piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Jens Peder Pedersen (2024-01-04 19:20:59+00:00): Jeg er meget glad for at have fået kontakt med dig, da jeg kan forstå, at du har meget stor kendskab til og viden om vores område. Vores familie har haft huset i godt 40 år og jeg er meget interesseret i områdets historie.  Jeg tænker her bl.a. på afvandingen af Lille Bildsø og områdets udvikling som sommerhusbebyggelse op gennem 1960´erne og 70´erne. Har du kendskab til dette eller viden om muligt kildemateriale hører jeg meget gerne nærmere.
ChrissW-R1 (2024-08-25 20:23:12+00:00): Hi chris66,
könntest du bitte noch die Quelle ergänzen, nach der L585n in L585 (ohne n) umbenannt wurde? Hierzu finde ich einfach nichts.
Danke sehr.
Chriss
chris66 (2024-08-25 21:21:19+00:00): Hi,
puhh, ist schon länger her, aber ich meine dass ich NWSIB genutzt habe.
(Ist ne erlaubte Quelle).
ChrissW-R1 (2024-09-08 18:04:23+00:00): Ok, danke für die Info.
Dann passt das und meine Infos waren veraltet.
Fizzie-DWG (2024-01-04 05:22:06+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15547
Nathan_A_RF (2024-01-02 22:57:04+00:00): I would argue the width doesn't mean this should be marked as a pedestrian street. The vehicles you describe can also use the paths in parks, yet these are not pedestrian streets.
Bexhill-OSM (2024-01-03 21:55:50+00:00): East Parade has a legitimate street sign like you find on a road, so it is for the need for consistency to follow that onto the other promenades.
habi (2024-02-02 21:05:47+00:00): Ciao MappSurfer
Hast du für das Hinzufügen von https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1229792836/ und https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1229792834 unter einer CC4.0-Lizenz eine Bestätigung, dass das geht?
Siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creative_Commons#Importing_creative_commons_licenced_data_into_OpenStreetMap, ansonsten ist das lizenzrechtlich nicht möglich.
Gruss,
habi
habi (2024-02-02 21:16:43+00:00): "CC BY-NC-SA 4.0" ist laut https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creative_Commons#Fundamentally_incompatible inkompatibel mit OpenStreetMap, deshalb habe ich alle betreffenden Objekte in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147001087 entfernt.
MappSurfer (2024-02-06 20:33:08+00:00): Hallo habi

Nein, eine Erlaubnis habe ich nicht. Aus diesem Grund hatte ich damals auch "source=" und den Link zu Lizenz hinzugefügt. Da du mir ja auch schon bereits früher Links zum Wiki zu den Urheberrechten gesendet hattest, hatte ich auch ein bisschen dazu recherchiert. Dabei bein ich dann aber zum Schluss gekommen, dass esreichen würde, den Link zur Lizenz und die Quelle anzugeben. Offensichtlich ist dies ja aber nicht der Fall. Deshalb vielen Dank für das Entfernen!

Liebe Grüsse
MappSurfer
mcliquid (2024-01-03 09:47:50+00:00): Hi,

please note: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:

• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)

• keep changes within the same country

• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
eggie (2024-01-03 10:42:14+00:00): Dag scilaneous,

Die bosgebied kun je gewoon aanpassen. Het is onnauwkeurige import vanuit de 3dShapes.
De regel source=3dShapes kun je daarna verwijderen.
Mapse
eggie
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-07-29 17:47:25+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1236407674 - name nie jest na opis obiektu
IMAN SELEMAN (2024-01-02 19:30:39+00:00): I added a building
Dimitar155 (2024-01-04 20:26:31+00:00): Thank you for adding the road names! The local map looks a lot better with the names.
forstner-m (2024-01-07 09:16:23+00:00): A lot of mistakes were made during the changes. Please look at the errors in OSMOSE and repair them.
silversurfer83 (2024-01-02 21:43:01+00:00): howdy pobloscloud :)

deleting highways and then tracing them anew is seldom a good idea since many a road is part of some network of relations which then get broken.
I believe (or hope) that the easy fix to the routing problem you encountered is a simple "no left turn" restriction.

I do hope I fixed your attempt and now everything works.
Routing may take a while to change, depending on the software used and the update cylce.

safe travels
silversurfer83
Hazelnut0241 (2024-01-03 17:34:50+00:00): could you by any chance remove my old username from the comment <3
silversurfer83 (2024-01-03 17:40:43+00:00): Sorry. As a simple user I can't change comments after they are submitted. If this is really (I mean REALLY) important to you, you need to contact the Data Working Group at
data@openstreetmap.org
and explain exactly what it is you wish to happen, linking all relevant things in the email.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-01-03 12:02:13+00:00): Hi!

Please use bicycle=dismount for these paths, to avoid routing problems (some routing engines may block bicycle routing for small segments and create long detours for bicycle=no). It is almost always permitted to walk alongside a bicycle, except in some indoor areas. Thanks!
MPeloquin (2024-01-03 19:03:12+00:00): @ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy I've updated the tags here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145848452
Thanks for the tip!
user_20731664 (2024-01-20 18:19:04+00:00): Cześć. Czy napewno DK 5 jest podzielona na dwie części?, czy nie przebiega razem z S3 od węzła Kamienna Góra Płn do węzła Kamienna Góra Płd?
szalona_entropia (2024-01-20 23:30:38+00:00): Według oznakowania - nie przebiega
szydzio (2024-05-08 16:10:00+00:00): Cześć! 
Według oznakowania pionowego przebieg DK5 wciąż wiedzie przez ulice Jeleniogórską/Boh. Getta/Wałbrzyską/Legnicką.
Zweryfikowane w terenie w majówkę.
Oznaczenie jako ref=5 przywróciłem na ww. odcinku.
Pozdr!
eggie (2024-01-02 20:25:30+00:00): Hi... 
You are asking for feedback.. 
Please don't remove the address. 
I restored the addressnode. 

Greetz,
eggie
SomeoneElse2 (2025-09-05 18:57:06+00:00): Hello,
If https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/233317913/history has a sidewalk on both sides the normal tag for that would be something like "sidewalk=both".  "footway=sidewalk" notmally means "this is actually a footway of some other road".
Would it be OK to change this to "sidewalk=both" (if that would be correct)?
Best Regards,
Andy
JamJar II (2025-09-08 16:42:47+00:00): Hi Andy,

In that case it should be "sidewalk=-left" as there is only a sidewalk on the North side adjacent to the static caravan park boundary wall. 

Cheers,

James
JamJar II (2025-09-08 16:44:42+00:00): Hmm. Already has  "sidewalk=left". What would you recommend?
SomeoneElse (2025-09-12 15:48:14+00:00): Ha - so it does (I didn't spot that).  I'd just remove the "footway=sidewalk" altogether.
BPTT (2024-07-08 01:21:46+00:00): I'm afraid these don't exist... There are only regular concrete sidewalks here.
1998alexkane (2024-07-08 07:38:54+00:00): They are relatively new, given they were just opened in 2023. They're asphalt next to the sidewalk, and I rode it myself. The construction contractor also published some drone footage during construction if you'd like to see what it looks like: https://graef-usa.com/west-north-avenue/
BPTT (2024-07-08 18:43:07+00:00): Great find! Sorry I doubted you! After looking at that footage, and seeing as how the bike path and sidewalk are side by side but on the same level, perhaps we could re-tag these ways as feature type Cycle & Foot Path, with the oneway applying to only bikes: 
bicycle=designated  
highway=cycleway  
cycleway:surface=asphalt  
oneway:bicycle=yes  
foot=designated  
footway:surface=concrete  
segregated=yes  
surface=paved  
What do you think?
BPTT (2024-07-08 18:45:27+00:00): Although I suppose an argument could be made that since they are side by side and level but neither the same surface nor the same pathway, there could be concrete sidewalks and asphalt one-way cycle paths as separate and parallel ways. Perhaps this would be best, to keep them discreet. Currently, they render in OpenCycleMap and CyclOSM as the same double-designated pathways.
1998alexkane (2024-07-11 07:07:05+00:00): At least according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway, you can use either highway=path or highway=cycleway (along with the other tags you mentioned) for this sort of situation  without any sort of difference, so IMO it doesn't make much of a difference either way. I do  however think that it should be one way considering you can go from the sidewalk to the bike lane portion without any large effort.
wies1 (2024-01-07 14:48:25+00:00): Hallo,
du hast die Daten zum Parken als veraltete Daten in der Südstraße hier
herausgenommen nachdem du vor Ort warst. Ist Parken an dieser Stelle jetzt erlaubt? Wenn ja, wie?

Oder ging es dir nur darum das alte parking tagging herauszunehmen?

Gruss

wies1
Manuel Krämer (2024-01-08 14:08:53+00:00): Hallo Wies1,
bei der Änderung ging es mir nur darum das veraltete parking-tag herauszunehmen, das Parken ist an der B293 (Südstraße) nach wie vor nicht erlaubt.

Beste Grüße

Manuel
wies1 (2024-01-10 14:59:02+00:00): Hallo,

danke für die Rückmeldung. Ich habe nun das neue parking-tag an dieser Stelle angebracht, da ja das Parken, wie du sagst, nach wie vor nicht erlaubt ist.

Gruss

wies1
desertivy (2024-01-02 21:05:01+00:00): the reason for the changset being this big is because I made a minor alignment to "الطريق الحلقي الرابع" near neighbourhood 766.
tracker51 (2024-01-04 01:48:18+00:00): Leider habe ich die Begründung für diesen meinen Änderungssatz versehentlich abgebrochen: deshalb jetzt hiermit vollständig:
Die Änderungen/Ergänzungen basieren auf
- eigener Anschauung vor Ort,
- SAPOS-korrigierten GNSS-Tracks und
- dem im Editor unterlegten ESRI-Luftbild.
mapbear66 (2024-12-22 19:57:27+00:00): Hi,
You created a multipolygon of natural tundra. I'm wondering why as large areas of moor land like this is usually marked as natural-heath or scrub? And are you still working on it?
Thanks.
KoiAndBlueBird (2024-12-23 09:40:13+00:00): Thank you for reaching out! No, I am not currently working on it.
I remember spending quite some time on the wiki debating over which tag to use. There is natural=fell, tundra, heath & scrub. In the end I read the descriptions, compared the images and apparently considered tundra/fell appropriate. 
I do see that those are not rendered by OSMCarto, which is unfortunate.
In general, I would still vouch for my decision of tagging (maybe fell is better), instead of scrub/heath. Yet, I certainly won't start re-editing, should you feel compelled to change the tags. I can have a better look at the inagery and wiki later, this might shed some more light on why I arrived at that decision.
mapbear66 (2024-12-23 11:50:25+00:00): We don't really use fell in Scotland. And whilst I kinda object to our moors having to be tagged as heath, it is heather moorland. So that's the accepted tag. Tundra seems an odd tag to use. It's neither cold, nor high. The closest we have to the general idea of tundra is the Cairngorm plateaux. 

Anyway, either reconsider, or if you are done with the area I can take it over. 

I just didn't want to tread on your toes.
KoiAndBlueBird (2025-01-04 16:53:26+00:00): I am (at least currently) done with this area and won't mind at all if you have a go at it. 
I see how this tagging scheme is inferior to the one you mentioned. Again, thanks for reaching out and happy mapping!
aTarom (2024-01-03 08:50:01+00:00): Hola alex_lofi, cuando puedas mira si este tag es el name porfa
"Estanco"="El Barrio"
y si este es correcto para tenerlo en cuenta en siguientes revisiones
"main"="tobacco"
en
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11480955330/history
saludos
alex_lofi (2024-01-03 09:03:22+00:00): Ah, creo que sé lo que ha pasado: el estanco estaba pegado a la línea, lo separé para dejarlo independiente y josm creó un nodo nuevo.
Ahora le echo un ojo.
aTarom (2024-01-03 09:10:13+00:00): Genial!!! así es un placer participar, muchas gracias, buen trabajo
PierreV79 (2024-01-03 19:32:15+00:00): Merci d'attendre la fin de la discussion sur le forum avant de "transformer" les collines que tu n'as pas vu sur le terrain qui ne sont pas des sommets, mais juste des points le plus élevés par rapport aux alentours.
jcr83 (2024-01-04 07:27:25+00:00): Je n'ai pas modifié la colline existante (natural=hill), j'ai seulement indiqué la position du sommet de la colline (natural=peak).
Un sommet est précisément le point le plus élevé par rapport aux alentours.
cquest (2024-01-04 09:45:28+00:00): Il y a un lieu-dit du même nom à proximité...
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-02 21:40:27+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11480995349
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1123998298

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
MarcoR (2024-01-05 09:28:32+00:00): Ciao e benvenuta/o su OpenStreetMap!

Ho provato a correggere la strada vicinale che avevi inserito e a mappare la "casa vacanze"; per favore verifica che il sito web sia corretto (non conosco la zona)

Buon mapping,
Marco.
M0rd0r (2024-01-06 19:57:17+00:00): Ciao, grazie.

La modifica è corretta. Quali erano stati i miei errori?

Grazie.
MarcoR (2024-01-06 21:22:23+00:00): Figurati, niente di grave: la strada era disegnata correttamente ma aveva un tag non appropriato (addr:street si usa per i civici, consulta https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:addr:* per maggior info) e pertanto sarebbe rimasta invisibile a tutti.

In più mancava la Casa vacanze che mi sembrava la cosa più importante da aggiungere alla mappa in quel contesto.

Buon mapping,
Marco.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-10 12:27:01+00:00): Is scrub -> scrubby change intentional for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1213041076/history ?
b-holdet (2024-05-24 04:02:56+00:00): I have made the change in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145816195
and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151749423
Seems that grass was covering scrub and the scrubby could be drawn over grass. It is now a relations with a cut out for the scrub.
ADJ Souza (2024-01-02 22:13:21+00:00): It a necessary update to include the Passadiços de Loulé boardwalk.
bxl-forever (2024-01-03 00:26:16+00:00): Hello,

associatedStreet relations are a special type of relation used to create a logical connection between addresses and named roads.  Please do not tamper with them.  In particular, please do not add sidewalks into those relations.

Have a nice day.
Allison P (2024-01-02 22:45:51+00:00): Accidentally overwrote my changeset message and submitted before I meant to
KevinOs (2024-01-03 04:35:54+00:00): I was editing the area while you uploaded and i might have messed up your edits to 15th Street.  Would you mind taking a quick look at it again, is there actually a separate bike lane path along the gravel road or is the shared use along it ok?
Necessarycoot72 (2024-01-03 05:48:27+00:00): I actually don't know if there is a separate bike path. I was just fixing overlapping ways.
Looking at the street, you added it to the bike routing relation, so if that's what you wanted to do, it seems like everything fine.
KevinOs (2024-01-04 05:24:50+00:00): ah ok, i think we are good to go, thanks for double checking and your work in the area!
NeisBot (2024-01-03 00:19:22+00:00): Hi mgrubbsjr 👋

your recent changeset has been marked due to a temporary or permanent block from further map edits. 

If you have any questions or if there's anything you'd like to discuss regarding the mapping, feel free to reach out! We're here to help. 

Best regards, 🤖

Details https://osm.org/user_blocks/15544
#ContributorHasBeenBlocked
Fizzie-DWG (2024-01-02 23:45:17+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15545
ainki (2024-01-02 23:28:23+00:00): Breaking*
forstner-m (2024-01-07 09:17:51+00:00): This area was completely error-free before your changes. Now countless errors have been added here. Please repair...
forstner-m (2024-01-16 19:26:24+00:00): Hello Miroslav,
maybe you have not seen my message. Unfortunately, you have not repaired the many errors you have produced. I have now done this for you. Please pay more attention to the changes in the future. Thank you...
Glassman (2024-01-03 03:16:54+00:00): Can you clarify what you mean by private?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145818235
Stella92 (2024-01-03 18:05:44+00:00): Private means that the road is maintained by an HOA and not by the City of Seattle, therefore the alley is not a public right of way.
Glassman (2024-01-03 20:06:48+00:00): Since the HOA owns the shared alley the road can be tagged with operator=(the HOA name). Since the HOA owns the service road that means any resident can use the road.  

BTW  - I live in a HOA with some HOA owned roads. Those roads are open to the public, not just the homeowners.  In your case, if a delivery is to be made to one of the houses serviced by the private road, the delivery driver can use it. So can guests. 

I would recommend adding the operator tag and removing the access tag since there is not signage restricting use.
Cayenne17 (2024-02-03 10:29:09+00:00): Bonjour C1tizenfour,

Concernant les allées privées, ne pas oublier de renseigner les restrictions d'accès à l'aide de la clé access (access=private dans le cas du way : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1236453696).

Voir Wiki : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:service%3Ddriveway
yrtimiD (2025-09-26 22:45:22+00:00): hi, are you sure the park can have an address with housenumber? feels unusual
yrtimiD (2025-09-26 22:46:03+00:00): BTW, afaik, nor raanana.muni.il nor v5.gis-net.co.il are approved sources we can use.
rskedgell (2024-01-03 07:55:15+00:00): Thanks for updating this.

We have a lot of this, which is essentially tagging for the renderer and doesn't work properly for routing where there isn't a highway=footway/cycleway way.

However, rather than deleting the surrounding footway areas, could I suggest replacing them with area:highway=footway (areas around a linear way) or area:highway=traffic_island?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:area:highway%3Dfootway
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Street_area#traffic_island
emersonveenstra (2024-01-03 12:53:17+00:00): Hi there,

You created https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11481202529 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11481213929 with only a name tag. Because of this, nothing will be able to know what it is. Could you please go back and add some relevant tags? If you need help, let me know what they are and I can find the right tags. Thanks!
gscholz (2024-01-05 08:42:04+00:00): Hi Ferreira8940,
this changeset has created errors regarding overlapping ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-36.52268&lat=-9.78031&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.77&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=145818980

    This kind of error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps.
    Can you please fix this?
    Kind regards
    Guido
Adam Franco (2024-01-30 16:23:35+00:00): Hi @scarapella, I just noticed the use of this little waterway=link way via the new map produced that shows the end-points of flows in waterways:
https://waterwaymap.org/ends/#map=18.2/46.763195/-69.305047

I've not seen the waterway=lnk tag used before, but if that is important to map I'd suggest flipping the direction of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1236467015 so that it goes into the Allagash River instead of diverting the Allagash river's flow out.

See also: 
* https://github.com/amandasaurus/waterwaymap.org
* https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2024-January/088486.html
scarapella (2024-01-30 18:24:39+00:00): Hey @Adam Franco  

Thanks for pointing that out.  I proposed that we should exclude the waterway link from the waterway length and end of waterway calculations since it's sole purpose is to have a route-able link for paddle routes.

https://github.com/amandasaurus/waterwaymap.org/issues/34

In the meantime, i reversed this link as anyway it seems to be the convention created by quincylvania and it's functionally identical. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146874546

cheers,
scarapella
Adam Franco (2024-01-30 19:25:20+00:00): Thanks for the quick turn-around!
HAmap (2024-01-03 01:54:39+00:00): Hallo Interteutones,
so finde ich die Mauerbacken für die Sicherheitstore gut erfasst. In diesem Fall habe ich die barrier=retaining_wall direkt auf die Gewässergrenze gesetzt, was der Realität entspricht. Ich bin nur nicht sicher, ob es klug ist das Objekt mit der Fläche zu verkleben ... 
Was meinst du? Passt das?
Interteutones (2024-01-03 16:20:41+00:00): Hallo, ja, von meiner Seite iO.
citrula (2024-01-03 02:40:11+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thank for your contribution. You can add a single point for your business (iD should have a preset for arcade once you place the point). I will go ahead and fix this change because you have made the building outline much smaller than it is in reality. Please let me know if you have any questions, happy mapping!
citrula (2024-01-03 02:40:48+00:00): You can see my revert here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145820756
canfe (2024-01-03 18:09:57+00:00): Appena telefonato adesso all'AIB: come sapevo la stazione non è abbandonata ma pienamente operativa. Non si sono trasferiti al civico 100, e la mappa non viene modificata a caso.
A breve metterò tutte le features presenti nella nota
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4051206
Fedurli (2024-01-04 00:30:56+00:00): I vigili del fuoco di Mathi sono via Santa Lucia 100. AIB e vigili del fuoco sono due enti diversi, fanno attività diverse e dipendono da enti diversi. Quindi non è detto che sia corretto mapparla come "caserma vigili del fuoco" dato che non lo è. Al limite "caserma AIB". In ogni caso il comune di Mathi riporta la sede dell'AIB in Via Santa Lucia 90
canfe (2024-01-04 06:01:32+00:00): E non è neanche il 90 il numero esatto. Ma bisogna conoscere i luoghi...
Comunque se hai un tag migliore per caserma che si occupa di incendi ma non sono i classici VV.F. dillo.
Fedurli (2024-01-04 15:16:56+00:00): Intanto vedo che è mappato come "Vigili del Fuoco - Distaccamento volontari di Mathi", cosa che non è. 
Il civico 90 di Via S. Lucia è riportato sul sito del comune (https://www.comune.mathi.to.it/it-it/vivere-il-comune/associazioni-enti/a-i-b-squadra-di-mathi-29436-1-744f874e4bb7abba9f1a458ff866e9cb)

Direi che per gli AIB emergency_service è più appropriato
canfe (2024-01-04 17:48:55+00:00): Ma sei TU che gli hai dato quel nome!!
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145719450
Invece l'altra sede, pur essendo indicata sul sito del Comune NON è al numero 90.
Bisogna conoscere i luoghi!
Adesso vediamo come ne vieni fuori.
Fedurli (2024-01-04 19:43:21+00:00): Diciamo che chi ha ripristinato il landuse a caserma VVF non ha provveduto a correggere il nome errato da me attribuitogli.

Che non sia la numero 90 ho dei dubbi, dato che Totò e Macario è al numero 94 e l'ingresso è/era due portoni prima.
canfe (2024-01-05 05:51:50+00:00): Guarda che OSM non funziona così.
Chi ha ripristinato ha ripristinato ad uno stato "corretto".
Nella history rimarrà sempre il tuo changeset errato. Non c'è su OSM la funzione che cancella i CS passati.
Fedurli (2024-01-05 06:17:40+00:00): Ah no? Strano, perché su Coassolo per esempio, numerose aggiunte di strade da me fatte (del tutto corrette) sono sparite. Qualcuno ha annullato del tutto le mie modifiche, (per altro, corrette, ma non è questo il punto adesso). Che il nome rimanga d'accordo, ma chi ha rimesso il landuse a "vigili del fuoco" non ha corretto il nome, lasciando il lavoro a metà.
canfe (2024-01-05 07:34:15+00:00): No, non è vero.
Chi ha corretto ha riportato la situazione originaria (sono stato il primo a mapparlo) ove non c'era nessun nome.