piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
TheNet1996 (2022-04-20 18:42:57+00:00): Hi,
da hast du nun ziemliches Chaos verursacht. Ich würde dich bitten, dass du jemand kontaktierst, z.B. im Forum, damit jemand deine Änderungen (Changesets) zurücksetzt.

Deine Bürgersteige sind auch alle falsch, sofern sie nicht baulich getrennt sind, wird diese Information an der Straße hinterlegt. Steht übrigens auch in der Wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:sidewalk
Also keine extra Wege erfassen.
Wiki lesen!

Danke
Grüße
Mike
TheNet1996 (2022-04-20 18:43:39+00:00): Du hast vor ein paar Minuten wieder Änderungen gemacht. Bitte erstmal STOP!!!
Rainero (2022-05-10 20:11:53+00:00): Hallo,  
nun habe ich mich bis zu diesem CS durchgearbeitet. Wo andere Ergänzungen waren, z.B. Bäume, Wege in Wohnanlagen, habe ich nur Teilreverts gemacht, um diese Dinge zu bewahren. Es gab einige Konflikte zu lösen, weil inzwischen weitere Attribute ergänzt wurden, die ich auch erhalten habe. 
Viele Wege hatten layer=-1 oder =1, obwohl da keine Objekte drüber bzw. drunter liegen. Keine Ahnung, was damit bezweckt wurde.

Viele Grüße,
Rainer
BCNorwich (2022-04-19 19:15:10+00:00): Hi, I've removed the incorrect name and tagged it as private, if it's a highway there must be some access.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:22:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
BCNorwich (2022-04-19 19:19:31+00:00): Amend farm tags, landuse is an area tag.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:30:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:20:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:18:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
MxxCon (2022-04-19 19:50:35+00:00): Hello.
Please note that crosswalks controlled by traffic light should be tagged as such. "marked" crosswalks are intended for the ones with STOP signs. 👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119917864
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:18:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:29:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
ivanbranco (2022-04-20 16:06:14+00:00): Hi Rinhime,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9677944739

notice the typo please (hamlet3 instead of hamlet). Usually hamlets have a name, do you know it? If yes add it, if not it would be better to add a note=* tag explaining it has one but you didn't know it, if it doesn't have a name you should add noname=yes. Could you check it out please?
bxl-forever (2022-04-19 23:37:17+00:00): Hello,
Thanks for this.
If you want to draw missing buildings in Brussels, please connect to the UrbisAdm layer, which also gives the proper house numbers.  We *never* trace buildings on top of aerial imagery, this is recipe for disaster.
Don’t worry, I fixed this one.
Have a nice day.
eggie (2022-04-19 19:17:11+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
ColdWaterSeal (2022-04-26 00:29:17+00:00): Source correction: SDFE
eggie (2022-04-19 19:19:23+00:00): Dag Aad
Het beste kun je amenity=drinking_water bijtaggen. Dat geeft een symbool.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-04-19 19:21:34+00:00): Als voorbeeld even een kraan toegevoegd bij het bruggetje. Daar zit in ieder geval een kraan weet ik.
Gr eggie
eggie (2022-04-19 20:05:43+00:00):  Parkeerplaats Camping De Boogaard maar zelf toegevoegd.
Gr eggie
eggie (2022-04-19 19:22:50+00:00): car park for camping De Boogaard ?

Geef steeds bij je commentaar op wat je hebt aangepast of toegeviegd.
berjk (2022-04-25 13:53:02+00:00): Hallo limes11, du hast einen Trampelpfad in der Trossinger Straße (Nr. 18 bis zum Kreisverkehr) südost-Seite grade4 gelöscht. Evtl. nur vor Ort erkennbar.
limes11 (2022-04-25 16:07:09+00:00): Hi, 

Ok. Für Blubberfass war er nicht erkennbar, deshalb (und weil hw=path, surface=asphalt Unsinn waren) hatte ich ihn verkürzt. Falls es den doch geben sollte, gerne wieder einzeichnen.

Viele Grüße, Limes
berjk (2022-04-25 16:18:35+00:00): Danke für deine schnelle Rückmeldung. So wichtig ist dieser Weg nicht, da er nur eine Sackgasse ist.
Ist halt nur ein bisschen ärgerlich, wenn man sich das ganze anschauen möchte und der Weg ist dann nicht mehr anzeigbar.
Da kommt man nicht mehr an die history dran; wenigsten nicht mit den Mitteln die ich kenne bzw. ohne rießen Aufwand.
user_8101879 (2022-04-20 21:32:12+00:00): same as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119920802
streckenkundler (2022-04-19 19:10:13+00:00): ...und nochmal...

Unterlasse deinen F-Land-Quatsch. Das was du betreibst, geht für mich in Richtung Vandalismus. Du hattest deswegen schon mal eine Sperre. Ich kann mir gut vorstellen, daß weitere folgen. Aufgrund deines uneinsichtigen Verhaltens ziehe ich mittlerweile einen Großteil deiner Bearbeitungen äußerst stark in Zweifel.

streckenkundler
vasony (2022-04-20 05:41:40+00:00): Szia!

Érdemes lenne az eredeti szerkesztéshez hozzáfűzni mi is volt a probléma ami miatt vissza kellett vonni az egészet, különben ide-oda fogjátok változtatni.

Tamás
balint36 (2022-04-20 09:43:19+00:00): Jogos a felvetés, 8 üzenetben leírtam számára, mi volt a baj, de leírhatom, hogy mi volt a baj, hogy később is lehessen látni:
* Az eredeti vágányok duplikálva lettek, a címkéi nem megfelelően lettek átvéve, több helyen rosszul vagy helytelenül lettek alkalmazva, miközben az eredetiek indok nélkül törölve lettek. Állítása szerint a vágányok nem voltak pontosak, azonban amikor mindkét változat  fent volt, akkor lehetett látni, hogy szinte pontosan ugyanoda lett felrajzolva, több hibával (pl. helyenként a vonalak megszakadása). Ezeket visszajavítottam.
* A váltókat és jelzőket jelölő pontok lekerültek a vágányokról (annak ellenére, hogy rajtuk kellene lenniük), illetve a vágányok számozása is elcsúszott. Ezeket visszajavítottam.
* Állomásépületek, váltó és peronok már eddig is fent voltak a térképen, de duplikátumként ismét feltöltötte pontatlanabb polygonként (pl. kisterenyei állomásépület főépülete, épületszárnyai és peronteteje szépen fel voltak rajzolva, de egy torz alakzatot feltöltött helyette), az eredetit pedig törölte. Ezeket visszajavítottam.
* Állítása szerint a fentrol.hu oldalról másolt, azonban olyan elemeket is átmásolt, amik már nincsenek is ott (pl. Hatvanban a 3-as főút egykori felüljárójának a korlátjai: http://tiny.cc/vxsquz). Ezeket visszajavítottam.
user_8101879 (2022-04-20 21:31:27+00:00): Hi

what is the useless of this : do you think you will add all shops (several billions) in areas ?
Please read the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations_are_not_categories
epochkc (2022-04-20 21:39:38+00:00): thanks for asking.  by my understanding a parent is a superset of the child(ren) and thus when identifying a "place" boundary as a parent district to subset child cafes.
TheNet1996 (2022-04-20 16:36:05+00:00): Hallo,
was machst du da?

Seit wann werden gemeinsame Fuß- und Gehwege mit Trennlinie  (Verkehrszeichen 241) als eigenständige Wege erfasst?

Schau doch bitte mal hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dpath

Aus meiner Sicht ist das alles falsch.

Viele Grüße
Mike
jb54osm (2022-04-19 21:57:38+00:00): Dag apoo,

Er is verschil tussen Temeculaplein 2 (beneden, uitrukplek) en Via Donizetti 1 (boven naast fietspad thv trap Via Mercadante, bezoekadres). Nummers en straatnamen lijken nu door elkaar te lopen, alles is één geworden. Wil je er nog eens naar kijken?
TG-map4 (2022-04-19 20:08:02+00:00): amenity=parking is only for the parking lot as a whole. The individual spaces must be mapped with amenity=parking_space. Can you please correct that? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space
MxxCon (2022-04-20 03:38:18+00:00): Hello.
Could you please elaborate why did you delete bike path here?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119921403
Ryan Tenney (2022-04-20 04:23:31+00:00): @MxxCon I don't believe I did delete the bike path here. The bike path on the south side of the bridge was made up of a dozen or more ways, which I combined using jOSM.  If there was a problem with how I made this change, I'd be very happy to remedy it.
MxxCon (2022-04-20 04:27:38+00:00): Ah, you merged them. It didn't look clear on osmcha. 👍
Ryan Tenney (2022-04-20 04:42:05+00:00): Phew I'm glad!  Thanks for keeping an eye on the changesets!
DiogoBaptista98 (2022-10-12 17:22:34+00:00): Olá, moveste a paragem Bairro da Ajuda (Escola) para um local totalmente incorrecto, peço que corrijas a edição, cumprimentos
Boas edições
alesarrett (2022-04-21 10:45:23+00:00): Ciao antpriv, il tracciato proposto aggiunto ha come sources delle immagini a bassa risoluzione senza alcun riferimento e contenute in un sito che di ufficiale ha poco. Da dove provengono le immagini?
Inoltre, questo tracciato proposto che orizzonte temporale ha? Attualmente non sembra poter essere verificato e quindi non dovrebbe essere incluso in OSM.
antpriv (2022-05-24 23:47:09+00:00): Buon giorno. Andare a trovare il progetto ufficiale per me diventa complicato, però esistono tanti siti non ufficiali a favore e contro l'opera che indicano come tracciato di progetto un percorso interno che non tocca Chioggia ma taglia da Adria per evitare di andare a compromettere ecosistemi delicati come il delta del Po o le Valli di Comacchio. Anche come orizzonte temporale purtroppo spesso in Italia non ci sono tempi certi, l'opera doveva partire già prima del 2020 ma sono note a tutti le vicende che hanno portato alla sospensione e al blocco dell'opera, dall'opposizione dei verdi e di altri partiti di sinistra fino ad arrivare alle amministrazioni locali che non vogliono l'opera "nel proprio giardino", un po' la stessa sorte che ha ricevuto la ferrovia ad alta velocità in Val di Susa ma anche molte altre opere già previste e pianificate dai vari governi nazionali che si sono succeduti nel tempo, come la TiBre in Emilia - Lombardia, o la Medio - Padana, o la Nogara - Mare, o la Reggiolo - Ferrara. Anche al sud opere come lo svincolo di Giampilieri o a Roma quello di Guidonia (e l'anello ferroviario) sono progettati e attesi da decenni ma (in parte la lenta burocrazia, in parte l'opposizione di comitati ecc) ne hanno ritardato o impedito la realizzazione. I progetti ufficiali però esistono, ma io non sono in grado di reperirli, così come ad esempio non sono in grado di reperire i progetti della variante ferroviaria Fiumefreddo - Giampilieri (sempre in Sicilia) i cui lavori sono già stati appaltati e dovrebbero partire a breve. Se c'è qualcuno più esperto di me qui sul sito, chiedo per favore di reperire i progetti originali in modo tale da poter correggere tutte le imperfezioni evitando però di andare a perdere tutto il lavoro fin qui svolto e i dati inseriti http://www.verdi.ferrara.it/sito/wp-content/wp-upload/Schermata-2010-12-21-a-10.42.42.png
antpriv (2022-05-25 00:13:15+00:00): https://nuovavenezia.gelocal.it/venezia/cronaca/2012/04/19/news/romea-commerciale-si-all-innesto-a-crea-1.4392985
antpriv (2022-05-25 00:15:36+00:00): https://nuovavenezia.gelocal.it/venezia/cronaca/2014/02/14/news/nuova-romea-l-innesto-sia-sul-passante-1.8672492
antpriv (2022-05-25 00:19:13+00:00): Di questo progetto si parla un po' ovunque, il problema è andare a reperire informazioni che abbiano un carattere di ufficialità, ma sicuramente non è qualcosa di inventato o campato in aria
https://trail.unioncamereveneto.it/infrastrutture/nuova-romea-autostrada-orte-mestre/
Friendly_Ghost (2026-01-02 19:16:31+00:00): Construction has still not started from what I can see, so I'd like to suggest that we remove this proposed road from OSM until construction has started and we can map it with on-the-ground sources and finalized official plans.
SekeRob (2022-04-20 09:23:25+00:00): Hi,

I must have been fixing the Wienerwald for the dozenth time in the last month. You, and not only you, need to  pay attention to inner and outer roles and where they go. When e.g. scrub and grass share sides, the forest role should not pass in between, the line should be cut and the forest role removed inbetween. Here in fact the scrub is no longer inner anymore since the forest is not 360 degrees surrounding it. There's more of the same problems to the east side forest as well, again scrub and grass sharing a side(s) with each other. The forest outline cant go there, not inner or outer.

Also there was a new line drawn only used by the wald relation, in places it overlays the grass area which caused render issues.

Anyway the corrections are in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119943525

Study the changers please and if not understood, ask, as keeping repairing this wood is not good for anything.

Ciao from the Abruzzos
Luzandro (2022-04-20 14:31:14+00:00): Hi,

I stumbled upon this discussion and as far as I can see, the previous version was valid by the definition of osm as touching inner rings are allowed there: 

http://overpass-turbo.eu/?Q=%5Bdate%3A%222022-04-20T00%3A00%3A00Z%22%5D%5Bout%3Axml%5D%3B%0Arel(7432844)%3B%0A(._%3B%3E%3E%3B)%3B%0Aout%20meta%3B&C=48.17299;16.11322;17

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon#Touching_inner_rings

The current version on the other hand, where the inner simple polygons are also specified as multipolygons are not only more likely to break, it is already broken, as way 1053275982 shouldn't be inner of the forest polygon, just like much of way 220270804, which partially covers the same segments

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1053275982

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/220270804
SekeRob (2022-04-20 14:39:46+00:00): You're correct, I missed to remove that inner forest role that passed between the grass and scrub. Duly removed. We'll see tonight if OSM Inspector is still highlighting all of these with dark blue i.e. borders used in multiple rings that intersect itself.
SekeRob (2022-04-20 15:25:57+00:00): Rereading the wiki, the problem is the ever growing 'inner' being mapped by various, 12 mappers, 13 interpretations. Take a big box with 2 squares inside that float in the centre and the 2 squares share 1 side. Some will draw another line around the 2 squares and tag that as inner. Then a 3rd square enters the fray and shares 1 half side with square 1 and the other half of that side with square 2. Now the forest is inner to 1, 2, no role yet on 3. Then the mapper decides to tag that 3rd square as inner and you got the forest running twice between the square. -TO ME- cutting up the outlines of the square is much simpler. Few if not none will go about and delete the old outline around 1-2 and map a new one around 1-2-3.
The largest issue I have with what the wiki samples is, that if you touch any border running between 2 areas is, you only get told what that border is for on 1 area, not roles and memberships of the borders that are 'below' so to speak. One finds at times 3 lines on top each-other. Does not work for me. 1 border in a multi area multiprocessing structure with all it's roles shown I much prefer. No flagging in Inspector regardless of OSM having the render tolerance or not. If Inspector, Osmose, Keepright etc are wrong then maybe they should be adapted to that OSM tolerance. Classic case, 1 says that the spelling 'side= is correct and the  says sides= is correct for 2-3-4 sided totems and billboard. Seems there's no agreement what it has to be.
Luzandro (2022-04-21 06:23:27+00:00): yeah, well warnings aren't necessarily errors, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Areas#Touching_ring
"Touching rings don't have to be a problem"

There have been a lot of discussions about different mapping styles, but the main point is: if it ain't broken, don't fix it - don't change it from one representation to another just because of personal preference without contributing anything new or fixing an actual problem. Besides that the recommendation is to avoid multipolygons if it is not necessary and simple closed rings can be used instead, see for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1084

"*Generally try to use multipolygons only where there’s an important reason to do it. Try to use simple closed ways wherever that results in a simpler map."
SekeRob (2022-04-21 07:56:53+00:00): Interesting, so the view is/was to map overlaying lines again and again and again going with the risk not to connect or even overlap areas as was found here where the single wood 'inner' outline went inside the grass zone.

As for rebuilding, In this region I've come across MP's with 2000-4000 members, thousands of nodes single lines, one with even 56000 nodes, which ID Editor today does not seem to allow. Impossible.

Can point to many active mappers that work the way I do, but what I do not do but rarely and see daily is e.g. multiple isolated scrub zones in forest which are then also put in a MP relation so what you get is N rings, all outer in 1 MP, to include scrub pockets that are not even inside the forest. I'd say the admonishing of that user block sample has long been binned or rather, is not widely taken on, certainly by far not taken as working guideline. 

I'll try to take the advise though on of not changing the methodology used in an area. Makes sense for those coming after me.

Thanks for sharing.
Luzandro (2022-04-21 10:45:58+00:00): Thanks and just to be clear, I really appreciate it, when people put time and effort into tedious quality assurance, and I understand the view that sharing segments could be seen as more elegant, I just wanted to point out that many people don't see it that way and excessive use of multipolygons has many times lead to hard to maintain areas that easily break, often with more severe consequences, than small overlapping areas
eggie (2022-04-19 19:26:04+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback.. Je bedoeling is natyurlijk goed, maar met je actie heb je de relaties van de busroutes onderbroken.
Wellicht heb je er geen erg in gehad. 
MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-04-19 19:42:20+00:00): De OV routes heb ik hersteld.
Eigenlijk tekeken we eerst de rotonde in met highway=construction. Maar als ze nu bezig zijn kan het beter zo bliven. Je hebt fietspaden toegevoegd. Zijn die er in werkelijkheid.
Nu staat er nog shared lane op de hoofdrijbaan en die staat nog open voor fietsers. 
De tags zal ik verwijderen en de hoofdrijbaan op slot zetten voor fietsers.
Verder nog oneway=yes en straatnaam op de toevoerwegen gezet naar de rotonde.
Gr eggie
eggie (2022-04-19 19:59:48+00:00): Overigens netjes ingetekend!
mapse verder
eggie
eggie (2022-04-19 20:51:41+00:00): bicycle=use_sidepath hoort niet op een fietspad. Dat is juist de plek waar je 'moet' rijden.
Die tag hoort dan op de hoofdrijbaan.
Ik heb de accesstags verwijderd
eggie (2022-04-19 20:59:04+00:00): maxspeed even verwijderd. Toevoerwegen 50, waarom dan 80 op de rotonde?
user_15629788 (2022-04-19 21:18:44+00:00): Hallo Eggie,

Ik heb me nog niet in alle functies verdiept, maar was zeker van plan dit binnen zeer korte tijd te doen. De fietspaden zijn er inderdaad zoals nu ingetekend. Ik heb aangegeven feedback te willen in de hoop dat iemand het OV voor me kon herstellen, dank daarvoor!
user_15629788 (2022-04-19 21:20:09+00:00): De busroutes had ik inderdaad doelbewust verwijderd anders kon ik de bestaande weg niet verwijderen om de rotonde ertussen te plaatsen
eggie (2022-04-19 21:24:20+00:00): In het begin lijkt osm een grote rijstebrij. Dat gaat vanzelf over 😀

Groet
Eggie
user_15629788 (2022-04-19 21:25:17+00:00): Overigens zijn de wijzigingen nu in de hoogste zoomniveaus niet meer te zien. Komt dit door jouw herstelacties?
eggie (2022-04-19 21:27:43+00:00): Nee.. gewoon je cache even leegmaken.. paar keer ctrl f5
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-04-23 03:13:40+00:00): Hi,
Welcome to OSM!
Addressing should be not be added to roads nor should the name field be used for the address. This changeset also added a duplicate which is not advisable. I've removed and correctly mapped the address at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9687132772
SekeRob (2022-04-19 20:42:22+00:00): Hi,

Perché hai tolto il nome 'Largo Sant'Eustachio' e poi l'hai ripristinato come Piazza Sant'Eustachio? Si prega di aggiungere il tag source=.... sull'oggetto con la descrizione delle origini.

Ciao,
NaturAufnahmen (2022-04-19 19:31:49+00:00): War erstr heute vor Ort, an dieser Stelle wird gebaut und das Gebäude ist deutlich sichtbar und auch schon fast fertig.
NaturAufnahmen (2022-04-19 19:32:07+00:00): War heute erst*
streckenkundler (2022-04-19 19:44:56+00:00): Bei dem, was du "produziert" vertraue ich dessen nicht mehr... Bitte ausdrückliche eindeutige georeferenzierte Fotobelege!
NaturAufnahmen (2022-04-19 19:49:32+00:00): Okay, ich werde mal schauen ob ich in den nächsten Tagen mal dort vorbeikommen und Fotos machen kann.
Wolderik (2022-04-19 20:42:16+00:00): Hoi Wim, ik zie dat je bij de Stevertsebaan (bij Riethoven) een picknicktafel heb toegevoegd. Er stond op die plek al een picknick tafel ingetekend op de kaart. Is er nog een nieuwe bijgekomen ?
Wim van der Ven (2022-04-20 13:57:06+00:00): Beste Wolderik,
Bedankt voor de melding. Ik had problemen met de GPS door een fout in een andere app, daardoor heb ik de picknicktafel niet gezien.
Goed van jou om dat  te zien.
Wolderik (2022-04-20 20:44:17+00:00): Dank voor het weer aanpassen (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119956080)
mueschel (2022-04-24 10:05:57+00:00): Please check this way, it didn't get any meaningful tags: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1053136669
user4816003805 (2022-04-27 20:21:04+00:00): Why is it a bench?
user_5359 (2022-04-28 06:44:39+00:00): My fault!
TG-map4 (2022-04-19 20:12:21+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:ford%3Dstepping_stones is wrong here because there is no water: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1053137871 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1053137870 | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1053137868. Furthermore, please only map restrictions that are signposted on the ground. horse=no is useless. Of course no horses should ride there. Please only map traffic sign restrictions. If there is no traffic sign, remove all restrictions.