piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Gregory Peony (2025-04-18 19:53:13+00:00): I flagged some footprints which are invalid becasue they envelope multiple buildings or include gardens. It lookos like you correctly deleted an invalid footprint. The footprints you added here should be square: make them so by pressing (q) after tagging. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164179970
Gregory Peony (2025-04-14 21:22:27+00:00): Most footprints are valid; the Western two do not need to be mapped for this project. Please remember to square (q) the footprints you digitise; it's common for buildings to have square corners and it's difficult to map precise corners.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180102
Gregory Peony (2025-07-12 01:18:14+00:00): Most buildings here are valid but inaccurate becasue they are oversized and have not been squared.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180112
Gregory Peony (2025-04-03 04:41:20+00:00): All footprints valid, vast majority accurate.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180145
Gregory Peony (2025-03-31 15:27:45+00:00): You added temporal yurts and footprints for buildings which are no longer visible in the more recent ESRI imagery. I encourage using multiple sources to aid your interpretation; just be sure to cross reference the most recent source to see if the features you're adding to the map are still there.
Gregory Peony (2025-04-04 20:05:10+00:00): Western footprint is not valid. The eastern one is valid and appropriately squared but it's oversized becasue its shadow was outlined and its orientation could be more accurate. Hope this helps. Please continue mapping.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180216
mstrbrid (2025-04-15 14:16:46+00:00): Hi, nice to see the Three Queens development finally on the map. Any reason you've modeled it as separate buildings?
Gregory Peony (2025-03-31 16:26:34+00:00): The some of the footprints you added here are too big in particular the two Eastern most ones. The building you modified is now less accurate I would say that the section you extended the footprint to should instead be mapped as a different footprint.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180260
CurlingMan13 (2025-04-05 06:16:53+00:00): Is the name of the place "glassworks" or "Glassworks" ?  Your note says it is "Glassworks" but you added it as a construction area with "glassworks"

Which should it be?
Gregory Peony (2025-04-03 04:40:08+00:00): The footpritnts here are valid and accurate. You correctly modified the highway to make room for the footprints you added. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180384
Gregory Peony (2025-07-26 00:11:35+00:00): Most of these footprints represent buildings, some are fairly well mapped but could be slightly smaller. When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint.  Keep in mind that you are looking at the roofs of buildings, but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag.  Take care to make contributions that others can build upon. See how I mapped some here https://osmcha.org/changesets/169481125
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180445
Gregory Peony (2025-07-26 00:12:34+00:00): valid trimming of a highway which overlapped with buildings in the imagery.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180565
ygcgjp5 (2025-03-28 07:30:52+00:00): Were the combined foot and cycleway signs actually removed from these paths?
eldora62 (2025-03-31 14:32:50+00:00): There was no sign at northeast/zoo entrance of the park; it prompted me to start removing bike/foot "designated" tags.
However, signs are present at all other entrances. Restored removed tags, my bad :)
Gregory Peony (2025-04-02 04:10:57+00:00): you improved the acuracy of these buildings, however they could still be more accurate and are generally oversized. It's easier to obtain accurate results by drawing the footprint a little undersized and then scalin it up after squaring. Thanks for modifying most of these footprints instead of deleting them and drawing new ones.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180865
Gregory Peony (2025-04-14 21:43:20+00:00): All footprints you added are valid, appropriately squared and most are accurate. Hold alt to prevent your cursor from snapping to data and press d to disconnect shared nodes.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180890
Gregory Peony (2025-04-02 15:22:28+00:00): Almost all of these footprints are valid though they could be more accurate. Some are oversized the Western building outlines two buildings.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164180948
Gregory Peony (2025-04-02 04:17:30+00:00): This highway was modified in line with instructions to avoid highway building overlapps.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164181052
NeisReview (2025-03-28 06:25:21+00:00): Partly revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163324104
Marildv (2025-03-31 13:49:44+00:00): Hi, NeisReview! Thank you for your comment. Feel free to reach out if you have any questions or notes. Best regards, Maria.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164181078
NeisReview (2025-03-31 14:28:53+00:00): Hi Maria,

Thank you for your reply and for correcting the map data. It would be very helpful if you could also add a comment to the initial changeset next time, indicating which map data or edits you've corrected. This will help make the changes clearer for everyone reviewing them.

Thanks again!
Marildv (2025-04-04 20:44:01+00:00): Thank you for your interest! Is it a common practice to comment the previous edit? As far as I know editor should provide the purpose and source of an edit in the comment to the changeset he/she adding, do you think it would be better to provide such information twice?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164181078
Gregory Peony (2025-03-27 22:52:19+00:00): Overall a good changeset. I flagged footprints you added which envelope more than one building. Use shadows and roof colour to determine when one ends and the next begins. Check Changeset: 164186287 for my partial resolution. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164181096
Emilius123 (2025-03-27 20:06:33+00:00): Ergänzende Quelle: Mapillary.
flohoff (2025-03-29 19:52:58+00:00): Moin,
so als hint - wenn du solche access tags einträgst ist das immer super wenn du den exakten Wortlaut des Schildes in ein note:access packst damit andere das Nachvollziehen können.

access=destination wäre ja 

"Durchgang verboten" 

Denn access (im gegensatz zu vehicle oder motor_vehicle) beinhalten ja auch Fußgänger.

Flo
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-02 05:27:59+00:00): DWG revert - sock-puppet account

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164402167
Gregory Peony (2025-03-27 22:28:02+00:00): Hold alt to prevent your cursor from snapping to data. You joined buildings to highways here. Remember to square footprints where appropriate. This counts as an appropriate occasion. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164181405
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-02 05:28:00+00:00): DWG revert - sock-puppet account

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164402167
Edelsalami (2025-04-05 08:17:51+00:00): Hi Mikeho, du hast hier eine abgebaute Bahnlinie/Gleise eingetragen. Davon ist bis auf den allgmeinen Verlauf einiger Straßen aber nichts mehr zu erkennen. Kannst du mir erklären, wie das eintragen von nicht-existenten Objekten mit den Grundsätzen von OSM vereinbar ist? Und welchen Nutzen haben Benutzer von OSM wenn nicht-existente Objekte eingetragen werden? Wären historische Objekte nicht eher was für die historische OSM? Gruß
mikeho (2025-04-06 18:50:54+00:00): Hallo „Edelsalami“, 

auf openrailwaymap.org findet man Bahnstrecken/Gleis in allen Stadien ihres Lebenszykluses: in Planung (proposed), im Bau (construction), … , erhalten (preserved), abgebaut (abandoned), verschwunden (razed). Das OSM-Wiki informiert über das dbzgl. Tagging im Details.

Der Umstand, dass eine Bahnstrecke vor der „Geburt“ von Openstreetmap im Jahr 2004 abgebaut wurde, ist für mich keine Grund, dies Objekte der OSM-Datenbahn nicht per Mappen hinzuzufügen. 

So weit mir bekannt, erfolgt das Mapping mit Tools wie JOSM etc.; von eine „historischen Variante“ habe ich noch nichts gehört.  

Ein historisches OSM habe ich bislang nur bzgl. der Karten-Darstellung wahrgenommen (https://www.openhistoricalmap.org). By the way: Ich habe den Eindruck, hier fehlt noch einiges im Hinblick auf die Darstellung, bspw., des Eisenbahnnetzes von 1980.

Viele Grüße
Michael
Piskvor (2025-03-28 09:51:58+00:00): Ahoj, tady se změnilo značení? Ještě zcela nedávno byl tento úsek značený jako "silnice pro motorová vozidla" (což je jedna z podkategorií silnice I.třídy, a v OSM se značí highway=trunk)
singousek (2025-03-28 13:31:56+00:00): Ahoj, tady už dlouho není silnice pro motorová vozdila, hlavně kvůli přechodu na padesátníku
vojtechzaboril (2025-04-08 07:53:18+00:00): Není nutné, aby se jednalo o SMV. Jako trunk se značí všechny směrově dělené silnice s mimoúrovňovými křižovatkami dálničního typu. Vracím tedy zpět na trunk.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:highway%3Dtrunk
NeisReview (2025-03-28 06:27:09+00:00): #NodeDragging

Hello, and welcome to OSM.

Thank you for contributing to the map. I’ve reviewed your recent edits and noticed that at least one node of a way was moved. This can sometimes happen unintentionally, and it’s led to some unusual intersections or overlaps between street segments and other map elements.

Could you kindly confirm whether these changes were intentional or if they may have been made by mistake?

Thank you, and I look forward to your response!

---
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10723959245
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1027662427
jb54osm (2025-03-27 23:30:19+00:00): Hi GullibleMappazo,

Buildings in The Netherlands are imported from the official registry Kadaster. So changing them in OSM won't help much; during the next update the building will return to its previous outline.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-02 05:28:01+00:00): DWG revert - sock-puppet account

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164402167
Geo-Tobi (2025-03-29 10:17:24+00:00): Bzgl. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258362836/
bicycle=optional_sidepath gehört auf die Straße, nicht auf den Gehweg (wenn du es wirklich benutzen möchtest. Der Nutzen ist für mich fraglich; ich weiche mit Rad nur ungerne auf einen Gehweg aus, bei welchem ich mich den Fußgängern unterordnen muss und zudem nur Schrittgeschwindigkeit fahren darf. Würde dieses Tag daher gänzlich weglassen.)
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-03 19:58:04+00:00): Hier ist ebenfalls noch ein optional_sidepath drauf: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1030984797   Bitte korrigieren. Danke
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-03 20:03:00+00:00): Und hier auch: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258362844  ;-)
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-10 12:52:10+00:00): Friendly reminder. Da sind noch obige zwei Abschnitte offen, zur Korrektur. 😉
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-10 16:07:37+00:00): Ich hab da mal Hand angelegt und einige Verbesserungen vorgenommen, auch hinsichtlich der Übergänge an seitlich einkommenden Straßen. Ist also erledigt.
Wegeschlenzer (2025-04-18 22:12:20+00:00): Hi Tobi,
die Querungsstellen an der Haager Str. haben Bodenmarkierungen. Die hab ich am 16.4. noch nachgetragen.
kasa kai (2025-03-27 21:08:19+00:00): Goddammit OsmAnd sucks at editing
Lezurex (2025-03-28 08:36:49+00:00): Hi threefoursixninefour,

I see two lanes here: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1196813585455077 for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/554298199.
threefoursixninefour (2025-04-03 12:57:19+00:00): Many thanks for your note.  When I surveyed the junction there was only one lane, but that may have been due to construction work which is now finished.  Have corrected to 2 lanes as per current imagery.
A67-A67 (2025-08-02 10:54:30+00:00): In deze wijziging worden wegen op bedrijventerreinen omgezet van het correcte highway=unclassified (lokale weg) naar highway=residential (woonstraat). 

Dat is incorrect. Het wegtype highway=residential is voor wegen in woonwijken, waar huizen aan de weg liggen. Het wegtype highway=unclassified is bedoeld voor lokale wegen waar geen huizen aan liggen, zoals wegen buiten de bebouwde kom en wegen op bedrijventerreinen.
Jorik “GingerLionXx” Seisveld (2025-08-03 19:08:02+00:00): Aah excuses, waarschijnlijk is mijn enthousiasme gebeurd. Ik zie nu ook dat ik dat ook vaker in bv Ommen gedaan heb. Ik zag dat jij dat al gefixed had bedankt.

Ik zag in een andere changeset in Ommen dat je een aantal wegen foot=use_sidepath hebt getaged. Ik heb deze tag nog niet eerder gebruikt, maar klopt het dat je deze gebruikt wanneer er naast een weg een sidewalk of cycleway is? Als dat zo is zal ik deze ook gaan gebruiken.
A67-A67 (2025-08-08 16:38:51+00:00): De tag foot=use_sidepath betekent inderdaad dat voetgangers het naastgelegen voetpad of fietspad moeten gebruiken, wanneer dit apart is gemapt als aparte way. Dus niet wanneer de weg zelf de tag sidewalk=right heeft en voetgangers die stoep moeten gebruiken.
CurlingMan13 (2025-04-01 03:07:14+00:00): Please use more detailed changeset comments.  What did you do and why?  "m" tells me nothing about what you did.

Please read:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments#:~:text=A%20good%20changeset%20comment%20should,have%20edited%20on%20the%20map.
Frans S (2025-03-28 16:13:25+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
One of the validator jobs is to reviews the taggings of highways . 

About 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.
Use the tag 'service' only when it is private access.  
The tag 'highway=residential' is mainly used in urban areas (towns, villages)

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
Langlaeufer (2025-03-28 11:01:49+00:00): Hallo DiesterWanderer,
die Lage des Turmes war vorher perfekt. Bitte nicht auf die Bing-Luftbilder verlassen. Die ESRI-Bilder entsprechen in Niedersachsen den Orthophotos von der Landesvermessung.
Die Knicke im Wegverlauf mag ich eigentlich auch nicht glauben. Der Weg ist im ESRI-Foto auch zu erkennen.
Grüße Langläufer
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164183891
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-27 21:41:25+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12705943027

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
urbalazs (2025-03-28 00:45:22+00:00): Én úgy emlékszem, hogy a w636880923 is térkő (paving_stones), nem macskakő (sett).
BáthoryPéter (2025-03-28 09:17:22+00:00): Köszönöm, tényleg elírtam. Javítva.

Meglepett, hogy ennek az utálatos térköves Könyves Kálmán körútnak milyen nagy része volt OSM-en tévesen aszfaltozottnak jelölve. A Gyáli úti aluljáró és a körút között meg macskakőnek volt jelölve, pedig mellette van kerékpárút aszfaltos. Én meg csodálkoztam, hogy a tervezők hülye útvonalakat javasolnak.
k-f (2025-03-29 15:19:06+00:00): Dear eggie, why do you think https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=pedestrian suits this path better than https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway ?
eggie (2025-03-29 15:31:23+00:00): Hi k-f

In case the area is wide it can be a pedestrian area.
Most of the time cycling is also permitted. It wil render wider.
A footway most of the time has an traffic_sign NL:G7 (cycling not allowed)
An pedestrian area G7zb with often an extra sign fietsen toegestaan. 
Sometimes even motor_vehicle. 

The former mapper created here an highway=residential.
I don't think it's a residential. (old situation?)
But up to you as local mapper. :)

greetz,
eggie
eggie (2025-03-28 07:52:26+00:00): Hoi,

Tja..  Of het een of het ander. De school staat al op het vlak gemapt. Dus niet nogmaals een node gebruiken. Het kan allebei goed zijn, maar niet samen.
Overigens is een VMBO , VWO amenity=school.
.. college gebruik je voor AOC en ROC.
Ook al heet het college... het is een school. 
university voor HBO en universiteit. 
Dubbele vermelding verwijderd. 
ROC West-Brabant is dat alleen maar het kantoor? 
Groet,
eggie
Flits216 (2025-03-28 20:36:20+00:00): Ahh nu snap ik 'm! Ik denk dat ik de amenity niet helemaal juist gebreep van de wiki.

Ik durf niet te zeggen hoe het precies zit met ROC West-Brabant. Ik denk dat het tegenwoordig Curio is geworden. Voor zo ver ik weet is die wel (nog) hier gevestigd zit en ik verwacht dat dit het hoofdkantoor is wat in Etten-Leur is gevestigd.
eggie (2025-03-28 20:49:22+00:00): Ahhh... nog iets om uit te zoeken. Voel je niet verplicht.
SomeoneElse (2025-03-28 11:10:40+00:00): Hello,
It looks like this change might have introduced a gap into a couple of townlands - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4204334#map=19/54.816293/-6.130655 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4161726#map=19/54.816293/-6.130655 .  Are you able to fill it in or would you like help with that?
Best Regards,
Andy
NeisReview (2025-03-28 06:17:54+00:00): #HighwayChanges

Hello, welcome to OSM.

In this changeset, some types of highway are being added or modified by you. 

Could we know the sources that you used? Thank you.

More information about the changeset: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=164184892
eggie (2025-03-28 06:58:51+00:00): Hi   better revert this  changeset.. 
This was mapped well by the former mapper.

Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2025-03-28 07:07:04+00:00): reverted by changeset #164193591

If you have any questions you are welcome,
eggie
k-f (2025-03-29 14:10:24+00:00): Dear NeisReview,
1. https://i.imgur.com/MRO35nS.jpeg, https://i.imgur.com/iRupszk.jpeg[
2. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway vs. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=pedestrian
eggie (2025-03-29 15:16:16+00:00): Hi k-f,

The line-elements highway=pedestrianen are for routing... because an area will no route well.
That's the reason the former mapper used highway=pedestrian and not foorway. 
Cycling on a highway=pedestrian is possible for sure if the traffic_sign is clear about that.
Greetz,
eggie
k-f (2025-03-29 17:19:07+00:00): @eggie, hmmm, when reading about https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:traffic_sign%3DNL:G7 I see that it means "highway=footway". And that's how these roads are marked: https://imgur.com/iRupszk
Also that sign is clear that cycling is allowed.
k-f (2025-03-29 17:20:58+00:00): But that's true that OsmAnd, for example, doesn't build a route through "highway=footway" even when "bicycle=yes".
eggie (2025-03-29 17:35:37+00:00): That's the exception...  mostly voetgangers gebieden.
pedestrian area.
But up to you.
The routing lines are cosmetic. Yhey look invisible because of the area=yes
It's a way of mapping for good routing.
Here the samen trick for routing in pedestrian are.
cycling is also permitted some hours.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.813959/4.669026
eggie (2025-03-28 07:01:03+00:00): reverted by changeset #164193459

Wanneer je vragen hebt stel ze gerust.
MVG
eggie
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-21 16:00:25+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12705970390/history has religion = protestant that was added in this edit
what was meant by religion=protestant ? It is duplicate of religion=christian denomination=protestant - right?
Map_HeRo (2026-04-21 17:40:49+00:00): You are right of course. Usually I try to avoid to map religious stuff so I am not really firm in doing so. Gonna change it. Thanks.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-22 02:32:37+00:00): Thanks for mapping this! And thanks for a fix!
LA2017_UTRK (2025-03-29 17:20:55+00:00): I reverted the changeset because I wanted it, I think it could no longer be gotua

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164258655
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-27 22:31:55+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/854971838

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
rskedgell (2025-03-27 23:01:13+00:00): (Review requested)

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Your edit looks fine to me, thank you for improving the map.

It may take a couple of weeks for your changes to propagate to routing software, as their update frequencies vary.