piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
renosmo (2024-05-12 01:37:47+00:00): A zona residencial que eu mapeei, não está incluída em nenhuma das quatro situações em que a wiki diz para não usar tal etiqueta. E, tal como a wiki diz e eu citei: "If there is a small (one company/property) area of commercial (or similar) landuse within an otherwise residential area, you can still decide to use landuse=residential for the outline of the whole larger area as a preliminary solution. You could later draw a separate area tagged with landuse=commercial for that commercial establishment." Do que me lembro, provavelmente terei incluído uma ou outra (muito pequena) zona incorrectamente, nessa maior área residencial - como a igreja, que está num largo rodeado de casas. Mas, como eu disse e também diz a wiki, para incorrecções "if you want to make a hole for another landuse inside a residential area, you can use a multipolygon relation". Ou seja, a maneira de resolver pequenas incorrecções, é editar a área residencial em causa - e não apagá-la toda (visto que ela está essencialmente correcta). E, quem depois souber os nomes e limites exactos de alguns bairros (pelo que sei, só há um ou outro sítio na vila apelidado como tal) pode depois cortar esta área residencial em áreas mais pequenas e então usar a etiqueta "place" no seu lugar (sendo este o único uso - dos que eu vejo na lista - que poderá ter a etiqueta "place", para uma vila com estas características urbanas). Não percebo qual é a sua *grande* discordância, para querer apagar *toda* a "base" que eu tinha criado (que estava essencialmente correcta). Da maneira que está agora o mapa, a Golegã não tem uma área residencial, mas apenas um terreno de uso desconhecido, rodeado de campos de cultivo. É isto é que está mais correcto?
AntMadeira (2024-05-12 13:04:32+00:00): Sim, é assim que está mais correto.
Mapear uma área residencial para ocupar uma vila ou cidade é uma das outras violações das regras base do OpenStreetMap: que é a de mapear para o renderizador:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Boas_pr%C3%A1ticas#N%C3%A3o_mapear_para_o_renderizador

O uso de uma área residencial para ocupar uma vila inteira, viola os três primeiros pontos do parágrafo sobre quando não usar, ao contrário do que dizes. Ou seja:
- estás a incluir edifícios sobre os quais desconheces o seu uso
- estás a agrupar edifícios supostamente residenciais sem os diferenciares de outros edifícios que pertencem a outras áreas de ocupação de solo
- estás a usar a etiqueta para mapear uma zona urbana que corresponde a uma zona administrativa (a vila de Golegã)

Uma vila como a Golegã aparece no mapa de várias maneiras:
- com o tamanho de letra da palavra Golegã por ser uma vila (town)
- da sua importância administrativa, por ser capital de concelho (de valor 7)
- do mapeamento dos seus edifícios, que depois são mostrados no mapa, criando, assim, a malha urbana.

Uma área residencial não tem nem nunca teve esse intuito e o seu uso é só para mostrar a povoação no mapa, o que é um erro, por estar a forçar algo que não corresponde à realidade.

O que a wiki diz é que dentro de uma área residencial (ênfase na palavra residencial), ou seja, num bairro, quarteirão, pequena aldeia, é possível criar pequenas ilhas de outras áreas. O que é normal. Um bairro pode ter alguns elementos pontuais que não são edifícios residenciais e é possível criar um multipolígono para esses casos. Isso não é equivalente a dizer que se pode fazer isso numa cidade ou vila, onde essas áreas são muito maiores e mais frequentes, por conseguinte, muito mais difíceis de confirmar e de criar multipolígonos.
Se te quiseres dar ao trabalho de criar múltiplas áreas residenciais devidamente delimitadas com observação no terreno, isso é contigo. Há quem o faça, não de uma vez só, como tu fizeste, mas ao longo de muitas edições, para confirmar que essas áreas são realmente residenciais.

Cumprimentos,
António Madeira
kapazao (2024-05-03 11:05:35+00:00): Hola, por favor trata de revisar tus ediciones y ser un poco más preciso con las geometrías. En este caso hay algunas vías que se salen de la línea real y esta balsa (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1278818831) no estaba bien etiquetada y su geometría era bastante mala, ya la he corregido.
Un saludo y gracias por tus contribuciones.
tekim (2024-05-01 19:31:03+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.  It appears that you might be adding fake data to OpenStreetMap.  Please don't do that - OpenStreetMap is a map of the real world as it exists, not what you would like to see. 

In this case you have added a football field, but it appears to be too small to be such, which previously you have retagged a real football field, as a park, but then named it "Campo de Futbol" - so you seem to agree that it is a football field, but for some reason you want it to appear as a park.

Further, in OpenStreetMap the name tag is for the actual name of a feature, not for a description, e.g. your should not set name=Campo de Futbol"
tekim (2024-05-01 19:31:35+00:00): reverting a changeset that contains fake data

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150765764
BR_pebble (2024-05-22 07:52:32+00:00): Hello charles chilufya
Thank you for mapping!
I have missing building 41.0799941, 28.9154339;
41.0799855, 28.9154128;
41.0799737, 28.9156006;
41.0799889, 28.9151334;
41.0799178, 28.9155731;
41.0799365, 28.9157762;
41.079785, 28.915318;
41.0795695, 28.914881;
41.0794868, 28.9148307;
41.079473, 28.9148281;
41.0794058, 28.9149103;
41.0803338, 28.9155952;
41.0803307, 28.9155845;
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Dani CS (2025-01-29 14:06:51+00:00): Tanto en este changeset como en otros similares se añaden muchos cerros cuyas únicas etiquetas son natural=peak y ele=*. 

Lo cual no aporta información al mapa (ya que equivale a una réplica de los datos de mapas de elevación). Otros picos tienen más legitimidad ya que vienen acompañados de una etiqueta name=*.

Visto el volumen, se podría interpretar que estos changeset son, colectivamente, una importación masiva de datos del IGN.

¿Está documentada esa importación en algún soporte (wiki, lista de correo, …)?

Gracias de antemano.
itrivi (2025-01-30 15:58:31+00:00): Nunca añado cimas sin la elevación. Si hay alguno, debe ser un error que, tras escribir la altitud, por lo que sea se elimina. Es obvio que es un error mío, y a veces lo he detectado, pero ya veo que se me han escapado algunos. ¿Son muchos? ¿Cómo puedo obtener un listado de ellos para editarlos?
Dani CS (2025-03-08 08:29:49+00:00): Hola. Se está comentando esta importación de `natural=peak` en este hilo de discusión: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/peaks-in-the-area-of-nerja-costa-del-sol/112600/12

¿Quizá podrías explicar en ese foro tu forma de proceder?
Fede Z (2024-05-01 16:51:24+00:00): Please split into multiple changesets when modifying POIs in different parts of the world
Tatti Barletta (2024-05-01 18:38:10+00:00): When you are sipping a coffee in Bolivia and you suddenly have to hurry to the bathroom in Germany XD
lefuturiste (2024-05-04 13:37:46+00:00): Lol too bad x)
pluton_od (2024-07-06 06:00:36+00:00): Відновив старі імена у зміні 153611327.
eggie (2024-05-01 18:04:28+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback In het vervolg kun je het best een verzoek indienen op het forum voor BAG import. Er wordt periodiek geïmporteerd vanuit de BAG. Je kunt dat dan versnellen. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
BR_pebble (2024-05-22 07:56:47+00:00): Hello charles chilufya
Thank you for mapping!
I have added missing building 41.0803014, 28.9136982
;41.0800299, 28.913459;
41.0800287, 28.9134749;
41.0802095, 28.913453;
41.0797873, 28.9135165;
41.079753, 28.9137778;
41.079629, 28.913647;
41.0795078, 28.9135547;
41.0794812, 28.9138239;
41.0793314, 28.9135185;
41.0793931, 28.9133448;
41.0794287, 28.9143672;
41.0796534, 28.9144531;
41.0798696, 28.9142714 ;
41.0803095, 28.9144371;
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Jonathan Cupit (2024-05-01 17:06:03+00:00): See discussion of changeset here - https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/edits-to-reference-name-to-more-clearly-and-consistently-describe-the-texpress-express-and-hov-lane-system/110949/
pluton_od (2024-07-06 05:55:07+00:00): Відновив старі імена у зміні 153611231.
pluton_od (2024-06-30 10:30:21+00:00): Відновив старі імена у зміні 153362772.
pluton_od (2024-06-30 10:24:04+00:00): Відновив старі імена у зміні 153362529.
Frans S (2024-05-02 09:43:40+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped and not squared.
Buildings need to be tagged as building=yes

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150759029
pluton_od (2024-05-07 16:47:24+00:00): Привіт, nickkhramov.
Дякую за перейменування! Декілька зауважень:
1. Будь ласка, залишайте старі назви у тегах `old_name*`. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:old_name Приклад таких тегів на вулиці: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1064411198.
2. Будь ласка, вказуйте джерело даних у тегу `source` зміни. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source#How_to_use_on_changesets https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Дякую!
pluton_od (2024-06-30 10:14:17+00:00): Відновив старі імена у зміні 153362092.
pluton_od (2024-06-30 10:07:04+00:00): Відновив старі імена у зміні 153330598.
joost schouppe (2025-07-10 08:49:57+00:00): All of these have been reverted meanwhile. I agree in the sence that these are not railway=station. One of them was retagged as railway=yard; maybe it is worth adding the ones that were deleted as that kind of object.
gurglypipe (2024-05-02 12:03:57+00:00): Hiya, thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap. Are these racing markers permanent, or are they for a specific event?

If they’re permanent, are they buoys? If so they may be better off tagged as seamark:buoy_special_purpose:category=racing (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:seamark:buoy_special_purpose:category%3Dracing and related pages). The tagging scheme is a little complex, so I can help change the tagging if you wish.

If they’re not permanent, or are not physically marked, they probably don’t belong in OpenStreetMap — see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability

Thanks :)
gurglypipe (2024-05-07 10:20:13+00:00): I’ve changed the tagging to use seamark:buoy_special_purpose in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151002568, please say if that’s not correct. Thanks
silversurfer83 (2024-05-02 17:01:47+00:00): Ich schon wieder :)

die letzten 10 Versionsänderungen an diesem langen Abschnitt einer Grenzlinie sind von dir weil du ständig Punkte mit dieser Grenze verbindest. Bitte verbinde keine Objekte mit Grenzen. Die gehören da nicht dran. Danke.

Du kannst im Editor, wenn du die Karte bearbeitest, rechts im Panel auf das Symbol für "Kartendaten" klicken und dann unter "Karten-Objekte" den Haken bei "Grenzen" entfernen. Dann werden dir für diese Bearbeitung alle Grenzen ausgeblendet und du kannst sie nicht aus versehen bearbeiten.

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150759926
rskedgell (2024-05-01 19:38:49+00:00): Unfortunately, removing the highway=unclassified tag from part of Hedley Avenue effectively removed it from the map. Private roads are still roads, so this tag should not be removed. I am not sure what "no highway status" means, but Hedley Avenue is in OS Open Names and has a Designated Street Name USRN, so it will also be on OS maps and derived products.

Also, I can see from Bing's street side imagery that the entrance to Hedley Avenue is signed "private road". This means that it is privately owned, not that access is private. In this case, ownership=private + access=destination is probably the best tagging.

OSM data is used by navigation software, users of which would reasonably expect to get them to the gates of the premises to which they are travelling.

You may find the documentation for these tags on the wiki helpful:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ownership

I have restored Hedley Avenue and added a little more information in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150765919
Violaine_Do (2024-12-04 22:50:16+00:00): Hi, I corrected road alignment based on strava
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150760214
matt_ellery (2024-05-02 19:53:00+00:00): Hi, you requested a review for this change. It looks good to me, well spotted!
All the best,
Matt
silversurfer83 (2024-05-02 17:03:33+00:00): Hi Bart :)

could you please add meaningful comments to your changes? Your app has a feature to do that.
Maybe check this article for reference
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments

happy mapping
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150760483
felipeeugenio (2024-05-01 20:33:52+00:00): Hola. Buenas tardes
por favor no hacer restricciones de giro en las vías consigo mismas.
gracias
mapboy63 (2024-05-22 14:48:42+00:00): Any particular reason you've changed so many highways in this area into cycleways even though they aren't?
eggie (2024-05-01 18:08:40+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback  Geef concreet aan wat je hebt veranderd in het commentaar van je upload. 
note= deze bestaat niet ... Dan kun je de paal beter zelf verwijderen van de kaart. 
Nog een tip... Houd het gebied van je edits klein. Dus niet schuiven met de kaart. Dat kan schade opleveren.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
Tim Bonsema (2024-05-01 18:18:55+00:00): Sorry, ik had de verwijderknop nog niet gevonden, ging er van uit dat ik dat nog niet mocht. Ik had ook niet door dat alle edit gebundeld werden, zal dit voortaan anders doen.
eggie (2024-05-01 18:23:31+00:00): 👍 Top... veel plezier met mappen.
Groet..
eggie
eggie (2024-05-01 18:10:11+00:00): Oke... Dan zou commentaar kunnen zijn. Flitspaal verwijderd.
Gr eggie
rbuffat (2024-05-01 18:41:36+00:00): Hey, I noticed you mapped a touristic hiking route (the green ones with numbers). Please be careful not to use any SchweizMobil / SwitzerlandMobility sources (e.g. from wanderland.ch or the corresponding map.geo.admin.ch layer), as to my current knowledge their license is currently not compatible with OSM.  See also this discussion here: https://lists.openstreetmap.ch/archives/list/talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch/thread/CRRKL53OYULKRXUU4SYZOCRYA3RN22FU/
rskedgell (2024-05-01 18:58:14+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

As Cody Road and the raising bollards near the roundabout already have access=permissive, there shouldn't be a problem here. It might be more appropriate to file a bug report with the game developer. If that doesn't work, you could ask for help on the OSM Community Forum.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/

Adding motor_vehicle=yes is problematic, as an access value of yes implies that there is a legal right of way here, which isn't the case.

I've updated the access tagging through the gated Prologis Park section and added tagging to show that it's privately owned/operated.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150764479
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-06 08:44:27+00:00): Thank you for mapping. Please provide the changeset comments regarding the modification and mass deletion. Happy Mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150761330
L29Ah (2024-05-02 09:13:04+00:00): I think landuse=allotments is inappropriate, since people live there, and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=allotments suggests quite a narrow case of land rented exclusively for gardening.
gardenBiker (2024-05-03 19:52:44+00:00): @L29Ah, I also think you are right. I was here a couple of days ago. This is private land with a home. How should we classify it?
L29Ah (2024-05-03 20:14:04+00:00): I'm not aware of any specific tagging for personal plots; it's just a landuse=residential if it has housing.
gardenBiker (2024-05-04 11:18:29+00:00): Ok, I reclassified landuse to residential
eggie (2024-05-01 18:13:23+00:00): Dag Dirk.. Je mag wel fietsen, maar niet lopen.
foot=yes was hier toegevoegd omdat de algemenen accesstags permissive was.
foot=no zou natuurlijk kunnen en als er een bord verboden toegang staat zou de algemenen accesstag kunnen zijn access=no.
Nu staat er nog bicycle=yes?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-05-01 18:15:20+00:00): Dirk,
De tagging is niet helemaal consistent. 'k Zal het even doorsturen naar de oorspronkelijke mapper. 
Jouw edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=150761515

MVG
eggie
OttoR (2024-05-02 15:43:34+00:00): Hi Eggie,
Kan mij niet herinneren wat ik hier gewijzigd heb. De Van Gendt Hallen worden inderdaad gerenoveerd.

Best mooie duurzame renovatie van een monumentaal pand; maar het zal nog wel even duren inderdaad.

Groet.
Otto
eggie (2024-05-02 16:02:45+00:00): Wellicht reageert Dirk nog?
Groet..
eggie
Dirk DMM (2024-05-02 16:26:30+00:00): Weke reactie verwachten jullie van me? Er stond dat het open was voor voetgangers. Je mag er niet komen. Dat heb ik aangepast.
eggie (2024-05-02 16:47:42+00:00): Oke Dirk..
Maar wel fietsen?
Dat is even de vraag.

Mvg
eggie
eggie (2024-05-02 16:49:53+00:00): In dat geval dat het verboden toegang is kan het beter algemeen op access =no worden gezet.
Gr eggie
Dirk DMM (2024-05-02 17:18:29+00:00): Nee, mag ook niet. Ik zal het inderdaad aanpassen.
eggie (2024-05-02 17:21:59+00:00): 👍
Vinber-Pro (2024-05-07 07:45:11+00:00): bonjour Martin,
attention le name n'est pas une description name=FORET. C'est bien l'attribut landuse=forest qui décrit que c'est une forêt et pas le name.

à plus
aTarom (2024-05-01 19:03:24+00:00): Hola, gracias por editar, la etiqueta "name:ca"
en
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/643437461/history
versión 11
tiene consumidor de datos en
https://www.openstreetmap.cat/
te va bien que la coloque?
Gracias y feliz mapeo, cualquier duda puedes comunicarla en el foro de la comunidad
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/name-ca-una-peca-mes-del-mosaic-cultural-i-tecnic/104631
Saludos
Norzclock (2024-05-01 19:07:59+00:00): Perdona, la he quitado sin querer. Ya esta puesta de nuevo. Gracias.
aTarom (2024-05-01 19:26:11+00:00): Genial! Gracias. Nada que perdonar, es fácil olvidarlo, un placer la rapidez de la respuesta y corrección.
Feliz mapeo!
Saludos
MxxCon (2024-05-03 21:31:15+00:00): Hello.
Please split long ways so that the maxheight tag applies only to sections of the way where it's relevant. You can do it directly in StreetComplete app..
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150762168
voschix (2026-07-01 13:13:57+00:00): Hi. Regarding the cycle paths along Via Orti Ovest: they have no vertical signs, and only one lonely horizontal marking (bicycle sign). The crossings connecting them with the road are clearly marked as cycleways (no foot use). So the dedicated shared foot-cycle-way mapping is in doubt. The markings and signs are certainly unsatisfactory on the ground. Nevertheless I would map them as cycleways. If they were cycleways they most likely would be by default oneway. What's your opinion?
(removed my cycleway=track tag from the road, as there are now separately mapped sidepaths)
DressyPear4 (2024-05-02 18:41:43+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Good_changeset_comments
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150762340
MarinoBM (2024-05-02 16:25:41+00:00): Hola nig82. Gracias por contribuir a mejorar el mapa.
De nuevo superpones edificios de forma incorrecta. Lo importante es dibujar el contorno del edificio. Hacerlos en 3D es más complejo.
Revisa tus ediciones.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Edificios_3D_sencillos
maro21 (2024-05-09 16:18:56+00:00): Proszę zapoznaj się z zasadami wykonywania automatycznych edycji:
https://osm.wiki/Pl:Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
https://osm.wiki/Pl:Co_jest_nie_tak_z_mechanicznymi_edycjami%3F
pavvv (2024-05-09 17:08:53+00:00): Dopuszczalne jest poprawianie oczywistych błędów jak wpisanie sieci jako firma.
maro21 (2024-05-17 21:46:22+00:00): Dla mnie to nie jest oczywisty błąd, tylko zmiana tagowania, więc podpada pod zasady automatycznych edycji. I nie jest to ani literówka, ani błąd ortograficzny.
Jeśli błąd byłby oczywisty, to szybko by został poprawiony przez te 6 lat.
pavvv (2024-05-19 16:37:03+00:00): Co jest w tym nieoczywistego? Obiekt ma tagi
network=Wrocławskie krasnale
brand:wikipedia=pl:Wrocławskie krasnale
brand:wikidata odwołuje się do pl:Wrocławskie krasnale 

Wrocławskie krasnale nie są firmą. Samo to oznacza, że użycie tagów brand:* jest nieprawidłowe.
maraf24 (2024-05-23 12:43:37+00:00): >Wrocławskie krasnale nie są firmą. Samo to oznacza, że użycie tagów brand:* jest nieprawidłowe.

To nie jest oczywisty błąd, tylko Twoja opinia. W OSM mapujący mają zwyczaj poszerzać użycie tagów. Dlatego należy przeprowadzić dyskusję, bo może mają rację tak robiąc.
Tutaj maro21 słusznie zauważył, że to jest nieprzedyskutowana mechaniczna edycja.
pavvv (2024-05-23 19:39:30+00:00): W takim razie dlatego same Wrocławskie krasnale są w tagu network a nie brand? Ten dziwny brak konsekwencji w tagach nie wydaje się być prawidłowy.
maraf24 (2024-05-23 21:36:36+00:00): Ja dodałem network, by połączyć krasnale bez konieczności użycia relacji.
Tagi brand zostały zaś przekonwertowane z tagu wikipedii, który nie pasował, bo nie dotyczył konkretnego krasnala, ale całości. 
Być może network:wikipedia jest lepszym rozwiązaniem, ale skoro nie było dyskusji, to nie byłbym tego taki pewien.
Ewrt1 (2024-05-01 20:37:54+00:00): Hi Evpac,
You've made edits down in Calgary, and yet your changeset comment says you're adding/fixing stuff in Edmonton.
map per (2025-03-25 20:33:55+00:00): Hallo filbro,

ist Radfahren auf den kleinen Wegen entlang der Isar wirklich verboten? Oder sind die Wege nur ungeeignet?

Ich hab nie wirklich auf Verbotsschilder geachtet, aber ich glaube da stehen keine.

Danke und viele Grüße
map per
filbro (2025-03-30 17:05:43+00:00): Hallo map per,

ich kann es nicht mit hundertprozentiger Sicherheit sagen ob genau in dieser Gegend Verbotsschilder existieren. Was ich aber absolut sicher weiss, ist dass es weiter nördlich welche gibt. Das ganze Thema Mountainbiken auf den dortigen Isartrails ist ein extrem sensibles und wurde vor vielen Jahren schon leidenschaftlich diskutiert. Es gab sehr viel Streit und Missgunst deswegen. Ich werde, wenn ich mal wieder dort unterwegs bin, nochmal genau darauf achten.

Viele Grüße, Filip
map per (2025-03-31 17:59:05+00:00): Danke, hab nur nachgefragt weil es immer wieder mal vorkommt das jemand bicycle=* dafür verwende ob Wege geeignet sind anstatt ob Radfahren erlaubt ist.
filbro (2025-04-01 08:19:43+00:00): Ja, das stimmt allerdings. Ich passe sowas normalerweise auch immer an bzw. lösche überflüssige Tags.
dypa (2024-05-01 18:43:29+00:00): Для нашедщих этот пакет правок:

ежегодно в апреле закрыты на просушку парки
    Таврический;
    Лопухинский;
    Румянцевский;
    Летний;
    Михайловский;
    Юсупинский.

следует использовать https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#Access_time_and_other_conditional_restrictions
cronoser (2024-10-10 12:43:52+00:00): Hola, quisiera saber porqué has quitado la tipología de las pistas o caminos, me refiero al grade, es algo muy útil en muchos vehículos, desde un coche a una bici.