piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SGorskiy (2023-08-14 09:15:44+00:00): Здравствуйте. Вы создали точку с гостинецей, которая уже существует. Пожалуйста, будьте внимательней! Не создавайте дубли. 
Я удалил вашу точку как дубль и обновил https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/474946083
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139859463
gscholz (2023-08-15 08:02:27+00:00): Hi paoloricciotti,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=13.04178&lat=41.99023&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=139859902

This kind of error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps. Can you please fix this?

You may also like to educate yourself about how to edit hiking routes properly:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dhiking

Kind regards
Guido
Davileci (2023-09-17 08:52:37+00:00): Villarcayo es capital=7 por ser cabeza de partido https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Directrices_de_etiquetado_españolas#Núcleos_de_población
Hugoren Martinako (2023-09-17 15:26:19+00:00): Hum, cierto, no tuve eso en cuenta. Actualizaré los listados de la wiki para que aparezcan todas las cabezas de partidos judiciales.
SekeRob (2023-08-25 05:37:26+00:00): Hi,

I've repaired this vineyard relation some members 3x part of the same one. 1 area looks in fact in ESRI like a motocross pitch  and was made inner to the wrong vineyard https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/512794097
Now the area renders correctly, i.e. no large white space
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140352373

ciao
JLZIMMERMANN (2023-08-27 21:06:59+00:00): Thanks :D
map per (2023-08-28 16:33:03+00:00): Hello Hassan Arara,

at least as far as I can tell this (1) isn't a man_made=groyne (Wiki page: (2)).

Greetings from munich
map per

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1197729863
(2) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dgroyne
map per (2023-08-28 16:34:15+00:00): * as far as I can tell from looking at aerial imagery
totera (2023-09-10 16:28:07+00:00): Ciao Matty88A,
ti segnalo alcune cose che non vanno bene nelle tue modifiche e che sto sistemando:
1) il tratto che esisteva già del fondovalle Miano (fino alla strada privata che scende dal capolinea del 91/92 per intenderci) non può essere una cycleway perché continua a essere usato da trattori e automobili di chi abita o ha terreni in zona;
2) neanche tutto il tratto nuovo al momento è una cycleway perché mancano gli appositi cartelli rotondi blu;
3) al momento non può essere usata neanche la relazione perché pure non ci sono cartelli di itinerario ciclistico. Ci sono indicazioni "Biciclovia del Conero", che a sua volta fa parte dell'itinerario nazionale 6, a Falconara e Loreto; vedremo se saranno aggiunti anche qui;
4) la superficie usata è fine_gravel; gravel è per pietre più grosse, tipo massicciata ferroviaria;
5) perché hai cancellato il fosso https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/490989940 ?
Matty88A (2023-09-11 13:24:00+00:00): Provo a rispondere:
1) non ho capito bene a quale ti riferisci. Se è la parte lungo il Miano è stata rifatta di recente come parte integrante della nuova pista ciclabile. Se poi occasionalmente ci passa qualche altro mezzo non so come va mappato
2)  Ok ma di fatto è aperto e ci vanno le bicilette (e anche a passeggio). Forse i cartelli li metteranno più avanti ma non credo ci siano dubbi che quel percorso è stato fatto come pista ciclabile
3) come il punto 2
4) vero, correggo
5) temo di averlo fatto per errore
arjunaraoc (2023-08-15 01:25:17+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia)  I could not verify geometry can not be verified from Bing aerial maps. You can add local knowledge as one of the sources in such cases
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139861100
csomerville (2023-08-16 09:45:29+00:00): I see from history this intersection has bounced back and forth a few times in how it is being tagged. However it doesn't seem like we need or benefit to split the ways here in the first place. The island can just be mapped using a node on the way. 

What do you think?
pmarkina_lyft (2023-08-16 13:52:28+00:00): Hi, csomerville!
My name is Polina, and I am a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft. I removed the ‘oneway’ tag because due to the current geometry the existing ‘oneway’ tag blocked some maneuvers at this intersection, which are allowed based on the road markings. I left the road geometry unchanged, since it was added recently by another mapper, and in our practice, we try not to change geometry without apparent reasons for that. 

However, I agree with you that it would be preferable in this instance to map this intersection without taking into account the physical barrier as bidirectional with the traffic_calming=island tag (example https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10628563875/history). But according to the OSMwiki this tag should be used between two lanes of a carriageway. 

Best regards, Polina.
csomerville (2023-08-21 01:54:41+00:00): Hi Polina. Great to make your introduction. The wiki suggests two ways to map. The first is "put a node traffic_calming=island node on the road (especially if it's a small island),", like the example you provided, and the second is between the two lanes of a carriageway. Either method is equally acceptable though I think the first would be more beneficial here.
amakarevich_lyft (2023-08-22 10:10:34+00:00): Hi, csomerville,

My name is Artem, and I'm Polina’s teammate. I don’t see any significant reasons to remap the road and at the same time there are some doubts on how to do it right for such an atypical road. However, I have nothing against the first approach. If you are sure that a bidirectional road is more beneficial here, please feel free to change our edits. We really appreciate your intention to find the best option and discuss it with us. Thank you for your contribution!

Best regards, Artem
csomerville (2023-08-23 02:13:12+00:00): Hi Artem, Thank you for the reply. 

The oneway tag here has been reverted back and forth four to five times now. I see that lyft has had to come back to fix it more than once. I think there may be automated QA tools that are flagging it and causing drive by contributors to change it back to oneway.

I will solicit additional feedback from community on proposed change to ensure it is the optimal approach and best way to map this intersection. I’ll also see if I can confirm my suspicion about QA tool and if this needs to be raised with the maintainer of said tool. 

If the proposed solution changes and it appears that it might benefit from further solicitation of input from Lyft, I’ll follow up with another comment on this changeset.

Best regards. :)
amakarevich_lyft (2023-08-23 10:27:56+00:00): Hi, csomerville,

Thank you for your contribution! We will be waiting for any updates that you can find out about mapping such intersections.

Best regards, Artem
SekeRob (2023-08-23 18:01:13+00:00): Hi,

This forest relation is pretty badly broken so it stopped rendering, multiple self intersections to be seen in OSM Inspector, indicatiing this happened some 9 days ago. Are you going to fix this or do we need to fly in Brigade Spéciale from abroad?

Let me know

ciao

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=5.29255&lat=43.99643&zoom=12&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.65&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
eggie (2023-08-14 11:21:10+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback...  Meestal wordt access=private gebruikt ipv =no
MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-08-14 10:47:07+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 139608732, 139608762, 139608874, 139608961, 139609084, 139609145, 139609203, 139609455, 139609754, 139609788, 139609950, 139609989, 139610171, 139610545, 139610612, 139610652, 139610843, 139610905, 139611067, 139611392, 139611542, 139611628, 139611669, 139611764, 139612066, 139612316, 139612408, 139612491, 139613251, 139613362, 139613537, 139613607, 139613761, 139613873, 139614012, 139614219, 139614249, 139614278, 139614323, 139614429, 139614482, 139614562, 139615141, 139615186, 139615224, 139615272, 139615514, 139615610, 139615715, 139615980, 139616030, 139616087, 139616127, 139616260, 139616397, 139616439, 139616605, 139616736, 139616900, 139616971, 139617149, 139617224, 139617274, 139617910, 139618047, 139618203, 139618311, 139618476, 139619077, 139619217, 139619292, 139619393, 139619667, 139619732, 139619749, 139619810, 139619933, 139619977, 139620188, 139620460, 139620742, 139620786, 139620875, 139620969, 139621064, 139621216, 139621284, 139621365, 139621526, 139621590, 139621617, 139621686, 139621951, 139622004, 139622097, 139622154, 139622279, 139622623, 139622759, 139622817, 139622887, 139623296, 139623347, 139623385, 139624974, 139625045, 139625273, 139626136, 139626415.
SomeoneElse (2023-08-14 11:14:25+00:00): Reverting some poor quality 'delete and remap' that broke many existing features inc LDPs. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139626415
bxl-forever (2023-08-14 10:18:40+00:00): Sorry but the container on Rue Abbé Cuypers/Priester Cuypersstraat that was presented to you was explicitely marked as "Oliobox".
Those are the orange boxes for cooking oil.

The glass-recycling container is operated by "Bruxelles-Propreté/Net Brussel" and is drawn separately on the map.  This is important to identify each object.

In the quest, you answered that the Oliobox accepts… glass bottles.  This is not correct.  We had to undo your change.

Please make sure you understand how your app works to avoid adding fancy information.  OSM is a database used by multiple people, it is important that information is correct.
bxl-forever (2023-08-14 10:14:36+00:00): Hello
Addresses in Brussels always have FR and NL names, not just FR.
Moreover, this is just a shed at back of housenumber 383, it should not have a number.
Don’t let this easy StreetComplete app fool you, not every quest is useful, you may ignore most questions if you are not sure.
Yog Sot (2023-08-15 14:04:54+00:00): - w lasach państwowych obowiązuje zakaz poruszania się autami
- wstęp do lasów państwowytch autem mają np służby leśne lub osoby posiadające zezwolenie. 
Są na to odpowiednie tagi
- miejsca do zawracania prezentuje się tagiem na końcowym węźle drogi
Wprowadzanie danych umożliwiające nielegalne rozjeżdżanie lasu jest szkodliwe
Aim311_ (2023-08-15 21:27:13+00:00): Dlatego dodałem drogę highway=track, której zadaniem jest dojazd do pola lub lasu, a nie drogę typu choćby highway=service lub wyższej kategorii.

Proszę zapoznaj się z zasadami edycji, które możesz znaleźć na https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Main_Page
Jeśli potrzebujesz pomocy związanych ze swoimi edycjami śmiało pytaj na Discordzie ktoś na pewno ci pomoże.
Swic (2023-12-08 15:08:47+00:00): Bonjour, qu'en est-il pour l'accès piéton, notamment pour le passage du GR 5 ? Access=no pour tout le monde ?
itineris (2025-03-06 20:06:50+00:00): Szia!

Mi a forrásod a Simon-barlangra )(egyrészt hogy tényleg barlang, másrészt hogy ez a neve)?
Az Országos Barlangnyilvántartás ezen a környéken semmit sem tartalmaz.

Üdv:
Ákos
Takács Ferkó (2025-03-07 05:06:16+00:00): Szia! A Simon-barlang egy mesterséges üreg, ezért nem szerepel a nyilvántartásban. Sokat keresgéltem, de semmilyen írott forrást nem találtam róla, senki sem tudja, hogy minek (Hubertus-vadászlak, Bécsi úti őrs) a mije lehetett. A Virágvölgyben élt egy Simon nevű remete, a "barlangtól 1500 méterre van a Simon-kereszt, talán ehhez lehet köze a névnek. Vagy az alpolgármester vendéglőjéhez. Nem tudjuk.
itineris (2025-03-07 06:14:22+00:00): Jellegre barlanglakás, pince, vagy vízszintes táró?
Takács Ferkó (2025-03-07 06:17:43+00:00): vízszintes táró
itineris (2025-03-07 06:23:29+00:00): Köszönöm. Átcímkéztem ennek megfelelően.
canfe (2023-11-16 17:01:01+00:00): Il telefono non ha la formattazione corretta
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139863463
canfe (2023-11-16 17:01:51+00:00): Il name non andrebbe in maiuscole
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139864096
Kovoschiz (2023-08-15 13:12:38+00:00): Please use `addr:full=` if you don't know how to split the address. Don't remove the `addr:housenumber=`.
Frans S (2023-08-18 10:48:11+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
You forgot to tag the traces (paths) you mapped. Always tag a trace you map 
I adjusted them
Best regards
Frans S (2023-08-18 12:30:04+00:00): Hi. Another issue.
Again about traces of highways.
try to connect them to other highways so that you make a network. Isolated highways cannot be reached by NAV systems.
emersonveenstra (2023-08-22 14:33:39+00:00): Hi,

You created a way with no tags here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1197976899

Could you please go back and tag it? Thanks!
ivanbranco (2023-08-14 12:32:49+00:00): Ciao Giggio73,

sembra tu stia duplicando degli elementi aggiungendogli questi tag:
full_id=w1197782143
osm_id=1197782143
osm_type=way

riesci a sistemare?
Giggio73 (2023-08-14 12:51:30+00:00): non capisco come fare, mi puoi aiutare? grazie
infeeeee (2024-08-18 15:45:56+00:00): Szia! Ez egyik műholdképen se látszik, mi a forrásod erre?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-08-14 10:47:06+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 139608732, 139608762, 139608874, 139608961, 139609084, 139609145, 139609203, 139609455, 139609754, 139609788, 139609950, 139609989, 139610171, 139610545, 139610612, 139610652, 139610843, 139610905, 139611067, 139611392, 139611542, 139611628, 139611669, 139611764, 139612066, 139612316, 139612408, 139612491, 139613251, 139613362, 139613537, 139613607, 139613761, 139613873, 139614012, 139614219, 139614249, 139614278, 139614323, 139614429, 139614482, 139614562, 139615141, 139615186, 139615224, 139615272, 139615514, 139615610, 139615715, 139615980, 139616030, 139616087, 139616127, 139616260, 139616397, 139616439, 139616605, 139616736, 139616900, 139616971, 139617149, 139617224, 139617274, 139617910, 139618047, 139618203, 139618311, 139618476, 139619077, 139619217, 139619292, 139619393, 139619667, 139619732, 139619749, 139619810, 139619933, 139619977, 139620188, 139620460, 139620742, 139620786, 139620875, 139620969, 139621064, 139621216, 139621284, 139621365, 139621526, 139621590, 139621617, 139621686, 139621951, 139622004, 139622097, 139622154, 139622279, 139622623, 139622759, 139622817, 139622887, 139623296, 139623347, 139623385, 139624974, 139625045, 139625273, 139626136, 139626415.
pio2_122 (2023-08-14 20:24:02+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/223494645 - dlaczego umieszczasz opis w polu przeznaczonym do nazwy?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Nazwy#Nazwa_jest_tylko_nazw%C4%85
eggie (2023-08-14 11:22:48+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
Frans S (2023-08-26 12:13:58+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings need to be improved to meet the quality standards of HOTOSM.
Please pay attention to next summarized issues. (see attached document for more info)
A: E: Inaccurate mapped and / or not squared.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve 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/139866217
HellMap (2025-07-09 12:28:55+00:00): Hi!

Wanted to ask you about this Circle K/Kurši connecting road since you seem to know the situation here - do you know who exactly can get a permit here? Like, is it literally anyone who wants it or is it limited to residents or employees or something like that?

Thanks
Mrborkander (2025-07-09 12:40:06+00:00): Hey!

Glad to hear from you!

As I understand it, any customer of Kurši can get the permit. You can obtain it at any Kurši cashier by simply asking for it. The permit is valid for one year and features the Kurši logo.

Thank you for the work you do!
HellMap (2025-07-09 12:49:59+00:00): I see, thanks for clarifying! This does indeed sound like a "public" permit (usually such "izņemot ar xxx atļaujām" locations are actually private).
Mrborkander (2025-07-09 13:06:49+00:00): To further clarify. When going from CircleK parking to Kurši, there is a traffic sign 301. (Iebraukt aizliegts) with the additional 849. traffic sign "izņemot ar xxx atļaujām". 

I think the same combination of signs exist when going from Kurši to CircleK, but I'm not 100% sure.

If it would be better I can take a picture next time I'm there.
HellMap (2025-07-09 13:21:04+00:00): I recently biked through here, so the photos are available here: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1207689734465017&focus=photo / https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=732016132572944&focus=photo .

It is indeed still the typical 301+849. I would normally adjust the access myself, but your changeset comment mentioned further details. (It's actually very rare in Latvia for such signage to refer to permits that can be publicly acquired by anyone. Usually these are on private roads, parking, courtyards, etc.)
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-05-18 22:22:30+00:00): These aren't oneway
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139866293
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-05-18 22:24:52+00:00): oneway means vehicles are only allowed to travel one direction. Not whether vehicles can pass each other at any point along the road
probe_droid (2023-08-24 07:55:45+00:00): Is is just OK to mark this as obstacle=vegetation or should the upper part of the track better marked as not existent anymore?
Le_Cartographe (2023-08-21 16:06:29+00:00): Bonjour, j'ai remarqué que vous avez modifié le tracé de certains sentiers dans le périmètre du Parc du Montguichet. Seulement ces modifications ne sont pas cohérentes avec ce que l'on peut trouver dans l'imagerie aérienne et mes propres traces GPS (je me balade souvent par ici).

Pourquoi avoir modifié des sentiers bien cartographiés ? Sans ajouter d'autres attributs particuliers ?
Votre contribution a créé des « coudes » à certains chemins et ces mêmes chemins ont un décalage de plusieurs mètres au tracé initial et ce que l'on peut voir via l'imagerie.

La cartographie via traces GPS n'est pas assez précise pour cartographier quelque chose : elle doit être utilisée avec un autre support tel que l'imagerie aérienne. A l'avenir, vérifiez vos modifications avec les différentes couches que l'on peut trouver dans iD, à droite de votre écran (il pourrait y avoir les traces GPS d'autres contributeurs pour vous aider dans vos prochaines modifications).
Je vais remettre en l'état les chemins modifiés d'ici quelques jours.

~Le_Cartographe
petitdragon999 (2023-08-21 18:51:05+00:00): Bonjour,

Ah zut ! J'avais constaté un delta important avec ma trace et pensé que ces chemins n'étaient pas correctement cartographiés :( Je ne vois pas comment vous pouvez utiliser l'imagerie aérienne sur des chemins qui sont masqués par des arbres mais j'aimerai bien comprendre votre technique pour ne pas refaire la même erreur !
J'ai essayé de tester le plugin Reverter sur Josm pour annuler mes modifs mais je ne le maitrise pas et j'ai peur de faire encore des ânneries, je vous laisse le champs libre et m'excuse encore platement pour ce massacre indépendant de ma volonté.
Le_Cartographe (2023-08-21 20:43:29+00:00): Bonsoir,
C'est vrai qu'en couvert forestier c'est un peu plus compliqué ! mais en zoomant à 20 mètres du sol on arrive à distinguer les chemins en prenant la couche BDOrtho IGN (à 20m elle se transforme en la couche « Photographies aériennes très haute résolution »).
En s'aidant des traces GPS on arrive à trouver quelques parties des sentiers, il ne manque plus qu'à aligner les traces GPS avec ce que l'on peut voir et on obtient un chemin plutôt correct. Peut être que ça peut ne pas marcher avec toutes les forêts, mais avec celle-là, oui :)

Pour ce qui est de la grande partie du « Chemin de Ronde », je laisse vos modifications car je n'ai pas encore eu le temps d'y faire un tour et j'avais déjà repéré des décalages que je prévoyait de changer.

Merci pour cette réponse assez rapide !

~Le_Cartographe


PS: La couche haute résolution est surtout disponible dans les grandes villes et leur périphérie. Pour réaligner les traces GPS dans les zones non-couvertes, il faut s'aider de ce qui est discernable sur l'imagerie : une route identifiable, un arbre qui se démarque des autres, une allée plantée peuvent nous aider à replacer nos traces ! De plus, dans l'Yonne je trouve la couche PCRS Raster qui est à peu près un équivalent à la haute résolution. Si vous vous trouvez dans certaines régions, regardez s'il n'y a pas un calque qui apparaît dans la liste ;)
petitdragon999 (2023-08-21 21:31:57+00:00): Merci pour les conseils avisés, je prends tout :)
pitfire (2023-08-26 04:37:14+00:00): Hi joske1,
eine Sitzbank fast mitten auf der Wiese?
Auf Luftbildern ist da nur Gras :-)
MxxCon (2023-08-16 03:13:35+00:00): Hello.
You might want to consider using https://vzv.nyc it's easier to navigate and see relevant data.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139867604
valaise (2023-08-16 13:57:05+00:00): Thank you. I pulled the data and visualized it separately, but this resource looks to show similar info!
eggie (2023-08-14 12:47:51+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
Casey_boy (2023-08-14 14:24:17+00:00): Discussion about splitting and using relations for sub-division/access tagging: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/splitting-beach-into-dog-access-sections-edit-sanity-check/102460
eggie (2023-08-14 12:53:28+00:00): Dag John,

Je vraagt feedback.. Het klopt niet wat je doet denk ik.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=139869547

Dit gedeelte van de IJburglaan heeft aan de noordzijde een fietspad.
We taggen bicycle=no als er een C14 en/of C15 bord staat. En een Voetgangersverbod.  Staat dat bord hier?
Het zal heel goed kunnen, maar je tagging is niet consistent.
Je tagt bicycle=no en foot=no, maar laat moped en mofa op use_sidepath staan?


In andere gevallen gebruiken we use_sidepath

MVG
eggie
John van Kemenade (2023-08-14 14:20:21+00:00): Dank je wel voor je feedback Eggie. Dit is exact de reden waarom ik feedback vraag ;-)
Ik zal binnenkort eens kijken of de borden er staan. Reden waarom ik probeer de tagging aan te passen is de volgende. Ik ben een hardloper en maak gebruik van http://citystrides.com om zoveel mogelijk straten te lopen. Volgens Citystrides moet ik de zuidbaan van de IJburglaan nog lopen, maar dat kan / mag niet. Citystrides gebruikt OpenStreetMap en vraagt door te geven als de praktijk niet overeenkomt met kaart. Vandaar.
Graag hoor ik wat ik hier aan kan veranderen; of  als jij het wilt bijwerken zoals het moet is dat natuurlijk ook prima.

John
eggie (2023-08-14 14:43:19+00:00): Dan zou foot=use_sidepath moeten werken.. Wellicht dat de app die officiele tag nog niet ondersteunt?
Je zou het eens kunnen vragen aan de app ontwikkelaar.
Mvg
eggie