piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Andrea Musuruane (2020-11-10 09:22:10+00:00): Ciao,
    OpenStreetMap è un database. Con i suoi dati si possono fare diverse cose, tra cui visualizzare delle mappe. Ne esistono diverse. Una di queste è la visualizzazione di default presente sul sito www.openstreetmap.org, che si chiama Mapnik. Ce ne sono altre, sia sullo stesso sito (accessibili attraverso l'icona del "panino" in alto a destra), sia su altri siti.
	
Una delle regole di OSM è che non si mappa per il rendering, ovvero per far apparire delle informazioni su una specifica mappa. Le informazioni devono quindi essere inserite correttamente, indipendentemente dalla loro visualizzazione.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Good_practice#Non_mappare_per_la_visualizzazione

Ci sono delle mappe specializzate per visualizzare i percorsi in mtb, come ad esempio la seguente:
https://mtb.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=11.718704183067985!45.6363!8.1273

Come vedi i percorsi che hai inserito tu, lì non sono presenti, perché non sono stati inseriti in relazioni, seguendo le indicazioni e le etichette descritte in questa pagina:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mountain_biking

Ciao,

Andrea
JesseFTW (2020-11-10 02:07:26+00:00): I fixed some of the crossed lines added in here, in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/93826824
gileri (2020-11-09 09:41:26+00:00): Modifications annulées : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/93787051
pyrog (2022-01-01 11:04:27+00:00): Hi,

There is only 2 bubbleid tags in OSM database.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/205640252
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8090208402

How to get this "bubble" id from Bing maps Streetside and/or the OSM iD editor ?

"Bubble" describe the photosphere from Bing Maps Streetside.
This is not so meaningful.

Why not rename this tag "streetside" or "bing_streetside" ?

Best regards and happy new year
Arlo James Barnes (2022-01-01 17:48:50+00:00): Happy New Year, pyrog! Thanks for setting up a [wiki page](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bubbleid) for the key. I'm not picky about the particular name, I just wanted some way to record the info to (as you say in the wiki page) source non-obvious data about map objects; it can be migrated to whichever key the community thinks is best (that'd be you since nobody else has contacted me about this yet). To retrieve the bubbleid, open the streetside view in iD and hover over the text in that pane that says "Report a privacy concern with this image"; it will link to a url that includes the string "?bubbleid=[the id]".
Arlo James Barnes (2022-01-04 22:16:23+00:00): comment from the OSM-US Slack:
> might be good to have a common prefix: to group mapillary and bubbleid
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 08:13:27+00:00): Please check that this is `highway=motorway_link`, not `highway=motorway`
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93761856
小智智 (2020-11-09 08:26:41+00:00): the boundary of motorway_link is also limited to the ramp of the "expressway / tunnel area" signs
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 12:43:07+00:00): This was discussed quite a few times already. This doesn't reflect the reality and practice where the connection to the `highway=motorway` is to be `highway=motorway_link`. There are a number of cases where expectations will fail. The details of this has been tentatively incorporated as `motorway=no`.
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 12:43:29+00:00): Making them `highway=motorway` may be worse.
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 12:44:36+00:00): Although routers may overcome this situation, this emerged as a tentative compromise.
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 12:45:39+00:00): `highway=trunk` itself has no such issue, lacking physical and legal connotations, which may be handled by `noref=yes`
小智智 (2020-11-09 12:46:56+00:00): highway=motorway_link has implication that motorway law also applies in the area
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 12:46:57+00:00): Additionally, `destination:ref=`. 
A non-standard `destination:motorway=` is used as a placeholder to clarify what a `motorway=no` means or leads to.
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 12:48:08+00:00): This implication is unfounded. There is no such assumption. Furthermore, this breaks continuity on `_link` classification.
user_5359 (2020-11-09 05:04:10+00:00): Hello again! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/868170452/history: Did you know the keys building:part (see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:building:part?). The key layer doesn't say about the position or floor.
blackboxlogic (2020-11-15 20:31:24+00:00): Hi Art,
Thanks for your edits. I keep an eye on Maine and I've seen you focus on 'access' tags. Since it's hard to tell what other mappers see, I just wanted to make sure that we're interpreting that tag the same way. To me, "access=private" means that there is a sign that says something like "keep out", or a physical barrier (gate or fence) not just that the space is /owned/ by a person. If that's not how you see it, lets chat it out.
-Alex
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93762294
Art Vandaley (2020-11-15 21:08:51+00:00): This one was a weird change that if you think was wrong lets change it back.

I am doing CityStrides and so I have run every bit of every road in kittery and I am making changes based on running them.  Most of my changes are from no tresspassing signs, or from roads that do not feel safe to run down (ie they are narrow dirt roads that are more like driveways and are not public streets).  You have probably noticed that when I make these changes I usually indicate if there is a sign or a gate.

For this one, this is a road extension of a road from York Maine the goes into Kittery and is not maintained by any city at that point, but is able to be navigated.

There are a few other roads that were already private that might be able to be navigated but I have not tried because they were marked private, should I run those and see if they should be changed back (I did change one back to public recently that you might have noticed that is a very nice road).
blackboxlogic (2020-11-17 00:03:53+00:00): I thought I responded, but I don't see it, sorry if you get duplicates.

I'm not worried about past edits, just thought you might be doing a lot more of this so... worth making contact.

If there is a "keep out" sign or a gate, access=private is perfect. For the other cases you describe (like "is not maintained by any city") I would offer/suggest ownership=private. The difference is that access is about your rights to be there, and in Maine, you /can/ generally be there (even privately owned land) unless indicated otherwise.
JJIglesias (2020-11-09 02:44:39+00:00): Saludos, te sugeriria NO colocar la altura en metros, a no ser q la conozcas con precision, el colocar los niveles SI esta bien, asumir q 3 metros es la altura de 1 nivel No esta mal, pero en este caso OSM requiere medidas exactas, y no podemos precisarlas, asi q mejor dejar solamente el dato de niveles (pisos) y no el dato de altura.
Gracias
5m4u9 (2020-11-09 06:02:56+00:00): hola blue jess, en general veo bien el mapeo. quité y mejoré algunos edificios inventados...

solo recomendarte que en los edificios de 2 plantas o más lo estás dejando el contorno en el techo, esta bien pero luego de rectangular tienes que moverlo a la base del edificio, espero se entienda, revisa el lugar para ver como debe quedar

es bueno ampliar hasta el nivel máximo para evitar mapear patios o dos viviendas en uno. En Cochabamba y Bolivia no tenemos grandes construcciones en bloque, no es común y viendo el mapa se ve como invención

no todo se puede mapear en edificios por las limitantes de calidad de la imagen satelital, pero comenzando con este mapeo cada tanto se puede mejorar
Jarek 🚲 (2020-11-09 02:16:03+00:00): iD doesn't ask - sorry - but source is survey today
Warin61 (2020-12-22 02:25:03+00:00): Hi,
Relation: 11863112 "landuse"="grass"  "type"="multipolygon"

has only one member and that member has  the same tags... suggest you delete it. 

Note I find these errors using https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=151.75568&lat=-32.94248&zoom=12
Warin61 (2021-01-16 08:06:11+00:00): 25 days and still not fixed? 


Suggest you use https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=151.78544&lat=-32.92980&zoom=18 to keep an eye out for your mistakes. It is what I do...
Warin61 (2020-11-10 07:29:33+00:00): The changes broke the administration boundaries for 2 councils. 
Please take care when changing things - refer to the OSM standard layer as that should show any linked features.
Владимир К (2020-11-16 16:42:55+00:00): Добрый день! 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/323899530 зачем называть мост через реку рекой? По-моему, это ошибка
Kovoschiz (2020-11-09 08:12:25+00:00): See Discord message https://discord.gg/P8fxC98
muralito (2023-03-11 00:23:44+00:00): Hola Javier. El camino de las altas cumbres se clasifica como trunk, no como primary. Saludos.
woodpeck (2021-03-25 21:11:31+00:00): Du hast in diesem Changeset die Verbindung von der Carl-Schwenk-Str. zur Schachtstraße gelöscht (inzwischen wiederhergestellt), und auch eine Treppe, die vom Ende des Fußwegs, der die Carl-Schenk-Str mit dem Bernhardusweg verbindet, bis zum Waldrand am Hohlenstein führt. Hier siehst Du die Löschungen in rot:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=93766900

War das absicht? Wenn nicht, kannst Du das dann wieder reparieren?
Pfefferdose (2020-11-10 19:36:22+00:00): Hallo deocka, bitte beachte, dass nicht jeder Radweg vom Land BW betrieben wird, deshalb würde ich die lcn-Radrelationen auch nicht mit dem RadNETZ-Netzwerk verknüpfen. Ich hatte angedacht, die RadNETZ-Routen möglichst geschickt zu trennen und nach dem Schema "RadNETZ X-Y" zu kennzeichnen. Ich benutze diese Karte um zu unterscheiden, welches wirklich RadNETZ-Radwege sind. Beachte, dass die Karte veraltet ist, dennoch ist sehr viel noch aktuell. 
Gruß Pfefferdose
www.wegedetektiv.de/radnetz
deocka (2020-11-11 07:42:36+00:00): Wenn ich doch aber auf den von mir befahrenen Wegen auf dem Asphalt das Symbol >>RadNETZ<< sehe, dann ist das doch ein Weg im RadNETZ in BaWü - oder nicht?
Was ist denn der Unterschied zwischen "RadNETZ BW"  und "RadNETZ Baden-Württemberg" ? 
Für mich ist das so gleich wie die "A5" oder die "BAB A5" oder die "Bundesautobahn A5"
Wenn es da einen Unterschied gibt, den ich nicht verstehe, dann kann es von mir aus auch wieder getrennt werden.
Pfefferdose (2020-11-11 09:09:28+00:00): Es ist tatsächlich das gleiche RadNETZ. Jedoch sind alle Relationen der Landesfernradwege schon automatisch im Netzwerk RadNETZ und müssen daher nicht extra gekennzeichnet werden. Auf der Karte wären die Radfernwege die Grünen Linien. Extra kennzeichnen und als Relationen aufzeichnen würde ich nur die roten Wege, da diese noch nicht in OSM zu finden sind. Ich fände es keine gute Idee, die Radfernwege doppelt zu kennzeichnen. Das ist aber auch nur ein Vorschlag meinerseits.
Gruß
deocka (2020-11-14 06:23:35+00:00): Was sind grüne Linien? Und den Automatismus habe ich auch nicht verstanden.
Geht es darum, dass Fernwege von lokalen Wegen des RadNETZ getrennt sein sollen? Bräuchten wir dann zwei Netzwerke? Das eine für Fernwege und das andere für lokale Wege im RadNETZ.
Supaplex (2021-04-16 16:46:04+00:00): 恭喜您透過 Maps.Me 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。Maps.Me App 採用開放街圖的地理資料，由社群而非商業公司建置的地理資料庫。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
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

由於Maps.Me隨著軟體更新更新最新地圖，App裡的地圖資料版本可能略舊，透過Maps.Me增添商家等資料時有可能開放街圖上已經有了，請到http://www.osm.org 網站看是否要加的商家有沒有人加上去了。

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
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!
Supaplex (2020-11-09 08:55:00+00:00): 不畫出區域?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93769513
Dimacn (2020-11-27 00:55:27+00:00): Скажите пожалуйста почему у вас объекты "тополь" отмечены на зданиях? Это отдельные деревья?
Supaplex (2021-04-16 16:46:39+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
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
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!
DovGazit (2020-11-09 06:07:29+00:00): פרסום כאן:
https://www.facebook.com/727308692/videos/10157956934633693/
gurglypipe (2020-11-09 14:11:40+00:00): Hi, what’s your source for this edit? From its name, I would expect Chapel Close to be a no through road, and from the Bing satellite imagery it looks like the service road off Langdale Crest is actually just a driveway for one house, which potentially doesn’t connect to Chapel Close. I might be wrong, though. Do you have driver feedback for this edit? Thanks
baggg (2020-11-11 04:01:18+00:00): thanks for checking into our edits. i have added the missing road based on the driver feedback and available resources. i have added the connection based on the available imagery. thanks for the quick suggestion. please find the changeset(93893523) for the suggested modifications. i will take this as a learning from the community and make sure to implement in my future edits. always happy to learn from the community
A67-A67 (2022-03-08 16:13:52+00:00): Je hebt hier voorsorteervakken verwijderd, die wel gewoon bestaan, met het commentaar "Fout in de kaart". Ik zal deze terugzetten.
Dimacn (2020-11-27 01:02:07+00:00): Вы случайно переместили точку 1589165539 одного здания на другое здание, тем самым сломали геометрию. Пожалуйста будьте аккуратнее, не портите карту. Я уже исправил вашу ошибку.
Patr1k_P (2021-11-10 14:49:36+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/255913675

...tym ze si oznacil tuto cestu a aj dalsie v okoli bicycle=designated, tak ju kresli ako cyklocestu, co je nezmysel...musela by tam byt napr. takato znacka 
https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chodn%C3%ADk_pre_cyklistov
Rado209 (2021-11-11 06:37:32+00:00): máš pravdu a sa mi páči ako suverénne niekto (ako ty teraz) napíšeš že "si označil.." nie neoznačil, aj v popise zmien som dal iba "zmena názvu trasy" zmena trailu na designed urobil niekto niekoľko mesiacov dozadu. Ja v iD nevidím históriu zmien.
Rado209 (2021-11-11 06:38:55+00:00): zmením to, vyhodím to odtiať ale nebolo by odveci aby tam bola rola trasy pre bicykle. aj keď nie je oficiálna Ctrasa je to vybudované bikermi tak ako hocijaký bike park kde sú označené traily.
Rado209 (2021-11-11 06:40:54+00:00): ako je toto v kálnici
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/48.75338/17.93540
Rado209 (2021-11-11 06:44:03+00:00): + našiel som divný cípok prirobený... užívateľom laznik, píšem mu či to on zmenil.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/896906648#map=19/49.28639/18.24945
Patr1k_P (2021-11-11 12:52:47+00:00): neber ma v zlom, len som ta chcel upozornit...ked si otvoris tento odkaz normalne v prehliadaci, vlavo dole mas historiu cesty a tam je vidiet, ze si tam ten tag pridal pred cca rokom, asi si aj zabudol na to

....ale nakoniec teda zistujem, ze tak vykresluje preto lebo tam je path a staci teda zmenit na track
Patr1k_P (2021-11-11 12:56:13+00:00): bud by tam bolo path bez toho tagu, alebo track...ci sa vsak jedna o lesnu cestu alebo len chodnik neviem posudit, ale asi by som nechal ako bolo predtym a len vyhodil ten jeden tag...kedze tam je name, tak na mape budes vidiet ze to je Maríkovský single track
Rado209 (2021-11-12 11:08:13+00:00): Prepáč, bol som naštartovaný lebo pár dní pred tebou som dostal správu skrz zlú korekciu zástavky ...ako keby som zrušil BSU station v Londíne.
...a fakt máš pravdu, zadal som to tam ja, zabudol som.
Spravím to tak že ten tag vyhodím. Názov ostane ale to ti tak v mape nenapovie ako keď vidíš prerušovanú fialovú že tam je nejaký trail.
Patr1k_P (2021-11-14 13:32:24+00:00): myslim ze si to este neupravoval tak to tak nechaj...nasiel som aj inde ze to tak je, potom to tak asi ma byt...len ma prekvapuje ze to kresli fialovou...lebo fialovou kresli aj klasicky highway=cycleway cize klasicky cyklochodnik s dopravnou znackou.....
Rado209 (2021-11-16 08:53:49+00:00): áno, ja si tiež vybavujem plnú fialovú len ako cyklochodník. keď je prerušovaná tak buď je to súčasť nejakej inej cesty alebo zvážnice. Myslím že keby je tam prerušovaná tak je to na mieste, nemyslíš?
Patr1k_P (2021-11-16 09:08:30+00:00): tak urcite by bolo prehladnejsie keby to bolo odlisene od klasickeho cycleway,takto je to trochu zvlastne a trochu to myli..
aceman444 (2022-02-10 19:54:29+00:00): Osobne si nemyslim, ze by na lesnych cestach mal byt ten nazov "Maríkovský  cokolvek", len preto, ze tadial ta trasa pre bicykle prechadza. Na usekoch, ktore boli specialne pre tuto trasu vytvorene, tam mozno.

A modra ciarkovana cesta sa renderuje zrejme kvoli highway=path+bicycle=designated.

Este by som tam navrhoval mtb=yes, aby sa odlisilo, ze to nie je pre cestne bicykle. A ak to je legalna trasa a ma to nejaku webstranku ci co, dala by sa z toho urobit relacia, ktora by niesla ten nazov a nie jednotlive cesty, ktore sa mozno volaju inak (alebo nijako).
aceman444 (2022-02-10 19:58:40+00:00): Tiez je tam plno tych ciest oznacenych tracktype=grade1, pritom maju uvedeny strkovy povrch, co si myslim odporuje.

Chcelo by to udolie nad Hornou Marikovou nejaku koncepciu :)
Patr1k_P (2022-02-12 16:49:39+00:00): ano renderuje ju kvoli bicycle=designated...len rovnako renderuje aj klasicku highway=cycleway s dopravnou znackou pre bicykle...chyba mi tam nejake odlisenie...toto je trail kdesi v lesoch pre mtb, na ktory by som najskor nesiel...keby to bolo ako relacia, tak by to odlisene bolo, aj mapy cz by vykreslovali ciarkovanou ciarou a nie suvislou ruzovou, tak ako pri beznych cycleway vhodnych aj pre mestkace

https://sk.mapy.cz/turisticka?x=18.2947618&y=49.3010088&z=17
aceman444 (2022-02-12 18:33:56+00:00): No nema inu moznost, kedze tam ziadne znacky na odlisenie trasy od cesty pre cestne bicykle nie su. Zial bicycle=designated je asi spravne, lebo to zahrna vsetky typy bicyklov (asi ani zakon ich nerozlisuje).
Ale hodilo by sa pridat nejake znacky pre horske bicykle z
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mountain_biking
DUGA (2021-03-26 14:49:35+00:00): This is not the correct way to draw a driveway across a connector.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/868537964 has been reworked, please do not make the map complicated.
abvincen (2021-03-29 07:39:12+00:00): Hi,

Thank you for reviewing and correcting the edit, Apologies for incorrectly adding the driveway across the  connector, will ensure not to repeat such errors. Looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
abvincen.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93773106
mavl (2020-11-27 14:31:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 94899134 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94055460].
FreedSky (2020-11-22 06:04:01+00:00): 请不要乱修改，临安区是行政边界不是公交线路
rskedgell (2022-04-18 04:24:47+00:00): What is your source for the spurious bicycle prohibition at the Hullbridge Road, South Woodham Ferrers bus gate? There was no prohibition in place on Saturday and local council minutes from 2021-07-07 mention a "bus and cycle sign" at E215 (this will be TSRGD diagram 953, with "taxi" omitted).
https://www.southwoodhamferrerstc.gov.uk/_UserFiles/Files/_Minutes/128321-20210707__Environment_Minutes_b.pdf
Nathan_A_RF (2022-04-18 17:30:24+00:00): I assume the signs have changed then, as I recall that a prohibition with an "except buses" plate was used before. Please feel free to make any corrections.
Katyyyyyyyyyyyyyya2 (2020-12-15 17:22:31+00:00): неправильное написание
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93778810
Wudang (2020-12-15 23:54:25+00:00): Thanks for the heads up, I didn’t realize aerodrome was misspelled when I uploaded. 

Automatic Translation:
Спасибо,  я не заметил ошибки в написании слова "аэродром"
user_5359 (2020-11-09 18:26:59+00:00): Hello! Please have an look on https://www.osm.org/relation/11855668. What is the meaning of the key +?
wies1 (2020-11-27 18:08:54+00:00): Hallo, Ich hatte deinen Kommentar leider nicht gesehen. Das war ein Fehler meinerseits. Ich wollte in JOSM einen Kartenausschnitt heranzoomen und habe ich nicht gemertk, dass ich ein Plus odee mehrere in die "offene " Relarion geschrieben hatte. Daher wurde es versehentlich hoch geladen. Zugegeben, ich habe leider erst nach längerer Zeit gemerkt, was ich in diesem Zusammenhang falsch gemacht hatte.
Puxan (2020-11-09 12:54:29+00:00): @guidocampani.     Buen trabajo. Los edificios de más de 4 lados tambien se pueden escuadrar.     
Muy bien, sigue mapeando.     Joaquim
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93780174
MrMoehritz (2020-12-19 19:24:26+00:00): Nich Edingen kaputt machen :-P
gileri (2020-11-09 10:46:36+00:00): Bonjour,

À Lyon comme la plupart des grandes villes les adresses sont déjà cartographiées, il n'y a pas besoin de les dupliquer. Exemple : 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3078325385

Malheureusement StreetComplete propose toujours cette quête alors que l'adresse existe déjà, il vaut mieux l'ignorer en ville.
MatthieuLyon69 (2020-11-09 15:39:51+00:00): Bonjour. Merci. Ce qui est étrange, c'est que la demande revient souvent. D'ailleurs dans l'aperçu à droite, le numéro n'apparaît pas.   Je vais désactiver la quête dans street tant que je suis sur Lyoncomplete.
4004 (2020-11-16 01:25:43+00:00): уже открыли? о как
eggie (2020-11-09 08:15:23+00:00): Dag Terence.. Weet je ook of dit voor het noordoostelijke stuk Ophelialaan geldt?
Dat staat ook nog op oneway=yes..

oneway=no hoeft trouwen niet op reguliere wegen. Je kunt de regel oneway=no verwijderen
mvg,
eggie
Warin61 (2020-11-26 04:38:19+00:00): Relation 11863794... fails.
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=151.78669&lat=-32.92786&zoom=18

Others look to be your work too? Pan that map south for more.
Warin61 (2020-12-05 08:04:04+00:00): The error for this relation continues to exist.
Warin61 (2021-01-09 05:05:36+00:00): Deleted. 
And deleted another duplicated relation...
iPelle (2020-11-09 08:25:52+00:00): Source: Comune di Pino Torinese
URL: http://comune.pinotorinese.to.it/index.php/notizie/notizie-comune/710-servizi-per-i-pinesi-consegna-farmaci-a-domicilio
mueschel (2020-11-10 10:19:28+00:00): Hi,
you used several tags here that are not used in any other place, e.g.

entrance:primary=Principale
entrance:type=Atro
numberplaque=Assente

Please use only tags that are documented in the Wiki or that are available as presets in your editor.
DUGA (2022-05-08 20:22:37+00:00): Should I report you to your team lead for adding wrong way streets?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/868573987/history