piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
marczoutendijk (2025-02-16 14:30:37+00:00): Deze wijzigingen hebben vooral betrekking op de situatie die is ontstaan na het verplaatsen van de parkeerplaats langs de Nijkerkerstraat.  De gebiedsbeheerder heeft een aantal paden parallel aan de Nijkerkerstraat, vanaf het bos achter huisnummer 26 en richting het noorden, ontoegankelijk gemaakt gemaakt cq. verwijderd. De rondgang die het Laakespad in dit deel van het bos maakte, is nu niet meer mogelijk.
marczoutendijk (2025-02-16 14:34:16+00:00): Laakespad = Laaksepad!
marczoutendijk (2025-02-16 14:36:41+00:00): Op OSM stond de naam van het pad foutief. Gecorrigeerd naar Laaksepad.
eggie (2025-02-16 14:53:03+00:00): Dag Dave... Dit routeert allemaal niet meer.
Tijdelijke werkzaamheden niet op deze manier aanpassen.
Een weg kan geen barrier=yes worden. Het is ook geen link. 
Ik draai je changesets terug.
Probeer eens te reageren op opmerkingen.
Er staan  nog veel opmerkingen open. 
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=5434634

MVG
eggie
De tagging is ook niet des OSM's

Zet anders een opmerking op de kaart dan pakt een ervaren mapper dit op.
eggie (2025-02-16 14:55:43+00:00): reverted by changeset #162573973
stosh77 (2025-03-08 15:24:33+00:00): revised.
Soshal Distan Singh (2025-03-23 17:19:29+00:00): 👋

>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1360349524/history

📃
"Почему не нужно расставлять на дорогах/тропах теги bicycle=yes, foot=yes и т.п.

Не следует расставлять теги bicycle=yes, foot=yes, horse=yes, access=yes и т.п. на дорогах (пешеходных и автомобильных), на грунтовках и тропах. Данные теги (как и любые access-теги) применяются для того, чтобы отобразить административные запреты/разрешения (т.е. установленные дорожными знаками, объявлениями, описывающими режим объекта и т.п. - или даже просто охранником, стоящим на КПП), а не физическую возможность проезда для пешехода или велосипедиста. При этом, существует перечень значений по умолчанию: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Russia. В связи с этим данные теги избыточны, не имеют смысла и зачастую даже противоречат истинному положению вещей (в частности, проезд по тротуарам на велосипеде почти во всех случаях прямо запрещен ПДД), и поэтому вычищаются из базы.

Имеет смысл расставлять на дороги только запрещающие или ограничивающие access-теги - только в том случае, если в этом месте действительно есть соответствующие знаки или иным способом реализованный запрет, например:

    motor_vehicle=private (когда для моторизованных транспортных средств доступ по пропускам - в частности, если путь преграждают шлагбаум или ворота с замком/электронным доступом или охранником, но пешеход/велосипедист может проехать)
    access=private (то же самое, что и в предыдущем пункте, только если распространяется еще и на пешеходов и велосипедистов)
    bicycle=no (когда есть знак “Движение велосипедистов запрещено” или на велосипедах просто не пускают)
    и т.п."

©️ https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/literan
Rapppex (2025-02-17 09:43:16+00:00): Hallo schoen6
kann es sein dass dir in diesem Changeset ein node (12426938177) verrutscht ist?
LG Rapppex
Langlaeufer (2025-02-27 18:37:10+00:00): Hallo,
du hast zur Schmiedegasse bicycle=designated zugefügt. Ist der Weg mit eine Verkersschild beschildert, wenn ja wie?
hatul (2025-07-22 07:43:46+00:00): שלום Compositor,
לפי המקום אני מניח שזה בור ולא באר. בכל מקרה בבקשה לא לסמן שתי נקודות על מקום אחד.
marczoutendijk (2025-02-16 15:09:24+00:00): Zie ook: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162572704#map=18/52.189104/5.444364
NorthCrab_upload (2025-02-16 15:05:55+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Ligonia":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593126086

"Piotra Ściegiennego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593135693

"Żwirki i Wigury":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593135740

"Astrów":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593135781

"Osiedle Sadowy":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593135851
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593135852

"Na Stoku":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593135906

"Kochanowskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593136057

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-16 18:10:41+00:00): #seo #spam
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-28 11:33:56+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593112651

is it about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/229925454#map=19/48.693630/21.290691&layers=N not being overground here?
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-16 18:20:08+00:00): Hi Tais Bean, welcome to OSM!

If a path crosses your private property, it’s not a reason to delete it. Could you please revert your recent map changes? Thanks
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-26 11:49:29+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593104788/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
menganito (2025-04-28 08:31:01+00:00): I removed the erroneous point.
Hugoren Martinako (2025-06-19 07:50:06+00:00): Buenas, he visto (no solo en este changeset) que haces mucho abuso de highway=service, service=alley, en todo el norte palentino. Los callejones, sobre todo en zonas rurales, no son apenas comunes.

Lo primero que has de mirar, dando igual si la calle es estrecha o si tiene salida... es si tiene portales (capa catastro): en tal caso, siempre es calle urbana. Si no cabe un coche, quizá footway sea más apropiada.

Y luego, si una via está pavimentada (asfalto u hormigón) pero continua en camino típico (track), tampoco es service: sigue siendo track, pero su tracktype será grade1.

Saludos
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-16 18:11:11+00:00): #seo #spam
pyrog (2025-02-16 16:07:38+00:00): Bonjour,

Cette modif a cassé des itinéraires du réseau pédestre.
https://knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/route/18713039/map?layers=osm,hiking,nodes,unused&position=44.23607128,4.72073681,15
_
Yves
Patchi (2025-02-16 16:16:03+00:00): Bonjour Yves,

Le node_network "Le Grès Sud" n'était pas au bon endroit. Le panneau lui est à la bonne place.
Je viens de corriger les autres relations. Normalement tout devrait être en ordre maintenant.

Bonne continuation,

Patchi.
pyrog (2025-02-16 16:48:17+00:00): Merci :)

En fait j'avais positionné le carrefour à l'intersection logique (et mis une note mais que sur le poteau).

Le poteau dans OSM est à la bonne place, mais je pense qu'il a été placé au mauvais endroit sur le terrain (j'ai déjà vu ça en Isère).

Il faudrait qu'on arrive à contacter les techniciens rando sur place ou le SIGiste du département pour être sûr.

Yves
Patchi (2025-02-16 17:09:17+00:00): Je ne pense pas que le poteau "Le Grès Sud" soit au mauvais endroit. Les distances indiquées sur ce panneau (OK un peu vieux puisque année 2019) vers "Le Grès Nord" (1.1 km) et "Les Peyras" (0,9 km) et réciproquement correspondent au terrain. Je pense que c'est plutôt la carte IGN qui n'est pas correct (ce qui ne serait pas non plus la première fois).
Le GRP ne passe
pyrog (2025-02-16 17:18:43+00:00): Le poteau est au bon endroit sur le Scan 25.

Il y a probablement une erreur sur la carte IGN (j'en trouve régulièrement).
Il faudrait vérifier la présence de ce carrefour et des itinéraires autour.
https://knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/node/1407033010

2 itinéraires se superposent à l'Est du "Grès Nord"
https://knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/node/1407033010/map?layers=background,hiking,node-marker-layer&position=44.23707052,4.72328604,16
pyrog (2025-02-16 17:29:18+00:00): Il y a un poteau au carrefour "?" que tu as ajouté.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fmyQJqWJxo7nByQ99
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=3899758563425514&lat=43.86623722096195&lng=5.121507101751604&z=18.450123883392155&focus=photo&x=0.31490838597222726&y=0.4749096692237873&zoom=3

Je vois que tu as ajouté aussi le poteau :)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593202792

Mais c'est bizarre que tu ne l'as pas vu sur le terrain lors de tes randos.
Patchi (2025-02-16 17:45:55+00:00): Je crois surtout que je vais supprimer le panneau et carrefour "?" dans le coin car au vu de cette image https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=911427859701680 le haut du poteau est vert donc pas forcément un vrai panneau officiel. De plus il n'est référencé ni pas "Le Grès Sud" ni par "Les Peyras". Et je vais corriger les relations donc il n'y aura plus de superposition.
pyrog (2025-02-16 17:51:02+00:00): Attends peut-être que quelqu'un vérifie sur le terrain ?

Les poteaux adjacents ont peut-être été mis à jour depuis ton passage ?

J'ai vu des lames vertes dans le Vaucluse (et dans d'autres départements).
Ça indique des monuments, itinéraires… pas dans le PDIPR, ou pas balisé… bref quelque chose hors "réseau"
Patchi (2025-02-16 17:57:03+00:00): Je laisse le poteau mais sans nom.
Les lames vertes indiquent des chemins locaux (donc pas gérés par le Conseil Départemental).
Dès que quelqu'un vérifie on pourra adapter en conséquence.
Frans S (2025-02-22 12:13:11+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please tag barriers=hedge instead of barrier=fence. Read the instructions about this subject.
Best regards
justb (2025-02-22 14:12:40+00:00): Hi, think we should revert this changeset. Good extercise for you!
Had already to send away tourists. :-).
bxl-forever (2025-02-16 16:30:48+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM.

I understand you have good intentions and probably believe that you are doing something useful when adding the addresses but…

Please do not type addresses on businesses.  We no longer do this in Belgium nowadays.  All  the addresses in Brussels are already on the map, duplicating them on shops is unwanted.

For Cambio stations, please do not type "Cambio" as part of the name, we don’t do this either.  All Cambio stations already have brand and operators correctly set.

Have a nice day.
mstrbrid (2025-05-24 09:04:01+00:00): Hi ceirios, looks like you've got yourself upside-down and mapped the stream valley as a mountain ridge. The stream, Afon Mihartach, is already mapped from an NPE import, and the small side "ridges" that you've mapped don't really meet the definition of a ridge - they're probably best left to be represented by contours. Might be best off just deleting the whole changeset?
ceirios (2025-05-24 09:08:02+00:00): whoops, i had a feeling it looked a bit weird - thank you!

will delete it now
justb (2025-02-22 14:13:28+00:00): Same for bench. Maybe you can real benches in Válor.
Baloo Uriza (2025-02-16 21:04:42+00:00): Take another look for a better way to tag that.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162576129
trial (2025-11-04 08:44:28+00:00): name=Perl
old_name=Perl
Vraiment ? ;-)
C'est une perle !
Lyon-St-Clair (2025-11-05 20:32:58+00:00): ah oui bien vu, j'avais dégagé un nom non-officiel
trial (2025-11-06 08:29:23+00:00): J'avais bien compris. C'est aussi le problème des attributs dépendants : tu as un name et un alt_name, quelqu'un inverse les deux (potentiellement pour de bonnes raisons) mais n'inverse pas les source:name et source:alt_name. Que celui qui ne s'est jamais fait avoir lève la main.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-02-16 16:03:51+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Wilczka":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593268854
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593268855

"Sienkiewicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593269125

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
silversurfer83 (2025-02-16 17:10:45+00:00): Moin :)

zwei Kleine Hinweise aus unserem Wiki für dich:

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

Check mal bitte, ob der Name hier korrekt gesetzt ist. Danke.

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162576386
felipeeugenio (2025-02-17 14:50:21+00:00): Hola. Hay algún motivo por el cual eliminó la dirección del taller? no es la correcta?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162576591
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 01:50:31+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164657611
CoyKoi (2025-02-16 23:00:48+00:00): You have put a question mark as a bus stop name.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162577041
sykul (2025-02-16 17:58:57+00:00): Hi. Thanks for your contributions in the area. Some really good work.
I just want to check about https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/330950304 'One fitness club'.
It looks like this node used to be a fuel station, there are still fuel-related tags on it, and the location definitely suggests fuel station rather than fitness centre.
Are you sure this is the correct location for the fitness centre?
Nakaner-repair (2025-08-18 12:41:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170614902 where the changeset comment was: "Revert changesets 164216585 and 162577298 due to copyright violation. The user did not respond to questions asked via changeset comments."
woodpeck (2025-02-16 16:25:28+00:00): Dear Harsh_IITBHU, please add proper changeset comments to your uploads. "hhhh" or "mm,mmm," are not sufficient. You can group many trees in one upload and then you can write "added trees" or something.
Marek-M (2025-02-16 17:46:20+00:00): Cześć, czy ta droga rowerowa https://www.osm.org/way/1360373522 jest faktycznie oddzielona od jezdni?

W jakim celu dodajesz zbędne węzły na liniach highway? Nie ma potrzeby dodawania węzła co 1m na prostych liniach.
mueschel (2025-02-18 19:16:46+00:00): Hi,
these bus stops got three strange tags:

stop_code
stop_desc
stop_url

The first one is a duplicate of 'ref'. Did you really mean to add these tags?

'wheelchair_boarding' is also not an established tag - bus stops are typically tagged with 'wheelchair'.
eikleinbaum (2025-02-18 19:41:59+00:00): Thanks. Forgot to remove the tags from the data source. I'll update these.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-02-20 02:04:51+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17287
Emilius123 (2025-03-27 12:26:07+00:00): Hallo adjuva,

durch eine Änderungen an folgendem Kreisel:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1349759487

Hast du folgende Relationen gebreakt:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12212692

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12212753

- Bitte aufpassen.
Emilius123 (2025-03-27 12:29:59+00:00): PS: Ich habe das jetzt alles wieder gerichtet.

Nichts für ungut, danke für deine Arbeit auf den Linien!
marc__marc (2026-01-29 23:48:13+00:00): en février 2025 tu as mis survey:date=2026-06 sur 2 objets
je te laisse voir si c'était une double type pour survey:date=2025-02
pyrog (2026-01-30 07:34:08+00:00): Bien vu.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2481594866
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593341644
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-16 18:11:39+00:00): #seo #spam
Tomas Straupis (2025-02-16 18:45:19+00:00): Laba diena. Šitas dviračių takas per daug integruotas į patį kelią, kad būtų žymimas kaip atskiras vektorius. Todėl jis atskiru vektoriumi ir nebuvo pažymėtas. Ir nereikia jo atskiru vektoriumi žymėti.
SomeoneElse (2025-02-22 12:00:08+00:00): @kkuzmickas Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
How and whether to map "cycling on the sidewalk" infrastructure is a hotly-debated topic within OpenStreetMap.  There are cycling advocates that argue that everywhere it is allowed it should be mapped separately, and there are those (like Tomas here) who argue that "cycleway:right=oneway" is correct, and anything more would misrepresent the amount of cycling provision here.  Generally speaking, I suspect  that people with the former view are in the majority and people who agree with Tomas the minority.
However, what is correct in any individual case depends on that individual case.  
There does seem to be quite good Mapillary coverage here - see e.g. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=54.674222222222&lng=25.272191666667027&z=17&pKey=505301730893404&focus=photo - and it does look like there's a strip of grass between the cycleway/sidewalk and the road, which would suggest that you were correct and Tomas was incorrect.
@Tomas%20Straupis do you have any comment on that?
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2025-02-22 12:00:27+00:00): @kkuzmickas Sveiki ir sveiki atvykę į OpenStreetMap!
Kaip ir ar pažymėti „važinėjimo dviračiu šaligatviu“ infrastruktūrą, yra karštai diskutuojama OpenStreetMap tema. Yra dviračių šalininkų, kurie teigia, kad visur, kur tai leidžiama, reikėtų pažymėti atskirai, o yra tokių (kaip Tomas čia), kurie teigia, kad „cycleway:right=oneway“ yra teisingas, o kas daugiau čia klaidingai parodytų dviračių nuomos dydį. Paprastai kalbant, įtariu, kad ankstesnės nuomonės žmonių yra dauguma, o su Tomu sutinkančių – mažuma.
Tačiau tai, kas yra teisinga kiekvienu konkrečiu atveju, priklauso nuo to individualaus atvejo.
Atrodo, kad čia yra gana gera Mapillary aprėptis – žr. pvz. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=54.674222222222&lng=25.272191666667027&z=17&pKey=505301730893404&focus=photo – ir atrodo, kad tarp ciklo ir kelio juostos, kuri rodo teisingą gatvę/kraštą, yra ir Tomas buvo neteisus.
@Tomas%20Straupis ar turite ką nors pakomentuoti?
Pagarbiai
Andy Townsendas, OSM duomenų darbo grupės vardu.
Tomas Straupis (2025-02-22 13:06:11+00:00): My simple comment is "refer to local community". This has been discussed quite a lot. The statement I made is from Lithuanian mapping community, not mine alone. I have no idea how Andy is being able to "calculate the popularity", especially when popular is not the same as professional/correct :-)
Contact local community and discuss there. If you change ONE street (or even ten of them) and make it totally different than thousands of other Lithuanian streets, you're not doing any improvement, rather the opposite.
SomeoneElse (2025-02-22 13:11:17+00:00): @Tomas perhaps you could link to the public forum where this discussion has been taking place?
Tomas Straupis (2025-02-22 13:17:18+00:00): Discussions have been done in mailing list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/admindb/talk-lt years ago (in Lithuanian of course). Also in our meetings in a pub (not documented, of course), we sometimes get more than 10 participants even from outside of Vilnius, so it is very representative. It also has some prominent Lithuanian cycling enthusiast representatives.
SomeoneElse (2025-02-22 15:15:24+00:00): > Discussions have been done in mailing list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/admindb/talk-lt years ago

Thanks - do you have a link to the thread?
Tomas Straupis (2025-02-22 15:35:39+00:00): No, too much info there. But kkuzmickas reads Lithuanian, so he can go through, there might be some other important or interesting information for him. There were a number of cycling related discussion as we were discussing cycling schema to use, maps products to make etc. If he still has questions we welcome everybody to THE CARTOGRAPHY PUB!!! :-)
somehundred (2025-02-22 15:42:42+00:00): I just want to point out that the provided mapillary footage is outdated. Here's a new one from July 2024: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=54.6729267&lng=25.2726497&z=19.9&pKey=880819717313713&focus=photo&x=0.08102023366484773&y=0.6206059317455411&zoom=0.8075370121130552

And in this region NŽT ORT10LT is outdated too. Bing here is much higher quality and more up to date. The separation between main street and cycleway is clearly visible in both Bing aerial imagery and mapillary footage.
SomeoneElse (2025-02-22 15:56:04+00:00): Indeed - and I have to agree that even to someone (like me!) who tends to map roadside infrastructure as "part of the road", https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=54.673459200000025&lng=25.272460000000024&z=19.9&pKey=522626237131593&focus=photo&x=0.9962062785249548&y=0.5534350176382107&zoom=0.8075370121130552 definitely looks separate!
SomeoneElse (2025-02-24 22:27:11+00:00): Following the complaint to the DWG Ticket#2025022210000194 and the discussion above, I've reverted this in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162910810 .
To reiterate, I suspect that, based on the sources above _most_ OSM mappers (even ones like me who often map such infrastructure as part of the road) would map this as a separate cycleway.
If anyone would like to discuss this further I'd suggest doing so in a public forum such as https://community.openstreetmap.org (I can add a "lithuania" tag to any posts if so desired).  Discussing there would be better than a private location or a mailing list that's had one post in 6 months.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
Tomas Straupis (2025-02-25 06:22:38+00:00): Ok, I see. So once again you, Andy, do not consult local community, but rather make your own decisions and in this case leave after yourself broken data - now cycleway is double-tagged. No, I will not discuss it here anymore. We will keep discussion in our closed forums away from incompetence of DWG and especially you. Bye.
PonasJonas (2025-02-25 18:10:59+00:00): Well, I believe 'thank you's are in order for the exceptionally, ahem, 'warm' welcome.

I marked the aforementioned bicycle path as separate structure, rather than part of the road, solely from my personal expertise, since I live in close proximity to the object of discussion.

I strongly oppose the idea of it being marked as part of the road, since the two (i.e. the carriageway and the bicycle path) are separated via the parked cars and (in some places) the center median island.

I apologise for my 'limited' vocabulary in the english language and, perchance, the poor knowledge of undisclosed or internal agreements within a certain OpenStreetMap (-s) community.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-26 09:03:21+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12593349831/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-16 18:12:15+00:00): #seo #spam
phodgkin (2025-04-18 09:31:10+00:00): I don't think it really works to pick out the Departmental of Obstectrics in the James Cook when the rest of the hospital is unmapped (and there isn't a good scheme for hospital mapping).

It also looks a bit spammy to advertise a private consultant in an NHS hospital?

I have retagged to clinic to avoid having two hospitals. But I would be tempted to delete?
SK53 (2026-01-18 19:46:28+00:00): Any information about the path you marked as abandoned (way 1360384412)? I walked this in 2014 and it's clearly visible on aerial imagery.

Presumably an earlier version was deleted, because it was definitely on my Garmin 15.5 years ago.
*abq* (2026-01-19 18:01:16+00:00): Hi, 
this path has been off limits in the nature preserve for decades. You are not allowed to enter there. Other abonded pathes in the area are treated similirly.
Regards, Reiner
eggie (2025-02-16 18:41:09+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback De tagging van het fietspad heb ik aangepast naar een onverplicht fietspad.
bicycle=yes hoeft niet op een fietspad. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
NeisBot (2025-02-27 09:36:03+00:00): Hi Rothemuehle, thank you for your contribution to the OSM project.

Over your latest stretch of time, you've made at least 46 changesets with minimal or no meaningful comments.

To enhance collaboration, please consider using the comment field to describe your map changes. This helps others understand and follow your adjustments more easily. You can find guidance on good changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 

Thanks!

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

#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-17 07:14:51+00:00): Hi cavixsd, welcome to OSM.

Please have a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks!