piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Hanni54 (2025-03-25 22:18:53+00:00): Hallo Flo. 
Danke für den Tipp. 
Die Straße ist gekennzeichnet mit privat. Dann wäre Alle=„destination“ sicher besser, um auch das Routing zu ermöglichen. 
Gruß Hanni
Lezurex (2025-03-26 12:00:56+00:00): Hallo cooperspale118,

Willkommen auf OpenStreetMap und danke für deine Beiträge!

Ein zwei Dinge:

Bei Websites bitte immer die volle gültige URL angeben, also mit https://. Am besten einmal im Browser aufrufen und dann aus der Adressleiste kopieren.

Öffnungszeiten haben eine festgelegte Syntax: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:opening_hours Die sollte befolgt werden damit sie auch von Apps etc. ausgewertet werden können.

LG Lezurex
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-24 22:30:58+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9550726627

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Marek-M (2025-03-27 10:26:06+00:00): Cześć, dzięki za edycję.

Wkradły się w niej błędy:
* utworzyłeś obszar szpitala https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1370991313 zostawiając istniejący węzeł oznaczający ten sam szpital  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2495022112 w ten sposób utworzyłeś duplikat POI.
* Dodatkowo obszar szpitala połączyłeś z rzeką a w OSM nie łączymy obszarów ani z drogami ani z ciekami wodnymi.

Poprawiłem te błędy w changesecie: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=164156885 ale na przyszłość proszę trzymać się zasad ustalonych w OSM
Marek-M (2025-04-10 09:23:57+00:00): Nie nadajemy nazw opisowych obiektom. Czym jest dane miejsce opisują odpowiednie tagi. Tutaj poprawiłem utworzony przez Ciebie kompleks sportowy z takimi nazwami: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164759211
Aim311_ (2025-07-10 08:03:31+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3374209 skąd info, że to jest park? Po wjechaniu w drogę do zabudowań jakichś domków letniskowych z tabliczkami teren monitorowany, całkiem sprawnie, na sygnale przyjeżdża security!
eggie (2025-03-25 06:30:53+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Alle begin is moeilijk.
warnings:disconnected_way:highway
  	1
Hier zit het trottoir nergens aan vast. Het zal dan niet routeren.
Wanneer iets een grasveldje is landuse=grass dan niet name=grass bijtaggen. Dus niet de name= tag gebruiken om iets te beschrijven.


MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-03-25 06:43:49+00:00): Hier heb ik het trottoir verbonden met de andere wegen en losgemaakt van het gras. name=grass verwijderd.
Gr eggie
DaveF (2025-03-26 11:47:20+00:00): Hi
Platforms don't require highway tags as their only purpose is to be walked upon.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/64689692
skifans (2025-03-27 21:17:44+00:00): Hi, ok - see yourself/someone has already sorted it. Thanks. Was just trying to indicated lots of people were walking along and using it as a through route rather then just for waiting for a trip.
eggie (2025-03-25 06:33:08+00:00): Quinn Wat bedoel je met barrier=construction?
Je hebt dat in een lijnelement verwerkt en op de weg geplakt?
Wanneer een weg tijdelijk voor korte tijd niet open is wegens werkzaamheden laten we het gewoon zo. Duurt het erg lang.. meer dan drie maanden dan gaat zoiets op een andere manier.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-03-25 06:45:31+00:00): De barrier construction heb ik verwijderd
eggie (2025-03-25 06:34:45+00:00): Dag Quinn,

Niet name=  gebruiken om iets te beschrijven. 
Het doet niets in OSM. 
Kijk in de wiki hoe een ingang te mappen.
bv entrance=main

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-03-25 06:50:22+00:00): Hier staat geen gebouw met  7 verdiepingen. Ik pas het weer aan.
Quinn1407928282 (2025-03-25 06:55:42+00:00): Er staar ee  gebouw van 7 verdieping ik woon daar namelijk
eggie (2025-03-25 07:13:04+00:00): Oke, maar je had dat aantal verdiepingen gezet op het verkeerde deel.
Kijk hier voor je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=164054653
Klik op de blauwe lijn voor je tags.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-03-25 06:39:54+00:00): Dag Quinn,
Dit lijkt me oke. Wel heb ik de parkeervakken wat netter gelegd.
.. natural=grassland gebruiken we voor 'wilde' graslanden. In de bebouwde kom gebruiken we vaker landuse=grass

Mapse,
eggie
Quinn1407928282 (2025-03-25 07:03:06+00:00): Dankjewel voor de tip
woodpeck (2025-03-24 23:51:16+00:00): In this changeset you have added a lot of non-obvious detail about a railway line. Please make it a habit for future edits to name the source you got the information from in the changeset comment so that we can be sure we're not ingesting information from copyrighted sources.
santamariense (2025-07-08 15:00:40+00:00): LUIS ÊNIO,

Percebi uma prática sua indo na contramão das convenções adotadas no OSM. Só deve ser duplicada a geometria de uma via, com uma geometria em cada sentido se, e apenas se, houver barreira física entre os dois sentidos.

Bons mapeamentos!
aTarom (2025-03-25 09:45:59+00:00): Hola, gràcies per editar, el tag
ring_road=yes
a
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18795618/history
es necessari tenint
road=ring_road
?
Salutacions
Xavizard Knight (2025-03-25 12:31:03+00:00): Bones! Les etiquetes road=ring_road i ring_road=yes les he posat per marcar que aquesta relació és una ronda que encercla la ciutat.

He estat cercant per taginfo i per altres relacions de rondes d'OSM i no he trobat cap etiqueta que específicament marqui que certa relació de ruta és una ronda, així que he posat els dos ring_road per indicar-ho.

No obstant, cert és que amb un ring_road sol ja és suficient.
Així que deixa el que vulguis i l'altre esborra'l, o digue'm quin no t'agrada i l'altre l'esborraré en mun pròxim commit.

Gràcies per l'avís i disculpa les molèsties!
aTarom (2025-03-25 14:48:18+00:00): No es tracta de la que més m'agradi, simplement prefereixo detectar els tags nous a Espanya abans que siguin detectats per altres que els "arreglen" sense preguntar abans a qui els va posar, sabent que no és un error així es queda, gràcies per l'explicació
mueschel (2025-03-26 10:18:06+00:00): Hi Xavier,
please let me repeat my request: This new scheme for destination signs adds huge amounts of undocumented tags (115 new keys just today!) that are of no use to any other data consumer. We absolutely need a proper documentation and discussion before these get into such widespread use.
mueschel (2025-03-27 10:51:52+00:00): " at the forum thread that we only talk yopaseopor and myself.  That's because we are the only two users in the Catalan community"

That's part of the problem. Traffic signs are not a local thing, but globally (or at least Europe-wide) very similar. A tagging scheme can't be discussed in a small local group, it needs to involve the whole community. That's what proposals are for.

Please don't use changeset comments to explain things, this information can't be found later.
mueschel (2025-03-27 16:34:11+00:00): The "Finland Scheme" is long outdated. The wiki page you cite has been written 12 years ago, without updates since.

The discussion about traffic_sign:id was very broad. The situation for destination signs is a lot simpler. Any new scheme can be extended throughout the whole of Europe without problems - and the existing scheme is almost capable of it, with just some minor tweaks and extensions. 

Please write a request for comments in the international tagging section of the forums.
mueschel (2025-03-29 11:13:49+00:00): The gas station also got several fuel tags that are not used in other places. These are branded names, that should be translated to generic names like fuel:diesel_b7 or fuel:biodiesel

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1314245762
Xavizard Knight (2025-03-30 02:02:57+00:00): Heyas!
Yep, you are right that these tags are unique and not great.

For adding fuel tags, I used a combination of the ones that are in the JOSM built-in preset and some taginfo search as guidance. For "fuel:blue+", "fuel:diesel_e+" and "fuel:diesel_e+10" I assumed that these are Repsol-exclusive fuel types whose name/type is this, or industry-wide ways of referring about them, so I added them as such.

I'm doing edits on other gas stations in Valls, so I'll revise the fuel tags of this station and the others, and I'll try to fit them more common values.
If I don't find a taginfo equivalence, I'll note it in a fixme= or make a nearby note.

Thanks for the heads-up!
mueschel (2025-03-30 09:11:21+00:00): Thanks! The best would be to have a picture of the actual pumps. They are required to label them with the actual generic type of fuel.
Xavizard Knight (2025-04-01 17:11:01+00:00): I don't think that the generic fuel name is written anywhere near the pumps in Repsol gas stations, everything is filled with the branded fuel logos and colours and such. Although, to be honest, I don't look them much when I go there xD

For now, I've been able to find more info online. On Repsol's website, they talk about Repsol Blue+ as their version of Adblue fuel, which means that Blue+ is equivalent to fuel:adblue.
Also on their website, they seem to say that Repsol's "Diesel e+" is their basic diesel, and the "Diesel e+10" their super enhanced diesel, which seems to align with the tags fuel:diesel and fuel:GTL_diesel respectively (reading from the wiki Key:fuel:* tag page)

Besides, the fuel:diesel and fuel:GTL_diesel tags do also appear in other Repsol gas station throughout the city that originally came from a 2010 import (that I should have looked before tagging my way... ups). I'll add these values and replace the old ones in my upcoming commit
InsertUser (2025-03-25 13:31:11+00:00): Source?
BigKev97 (2025-04-28 12:52:00+00:00): Found it during a visit.
Mxdanger (2025-03-25 05:48:14+00:00): I saw you made multiple edits to add to this relation. For big relations I highly recommend you check out JOSM! It makes relation editing very easy and quick.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-03-25 05:50:04+00:00): I've seen JOSM in the edit menu, but it says I need something external, and I'm not sure what it does.
Mxdanger (2025-03-26 22:31:00+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM
neuhausr (2025-05-28 21:13:13+00:00): Hi, do you have a reference for these golf holes? I don't see anything in imagery, they're not within a golf course area, etc. If they are planned for the future, there are tags you could use to reflect that, such as the proposed: prefix. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed Thanks
真中あお (2025-12-26 20:31:25+00:00): OSM数据库是公共的，请不要添加不符合事实的内容
Frank Peng (2025-12-04 06:48:35+00:00): I noticed that you tagged the Gateway Lane Northeast ways https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1371012842 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1371012843 as oneway=yes, but tagged them as going in the wrong direction (I can see the error you made on the map). As a result, those Gateway Lane Northeast ways appear to go in the direction opposite of where they're actually supposed to be going. The oneway tag is defined in relation to the direction the linear feature ("way") is drawn in OpenStreetMap. If the oneway restriction is in the opposite direction to the drawn way, the fix in most cases is to turn the way around ("reverse way" tool in the map editors) and apply oneway=yes, or by clicking on the "Change Direction" button in the "One Way" field of the selected way after applying the oneway=yes tag. Per the OSM Wiki article on the oneway tag, it states:

>"Note that the oneway tag is defined in relation to the direction the linear feature ("way") is drawn in OpenStreetMap. Identifying the direction of a way describes how to determine the direction of a way in the main OpenStreetMap editors."
>"If the oneway restriction is in the opposite direction to the drawn way, the fix in most cases is to turn the way around ("reverse way" tool in the map editors) and apply oneway=yes. If in a (very) rare case, the direction of the way cannot be changed, you can instead tag it as oneway=-1."

In the United States, we drive on the right-hand side of the road, not the left-hand side. If you tag a road as one-way but tag it as going in the wrong direction, this could cause routing software to direct drivers to go on the wrong side of the road or go the wrong way on a one-way road, and potentially cause an accident or cause a driver to get stopped by police, all because of the error you made on OSM. Many different data consumers use OpenStreetMap data, and rideshare services such as Uber and Lyft also use OSM data for routing. When tagging roads as one-way, make sure to tag them as going in the correct direction based on signs or pavement markings seen on the ground or street-level photos like Bing Streetside and Mapillary, so routing software doesn't direct drivers to go on the wrong side of the road or go the wrong way on a one-way road.

I would encourage you to read this OSM Wiki article on the oneway tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway

As a future reference, here is an OSM Wiki article on major OpenStreetMap consumers, containing some of the companies that use OSM data for their maps or services: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Major_OpenStreetMap_consumers
You can also find many other websites or services that use OSM here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/They_are_using_OpenStreetMap#United_States_of_America
Frank Peng (2025-12-04 07:05:47+00:00): I corrected the direction of the Gateway Lane Northeast one-way roads in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175475244 by clicking on the "Change Direction" button in the "One Way" field of the ways in iD editor.
Frank Peng (2025-12-23 06:07:12+00:00): Just FYI, you could have changed the bi-directional roads to dual carriageways by splitting the ways at the point where the road divides and adjusting the section of the road on the dual carriageway to one of the carriageways, instead of splitting the way and then deleting the section of the road on the carriageway and drawing new roads on the carriageways. By splitting the existing ways and adjusting the section of road on the dual carriageway to one of the carriageways instead of deleting it, you help preserve the history on OSM. This also helps preserve the original nodes. So for this instance, it would have been better to split the roads at the point where the road divides and adjust the section of roads on the dual carriageways to one of the carriageways, then changing its lane count and tagging it as one way going in the correct direction of the road on the ground, preserving the editing history of the original nodes from the roads. Then drawing the new roads on the other carriageways and adding its lane count and tagging it as one-way going in the correct direction of the actual one-way restriction.

Here are a couple of my changesets that changed bi-directional roads to dual carriageways without deleting any existing roads or nodes, preserving the editing history of the original nodes:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133277884
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173780503 (for this changeset, I actually copied and pasted a section of an existing road to one of the road carriageways, and then adjusted the existing road to the other carriageway.)
Frank Peng (2025-12-23 06:24:55+00:00): Also, before modifying any elements on OSM, please check their editing history, changeset comments, and source tags. You may see why the original editor mapped the element or mapped it the way it is. A feature may have been mapped based on a recent survey in person or more recent aerial imagery. Per the OSM Wiki article titled "Keep the history", it states:

>"Before making significant changes to major features based on aerial imagery or past knowledge, check their history, changeset comments, and source tags. A feature may have been mapped based on recent survey in person or more recent aerial imagery. Previous editors may have valuable insights to offer on why things are currently tagged the way they are."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history#Check_the_history

I saw in this changeset and some of your other changesets that you deleted some map features, such as roads or buildings, probably without checking their editing history, changeset comments, or their source tags; or maybe you did but chose to delete them, probably because you think that you might not need them. We know that not everything is needed by everyone, but you should not work the other way around and remove map details that someone else added just because you do not need it, you think it's stupid, or the validator ordered it so. Please leave existing valid map details as they are.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_remove_objects_that_you_don't_need_or_like
Frank Peng (2025-12-23 06:29:18+00:00): I saw in this changeset and some of your other changesets that you deleted some map features, such as roads or buildings, probably without checking their editing history, changeset comments, or their source tags; or maybe you did but chose to delete them, probably because you thought that you might not need them or might not like them. We know that not everything is needed by everyone, but you should not work the other way around and remove map details that someone else added just because you do not need it, you think it's stupid, or the validator ordered it so. Please leave existing valid map details as they are, regardless of whether you might need them or not, or whether you may like them or not.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_remove_objects_that_you_don't_need_or_like
Frank Peng (2025-12-23 07:07:04+00:00): Please do not delete existing roads or elements on OSM and then redraw them from scratch. It is against good practices on OSM to do that. It's better to modify the existing roads and elements instead of deleting them! Please help preserve the history on OSM by not deleting any existing elements and instead modifying them.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
 
This changeset's comment states that you "redid parking lots and roads". Well, you actually deleted a bunch of existing roads in this changeset and redrew them from scratch. Please don't do that. You need to modify existing roads by adjusting their geometry (you can move the nodes of the roads, or add nodes to them and move them) or changing their tags, instead of deleting them altogether. I know that you deleted roads and redrew them in this changeset by looking at this changeset's map changes on FacilMap (you can see which roads or elements you deleted in this changeset): https://facilmap.org/#q=changeset%20164057264. If you really want to redo roads or parking lots, please just modify the existing roads or parking lots by adjusting their geometry or changing their tags, and do not delete them and redraw them from scratch. 

In the future, when making changes on OSM, please modify existing elements instead of deleting them and redrawing them from scratch. Don't delete the history on OSM. Please keep or preserve the history. It can be worth taking a few extra steps to help preserve this history.
Frank Peng (2025-12-24 05:34:26+00:00): I also saw in this changeset that you moved the traffic signal nodes from the stop lines to the intersection nodes (I can see that in the FacilMap link in the previous comment in this discussion): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3717639460
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3717639461
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3717639465
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3717639463
I don't have a strong preference for where traffic signal nodes should be placed at intersections, whether it be on the intersection nodes or on the stop lines. If the traffic signal nodes are on the stop lines, then you can leave them on the stop lines. If the traffic signal nodes are on the intersection nodes, then you can leave them on there if you want. There is no well established convention on where traffic signal nodes should be mapped at intersections.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals#Complex_intersections
Frank Peng (2026-01-18 01:16:58+00:00): I see that you also deleted ways with valid lane guidance (turn:lanes and change:lanes tagging) in this changeset. Please don't delete sections of roads with valid lane guidance (turn:lanes and change:lanes tags), such as what you deleted in this changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/891783068/history and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341723892/history
Per the OSM Wiki article on "Key:turn", it says:

"The turn=* key can be used to specify the indicated turn or merge direction for a way or lane. The key is predominantly used with the lanes suffix (turn:lanes=*) to tag indicated turn markings for individual lanes at intersections or other junctions. While turn lane markings are the most obvious method of indicating turn directions, the turn=* key can be used in any situation where a manoeuvre is signed, marked or otherwise implied by road markings."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn#Indicated_turns_by_lane
Many map data consumers use OSM data and their routing software use lane guidance from roads mapped on OSM to aid drivers in which lane to be on depending on the driver's highlighted route.

Per the OSM Wiki article on "Key:change", it says:

"Mapping lane change restrictions makes it possible for navigation software to time guidance instructions more precisely, telling drivers when to change lanes without forcing them to cut in line. This key is preferred over mapping the lanes as separate ways, which would violate the rule about only mapping parallel ways when there is a physical separation."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:change
Frank Peng (2026-01-18 02:18:37+00:00): Given the amount of history deleted, and the scope of those unnecessary deletions and redrawings in this changeset, I find that the edits made in this changeset (except for the highway=footway ways, amenity=parking ways, landuse=* ways, and the highway=crossing nodes mapped or modified in this changeset) do not follow OSM good practice. Here are the rules of OSM good practice that I find that this changeset's map edits (except for the highway=footway ways, amenity=parking ways, landuse=* ways, and the highway=crossing nodes mapped or modified in this changeset) do not follow:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_remove_objects_that_you_don't_need_or_like

In the future, please make sure your map edits on OSM follow good practice. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice
Frank Peng (2026-01-18 07:02:40+00:00): OSMCha link of this changeset: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164057264
Frank Peng (2026-01-18 21:55:04+00:00): Given the amount of history deleted (existing ways and nodes), and the scope of those unnecessary deletions and redrawings in this changeset, I find that the edits made in this changeset (except for the highway=footway ways, amenity=parking ways, landuse=* ways, and the highway=crossing nodes mapped or modified in this changeset) do not follow OSM good practice. Here are the rules of OSM good practice that I find that this changeset's map edits (except for the highway=footway ways, amenity=parking ways, landuse=* ways, and the highway=crossing nodes mapped or modified in this changeset) do not follow: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_remove_objects_that_you_don't_need_or_like In the future, please make sure your map edits on OSM follow good practice. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164057264
NeisReview (2025-03-25 05:51:08+00:00): #UnexplainedChanges

Hello, welcome to OSM.

Could you please clarify the purpose behind your map changes? It's not entirely clear from the edited data and your added description. Also, what was used as a source of your activity?

Looking forward to your response. 
Thank you.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-03-25 22:56:01+00:00): reverted

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164100129