piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Luzandro (2024-10-17 10:53:40+00:00): habe die L2003 aktualisiert, die hier wirklich ein Lücke hat, siehe 
https://www.noe.gv.at/noe/Amtliche_2022_08.pdf

und 

'Durch die 2. Novelle des NÖ Straßengesetzes 1999, LGBl 8500/99-2, die am 29. April 2010 in Kraft getreten ist, wurde der bisherige § 5 (bisher Landesstraßen – nunmehr NÖ Landesstraßenverzeichnis) geändert. Laut Motivenbericht wurde das bisherige System des NÖ Landesstraßenverzeichnisses den seit dem In-Kraft-Treten des Bundesstraßen-Übertragungsgesetzes (BGBl. I Nr. 50/2005, Art. 5) geänderten Rahmenbedingungen nicht gerecht und war die grundsätzliche Entscheidungen über die Neuschaffung oder Verlagerung von Verkehrsachsen in der Form einer (Voraus-)Be-stimmung des Verlaufs sämtlicher Landesstraßen durch eine Verordnung nicht mehr sinnvoll und auch nicht mit der erforderlichen Raschheit und Flexibilität durchführbar. [...] Weiters lautet § 4 Z. 3 NÖ Straßengesetz 1999: „Eine öffentliche Straße liegt jedenfalls mit der ersten nachweislichen Information der Öffentlichkeit über ein konkretes Straßenbauvorhaben vor. Als erste nachweisliche Information der Öffentlichkeit über ein konkretes Straßenbauvorhaben gilt jedenfalls: ….“. Aufgrund des Wortes „auf jeden Fall“ handelt sich um eine beispielhafte Aufzählung und kann die Öffentlichkeit auch anders nachweislich erstmalig über ein konkretes Straßenbauvorhaben informiert werden kann, wie zB durch die Veröffentlichung in den NÖ Amtlichen Nachrichten. Diese Veröffentlichung ist keine Verordnung, hat aber zur Folgen, dass aufgrund des NÖ Straßengesetzes 1999 diese Straßen oder dieses Straßenteilstück als Landesstraße oder Landesstraßenteilstück gilt. Das NÖ Landesstraßenverzeichnis wird – aufgrund der Vielzahl an Landesstraßenumlegungen, -auflassungen und auch neuen Landesstraßen oder Änderungen des Verlaufs von Landesstraßen – nicht für jede Landesstraße einzeln geändert, sondern erfolgt dies gemeinsam als „Sammelverordnung“.'
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:22:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-11-07 01:43:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 158838435 where the changeset comment is: Reverting spam, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16832
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:13:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
rhhs (2024-10-07 10:44:49+00:00): Hi, I disagree with your edits to Парк център София (this way, for instance https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1243467417 They are corridors inside a multilevel shopping centre where the other levels haven't been mapped yet. Maybe level=0 is default, but in a multilevel location I think it's good to add. Could you check your edits and revert where necessary?
foreigner037 (2024-10-07 11:28:21+00:00): Hi, there are too many ways to check each one individually so some assumptions had to be made, for example that level=0 is redundant. In the majority of cases level is mistaken for layer and used in combination with bridge/tunnel=*. In some cases the bridge was removed, but the layer/level tags not. There were also forest tracks marked with level=0, which is baffling.

I will take a look which of the removed tags make sense to be reverted.
rhhs (2024-10-07 15:42:47+00:00): i agree with the cases you mentioned, but there were also edits to highway=corridor which is always inside a building (so likely multilevel). There was also a Lidl with parking on the ground floor and the shop above, and the Decvmanvs maximvs in Plovdiv which I think is below street level so level=-1 makes sense.
foreigner037 (2024-10-07 15:52:54+00:00): Level should only be used inside buildings. Decvmanvs maximvs is in Stara Zagora and it is not really below street level, as only the exposed part is mapped. Were the whole street mapped, layer=-1 would be more appropriate IMO. The Lidl I would agree if you could enter the shop from the parking without going outside. For the rest I agree.
foreigner037 (2024-10-08 07:38:02+00:00): Here are some quotes from the key:level page of the OSM wiki:

The level=* key indicates the floor level where a feature (such as an amenity or a shop) is located in a building.

Highways (and other ways) can be also tagged with level=* when they are essentially bound to a floor of a building complex.

But for typical crossings of roads, waterways or railways via bridges or tunnels, layer=* should be used instead. 

Roads or other ways passing through buildings should be marked with tunnel=building_passage. They should be only marked with level if they allow access to a specific level of the building.
rhhs (2024-10-08 12:49:09+00:00): Thanks, of course I know the wiki. Features in buildings can be highways too, such as corridors and parking aisles. I repaired the damage you did to these buildings https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/589854027 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/166213061 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/96425745 Please repair the rest yourself
eggie (2024-10-07 06:59:12+00:00): Staat hier werkelijk een telefooncel?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-10-07 07:45:51+00:00): Een vergissing?  Ik zal de telefooncel verwijderen.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=157567405
Gr eggie
jengelh (2024-10-07 10:14:25+00:00): Das kannste sooo nicht machen.

maxwidth/maxheight gibt eine Beschilderung wieder, und ist nicht dasselbe wie physikalisch vorhandenen Dimensionen.
ayxis (2024-10-07 11:11:48+00:00): oooohh. Da hast du vollkommen recht. Ich mache es wieder rückgängig. Vielen Dank!
eggie (2024-10-07 07:00:51+00:00): Misschien loopt hier wen veldweg naar nr 10, maar er loopt toch geen asfaltweg verder voor bij nr 10 ?
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-10-07 07:17:42+00:00): Ik heb het wegtype aangepast naar gravel. tracktype=grade2
Sinds wanneer ligt hier asfalt? 

MVG
eggie
Wild Spike (2025-02-10 15:53:10+00:00): Do you know what is going to be built here by any chance?
jhaluska80 (2025-02-10 17:24:18+00:00): Chipotle and Panda Express
https://www.mountolivetwpnj.org/media/11291

The Chipotle has hiring ads up and looks like it'll open very soon, Panda Express doesn't even have a sign up so maybe it changed.

External construction is done, I just left it to indicate they're not open and maybe they will have construction trucks parked there.

I drive by it about once a week, so I'm actively monitoring it.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-02 10:57:27+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12231198676/history has fixme:type = primary school that was added in this edit
Would it be amenity=school ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool )
Something else?
nyampire (2024-10-08 06:38:18+00:00): 編集をレビューしました。
住所の記入までしていただき、素晴らしいです。

1点、opening_hoursタグですが、ちょっと特殊な記法があります。
今回のケースであれば、「Fr-Su 10:00-19:00; PH 10:00-19:00」のように、曜日と営業時間のペアで表します。
詳しくは以下を参照ください。最初は難しいと思いますので、今回のように日本語でも書いてもらえれば、後で気がついた人が直せます。
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Key:opening_hours

これからも編集をしてみてください。
Happy Mapping！
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157568131
AgusQui (2024-10-07 13:32:21+00:00): Which nodes were deleted? In this changeset I corrected another user's erroneous edits, but there are no deleted nodes.
AgusQui (2024-10-08 01:21:54+00:00): I reverted your revert, you have not responded to my comments
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:10:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:19:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:18:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:23:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:15:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
TrickyFoxy (2024-10-07 09:45:22+00:00): Сомнительно, что ref=1 у всех опор. Да и по забору ЛЭП тоже вряд ли проходит
Metzor (2024-10-09 17:15:39+00:00): Hallo hurdygurdyman,

Danke für das Wiedereröffnen der Straße.

Du hast access=yes gesetzt. D.h. auch Fahrrad- und Fußverkehr darf diese nutzen? Das kommt mir komisch vor, weil es ja teils begleitende Wege gibt. Aber ohne deine Ortskenntnis möchte ich nichts ändern. Das note würde ich dann auch löschen. Passt das?

Gruß
Metzor
hurdygurdyman (2024-10-09 19:01:58+00:00): Hi Metzor, ich hatte das auf die Schnelle unterwegs mit Vespucci erledigt und werde es daheim mit ID oder JOSM richtig erledigen.

Gruß  hurdygurdyman
Metzor (2024-10-09 19:19:17+00:00): Okay, danke!
hurdygurdyman (2024-10-10 16:44:53+00:00): Hab vervollständigt und dabei opening date und Note gelöscht. Ich hoffe, kein Teilstück übersehen zu haben.
Metzor (2024-10-10 18:02:36+00:00): Danke :-)
bxl-forever (2024-10-07 08:16:13+00:00): Hello,

Why did you change this former church into an active "place of worship"?  It is not an active church.
Tom Ameye (2024-10-07 14:08:54+00:00): Dear bxlnforever, before doing so I checked the Google street view an the link to the website mentioned in Google maps. That site showed a recent calender for masses in the church. I made the change based on this evidence.
yelisey90 (2024-10-07 19:15:08+00:00): Thanks for the info! You've provided me with my today's dinner ;)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:13:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
Bienson (2024-10-07 19:42:09+00:00): Hi, da ist ein bisschen was schief gelaufen - es wurden Strommasten eingetragen, die nicht existieren, z.B.:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4813575925

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6563526632

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/704805807

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4680278259

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9079867575
Edelsalami (2025-07-09 09:37:48+00:00): Mond00 scheint es nicht für nötig zu halten seine/ihre Bearbeitungen zu kontrollieren oder gar zu korrigieren.
Mond00 (2025-07-09 18:25:19+00:00): die Nachricht ist leider verloren gegangen. Der Pole Eintrag ist nun entfernt.
Edelsalami (2025-07-10 10:34:45+00:00): Und was ist mit den restlichen, von dir fehlerhaft eingetragenen, Strommasten? Müssen wir die Nodes einzeln aufzählen?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-10-07 08:00:08+00:00): z zdjęć lotniczych i wizyty na miejscu
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-10-07 08:00:34+00:00): granic w 1000% pewien nie jestem, może wyamagać jeszcze poprawek
eggie (2024-10-07 08:19:31+00:00): Dag jkorf... Probeer als het kan op de BAG adresnodes bij te taggen..
MVG
eggie
BCNorwich (2024-10-07 10:48:23+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Your website says your office is at North Harrow quite some distance away from this position. If it's within a multi office building it should be mapped as a node within the building, not a line. Thus I've removed it.

If you need help please comment here below.

Regards Bernard.
willkmis (2024-10-08 12:28:47+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding to the map in the area! I noticed you have created neighborhood boundaries for Sawtelle, Century City, and Westwood sourced from the LA Times's Mapping LA project.

While I appreciate the effort it probably took to draw these, I find the Mapping LA boundaries unsuitable for OSM and think they should be removed. These boundaries were essentially made up for the purposes of a newspaper project and have no official status. Moreover, these boundaries are copyrighted with a CC BY 4.0 license, which is incompatible with OSM without a waiver from the LA Times.

Anecdotally, I also tend to find the Mapping LA boundaries to be inaccurate, or at least oversimplified (as a former Sawtelle resident, I would not consider anything south of the 10 or east of the 405 to be Sawtelle, for instance). I don't think that LA has any well-defined neighborhood boundaries, so I've tended to map them as nodes near their centers, per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place=neighbourhood#Node_or_area?. At the very least, any boundaries drawn should not be boundary=administrative, admin_level=9, because they are not administrative boundaries.

Also, I am changing Sawtelle back to place=suburb. Note that in OSM, "suburb" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dsuburb) just means a very large neighborhood within a city, not the US English definition of a separate outlying town. Sawtelle is definitely bigger than a place=neighbourhood.
HollywoodVibes (2024-10-08 15:09:00+00:00): Hi,

Thank you for your message and for explaining in detail some aspects I was unaware of, particularly the licensing issue. Consequently, I will remove the few relations you mentioned, namely Sawtelle, Century City, Westwood, and West Los Angeles.

Thanks again,
Alexis
HollywoodVibes (2024-10-08 16:09:39+00:00): Just to confirm I deleted the 4 non-relevant relations. In doing that, I noticed this boundary a little surprising =>
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/785253618  
If you can have a glance on? Thank you.
willkmis (2024-10-09 01:03:07+00:00): Thanks for the quick response, appreciate it! It seems like you've been adding a lot of good details to the map, so keep it up!
willkmis (2024-10-09 01:05:27+00:00): Huh, that random rectangle in the middle of a TV studio is a weird one. But looking at other official maps, like https://data.lacity.org/City-Infrastructure-Service-Requests/City-Boundary-of-Los-Angeles/ppge-zfr4, it seems real! I guess it's just one parcel that never got annexed for some reason, though I wasn't able to find any specific information about it anywhere. It should probably be an "inner" member of the Los Angeles city relation.
Vinber-Pro (2024-10-07 09:32:46+00:00): bonjour,
est-ce un magasin à la ferme ? ouvert à l'année ?

à plus
Marianne Pierre (2024-10-07 13:08:04+00:00): ils ouvrent effectivement un marché à l'année mais je ne sais plus quel jour. je crois que c'est le vendredi mais je ne suis pas sure
Hadi Omid (2024-10-07 10:00:46+00:00): شما ظاهرا علاقه خاصی به حذف کردن دارید!
این مسیر موقتا مسدود شده و دلیلی برای حذف نداشت
mike140 (2024-10-12 23:28:01+00:00): Така назва тут не потрібна: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Uk:%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B8#%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%96_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8
rskedgell (2024-10-07 09:11:26+00:00): Hello, @MKBE_'s latest sock puppet. How short is this temporary road closure?
L'imaginaire (2024-10-07 08:31:22+00:00): bron: open data Toerisme Vlaanderen
Vinber-Pro (2024-10-07 09:29:27+00:00): bonjour,
j'imagine que c'est de la vente de bière ?

et le lieu de vente est sans doute dans un batiment non ?

sais-tu lequel ?
Marianne Pierre (2024-10-07 09:54:10+00:00): La Brasserie est dans le grand bâtiment.
La vente se fait là mais également partout sur le territoire et sur les marché
Marianne Pierre (2024-10-07 09:54:32+00:00): s
Vinber-Pro (2024-10-07 10:10:18+00:00): salut,

j'ai déplacé dans le bâtiment car c'était placé devant, mais n'est ce pas plutôt le bâtiment où il y a le musée également ? avec la boutique ?
Marianne Pierre (2024-10-07 10:23:17+00:00): Oui c'est ça
user_11609320 (2024-10-07 08:42:35+00:00): i kid you not, this pedestrian fence cost the city half a million
NeisBot (2024-10-07 08:44:48+00:00): Hello Netrali, welcome to OSM, and thank you for your contributions!

I've taken a look at your recent edits and wanted to discuss a few discrepancies I noticed regarding the surrounding environmental features. Specifically, the locations in your edits don't seem to align with the typical geographical characteristics expected in that area. Here are some (max 10) relevant links to the edits:
https://osm.org/node/12231315108

Could you please take a look?
Looking forward to your response.

#Somewhere
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=157571100
pitscheplatsch (2024-10-07 18:02:45+00:00): Remove #testdata. Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157593579
AjBelnuovo (2024-10-15 15:59:56+00:00): Qual é a fonte da extensão da Rua dos Onix até a Avenida Cascata?
LakeOntario (2024-10-17 03:12:25+00:00): Hello AjBelnuovo. Maxar SecureWatch Imagery 2024-08-18 shows a clear road which justifies the highway extension.  For clarity, Apple has an agreement with Maxar to use their more recent imagery to edit OpenStreetMap, which is not publicly available for editing OpenStreetMap. I hope this answers your question.


Olá AjBelnuovo. As imagens do Maxar SecureWatch de 2024-08-18 mostram uma estrada limpa que justifica a extensão da rodovia. Para maior clareza, a Apple tem um acordo com a Maxar para usar suas imagens mais recentes para editar o OpenStreetMap, que não está disponível publicamente para edição do OpenStreetMap. Espero que isso responda à sua pergunta.
AjBelnuovo (2024-10-17 17:31:40+00:00): Ok
Nzau (2025-01-01 13:25:12+00:00): Bonjours maccamons,
Si la circulation n'est pas réglementé sur ce tronçon : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1321789151/history

Il suffit de laisser vide le formulaire sur iD pour les tags access

Je vais faire les modifications nécessaires.
Bonne journée,
Enzo
Francesco Zanaboni (2024-10-07 08:54:49+00:00): il chanseget è largo per via di modifiche ai tag della Roggia Acqua Rossa
Bexhill-OSM (2024-10-07 16:43:54+00:00): I wonder if that track around the back of the tip is still accessible, especially with motorcycle training moving there? Walked through there a few years ago and it was pretty overgrown then.
amosharper (2024-10-07 16:58:37+00:00): I wondered about that - I didn't want to remove it, but the Strava heatmap doesn't have anyone going that way. Satellite has a visible path where is joins Freshfields, but while Esri Clarity shows it joining the 1066 grounds, Bing has it joining the edge of the field - and since unofficial paths come and go with the seasons, we can't trust them too much. Worth a survey, maybe.
Bexhill-OSM (2024-10-07 17:31:05+00:00): I'll stick a informal=yes on it for now. Cheers.
Vinber-Pro (2024-10-07 10:24:11+00:00): bonjour,
tu viens de noter shop=butcher donc c'est une boucherie !

pour la conserverie cela sera craft=cannery, je viens de l'ajouter
Vinber-Pro (2024-10-07 10:29:20+00:00): j'ai retiré le shop=butcher donc :)
:-} (2024-10-10 14:24:58+00:00): Jest normalne fizyczne rozdzielenie jezdni. Wyspy są wybrukowane normalnie, a takie coś zalicza się do fizycznego rozdzielenia jezdni!!! Pomyśl czasem lepiej zanim wycofasz coś bezpodstawnie!
Marek-M (2024-10-10 18:11:19+00:00): Korekta słuszna - rozdział fizyczny tutaj jest na tyle krótki, że jest zbędny.
okainov (2024-10-11 14:47:00+00:00): Hi! It doesn't seem there is such a cafe in the middle of Italian countryside. Also the address tags are off. Please make sure you place the points in the right places :)
cuzi (2024-10-09 17:05:46+00:00): Du hast hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12231341281 die Hausnummer geändert von 65a zu 25a, war das Absicht?
MichS (2024-10-07 15:20:09+00:00): Hallo,

sie geben u.a. als source https://maps.rlp.de/ an.

Wie ist denn dort die Datenlizenz beschrieben?

Sie sollten sich wirklich die Zeit nehmen und sich informieren, welche Quellen für OSM erlaubt sind!

Sie haben Freude den name-tag zu verwenden, doch nur dort wo es angebracht und/oder wie es in den Hinweisen im osmwiki beschrieben ist. Hilfestelluneng habe ich schon genug gebeben.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146536989

MFG
yamada-as (2024-10-07 09:05:35+00:00): Remove a house name for privacy
bxl-forever (2024-10-07 09:19:05+00:00): Please type real changeset descriptions when you update the production database.

Typing a single dot (.) to evade the warnings make your edits look really suspicious.
Tom Pouce (2024-10-07 09:24:30+00:00): Will do in the future
bxl-forever (2024-10-07 11:30:02+00:00): ## REVERTED
Reason: address already on the container building
Tom Pouce (2024-10-07 12:17:36+00:00): ok
flohoff (2024-10-08 08:13:41+00:00): Moin,
ich hab nicht ganz verstanden wo das schild steht. Aber wenn das an der Ecke Meyerhofstraße/HJerzogweg steht dann wird sich das doch auf den Track beziehen der in 150m beginnt und nicht auf den Herzogweg oder?

Aktuell ist ja der Herzogweg jetzt mit horse=no getagged.

Flo
dieRatte (2024-10-08 12:27:22+00:00): Ja, so ist es. Das Schild steht direkt an der Meyerhofstraße an einem schmalen Pfad der zu einem im Wald befindlichen Wanderweg führt (allerdings in höchstens 50m), der vorher nicht in der Karte verzeichnet war - das müsste folglich schon der Wanderweg "Herzogsweg" sein. Den bin ich stets weiter geradeaus gelaufen bis zum Ausgang zur Straße "Herzogsweg" und hier ist die Beschilderung "Hz Herzogsweg".
hk51 (2024-10-08 11:04:24+00:00): Hi,wieso löscht Du ständig vorhandene Wege ?
Aleksandar Matejevic (2024-10-07 10:25:25+00:00): Hi Tellurium,
please do not add administrative buildings in relations, admin_center role is for the place, not for the building.
rene78 (2024-10-12 08:40:38+00:00): Hi kayuxtz,

sorry but I have reverted this changeset. Non of those buildings are actually there.

Was this some automated edit?

Regards
Rene
hk51 (2024-10-08 11:04:44+00:00): Hi,wieso löscht Du ständig vorhandene Wege ?
streckenkundler (2024-10-08 11:24:16+00:00): Dazu von mir ergänzend die Frage: ist das ein offizieller Account der Stadt Niesky? Dann bitte zwingend im Profil kennzeichnen.
streckenkundler (2024-10-08 15:32:25+00:00): @Stadt Niesky hier noch der Wiki-Link, warum: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Organised_Editing_Guidelines
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-10-08 04:01:17+00:00): Trời ơi, trong phần mô tả của bạn oki rồi. Nhưng mà phần thao tác bạn chưa  chuẩn lắm. Xem lại thông tin relation mới hoặc lên Group Facebook OpenStreetMap VN để tham khỏi hoặc đặt câu hỏi ngay trên đó nhé bạn.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-06 04:17:01+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164574185
pitscheplatsch (2024-10-07 18:09:42+00:00): Hallo,
ich hatte bereits andere Changesets kommentiert und auch auf eine private Nachricht von Euch geantwortet. 

Ich persönlich finde es sehr schade, dass Ihr alle gemappten Zufahrten hier entfernt. Meines Erachtens haben diese Zufahrten und auch gemappte private Wege ihre Berechtigung im OSM Projekt.
Vinber-Pro (2024-10-07 16:22:08+00:00): même question, seulement covoiturage ou aussi parking et covoiturage ?
pitscheplatsch (2024-10-07 18:10:06+00:00): Hallo,
ich hatte bereits andere Changesets kommentiert und auch auf eine private Nachricht von Euch geantwortet. 

Ich persönlich finde es sehr schade, dass Ihr alle gemappten Zufahrten hier entfernt. Meines Erachtens haben diese Zufahrten und auch gemappte private Wege ihre Berechtigung im OSM Projekt.
Vinber-Pro (2024-10-07 15:44:54+00:00): Bonjour,
ce lieu est-il exclusivement réservé au covoiturage ? ou il y a aussi des places de parkings "normales" ?
à plus