piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
PlaneMad (2016-12-07 15:57:09+00:00): Please change it :) It seems to have been added by a previous mapper. Awesome work on the relations!
DaxServer (2016-12-08 05:33:58+00:00): Thanks, Arun ;)
SK53 (2019-11-21 11:42:27+00:00): Hi Andy,

Is 314 Boldmere Road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/145042764) really a social club just looks like an ordinary semi to me on Bing Streetside.

Jerry
blackadder (2019-11-21 11:50:19+00:00): No I'm sure thats wrong. I must have accidentally tagged the wrong building as the North Birmingham Bridge Club just down the road and mapped at the same time should have that tag and doesn't.

I'll fix when next editing.

Cheers
Andy
SK53 (2019-11-21 12:46:29+00:00): Thanks, I'm just looking at social clubs because iD is changing the tagging (incorrectly) and it has highlighted inconsistency in tags. Mainly we're looking for working man's club style social clubs which are pseudo-pubs.
*Martin* (2018-05-24 20:25:45+00:00): Ahoj Isidor. Co si v areali v Barci pridaval railway=level_crossing, su tam naozaj zavory?
isidor (2018-05-24 22:26:21+00:00): Ahoj, dnes asi nie su a ci boli v r. 2012, to je tiez otazne :-) ale ak dobre citam wiki, tak zavory nie su povinne, jedna sa proste o krizenie cesty a kolaje, ci?
*Martin* (2018-05-25 04:56:47+00:00): Ahoj. Ospravedlnujem sa, mas pravdu, zle som pochopil ten tag :).
tuxayo (2017-08-04 12:04:02+00:00): way 146693871 Didn't exist, along with many other mistakes and unprecize stuff in the area. The tracing was done too fast, slow down ;)

So other don't have to clean after you
canfe (2025-02-02 08:36:23+00:00): Perché solo segragated nell'edificio https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/138732109#map=19/45.550986/11.546589&layers=N     ???
Thundercel (2016-06-19 15:14:09+00:00): Essa relação type=collection não existe e não deve ser empregada conforme citado em http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:collection
Skippern (2016-06-19 15:19:31+00:00): Eles sao um resultado do um discussão antiga que nunca resulto em consenso, vc pode tranquilamente apagar todos eles.
Thundercel (2016-06-19 16:26:07+00:00): OK. Com bastante frequencia me dirijo a Barra de São Francisco uma vez que os parentes de minha esposa lá residem. Assim, decidi arrumar toda a cidade iniciando pelos avisos de validação do JOSM e esbarrei nessa relação. Vou excluir então.
Skippern (2016-06-19 16:32:55+00:00): Também apagando eles quando descubre, mas geralmente os conjuntos e tao grande que esses avisos sera ignorado, se me lembrando certo ja tem esses relações por volta do Vitória apagados.
GinaroZ (2017-07-07 12:36:58+00:00): Shouldn't https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146912727 be a service road rather than a track (as it's not for agricultural use)?
drnoble (2017-07-09 09:59:33+00:00): I suspect this was a very rough route, difficult to get a car down, which was why I mapped as a track. I don't think all tracks need be for agricultural use. But feel free to change if you have more recent information, it was 5 years ago I mapped this.
Tchiller (2016-07-08 10:36:39+00:00): Wieso opposite_lane in der Beethovenstrasse? Soll diese eine Einbahnstrasse sein?
Warin61 (2017-02-12 01:57:36+00:00): Hi,
The Epping platform (5+ 6)  is not wide enough - does not line up with my recollections of the lifts at their above ground locations.. I'll do a survey when I can. But i think this may be better as 2 separate platforms as they are separated by walls at this station.
bentrails (2017-05-17 07:37:41+00:00): Hi... Thanks. I completely understand what you're saying and I agree. Sorry for taking so long to get back to you.
Warin61 (2018-11-22 02:37:48+00:00): Hi again. 
Way: 146997564 appears to be wrong to me.
There is a cross over between the two lines t allow emergency access, but this line does not allow that .. it comes to a point .. that would not allow a train to cross over.  

The next bit of the problem .. it is tagged railway=rail, the new line is tagged railway=subway.
bentrails (2018-11-22 07:13:06+00:00): Thanks for letting me know. I fixed 146997564 as per memory - best estimate. For some reason it had moved and been reshaped. Haven't been active on OSM for very long time... looks like someone has been modifying the Northwest Metro ways and it might have been thrown off.  Also the new North West Metro lines have been changed from =rail to =subway to reflect metro operations and differentiate between heavy rail and metro rail.  Whoever edited the main lines didn't change this crossover, so I've fixed to reflect the change. Thanks for letting me know. Feel free to make any other changes directly as I no longer live in Sydney and no longer work at Sydney Trains.  Hopefully my contributions in the past have been useful for a lot of people. Thanks.
Warin61 (2018-11-22 08:07:08+00:00): Thanks. I only noticed this strange thing on the map and did not know what it was.. downloaded it to find out. 

 I do know there is a crossover somewheres around there .. you get the points noise/vibration. But I have no idea where it is even roughly. You'd have a much better idea of it than me. 
Not certain the same can be said for whoever changed it to subway.. technically correct but .. I have not check their knowledge. 

I do look forward to the completion .. at least of this stage. I'll have a ride a week or two after it opens .. let the alpha tests go first. I have not tried the 'station link buses' that 'replace trains' ... thanks but no thanks.
SomeoneElse (2023-10-13 00:05:38+00:00): I know that https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1602070477 was 11 years ago (!), but I wonder if it is actually what is now https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/372776872 ?
Cheers,
Andy
EdLoach (2023-10-13 10:34:34+00:00): Using JOSM to identify the relevant GPS trace I then tracked down a photo, and a duplicate seems likely. As might this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1602070540/history
EdLoach (2023-10-13 11:22:22+00:00): So I've removed them. But there is still stuff needs fixing in the area - the footpath definitely didn't involve wading in a river.
SomeoneElse (2023-10-13 11:31:57+00:00): Great, thanks!
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-01-27 15:28:45+00:00): What happened here? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/141681953 and other geometries completely mismatch geometries of actual buildings
Warin61 (2021-03-05 05:10:50+00:00): Hi,

Umm some of these lines are 'Up' not 'Down' ... they run to Central not away. 

This is confusing me no end. 

e.g Way: 147042409...
Warin61 (2021-03-05 05:15:00+00:00): Arr I think I see what is going on... sigh. Relax... I'll just run in circles a bit more...
canfe (2024-06-08 07:35:36+00:00): Ma davvero si chiama A2 il monumento? E' forse una stele?
Ropino (2024-01-07 19:20:42+00:00): Hi, 
ist schon etwas her (mehr als 10 Jahre):
name=geplant?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1603154322
Bitte mal prüfen. 
Danke im Voraus.
eggie (2019-04-23 13:58:27+00:00): Met veel tussenpozen over de jaren aan het mappen en nooit een welkomstmail ontvangen zie ik... bij deze alsnog... Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
MantheNorth (2021-05-17 18:58:16+00:00): Correction: Source used was Strava”
loir (2021-05-17 19:15:33+00:00): It was not strava
MantheNorth (2021-05-17 23:01:26+00:00): Apologies! Source adjustment was meant for a different changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104836888)
frosm (2024-09-22 14:37:51+00:00): Bonjour,
Où se trouve la voie Traverse de Cuques dont u as ajoutés addr:street sur la réception ?
c'est celle-ci https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/118025007 ?
mais l'adresse des autres bâtiments + centraux dans le site sont en Rue de Cuques
gileri (2024-09-22 14:47:23+00:00): Salut ce changeset a 12 ans, je ne me rappelle plus.

De plus, il y a eu des travaux de voirie récents dans le quartier, ça a pu bouger.

Le mieux c'est aller voir ou regarder d'autres sources je pense.
JayTurnr (2021-03-31 12:05:55+00:00): Hi, I reverted you edit here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102054292 

naptan tags are an import tag in the UK and shouldn't be used for anything else
eggie (2021-12-06 14:58:52+00:00):  Na jaren weer een aantal edits.. daarom Opnieuw Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
user_5359 (2023-07-06 16:15:25+00:00): Hello! Please take look on https://www.osm.org/way/147371589/history. What is the mean foreign keys
_Area_Ha_ = 42.52252761000
_ID_ = EU-1808776 ( could be clc:id)
_REMARK_ =  (empty value!)
_Shape_Area_ = 425225.27610000002
_Shape_Leng_ = 4107.96306467000
_code_06_ = 313  (could be clc:code_06=313 means mixed wood)
AndersAndersson (2023-07-06 16:59:06+00:00): It's from an old import. You can find it in many places in Sweden. You can remove it if you are editing the forest. It does not contain any valuable information. But it doesn't do any harm so don't create changesets just to remove it.
Rizki IRM-ED (2022-12-20 02:04:56+00:00): Hi Johnny Carlsen. Your edit looks awesome, but I suggest you to improve highway (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/147381990)  due crossing with water body. If you have any other suggestion, please let me know (https://maproulette.org/challenge/30161/task/143786403). Thank you.
Geo-Tobi (2024-10-06 11:25:39+00:00): 
Hi, ich weiß, es ist lange her, aber mal ein kleiner Hinweis:
Du hast hier agricultural= und forestry=yes gesetzt. Vermutlich in der Absicht "land- und forstwirtschaftlicher Verkehr frei" zu taggen.
Das ist leider nicht richtig.
Agricultural=yes ist "Traktor frei"
Forestry=yes existiert gar nicht.
Korrekt wäre Access=agricultural;forestry (häufig motor_vehicle=agricultural;forestry)
Ist im Wiki auch unter "Häufiger Fehler" angegeben.
Ist kein großes Ding, doch vielleicht hilft es dir, weitere fehlerhafte Tags zu vermeiden.
Würde mich auch freuen, wenn du es ggfs. in deinen bisherigen Tags nach und nach korrigierst.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147391921
Grüße
Geo-Tobi
SGiersch (2024-10-06 13:57:51+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, aber ich glaube das es schon recht lange her ist das ich in diesem Bereich, bei Fischbachtal etwas geändert habe.
Geo-Tobi (2024-10-06 14:18:09+00:00): Das stimmt wohl, aber die Korrektur bedarf vermutlich keiner Vor-Ort Prüfung. Anders gesagt, es ist irrelevant wie lange das her ist. Liege ich falsch? 😀
eggie (2021-04-08 05:32:44+00:00): Na jaren weer een bijdrage in Nederland, maar nooit de welkomstmail ontvangen.. bij deze alsnog Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 
namens de OSM Community
marc__marc (2020-12-03 11:30:57+00:00): Bonjour,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/66442518
vous avez renseigné un bureau de posté nomé banque postale, cela signifie-t-il qu'à cet endroit il y a le bureau de poste et la banque postale comme souvent dans le même batiment ?
cordialement,
Marc
Paul Berry (2014-12-03 23:15:22+00:00): Trams in Morecambe? If these are former or proposed stops they should be tagged as such.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-01 18:23:55+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146004689/history has sport=team_handball that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
Would sport=handball (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dhandball ) be fitting at least equally well?
vlakos555 (2023-02-20 15:09:16+00:00): Budovy v servernej časti zástavby sú zakreslené veľmi nepresne voči ZBGIS
48.2672354, 17.0286758
Jose Riha (2023-02-20 21:05:32+00:00): ahoj, ked si pozries historiu, tak tieto budovy boli zanesene pred vyse 10 rokmi. s velmi velkou pravdepodobnostou neboli obkreslovane rucne, ale bol pouzity kapor import plugin (josm). sedeli teda s kapor/ZBGIS v tom case. no data katastra sa casom vyvijaju (obcas dochadza i k opravam posunu) a tak takychto oblasti bude urcite viac. ak na nieco narazis, kludne to daj do aktualneho stavu.
marczoutendijk (2021-12-23 19:50:07+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147555123
historic=* is describing or characterising an object and not a date. It seems you have been trying to put a date or number in the historic key. Maybe you should use start_date?
Please read: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Ahistoric and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date
kreuzschnabel (2018-08-22 12:13:35+00:00): An der Position von http://osm.org/way/147601135 ist auf keinem Luftbild ein Haus erkennbar, obwohl es im Januar 2012 gemappt wurde, und in den Hausnummern ist auch kein Platz mehr dafür – sicher, dass es existiert?
vichada (2018-08-22 18:33:58+00:00): No. Doesn't exist. Maybe a left over from an earlier remapping ...
Thanx for noticing ...
Constable (2017-03-04 09:51:29+00:00): ciao, quale tra questi due nodi è nella posizione corretta?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/672556639
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/672556638

Grazie
AnyFile (2017-03-08 21:15:43+00:00): Scusa ma a distanza di così tanto tempo non mi ricordo. Mi ricordo solo che effettivamente la cosa mi aveva creato qualche grattacapo. La prossima volta che ci passo, vedi di ricordarmi di dare un'occhiata. 

A naso direi che è più probabile che sia giusta la posizione http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/672556639 , ma aspetto di ricontrolare
Constable (2017-03-09 11:46:24+00:00): Ciao, va bene, grazie per la risposta!
martiensch (2014-12-12 12:45:49+00:00): Hey, heb jij op alle opritten de de destination voor de afrit gezet???
philippec (2020-05-01 16:24:17+00:00): Beerzel.  Het padje tussen Borgstraat en Diepestraat is er niet meer.
Lucapersempre (2020-05-02 11:27:59+00:00): Bedankt, ik was er maar éénmaal, acht jaar geleden.
philippec (2020-05-02 12:10:02+00:00): Ik dacht dat ik bewijs toegevoegd had.
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/dDYJyFun-DtfF27B-IjGgA
AlaskaDave (2019-03-26 14:11:30+00:00): Hi,
I do a lot of work aligning the terrible PGS coastline of Alaska. It's slow difficult work and the number of hours required to properly edit all of Alaska's coastline is daunting. Today, while working in the Glacier Bay area, I came across this changeset of yours that quotes Geobase as a source of your coastline data and from what I cans see it's a huge improvement over the miserable PGS data. Can you suggest a method for me to obtain some of this same data?
I realize this all happened a long time go but perhaps you still have a finger in that pie.
Thanks,
AlaskaDave
Ficky IRM-RV (2021-06-07 02:39:34+00:00): Hi Beerforfree,
Hope you are doing great.

may I modify this leisure=common (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/1996500),
from the osm wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dcommon) leisure=common should not be used in relations, and is it better to change it to leisure=park?
Thank you, happy mapping!
Akrimullah IRM-RV (2020-05-19 01:51:11+00:00): Hi, 
what imagery did you use when drawing highway from node 4889159417 to 1611616292 segment ?? thank you...
just wanna know, because in any imagery i use (bing, maxar, esri, mapbox) none of it give a clue.
Marc_ch (2018-01-23 00:34:45+00:00): Hello,
did you remember the meaning of this
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1611634450 ?
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-11-17 13:54:07+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148034559

Is it a shop? Specifically car repair place?

The shop tag is missing, likely shop=car_repair would be worth adding.

If you know that it is a car repair shop but unsure how to fix it - let me know.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-29 11:35:18+00:00): Hello!

You used
barrier=f
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/112303737/history

Have you maybe meant
barrier=fence
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
SK53 (2017-10-31 07:34:54+00:00): The alterations made in this change set a) removed useful & important information ( that a building has 41 storeys) and b) replaced the height with a clearly erroneous value. I hope that these changes "to the new tagging scheme" were an accidental one-off. The continued use of Manhattan buildings in visualisations suggests that this is the case. I'd be grateful if you could review any similar edits which may have caused similar discrepancies.
robgeb (2017-10-31 13:26:09+00:00): Don't know if I understand you correct. The building 666 Fifth Avenue is additionally tagged in 3D. It consists of five ways. The ways are grouped in a building relation. Maximum height an level information is in the highest building part. All tags are given according: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings. You can see a sample rendering here: http://demo.f4map.com/#lat=40.7608648&lon=-73.9764972&zoom=18&camera.theta=33.541&camera.phi=3.151
I tagged hundreds of buildings in manhattan the same way in the last years. Please specify your objections.
SK53 (2017-10-31 14:02:57+00:00): I would not expect the object tagged with building to have any height information if tagged using S3DB, rather everything on building parts. I was looking at the data on a phone so only looked at the outline, and I must have read a comment on another changeset in the object history rather than this one or I would have looked more closely. So in practice my objections are very minor: a) separate building part for the lower section; and b) would be nice to have building:levels for other building parts (but I imagine this is far too much work).
srividya_c (2015-05-28 05:16:45+00:00): Hey, does these footway trail exist now? Imagery doesn't show any path there.
aharvey (2018-01-01 21:09:04+00:00): Is http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1613912944 open to the general public? If not it should be access=private.
mariotomo (2021-03-09 23:13:28+00:00): hola! vi tu mensaje en el forum#61.  no vuelves a mapear?
marc__marc (2021-02-22 10:56:07+00:00): Bonjour,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148449410
est-ce que c'est une variante en tant que telle du jeux de boules ? ou c'est une des variantes style pétanque ou lyonnaise ?
marc__marc (2021-02-22 13:58:45+00:00): plus d'info sur les variantes actuellement documentée dans osm https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:sport%3Dboules#Type_de_Boules
zewan (2021-02-22 17:52:46+00:00): La boule en bois est un jeu qui se pratique surtout dans le Poitou.
https://www.lanouvellerepublique.fr/deux-sevres/commune/salles/la-boule-en-bois-sport-poitevin
marc__marc (2021-02-22 18:00:30+00:00): est-ce la même chose que https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boule_de_bois ? car la page ne parle pas de l'ouest :)
si oui je vais le documenter sur le wiki
zewan (2021-02-22 23:03:47+00:00): En effet, c'est bien cela. On y parle des Deux-Sèvres et de la Vendée, il s'agit bien du Poitou.
eggie (2017-10-09 22:08:39+00:00): Opnieuw welkom bij osm per PB verstuurd
messpert (2024-04-09 13:49:06+00:00): I have removed the emergency Phone fro the layby on node 1615630717, 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=51.83207&mlon=-1.82008#map=19/51.83207-1.82008&layers=D
after a video survey that showed no trace. Knowing the area a little, it does seem unlikely that it was ever there. It looks from the istiry as if you first mapped it.
southglos (2024-04-09 14:34:14+00:00): A little unnecessary?  Mapped correctly at the time (12 years ago).  Looks like it was removed sometime between 2015 and 2017.  https://maps.app.goo.gl/PSyzNDb8xrw1SvNJ6
messpert (2024-04-09 17:59:12+00:00): Ah. I had not thought of looking on that commercial map site :-)

I don't like deleting other people's work without checking with them.
DENelson83 (2018-06-14 03:51:10+00:00): Re way #148485129:

You had a fixme note at this location indicating some temporary coastline data. 
 I have added the complete coastline for the body of seawater known as Wyclees Lagoon, which was rooted off of this way.  See changeset #59829988.
Mateusz Konieczny (2019-04-15 09:16:26+00:00): Can you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1746636 ?
Graf Westerholt (2017-02-04 10:56:59+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148517427/

Bei Parkhäusen trägt man nicht building=yes ein. building=yes ist ja unspezifiziert. Spezifiziert wäre es building=multi-storey, was aber schon über parking=multi-storey angegeben ist. Also daher kein building=yes. Steht auch nicht im Wiki, dass dabei building=yes angegeben wird. Ich habe es korrigiert.
DD1GJ (2017-02-04 13:12:30+00:00): Hallo Graf Westerholt, ich halte Deine obige Aussage für bedenklich bis falsch. Zunächst mal ist es ein Gebäude und building=yes hat seine Richtigkeit. Anstatt yes kann die bauliche Nutzung noch verfeinert werden, Wenn auf einer Karte Gebäude, also Baukörper, dargestellt werden sollen, dann ist building das Hauptentscheidungskriterium. Es ist sinnvoller, manchmal etwas redundante Information in den Daten zu haben, als dutzende Sonderfälle in verschiedenen Values von anderen Tags, die sich ständig erweitern können, mit auszuwerten.
Hanif IRM-RV (2020-08-26 06:50:07+00:00): Hi guenter!
I've changed the classification of this road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148591093, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148590387, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148592528, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148592527) to the appropriate classification
Thank you!
30303020 (2017-12-31 12:36:21+00:00): Hey, 
mit diesem CS hast du fast alle Elemente der Buslinie 10 in Cottbus aus den Relationen gelöscht (s. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1722180 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1721648). Wurde die Buslinie eingestellt oder war das ein Versehen? 
Momentan verkehrt die Linie ähnlich zu der Linienführung vor der Änderung.
Nakaner (2015-01-20 21:20:08+00:00): Die Verbindungskurve von Mahlow auf den Berliner Außenring Richtung Schönefeld kann ich auf Bing nicht erkennen, erst recht nicht als Museumsbahn (railway=preserved). Wenn ich keinen Bildbeweis oder eine gescheite Begründung bekomme, fliegt das Ding raus.
Nakaner (2015-01-25 09:13:09+00:00): Mangels Reaktion deinerseits habe ich die Verbindungskuve jetzt gelöscht. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28390652
anderfo (2017-01-25 20:34:47+00:00): Østbyen er vel egentlig ikke et stedsnavn på en bydel eller forstad, men heller navnet på en administrativ inndeling. Jeg tror det heller bør merkes med bydelsgrenser, som angitt her på wikien:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/No:Map_Features#Places.2FSteder
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/No:Map_Features#Borders
Peter Bremer (2017-02-10 22:42:38+00:00): Problemet er bare at det ikke finnes noe detaljerte, åpne kart som viser bydelsgrenser. Har du noe info om grensene? Ved mangel av grensene tror jeg at en node er det nest beste alternativet.
Arma IRM-ED (2020-08-10 04:22:36+00:00): Hi, Dymo12. I added bridge on highway (way 148723823) because it's crossing with waterway
Aglis IRM-ED (2020-09-17 04:13:44+00:00): Hi Dymo12. I changed geometry of this way based on Maxar Premium Imagery (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/148737158). I also made some change around this changeset. Thankyou
Arma IRM-ED (2020-09-23 08:54:26+00:00): Hi, Dymo12. I have adjusted the secondary road (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/148737158) based on Maxar Premium Imagery
Fanny IRM-ED (2020-09-04 06:31:56+00:00): Hi Dymo12,
I changed geometry of this way based on Maxar Premium Imagery (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/10590359. 
Thank you in advanced
Arma IRM-ED (2020-09-18 02:21:25+00:00): Hi Dymo12, I have adjusted the secondary road (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/148780874) based on Maxar Premium Imagery. Thank you
Elisabeth IRM-RV (2020-09-21 07:27:58+00:00): Hi Dymo12,
I've adjusted the highway(way148780874) based on Maxar Premium Imagery. Thank you
GerdP (2015-10-31 10:01:04+00:00): please help me to understand:
ways 148910131 and 148910129 are tagged highway=moving_walkway
which is rarely used.
It seems to be a 
highway=footway
conveying=*
See 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aconveying
ae6mb (2015-10-31 18:10:31+00:00): It looks like my changeset was made when the conveying key was still a draft proposal. 
I will try to update in the next few days unless you wish to do so sooner. They should probably also be tagged incline=up if they are not already.