piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ilias_ (2025-05-10 20:55:49+00:00): Moreover, all news media sources seem to call it "Étang d'El Oulfa" not "Lac d'El Oulfa". In Arabic, some refer to it as ضاية الولفة. I have no idea how it's acually called, you seem to know more about the area. What do you think?
user_22463405 (2025-05-11 14:22:16+00:00): I didn't find the Amazigh name of the lake, so I let the old name
ilias_ (2025-05-11 14:24:59+00:00): That's what I'm saying
MxxCon (2025-05-10 03:49:11+00:00): Hello.
Please do not tag curbs just for the hell of it without performing actual in-person survey. It's virtually impossible to tell from the satellite imagery whether a curb is lower or not.
However, on a bunch of curbs here you tagged them as tactile_paving=no when you can clearly see red plastic bumper plates.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166045877
literan (2025-05-11 12:33:56+00:00): Велопрокат это не имя собственное, а тип объекта. Добавляйте как названия только имена собственные (а не просто любой текст с вывески).
MxxCon (2025-05-10 03:53:31+00:00): It's really unnecessary to map these landuse areas when all the buildings inside are already mapped. landuse information can be inferred from the building types.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166046420
ika-chan! UK-USA (2025-05-10 15:59:08+00:00): I have to disagree with the comment, because many cities in the world, such as London, Singapore, and even neighbouring Nassau County, have landuse=* to indicate the main usage of the land, even if the area is well mapped with buildings. I wish to ask what makes the situation different in New York City?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166046420
MxxCon (2025-05-10 16:26:28+00:00): Logical sense is what makes that situation different.
Mapping landuse= over areas which already have higher detailed features mapped is duplicated and wasted efforts. All the necessary information can be derived from these higher detailed features.
Blindly mapping something without fully understand why that is being mapped is not a good approach to mapping. You need to understand what and why you map something.
ika-chan! UK-USA (2025-05-10 17:04:03+00:00): Has there been any discussion that led to the discouragement of landuse=* in areas with well-mapped buildings in the area? If so, then https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse may have to be updated with a "regional variations" section or something.
OldManCelli (2025-05-25 16:01:02+00:00): Hey KindredCoda... Thanks for adding the GGB building structure! I'm wondering if a type=building relation would be better here. Then all the parts would be role=part. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:building
The way it is now as a multipolygon and all the parts that overlap each other as role=outer doesn't really work very well because "Generally, the multipolygon relation can be used to build multipolygons in compliance with the OGC Simple Feature standard (Graphical examples of OGC validity). Anything that is not a valid multipolygon according to this standard (e.g., polygons with intersecting rings) should also be considered an invalid multipolygon relation, with the notable exception of touching inner rings (see below)."

Just a thought - I don't think it would be hard to convert it - you've done all the hard work already.
KindredCoda (2025-05-26 03:14:16+00:00): Ok, I've changed the relation to a building.
KindredCoda (2025-05-26 03:20:50+00:00): Also changed all roles to 'part'.
bkil (2025-05-10 08:26:12+00:00): Van írásos szerzői jogi engedélyünk a Fömi alappont importálására ami kompatibilis az ODbL feltételeivel? Ha igen, fel tudjuk venni a wikibe és be tudjuk tömegesen importálni? Ha nem, visszavonandó.
Thelone1986 (2025-05-10 10:35:55+00:00): Hey,

Just fyi, the big forested area north of the industrial zones has been cut down significantly recently (visible on Sentinel-2 imagery for example), that's why it was reduced compared to 2023 and PICC imageries
Jef_K (2025-05-12 11:50:45+00:00): Thank you for your note. I indeed used latest version of SPW imagery.
However, I don't know how to revert forest to previous version from history.
Thelone1986 (2025-05-12 13:08:57+00:00): I mean, it's nothing major and I think there might be more important changes around that area in the near future anyway. I'd just wait and see to be honest
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:11:42+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166048063
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:06:54+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166047919
marczoutendijk (2026-02-05 20:52:31+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19110249/history/1
What is the meaning of place=Commune?
Best regards  
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
Moldovan_Merkator (2026-02-06 07:29:41+00:00): Hello, idk why i put these tags, probably i seen them somewhere and used that, but after some thoughts i think i'll change them to =village. Thanks for informing!
Moldovan_Merkator (2026-02-06 07:39:32+00:00): no, maybe to =municipality will be better.
marczoutendijk (2026-02-06 14:32:05+00:00): Will you perform the change yourself?
Moldovan_Merkator (2026-02-06 15:55:53+00:00): I already done that
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:12:16+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166048077
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:09:41+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166048001
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:11:09+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166048049
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:08:05+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166047964
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:06:28+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166047908
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:10:25+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166048029
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:05:41+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166047900
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-09 22:07:18+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166039325

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166047941
eggie (2025-05-10 13:00:47+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
NorthCrab_upload (2025-05-09 22:10:53+00:00): 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.

"Prusicko":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824612965
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824612966
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824612967
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824612968
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824612969
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824612970

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eggie (2025-05-10 13:03:16+00:00): Dag cj,

Kort door de bocht..
highway=footway..G7 bebording.  fietsen niet toegestaan behalve bij onfderbord fietsen toegestaan. Komt bijna nooit voor,

Geen bebording... dan highway=path gebruiken. Dat routeert ook voor fietsers. Up to you.
MVG
eggie
osmviborg (2025-05-10 06:09:51+00:00): 'railway=abandoned' betyder at der skal være synlige spor tilbage af en tidligere jernbane, det er ikke tilfældet her, slettet.
Esbern (2025-05-10 10:04:45+00:00): Ok, der er spor af jernbane tracen især der hvor den går på dæmninger og over broer. Jeg har tagget den som jernbane der går den anden vej ud af byen (det er den samme nedlagte bane), måske er den også tagget forkert
Esbern (2025-05-10 10:05:56+00:00): .. og for øvrigtmangler der stadig noget af stien, jeg skal lige have et gps spor på plads
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-09 17:04:21+00:00): Hello!

You used
material=stonech
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824696513/history

Have you maybe meant
material=stone
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
acidyellow (2026-04-01 22:01:11+00:00): That was indeed supposed to be "stone". Thanks for the notice, I fixed it.
dypa (2025-05-10 08:15:19+00:00): При указании размеченных не регулируемых пешеходных переходов нельзя использовать тег crossing=zebra, см https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:crossing=zebra

Пожалуйста при внесении следующих правок используйте теги (Размеченный (нерегулируемый) пешеходный переход)
crossing=uncontrolled
crossing:markings=zebra

Заранее спасибо!
noname1313 (2025-05-09 23:29:54+00:00): I meant to say Rt 82 to Rt 22*
Glassman (2025-05-10 19:57:03+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166049300
silversurfer83 (2025-05-10 08:29:29+00:00): Moin :)

der jengelh hatte hier schon einen Zaun und eine Landnutzung an einer Linie kombiniert eingetragen, was ich für wenig optimal halte, da das eine (Zaun) eine Linie ist währen das andere eine Fläche ist. Nun noch eine Adresse an den Zaun zu taggen ist in meinen Augen ganz schlecht. Außerdem ist durch die Tore der Zufahrtsweg auch mit der Landnutzung verbunden, was falsch ist.
Achte da in Zukunft bitte ein wenig drauf, was womit verbunden wird und welche Eigenschaften an welche OSM-Objekte getaggt werden.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Ein_Objekt,_ein_OSM-Element

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166049714
Lenkradfreek (2025-05-10 09:01:22+00:00): Hallo zurück,

das mit dem Zaun habe ich auch gesehen, aber erstmal nicht geändert, da mir das ganz logisch vorkam.

Dass schon eine Adresse an dem Hauptgebäude getaggt ist, habe ich erst jetzt gesehen. Laut der Regel, die du verlinkt hast, sollte man die Adresse nur an der Fläche taggen und nicht an einem einzelnen Gebäude, wie ich es verstehe.

Und bei den Zufahrtswegen weiß ich nicht genau, wie du das meinst. Weder die Wege noch die Tore haben ja einen landuse-Tag.
silversurfer83 (2025-05-10 09:10:55+00:00): Danke für die flotte Reaktion :)

Da die barrier=gate ja als node auf dem Zaun und der Zufahrt liegen ist die Zufahrt nun mit dem landuse verbunden, da der Zaun gleichzeitig auch landuse ist. Halte ich für unglücklich.
Musst du jetzt auch nicht zerpflücken, mein Kommentar war hauptsächlich für die Zukunft gedacht, dass solche Sachen nicht mehr verknüpft werden.

(Zufahrt und Tor müssen natürlich einen gemeinsamen node haben, da sonst das Routing nicht passt)
Lenkradfreek (2025-05-10 09:43:20+00:00): Ja, aber diese Verbindung entsteht doch auch, wenn ein Weg/eine Straße mit den Grenzen einer Fläche in einem Punkt verbunden ist (was ja weit verbreitet ist), oder sehe ich das falsch?
infeeeee (2025-05-10 14:56:25+00:00): Szia!

maxweight helyett biztos nem a maxweightrating:hgv-t akartad címkézni? Ennek a táblájában van kis teherautó, a maxweight-ben nincs: 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweightrating#Difference_to_maxweight=*

Tűzcsapokra is vonatkozik, hogy ne adj nekik nevet, következik a többi címkéből: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Ha kérdésed merülne fel, a magyar szerkesztő közösség elérhetőségeit megtalálod ezen az oldalon: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Közösség#Elérhetőségek

További jó térképezést!
aceman444 (2025-05-11 14:28:07+00:00): Zdravim, dakujem za opravu.

Preco ste cestu https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8025375 celu vymazali a vytvorili novu https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385201221 ? Nedala sa skratit? Okrem toho existuje aj cesta pred tym domom, ktory ste upravili, cize aj ten usek sa dal ponechat, len by cesty neboli spojene (zda sa, ze je tam plot).
🇨🇿 Roman Horník (2025-05-11 21:55:15+00:00): Pokud vím, jen jsem ji zkrátil a udělal z ní, původně chodníku, příjezdovou cestu (footway ⇒ service a +service=driveway), dokonce tam zůstalo i původní určení povrchu.
No a teď co jsem zjistil:
1) Na adrese je 7R Panmed, asi sklad.
2) Má 4 vjezdy: 2x Revolúčna (ocelová brána vpravo a dřevěná vlevo), 1x Na Úvrati (dřevo) a pak tou dlouhou uličkou z ulice Pri Strelnici - dřevěná brána. A plot kolem je dřevo + sloupky z betonu.
3) Přes pozemek se nedá běžně projet ani projít, proto jsem cesty vedoucí přes něj odstranil.
aceman444 (2025-08-06 22:34:53+00:00): Ano, situacia moze byt ako pisete. Povodny chodnik z "Na utvrati" ste uplne odstranili (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8025375) a na jeho mieste urobili novu cestu (novy objekt) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385201221 . Preco ste to urobili tak. Lebo takychto zmien mate vela (ako aj rozdelenia ciest na useky bez zjavneho dovodu). Toto je zbytocne a nici to historiu objektov, preto sa Vas na to stale pytam preco to robite.

A sam pisete, ze je vjazd aj z Revolucnej, preto sa pytam, preco tu cestu ste odstranili uplne a nenechali tam aspon usek, ktory je vidiet na Ortofoto (ano, to uz by bol asi novy objekt po rozseknutli povodnej cesty).
infeeeee (2025-05-10 14:49:44+00:00): Szia!

Nem kell neveket adni ilyen dolgoknak, ezek következnek a többi címkékből: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

További jó térképezést!
infeeeee (2025-05-10 14:43:08+00:00): Szia!

Tűzcsapokat nem így jelöljük! emergency=fire_hydrant: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant


Részletes magyar nyelvű leírásunk is van erről: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Jelölési_példák/Tűzcsap

Ha kérdésed merülne fel, a magyar szerkesztő közösség elérhetőségeit megtalálod ezen az oldalon: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Közösség#Elérhetőségek

További jó térképezést!
infeeeee (2025-05-10 14:47:47+00:00): Illetve azért nem ajánlotta fel a tűzcsapot, mert ezt mindig pontként jelöljük.
Glassman (2025-05-10 20:00:03+00:00): It looks like you added a park that is already mapped in OSM, but with a different boundary. Can you determine which boundary is correct and remove the wrong one? Let me know if you need help
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166050362
Glassman (2025-05-10 20:02:05+00:00): It looks like you deleted an address node. It's a good idea to leave the address node for future businesses.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166050454
BainbridgeBoyd (2025-05-11 04:31:10+00:00): It previously was run as three businesses from one location. Now there are two which are set correctly
Glassman (2025-05-11 20:33:24+00:00): I only see one business with that address.
dieterdreist (2025-08-29 12:33:25+00:00): Hi, I noticed you retagged the train halt La Giustiniano from railway=halt to railway=station, your comment is misleading and I beliebe the edit is wrong, because it is not a train station, it is a halt (no possibility to change from one rail to another). Can you explain your sources?
donovaly (2025-08-31 12:24:27+00:00): I took the info from the Wikidata:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3969884
Feel free to revert. I had a quick look but I could not find the official station register of the FS. And
https://www.rfi.it/en/stations.html
does not provide enough info.
dieterdreist (2025-08-31 13:09:46+00:00): The source for the claim is the Italian wikipedia, but there it is writtten that it is a halt: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stazione_di_La_Giustiniana
basically an error in wikidata. Generally the OSMF-policy does not allow taking information from Wikidata / Wikipedia.
dieterdreist (2025-08-31 13:23:37+00:00): Generally, you should check the aerial imagery and usually you can already see whether it is a station or a halt. Did you retag more halts? Did you do it systematically?
donovaly (2025-09-01 11:50:50+00:00): > Generally the OSMF-policy does not allow taking information from Wikidata / Wikipedia.
Really? That is strange. But be it.
donovaly (2025-09-01 11:53:28+00:00): > you should check the aerial imagery

When I map I always have the satellite as underlay. But how does that help? It is up to the railway infratructure companies to declare a station type. For example for Germany I have the official station index of the company "DB InfraGO" and map accordingly and their classifications are, well kind of random. In some OSM stations I saw explanations like "if there is no railway switch, it is a halt", but this does not match the classification.
dieterdreist (2025-09-01 13:08:30+00:00): in Italy at least, this is the significant difference which I am aware of. Actually, there could be switches, but for a halt they have to be “permanently” blocked with appropriate devices.

If you want to learn about the license problems with wikidata you can find the information here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikidata
For wikipedia, the problem is incompatible licenses (also found in the osm wiki)
dieterdreist (2025-09-01 13:10:34+00:00): Anyway, if you did not find official information about the station status, and all you got was a different statement in wikidata compared to OpenStreetMap, what made you believe wikidata was right and OpenStreetMap was wrong?
donovaly (2025-09-03 11:00:25+00:00): Let's please be constructive. You are an experienced mapper and our common goal is to collect and distribute information. Therefore please help to improve Wikidata. Its aim is exactly this - collect there all information and distribute it. And that is why I for example connect in Wikidata the OSM nodes/ways/relation.
If you have knowledge, please share it, just fix bugs you see.
Regarding the license, it is simple: also only data publicly available can legally be added to the Wikidata. So the legal status of the sources matters. And of course, if you have e.g. the official FS station classification, you can distribute this info to Wikidata and OSM. If they don't offer such info publicly, then you are of course not allowed to distribute this info.
many thanks and regard, donovaly
dieterdreist (2025-09-03 11:37:54+00:00): FWIW, following our dialogue I fixed wikidata, both the La Giustiniana object but also the railway halt item, which had stated that halts were a subclass of stations, which they are not, and also that they were distinct from stations, which they are.
dieterdreist (2025-09-03 14:24:32+00:00): and someone reverted the edit so that the halt was again a subclass of station. I am mainly concerned with OpenStreetMap and do not want to go into edit wars on wikidata, which has their own rules. The relationship of wikidata items and OpenStreetMap objects is not identity, it’s more: “a similar concept”
donovaly (2025-09-05 14:15:36+00:00): Many thanks! The other change is correct, because you labeled it as a halt, therefore it belongs to the category "railway stop" and this is what the other person did.
By the way, I just found out that there is a second railway halt in Rome with the same name:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1313285443
dieterdreist (2025-09-05 14:24:40+00:00): yes, I know there are several railway halts with the same name, it is not the only one, but they are on different lines. Btw. also happens in other cities, e.g. Berlin Yorckstraße
FeetAndInches (2025-05-10 01:38:35+00:00): See https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4748857
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:56:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
infeeeee (2025-05-10 14:41:03+00:00): Szia! Üdv az OpenStreetMapen!

A note kulcsba többi szerkesztőknek szóló megjegyzéseket kell megadni, az ilyen általános szabadszavas infókat a description címkében tároljuk inkább:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:note
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description

De látom ezeket felvetted külön pontként is, az elég ilyenkor, nem feltétlenül kell két helyen jelölni.

Ha kérdésed merülne fel, a magyar szerkesztő közösség elérhetőségeit megtalálod ezen az oldalon: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Közösség#Elérhetőségek

További jó térképezést!
Samuel Eduardo Pincay Vélez (2025-05-10 02:11:30+00:00): tienda tuti
pincaypixel (2025-05-10 03:01:39+00:00): letreroa gigantografías
aceman444 (2025-07-15 07:58:45+00:00): Dobry den, Vy ste asi boli na kazdej ulici v Bratislave, ako ste pisali.

Preco vymazavate body ako https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/372829138 a potom hned vedla vytvorite novy bod https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824978057 ? Preco nestaci presun?

Preco odsekavate useky ciest, hoci su ich vlastnosti rovnake ako povodna cesta? Napr. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228888 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228885 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228890 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228886 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228879 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228889 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228887 .

Relacia https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19110763 je v poriadku? Co zakazuje zabocit zo Syslej ulice na Parkovu? Ciaru na ceste nevidim. Aka je tam dopravna znacka?

Vytvorili ste novu vetvu cesty https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228878 , ale ponechali ste ju v relacii https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2744419 , kam asi nepatri.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824978038 naozaj brana? Na Ortofoto su tam mini_bumps. To iste https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12824964829 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/51250879 .

Preco je chodnik https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385228872 ako sidewalk, ked nejde popri ceste? Nemal by ako sidewalk byt oznaceny chodnik https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/799366783 ?

Zase nahodne zmeny unclassified na residential na cestach bez nazvu, ako napr. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/10117183
Herman Lee (2025-05-10 06:00:02+00:00): 谢谢修改与更新，不过站名不要将副站名放在name中，谢谢
Bienson (2025-05-11 00:21:20+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166089985 -

Weg war korrekt eingetragen.
DressyPear4 (2025-06-17 01:39:06+00:00): Por que remover a tag "wood"?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166052807
user_5359 (2025-05-11 13:51:34+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please check the position of your business.
mavl (2025-05-10 12:58:01+00:00): Здравствуйте.  
  
Отношение https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19110808 не содержит роли "to".  

Отношение https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19110809 не содержит роли "from".
Supaplex (2025-05-10 14:15:56+00:00): 請修正既有線段，而非刪除重劃
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166053551
reihusser04 (2025-05-10 05:15:20+00:00): Former OLFU Hilltop Mansion Heights
NM$L (2025-05-10 15:27:07+00:00): 问题出在关系11516599，还有不建议为了渲染画图