piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
nevw (2024-04-27 20:33:04+00:00): Hi Jon, osmi finds a problem here
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=152.75519&lat=-27.68302&zoom=16
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16805271#map=14/-27.6858/152.7561
I suppose the middle polygon should be removed from the wood multipolygon and be tagged landuse=construction or residential.
The wood multipolygon could be dispensed with and the two remaining areas be tagged as simple wood polygons as there appears to be no longer any need to map as a multipolygon now
nevw (2024-04-30 05:29:28+00:00): Hi John, I fixed this now
mueschel (2024-04-27 10:18:02+00:00): Hi,
you added a strange 'xxx_tmp' tag here - could you check that?
itineris (2024-04-27 10:45:49+00:00): Yes, it was used for fixing zillions of public transport relations while merging incorrect dual highways into a single one.

Thank you for noticing.
olo81 (2025-06-10 20:03:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1276409013/history

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sidewalk=separate

powinno być na drodze, a nie na ciągu pieszym, od razu zmieniam
eggie (2024-04-26 11:44:07+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-04-26 11:49:03+00:00): Dag yjk  Waarom construction:highway=secondary  Wat bedoel je daarmee? 
De weg stond toch op de juiste manier op construction?
Waarom haal je de weg van construction af terwijl hij pas half mei opengaat?
eggie (2024-04-26 11:52:50+00:00): De Melkweg heb je verwijderd van de kaart. De juiste highwaytag ontbreekt.
Heb je een reden om niet te reageren op de vele vragen die gesteld worden?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-04-26 12:05:24+00:00): Hikingroutes kun je niet aanpassen met editor iD  
Dat kan alleen met editor JOSM
Welke route heb je aangepast?
yjk12 (2024-04-26 13:18:38+00:00): Ik kon niet vinden hoe ik reacties kon krijgen, zie deze nu pas.
Met betrekking tot construction:highway=secondary volgens de wiki is dit een juiste manier wanneer reeds meer bekend is over de feitelijke weginrichting.
Ik heb de Melkweg niet verwijderd, ik heb slechts een tag iets anders ingericht.
Wat betreft de Hikingroute: De route van wkn64 naar 63 is op de verkeerde weg getekend, dit gaat over het schelpenpad, zie: https://routesingroningen.nl/routes/?network=true&transport=walking (overigens weet ik dit door erlangs te hebben gelopen).
eggie (2024-04-26 13:28:25+00:00): Oke... ik zal straks nog even kijken. Aarzel niet om hulp te vragen. 
De tagging van de melkweg wss correct gedaan door de voorgaande mapper.
Jouw tagging klopt echt niet.
Nu even druk .. kijk straks even.

Gr eggie
eggie (2024-04-26 14:36:35+00:00): De highway=construction Melkweg en de gebruikelijke specificatie  weer even hersteld.
De rendering zal weer terugkomen. 
Jouw tagging staat er ook nog op. 
De verlaagde weg heb ik op layer=-1 gezet.  Fysiek kan een layer=-2 niet aansluiten op veldhoogte.
Half mei gaat de weg open en kunnen alle verijzingen naar construction verwijderd worden.
eggie (2024-04-26 14:41:16+00:00): In route 63 64 zit nu een onderbreking en/of de relatiedelen sluiten niet meer aan. Ik kijk even of het simpel is op te lossen.
Editor iD is een zogenaamde routekiller. Die kan niet omgaan met relaties en zodra je knipt in een route of iets gaat verleggen gaat het per definitie fout.
Veel mappers weten dat niet en het is je ook niet kwalijk te nemen.
eggie (2024-04-26 14:53:12+00:00): 64 63 klopt weer
eggie (2024-04-26 15:38:58+00:00): https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=15.0/53.3072/6.6194
eggie (2024-04-26 16:01:42+00:00): Wegklasse Sint Annerweg teruggezet.
eggie (2024-04-26 16:04:05+00:00): Wellicht dat er wat aangepast kan worden als de Melkweg opengesteld is. Maar niet een stukje tertiary tussen secondary. Dat klopt niet.
Neem even contact op met de voorgaande mapper Jeroen van der Gun. Die is de expert.
yjk12 (2024-04-29 11:36:09+00:00): Je hebt gelijk ik liep voor met betrekking tot Sint Annerweg.
eggie (2024-04-29 11:49:40+00:00): Oke... Voorlopig klopt het weer met de (voorkeurs)routering.
Wanneer de Melkweg opengaat even opnieuw bekijken.
Mapse
eggie
Branko Kokanovic (2024-04-29 08:42:23+00:00): Kad menjaš naziv ulice, moraš da promeniš i int_name, alt_name i sva druga imena koja postoje. Takođe, moraš da proveriš i "ref:RS:ulica" tag ako postoji jer ako on pokazuje u RGZ-u na staru ulicu, može samo da ti se izbrišu izmene (automatizacija - tako uostalom se i vide ovakve greške). Ref možeš da nađeš na https://dina.openstreetmap.rs/st/report.html
aleksandra991 (2024-04-29 08:56:27+00:00): ok hvala
silversurfer83 (2024-04-27 09:11:14+00:00): Gude :)

ich nehme an, dass das ungefähr die Fläche der gesamten Baustelle sein soll?
In dem Fall wäre an der Stelle ein "landuse=construction" + "construction=fire_station" angebracht. Wenn sich die Gebäudeumrisse abschätzen lassen, kannst du die versuchen möglichst gut einzutragen, auch mit "construction=*" und einer note nach dem Motto "umrisse geschätzt. nach ALKIS und DOP Update verbessern" oder so.

bei Fragen immer raus damit
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150534764
Robert Whittaker (2024-11-06 16:15:22+00:00): Hi Thingummy, can I check the designation values you gave to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/123811168 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/112062963 in this changeset?

"Restricted Bridleway" is not a type of route; did you mean "Public Bridleway" or "Restricted Byway" instead?

However, according to the official records from Cambridgeshire County Council, the route is currently neither of these. I did find an *application* for a Definitive Map Modification Order to add a Restricted Byway along this route: https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/asset-library/imported-assets/M275-LH.pdf . But currently this is only an application, and the table at https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/asset-library/imported-assets/DMMO-Register.pdf says that it's "awaiting investigation" so it's by no means certain that it will ever be added in the future.

We should only map what the current status is now. It's looks like that is undetermined, with assumed access rights for at least non-motorised traffic. I'd map it like that, with a note linking to the DMMO application.
Thingummy (2024-11-06 22:48:22+00:00): Thanks  for that, As far as I can see it has no designation, except signage for a restricted byway. but as the application was for a bridleway, I used that instead. I've deleted that designation. My logic at the time was :
 1. On the o/s map at Bing.com it is marked a a road called Long Lane.
2. It looks like a single carrageway track.
3. The reference M279 LH on maps.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/mycambs.aspx for this route, has no link, and refers to a different path 500m to the east, although it may be that details for this route are just not published.
4. The Cadastral Parcels do not cross it - like a road,
5. It looks like a byway of the sort locals hate as it will be misused as a race track.
6. Applications of this nature are often not resolved for many years by under budgeted councils.
 For those reasons I have left it as a track, seasonal, or requiring a permit. If you think thats wrong, I  am happy for you to change it.
Thingummy (2024-11-06 23:00:54+00:00): Sorry just found your link where M279 LH refers to this route as not legally designated.
silversurfer83 (2024-04-27 09:14:42+00:00): Hi :)

einige Tips hierzu:

- nach dem Zeichnen kannst du Objekte, die rechteckig sein sollen mit der Taste "Q" rechteckig machen

- spätestens wenn du auf speichern klickst sollten die Fehlermeldungen im Editor erscheinen. Kontrollier diese bitte. Hier gibt es wohl übereinanderliegende Objekte. Das sollte verbessert werden, bevor man speichert.

- in NRW werden die meisten Gebäude, wenn plausibel, nach Liegenschaftskarte (ALKIS) eingezeichnet. Guck da nochmal drauf

- die Eigenschaften, die du hier gesetzt hast sehen alle ganz gut aus :)

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150535036
Leo Slager (2024-04-30 10:46:48+00:00): Dag Yjk12,
je vraagt om een review:
Dit soort wegwijzers hoort niet op een highway gepaaltst te worden.
Die horen op een aparte node daar waar ze irl staan dus naast de weg.
De juiste tagging is dan:
tourism=information
en 
information=guidepost.

Je kunt dat opzoeken in de wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:information

Verander je dat zelf ?
BCNorwich (2024-04-26 17:52:54+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've reinstated the tracks and joined your gate to the track, tagged it private, removed the name tag.

Regards Bernard.
mdhall335 (2024-04-27 13:36:44+00:00): Thanks. I am new to this!
BCNorwich (2024-04-26 18:02:59+00:00): Tags tweaked.
BCNorwich (2024-04-26 18:00:51+00:00): Hi, I've removed the tag bridge=construction from this half-mile long highway as it seems highly unlikely to be correct.
yasslay (2024-05-03 09:29:57+00:00): Hi,

Please don't erroneously tag land uses with highway=* tagging. I have reverted this change in the changeset linked below.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150827189
Ky_AT (2024-05-03 14:44:34+00:00): Hi  yasslay, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.
Ky_AT (2024-05-06 11:36:16+00:00): Thank you yasslay for correcting the data. I had accidentally added the highway tag and I'll be more careful while editing.
pitfire (2024-08-11 05:10:12+00:00): Hallo zelsis,

hattest Du dir den Verlauf angesehen.
betr.: Weg: 195255288 & gelöschtes "dismount". Auch wenn für den Abschnitt "foot/bicycle=designated" DE:240 Beschilderung gibt , heb es "dismount"  nicht auf.

VG pitfire
zelsis (2024-08-12 07:47:32+00:00): Hallo pitfire,

das berühmte "Radfahrer absteigen" hat keinerlei rechtliche Bindung und ist vor allem bei einem mit VZ 240 sinnlos. Denn dieses Schild weist den Weg ja als Geh- und Radweg aus und nicht als Fußweg.

Laus OSM-Wiki impliziert ein bicycle=dismount aber ein bicycle=no, wobei das Schild ja aber bicycle=designated vorschreibt, weshalb ich die Verwendung von dismount problematisch finde (und das Schild ebenfalls, da es vor allem auf Inkompetenz der Planenden hinweist).

Viele Grüße
zelsis
BCNorwich (2024-04-26 18:03:57+00:00): Gate joined to highway, fiction name removed.
bxl-forever (2024-04-26 13:55:29+00:00): Hello,

We work with SIAMU/DBDMH (firefighting and emergency medical assistance service in the Brussels-Capital Region) and they have set emergency=* tags for service roads they consider to be needed to route their vehicles.

The standard tag we use is "emergency=*" (yes or no).

"access:emergency=yes" does not seem to be used anymore.  Could you please tell me why such a value would be wanted?  Who will use that?

I recommend removing this tag but I prefer asking your first.

Thanks in advance.
ayxis (2024-04-29 06:45:08+00:00): Hi!
If it is not used anymore I will remove it :)  I tagged it with emergency=yes already, so that can stay then
ayxis (2024-04-29 06:48:22+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150647072
osmviborg (2024-04-26 12:48:50+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:residential=apartments?uselang=da
BCNorwich (2024-04-26 18:23:45+00:00): Barrier removed as it's position serves no logical purpose there.
mini-me (2024-04-26 13:18:33+00:00): Только номера телефонов должны быть в формате +7 800 6007280,233
Leo Slager (2024-04-27 18:33:03+00:00): review:
dat lijkt mij prima in orde zo.
Op het eerste stukje van de Heliumweg heb ik ook nog foot=no toegevoegd.
Vas111 (2024-07-13 19:55:35+00:00): Hello there,
Can you provide a source for this landmass?
pitfire (2024-04-26 13:33:08+00:00): Hi  Kookykooky,
Please provide telephone number in international format (ITU-T E.164).
Lostmonkey (2024-06-12 06:59:48+00:00): Gen-udretning af Bernhardt Jensens Boulevard er ikke korrekt. Det forrige forløb var det, som findes i virkeligheden. Vejen sidste år omlagt til et snoet forløb for at dæmpe hastighed. Har forsøgt at rette tilbage igen efter nyeste luftfotos.
jarno_o (2024-04-26 13:18:05+00:00): First of the revision of the Bakkerspolder, the others are 150538636 and 150538784. I accidentally used my main account to upload this one - thanks OAuth 2.
jarno_o (2024-04-26 13:24:03+00:00): (it should be obvious the actual sources used are in the changeset comment, not the source tag - that was an error on my part with copy-pasting from an earlier changeset where I used the same sources)
jarno_o (2024-04-26 13:32:17+00:00): Second of three changesets which revise the Bakkerspolder. First is 150538390 (which I uploaded from my main), third is 150538784. It should be obvious the sources used are in the changeset's comment, not in its source tag. That was user error with copy-pasting from a previous changeset which used the same sources.
jarno_o (2024-04-26 13:19:21+00:00): Third changeset which revises the Bakkerspolder. The first is 150538390 (which I uploaded from my main), the second 150538636.
BR_pebble (2024-05-22 06:05:15+00:00): Hello IrdiIs
Thank you for mapping!
I have added missing building 42.3681341, 21.1316587;
42.3682016, 21.132403;
42.3680987, 21.132545;
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
IrdiIs (2026-06-08 09:15:32+00:00): Two years late but i had missed this. Thanks a lot!
BR_pebble (2026-06-08 15:42:04+00:00): Hi  IrdiIs, no worries! Happy mapping.
silversurfer83 (2024-04-28 13:50:35+00:00): Gude :)

ich komme mal wieder dazu auf die Gegend zu schauen und sehe deine aktuellen Änderungen.

Da du um review gebeten hast:
grundsätzlich sieht es ganz ok aus. Ein Hinweis: Wir versuchen die Geschichte eines einmal in die Datenbank eingetragenen Elementes möglichst zu erhalten. Den östlichen Teil hier hast du gelöscht und durch eine neue Linie (way) ersetzt. Das Prinzip ist in den Good Practices unter Keep the History erläutert:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Erhalte_die_Chronik%E2%86%99

ist für diese Änderung aber jetzt egal, soll nur ein Hinweis für die Zukunft sein :)

schönen Sonntag
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150539045
Jonas Sch (2024-04-29 13:52:59+00:00): Aaah okay... Merke ich mir.
marc__marc (2024-07-04 22:39:44+00:00): Bonjour,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17519037
j'imagine que tu voulais renseigner "Brasserie Ommegang " comme target

Cordialement,
Marc
bxl-forever (2024-07-05 13:43:24+00:00): OK, merci.
silversurfer83 (2024-04-28 14:13:11+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap :)

Danke, dass du hilfst die Karte aktuell zu halten.

Du hast darum gebeten, dass sich jemand deine Änderung ansieht. Ich mache das mal und gebe dir hier mit diesem Kommentar Feedback und hoffentlich hilfreiche Links für deine Arbeit an der Karte:

Die harte Nachricht gleich zu Beginn: Ich habe deine Änderung vollständig Rückgängig gemacht (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150620154). Warum? Es sieht so aus als hättest du im Bearbeitungsmodus aus versehen einen wichtigen Knotenpunkt von Straßen in Frankfurt am Main angefasst und stark verzogen. Deine Änderung komplett rückgängig zu machen ist wesentlich einfacher als nur die Verzerrung zu reparieren. Du kannst dein Versehen mit diesem Link ansehen: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=150539116#18/50.11094/8.68025

Daher meine Bitte: Trage die Änderung in Schleswig, wo sich die Einbahnstraßenregelung geändert hat, noch einmal ein. Die sah eigentlich ganz korrekt aus :)

Zu anderen Punkten deiner Änderung: Du hast einen Kommentar zur Änderung abgegeben der schon halbwegs erklärt, was geändert wurde. Eine Grobe Ortsangabe wäre noch schön und auch eine Quellenangabe, wie zum Beispiel "war vor Ort" ist immer sehr hilfreich für alle.

Grundsätzlich kann ich dir ein paar Seiten im Wiki empfehlen, die du dir mal ansehen kannst und wenn du Fragen hast gibt es auch eine Seite, die viele Möglichkeiten der Kontaktaufnahme listet wo du sicher eine Möglichkeit findest, die dir persönlich zusagt:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Contact_channels

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice

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

Lass dich nicht abschrecken und mach gerne weiter. 

happy mapping
silversurfer83
ivanbranco (2024-04-27 21:12:41+00:00): Ciao Arcangelo,

non mi sembra molto "natural" se fatta di cemento. É una modifica legata a Pokémon Go?
Gregory Peony (2024-05-02 02:29:16+00:00): woods and buildings should not share common nodes press g on them and pull them apart. press q to square corners. I reccomend you return to this area and just look around using esri imaging to learn how to better interpret the shape of buildings in imagery. it has better resolution at high zoom. Check out this wiki page too https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roof_modelling
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150539895
rskedgell (2024-04-30 12:54:54+00:00): You appear to have tagged a section of High Street as foot=no in response to a StreetComplete task asking "Are pedestrians forbidden to walk on this road here?"

I have checked the available Bing Streetside and/or Mapillary imagery for evidence that there really is a (signed) pedestrian prohibition here. I cannot see any TSRGD diagram 625.1 "pedestrians prohibited" signs on the imagery, so do not believe that a prohibition exists and have therefore reverted your edit.

The wiki states that access tags reflect legal access. Subjective opinions about whether it would be pleasant, a good idea, safe, etc. for a particular transport mode are not relevant to legal access.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:foot

As real pedestrian prohibitions on public roads other than those tagged as highway=motorway or motorroad=yes in the UK are quite rare and are always signed, this quest is probably better left disabled.

Non-extent restrictions removed in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150706766
coolmule0 (2024-05-01 09:06:38+00:00): Thats a really interesting point that I didn't fully realize. Thank you for clarifying for me. I will definitely bare that in mind in the future.
eggie (2024-04-26 15:19:35+00:00): 👍
dankarran (2024-04-26 14:43:56+00:00): Thanks for the update. Please could you check the website address, as it doesn't appear to relate to this business?
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-04-27 21:00:50+00:00): Reviewed
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150541241
Frans S (2024-06-03 12:30:36+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
Please use the correct tag where traces leads just into farmland/wood areas.
Track is the default tag in those cases
Where traces leads off a highway to a single house, farm, business they need to be tagged as highway=service

Please consult this wiki.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways
Best regards
miluethi (2024-04-26 17:24:24+00:00): Hi Sidra, please try to square out building whenever possible. Just select the building frame, press “Q” and done.
Thank you very much for your contribution to OSM Nicaragua. Michael
miluethi (2024-04-30 23:54:38+00:00): Gary,

I notice that your building shapes are far bigger than the satellite imagery. Please narrow buildings down to match exactly the satellite image.

Thank you for contributing to OSM Nicaragua.
sheldonelectric (2024-04-26 22:21:10+00:00): source:addr:housenumber:ref n'a pas documentation dans le wiki, faudrait-il l'effacer?
Syl (2024-04-27 06:25:40+00:00): Comme vous voulez, ça vient d'un vieux import des numéros depuis les données de la métropole et ce n'est plus vraiment utile aujourd’hui.
pitscheplatsch (2024-04-28 12:32:32+00:00): Hi DWinterrose, welcome to OSM.

Just a test?
Frans S (2024-04-27 08:34:30+00:00): 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. 
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped..
Oversized buildings.
Buildings not squared.
You map in JOSM. Don't you have the building tool plugin not installed ? With this tool, you draw automatically nice squared buildings,


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/150542253
miluethi (2024-04-26 17:27:52+00:00): Hi Rachita, please try to square out buildings before uploading them. Just select the building shape and press the “Q” key. 
This provides a much “cleaner” look than uneven corner.
Thank you very much for contributing to OSM Nicaragua!
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-26 14:40:18+00:00): 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/11563975700
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2972655566
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11563975625
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2972657669
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2972657796
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/812647104
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/812647106
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/812647112
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/812647113
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/909789494

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eisa01 (2024-05-08 18:49:31+00:00): Takk for at du er ute og surveyer!

Fikset noe på Julius Dahlsveg og den er da kun to felt, ikke fire? Ihvertfall ser det slik ut på flyfoto
Frans S (2024-04-26 14:55:01+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here.
You added a landuse =yes. I think you mend to tag it as landuse=residential. (common tag to tag a group of buildings. Please do not connect nodes of that mapping to highways, That are errors and need to be solved.
Best regards
Frans S (2024-04-26 14:58:40+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
One of the validator jobs is to reviews the taggings of highways .  Experience learns that traces of highways are regularly wrong tagged.

How to decide when a trace is a path or an unclassified highway (main choices in rural areas)
First, look what they connect.  Houses, settlements, villages. Then measure the width of that trace.

In iDeditor 

Shortcut : Ctrl+⇧ Shift+M – toggle  opens measurement panel
Draw a line between the shoulders of a trace (zoom in very far) and read the distance.
If a trace is max 2 meters wide, tag it as a path. Use footway only in urban (town) areas.
Wider and connect hamlets, houses and villages should be tagged as unclassified.
Tag residential in urban areas (villages, towns)

In JOSM, use the measure tab or, draw a circle (round building, shortcut Alt-Z when the building plugin is installed)) between the shoulders of a trace and read the distance on the lower toolbar. (don't map that bulding)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations

Quote: Tracks are roads of agricultural purpose. They usually connect fields to farms. The surface sometimes makes them inaccessible for regular cars, or at least limits the speeds to a very slow pace. Tagging a trace as 'track' should always be avoided for through-going traffic, access to houses/farms or within urban areas.

Important. Please connect highways to each other, where obvious,  to get a network which can be used by GPS NAV systems.

Best regards