piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
JezCrow (2025-08-14 01:26:43+00:00): Following the uMap link on the community forum discussion [1] I believe most of these streets do not have a weight restriction. The sign at the New Strangford Road/Tempest Road roundabout [2] shows the height/weight restrictions are 1 mile away, not immediately. The sign at the other end (East Cliff Road/Hill Crescent roundabout) is very hard to read unfortunately [3]. (Though it looks like the height restriction has been applied correctly in the next changeset)

[1] https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/optimoroute-organised-editing-activity-in-the-uk-truck-hgv-access/129894
[2] https://www.bing.com/maps?toWww=1&cp=54.836737%7E-1.343713&lvl=16.1&mo=om.1&pi=0.4&style=x&dir=134.4
[3] https://www.bing.com/maps?toWww=1&cp=54.826934%7E-1.325414&lvl=16.1&mo=om.1&pi=0.8&style=x&dir=312
MihaelIvanjek (2025-08-14 09:23:02+00:00): Hello! Looking back at this again, it seems you're right that there should be no restrictions added in this changeset. Apologies and nice catch! I made a rare mistake of misinterpreting the sign as saying the restriction lasts 1 mile instead of beginning after 1 mile. My bad.

As for the sign on the other end (Hill Crescent Roundabout [3]), you can tell that the restriction starts after the turn on the right - and just to be sure, I tagged it after the turn on the left, too. Since the sign on Tempest rd [2] roundabout indicates the height and weight restrictions start at the same place, I think the restrictions from changeset 168849836 can stay as-is. As for this one - I'll fix it immediately.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168849836
MihaelIvanjek (2025-08-14 10:48:50+00:00): Here is the changeset with the fix! 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170426350
atchisson (2025-07-12 19:34:39+00:00): noizay *
Leo Slager (2025-07-13 10:53:33+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
lyctkel (2026-06-13 13:16:52+00:00): Hi Wendy,
Ik ben een beetje in de war.
Je hebt de straten https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1529012990  en https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/98644455 gemarkeerd met access=no. In het commentaar bij de changeset staat dat dit komt door de twee hekken.
Ik zie hier geen hekken, zie ook https://api.panoramax.xyz/en/index?focus=pic&map=18.13/52.008767/4.249014& pic=777b0c9c-7628-4dc8-a054-0989d4ddfe52&seq=a8bbbcb5-d866-4205-adb3-0712d2cae400&speed=250& users=default&xyz=257.31/5.06/24 en https://api.panoramax.xyz/en/index?focus=pic&map=17.66/52.00875/4.248989& pic=2fb5b0fb-f0eb-4055-8f12-81868e601e20&seq=a8bbbcb5-d866-4205-adb3-0712d2cae400&speed=250&users=default&xyz=310.00/0.00/30 .
Ik zie hier ook geen borden met ‘Privéterrein’ of ‘Verboden toegang’. Is slechts een deel van de straat privé, hoe is dat aangegeven en waar is de straat privé?
Groet,
lyctkel
Linus W Frische (2025-07-12 20:07:25+00:00): Parkering, og bygningspolygoner rettet i vestbyen.
gdt (2025-10-05 13:13:03+00:00): L3 parcels shows Anthem Way and the other 3 as a public right of way.   I intend to inquire of the town; it seems that either L3 parcels is wrong or the signs are improper.
johnny_1982 (2025-09-19 19:32:35+00:00): Das gelöschte Telefon (node 1256091945) stand heute immer noch da. Ich habe es als disused:amenity wieder hinzugefügt.
Gregory Peony (2025-07-22 22:14:53+00:00): Why did you tag the ways flagged as highway= corridor and indoor=yes. I can see a car on that highway in the imagery. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168852935
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-12 22:51:00+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/643555154

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
SeaB33 (2025-12-28 09:50:41+00:00): hi, i added the phone number, but it seems like someone deleted it, im still figuring out OSM, can someone explain why the number was removed please
TheSwavu (2025-12-28 10:43:08+00:00): The phone number is still there, phone:AU=13 16 01

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features#Phone_Numbers
StC (2025-07-22 20:39:09+00:00): Bonjour,

sauf erreur de ma part ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là (et probablement d'autres). Pouvez-vous svp regarder où ils passent et rétablir la continuité ?
Djam (2025-07-23 08:40:13+00:00): Bonjour StC,
Merci pour votre remarque.
J'ai essayé de faire attention aux différentes relations. Je me souviens d'un itinéraire pédestre qui débutait là, mais pas d'autre, "traversant" qui aurait pu être interrompu.
Pouvez vous m'en dire plus sur ce que vous avez repéré (nom ou numéro de relation) et/ou les outils que je pourrais utiliser pour retrouver cela ?
Dès que je retrouve un accès à JOSM, je m'y replonge.
Merci
StC (2025-07-23 09:44:48+00:00): Après vérification dans le changeset, il s'agit des relations 15966598 et 2368515, toutes deux modifiées lors de la suppression d'une voie routière.
Djam (2025-07-23 10:20:44+00:00): Ok. Merci. Je regarde dès que possible.
Djam (2025-08-10 21:35:20+00:00): C'est corrigé !
EzyPup (2025-07-13 21:31:36+00:00): This should be tagged as Permissive
access=permissive
bicycle=permissive
foot=permissive
highway=path
horse=no
motor_vehicle=no
name=Boardwalk Trail
NeisBot (2025-07-13 00:45:35+00:00): Hi KennyDap, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 81% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 1 highway(s)
- 243 building(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=168855889
NeisReview (2025-07-13 08:12:16+00:00): Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional.
Kovirii (2025-11-03 13:21:26+00:00): The trail does still appear to have activity on Strava
John Hanover (2025-12-12 01:22:53+00:00): This seems rather questionable to me. The full route of the Chiricahua Peak Trail is still part of the USFS trail system. With these trails it is difficult to say whether it is "abandoned" or not. Having worked in trail maintenance for the USFS for several years, I can attest to the fact that they can sometimes go decades without maintenance due to budget limitations and yet still be considered active. 

For the Aspen Trail, which does seem to have been formally abandoned, I might instead tag it as informal = yes along with appropriate tags denoting it’s visibility and passability, as some advanced hikers might be interested to know that there is still the possibility of following a route there.
jonathanpatt (2025-12-12 01:52:56+00:00): The southeast end of the Chiricahua Peak Trail is formally decommissioned and is not part of the trail system anymore. It is occasionally unofficially maintained but is not in the system. It was removed from USFS maps at least a decade ago, and has deliberately lacked signage while other junctions around it have remained signed in that time. It might be a candidate for informal = yes.

The Aspen Trail does not even have evidence on the ground of existing anymore despite multiple serious attempts to find it from multiple people, including formally by the USFS, over the last decade.
John Hanover (2025-12-12 04:56:24+00:00): Copy that. Sounds like a solid rationale. I checked the USGS LiDAR DEMs for the area and didn't see any trace of the Aspen Trail. For a route on a sidehill that's a pretty strong indicator there's not much of anything left to follow.
Leo Slager (2025-07-13 10:09:11+00:00): Dag Skywave,
In je commentaar geef je aan dat de middenweg open is.
In de changeset verwijder je de highway van die weg en dus zit de hele zaak op slot. Alle routerelaties van het OV zijn nu kapot.  
Dus mijn grote vraag: Hoe kunnen de bussen nu het busstation bereiken ?
aTarom (2025-07-13 06:12:12+00:00): Hi, changed key "iDEstação" to "ref" at
https://osm.org/node/12996625827/history
https://osm.org/node/12996619900/history
if it is not correct, please, tell me.
Cheers
topolusitania (2025-07-13 11:42:58+00:00): Gracias. Los datos em mi tabla, estan asi:
Nome	                                     Número     Tipo	                        Latitude	 Longitude	Altitude Município	Início funcionamento

Vila Real de S.António			     866	E. A. Climatológica (EMA II)	37,18710556	-7,41632500	11	V REAL DE SANTO ANTÓNIO	18-01-2011
e mé olvidé de cambiar el iDEstação a ref. 
salu2
TL
Kovoschiz (2025-08-06 18:04:57+00:00): Reminder: `name=` and `place=` are the existing common name and concepts in public use, not what you think should be correct or proper. Put historic names and locations in OpenHistoricalMap, not OSM. Discuss with the community, where the Discord server (https://discord.com/invite/CyG9zte) has been made available in OSM Community Index for a long time already, and there is a wiki project (osm.wiki/Hong_Kong).
user_5359 (2025-07-13 11:59:58+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice the difference between email and website. The domain for the email is catalystcannabis.co (without minus and only co) and for the website is catalyst-cannabis.com (with minus and com). 
Unfortunately, I cannot check this, as the website cannot be used outside of America.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-10-11 23:30:03+00:00): DWG revert, apparent sockpuppet, poor quality mapping, unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173159012
Kovoschiz (2025-07-14 07:30:46+00:00): Please don't add historical names with no relevance in existing public use as `name=` in OSM. Add them to OpenHistoricalMap.
dknelson9876 (2025-07-15 03:08:24+00:00): Hi Kuatsystems, please note the callout on the wiki page for basin=stormwater (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:basin%3Dstormwater) that encourages mappers to use basin=detention instead of basin=stormwater, since they have the same meaning
Kuatsystems (2025-07-15 05:05:34+00:00): thanks so much!  i really appreciate your feedback, I will adjust them accordingly
[at]AJYTO (2025-08-18 12:12:06+00:00): Penutupan jalan setelah stasiun cimekar. Akses hanya untuk penduduk yang kenal kenal aja. 🙄
❤️‍🔥 (2025-07-13 05:20:40+00:00): according to https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/57504, the name Te Ara-o-Tūrongo only applies to the Taumarunui and Te Awamutu, which is represented by https://osm.org/relation/15094188
❤️‍🔥 (2025-07-13 05:21:14+00:00): *applies to the section between
StarTrek2 (2025-07-16 07:22:27+00:00): There is no house at this location.
StarTrek2 (2025-07-24 08:41:00+00:00): Removed.
aceman444 (2025-07-18 18:42:27+00:00): Dakujem za revert, aspon toto je tak ako sme to chceli urobit.

Revertovali ste vsetky boxy po Slovensku, kde ich tento autor nezmyselne vymazal a posunul?
aceman444 (2025-07-18 18:37:53+00:00): Vyborne, necitate historiu objektov (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/167829367 ) a potom zahladzujete stopy, aby sme tieto chybne boxy s operator=Zasilkovna lahko po Slovensku nenasli.
aceman444 (2025-07-18 18:39:48+00:00): Znacky ste upravili (takze uz operator=Zasilkovna) nenajdeme, ale na spravne miesto ste box nepresunuli, hoci na jeho stranke je vidiet kde je.

A kazdy box v samostatnej sade zmien, aby sa to po Vas tazko hladalo. Vyborne.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-10-11 23:30:04+00:00): DWG revert, apparent sockpuppet, poor quality mapping, unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173159012
NeisBot (2025-07-13 05:56:30+00:00): Hi Umka_007, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Modified node positions."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish #AIgenerated
NeisReview (2025-07-13 08:12:57+00:00): 👍 Thank you for your private message.
Leo Slager (2025-07-14 11:45:23+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
rempshaener (2025-07-13 10:07:56+00:00): Hallo,
das Problem war das Komma. Dezimaltrennzeichen in OSM ist der Punkt.
Viele Grüße
Steffen Schneider (2025-07-13 11:12:55+00:00): Danke sehr. Interessanterweise war das ein paar Jahre lang falsch. ;)
aharvey (2025-07-14 01:22:23+00:00): I changed these to better match what the transport agency use as it's more akin to the route name rather than the "MODE: FROM => TO" format.
NeisBot (2025-07-13 07:06:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
Skinsense (2025-07-13 07:36:25+00:00): Skinsense Laser & Medical Aesthetics offer professional skin care and related aesthetic services to both men and women.
NeisReview (2025-07-18 05:32:42+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169089747
nebulousCarina (2026-06-01 13:43:14+00:00): 👎(Partly) Reverted even more, since commercial nodes don't belong in the island's multipolygon relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183500387
Ponderosopine (2025-07-13 07:10:00+00:00): Updated, not upper
Nzau (2025-07-22 19:34:42+00:00): Bonjour olecky,
J'ai l'impression que tu as supprimé des tags bicycle=designated sur des highway=path.

En France, pour décrire une voie verte (aménagement mixte piéton et vélo). On utilise highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated.

Je vais faire retour arrière sur tes modifs.
Au plaisir d'en discuter.
olecky (2025-07-23 04:19:52+00:00): Bonjour, thank you for checking the edits. 

I don't think any of the changes I made here removed the bicycle=designated tag. I agree that "voie verte" should be tagged as you described. 

If you look at the history of the ways from the changeset, you'll see that the tag was removed by "David Crochet" with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168930076 after my edits (surface, smoothness). Compare for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/244159077/history/12 (after my edit) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/244159077/history/13 (after David Crochet).

The same changeset also removed abandoned:railway=rail from the voie verte, maybe that's also worth checking?
Nzau (2025-07-27 19:51:45+00:00): Hello and thank you for your reply.

I apologize for the confusion. I looked too quickly without checking the history carefully...

I'll take a look. He's a major contributor, but he's not up to date on all topics.

Have a nice day,
Enzo
pwbriggs (2025-09-12 19:48:57+00:00): haha, it took a while for somebody to notice https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1414386787 (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4952611). But please don't map made-up things in the future, we don't want to start a trend of vandalism.
antqweEoNw_at (2025-07-13 11:14:42+00:00): 평택파주고속도로의 명칭을 수원문산이나 평택화성으로 변경하시는 이유가 무엇인가요?
aaei924 (2025-07-13 16:00:57+00:00): 국토교통부 고시 상 고속국도 17호선의 노선명을 '평택-파주'로 붙였습니다만, 그렇다고 하여 도로명이 '평택파주고속도로'가 되는 것은 아닙니다. 도로명의 결정은 각 지자체나 행정안전부에서 합니다. 여기서 편집된 구간의 경우 실제 도로명이 변경된 사실이 없습니다. 도로명주소 안내지도에서도 이 부분을 확인하실 수 있습니다.
antqweEoNw_at (2025-07-13 17:01:04+00:00): 도로명주소 안내지도는 오래된 정보를 가지고 있는 지도입니다. 최소한 2020년 이전의 정보라 최신 상황을 반영하지 못합니다. 거기서는 제2경인고속도로가 인천대교고속도로, 안양성남고속도로등으로 나뉘어저 있고 양평ic 연장조차 불분명하게 나와있습니다 비슷한 사례로 새만금포항고속도로도 대구포항과 익산장수로 나뉘어져 있지 않습니까? 그건 편집을 하지 않는건 좀 의야합니다.
antqweEoNw_at (2025-07-13 17:24:42+00:00): 구리포천고속도로, 경인고속도로 해제 구간도 하나의 선으로 묶여 있는것, 화성광주고속도로로 불리는 수도권제2순환의 구간의 표시도 전혀 없고, 같은 17번인 익산평택도 지도에는 없습니다. 또한 봉담송산고속도로도 표지만에는 봉담송산이란 명칭보다 수도권제2순환고속도로 명칭의 표지판만 확인이 가능합니다.
문제의 수원문산도 봉담ic와 화성jc 사이의 구간은 변경 없이 그대로 두시는건 뭔가요? 도로명지도 상에는 수도권제2순환선으로 나와있는걸요? 편집에 일관성이 전혀 없습니다.
따지고 보면 서울문산, 수원광명이 정확하지 않나요? 수원문산이나 평택화성도 나중에 서울광명이 2030년 안으로 개통하면 수원문산이나 평택화성등의 명칭도 결국 점진적으로 평택파주고속도로 명칭으로 변경할텐데 지금 이름에 적는건 문제가 없다고 봅니다. 네이버등 지도를 사용하는 업체에서 도로명은 변경해서 사용하니까요. 다른 곳은 명칭을 다르게 적지만 평택파주의 정확한 이름은 적어도 osm에서라도 유지했으면 합니다. 도로명주소를 기준으로만 적용한다면 익산평택은 국토교통부 문서도 쓴 서부내륙으로, 포천화도고속, 화성광주, 봉담동탄, 인천김포, 인천대교고속, 안양성남, 구리포천 이나 제2경부고속도로(북용인jc의 표지판에 적힘), 대구부산(신대구부산고속도로), 익산장수, 대구포항, 부산울산, 포항영덕등으로만 이름을 적어야만 할것입니다.
antqweEoNw_at (2025-07-13 17:38:40+00:00): 도로명주소도 업데이트가 많이 느립니다. 수원문산이나 평택화성은 도로명상에는 따로따로지만 2027년경에 광명~서울이 개통되면 하나로 통일하겠지요 비슷하게 서울양양도 서울춘천고속도로를 쓰다가 지금의 명칭으로 바꿨으며 평택제천도 평택음성에서 바뀐 전적이 있습니다. 후자는 서오산jc 표지판에  명칭이 그대로 있습니다. 도로명주소도 오류가 있는게 봉담ic까지 수도권제2순환선으로 나오는게 좀 이상합니다. 그렇게 한다면 순환선의 형태도 아니고요
각설하고 평택파주고속도로 명칭도 틀리지 않다는 겁니다.
aaei924 (2025-07-14 03:44:32+00:00): 1. 안내지도의 문제점 지적에 관해
1-1. 안내지도는 진짜 업데이트가 안 된 것인가?
도로명 지정 고시가 도로의 최신 개통 추세를 따라가지 못하는 점은 인정합니다만, 안내지도는 고시가 나오는 대로 업데이트되고 있습니다. 제2경인선이 '인천대교고속도로', '제2경인고속도로'로 나뉘어진 것은 실제 도로명이 그렇기 때문입니다. 안양-성남 구간이 제2경인고속도로로 되어 있음에도 여전합니다. 인천대교의 관리기관인 인천대교(주) 본사의 주소는 "인천광역시 중구 인천대교고속도로 3" 입니다. 만약 이걸 멋대로 "제2경인고속도로 3" 이라고 적는다면 틀린 주소가 됩니다.

1-2. 지정해제구간의 반영
경인고속도로 해제구간의 경우 안내지도를 확대해 보면 인천대로로 잘 반영되어 있습니다. (축소할 때는 아직 경인고속도로입니다만...) 경부고속도로 해제구간은 서울시가 도로명을 변경하지 않아 고속국도 지정이 해제된 고속도로 구건으로 남아 있습니다.

1-3. 이미 개통했지만 표시되지 않은 고속도로
개통된 도로 중 표시되지 않은 구간에 대해서는 도로명이 고시되지 않았기 때문입니다. 고시가 상당히 늦는 편인데, 고속도로 부속 시설(영업소, 휴게소 등)이 존재하는 이상 추후 고시는 나올 것으로 생각합니다. 해당 고속도로와 교차하는 분기점에 "0000 고속도로" 라는 표지판이 보통 설치되어 있습니다. 보통 지자체/행안부에서는 국토교통부 고시 노선명을 따라서 짓기 때문에 (도로명 결정근거에 명시) 유추하여 짓는 것은 최후의 방법으로 고려되어야 한다고 봅니다.

2. official_name 태그를 사용했습니다.
말씀하신 봉담송산고속도로의 경우 화성시에 의해 고시되었지만 주소 용도 이외로는 전혀 사용되지 않는 듯하여 official_name 태그로 옮겼습니다. 이는 호남지선, 중앙지선 등의 도로명이 '호남지선고속도로', '중앙지선고속도로'인 것도 마찬가지로 처리했습니다. (이쪽은 수십 년간 관습적으로 다른 명칭으로 불린 바가 있어서 그렇습니다)

3. 봉담IC-화성JC 구간은 왜 그런가요?
일단 이런 상황의 고속도로가 전국 곳곳에 있고, JOSM에서 Overpass-Turbo API로 불러와 일괄적으로 편집했기 때문에 거기까지 세세하게 살피지는 못했습니다. 추후 Relation 명칭 수정과 함께 공식 명칭을 최대한 반영하는 쪽으로 편집을 진행할 생각입니다. 아직 편집을 못 한 구간을 두고 '일관성이 없다'고 지적하시는 것은 적절하지 않습니다.

4. 수원문산은 추후 도로명이 바뀌지 않을까요?
개인적 의견으로 서울문산-수원광명이 아닌 이유에 대해 생각해 보자면.. 수원~문산 계획이 한 번에 나와서 처음부터 도로명 지정을 그렇게 한 것 같습니다. 한편 수원문산 - 평택화성 사이는 수도권제2순환고속도로를 두고 끊어져 있어 도로명이 합쳐질 것이라는 기대는 하지 않고 있습니다. 서울-양양, 평택-제천은 다른 고속도로에 합쳐지지 않고 계속 이어져 있습니다.

5. 곧 바뀔 예정이므로 name 태그에 넣어야 한다는 주장에 대해
'추후 변경될지도 모르는 명칭이니 name 태그에 넣자'는 것은 사실 적절하지 않은 편집입니다. 미래의 명칭에 대해서라면 proposed:name=* 태그를 사용해야 합니다. 말씀하신 대로라면 '논산천안고속도로도 당장 호남고속도로로 바꾸어야 한다'는 뜻이 됩니다. OSM의 편집은 정확한 정보와 현실에 근거해서 하여야지, 네이버나 카카오같은 상용 지도에 근거하면 안 됩니다. 일단 익산-평택선의 경우 서부내륙으로 도로명이 지정되지는 않았습니다. 로드뷰로 확인은 어려우나 분기점 표지판이 '익산평택고속도로'로 되어 있을 가능성이 큽니다. 포천-화도, 화성-광주, 봉담-동탄은 딱히 가능성이 없는 것이, 봉담-동탄은 도로명이 이미 변경되었고, 포천-화도와 화성-광주 구간도 표지판에 수도권제2순환고속도로라고 적혀 있습니다.

## 결론 (가장 중요)
"정확한 이름은 적어도 OSM에서라도 유지했으면 합니다" 라고 말씀하셨는데, 일단 평택파주고속도로는 현재 정확한 명칭이 아닙니다. (국토교통부 고시 상 노선명을 가지고 임의로 붙인 이름에 불과합니다), 정작 지도를 사용하는 일반인은 국토교통부 고시를 볼 일도 없고 실제로 저 지역에 가면 '평택파주'라는 표현 자체를 찾아볼 수가 없는데 정식 도로명도 아닌 "평택파주고속도로"라는 표기를 고수하여 얻을 실익이 정말 있는지 궁금합니다.

원래 OSM은 지리정보를 제공하는 데이터베이스이지만, 지도라고 생각하더라도 지도의 목적은 길을 안내하는 것이고, 그렇기 때문에 현실과 동떨어진 데이터를 만들면 안 된다고 생각합니다. (넓은 맥락에서 On the ground rule에 해당하기도 합니다)

name 태그에 입력할 정도라면, 최소한 도로 표지판에서 사용하고 있거나 도로명 지정 고시를 통해 도로명으로 지정되거나 둘 중 하나는 충족해야 한다고 생각합니다. 표지판과 공식 명칭이 다르다면 공식 명칭을 official_name 태그로 나타내는 것도 하나의 방법입니다.

고속국도와 고속도로는 국도와 도로 사이만큼 서로 다른 개념임을 확인하여 주시고, 현실에서 OSM을 사용하는 입장도 한번 살펴봐 주시기 바랍니다. 저도 정확한 정보를 합리적인 방식으로 OSM에 반영할 방법에 대해 계속 생각해 보겠습니다.
user_5359 (2025-07-13 15:09:55+00:00): Hallo Norbert! Schön wieder mal von Dir zu hören! Aber kannst Du mir sagen was Du mit den Schlüssel (siehe https://www.osm.org/node/12996988076) meinst:
neu = Crataegus monogyna 'Stricta'
no = 3735
?
user_5359 (2025-07-14 16:58:34+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please habe a look on https://www.osm.org/node/12901499838. What is the mean of the tags
waste = mixed;پسماند_تر_تفکیک_شده_،پسماند_خشک_تحویل_غرفه_یا_نوماند
شمارره = 10
Please notice we use british English for the keys and values.
joost schouppe (2025-10-22 08:36:54+00:00): Hoi H4N5,
Als je werken invoert, probeer ze dan zelf ook als afgewerkt aan te duiden wanneer de werken voorbij zijn. Anders riskeer je dat OSM langer fout blijft staan dan dat het juist geweest is. Deze wegen waren al als afgesloten aangeduid door eimai (access:conditional=no @ (2025 Apr 1-2025 Aug 31) in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165196180
EIgenlijk is dit een betere manier van werken: de "trage" gebruiker van OSM data heeft niet het risico een dataset met (mogelijk verouderde) tijdelijke situaties te hebben, en de "geavanceerde routeplanner" kan de tijdelijke situatie wel gebruiken. En het is als mapper minder erg als je vergeet de werken weer te verwijderen eens ze afglopen zijn.
H4N5-antw (2025-10-22 17:34:57+00:00): Waarde Joost, 

Zie dat je Lakborslei als in gebruik hebt gezet: dat is onjuist.
Bekijk liever eerst Waze of zo: vooral Waze heeft in Antwerpen een heel actieve spotter. 

Wat de werken betreft : je hebt bovendien de kaart niet bijgewerkt: de Lakborslei wordt na heraanleg één rijbaan met een rijstrook per richting, langs de woningen een voetpad en een fietspad in asfalt, verder brede infiltratiestrook - zoals verderop aan de lei; 

als kers op de taart: de werken strekken zich nu uit tot de Confortalei. 

Met overigens vriendelijke groet,
Hans
joost schouppe (2025-10-23 11:43:47+00:00): Verdikke, ik had de melding van de stad verkeerd begrepen. Ik heb mijn aanpassing teruggedraaid. Als ik het goed begrijp blijven de werken dus langer duren dan initieel voorzien en getagd in de access tag?
H4N5-antw (2025-10-23 19:24:25+00:00): Waarde Joost, 

Bij deze prentjes van woe 22 okt: 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1463272294969757 , 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1468924560831181 (en nu zijn de andere tramsporen buiten gebruik, maar dat merkt De Lijn vanzelf), https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=767252056350111 in de Gryspeerstraat; 

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1524910045187542 het stukje Lakbors tussen Ten Eekhove en De Gryspeer is al in gebruik bij bewoners. 

Tenslotte hier die brede infiltratiestrook, belijning ontbreekt nog, doorgang Ten Eekhove <> Te Couwelaar wel open: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=816179498011654  

Mijn gedacht : oude rijbanen als removed:highway=* taggen, nieuwe rijbaan als construction? 

Dan nu, aan de hand van lokale TV dronebeelden, aansluiting Bypass op Viaduct van Merksem doen. 

Met als immer vriendelijke groet, 
Hans 

By the way: Waze, Google e. a. zijn goede bron om wegenwerken op 't spoor te komen, doch Google loopt nogal eens achter.
H4N5-antw (2025-10-23 21:21:25+00:00): Een en ander gedaan.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-13 09:20:45+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9580156027
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/643555124

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Fizzie-DWG (2025-10-11 23:35:43+00:00): DWG revert, apparent sockpuppet, poor quality mapping, unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173159122