piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2022-02-25 11:18:02+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
Buildings ought to be mapped as building=yes. 
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared. They are mostly strickt rectangular.

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 !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117300614
mariotomo (2022-02-11 19:50:50+00:00): Hola Kaart! are you only doing remote mapping? or you have a team in place at the moment? have a look at a user experience here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117174267
bit of a shame, letting a biker drive so many miles into a no-entrance private area, or enter a riverbed as if it were a road.
but that's something we can only address with on place observations.
whatmeinfallible (2022-02-11 20:14:57+00:00): Hi Mariotomo,
Kaart does remote mapping as well as ground surveys. The changeset you linked isn't from Kaart, but I can take a look at the area. Can you share specific feature IDs related to the issue you're concerned about in the area? Thank you!
mariotomo (2022-02-11 20:25:33+00:00): Hi.  The link to the changeset was to show you what happened to a foreigner trusting our OSM map here in Panamá. She then added the non-accessible area as a camping site, but whether that's correct or not, that's not the point and I cannot tell. The point is that we need survey because there's several private, no entry places here in this country, and they are very hard to tell just from aerial pictures. If I'm still not making any sense, please have a look at the youtube video she shared.
whatmeinfallible (2022-02-12 00:04:41+00:00): Thanks for the advice! I'll continue to exercise caution when mapping remotely. We definitely want to prevent bikers being routed through riverbeds.
MatejMecka (2022-02-11 20:20:47+00:00): Hey there! Thank you for your contribution :D I think I have added your house, I added a couple more around the area. It should be visible to you soon :)
multimodaal (2022-07-17 11:44:41+00:00): Hoi Leo, hoop mooie verbeteringen n deze changeset, maar er is ook een bruggetje + aanpalend pad verwijderd dat er gewoon nog is: 
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/34990185
 
Ben er gister voor de zekerheid nog even over heen en weer gelopen (-;
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=183004554122232

Undelete jij de betreffende wegen?
Thx!
Leo Slager (2022-07-17 12:59:24+00:00): Done. Dank voor de aanwijzing.
Het verwijderde bruggetje lag in het verlende van het Verhaartpad. En daar ligt geen brug, dus verwijderd.
Dat het bruggetje ruim 100 meter naar het NO ligt heb ik toen niet opgemerkt. :-(
multimodaal (2022-07-17 13:48:10+00:00): Hoi, dank voor je snelle (re-)actie!
drynwk (2022-02-17 03:04:01+00:00): I'm not sure removing the tags railway=abandoned and old_railway_operator=FEC is a good thing. railway=abandoned is a life-cycle tag that implies the tracks have been removed and it does not contradict highway=busway. Check out the wiki for more details. Both these tags add detail about the current and former use of this right-of-way (it is the former Miami-Key West railroad now turned into the South Dade Transitway).
Udarian (2022-02-22 21:43:22+00:00): the issue is that on iD when you inspect one of the bus ways they are marked as abandoned rail roads which they are for certain not, they have been paved over with no rail lines for as long as I remember and I have been living in Miami my whole life. This makes me think that osm on the backend sees it as such and that applications such as OsmAnd (which I use) would also see it as such and that would impede their navigation algorithms. also the rail road has been paved over and non existent for so long that it makes no sense to keep that data around any longer since it, at this point can only impede as explained above, so for certain its "life-cycle" is most definitely over by now.
ilasolthah (2024-05-20 08:59:02+00:00): Hi Griff, building are largely mapped. You need to do it one by one building by building to make it correct. And don't miss to square them.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-17 14:13:19+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Frans S (2022-02-24 13:28:50+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
Please do not include the shadow next to a building into your mapping.
The standard tag for HOTOSM mapping is building-yes.
about residential. Please follow the rules in the instructions. Not oversized or just circular.



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 !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117301456
Schmiddles (2022-02-24 13:50:01+00:00): Thank you for the response. I'm not exactly sure how I'm supposed to tell what is a true shadow and what is not. The imagery is not exactly clear and the document that you forwarded wasn't very helpful at all. I guess I don't exactly understand why not including the shadow is important. It is such a small inclusion around the buildings, after all... I mean, I know that my mappings are not always accurate because I don't know what these buildings actually look like.

Going forward, I will tag all structures as buildings - though I'm not entirely sure why that is okay and including a small bit of shadow is not. Is there any potentiality for a live mapping class? The documents and videos that I've watched have been okay, but I feel like, based on your note, I'm not being as helpful as I thought I was.

Please don't misunderstand. I appreciate the feedback and I want to improve.

Sincerely,
Steve
Frans S (2022-02-24 13:59:26+00:00): Hi Steve. Thanks for your fast response. 
Your mappings are helpful. No doubt about that. It is a common error many mappers make by including a the shadow in a building. It matters, even here. The buildings here are rather small and including the shadow gives a wrong picture. In rural areas it is more important.
To decide if an object is a building, check for these points:
Clear round or rectangular rooflines, 
When there is a shadow next to it proofs that it is above ground level. 
Also when the ground around if somewhat lighter of color gives an indication there are human activities.
Best regards
Schmiddles (2022-02-24 20:27:31+00:00): Thanks for your explanation. Much appreciated, Fran. I'll work on cleaning up my mapping going forward. Most likely, I have to slow down. Have a great day!
user_3022894 (2022-02-28 16:26:45+00:00): Hi,
perfekt, ich danke dir! :-)

(Bezug nehmend auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105933181 )
wuppertal-freund (2022-02-28 19:33:33+00:00): danke, so soll's aussehen
Frans S (2022-02-23 10:16:26+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared. They are mostly strickt rectangular.



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 !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117301546
Frans S (2022-02-25 11:13:35+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
Buildings ought to be tagged as building=yes.
Residential areas ought to be tagges as landuse=residential and additional tagged as place =hamlet, village etc.
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
B: overlapping buildings drawn.
C: multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.
D: nodes of roads linked to other areas.


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 !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117301673
martinst (2022-02-17 20:25:42+00:00): Hallo Paradine,
macht es denn Sinn so viele Punkte zu setzen wie z.B. um diesen Node herum?: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9499098558
Ist ein JOSM-Plugin dafür verantwortlich?
Gruß Martin
WoSoe (2022-02-21 08:43:31+00:00): Denke da wird das JOSM Plugin Splinex verwendet.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Splinex
Dann wird mit zu vielen Kontrollpunkten gearbeitet und/oder einem zu hohen Wert bei den »curve steps«.

Und auch nicht der Empfehlung nachgekommen die Linien zu vereinfachen:

Splinex generates a lot of points so it is important to reduce it in JOSM using Tools -> "Simplify way" (Shortcut: Shift + Y).
0.25 for ways and e.g. 0.35 for areas

Gruß
WoSoe
Paradine (2022-02-22 06:22:35+00:00): @WoSoe: Ich verwende kein JOSM Plugin, ich zeichne alles per Hand ein.
Kenne das Splinex Plugin gar nicht.
Paradine (2022-02-22 06:23:19+00:00): @martinst:
Ich finde einen hohen Detailgrad wichtig. Was spricht gegen so eine Genauigkeit?
martinst (2022-02-23 19:52:44+00:00): Wie viele Punkte man setzt ist sicher auch eine Geschmacksfrage, wenn aber alle 1,5 Meter ein Punkt auf fast kerzengerader Linie liegt erschließt sich für mich der Sinn nicht wirklich.
Stören tuts natürlich nicht, es bläht aber die Datenbank unnötig auf und erschwert späteres Nachbearbeiten.
dx125 (2022-02-25 08:12:00+00:00): Ich sehe in der Gegend, wo Paradine mappt, viele gänzlich ungemappte Flächen. Da gibt es nicht gaaaaanz viele Punkte, da gibt es keinen Punkt.
Aber er ist mit seinen vielen Punkten immer die Nr, 1 in dieser Statistik hier:
https://osmstats.neis-one.org/?item=countries&country=Germany
Alles klar.
Kann gar keinen anderen Grund geben.
; - )
Paradine (2022-02-26 08:19:50+00:00): @martinst: 
Klar, das ist eine Geschmacksfrage.
Bitte zeige mir ein Beispiel, bei dem ich zu viele Punkte auf eine kerzengerade Linie gesetzt habe. Das Beispiel von oben ist eben nicht kerzengerade.

Das mit der Datenbank macht auf jeden Fall Sinn. Wobei die heutige Computertechnik und Datenbanktechnik auch mir recht großen Datensätzen (im hunderte TB bereich) zurecht kommt.

Einzig wären da die Kosten für den Speicherplatzbedarf ja.

Ich versuche bei wirklich kerzengerade Linien weniger Punkte zu setzen. Die Funktion Linie vereinfachen sollte da helfen.

Danke für das Feedback!

Grüße Paradine
Paradine (2022-02-26 08:21:15+00:00): @dx125:
Verstehe ehrlich gesagt nicht ganz, wie dein Beitrag konstruktiv zur Diskussion beiträgt. Kannst du das näher erläutern? Statistiken sind schön und gut, aber was willst du damit zum Ausdruck bringen?
martinst (2022-02-27 07:21:39+00:00): Die dem oben genannten Node umgebenden Punkte befinden sich auf einer mir ausreichend geraden Linie um ihre Sinnhaftigkeit in Frage zu stellen. Jeden Grasbüschel, der sich im Luftbild höchstens noch erahnen lässt zu erfassen erschließt sich mir nicht.
Paradine (2022-03-19 08:38:46+00:00): @martinst:
Es mag sein, dass die Punkte des oben genannten Nodes sich für dich in einer ausreichend geraden Linie befinden.
Und diese ist nicht "kerzengerade".

Ass meiner Sicht ist die Linie des o.g. Nodes nicht ausreichend gerade. Und ich will, das ist mir wichtig, so detailgetreu wie möglich die Landschaft abbilden. Das ist weder verboten, noch gegen "Best Practise". Wenn doch, dann zeige mir einen entsprechenden verbindlichen Blogeintrag.

"Jeden Grasbüschel, der sich im Luftbild höchstens noch erahnen lässt zu erfassen erschließt sich mir nicht."
--> Wenn die Karten so genau wären, dann würde ich tatsächlich jeden Grasbüschel mit Mappen.
WoSoe (2022-03-19 18:23:10+00:00): Wenn ich zwischen den beiden angrenzenden Nodes (Abstand 2,373 m) ein Gerade ziehe, dann beträgt der Versatz zur oben verlinkten Node 44 mm!
Ganz ehrlich das läuft irgend etwas falsch …

Du zeichnest das landuse von Bing Luftbildern ab – richtig!?

Gruß
WoSoe
Scout Jens (2026-02-24 15:36:32+00:00): Die Tags access=yes und access=permissive kennzeichnen ein Merkmal als zugänglich für alle Verkehrsträger. Dies ist fast nie der Fall, und stattdessen sollten genauere Tags verwendet werden. Für weitere Einzelheiten siehe Wiki. 
Grüßle, Jens
Patr1k_P (2022-02-13 15:19:12+00:00): mala poznamka, v tomto pripade sa skala znaci vacsinou ako samostatny uzol a nie plocha, tak to pisu na wiki
Stefan_Varga (2022-02-15 20:32:25+00:00): Ok chapem. Myslel som si že je lepšie ked to označim ako plochu. Predsalen plocha kopíruje tvar skaly. Ale ak to vadí tak to môžem zmeniť na bod.
Patr1k_P (2022-02-16 15:33:30+00:00): podla wiki by to malo byt ako bod...tu som nasiel priklad ked to je ako plocha a napr. freemap aj mapycz to aj tak vykreslia ako len ako ikonku

https://www.freemap.sk/?map=19/49.328013/19.536449&layers=X&tool=objects&objects=natural%3Drock

https://sk.mapy.cz/zakladni?x=19.5363108&y=49.3281213&z=19

...ale trebars hola skala (bare rock) uz sa ma kreslit ako plocha
Patr1k_P (2022-02-16 15:34:45+00:00): nabuduce ked to budes robit budes mat aj ty menej roboty, lebo to nemusis obkreslovat
Stefan_Varga (2022-02-16 20:42:42+00:00): Ano to maš pravdu. Ale ked klikneš na tu skalu čo označuje bod v mapy.cz tak ti zobrazí plochu tej skaly. Skus kliknúť na tu sklau čo si mi poslal v odkaze.
Stefan_Varga (2022-02-16 20:44:06+00:00): Neviem potom načo je ta možnosť nakresliť plochu pevnej skaly/balvanu.
Patr1k_P (2022-02-17 05:36:41+00:00): Viem ale to už je možnosť samotných máp..asi to nie je závažná chyba ale pre nás je dôležité čo je na wiki..a myslím že tam píšu nie striktne, ale väčšinou ako bod
zluuzki (2022-02-12 19:04:02+00:00): Hello, you can add such old railroads, BUT: If they ran on streets (tram tracks), you should add "railway=abandoned" tag to the road itself. Please do not draw a seperate way over the roads, because this makes editing extremely hard.
Message me of you need help.
DUGA (2022-02-12 19:19:24+00:00): I would like to note that you should not add any abandoned railways if they no longer exist on the ground.

While modern streets may be built based on the original railroad, once they are paved it is hard to tell if there is anything underneath the road surface, and adding such kind of feature from 100 years ago is literally pointless.

Your edits are found across several states in a very short period which I believe they are based on armchair copy and paste but not boots on the ground. As a person currently living near the border of MD-PA, I find it very disturbing when someone adds something that I've never seen on my daily drive.
marczoutendijk (2022-02-12 19:39:28+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5689


Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
boopington (2022-04-18 02:53:53+00:00): who made you king of the mason dixon line DUGA?
DUGA (2022-04-18 15:38:20+00:00): Who gave you the authorization to add anything not existing on the ground in the 21st century?

Just because you think you can do it?
boopington (2022-04-18 19:24:01+00:00): I know I can because last I checked your not the founder of this site, secondly this isn't your home area and you seem to be repeatedly griefing this user for no reason and getting him blocked even though no one else seems to have an issue with his work. Lastly so what if it doesn't?
DUGA (2022-04-18 23:33:20+00:00): "your not the founder of this site"...You sound like I claimed myself as the founder of the project?

"This is not my home area"...Where???

"No one else"...Just because you did not see it does not mean it does not exist.

"No reason"...I think there is no reason for me to reply anymore based on your reply :)
boopington (2022-04-19 01:11:14+00:00): No but you sure act like you have the authority of it, you also repeatedly say your area already so don't play ignorant, then show me.
i2004 (2022-02-14 01:06:06+00:00): SOLO UNA CUADRA
woodpeck_repair (2022-05-12 18:13:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120901144 where the changeset comment is: revert PeckerHead vandalism (DWG Ticket#2022050610000189)
PT-53 (2022-02-12 07:20:34+00:00): Hallo brudern,
Du hast in diesem CS 2 Gebäude in Hettingen anhand des Luftbildes mit Dachumriß eingezeichnet. 

Dazu folgende Tipps:
1.)	Luftbilder haben immer einen kleineren oder größeren Versatz. Bevor man Gebäude oder Straßen von Luftbildern abzeichnet sollte man immer diesen Versatz vorher korrigieren.
2.)	Wenn möglich sollten Gebäude nicht mit dem Dach-Umriß sondern mit dem EG-Umriß (wie das Gebäude auf dem Boden aufsteht) eingezeichnet werden.

In Baden-Württemberg steht uns in OSM die amtliche Karte Maps4BW zur Verfügung. In dieser sind die Gebäude lagegenau und mit dem EG-Grundriß eingezeichnet.
Maps4BW kann in den Editoren JOSM und ID jeweils als Hintergrund eingeblendet werden  und wir dürfen davon legal abzeichnen.
Mit lagegenau und dem EG-Grundriß eingezeichneten Gebäuden kann man dann auch den Luftbildversatz berichtigen.
Wiki - Maps4BW:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maps4BW
Wiki - Luftbilder ausrichten:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Luftbilder_vor_dem_Abzeichnen_ausrichten

Schaus Dir mal an.
Grüße
user_12531033 (2022-02-11 21:05:36+00:00): 道岔到底用ref还是railway:ref啊
新人求教
eggie (2022-02-11 21:37:57+00:00): Dag Paver.. Lijkt me oke zo.
gr eggie
eggie (2022-02-12 08:55:58+00:00): Alleen is het vreemde dat ik op de meest recente luchtfoto daar geen paden zie lopen?
Gr eggie
eggie (2022-02-11 21:46:07+00:00): Beste Olivier..  De loopbrug die je hebt  hebt ingetekend is daar niet aanwezig. Wat is je bron?
Heb je wel bewust iets aan die loopbrug veranderd of was dit per abuis? 
Die loopbrug heb je gewoon naar de westkant van de brug in de lengte gehaald?
De fietsenstalling heb je ook  verplaatst. Dat zou natuurlijk kunnen.
De naam heb je veranderd in Westerlijke Stalling  . Is dat geen spelfout?
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=117303474
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-02-11 21:51:24+00:00): Westelijke fietsenstalling .. spelfout verbeterd.
Loopbrug over water teruggelegd. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-02-11 21:55:05+00:00): Olivier.. Bedankt voor je bijdrage.. Het is weer actueel nu.
gr eggie
Florek89 (2022-02-19 11:38:06+00:00): Czy ulica Jaworowa w Gawaratowej Woli powinna być tak oznaczona?
Jest: ref=Jaworowa
Nie powinno być: name=Jaworowa?
pio2_122 (2022-02-19 11:44:36+00:00): Oho, faktycznie. Dzięki za uwagę :)

W JOSM'ie pola dla tagów ref i name są obok siebie, więc przypadkowo musiałem tam wpisać nazwę w złe pole.
Już poprawiam.
Florek89 (2022-02-22 20:37:20+00:00): Tak właśnie myślałem, że to zwykła pomyłka, ale wolałem się upewnić.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 11:14:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122245102 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint to the DWG, reverting some dubious-source edits.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6058 .
user_12328418 (2022-03-20 14:33:17+00:00): Bitte mal kontrollieren, dein Zaun geht über die Zufahrt zu Haus 10.
Ich lass es erst einmal so zum korrigieren. (JOSM Fehlermeldung)
Gruß Gerd
Tatfahren (2022-03-20 15:01:15+00:00): Ich würde laut meinen Bildern sagen das die zufahrt nicht mehr existiert, da deutlich ein Zaun mit Zaunpfahl mitten auf der einfahrt erkennbar ist. Ich hatte es damals  warscheinlich übersehen. Ich habe diese Website zum Bilderteilen gefunden, weiß aber nicht ob du das darüber sehen kannst.
https://abload.de/image.php?img=zufahrtwtkb7.png

soll ich den weg dann löschen?
emergency99 (2022-02-11 22:15:14+00:00): Nicht gleich so rasend werden ;) Wenn man auf Google alte Luftbilder anschaut bemerkt man: 2014 stand dort ein Gebäude. Und da es vor 7 Jahren eingezeichnet wurde war es damals da. Die beiden Flächen sind die Überreste dessen. Auch stand daneben bis 2019 eine Art Container. Daher wurde das wohl bis jetzt nicht gelöscht. Aber das Gebäude hatte damals seine richtigkeit. Also: Take a chill pill…
Tommy73_ (2022-02-11 22:19:30+00:00): Hallo, danke :) ich hatte es schon mal gelöscht und es war wieder eingetragen.
olo81 (2022-03-25 03:27:34+00:00): Czy jest tutaj jakiekolwiek oznakowanie dopuszczające rower? Jeśli nie ma tag bicycle=yes jest do wywalenia! 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/534729517
olo81 (2022-03-25 03:29:24+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Rowery
archpdx (2022-02-11 22:42:46+00:00): Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Make sure to remove the way after you remove it from the city boundary relation.
Kento Kei (2022-02-13 08:21:29+00:00): not sure exactly how willing or useful this edit was, but if it was unlawful, then I guess tell me
marc__marc (2024-08-31 22:34:12+00:00): Hello,
you have uploaded a lot of orphan nodes, are you willing to do something with them or I cleanup ?
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Qvv
Regards,
Marc
marek kleciak (2024-09-04 20:15:13+00:00): Dear Marc, thank you for Your attention! I think it was one situation with lost Internet connection. Recently I don't have free time to do mapping, hope to come back in few months. So, feel free to change the bugs. With best greetings from Erlangen! Marek
marc__marc (2024-09-06 00:00:40+00:00): Thanks for your reply, cleaning done.
user_5359 (2022-02-12 19:41:10+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/738079087/history. Did you mean old_name instead before_name?
Yssrcuba (2022-07-07 01:25:54+00:00): Este negocio ya no existe
MxxCon (2022-02-12 06:48:07+00:00): Should this be considered layer=1 or should highway be layer=-1? it seems like this parking lot and road are at the same level as the rest of street network, while the highway is in a trench?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117306032
jmapb (2022-02-14 14:15:22+00:00): This is an odd one... official DOT signs clearly say "DO NOT ENTER except pedestrians bicyclists & local deliveries." But private vehicles are still using the street for parking, and the Dept of Sanitation alternate side parking signs are still up without any kind of counterindications.

Do you know if this is planned as a permanent change? As of now the signs aren't mounted on the pavement, just sitting in giant flower pots.