piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
txemt (2025-12-13 03:45:31+00:00): May I ask where these service roads came from? Are these from Lyft dash cams, or somewhere else?

The reason why I ask is that is a construction site for a new garage and that area is NOT open to the public. Those roads may also change at any given moment, as I believe they're only dirt roads.
eggie (2022-09-07 10:07:05+00:00): reverted by changeset #125893816
eggie (2022-09-07 10:06:28+00:00): reverted by changeset #125893805
eggie (2022-09-07 09:37:46+00:00): Hi Lilia,

This is not correct
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=125891690

The oneway exception for oneway=yes is only for psv
The tagging was okay here. 
I suggest a revert of all your edits here.
What is your source in this matter?

Greetz,
eggie
LiliaAngelova (2022-09-07 09:48:53+00:00): You are right that the bridge seems to not be open for regular traffic yet, but I don't agree with the one-way tag. The bridge is not one-way as it is not one-way for the busses. How it is not routable if all three segments are open in both ways?
eggie (2022-09-07 10:02:55+00:00): The bridge is open in two directions because 
the exception tagging for oneway=yes 

oneway:bicycle	no	
oneway:mofa	no	
oneway:moped	no	
oneway:psv	no

Are you ware of those tags? 

In that case ask the former mapper why he tagged oneway.

I will ask the Dutch Forum to have a look.
I'm just a validator and see inconsistent tagging. That why I will intervene. 

I doubt if you are familiar with the situation here.
You are? 
What is your source. Only aerial imagery and google? 

I shall revert your edits now.. and discuss it later on.

Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2022-09-07 10:06:03+00:00): reverted by changeset #125893805
Jorisbo (2022-09-08 11:11:48+00:00): Hallo Jens, Ik zie dat je een aantal wijzigingen hebt gemaakt rondom park het prieel. Het park is wel degelijk een park van de stad antwerpen (http://www.berchemisdemoeite.be/plaatsen/park-het-prieel/) Het wordt zo benoemd en beheerd. Ik heb de wijzigingen teruggedraaid. Een park is een gebiedsaanduiding. Gras is een begroeiing in een park. Je zou dus graszones kunnen toevoegen op het park als je die juist kunt aanduiden met daarop bomen. Ik heb er weer een park van gemaakt. groeten Joris
Jens V (2022-09-08 11:46:41+00:00): Ik begrijp dit slechts gedeeltelijk, aangezien OSM in eerste instantie het actuele landgebruik aangeeft en niet de al dan niet juridische invulling die de eigenaar eraan geeft. Zo kan je in OSM bv. buffelwegels aanduiden, terwijl dit geen enkele juridische betekenis heeft, maar dat wel relevant is voor wandelaars en fietsers.
Ik ga hier niet lastig doen, dus laat het hierbij.
Frans S (2022-10-11 10:45:45+00:00): hello again.  See my comment on one of your changesets. 
Most of your mappings shows the same issues.
Not squared and added description to buildings.
Please do not upload each single mapping in a task. collect them.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125891886
gmar5 (2022-09-07 12:38:13+00:00): Hi. This changeset seems to have deleted the buildings you had added. Just as a heads up, assuming it wasn't intentional.
stick2 (2022-09-07 12:43:06+00:00): I know.  The problem was the deletions it included... I need to re-do it and be more careful with resolving the overlaps of additions/existing.
Frans S (2022-10-11 10:43:52+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
* Most buildings are fair rectangular. Square them with the Q key when the object is selected.
* Tagging of buildings. For HOTOSM projects, the standard tagging is 'building=yes' No text adding.  Please keep that in mind at further mappings.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125892354
eggie (2022-09-07 10:48:50+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
Andrea Musuruane (2022-10-23 15:16:48+00:00): Ciao. L'osmc:symbol del sentiero "6 -7" è errato. Ciao, Andrea PS Ma il ref è corretto?
dieterdreist (2022-10-23 16:32:00+00:00): Questi sono dei casi che andranno ritoccato una ulteriore volta, sono da riverificare sul campo se non si dovesse riuscire a chiarire il problema.
ma-rt-in (2022-09-08 14:16:27+00:00): Hallo und Willkommen bei OSM,

deine Änderungen erscheinen mir nicht richtig. Woher hast du die Informationen?

vg
mavezum (2022-09-09 07:27:25+00:00): Hi, welche Änderung genau?

Die Bergedorfer Str speed limit weiss ich weil Kollegen von mir sind dadurch gefahren. Auf Google Street View sind die Geschwindigkeitsschilder teilweise auch zu erkennen.

VG
Mariana
ma-rt-in (2022-09-13 08:06:39+00:00): Ja genau ea geht um die maxspeed Änderungen. 
Jeder Dienst von Google ist für OpenStreetMap unzulässig.
Es erscheint mir aufgrund der örtlichen Gegebenheiten nicht sonderlich zuverlässig, das aufgrund der baulichen Gegebenheiten dort 60 kmh zulässig ist.

Vg
mavezum (2022-09-13 08:10:03+00:00): Kollegen von mir sind durch die Strasse gefahren, ich habe Bilder beweis wo es steht dass die Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzung dort 60kmh ist.
ma-rt-in (2022-09-20 10:24:37+00:00): Ich hätte da eine Idee. Warum zeichnest du nicht mal mittels Mapillary oder Kartview die Strecke auf.
In https://t.me/OSM_de_HH hatten wir über die Änderungen gesprochen. Es kann gut möglich sein, das dort das maxspeed angehoben worden ist. Es kommt mir halt nur so seltsam vor aufgrund der baulichen Gegebenheiten.

Wenn ich fragen darf, was machen den "deine Kollegen", wenn sie dort lang gefahren sind und die Daten somit inkorrekt wären?

vg
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-11 12:38:09+00:00): name=Eastside Liquidation
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1092356586

shop=liquidation ? What is the meaning of that shop value? What kind of services or products are sold here? Is anything from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tag_descriptions_for_key_%22shop%22 fitting? Maybe new value needs to be invented? Maybe this data is wrong and there is no shop here? Maybe it is not a shop but something else?

(if anyone wants I can provide list of weird shop values in some country/area - let me know if you are interested, some are already at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Mateusz_Konieczny/unusual_shop_values )
user_5359 (2022-09-08 08:21:18+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://taginfo.osm.org/search?q=ref%3Afr%3Afan. Please use ref:FR:FANTOIR.
Adikso (2022-09-07 10:53:12+00:00): Wszystko wygląda dobrze oprócz "payment:telephone_cards". To są karty telefoniczne jak w budkach telefonicznych.
dafadllyn (2023-07-25 19:38:29+00:00): Hallo! Ich habe name=Eisenbahnbrücke auf der Brücke https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1092586712 entfernt, da es sich dabei nicht um einen Namen, sondern um eine Beschreibung handelt; siehe auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen#Namen_sind_keine_Beschreibungen. Gruss, Raphael
kkrish11 (2022-09-07 10:08:13+00:00): Source: Maxar Premium Imagery
BCNorwich (2022-09-08 08:10:26+00:00): Removed duplicated highway Way: 1092587838
Demir Değerli (2022-09-07 10:36:07+00:00): Wrong submission / Yanlış değişiklik
bkil (2022-09-07 14:14:31+00:00): Köszönjük a közreműködést. A surface=unpaved helyett javasoljuk a lehető legspecifikusabb felületet feltüntetni: kavicsos, döngölt, fű, föld stb. Kerékpárok és babakocsik megköszönik.
Tilia_J (2022-09-07 17:35:54+00:00): Hoi,

Je wijzigingen beslaan een te groot gebied. Zou je je wijzigingen tot kleinere gebieden willen beperken (vaker opslaan)?

Dankjewel en map ze!
HiddeV22 (2022-09-07 19:39:09+00:00): Ok, ik heb dit gedaan omdat het me onzin leek om voor elk luchtalarm een andere changeset te maken, maar als dit geen probleem is doe ik dat in het vervolg.
Tilia_J (2022-09-08 08:04:22+00:00): Elk afzonderlijk luchtalarm kán ook weer overdreven zijn. Het gaat erom dat je changeset niet een kwart van Nederland beslaat.
eggie (2022-09-07 10:52:16+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 (2022-09-07 10:55:25+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback..  Die hele Pelibar kan denk ik wel weg hier. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-09-07 11:15:35+00:00): Dag Rozijntjes.. Iets is een cycleway=track als er een apart aanliggend fietspad is.  Wanneer een een fietsstrook wordt bedoeld dan is het cycleway=lane

Nu klopt denk ik iets niet meer hier. 
Ik heb wat aangepast. 

MVG
eggie
user_2066394 (2022-09-07 11:07:41+00:00): Quelle für die Hausnummern?
ImaginaryMachine (2022-09-07 11:45:44+00:00): Ich bin zwei Mal die Woche in der Straße und hab mir zur Kontrolle den Bayernatlas aufgemacht.
joost schouppe (2022-09-08 14:40:38+00:00): Ik zie op deze track geen verbodsborden voor voertuigen, noch op mapillary noch in de verkeersbordendatabank. Is er werkelijk een verbod voor motorvoertuigen? Als je gewoon een router wil tegenhouden om dit te gebruiken, voeg dan misschien tracktype en eventueel smoothness toe. Anders gaan gebruikers van quads, bromfietsen, crossmotos en 4x4s hier onterecht niet kunnen passeren.
Mizuna (2022-09-08 19:22:45+00:00): Ja inderdaad, het leek me zo absurd dat graphopper de auto's er langs stuurde.
CurlingMan13 (2023-04-08 21:12:57+00:00): Is it still under construction?  The GPS units are not able to route anywhere here since this is still marked as closed on OSM.

Generally, temporary road closures are not added on OSM, since it could continue to show up as closed even when OSM is corrected since most software is not live, and the data could easily be 6 months old or so.
kmarkish_lyft (2023-04-10 10:00:43+00:00): Hello, CurlingMan13!

My name is Kate, and I’m a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Many thanks for paying attention to this and for your question. 
I’d like to point out that in most cases our team mainly adds the data from other sources considering the timeliness of construction (e.g. official government sources or articles in the social media). For each case, we check the date of completion of works and add necessary tags if the construction projects have a longer than six-month planning period.
As for this changeset, we added a construction tag based on the official FB page for Tarrant, Alabama  https://m.facebook.com/cityoftarrant/photos/a.1313674498725762/5310808212345684/.

There is no evidence about the end of the construction, but according to the Lyft owned telemetry data, the road seems still closed (Lyft GPS tracks from 04/09/2023 show the frequency of driver’s traversals on the roads from the past week https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OvY1EEgMHgEqtRQ7oQBsh_3U0-UItr-9/view?usp=sharing).

If you have some additional information about the completion of this construction, we would appreciate sharing it with us, and I will fix the map as soon as possible.

Best regards, Kate
Justus Weisensee (2022-09-09 17:21:53+00:00): Kannst du die Bitte wieder rückgängig  machen, da es im Alarmmonitor wichtige Information hergibt im Einsatzfall! 
Gruß Justus
J-MUC (2022-09-09 19:39:46+00:00): Hallo Justus,

die Änderung war dazu da, die Prinzipien "Don't use name tag to describe things" sowie anscheinend "Don't map for the renderer" (siehe Punkte 5.1 sowie 5 unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_for_the_renderer) umzusetzen.

Die richtige Lösung wäre, den "Alarmmonitor" anzupassen, dass er die nach wie vor vorhandene Information entsprechend auswertet. Für eine/n menschliche/n Nutzer/in könnte z.B. ein neues theme à la https://mapcomplete.osm.be/ eine Option sein.

Viele Grüße

J-MUC
MrMoehritz (2022-12-20 19:29:57+00:00): Hallo Norman,
willkommen bei OSM. Hat die Düne denn einen Namen? Denn das jetzt ist eher eine Beschreibung. Habe das mal angepasst: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130303482

Viel Spaß beim Mappen, Mo
eggie (2022-09-07 13:08:49+00:00): Hoi.. Dit is fysiek onmogelijk.. Je kunt geen oneway=yes taggen vanaf een paaltje.
Dan kun je daar als motorvoertuig alleen nog maar uit, maar nooit meer in. Zou oneway=yes dan gelden vanaf de uitrit vanaf de parkeerplaats tot aan het paaltje.?
Tag ook moped =yes en mofa=yes bij op een paaltje tbv de routering. Voor OSM zijn dat motorvoertuigen.
Kijk je nog even?
MVG
eggie
Threore (2022-09-07 13:45:54+00:00): Ik zal binnenkort eens langsfietsen om te kijken hoe het nou precies zit met de borden daar tegenwoordig, en het updaten. De moped en mofa voeg ik nu vast toe.
eggie (2022-09-07 14:30:40+00:00): Soms kloppen de borden echt niet..  Dan wordt het schipperen.
Syl (2023-03-31 09:29:11+00:00): Bonjour, j'ai annulé vos modifications. Les noms que j'avais ajouté sont ceux visibles sur le terrain.
aixbrick (2022-09-07 16:44:25+00:00): Hello,
please use the tagging for https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dpost_office#Shop_as_post_partner.
Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6574103754.
Regards
LucGommans (2022-09-10 22:10:38+00:00): Implemented in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126031248

Thanks!
aixbrick (2022-09-11 08:42:47+00:00): :-)
PierZen (2025-11-25 23:36:53+00:00): Un beau clin d'oeil. Je vois ces deux panneaux près de l'écluse mis en évidence sur la carte https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-vector-web-display
user_5359 (2022-09-08 18:04:44+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have revert your SEO SPAM (mostly no standard keys, no verifiable data, not positive verifiable address data, destroying data). If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data. For the most information in the description we have own keys. Please have look on the website http://wiki.openstreetmap.org.
Claudius Henrichs (2022-09-07 12:00:05+00:00): CS comment should have said:
Parque Eólico do Alto Douro
BCNorwich (2022-09-07 15:42:12+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

It looks like you've got a few things wrong here. Firstly you've drawn an area over a fuel station and highways. The area is also joined onto a highway. The address and postcode suggest that the premises should be located at a house further north on Station Road. Could you please relocate the feature?

You've placed the Node: 10006385845, a roof solar power generator, in the middle of Station Road. Could you please relocate or remove this misplaced feature?

Need any help please just ask. Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2022-09-15 09:04:20+00:00): No response so I've made POI of business, and removed solar.
ruugie (2022-09-09 10:14:44+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:Good_changeset_comments
bxl-forever (2022-09-08 17:49:22+00:00): Merci. Nous avons corrigé aussi.
Important : Si une rue devient oneway il faut aussi mettre les exceptions vélo (oneway:bicycle=no).
Si vous ne mettez pas, alors le cycle routing est cassé car il ne sait pas que les rues sont des SUL.
Nous avons vu aussi que suite CLM Cureghem ont été mis des panneaux M12 et pas M2, donc on va aussi regarder si ce sont ces panneaux-là ici, parce qu'on doit aussi ajouter mofa et speed pedelec aux exceptions si oui.
Happy mapping!
flohoff (2022-09-08 10:57:18+00:00): Moin,
du hast hier auf dem "path" ein "tracktype" eingetragen. Tracktype gilt eigentlich nur im zusammenhang mit "highway=track". Wenn du einen path genauer beschreiben willst muss das doch über so dinge wie surface, width, smoothness, sac_scale etc gehen.

Flo
BCNorwich (2022-09-08 08:08:43+00:00): Removed Way: 1092612214 as it's across houses.
gscholz (2022-09-19 06:09:26+00:00): Hi Arturo,
this changeset has, like countless others of your recent edits, added errors to the OSM database regarding overlapping ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-4.12700&lat=40.86754&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=125899653

This kind of error irritates routing software. Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-10 05:22:49+00:00): Jei šiauriniame kampe žymim darželį, tai ten tada ne parkas, tada ten residential, kaip aš ir buvau pataisęs. Ten nelabai parkas prie miesto laboratorijos.
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-10 05:51:55+00:00): Tiksliau parke darželis gal ir ok, bet negerai, kad dabar darželis vėl padarytas miške (ką aš ir taisiau).
DaanLT (2022-09-10 13:47:57+00:00): Nu kad parkas ten https://www.15min.lt/m/nuotrauka/2459757
Bei https://maps.vilnius.lt/teritoriju-planavimas#
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-10 16:16:05+00:00): Gerai, bet tada reikia mišką patraukti iš ten. Topologijos klaida yra tame, kad miške darželio plotas negali būti. parkas realiai nelabai įdomu kur kaip :-)
highflyer74 (2022-09-08 15:09:06+00:00): Moin Norbert!

Kannst Du hier noch einmal gucken? Da überschneidet sich einiges 

(https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=8.91012&lat=53.09579&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways)

Danke Dir!
nkbre (2022-09-08 15:32:25+00:00): Danke, schau ich mir an. diese Geometrien vom LfD fand ich schon merkwürdig und will den Kollegen dort auch befragen, was die Nicht-Buildings darstellen. Aber diese Überschneidungen bearbeite ich vorher.
BCNorwich (2022-09-08 08:14:39+00:00): Remove part of Way: 1092616520, duplication.
Romwriter (2022-09-08 20:09:11+00:00): Hallo bnc-online, warum hast Du hier die Hausnummer geändert?
bnc-online (2022-09-11 12:19:43+00:00): Hallo Romwriter, es lässt sich überhaupt kein Eintrag für unser erkennen. Die Hausnummer müsste 50a sein... Das macht wirklich keinen Spaß hier!
Romwriter (2022-09-11 13:11:43+00:00): Hallo bnc-online, es geht nicht um "euer", sondern es geht um das Objekt, dessen Hausnummer Du geändert hast. Das Gebäude https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/224956469 trägt richtigerweise die Hausnummer 10. Du hast sie am 7. September 2022 auf 52 geändert. Das ergibt keinen Sinn.
pio2_122 (2022-09-07 18:43:11+00:00): Dlaczego dodałeś wyburzone budynki?
Na ortofotomapie, która została podana jako źródło jednoznacznie wydać ślady po wyburzeniu, a dodatkowo były już dodane obrysy z note=demolished...
jslawin2 (2022-09-07 19:17:17+00:00): Obiekty zostały pobrane z https://budynki.openstreetmap.org.pl/
Faktycznie nie sprawdziłem ich stanu. Zdarza się. Błąd naprawiłem.
pio2_122 (2022-09-07 19:19:17+00:00): Rozumiem. Dzięki za poprawkę.
archie (2023-01-07 19:03:24+00:00): Hej, this is the third case where you inserted av culvert instead of - correctly - inserting a bridge instead. I think you have done a bit too many guessworking here.
Other mappers should check in regions known to them if there are more cases as these. This overpass query should be of assistence to them: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1pQ3
archie (2023-01-07 20:01:28+00:00): Just for the record and if you should wonder; here are the two (2) other cases where you should hade inserted a bridge instead of a culvert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1098207312/history   
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1097984191/history
As you have guessed so wrongly  now at least three (3) times, it might be better to keep the water/highway-conflict untill someone w local knowledge will fix it. Otherwise risk is that this sort of faulty edits will be undetected for quite some time. This of course does get into conflict with your employers wish to get rid of these kind of conflicts in order to get proper routing.
archie (2023-01-07 20:09:11+00:00): I am sorry to inform you about the forth (4) case wher you should have inserted a bridge (correctly) instead of a culvert (wrongly): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1098476524.
archie (2023-01-07 20:23:38+00:00): Fifth case:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1096209044
miroslavuzice87 (2023-01-10 07:28:15+00:00): Hello. I will have to go through all the edits related to these cases, check them at the street level again, and will do revert to the ones I am not sure of.
Frans S (2022-10-03 08:01:38+00:00): Hello,
I review changesets to check if they are in line with the OSM instructions.

Please check this document to get your knowledge of how to map and tag highways up to date.
https://learnosm.org/en/coordination/remote-tracing/ 
Never tag a road in rural area as residential.
You mapped quite a lot of tracks in between the field. 
Please focus on highways which connects isolated dwellings, hamlets, villages and bigger rather than mapping tracks which are only of interest of local farmers.
Tip:
Connect nodes of highways to each other to achieve a road network which can be used by satellite navigation systems. (these cannot deal with a gap between 2 pieces of roads)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125900409
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-09-09 14:05:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125983342 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-09-09 14:05:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125983342 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-09-09 14:05:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125983342 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-09-09 14:05:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125983342 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-09-09 14:05:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125983342 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism.
Rodrigo Rega (2022-09-18 01:16:06+00:00): Hola Gabriel. Antes de nada darte las gracias por tus ediciones en Lugo. En este conjunto de cambios se añadieron vías independientes para el carril bici, pero en algunos casos ya estaban añadidos como etiquetas en las propias vías. ¿Podrías revisarlo para que no haya duplicidad? Un saludo.
Gabriel44200 (2022-09-18 10:23:17+00:00): Ok,sin problema. Saludos!
Gabriel44200 (2022-09-18 10:41:22+00:00): Lo he editado ya,no sé si es la manera correcto pero es como están añadidos la mayoría de Coruña
Rodrigo Rega (2022-09-19 19:31:13+00:00): Hola, Gabriel:

Gracias por tomarte la molestia de revisarlo. He echado un ojo y creo que no está del todo correcto. Según lo que indica la wiki, no se deberían mapear estos carriles bici como vías independientes: "La infraestructura ciclista inherente a una carretera y que forma parte de ella - en particular, los "carriles bici" asociados a la misma - normalmente no deben ser etiquetados como una ciclovía a parte, sino añadiendo la etiqueta cycleway=* a una highway=* existente, en su lugar."

Tenía pensado en algún momento meterle malo al carril bici de Lugo, así que si no quieres o puedes arreglarlo, me ocupo de ello en un futuro, espero que próximo. 

¿Has usado alguna referencia concreta para saber por donde discurren los carriles o es conocimiento local?

Gracias de nuevo por tu trabajo en OSM.