piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Taunusklub | Stubenkaterin (2025-01-24 06:26:20+00:00): Hallo Zusammen, die Wanderwege des Taunusklubs führe ich & pflege somit alle Relationen. Als Anstoß habe ich die Diskussion genommen, um einfach mal von Ockstadt zum Steinkopf auf der Route 071 PRT zu wandern. Die Beschränkung auf dem Weg ist weg. Es wurden rund um den Weg Ruhezonen eingerichtet. 

Leider kann ich das Access=no nicht so zurücksetzen, dass der Weg wieder als begehbar (Rad passt auch) angezeigt wird. Habe schon div. Varianten probiert. Wer kann mir damit helfen? Danke für Eure Antwort. Stubenkaterin
Bierphysik (2025-01-26 09:18:11+00:00): Ich verstehe das Problem leider nicht ganz. RoedeOm hat das access=no schon entfernt. Ich entferne jetzt noch das access=yes, denn das ist auch nicht korrekt.
RoedeOrm (2025-01-27 10:59:56+00:00): Ich hatte mir das angeschaut und war dann selbst verwirrt, weil bei Zugang "Forrestry" stand. Ich habe es auf Yes geändert in der Annahme, der Weg sei wieder frei nutzbar. 
Bin da ja selbst eher laienhaft unterwegs, muss ich gestehen.
flohoff (2021-05-10 15:38:21+00:00): Moin,
nur um das nochmal klar zu machen - "track" ist keine Oberflächenbeschaffenheit. "track" heisst - "Diese Straße wird nur oder überwiegend für die Landwirtschaft genutzt". 

Auch öffentliche straßen können Sand sein oder Schotter. Das gehört in das surface tag.

Also ich kenne die Stelle jetzt nicht genau und will nciht sagen das das kein Track ist, aber dein changeset kommentar lies auf eine Fehlinterpretation des highway=track schliessen.

So long

Flo
aixbrick (2021-05-10 06:35:13+00:00): Hello,
- You connected https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/683437963/ and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/941110920/ with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/941110919/, but there is no connection for real.
- Same for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/683437962/ and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/683437966/
- Roads running through a parking lot are not automatically service=parking_aisle, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle#Disambiguation.
Regards
threefoursixninefour (2021-05-16 15:33:20+00:00): Hello and thanks for your comments, sorry for taking a while to address them but I wanted to carefully check the mapping convention.  Initially I'd connected the three ways you mentioned because they were giving warnings ("start unreachable") in iD, but looking at the documentation there should indeed be no service road there and the warnings can be ignored.  Hope this is OK.
aixbrick (2021-05-16 19:15:11+00:00): Looks good :-). Thank you.
Mike Baggaley (2021-05-12 17:12:22+00:00): Hi, I know you didn't set the access, but do you know if there is there a reason why the footways into the station have access=no? Way 845089075 and adjacent. Cheers, Mike
ramthelinefeed (2021-05-12 18:48:35+00:00): Hi, I'm guess it is probably because there has been some construction work / remodelling of the station in recent years, and some of the ways through have been closed off whilst it was ongoing. They probably need their 'access' tag revised now - I'll take a look!
ramthelinefeed (2021-05-12 18:53:43+00:00): The 'pedestrian area' forecourt is free to access, I think, so I have cleared the tag on that. I don't think you can go through under the tracks to reach Wallis Road yet.
mueschel (2021-05-13 09:24:32+00:00): Hallo,
das Tag 'fuel:AVGAS' gibt es nicht - welcher Treibstoff genau ist gemeint?
N9713 (2021-05-15 07:33:18+00:00): Unter http://atterheide.de/flugplatz/flugplatzdaten/ ist nur AVGAS angegeben. Bin im Luftfahrt-Thema zu wenig drin, um zu wissen, ob das nun auf fuel:91UL, fuel:100LL oder beides hindeutet. Habe deshalb erstmal dieses tag gesetz, bevor ich garnichts eintrage. Falls Du dich besser auskennst, gerne anpassen oder auch als FIXME setzen.
bxl-forever (2021-05-11 09:29:12+00:00): Hello,

A question about a gate, here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8715690278

access=private?
Or is it open for anyone?
ovruni (2021-05-09 22:36:46+00:00): Hola, he notado que en este conjunto de cambios, al igual que en 104082741 se ha ingresado el texto " vivo en la zona y lo conozco", lo cual sigue sin dar detalles sobre sus contribuciones, tal como se encuentra indicado en la documentación sobre los buenos comentarios en conjuntos de cambios [0], que incluyen la eliminación de un nodo contenía la etiqueta  "fixme=position". Por otra parte, el uso de las etiquetas building [1] es para edificios individuales, no para lotes, como parece apreciarse desde la imagen de Bing que se encuentra indicada en este conjunto de cambios.
Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Buenos_comentarios_en_conjuntos_de_cambios 
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
Gregory UKR (2021-05-11 16:35:05+00:00): Bună, it appears to me that you have moved again the state border of Ukraine and Moldova inside the Ukrainian territory (see my previous comment at changeset 104380670). A trivial look at currently available Esri, Mapbox, and Maxar images reveals that Ukraine has been conducting river bank reinforcement works and the border line that you drew passes right through this construction area. On the other hand, the previous location of the border in OSM reasonably coincides with the end of the construction area. Additional checks at official Ukrainian and Moldovan websites do show some differences in the border location, but at none of them I can see the border plotted nearly that far inside Ukraine as you did. Therefore, again, I ask you to support all your state border changes by sources and abstain from unreferenced changes. Please understand that invalid changes to the border in OSM do not move the actual border on the ground even by a little bit, but they diminish the quality and the value of OSM. While your largest change to the border near the riverbank is not acceptable and will be reverted, your small changes at posts 108 and 109 are well referenced and much appreciated.
habi (2021-05-10 14:02:33+00:00): Your bogus changeset has been reverted.
rupertvdk (2021-10-08 12:30:43+00:00): Schade dass die Wege gelöscht worden sind, denn 

1. obwohl die Trampelpfade illegal sind, existieren sie ja dennoch in der Realität.

2. gibt es in der OSM glücklicherweise bessere Arten, Wege die nicht (mehr) benutzt werden (dürfen) kenntlich zu machen, ohne gleich die gesamte Chronik und Eintragung der Wege zu löschen. Siehe dazu im Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dno

Fazit: Bitte NICHT einfach Objekte aus der OSM löschen, außer du weißt sehr genau was du machst!!
rupertvdk (2021-10-08 12:31:23+00:00): Werde mal versuchen, ob die Wege noch über das JOSM Recovery Tool wiederherstellbar sind, melde mich sobald ich das ausprobiert habe.
◪ Jarv (2021-05-09 23:47:44+00:00): Hi NetWisdom, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
I see that in this changeset you added the name of the route to the footpath.
Because Viking Way is a route rather than a path name it is mapped as a relation (a relation contains multiple ways). The Viking Way relation contains these paths already, although it doesn't render the name on the map it is correctly mapped already. For this reason I'm going to remove the name from the way.
This is an easy mistake to make, and I made it before when I was new too.
You can see the relation here https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/404079
Some maps show these relations such as https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=14!53.1918!-0.5374

Kind Regards,
Thomas
user_5359 (2022-01-29 07:11:30+00:00): Hello! Pleease have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/941124397. What is the meaning of the tag yes=grass?
GeorgeHoneywood (2022-01-29 07:38:58+00:00): Apologies, looks like a mistake. Think I originally added a single building in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95694620 with the yes=grass, then when I split the building up the new ones also got it.

Feel free to clean it up, or I can do it later today :)
Thanks!
GeorgeHoneywood (2022-01-29 19:23:16+00:00): Now fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116757098
Thanks for pointing it out!
eggie (2021-05-10 06:22:27+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-05-10 06:27:04+00:00): Dag Techtube.. Het zal niet routeren, want de verbinding van het Westeind sluit niet aan op het nieuwe stuk Kleine Vliet.
Het gaat vioa een stukje fietspad.
http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=104413041

Ik heb het even aangepast.
MVG
eggie
felipeeugenio (2021-05-09 22:52:47+00:00): Hola
Hya una aplicación para el telefono que se llama street complete. Permite sin mucho esfuerzo el poner números a las casas, entre otras cosas. Es muy didáctica. 
por si le interesa.
saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104413144
◪ Jarv (2021-05-09 22:38:04+00:00): What is the E-W road being constructed as? I'd presume at least 	tertiary rather than unclassified.
Also I'd guess you watched the video by jen which really out to be tagged as the source of the changeset. But also in that video it shows that the roundabout isn't open (i.e. you cannot make any movement other than ahead) while this change (or maybe the one before it) shows that it is possible to go all the way around the roundabout.
Nathan_A_RF (2021-05-10 01:10:25+00:00): i suppose the roundabout could be marked as tertiary. I'll make some adjustments
scotteaton92 (2021-05-09 22:39:42+00:00): Sources: Local knowlege
Mammut47 (2021-05-10 06:18:57+00:00): Die Haltestelle gibt es noch. Die wird von der OVA im Auftrag der RBS bedient. Bitte wieder einfügen. Gruß IT OVA Aalen
THE SWÄG (2021-06-22 19:35:48+00:00): Die Haltestellen gibt es nicht mehr. Es sind (Stand heute) weder Haltestellenschilder noch Masten vorhanden.
Cebderby (2021-05-12 19:00:46+00:00): Should disused railway platforms that are not public transport platforms be tagged as if they are?
Should private bus stops that are not public transport platforms be tagged as if they are?
Sometime inconsistencies are deliberate, not errors.
tonyf1 (2021-10-25 06:19:36+00:00): revert tags  Changeset #112930546
tonyf1 (2021-10-24 22:18:43+00:00): reverted tags  Changeset #112923179
flohoff (2021-05-10 15:35:24+00:00): Moin,
du hast das als "path" eingetragen und einen "tracktype" gesetzt - Das macht keinen sinn. Ein tracktype macht nur auf einem track sinn. Bei einem path würde man das mit surface, smoothness und co taggen.

Flo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104414536
gscholz (2021-05-11 04:09:29+00:00): Hi Túllio,
this changeset has added several errors to the OSM database regarding duplicate nodes and self intersecting lines:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-49.43454&lat=-14.22951&zoom=12&overlays=self_intersection_ways,self_intersection_points,single_node_in_way,duplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?
Kind Regards
Guido
gscholz (2021-05-11 04:10:59+00:00): Hi Túllio, 
can you please also check if the flow direction of your new streams are correct?
Guido
Túllio (2021-05-12 18:23:19+00:00): Helo! Thanks for your message! Since the day I uploaded it, I've been working to finish the edits as correctly as possible, I was aware of the errors. Soon everything will be organized! Thanks!
ralley (2021-05-10 00:51:59+00:00): Please use changeset comments as per: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments#:~:text=A%20good%20changeset%20comment%20should,have%20edited%20on%20the%20map.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104414691
mikkolukas (2021-05-11 17:00:10+00:00): Stop adding wrong turn restrictions! You obviously have no clue what you are doing.
I have reverted your changes.
gpserror (2021-05-10 19:11:11+00:00): I have been talking to this "local resident"as well.  The original tagging of 'private' is correct as 'no' access means even residents are not allowed to use the road.  The problem is the issue of amazon drivers disturbing the residents.  I am not happy if amazon requires specific tagging to prevent its drivers from parking on a private street.  Please do not use custom tagging for personal(in this case corporate) needs.
gpserror (2021-05-11 02:20:28+00:00): To be honest I do not want to get into the politics here.  However I do want OSM to be reflective of the correct status of all structures on this map.  The specific case that I am worried about is if there was a legitimate guest who was invited to drive here and having this marked as 'no' precludes it, while having it marked as 'private' - the guest will know a private party invited them - and is okay.

While Amazon can also be considered a guest, however if they are not making deliveries to the specific units this parking is allocated for - this is trespassing.  This particular "local resident" is being particular to this issue, whether they are being unreasonable or not.  Ultimately this is the issue at hand here.  OSM should not get involved in this "war."

Now that the complete politics of this is laid out, I'm merely trying to keep OSM accurate to what's on the ground and not what people "want" it to be.  We have had situations where there are conflicts such as short cuts taken through private property, this has been taken care of in the past through other means.  However this appears to be a trespassing issue and not a routing issue and has nothing to do with how we tag things on the map. 

Having the road marked 'private' should be the correct tagging.  If this "local resident" wants to put up a sign "NO TRESPASSING, VIOLATORS WILL BE SHOT" or something to that extent, that ultimately is what they want to do.  However it still is simply a private access road, not a "no" access road.
jguthula (2021-05-11 02:40:40+00:00): Hi Gpserror,
Thanks for providing your inputs. I am totally inlined with your inputs and agreed to having "private" access in general case scenario. Also please do understand as a part of Amazon edit we never end up adding access as per business case. In this particular case the local resident of this house clearly mentioned that this road should not be used for trespassing or delivery. To avoid this he added access information on his own going through the wiki information but the access is getting changed by other community members it-seems. He particularly requested for it and considering him requesting edits to his own property, I took a call to make the changes. Do let me know your thoughts, happy to have appropriate discussion and take right call.

Regards,
Jothirnadh
gpserror (2021-05-11 06:39:11+00:00): He has admitted to me that he merely renting the property and not the actual owner.  In my opinion the right call is to let him suffer the consequences of his choice of living arrangement, but if you can somehow alert your drivers to not park in the parking lot next to his residence, that would be appreciated.

As can be seen I did some more research on this particular property and found it to be a historical building, and also includes a warning not to disturb the tenants.  But I believe this was referring to actually entering the premises to inspect the historical nature of the building versus parking in the lot.

I cannot control what he or the actual owner ultimately do with their building.  I also cannot control Amazon drivers.  All I wish is the OSM edit war is over with the proper and correct tagging and artwork, within reason of course.  In fact I've been correcting errors he has been introducing in order to make himself disappear from the map - he has been the person deleting everything he doesn't want on the map and lies that they don't exist.  As I am likewise local to the neighborhood, I can inspect the property on a daily basis.  His persistent lying upset me greatly, and I hope this is not causing me to bias against him as he has been deleting my work.

As said, he does not own the property.  All of us OSM editors, including people who haven't edited this house owns OSM, the fact that the building and road are there will not change until something drastic happens like house teleportation.  If not me, someone will draw, someone will tag, this will never stop.

Ultimately my preference is that it's tagged correctly.  Marking the road access as 'no' or simply deleting the road are both 'wrong'.  I agree if this road was actually used for traversal by the general public we could do things like add a gap, but this is not the case.  As far as I can tell his sole complaint is for Amazon workers parking their trucks in the private lot to deliver packages to other people in the neighborhood.  My suggestion is that he or the owner needed to erect "No Trespassing" signs on the property and that would be the end of this problem, this would be more clear to drivers that parking/standing in that lot is not acceptable / appreciated.

I don't know what other clues are given to Amazon drivers to not use specific roads for parking or even standing.  Given the fact that it seems delivery people have so little spare time I can understand why they use this lot.  Perhaps the other solution is to give more time for delivery so they can find other parking spaces.
jguthula (2021-05-12 12:38:38+00:00): Thanks Gpserror for the detailed explanation. The parking of vehicles has nothing to do with the map data. It is a decision made by the delivery partners based on what they see on ground. Anyways I will escalate to the concerned team not repeat it again.

Coming to the customers feedback, we were informed he is getting threatened for making changes in his property so I took a stab at making the changes. If its a pure one of case I am okay with converting the road access to no. But if the customer is deleting all other roads in the vicinity as well, I believe it is against the OSM norms and should be pushed back. 

I don't mean to enter or start an edit war. Please do understand, at Amazon we believe we are working along with the community to build a better map and not influence anything for our personal data usage. If anything of such you are noticing from our edits, please do inform us and we will take the complete responsibility to course correct ourself. 

Since I understand the situation now clearly, I and my team will stay out from making any further changes in this location. 

Regards,
Jothirnadh
gpserror (2021-05-12 16:56:38+00:00): Okay I think the correct course of action is this driveway be marked 'private' as that is the correct designation.

Also I think I may have inadvertently threatened this resident so he ended up deleting his OSM account after attempting to delete his residence and the associated driveway.  It was meant to be a tongue in cheek joke - he said he lives here and I parrot back that I know where he lives, well, yeah it is threat meme, alas no harm intended if he's still reading this note, but I still stand firm this should be mapped.

However the ultimate problem in this conundrum is his desire to make it seem like there's nowhere to park around this location.  I'm sure Amazon and any other delivery drivers will still see parking there when driving by and still attempt to park.  So, he has just decreased the quality of the maps and had no benefit to himself.  I told him that he needs to work with all delivery drivers directly to solve the problem, including erecting signs that indicate no parking for non-resident/guests, asking them to park on Peterson or Mathews St, since there is no parking along Mulberry.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm implying you or any other Amazon mappers that are causing OSM mapping problems, it's purely this resident that's trying so hard to stop a problem by making things worse for everyone using these maps, and this is my concern.  In fact I think the original mapping of this driveway was (correctly) done by Amazon and he deleted it...

(Also as a joke, if Amazon gives a tribute delivery to the guy every time they park there, I'm sure he wouldn't mind them parking there... It's another "Get off my lawn unless you're working for me" kind of deal.)
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-05-10 01:31:58+00:00): revertido, voce continuou deletando coisas que existem.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-05-11 00:28:03+00:00): talvez voce esteja vendo uma camada de imagens desatualizada, tente mudar a camada no seu editor para Maxar. Lá voce verá que as vias que deletou existem.
Canal des Pangalanes (2021-06-05 15:33:06+00:00): Hi Olyon,

I've noticed several occasions where ClimateTrace is reverting parts of your work, e.g. at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104680456 .
Will you demand more responsibility by them?
fx99 (2021-05-13 19:26:47+00:00): It seems that you have messed up some ways by moving node to fare away places. Can you fix this or do you need help?
Chet Collins (2021-05-13 22:16:08+00:00): Corrected.
ElliottPlack (2021-05-14 13:35:04+00:00): What was removed here?
ElliottPlack (2021-05-14 13:35:07+00:00): What was removed here?
ElliottPlack (2021-05-14 13:37:05+00:00): There is still a disused level crossing at the Walmart exit. Any reason why it was removed?
boopington (2021-05-14 23:09:52+00:00): what rail is left except on the bridge to the south?
boopington (2021-05-14 23:11:21+00:00): also no need for so many comments at one time
mitubato (2021-05-21 12:00:35+00:00): Thank you for correcting
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104421640
user_2066394 (2021-05-10 10:39:19+00:00): Kleiner Adress-Exkurs: Straßenname ist vor Ort nicht definiert, deshalb sind die Gebäude mit addr:place=* eingetragen.
drlellinger (2021-05-10 11:19:27+00:00): Ach Mist das passiert mir ständig, tut mir leid ich mach das rückgängig
abakus_uploader (2021-05-10 22:31:03+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!
user_8655426 (2021-05-10 11:05:54+00:00): こんばんは。
現地調査までしていただき、ありがとうございます！！
しかも、市内で最も世帯数の多い富塚町が、ここ一か月間で一気に埋まってしまいました！

パークタウン周辺のPOIの情報が古いようなので、私も車で通りかかった際は確認したいと思います。
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104423367
DressyPear4 (2021-05-10 16:02:46+00:00): Olá, não faça vandalismo no mapa
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104424786
eggie (2021-05-10 06:55:30+00:00): Tip: formeel zou het dan foot=permissive zijn.
De eigenaar van de grond kan je ten alle tijde de toegang ontzeggen. 
MVG
eggie
tux67 (2021-05-10 11:39:56+00:00): Hallo noxiii,
auf den in deinem CS referenzierten NRW DOPs kann man die Garagen noch nicht sehen. 
Wenn du sowas nur schätzt, wäre es nett das entsprechend  mit einem fixme am Gebäude zu kennzeichnen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Markiere_deine_Sch.C3.A4tzungen
Da die Garagen in den NRW vDOPs schon zu sehen sind, habe ich diese jetzt auf die richtige Position verschoben und die Größe angepasst.

Gruß
tux67
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104425836
eggie (2021-05-10 06:53:33+00:00): Dag A Zwaan...  Wanneer het Eigen Terrein betreft zou je 
De tag permissive kunnen gebruiken.
Wanneer het algemeen is dan access=permissive.
Dat routeert gewoon. 
Eigen terrein mag je dus gewoon komen. Er staat dan geen bordje art 461. wvs
MVG
eggie