piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
nnf635 (2026-06-10 20:36:10+00:00): Hallo johsin18,
für openrailwaymap ist der damalige Streckenverlauf äußerst wichtig. Der damalige Bahndamm in Haltingen ist noch existent. Die Strecke wurde in mehreren Alternativplanungen zum Projekt "Herzstück Basel" der SBB AG berücksichtigt. In den zitierten Kriterien für das Kartieren steht zudem: "Einige Kartierer*innen argumentieren, dass auch Dämme, Einschnitte oder Radwege entlang ehemaliger Bahntrassen kartiert werden können." Ich würde mich gerne an dieser Argumentationslinie halten und wünschen, dass die letzte große Landesbahnlinie dank der außerordentlich fleißigen Aufbereitung vom Geschichtsverein Markgräferland kartiert bleiben könnte, bzw. so konform umgeändert wird, dass sie als "abgebaute Linie" in OpenRailwayMap angezeigt wird. 
Besten Gruß, nnf635
johsin18 (2026-06-11 16:59:33+00:00): Wo soll denn in Haltingen noch ein Stück Bahndamm sein (dass nicht noch zu einer anderen Strecke gehört)?  Die Palmrainbahn gibt es seit fast 100 Jahren nicht mehr, sie gehört eher nach
https://www.openhistoricalmap.org/#map=14/47.59091/7.57520
(bzw. ist da schon halb eingetragen).  Zumindest muss man aber railway=historical oder razed taggen, sonst erscheint die Strecke in openrailwaymap genauso wie die Kehrschleife, so ja sogar noch Gleise liegen.
Nnifria (2026-06-09 12:23:52+00:00): За документом https://ladsr.gov.ua/perejmenuvannya-nazv-vulic-11-12-14-23-10-2025/
vectorial8192 (2026-06-09 12:27:05+00:00): One issue of the old info is that the climb from (ground level) Cheong Hong Road to Sky Plaza Road is clearly too steep for anything productive. A more probable approach would use the embankment at Airport Road to "bridge under", maintaining a reasonable height difference for vehicles, most probably buses.
kingkingHK (2026-06-09 13:29:51+00:00): How will it connect to Cheong Hong Road though?
vectorial8192 (2026-06-11 10:21:02+00:00): Right now it is not clear but the most probable plan is to make a new split between Airport Road and Cheong Hong Road. It even surprises me that the road was not part of the T2 opening.
kingkingHK (2026-06-11 12:04:13+00:00): Well, at the very least the old geometry was connected to Cheong Hong Road, already making it more probable than your new one. Imo at the very least you should connect it, even if you don't know the exact geometry.
vectorial8192 (2026-06-13 07:52:56+00:00): It is not immediately clear which side the new road would branch off from. Given the relative importance of the airport area, and the future arrival of newer imagery, someone will figure out the exact/improved details and add them into the map.
kingkingHK (2026-06-13 08:25:49+00:00): Making an educated guess should be fine. We have just got new Esri imagery last year; I am not optimistic as to when the next update will occur. And then obviously you can't fly drones in the airport so one cannot capture imagery themselves. Although the roof of Car Park 3 probably offers view to the bridge?
vectorial8192 (2026-06-13 10:27:13+00:00): I think new imagery is roughly yearly.

We may consider blaming the plane fanatics for this, but last time I checked, we may receive friendly fire from the AA just by existing at questionable places (e.g. car park rooftop) with a phone camera. AA has had enough with all that fanaticism.

There are strong contextual hints that something is being built here (e.g. WIP embankment; older OSM data says that was a bridge), though not concrete enough to clarify e.g. the shape.

In case you want to irl-review this, consider looking at this from e.g. 11 Skies / AsiaWorld Expo bridges. The area generally has good vision, should not cause inaccuracies.
kingkingHK (2026-06-13 11:11:51+00:00): Esri appears to be every 2 years from past record. But I will just find a date to visit this location. If all else fails, I can still take a bus to look at it from Cheong Hong Road.
Vracov (2026-07-11 15:51:55+00:00): Ahoj,
oba boxy (zásilkovna, gls) jsou vedle obchodu Billa u vnější obvodové stěny. Tvé boxy jsem smazal a ponechal ty v platných pozicích
lenochod (2026-07-13 06:06:56+00:00): Ahoj Vracov.
Prosím příště změn pouze amenity na removed:amenity, tím boxy z mapy zmizí, ale já je dokážu lehčeji dohledat a nadále s nimi pracovat.
Díky.
Taya_S (2026-06-10 11:40:46+00:00): Hallo Rubenke,

Zou je kunnen uitleggen waarom je in deze changeset en in vele anderen, alleen maar objecten verwijderd met de onduidelijke beschrijving 'fix'? Als ik zo kijk dan lijkt de data gewoon te kloppen.

Vriendelijke groet,  
Taya Snijder,  
OSMF Data Working Group
Rubenke (2026-06-10 12:47:43+00:00): Deze persoon zet op iedere kadastrale grens een hek, ook al staat die er niet, voegt tuinen toe waar deze niet zijn.  de routing van met name stoepen langs wegen loopt in rondjes, gebruikt vreemde tags voor bepaalde oppervlakken en laat beken over wegen stromen om water te verbinden. Revert daarna change sets waardoor het helemaal niet meer klopt. Dus al met al slordig. Dat fix ik, dat er weer een normale routing is en dat hetgeen er staat klopt. ipv een totale overload aan details waar een groot deel niet van klopt en hij na het toevoegen dat onmogelijk meer juist kan onderhouden waardoor het alleen maar slechter wordt.
Taya_S (2026-06-10 13:17:30+00:00): Hallo Rubenke,

Bedankt voor de reactie.

Jij doet veel meer dan alleen wat dingen fixen. Jij verwijderd hier grote hoeveelheden data van iemand anders om wat mij meer een verschil in mapping stijl lijkt te zijn. 

Routing kun je ook fixen zonder massaal data te verwijderen. Wat de één onbangrijke details vindt, is voor een ander mischien wel belangrijk. 

Als de kwaliteit van de data te laag is, of als een mapper systematische fouten maakt, dan is het altijd beter dit eerst te proberen op te lossen via changeset of forum discussies. De eerste stap is niet alle data verwijderen.

Ik wil jou vragen om niet zomaar dit soort details massaal te verwijderen zonder dit eerst met de oorspronkelijke mapper te discusseren of zonder dat hier een duidelijk community consensus voor bestaat.

Vriendelijke groet,  
Taya Snijder,  
OSMF Data Working Group
kingkingHK (2026-06-09 13:26:36+00:00): Imo stub should be `highway=service`. See e.g. the various stubs along Route 10.
vectorial8192 (2026-06-11 10:17:41+00:00): Indeed. Forgot about this.
Amguid (2026-06-09 12:57:15+00:00): Ya Lbahloul, why did you delete it just to make a new one?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/999590409
Taya_S (2026-06-09 18:31:20+00:00): Hello, 

you seem to have hundreds of changesets, all changing buildings to `building=construction`. Are you sure this is correct? Are all this building currently under construction?

Best regards,  
Taya Snijder
TeBaMa (2026-06-13 06:56:36+00:00): Hello,

I understand your concern, but there are indeed a great many buildings under construction in this region. I mapped this out more than two years ago. Many buildings have probably already been completed by now.

TeBaMa
Maplev (2026-06-12 05:12:18+00:00): "access=private"? Where did you get that info?
Kookykooky (2026-06-12 06:01:39+00:00): Hi,
thanks for the warning, it seems there was a mistake here, it doesn't look like a private road. I've adjusted the access.
santamariense (2026-07-16 17:29:29+00:00): Olá _Thico_,

Quando comecei no OSM também cheguei a mapear "Avenidas" como tertiary. Com o tempo aprendi que não fazia sentido fazer essa relação direta tertiary <-> Avenida. É um mero nome. Uma via com o nome de Avenida não implica necessariamente em sua importância.

Uma tertiary é uma via coletora, dentro de bairros, que coleta o fluxo de veículos de vias que a cruzam, e os veículos nessas vias que a cruzam tem que parar para ingressar nela.

Regra de classificação viária adotada pela comunidade: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brazil/Classifica%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_rodovias_do_Brasil

Se tiver dúvidas, fique à vontade para perguntar.

Bons mapeamentos!
Đuro Jiří (2026-06-14 19:32:06+00:00): Čau, můžu znát důvod, této proměny?
mapperue (2026-06-15 13:23:24+00:00): Ahoj, upravené cesty jsou cyklostezky a polní cesty.
Đuro Jiří (2026-06-15 21:06:43+00:00): Podle jakýho zdroje? Ja jsem žil 22 roku 150 metrů od té cesty a 100% to není ani cyklostezka,ani polní cesta.
mapperue (2026-06-16 07:31:52+00:00): Konkrétně která cesta? Změnil jsi cykostezku na highway=service.
Đuro Jiří (2026-06-16 19:00:36+00:00): Celá bývalá Signálka.
mapperue (2026-06-17 09:21:14+00:00): Tyto cesty jsou příjezdovými cestami k polím a u Mikulova cyklostezky, na které mohou vjíždět jen motorová vozidla s povolením.
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-09 13:47:42+00:00): Is the name real?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1375483977
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-09 13:50:01+00:00): c'mon ... 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/949491593/history/2
FajrAl (2026-06-10 00:56:36+00:00): alright, this is getting out of hand
JulesGabrielVerne (2026-06-10 09:30:18+00:00): wycinka to jeszcze nie budowa. Na teren ten mozna normalnie wejść. Wycieli troche i wszystko stoi
bobik123 (2026-06-15 17:36:51+00:00): highway=construction można zaznaczyć na mapie w momencie rozpoczęcia wycinki drzew lub innych prac, nie należy zaznaczać ich tylko dlatego, że podpisano jakieś dokumenty.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=construction
polecam poczytać ;)
Samuele Battarra (2026-06-21 15:29:53+00:00): Ciao, il nome dovrebbe indicare il nome dell'elemento, qualcosa come "Piazzale Garibaldi" o "Parcheggio Marconi", non una descrizione di cosa è, quello va indicato con appositi tag.
Stray_is (2026-06-21 16:15:09+00:00): Ciao, perdonami, sono nuova nelle modifiche. Ho controllato meglio e ha effettivamente un nome: "CUBO Velostazione".  L'edificio di fianco indicato come "Urbica Velostazione"  in realtà è un locale (sempre legato alle biciclette che c'entra in una qualche maniera anche con CUBO) che ha però i suoi orari. L'edificio che ho segnalato io è l'effettiva velostazione aperta 24/7. Per quello mi sembrava il caso di fare i dovuti distinguo. Non ho trovato il modo di inserire il sito da cui si hanno anche le info per l'accesso che è https://cubo.urbica.it/

Ho modificato la voce mettendo il nome effettivo e segnalando la cosa del sito nei commenti per Organic Maps. 
Grazie per la correzione.
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-09 13:48:52+00:00): Is the name real?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/949491595
FajrAl (2026-06-10 01:06:12+00:00): No. I've reverted it
Dimitar155 (2026-06-09 15:23:13+00:00): Свързали сте моста над околовръстното със самото околовръстно, което позволява преминаване от едното към другото ниво, което не е точно така в действителност.
Itay Grudev (2026-06-09 17:12:14+00:00): reverted: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183885788
Leo Slager (2026-06-10 21:00:05+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Leo Slager (2026-06-10 21:09:26+00:00): review:

De Zuivelhoeve stond al op de kaart op huisnummer 5A.

Ik verhuis de data even naar huisnummer 5
Layft Greater (2026-07-13 12:35:42+00:00): Hi! Tunnels must be accompanied with a warning road sign. If no sign - not a tunnel

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/150110274
Davie946 (2026-06-11 15:58:52+00:00): Hi Robert, we communicated about the stile at Harlowbury Chapel. I now notice our drive, round the front of our house and down to our garage is marked green which seems to suggest open to bikes and pedestrians. Is that correct? It cannot be right. A big chunk of that is right through our garden and some of it was created by us so cannot possibly ever have been public.
Robert Whittaker (2026-06-11 19:09:08+00:00): Do you mean https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/208399977 ?

In that case, I think the colour would have been pink dots or dashes not green (but then I am colour-blind so I might be mistaken). In any case, those dashes indicate restricted access, not public access.

I see that you've recently changed the access tag from access=destination to access=no. The latter indicates that no-one is allowed to use the drive, which is probably not correct. I assume that you and any guests/visitors are able to use it. In which case, either access=destination or access=private would be appropriate.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access for more details of the different values of the access=* tag.
LordGarySugar (2026-06-13 20:21:03+00:00): I have communicated with @Davie946 about this, and have changed the driveway to access=private. What happened was that CycleOSM was showing the driveway as green because of the presence of the access=destination tag (which CyclOSM clearly assume applies to motor vehicles only). Personally I always tag private driveways as access=private whether they're gated or not, and only use access=destination for 'No entry except for access' roads.
mig-l (2026-06-09 15:53:52+00:00): Han retirado estas dos mesas de picnic por encontrarse en mal estado
Yuri Matias (2026-06-10 21:32:08+00:00): Thks
Amguid (2026-06-09 14:28:09+00:00): يا لبهلول ! وعلاش محيتها غير باش تزيد دير وحدة جديدة ؟  
بانلي ما شربتيش دواك هاد اليامات ياك لاباس
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5618085321
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5618085321
Amguid (2026-06-09 14:40:42+00:00): يا البهلول! تزوّخ بالعربية كـلغة وطنية، والأونـڤلي كـلغة عالمية، وانت تخدم بـ JOSM بالفرونسي... واش هاد النفاق!
Dimitar155 (2026-06-09 15:21:16+00:00): Здравейте,

Тази промяна не е приемлива, понеже няма физически разделители между лентите. Ако имаше джърсита примерно, нямаше да е проблем да се начертаят по този начин.

Ограничението за забранен десен завой идвайки от моста е отбелязано чрез relation/14077037 (което в момента не се визуализира както трябва).

Коя точно GNSS NAV дава този проблем? За някое мобилно приложение ли става въпрос или за вградена навигация на автомобил?

Поздрави,
Митко
Itay Grudev (2026-06-09 17:11:27+00:00): reverted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183885753
Bill Howland (2026-07-07 12:58:25+00:00): You have deleted trails that are currently in-use and easily hiked! Using a tag of "informal path" was another user's solution. Let's do that.
RagnarOlafson (2026-07-07 13:57:32+00:00): Possible MCR 550 route is being used?? I didn't delete anything but downgraded that 550 line to 0 trail visibility as I couldn't find any of it the last time I looked. Parts of those other lines are being used and I have hiked that area a few times in the last 8 months. There is a new mini loop that circles a large old growth cedar in there that uses some of those lines that I am aware of who created it and would not have intentionally disturb that. Again, no deletions on my end as higher ups frown heavily on pure deletions. Maybe a DM would be good sir - I apologize for any inconvenience...
JeroenHoek (2026-06-09 18:03:21+00:00): That breaks the centre alignment of the ways. Why is this a problem for TomTom?
JeroenHoek (2026-06-09 18:06:48+00:00): If you add things like the driveways there (which I just did), you get a situation you can't 'solve' by just joining all the ways in one point. Who made this maproulette?
Gorger (2026-06-10 09:58:16+00:00): JeroenHoek, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.
Gorger (2026-06-15 17:29:36+00:00): Hi Jeroen Hoek, thank you for reverting the changeset. The challenges are only flagging very short road segments, not all of them requiring fixes. As you point out the center line orientation in this example, I should have keep the configuration as is. Thanks for your feedback and understanding.
mavl (2026-06-10 15:40:17+00:00): Здравствуйте. Проход в здании это tunnel=building_passage.  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:tunnel%3Dbuilding_passage  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1527868223
Titova Kseniya (2026-06-11 12:26:20+00:00): Здравствуйте. Спасибо, исправила
mavl (2026-06-11 13:58:30+00:00): А зачем нужен тег covered=yes?
BCNorwich (2026-06-09 17:04:48+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The mapped area of Way: 15700841 is already showing the car park so the new POI is not needed. I've placed your new data on the car park area outline.

Regards Bernard.
FajrAl (2026-06-10 01:44:53+00:00): sumber detailnya didapatkan dari mana?
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-10 10:13:34+00:00): Translate bahasa
FajrAl (2026-06-10 10:57:00+00:00): Mungkin saya salah komentar di changeset spesifiknya. Maksud saya sumber batas administrasinya.
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-10 14:30:14+00:00): Ini sumber utamanya, saya sengaja buat manual soalnya biar nggak kena hak cipta dan boundary nya tapi, kalo import bisa jadi kualitas boundary nya buruk.

https://gis.dukcapil.kemendagri.go.id/peta/
FajrAl (2026-06-10 15:19:53+00:00): Sebenarnya batas administrasi yang ditautkan ke peraturan itu tidak ada hak cipta, biasanya ada di RTR. Selain dari RTR, biasanya kualitas geometrinya ini bervariasi, makanya saya menanyakan sumber. Karena pembuatannya di changeset ini dengan cara trace, lebih baik tambahkan note=batas administrasi ini berupa indikatif; serta source=*.
Samuele Battarra (2026-06-21 15:32:14+00:00): Ciao, per creare un parco non si usa un nodo, ma va disegnata un'area per l'effettiva estensione dello stesso.
Taksine (2026-06-09 14:47:25+00:00): 欢迎化州老玩家回归👋
Y38100 (2026-06-09 15:39:48+00:00): 👋😊
Y38100 (2026-06-09 15:40:22+00:00): 👋😊
Martinligabue (2026-06-09 23:26:29+00:00): the address was removed, not only the guest house, reverting

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183897640
Syl (2026-06-10 06:56:16+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour ces ajouts.
Si le chemin que vous avez ajouté n'est pas une piste cyclable il vaut mieux utiliser des attributs adaptés en mettant que c'est un chemin et en précisant que l'accès en fauteuil roulant est dédié. Je vous laisse voir pour modifier.

N'hésitez pas si vous avez des questions.
Bonne journée.
Syl (2026-06-14 08:56:02+00:00): Bonjour, j'ai eu l'occasion de passer vérifier sur place du coup j'ai fait la modification.
ivanbranco (2026-07-28 16:01:10+00:00): Just a friendly reminder that Google Street View can NOT be used as a source to edit OpenStreetMap because the Google license forbides it.
il barbarico re (2026-07-28 16:44:59+00:00): gotcha
Wildsharky (2026-06-11 05:30:21+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:183910974
Leo Slager (2026-06-10 21:10:56+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Leo Slager (2026-06-10 21:13:02+00:00): Hallo Tries,

De editor iD geeft je een waarschuwing:
oneway=yes op een doodlopende weg is onmogelijk.

ik pas het even aan.
Tries (2026-06-13 14:29:07+00:00): Dank je wel. Ik zie de ingetekende straat er echter nog niet opstaan. Deze loopt voor huisnummer 9 en 10.
danieldegroot2 (2026-06-24 16:51:57+00:00): Hey bongomebong,

This is a duplicate of the existing Giant's Grave at
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1531994955

Make sure to be properly zoomed in when making edits. (Also, make sure the application your using displays existing objects); OsmAnd should be able to show such objects afaik.

I have added it as alternative name for now -which makes it searchable- though perhaps The Labby Rock is its main name, or local name, and Giant's Grave / Carrickglas Dolmen is used infrequently these days, but it can be changed later.

Merged in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184534077

You can see changes visually at
https://osmcha.org/changesets/184534077

Regards,

Daniel
Taya_S (2026-06-09 15:46:04+00:00): Hello,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20779
Given your previous block, could you explain why you added a village with zero people here in the middle of the water?

Best regards,  
Taya Snijder,  
On behalf of the OSMF Data Working Group
Taya_S (2026-06-10 09:55:34+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183914698
pwbriggs (2026-06-09 20:54:34+00:00): Thanks! We love to have government GIS professionals contributing :)

If you're interested in learning more about OpenStreetMap, I recommend joining the OSM US Slack at https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

Thanks again for your contributions and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
橘ヒカリ (2026-06-12 23:31:30+00:00): Reverted in 184036277
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183881681
橘ヒカリ (2026-06-12 13:06:49+00:00): 您好，工务定义的津霸客专起点就是这两个道岔。

Reverted in 184016169
qstep (2026-06-09 19:40:11+00:00): Is it working?
橘ヒカリ (2026-06-12 13:18:58+00:00): 您好，线路起终点应该以工务规定的道岔位置为准，一条轨道线路不能同时属于两个线路关系。

Revert in 184016802
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-09 15:51:20+00:00): Hi Fin and Bean, welcome to OSM.

Could you add some more information here? E.g. contact details, opening hours, ...

Thanks!
dknelson9876 (2026-06-13 22:54:46+00:00): Hi viktoryia, please do not use TIGER as a source for road names in Utah. TIGER did a horrible job of handling our multiple street names and the local community has put in a lot of effort to clean up the mess. Specifically in this case, note that the full numerical alternate street name "West 3940 South" was already captured in alt_name:full=* according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Utah/Naming_Conventions. Additionally, name_1=* has been deprecated and should not be used, according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Deprecated_tags
viktoryia fedarava (2026-06-23 07:13:05+00:00): Hello, dknelson9876! Thanks for your comment and the feedback.  I will take this into account when working on similar cases in the future.
Best regards, viktoryia fedarava.
yelisey90 (2026-06-09 18:05:00+00:00): oneway=yes? Разве?
evgenykatyshev (2026-06-10 06:25:20+00:00): Типа, нет знака, запрещающего дерево с другой стороны объехать?
yelisey90 (2026-06-10 16:16:09+00:00): вообще никаких знаков нет
И я, по памяти, ездил что в одну сторону, что в другую, с севера от дерева, т. к. там пошире
yelisey90 (2026-06-25 21:07:44+00:00): убрал oneway
evgenykatyshev (2026-06-27 07:07:33+00:00): Ok
mike140 (2026-06-16 17:59:07+00:00): This change package damaged numerous objects, especially several forested areas, which are no longer visible on the map. When deleting large polygons and lines, be mindful of adjacent objects, as their shape may become distorted.
MS50 (2026-06-17 05:09:05+00:00): I noticed something went wrong that I could not fix. Sorry
felipeeugenio (2026-06-09 18:52:44+00:00): Hola. Se pueden cuadrar los edificios con la letra Q. Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183883325
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-09 16:35:43+00:00): #Spam'my description
FroschForscher (2026-06-10 19:08:44+00:00): Müsste es nicht maxheight:physical= sein?
rigilk3nt (2026-06-10 19:36:37+00:00): Habs abgeändert. ist jetzt maxheight:physical. Danke für den Hinweis.
FajrAl (2026-06-10 01:38:29+00:00): There is. Are you not in Indonesia OSM Community?
FajrAl (2026-06-10 01:39:08+00:00): and please read the tag note=*
NaufalFarras (2026-06-10 08:24:03+00:00): There is. Please research more and don't use "local knowledge" as source since you clearly are not local citizen.
NaufalFarras (2026-06-11 16:11:00+00:00): Hi. Please read this before you do anything to the same highway.
BerryTrails (2026-06-15 11:18:24+00:00):  NaufalFarras
Okay, cool buddy. I have seen some very recent imagery showing clear vehicle movement on this highway, which is why I opened it. I also used local knowledge, as I recently visited the area and stayed there for more than a week. During that time, I was able to observe the situation on the ground firsthand. Therefore, I believe using local knowledge in this case is appropriate, and I don't think there is any harm in doing so.
BerryTrails (2026-06-15 11:20:32+00:00): Heyah FajrAl 
I'm not actively involved in the Indonesia OSM Community. My observations here are based on recent imagery and my understanding of the situation on the ground. If there's a local community decision or consensus regarding this road, please feel free to share it.
FajrAl (2026-06-15 11:37:09+00:00): There are some news 

https://diskominfo.kedirikota.go.id/berita/jembatan-kaliombo-i-ditutup-total-selama-7-bulan-dishub-siapkan-rekayasa-lalu-lintas/2212

https://surabaya.kompas.com/read/2026/05/29/131910778/jembatan-kaliombo-i-kediri-ditutup-total-hingga-desember-2026-ini-rute?page=all