piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
VictorIE (2025-12-28 02:26:05+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1456898372/

You have fixme=unclear direction of flow.

They all flow downhill!

If you look at Tracetrack Topo: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1456898372/history#map=15/54.47776/-6.09368&layers=P you can that downhill is to the northwest.

If you look at Ireland British War Office 1:25k GSGS 3906, you can also see the route it takes / used to take.
LateNightTone (2025-12-28 12:03:45+00:00): Ah! I wasn't aware of the Tracetrack Topo layer, thanks for that. Good tip about the War Office maps too, I often forget they have useful historical info. I've removed the fixme tag – thanks for filling the blanks :-)
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
SomeoneElse (2025-12-08 13:37:14+00:00): You probably haven't got to it yet, but https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403875321/history is also iffy.
borovac (2025-12-08 13:42:41+00:00): I will check him...
borovac (2025-12-08 13:48:34+00:00): It seems to me that everything is fine as it is right now.
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
Dodko (2026-03-06 08:05:14+00:00): Ak je v budove len jedna prevádzka a nič iné to nemôže byť, prečo odstránite tagy z budovy a robíte POI nový bod?
Nevidím v tom zmysel, len sa zbytočne zrušia väzby na pripojené fotky a hodnotenie pre mapy.com
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
K12230LF (2025-12-10 10:52:52+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue sur OpenStreetMap :)

Dans le cadre de votre modification, vous avez supprimé une haie d'arbre pour la remplacer par un chemin : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/743355414

Pouvez-vous nous dire si la haie d'arbre a bien disparue ou si c'était une erreur ? 

A noter que vous pouvez, si vous le souhaitez, trouver beaucoup de ressources ici : https://www.openstreetmap.fr/contribuer/ , notamment le forum pour échanger avec la communauté en cas de doutes.

Bonne cartographie !
nikoseag (2025-12-12 08:01:02+00:00): J'ai remodifié les derniers éléments.
J'ai rajouté les arbres.
whb (2025-12-20 09:53:51+00:00): Änderungssatz rückgängig gemacht:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176172409
GinaroZ (2025-12-08 19:25:21+00:00): Thanks, changed these to demolished:building=yes so they don't render on the map
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
rskedgell (2025-12-08 14:07:33+00:00): (Review requested)

Thanks for updating this.

For the private section, it should be highway=service rather than highway=secondary (used for B roads).
literan (2025-12-08 20:40:32+00:00): а почему не просто ДНП "Астра"?
Ozon OSM13 (2025-12-09 07:44:07+00:00): Здравствуйте. Спасибо, исправил
silversurfer83 (2025-12-08 18:56:37+00:00): Hi there :)

I don't really know how you got to Canada to delete that brigde but I'm here to let you know that I undeleted it.

happy mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175667275
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
jm428 (2025-12-12 16:46:08+00:00): Hi, I converted the node you added into an area and labeled it as grass. That should help it show up on the map. I notice that you removed the house number though, if the lawn actually has an address you can add the house number back.
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
ilias_ (2025-12-08 14:18:18+00:00): Hi Aya Samir,

You changed the roundabout's tags from sidewalk=right to sidewalk=both. sidewalk=both means both sides of the road has a sidewalk. But it's a roundabout, so there's no sidewalk on the roundabout itself.
ilias_ (2025-12-08 14:18:24+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/421877034
Aya Samir (2025-12-09 08:45:23+00:00): Hi Ilias_,
We added "sidewalk=both" because there's a sidewalk in the square shown in the 10th second in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bdf2qcVRsYE
, which shows someone walking on the sidewalk of the square
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bdf2qcVRsYE
If you have a different point of view, please share that with me
Best regards,
Aya
ilias_ (2025-12-09 09:05:08+00:00): 1. That video is from another place, Rond-point Bachkou, completely different from what you edited in this changeset.
2. Even if someone is walking on the roundabout, it’s illegal. You obviously can’t cross in the middle on the roundabout, and even less walk on it. Adding sidewalk=both will only make routers guide people into walking in the middle of the roundabout. We don’t want that, of course.
Aya Samir (2025-12-09 11:54:33+00:00): Hi Ilias_,
Thank you. I fixed that, but the video I sent previously was a mistake. I apologize for that. We added "sidewalk=both" because there's a sidewalk in the square shown at  minute 2:47 in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sey-Bn-o6J4
Best regards,
Aya
ilias_ (2025-12-09 12:02:23+00:00): Yeah I don’t think they’re walking on the roundabout itself, the angle of the video just isn’t great. They’re walking on the other side of the road. But even if they were on the roundabout, I would have the same comments, it’s simply illegal.

Thanks a lot for your collaboration!!
Aya Samir (2025-12-09 12:08:12+00:00): Thank you
mavl (2025-12-09 11:07:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
vasony (2025-12-15 08:47:01+00:00): Szia!

Mi az oka a házszámok törlésének?

Tamás
szigyi222 (2025-12-15 13:00:10+00:00): Szia Tamás, 

Ezt még én vittem fel korábban, de nem voltam elégedett az eredménnyel.
Szeretném majd egyben az egész utcát, környéket felvinni.
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:07:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:07:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
neviksasha (2025-12-22 13:09:21+00:00): Доброго дня!
Дякую за уточнення карти. Хочу зазначити, що згідно правил номера будинків з літерами пишуться через дефіс, наприклад 18-А, 20-Б тощо.
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
wireguy (2025-12-16 21:56:57+00:00): Hi solongago,  I think this edit touched and broke the relation 240591, and it is no longer closed.  Map is not rendering correctly.   
Can you look into correcting it?  thx.
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:07:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
silversurfer83 (2025-12-08 21:18:24+00:00): Hi again,

in this changeset you deleted a piece of way
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/372873543

The aerial imagery clearly shows a way where you deleted some.

Please explain why you removed this piece of way.

Also please take the following article into consideration for further mapping:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

looking forward to hearing from you
silversurfer83 (2025-12-08 21:20:45+00:00): sorry for the second comment:

the metadata of the changeset states "StreetView (April 2016)" as imagery_used

Could you please elaborate on that
silversurfer83 (2025-12-18 07:24:17+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176080283
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
Dawid2849 (2025-12-08 15:49:03+00:00): Błąd Ci się wkradł - numer DW wpisałeś do highway:category:pl
Mevess (2025-12-28 09:55:48+00:00): Bonjour !

l'arrêt Leinhon apparait en double sur la carte, s'agit-il d'une erreur ?

Bonne carto
Mevess
mga_geo (2026-01-07 07:07:47+00:00): Bonjour,
Oui c'est bien une erreur.
Le GTFS publié contenait des erreurs et je ne les ai pas détecté sur les quelques arrêts que j'ai vérifié.
Merci du signalement.
Marc
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
K12230LF (2025-12-10 12:05:02+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue sur OSM.

Merci pour l'ajout de l'Aire de Jeux.

La syntaxe pour l'accès ou non des chiens est disponible ici : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:dog

A noter que vous pouvez, si vous le souhaitez, trouver beaucoup de ressources ici : https://www.openstreetmap.fr/contribuer/ , notamment le forum pour échanger avec la communauté en cas de doutes.
Langlaeufer (2026-01-19 13:25:52+00:00): Hallo KnuFloh001,
wenn du Gehwege unbedingt separat erfassen willst, dann müsstest du auch alle Übergänge einzeichnen. Sonst funktioniert das Routing nicht mehr, weil die Router nicht erkennen können wo man die Straßenseite wechseln kann. Siehe z.b. diese Kreuzung: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5135259
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
Frans S (2025-12-09 13:49:42+00:00): Hello.
See my comments on another changeset.
Do you use a mouse ?
If not, it is hardly impossible to map accurate.
Best regards
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
rempshaener (2025-12-08 19:11:48+00:00): siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175681764
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:07:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
Patchanka (2025-12-21 09:15:25+00:00): bonjour
oups ici vous avez transformé tout le village en station de transfert de déchets

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:amenity=waste_transfer_station

Un accident est vite arrivé ^^
Je corrige

bonne journée
mavl (2025-12-09 11:07:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
Frank Peng (2025-12-10 03:09:42+00:00): Why did you change valid administrative boundaries into roads? Those are very clearly administrative boundaries and must not be tagged as roads.
Frank Peng (2025-12-10 09:41:52+00:00): Also, I can see that you added a non-existent bridge, which I don't think there is really a bridge here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1456912459
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 07:20:08+00:00): Those incorrect map edits you made in this changeset have been fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175908575. Please do not change valid administrative boundaries to roads, and also, please do not add any non-existent features to OSM. Please only map things that actually exist.
Gichuki2025 (2025-12-09 12:07:41+00:00): good
yelisey90 (2025-12-08 21:32:38+00:00): Umph, why did you remove street from buildings like these?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1252968037
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1321489719
Street relations are not a replacement for addr tags (except for potential conflict areas like Ukraine).
ffmp (2025-12-08 21:58:44+00:00): Why associatedStreet is not replacement for addr:street? What the purpose of having addr:street on houses, that present in relation?

From https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses:
"The associatedStreet relation provides a link between houses and streets. This can be used as an alternative to the addr:street=* tag. "

From https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:associatedStreet:
" Its purpose is to centralise some tags on one single object to avoid data duplication or mismatching names"
yelisey90 (2025-12-09 07:22:19+00:00): Because not all renderers are processing this relation. Even the default web form doesn't, check how the two adjacent buildings are presented when querying here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/query?lat=41.687896&lon=44.837541
One is just "#1327767512", while the other is "25 შორაპანის ქუჩა".
And the renderers are not required to processed it in light of the situation described here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:associatedStreet#Applicability . Such a vital info as an address has to be presented with the standard addr:street tags (unless there are some political concerns present) so that the data is available in as much providers as possible.

So, while there is no restriction on using associatedStreet for Georgia, please retain the addr:street tags and please restore them where you've deleted them.
ffmp (2025-12-12 16:32:22+00:00): Sorry for delay.
1. I think it's bad idea to wait for support from ALL renderers. This is quite old well known feature of OSM, so we can expect support from mature renderers.

2. I don't know, how and why osm.org fill names of objects on provided view but think, that this was done intentionally, because it "knows" about AssociatedStreet relations. See for example this view: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18749306#map=18/41.688534/44.837663.
To be clear, this part (i.e. pane with list of results) of osm.org is not 'renderer' (as I understand) - no need to work with graphics to produce names for URL links. May be Nominatim responsible for this.

3. About "And the renderers are not required to processed it ..." this link said nothing about requirements to renderers.

I think, that AssociatedStreet approach is strictly better, than addr:street for most cases, because
1. it allow to avoid data duplication.
2. easier adding tags for the whole street (name in different languages, etymology).
3. some minor pros: defense against typos; easier renaming; clear behaviour for difficult cases (2+ streets with same name for one city); easier validation and improvements (just look at associated street view and and see, whether all adjusted buildings added to relation, whether some was added by mistake, etc).

So I can't understand, why you need this addr:street tags. It it really because of search results view on osm.org?

I created a lot of AssociatedStreet relations for Telavi and nobody complains. If building contained addr:street I removed it usually.

I can add addr:street back for my Kojori-related changes (and I will remove these buildings from relations, so there will be one source of truth).
This will lead to situation, when half of buildings on street will be mapped via addr:street and another half - via AssociatedStreet. This is ugly, for me.

As alternative I propose next: I'll move whole Kojori to AssociatedStreet relation (with removing addr:street) and we will see, whether this will lead to problems. For the period of testing I will not remove addr:street for buildings outside of Kojori&Telavi.
yelisey90 (2025-12-14 08:27:46+00:00): Why remove the building from the relation in Kojori?! Or why remove addr:street from the remaining buildings?! They live together perfectly well, take a look at this relation, for example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15056525

The system works fine with two strategies being used as the same time.

And I totally agree that a relation encompassing all parts of a street is useful for adding tags for the whole street, like wikidata and etymology. Although I differ on two points: imho, names in different languages are still better kept at all parts of a street (being quite a vital part of information that is better to be provided for even the most basic of renderers), and I prefer relation with type=street rather than type=associatedStreet for the reasons I once explained in the telegram chat.
ffmp (2025-12-14 15:11:38+00:00): Removing is needed to avoid duplication and follow single responsibility principle.

About street vs associatedStreet: I don't know, what is better, mb you're right. Propose to discuss outside of this changeset.
yelisey90 (2025-12-14 18:55:42+00:00): "duplication and ... single responsibility principle"
Sounds like a totally artificial and far-fetched problem in contrast to the risk of leaving out vital info from some renderers.
ffmp (2026-01-28 13:02:33+00:00): I returned street names for buildings, that have it before my changes as promised. Still decide to leave these buildings inside relations.
See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177804687
yelisey90 (2026-01-28 13:28:51+00:00): Ok, thnx!
pbnoxious (2026-01-07 09:42:35+00:00): Hi, du hast hier für diesen way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146350884
von "sidewalk=separate" auf "cycleway:left=separate" gewechselt.  
Hier ist wie sonst überall im Wohngebiet nur ein Gehsteig eingetragen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1151935448
und im Luftbild kann ich auch nichts "Radwegmäßiges" erkennen.

Würde vermuten, dass der Wechsel "sidewalk"->"cycleway" aus Versehen war, oder gibt es einen Grund der mir entgeht?
misterte (2026-01-09 13:40:21+00:00): richtig vermutet, ist behoben
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
Sanniu (2026-06-01 08:53:15+00:00): Hi

Look like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/821787314 has bad name and also name:he is not aligned.
Can you fix this?
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].
mavl (2025-12-09 11:06:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 175707764 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the wrong name tag].