.
Bike Across Canada Route Network (2020-08-06 18:55:14+00:00): Slightly long-winded, but I hope it makes sense. :)
keithonearth (2020-08-06 20:23:34+00:00): It totally makes sense, I also think the Trans-Canada trail has many issues too. Even the parts of it that are a bike route are often poor. I think that developing new routes publicly, with many adjustments is a good thing.

All that said, I'm not sure if it is in keeping with the OSM policies or within OSM's scope. My understanding was that the purposed tag was for routes that have been officially purposed, not for active crowdsourced projects in development.
Bike Across Canada Route Network (2020-08-07 06:02:43+00:00): That would be for the OSM overlords to decide.  
Keep in mind that the TCT/TGT has been wrongly designated as a NCN in openstreetmap for over 12 years and nothing was done about it.  I didn't remove it when it was added because I wanted to replace it with something more useful. And this is exactly what I am doing now.  The TGT/TCT segments are being removed as the proposed Bike Across Canada Route Network is being added. 
If the OSM overlords do decide to prohibit the proposed Bike Across Canada Route Network from the map, it would be great to know about this sooner rather than wait 6-8 months when it's all been meticulously added in and a whole lot of time spent with this process.   
The alternative of course is to build my own map using free data sources and have the proposed Network added in and made available as an .osm file to be used by map makers as they wish.   Much harder, but it is an alternative, which might be done in the future - depending on how much effort I want to put into it. 
I'm wondering however, if this proposed Network were to be formally recognized by the Canada Bikes Organization (and published somewhere), would that then make it 'formally Proposed'?
keithonearth (2020-08-14 18:14:21+00:00): Additionally, in the interests of transparency, and to try to consolidate this discussion that has become spread out over a few changesets, I'll link to the other changesets we've discussed this on:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/87108609

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/88215490
Bike Across Canada Route Network (2020-08-15 16:49:25+00:00): Thanks for taking the time to get into detail on this issue.   Much appreciated than if we were to discuss this  8 months from now after spending that time adding it in.  

I've reached out to Canada Bikes, just waiting for a reply.  

On the topic of the TCT/TGT 
https://thegreattrail.ca/news/4-things-may-not-know-great-trail/ 
"The trail is not' ..... 
One Long Continuous Cycling or Hiking Path"
They also tweeted this.
https://twitter.com/TheGreatTrail/status/1035188337919909891?s=19
"Hi Sam, we actually never said it was a National Cycling Network".
Therefore, there is no intention on ever current cycling segments connected.  So designating cycling segments as NCN is not appropriate.   Do you have a source for where you think it should be NCN? (I know it's a common misconception when looking at signage on the ground)

Also, I'm checking the talk-ca mailing list, waiting to see if there is discussion. 

Great to hear input from Andy Allan, it's much appreciated :)   as well as pointing me to another track sharing website.  (I've added it to 7 already, another won't hurt)
keithonearth (2020-08-17 05:55:22+00:00): I'm sorry you are having such a hard time understanding this. The TCT is a multi-use trail, with many sections that are specifically intended for bicycle use, those sections are tagged with the `ncn` tag on osm. The fact that it is not a continuous national cycle network is irrelevant. You also quote that it is not a continuous hiking path, yet are the one who has changed it's tagging to nwn. 

It really doesn't matter if you understand or not. I've asked you not to edit the TCT relation, and you've agreed. As long as you stick with that agreement we won't have issues.
Bike Across Canada Route Network (2020-08-17 07:27:25+00:00): The tag ncn means 'National Cycle Route', which the TCT/TGT has stated (themselves) that it is not.  So tagging those segments that are cycling only is not correct. It's misleading for anyone looking at the map.  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:network%3Dncn

Yes, I remembered the '4 things you might not know' website after the fact, (and caused some more frustration) even though the TGT facebook group members agreed on the idea that it should really be tagged as a nwn (although it is not).   The rationale was that walking is the most common recreation for it (to try and give it some sense of usefulness) - even though it's not a National Walking Trail, and strangely should not be shown as one.  Even though people have written books claiming that they 'Hiked the Great Trail'. 

It's not a personal vendetta against the TCT/TGT it's against logic and facts.

"A national cycling route network is a nationwide network of designated long-distance cycling routes found in various countries around the world for the purposes of bicycle tourism. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_cycling_route_network

The TGT/TCT clearly does not fit into that description. 

... And in related news, I've taken up the suggestion to add it to uMap.  I very impressive website.    Looks like it should be relatively straight forward to pick out the roads/paths and save it as an .osm and .GPX file for each segment.
While it would be nicer to include it directly in OSM as proposed route relations, we await a response from Canada Bikes as to how to best proceed.  Giving a week to respond seems fair.
 
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/bike-across-canada-route-network_489471

Perhaps the TCT/TGT could be added to uMap and removed from OSM?  I do agree that it should be removed as a nwn designation. 

What's crazy is that in 1992, it's claimed that IS related to a National Cycling Route - despite themselves claiming it isn't. .. certainly is a National Embarrassment. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_Canada_Trail
"The creation of the trail was born of Canada's 125th anniversary celebrations in 1992.[4] It has its counterparts in such other greenway routes as the 12 EuroVelo routes, the UK's National Cycle Network, and the United States Numbered Bicycle Routes network."
keithonearth (2020-08-17 17:59:44+00:00): Good work on uMap! It looks really good, and like it will be a good way of representing your data, and will be a very helpful resource to people cycling across Canada.

It really doesn't matter if the TCT fits the definitions of a National Cycle-network outside of OSM, what matters is if it is a sensible way to structure the data in OSM.

You quote from the OMS wiki. The TCT fits that definition. I guess your logic is that it's not a continuous bicycle network across the country, therefor it's not a network at all. This is simply not the case, nor is it required by the definition you provide.

The opinions expressed in conversations on your facebook group don't have any weight here, it is not helpful for you to report them.

The sections of the TCT I've ridden in BC and the Yukon have issues, mostly poor route choice, but it's still useful. I would definitely not call it "a national embarrassment", and the fact that you do so makes me question your statement that you don't have a personal vendetta against the TCT.