piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
silversurfer83 (2023-08-03 15:53:12+00:00): Moin :)

Ein Hinweis für die Zukunft, da du hier einige Punkte gelöscht hast, die schon >10 Jahre in der Datenbank waren:
Es ist gute Praxis die Geschichte von Objekten zu erhalten. Das bedeutet in diesem konkreten Fall:
Wenn du aus einem als Punkt erfassten Objekt eine Fläche machen möchtest, dass nutze den Punkt für die Fläche. Die Eigenschaften kannst du dann vom Punkt auf die Fläche übertragen. So bleibt die Geschichte in der Datenbank erhalten.
Jetzt steht zb in Flechtdorf ein Turm in v1 vom 2.8.23 obwohl an der Stelle schon seit über 10 Jahren ein Turm verzeichnet war.

Details findest du zum Beispiel in diesem Artikel im Wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice (Punkt 10)

Das soll dich jetzt nicht von weiterer Arbeit hier abhalten :)

Bei Fragen, immer raus damit

Grüße
silversurfer83
Erdorbit (2023-08-03 20:57:35+00:00): Hallo,
da hast du recht. 
Wäre es denn praktikabel den Änderungssatz rückgängig zu machen? 
Bleibt die Historie erhalten, wenn nach Kopieren der Eigenschaften auf die Fläche, diese im Punkt gelöscht werden? Oder müssen sie im Punkt verbleiben? Dann hätte man eine Doppelung. Mit der Vereinigen-Funktion sollte es auch gehen, oder?

Gruß
silversurfer83 (2023-08-04 19:42:57+00:00): Hallo und danke für die schnelle Reaktion :)

Ein revert deiner Änderungen ist vermutlich zu viel des Guten. Mir ging es in meinem Kommentar primär darum dich auf den Umstand aufmerksam zu machen und dich für die Zukunft dafür zu sensibilisieren. 

Wenn ein Objekt nicht gelöscht wird bleibt seine Geschichte auch erhalten, wenn alle Eigenschaften entfernt werden. Es ist dann natürlich schwierig den richtigen node zu finden um diese dann nachzuvollziehen, aber sie wäre noch da.
Vereinigen müsste ich jetzt selbst gucken. Weiß ich gar nicht genau.

Grüße
canfe (2023-12-26 11:11:25+00:00): Se non ha numero civico si mappa

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:nohousenumber
OSMCowboy (2023-08-02 21:20:29+00:00): Correction: Source used was Esri World Imagery, Mapillary
dzidek23 (2025-06-17 14:55:43+00:00): Hey CJMalone,
Another user reported missing bus stop (missing on the ground)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5884897366

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4792787

Is it possible that Naptan database has "ghost" entries, planned but not implemented?
CjMalone (2025-06-17 23:54:52+00:00): Another?

This changeset was so long ago, but it doesn't look like I added any bus stops in it, just added the refs.

I don't know of NaPTAN including planned bus stops, but it does include stops without active routes, and it includes request only stops. There is lots of complexities with both OSM and NaPTAN, the wiki should remember more than me.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Surveying_and_Merging_NaPTAN_and_OSM_data#physically_present
mueschel (2023-08-03 09:16:14+00:00): May I suggest to change to change the "electrobus" tags to something that fits better with other tagging schemes?

1. we already use electric_vehicle and electric_bicycle. How about using "electric_bus"?

2. replace "type" by "manufacturer", which is already in use in many contexts.
Bobropiton (2023-08-03 19:45:04+00:00): Hi. 
1. Electric_bus sounds good. It would be great if PTV2 had its own label for electric buses, but...
2. Electrobus:type and after re-tagging electric_bus:type does not mean manufacturer. It mean type of charging
-ONC (Overnight charging)
-OC (Opportunity charging)
-IMC (In-motion charging)
Patchanka (2023-08-05 09:40:26+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue
pouvez-vous penser à mettre un commentaire à propos de vos modifications au moment où vous enregistrez ? Cela aide les autres contributeurs à comprendre ce que vous avez modifié.

Voici quelques bonnes pratiques : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/8/87/Les_10_cOSMandements.pdf

merci d'avance
ChehrehBargi (2023-12-02 09:52:35+00:00): سلام ضمن تقدیر از زحمات شما
برای کوچه ها فقط از برچسب جاده مسکونی یا highway=residential استفاده می کنیم. برچسب service=alley در ایران زیاد کاربرد ندارد. تنها برای بعضی از خانه ها که مسیری جدا برای بعضی از خدمات مثل رسیدن به کنتور برق یا چاه آب یا خدماتی از این دست راهی کشیده شده، استفاده می شود.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-12-02 18:04:21+00:00): It is possible that this edit should be done!

But it should be consulted with other members of community to confirm that mass edit is welcome, with mass edit linking to such discussion (and discussion ideally would be in place where OSM account is enough to participate)
ChehrehBargi (2024-01-03 06:42:10+00:00): Hello again
Your statement is correct. And I have already asked in Iran's osm group how to register an alley in Iran:
Answer: It is better to register the alleys by users who have seen it closely, of course, for narrow alleys, we can add the width of the alley and whether it is car-friendly or not, and the use of the service=alley tag is very rare in Iran.
Thank you for your attention and happy new year.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-09-13 11:56:47+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/119540556/history to też service=yard
richlv (2023-08-03 10:34:16+00:00): Hi, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193998524 currently has width=0.
Should it perhaps be changed to highway=path instead?
HellMap (2023-08-03 10:39:58+00:00): I just deleted the width=0, but I guess the question stands.
افسر (2026-02-02 06:57:35+00:00): آموزشگاه خیاطی ومزون بانوکی منش
5m4u9 (2023-08-03 00:44:30+00:00): Hi, I live near here. In these cases, the neighbours use the sidewalks to drive their cars.
Baconcrisp (2023-08-03 14:18:42+00:00): Hello 5m4u9,

I removed the vehicle access from these footways, because it was flagged in the validator and I didn't see any cars on those ways in ground imagery. If they are being used for parking may I suggest making them service ways with an "access=destination" tag? I appreciate your insight on this! Let me know if you find anything else!

Baconcrisp
5m4u9 (2023-08-03 20:51:08+00:00): Hi, there are no cars because it is a sidewalk, and takes up a lot of space. Generally, the owners keep their cars in their garages.
Baconcrisp (2023-08-03 22:08:34+00:00): That makes sense. Looking at it again I did see some cars along those ways in satellite imagery, but footways are primarily designated for pedestrian traffic and not vehicle traffic.

You could reclassify these footways to "highway=pedestrian" since this classification allows some vehicle traffic, but is still primarily for pedestrian traffic. 

Here's a link from the wiki to support it: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpedestrian#:~:text=A%20highway%3D,primarily%20by%20foot

Let me know if you have any other questions!

Baconcrisp
Srdjan023 (2023-08-03 14:01:50+00:00): Klasifikacaji putrva GU Beograd nije isto sto i klasifikacija puteva u OSM pogledaj https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dprimary
pio2_122 (2023-08-03 10:02:38+00:00): W OSM nie mapujemy obiektów, które nie mają stałego położenia: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_praktyki#Nie_mapuj_tymczasowych_wydarze%C5%84_i_tymczasowych_obiekt%C3%B3w

W związku z tym, usunąłem ten punkt.
jeslop (2023-08-03 08:07:14+00:00): Hola Vlanzarote. Los colegios e institutos deben ir rotulados en la etiqueta name como señalan las normas de buenas prácticas en España de la wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Buenas_pr%C3%A1cticas_en_Espa%C3%B1a#Name_con_abreviaturas.
Lo cambio.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
Taya_S (2023-08-03 07:52:37+00:00): Hallo A67-A67

Ik denk dat er hier iets is mis gegaan.
Er ontrbreekt een stuk snelweg afrit en een stukje highway classificatie lijkt mij niet te kloppen. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1194108595
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1148590222

Groeten,
Taya
A67-A67 (2023-08-03 11:04:46+00:00): Bedankt! Ik heb het nu aangepast.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2023-08-09 21:51:30+00:00): incluso si es privado, se puede mapear, la ruta solo necesita tener la propiedad access = private.
Sajeevini sivajothy (2024-05-22 11:27:23+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/139366214
Fizzie-DWG (2023-12-19 15:48:21+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145297399
Sajeevini sivajothy (2024-06-23 08:32:37+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work, and it looks good.#OMGuru#OSMCha
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139366292
felipeeugenio (2023-08-03 12:55:44+00:00): Hola.
está bien dosificar el uso de park y usar grass también y, por lo general, la gente tiende a usar park cuando debería ser grass.

pero acá pienso que pasa lo contrario. Todos esos grass que pusiste son verdaderamente plazas que deberían ser park.

saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139366379
Sajeevini sivajothy (2024-06-23 08:30:32+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work, and it looks good.#OMGuru#OSMCha
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139366398
Sajeevini sivajothy (2024-06-23 08:25:50+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work, and it looks good.#OMGuru#OSMCha
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139366424
gscholz (2023-08-06 07:48:36+00:00): Hi btns,
your recent changesets have created a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=26.69659&lat=39.31608&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=139366437

Can you please fix this?

As you are using JOSM, I am wondering how this could happen. May be you like to educate yourself about the internal validator of JOSM:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator

Kind regards
Guido
Abch222away (2023-08-06 10:10:55+00:00): I've used government basemap for the buildings and as they came as a AutoCAD format I've added georeference and imported it to JOSM. I tried to fix intersecting lines but I gave up after a point since it wasn't crating any visual problems. I will try to fix them gradually. Thanks for your concern.
gscholz (2023-08-06 07:48:11+00:00): Hi btns,
your recent changesets have created a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=26.69659&lat=39.31608&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=139366440

Can you please fix this?

As you are using JOSM, I am wondering how this could happen. May be you like to educate yourself about the internal validator of JOSM:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator

Kind regards
Guido
Glassman (2023-08-04 17:17:22+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/139366673
Frans S (2023-08-03 09:13:50+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
About tagging of highways
Please read and follow the tagging rules on this linked document.
Decision tree, which tag to be used for roads
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S48CEVi3yiAYWhIJu57jtLyv0ZVUbGwJ/view?usp=share_link
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
Best regards
martiensch (2023-11-06 21:19:20+00:00): Hoi A67-A67,

Ik snap die ingetekende verbinding op de zuidelijke rotonde van de afslag 36a Groningen-Corpus niet. Ik zie hem niet in het tracébesluit staan (https://www.aanpakringzuid.nl/publish/pages/4368/kaart03.pdf)

Groeten,

Martien
kogutowicz-mano (2023-09-29 04:37:50+00:00): Szervusz!
Úgy nézem arrébb húztad a metróvonalat. A Bikás parknál feltűnően pontatlan lett. A valóságban teljesen szimmetrikusan helyezkednek el a megállót fedő üvegbuborék hossztengelyére nézve.
leveskockaa (2023-10-04 10:01:49+00:00): Szia!
Szerintem nem én mozgattam el, mert nem is volt okom rá: a ,,négyes" talán a legpontosabban rajzolt metróvonal. Ugyan mutatja, hogy szerkesztettem a vonali alagutakat, de lehet hogy azért, mert töröltem egy-egy pontot: össze volt kapcsolva a felszíni búra magával az alagúttal, de ezeknek az OSM logikája szerint nem kellene hogy közös pontja legyen. Hozzáadtam ugyanakkor egyet-egyet mert felvettem szelvényeket.
kogutowicz-mano (2023-10-04 10:43:52+00:00): Kitöröltél pár pontot. Például
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1903783331/history
Ezért csúszott el a nyomvonal.
leveskockaa (2023-10-18 12:34:19+00:00): https://osmhv.openstreetmap.de/changeset.jsp?id=139367561

Ez alapján valóban pár méterrel odébb kerültek, mert azokat a pontokat töröltem amelyek a peronban törést okoztak, mivel hogy azok egyébként egyenesek. Javítottam, visszahúztam a vonalalagutakat a felszíni búra középvonalára.
Sandal man (2023-08-03 08:31:45+00:00): La cámara debería estar realmente en la carretera o mejor en una relación con la carretera, consulte:
OM (OrganicMaps) no advierte sobre esta cámara ahora.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:highway%3Dspeed_camera

Saludos Jan.
paunofu (2023-08-03 22:51:53+00:00): No lo añadí yo, ya estaba añadido desde hace años, sigue este esquema.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement#Example_3c:_Speed_camera_making_pictures_from_the_back

Saludos, Pau.
Sandal man (2023-08-04 04:50:17+00:00): Ja el vaig editar ahir. :-)
vectro (2024-07-26 00:04:30+00:00): I'm not sure what route relation 16153529, created in this changeset, is for. Is this route supposed to correspond to a particular cycle route?
Bill Sellin (2024-07-26 00:17:21+00:00): Sorry - not sure how that happened - it is locally called the "Walnut Trail" by the City of Irvine.  I would call it the Walnut Bikeway as it is a Class I bikeway with grade separation bridges at Culver and Jeffrey... "Walnut Bikeway (16153517), v2"
emersonveenstra (2023-08-03 11:36:29+00:00): Hi,

Seems like you have a typo on the voltage of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/89550655

Could you please fix that? Thanks!
the_edge01 (2023-08-03 11:50:31+00:00): I have fixed this in changeset 139390064.  Thanks!
jnighan (2023-08-03 00:42:44+00:00): Sources: CT DEEP Parcels (parcel shapes), CRCOG Parcel Viewer (ownership info)
Herman Lee (2023-08-03 10:42:01+00:00): 该修改集已退回
This changeset has been reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139368399
Fizzie-DWG (2023-12-19 15:48:14+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145297395
woodpeck_repair (2023-08-10 13:21:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 139707093 where the changeset comment is: revert deletions
这里没有鱼 (2023-08-03 21:03:01+00:00): 不要把建筑物的点粘连到道路上
mweper (2023-08-03 23:32:21+00:00): Veo que ya has llegado a pueblos más grandes o ciudades pequeñas. Es realmente impresionante y super importante el laburo que haces porque al añadir las alturas, le añade mucha más utilidad al buscar por dirección.
jlmw78 (2023-08-05 14:16:06+00:00): Gracias por el comentario. Efectivamente, disponiendo de información y tiempo, lo aporto.
Cualquier error u omisión, se agradece la revisión y corrección. Y mas en esta etapa de ciudades pequeñas donde el impacto puede ser mayor.
Nuevamente gracias.
samho1234567 (2023-08-03 03:27:29+00:00): It's a typo. It should be stop area.
arjunaraoc (2023-08-03 08:59:11+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)  Keep your changesets smaller.  Some of the roads that you mapped do not seem to be residential as seen from Bing maps, as there seems to be to few houses along the road.  If you are knowledgeable about this area, you may like to correct appropriately.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139371214
arjunaraoc (2023-08-03 08:46:28+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). Please limit your changsets to a smaller area as much as possible to facilitate review
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139371273
arjunaraoc (2023-08-03 09:26:09+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)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139371276
arjunaraoc (2023-08-03 09:00:29+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)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139371283
arjunaraoc (2023-08-03 09:23:57+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 have cleared few warnings via  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139383229
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139371335
arjunaraoc (2023-08-04 12:10:38+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)
Rather than minor adjustments to existing features, new features or addition of tags would be more useful.  while mapping from satellite imagery, there could be minor offset errors with actual ground features.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139371418
Javierpf (2023-08-03 20:03:02+00:00): Hello Agus! gracias por las actualizaciones. El changeset cruza varias provincias. para los revisores y otros mappers es mejor tener cambios en areas más pequeñas.   Asi que si es posible hay que tratar de mantener los changeset en areas pequeñas circuncriptas a provinces/municipality. Por ej. 
Si se está modificando 10 objectos en  2 ciudades distantes => entonces hacer 2 changesets, 1 per ciudad.
Si se está cambiando 14 objectos in 5 países => hacer 5 changesets, 1 por países.
Podés encontrar más info en este artículo: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
rapidassist (2023-09-11 20:13:06+00:00): Just an FYI that I'm reverting this change because the name of the Road is N-4. The Map roulette challenge suggested the change incorrectly. Anyway - just an FYI - happy mapping.
Pieter Vander Vennet (2026-03-31 18:47:40+00:00): Hey, could it be that a 'wayside shrine' would be a better match for this?

I know it is called a 'grotte', but a cave_entrance might be a mismatch
Romaine2 (2026-04-08 18:09:09+00:00): The difficulty is that it is both. A 'Grotte de Lourdes' tries to replicate the one in Lourdes, which is an actual cave with wayside schrine. I do not feel much for changing this, unless there is an agreement somewhere that we do the same for all the Lourdes grottoes there are.
mkopinsky (2023-08-31 16:20:37+00:00): This expansion wasn't correct - there are other lettered county roads in the vicinity. Undone in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140643690
arjunaraoc (2023-08-03 08:54:46+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)

overlapping way  should be avoided https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1194186985,   overlaps with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1194189165 created by Parcha
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139372274
DUGA (2024-06-27 02:26:01+00:00): Please take a look at the wiki on how to map things at OSM, your mapping literally makes no sense here.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1194187397/history#map=19/39.56449/-77.29218
rblldnk (2023-08-31 16:38:24+00:00): Halo Mas Cholis, saya izin bertanya.
Apakah penomoran ruas jalan sudah ada signboardnya?
Karena setelah saya telusuri signboard terkait nomor ruas jalan hanya untuk Jalan Kabupaten belum untuk Jalan Provinsi.

Thank you in advance,
Al Cholis (2023-09-01 10:45:12+00:00): halo rblldnk

mengenai signboard saya mengacu pada dokumen: SK-41-tahun-2023-Penetapan-Ruas-Jalan-Menurut-Statusnya-Sebagai-Jalan-Provinsi.pdf

cara mendapat dokumen yang dimaksud:
(1) https://dpupesdm.jogjaprov.go.id/layanan/index?id_kategori=6
(2) tombol "SK Gub DIY No. 41 tahun 2023 - Penetapan Ruas Jalan Menurut Statusnya Sebagai Jalan Provinsi" diklik
(3) muncul opsi buka file pdf terkait surat keterangan yang dimaksud (tertulis di web: SK-41-tahun-2023-Penetapan-Ruas-Jalan-Menurut-Statusnya-Sebagai-Jalan-Provinsi.pdf)

*memang dokumen yang dimaksud agak tricky untuk diunduh
rblldnk (2023-09-05 13:22:02+00:00): Baik terima kasih atas informasinya mas, berarti dapat disimpulkan bahwa secara peraturan sudah resmi namun pemda diy memang belum membuat signboard nomor ruas jalan provinsi ya..
Herman Lee (2023-08-03 10:40:47+00:00): 该修改集已退回
This changeset has been reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139372461
user_5359 (2023-08-05 09:57:46+00:00): Hello! Please take a look on http://www.osm.org/way/129290192. What is the mean of note:FM=3630958? Did you mean ref:FM?
berjk (2023-08-05 13:47:15+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3630958
berjk (2023-08-05 13:48:59+00:00): tag ref:FM kenne ich (noch) nicht...
user_5359 (2023-08-05 18:59:43+00:00): Ich kenne auch den Schlüssel note:FM nicht, es geht hier um eine saubere Definition, was dieses FM bedeutet. Bei note kommt sehr häufig eine Sprache, aber dies müsste dann kleingeschrieben werden.
literan (2023-09-12 12:17:11+00:00): а здесь https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16150513#map=17/55.83059/37.64209&layers=N что? парковка (раз оно платное)? 

а то как-то странно, объекта нет, а платность есть
solenoid jam (2023-09-12 16:53:26+00:00): Я не знаю что это будет. Может парковка, а может площадка для временных павильонов. 
toll наверно случайно добавил при выделении многих объектов. Сейчас сниму.
user_5359 (2023-08-05 13:02:23+00:00): Hello! What is the mean of the tags
CISCO = ANALALAVA
DREN = SOFIA
?
By the way: The tag building=school only says that the building looks like a school, not that there is a school there (amenity=school).
user_5359 (2023-08-05 13:14:02+00:00): Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building.
Grab_Cong (2023-09-15 03:33:08+00:00): Could you please help me more clear why you change from access=no to access=permit/destination?
Do you have evidence for this issue?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139374996
user_5359 (2023-08-03 18:26:35+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I reverted you SEEO SPAM entry (mostly foreign keys)
Tommybara (2024-01-19 20:34:25+00:00): Các ranh giới này có từ xưa, theo các nhánh sông rạch cũ. Mặc dù khi xây dựng khu đô thị mới nhiều sông rạch đã bị lấp, nhưng ranh giới vẫn không thay đổi do không thấy quyết định nào của cơ quan có thẩm quyền thay đổi bạn nhé. Cụ thể ranh giới phường Thủ Thiêm cho đến nay được thể hiện ở hình này https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1sCaHOr5e_lnA19LCR3okK0RMm6pISkf0 hoàn toàn không theo cái đường mà bạn sửa lại.

Vì vậy mong bạn không tự ý sửa chỉ để "vừa mắt". Cảm ơn bạn.