piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ptrsd (2025-07-25 15:29:32+00:00): Poprawione, dzięki!
Filip009 (2025-07-28 06:58:20+00:00): Zdravím, je v lese vybudovaný nový cyklochodník? Alebo len cyklotrasa, ktorá ide po lesnej ceste?

Lebo aktuálne je to upravené tak, že lesom ide dedikovaný cyklochodník.
monhiko (2025-07-26 02:59:30+00:00): 其实，在设定上有一个叫做“landuse=retail”的标签。。。
LordGarySugar (2025-08-08 23:46:47+00:00): Hi, I partially reverted this change so that the node could instead be tagged as disused:amenity=cafe, preserving the address info in this location
NeisBot (2025-07-25 15:39:46+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
Dentista Xalapa (2025-07-25 17:54:47+00:00): DENTISTA ESPECIALIZADA EN TRATAMIENTOS DE ORTODONCIA EN BENEFICIO DE TU SALUD DENTAL
NeisReview (2025-07-27 09:46:43+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169547859
Xeff (2025-08-07 14:26:35+00:00): Du hast hier den Weg über den Gletscher nach Strava angepasst, was auf Gletschern nicht unbedingt sinnvoll ist. Klar dort gibt es keinen Weg. Genau deshalb lieber an offizielle Wege halten, was beim alten der Fall war. Zudem bewegt sich der neue Weg von dir zT in Steinschlaggefahr. Ein solcher Vorschlag als Route in der Karte halte ich für problematisch. Gut ist allerdings das Einzeichnen des mittlerweile standardmäßigen Abstiegs zur Gletscherzunge. Besser wäre allerdings sich im Aufstieg danach eher westlich zu halten.
Infinite00 (2025-08-07 18:09:36+00:00): Bitte gerne korrigieren! Ich war bisher davon ausgegangen, dass der Weg, den die absolute Mehrheit geht der richtige sein sollte. Aber ja, wenn dieser dann in Steinschlaggefährdetem Gelände ist, sollte das korrigiert werden.
Xeff (2025-08-08 12:23:35+00:00): Okay, ich habe den Weg mal weiter westlich gelegt. So empfehlen zT auch Bergschulen den Aufstieg, wobei ich mir noch nicht sicher bin ob das in osm drin sein sollte. Aber so hab ichs jetzt mal gemacht.
canfe (2025-07-27 05:54:20+00:00): La torre non può avere valore -1.
Volevi fare un building passage?
Leggiti la wiki prima di mappare una cosa che non hai mai mappato, sennò mappi cose credibili ma errate che non verranno mai corrette.
Paolitosss (2025-08-01 19:28:35+00:00): Si esatto, come si vede dalla foto di Commons la strada attraversa la torre, la modifica l'ha fatto in automatico id credo quando ho inserito la strada, comunque leggo e correggo
canfe (2025-08-03 15:25:44+00:00): Parli molto di Commons, conosci anche Mapillary?
Potrebbe interessarti molto.
Paolitosss (2025-08-03 19:42:12+00:00): Conosco e lo uso ogni tanto per OSM, ma non ho tempo di dedicarmi a fare foto stradali...su Commons carico qualcosina ma poco, più che altro lo conosco un po' e cerco di usarlo quando posso, da ex Wikipediano lo usavo spesso una volta per Wikipedia...
gscholz (2025-12-03 07:25:27+00:00): Hi maferikotupi,
this changeset has destroyed the meadow relation 275973:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/275973#map=13/47.59254/-0.26792

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-0.24982&lat=47.59189&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Especially deleting a significant part of way 41723595 has caused this result:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41723595/history

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
DD1GJ (2025-07-25 19:10:46+00:00): Löschung rückgängig gemacht, Lebenszyklus verwendet.

Da hatte sich jemand viel Mühe gemacht um mittels Indoor-Mapping die Raumaufteilung zu erstellen. Wenn ein Geschäft schließt, bleiben normalerweise die Wände erhalten. Deshalb entfernen wir nur die eigentlichen Geschäftsdaten und lassen den Rest stehen für den Nachfolger, siehe auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lebenszyklus-Pr%C3%A4fix
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-25 16:42:08+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"III Poprzeczna":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13023580746

"Papierowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13023580747

"Aleja Generała Antoniego Chruściela "Montera"":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13023580768

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2025-07-27 11:44:20+00:00): Ten ostatni faktycznie (klasycznie zły cudzysłów), ale pozostałe dwa są poprawne : O
gscholz (2025-07-30 07:42:46+00:00): Hi lucywalks,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=43.77663&lat=41.17042&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=169465246

As you may know, this kind of error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?

You may also like to educate yourself about how to edit hiking routes properly:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dhiking

Kind regards
Guido
lucywalks (2025-07-30 19:33:41+00:00): Hi Guido,
Thank you for flagging this with me. I'm clearly showing my amateur status in terms of OSM edits and I can only apologise for not being more thorough and for any inconvenience caused. I have hopefully fixed the overlapping ways and created a relation as described in the hiking routes wiki.
Regards,
Lucy
gscholz (2025-07-31 08:57:48+00:00): Thanks for your quick response.
Guido
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-25 16:51:13+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13023558313

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
trial (2026-02-06 16:34:30+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1324308908 : tu t'es fait avoir (le resto est à côté, là c'est un automate).
Lisapple (2026-02-09 18:54:30+00:00): Eh oui ! Et comme le distributeur était sur un building, et que le garage prend quasiment tout le bâtiment, je ne l'aurais même pas remarqué !
Cela dit, le SIRET sur le distributeur reste pertinent.
trial (2026-02-10 09:34:33+00:00): Pas vraiment, puisque ça veut dire que c'est un établissement de la société. Un cas un peu limite une relation site entre les deux et faire porter le SIRET dessus ? Ça risque de ne pas être interprété par CTC et autres outils.
custodiankeyy (2025-07-25 21:24:10+00:00): Ek olarak sitenizdeki telefon numaranızı (+90 505 848 53 55) da ekledim.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169477041
Supaplex (2025-08-08 01:21:18+00:00): Hi May lie

This is Dennis from the Data Working Group

Please be aware that the OpenStreetMa project is a collaborative project. We need to let people know what are edits are, so you should use descriptive language when you upload your change.

FYR: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

And your change seems to be not that logic, we will assume you are not familar with the editor. The change is already roll back to its previous status.

Dennis Raylin Chen, Data Working Group

----

مرحباً ماي لي

معكم دينيس من مجموعة عمل البيانات

يرجى العلم أن مشروع OpenStreetMa هو مشروع تعاوني. نحتاج إلى إعلام المستخدمين بتعديلاتنا، لذا يُرجى استخدام لغة وصفية عند تحميل تعديلاتك.

FYR: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

وإذا لم يكن تعديلك منطقياً، سنفترض أنك لست على دراية بالمحرر. تم بالفعل إرجاع التغيير إلى حالته السابقة.

دينيس رايلين تشين، مجموعة عمل البيانات
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169466596
pitscheplatsch (2025-07-26 05:51:03+00:00): #NameTag

Hello, and welcome to OSM.

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I’ve taken a look at your recent edits, especially those involving name tags. Some of the names you’ve added caught my attention, as they seem a bit unusual. As noted in the OSM Wiki, the name tag should contain only the actual name of the feature—not descriptions, types, locations, family names, addresses, or other attributes.

Could you please confirm whether these entries were intentional or possibly added by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

---
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:name
Yannbarreto (2025-07-26 20:06:53+00:00): Olá, tudo bem? Não sabia dessa regra, me desculpe, pode ter sido engano meu
NeisReview (2025-07-27 09:06:33+00:00): Muito obrigado pela resposta. 

#HappyMapping
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-29 04:16:27+00:00): Have you verified this note, or is this edit as trustworthy as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169505716 ?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-29 04:16:24+00:00): Have you verified this note, or is this edit as trustworthy as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169505716 ?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-29 04:16:22+00:00): Have you verified this note, or is this edit as trustworthy as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169505716 ?
fortera_au (2025-07-26 03:15:32+00:00): Hi, has gem.wiki given OSM a waiver to use their data, as CC BY-NC-SA isn't compatible with ODbL by default. I can't find one from a quick search on the OSM wiki.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169468528
demon_box (2025-08-14 16:30:13+00:00): Ciao wavexx ho notato con che con questo tuo changeset del 25/07/2025 hai ritaggato la pedana di decollo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1417351061/history#map=19/45.549142/10.284618
che io avevo rimosso il giorno 01/05/2025 dopo esserci passato ed aver constatato che non esisteva più nulla. La domanda che ti faccio è semplice: hai rimappato questa pedana perchè (successivamento all' 01/05/2025) hai potuto rilevare fisicamente con sopralluogo in loco che è stata ricostruita? Mi sembra molto strano che in 2 mesi scarsi sia stata completamente ricostruita.... però se tu a luglio l'hai vista, non discuto.
Fammi sapere grazie!!
wavexx (2025-08-14 18:01:53+00:00): Non ci sono stato, ancora :(..

Stavo guardando le informazioni sul https://www.vololiberobrescia.it/bsarrivarci.asp e ho aggiunto un po' piu' di dettagli basandomi su quel sito e le foto di bing.

Se la pedana non esiste piu' toglila pure.. il sito non e' recentissimo, e si vede a malapena sulle foto.
demon_box (2025-08-14 18:23:22+00:00): Ok capito... come immaginavo 😉
Allora lo rimuovo.
Grazie ciao
custodiankeyy (2025-07-25 22:08:21+00:00): Merhaba, yol yapısını bozmuşsunuz. Metrobüs hattı için yeni bir yol oluşturmak yerine neden var olan yolu değiştirdiniz? Ayrıca lütfen iD Editörün vermiş olduğu uyarıları dikkate alın. Değişikliği geri alıyorum.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169478272
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-25 18:45:52+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006625633
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9979694571
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12248960340
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12248949875
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/181080554
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219213246
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1336419726
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1336419728

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/825883964

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Księdza Rogowskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/136444360

"Rymera":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209433037
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1085336067

"Idzikowskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/372079638

"Tęczowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834653725

"Sobieskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/843404097

"Damrota":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/879296935

"Pułaskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1025026971

"Adama Józefa Rostka":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1256325536

"Józefa Poniatowskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341046408

"Kochanowskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1354157551

"Juliana Niemcewicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1392009443

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NeisBot (2025-07-25 18:39:47+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
NeisReview (2025-07-28 06:56:45+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169594401
steinm (2025-07-25 19:48:32+00:00): Schau dir mal das Routing unter https://osm.zz.de/routeqa/?rid=534118,1090372#51.61161,8.75246,14z an. Jetzt wird in die K22 abgebogen, weil man geradeaus nicht mehr über die Kreuzung kommt.
jengelh (2025-07-25 21:04:13+00:00): Ich würds ja gerne fixen, aber zz.de/routeqa ist sowas von unhilfreich

schön und gut dass es way 322841873 rot anmalt, aber WHY THE FUCK.
es gibt nix auf node 1831310577, das den Eintritt auf way -873 verbieten würde
steinm (2025-07-26 07:42:05+00:00): zz.de/routeqa ist sehr hilfreich. Sonst würden solche Fehler nicht auffallen. Auch OsmAND routet über die K22, wenn der Startpunkt auf der L818 östlich und der Endpunkt westlich der Autobahn ist. Die andere Richtung funktioniert. Man kann die L818 in westlicher Richtung also nicht mehr an der Einmündung der K22 geradeaus fahren.
jengelh (2025-07-26 08:39:40+00:00): Wie gesagt, das Tool ist für mich hier *nicht hilfreich*, weil es nicht verständlich macht, *warum* es zu dieser Einschätzung kommt.
steinm (2025-07-26 14:16:03+00:00): Den Anspruch hat das Tool auch nicht.
Ich vermute der Fehler lag in der Abbiegebeschränkung nach rechts. Das 'to' war nicht die K22, sondern die L818. Faktisch dürfte dadurch das geradeausfahren verhindert. Ich habe das gerade mal korrigiert. Mal schauen, ob das Problem damit gelöst ist.
steinm (2025-07-26 16:09:36+00:00): Das Routing passt wieder.
Gregory Peony (2025-07-26 21:48:50+00:00): Please do not snap the corners of the buildings to other buildings or features such as roads and paths. In the iD Editor, hold down the `Alt` key to keep nodes from snapping to other objects and accidentally connecting. This [video about connected nodes](https://youtu.be/ltn1VOiq5_0) has more information and a guide. 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/169470531
ddm-dolomitico (2025-07-26 08:03:48+00:00): Bondì Dolomites,
il tag ridge configura una cresta mentre ciò che hai mappato non si configura come tale. Sembra, ma non intendo fare un processo alle intenzioni, che il tuo scopo sia quello di vedersi renderizzare da qualche parte il nome Tofana. Ma, ripeto, il tag ridge qualifica un elemento orografico che non esiste nella tua mappatura. Anch'io sento la mancanza di un tag che mi permetta di qualificare il nome di un gruppo di  monti, indipendentemente dalla natura orografica che li contraddistingue singolarmente, ma al momento, che io sappia, si può ricorrere a natural=mountain_range.
Dolomites (2025-07-26 10:45:41+00:00): Va bene, tolgo. Grazie.
Luigi
Filip009 (2025-07-28 07:45:22+00:00): Zdravím, autor môže ísť do tagu (značky) author https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12620910877
MilMapper (2025-08-06 07:28:09+00:00): Ok. Upravene
Filip009 (2025-08-06 07:39:13+00:00): Toto nevyzerá na upravené ;)
NeisBot (2025-07-25 19:07:01+00:00): Hi susan1365, 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: "Added a new school crossing with associated tags, including name and operator information."

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

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish #AIgenerated
Nadja15 (2025-07-25 19:09:58+00:00): Jag hade ritad in var besöksparkeringen var exakt vilka parkeringsrutor. Din ändring förstörde denna information, och visar nu besöksparkering på parkeringsrutor som är privata etc.
archie (2025-07-25 19:25:28+00:00): Det fixar du lätt. parking är till för att ange ytan där bilar kan parkeras. Här, som på andra ställen, gick gränsen för parkeringen långt utanför den markerade parkeringsplatsen/erna och omfattade gatumarken. parking är inte till för att göra osm snygg så att inga "glipor" syns, dvs platsutfyllnad.
archie (2025-07-25 19:32:05+00:00): De tårar kan du bespara dig. Informationen om besöksparkeringen var inte bättre före ändringen, snarare sämre eftersom parkeringen gick långt utöver de markerade parkeringsplatsernas gräns: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=169471037
Nadja15 (2025-07-27 09:32:14+00:00): Revertar felaktig ändring av parkeringsplats. En parkeringsplats skall täcka alla parkeringsrader och vägytan däremellan enligt wikin.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169547182
Filip009 (2025-07-28 06:16:54+00:00): Zdravím, prosím opravte si gramatiku.
MilMapper (2025-07-28 06:39:36+00:00): Gramatika opravena
Filip009 (2025-07-28 06:43:44+00:00): Vďaka :)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-09-01 08:34:30+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1065351957/history - zostały po tym jakiekolwiek pozostałości w terenie?

jak tak to jakie?
u1905 (2025-09-02 17:52:02+00:00): Nie ma po tej trasie kolejki najmniejszego śladu w terenie. Wsztstko zdemontowane a po sladzie przebiega stara ścieżjka rowerowa. Usunałem juz tę trasę ponad rok temu ale ktoś ją przywrócił jako "historyczną" i tak sobie wisi.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-02-28 12:58:45+00:00): to skasowałem tym razem ja
Filip009 (2025-07-28 07:44:20+00:00): Zdravím, text na tabuli sa dáva do "inscription"
MilMapper (2025-08-06 07:28:34+00:00): Ok. Upravene
Nadja15 (2025-07-27 09:32:15+00:00): Revertar felaktig ändring av parkeringsplats. En parkeringsplats skall täcka alla parkeringsrader och vägytan däremellan enligt wikin.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169547182
archie (2025-07-27 09:43:36+00:00): Noterat och anmält till DWG.
pitscheplatsch (2025-07-26 08:48:40+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169482717
NeisBot (2025-07-25 19:30:41+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
pwbriggs (2025-07-26 06:19:34+00:00): Also there's a lot of non-standard tags (like `gutter:protection`) which aren't really something the community uses. Those probably should be removed unless you have good reason to keep them, as few/no data consumers will end up using such tags.

Also note that the phone number should be in format +1-xxx-xxx-xxxx so that it's in international form.

But thanks for contributing your business info. Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
NeisReview (2025-07-28 06:56:11+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/169574650
CAM-Gerlach (2026-05-27 22:39:47+00:00): Removed SEO spam description=* (that was evidently accidentally left after the previous cleanup) in changeset 183278028

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183278028
trial (2025-09-02 19:33:19+00:00): Objection votre honneur ! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/22768642#map=16/48.38782/-4.39623&layers=N : la N 2165 est maintenue pour les usagers non autorisés sur la N 165, expliciter que les cycles et les piétons doivent passer par là était bien une information utile : ce n'est pas une voie classique, voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142921547
Nzau (2025-10-03 06:20:03+00:00): Objection rejetée, j'en suis navré.
Je viens d'ailleurs de retirer horse=yes.

Actuellement il n'y a aucun tag d'accès qui contraint les cyclistes ou piétons à emprunter cette route. 

Donc il n'est pas nécessaire d'ajouter bicycle/foot=designated.
S'il y avait access=no, dans ce cas bicycle/foot=designated pourrait être utile. Mais sur le way il n'est question que de motor_vehicle=no (donc aucune restriction pour les vélos/piétons).

On peux continuer la discussion ici si tu veux : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172773729#map=16/48.38844/-4.40058&layers=N
Carto'Cité (2025-10-29 11:32:46+00:00): Salut Nzau,
Je vois que tu retires effetivement des bicycle=designated là où je pense qu'il devrait être présent et à défaut de devoir l'être, ils ne seraient pas faux. Je pense particulièrement à cette « piste » : https://api.panoramax.xyz/?focus=pic&map=19.78/47.5825178/-2.6913411&pic=3743a74e-cacb-467e-8b96-6ff24ab423ca&speed=250&theme=default&xyz=33.34/-17.32/55
Je serais d'ailleur tenté de la passer tout simplement en highway=cycleway + agricultural=yes.
Je le fais et si tu as des retours on en discute :)

Sinon pour les bicycle=yes, effectivement utiles quand la présence d'un access=no qui ne s'appliquerait pas aux cyclistes ou quand l'interdiction des cyclistes n'est pas viable et cohérente avec la pratique. Par contre du bicycle=designated on peut en mettre dans pas mal de cas dès que l'aménagement comprend une signalétique qui indique bien qu'il est utilisable pour les cyclistes... bon je me doute que tu fais comme ça alors je n'ai pas peut-être pas saisi la situation 😅
À très bientôt.
Charles
Nzau (2025-10-30 15:35:32+00:00): Salut Charles,
Merci pour ton retour ! 
C'est assez drôle de voir qu'il n'y a qu'en Bretagne que j'ai eu des soucis avec ce type de modifications x)

Sinon oui je suis tout à fait d'accord pour passer le chemin que tu désignes en highway=cycleway (vu le panneau C113). Ou sinon de le mettre en highway=track + motor_vehicle = agricultural + bicycle=designated + traffic_sign=	FR:B7b;FR:C113 

Un peu comme ici : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146724685
https://api.panoramax.xyz/?focus=pic&map=20.53/49.2109768/-0.4344544&pic=6419488d-449c-41d7-9bdf-05f038fea810&speed=250&theme=default&xyz=301.00/0.00/30
Ou ici : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147061794#map=17/49.134603/-0.269821&layers=N
https://api.panoramax.xyz/?focus=pic&map=19.91/49.1354678/-0.2748733&pic=448da658-6cb1-4767-8831-a5c1e0e58c12&speed=250&theme=default&xyz=181.17/-24.47/30

Mais le cas dont me parle trial semble un peu plus ambigu.
On a continué la discussion ici : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172773729#map=16/48.38844/-4.40058&layers=N

A +
Enzo