piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2024-03-03 09:58:48+00:00): Tôi tin rằng tập hợp thay đổi mà bạn hoàn nguyên là một nỗ lực nhằm tạo ra các khu vực "ranh giới=tranh chấp", chẳng hạn như https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17296617, phù hợp với những gì được viết tại https://osmfoundation.org/ w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf "Chúng tôi đã và sẽ tiếp tục xây dựng các cơ chế
nơi các lựa chọn thay thế có thể được ghi lại và dễ dàng sử dụng trong các bản đồ phù hợp hơn với bạn".
Bạn đã hoàn nguyên nó mà không có bất kỳ cuộc thảo luận nào, điều đó là không ổn.
Tôi nhận thấy rằng một số đối tượng ở đây tại admin_level=4 trở xuống là đối tượng ranh giới=hành chính. Điều đó không có gì bất thường trong OSM; các nước thường tuyên bố “quản lý” những khu vực mà họ không kiểm soát mà chỉ giả vờ là có.
Vui lòng thảo luận vấn đề của bạn với https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148136531 et al với tác giả của bộ thay đổi đó một cách văn minh?
Tôi thực sự muốn đề xuất rằng https://community.openstreetmap.org/ là nơi tốt nhất để làm điều đó.
NM$L (2024-03-03 14:25:28+00:00): 我们不反对添加dispute相关内容，但是更应该添加在已有的relation 6753150中而不是新建一个关系，稍早前因为现实忙碌我尚未进一步变更相关内容或者评论，只做了退回处理，现在我才有时间进行更细一步的变更。对此我表示道歉。

你还应该注意到，此几个编辑中希望将部分没有实控的区域加入某个关系，这是不符合de-facto的。

我将会在先前的变更集留言。

I am not against adding dispute related content, but it would be more appropriate to add it to an existing relation 6753150 rather than creating a new one. I have not yet made any further changes to the content or comments due to the reality of my busy schedule and have only returned them, but I have now had time to make a more detailed change. I am sorry for this.

You should also note that a couple of these changesets want to add the area, which is not realistically controlled, to a relationship. It does not follow the de-facto.

I will leave a message in the relevant changeset.
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-03-03 14:57:29+00:00): Hello, SomeoneElse, glad to here that you have interest about those question, here are something I need to pointed. 

0. I ask for NMSL that he revert those 4 changeset

148136531
148136722
148136944
148137209

1. If this is disputed boundary, then whether just add it to a city/province's relation in one country is justice? 

I noticed r17296617(VN claimed Paracel Islands) was added to r1891418(Da Nang) directly as outer member.  and r17296618(VN claimed Spratly Islands) was added to r1887959(Khanh Hoa Province) as outer member.

But r1891418 and r1887959 are boundary=administrative and this tag should be used to be the one representing actual control according to description mentioned in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories (it reference OSMF document)

In my point I don't means I opposite the r17296619 or because the relation are truly boundary=disputed. But if this is the case, I think it should also be allowed to establish a similar relation of China claimed region.

In addition, based on the idea of ​​​​equivalence, if there is no problem with the editing of CactiStaccingCrane this time, then I think that if other editors make a move to establish a boundary=dispute relationship and add Hainan Province as the outer changeset, it should also be retained. , like today
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-03-03 15:01:46+00:00): I also invite @CactiStaccingCrane join this discussion in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148136531
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-03-03 15:03:51+00:00): Looks like here are some error in "0. I ask for NMSL that he revert those 4 changeset"

My original meaning is ”我向NMSL咨询，他说他退回了这4个变更集“
mipangan (2024-03-12 23:50:59+00:00): Hi! Thanks for mapping out CDO! I see that most of your buildings aren't properly squared yet. You can perfectly square a building by pressing 'Q' after tracing the polygon. Hope this helps in your future mapping!
HBanu (2024-03-05 00:46:43+00:00): Hello!
Good work. Make sure about overlapping buildings.
Thank you
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-14 14:10:47+00:00): Is change from office=government intentional at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/915126714/history ?
user_7130456 (2024-03-14 15:04:48+00:00): sorry, should be landuse
tastrax (2024-03-03 09:58:31+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
Xvtn (2024-03-04 16:38:10+00:00): Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great to me! Thanks for your contributions!
Nakaner (2024-03-07 13:12:06+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148341317
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-30 11:26:16+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11687222932/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-07 15:35:33+00:00): Hello! 

Thanks for adding this gazebo. Though note that it is not necessary to put description of object into name (I already fixed it in this case)
Frans S (2024-03-03 11:09:40+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. 
Hard to recognize buildings here.
You marked a few yards (light-brown area) as a building.
I corrected them
Best regards
Frans S (2024-03-03 11:18:05+00:00): When you take a look on google earth. on this location, you see a much clearer image.
13.057709599999999 22.90939025sxs
Just copy this and paste it in the search field of Google earth
Best regards
habi (2025-05-02 14:45:02+00:00): Ciao Luca

With this changeset you 'destroyed' the routing for cars through here, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4737867

I guess the road is only closed in winter really, no?

Greetings,
habi
Claudio Tam (2024-03-05 19:06:06+00:00): hello! i've seen that you have taken away the tunnels at the start and end of the way derb lakdar; i've been there yesterday and the tunnels are there; why did you take the tunnels away?
nona mostafa (2024-03-06 09:08:57+00:00): Hello Claudio Tam;
Thank you for noticing that, I removed the tunnel because it was not suitable in this case, and the correct one is  covered=yes "which is used to denote whether an object is represented by a node, way, or area is covered."
For more information on how to use tunnel please see:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tunnel
Regards
nona mostafa
Claudio Tam (2024-03-06 09:31:47+00:00): Hello!
The wiki for covered highways says this:
Open on at least one side => covered
Closed on both sides => tunnel
This is a very narrow way, it's closed on both sides, so according to the wiki I think it's a tunnel. More specifically, it's a building_passage. What do you think?
nona mostafa (2024-03-06 11:46:23+00:00): Hello Claudio Tam;
I agree with your opinion, it will be fine to be tunnel=building_passage, I fixed it now.
Regards
nona mostafa
Frans S (2024-03-03 09:19:21+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Buildings not squared.
Oversized buildings
Stay within the shadow lines a building gives.



Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen 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/148155428
az09 (2024-11-01 05:30:38+00:00): iD вместе с turism проставл building на "хорошо охраняемое место"( Внимательнее пожалуйста!
Airfall (2024-03-03 19:25:34+00:00): Hey Ipalli! In the future it's better to keep your edits localized in one area. This change set has edits in New Zealand and Switzerland. 

It makes it a bit difficult for people to see what you were doing with the edit since it spans multiple continents. 

Keep up the good work otherwise! Happy mapping!
berndw (2024-03-03 08:20:12+00:00): Warum lädt JOSM hoch, obwohl ich auf Abbrechen geklickt habe? ;-)
Egal, Kommentar sollte lauten
"Mendig: Fläche am Flugplatz nach Hinweis korrigiert"
Minh Nguyen (2024-03-03 08:25:22+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagging-counties-and-planning-regions-in-connecticut/109799
Hufkratzer (2024-03-03 18:24:28+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1257104828 is NO riding centre (Centro equestre/Centro ippico), it is a riding arena. iD has a preset for riding arenas with Italian name "Arena per equitazione"; this sets the correct tags leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian. Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/867703584.

See also https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148008584
Road–Runner (2024-03-04 23:20:00+00:00): @Hufkratzer
In case a user doesn't answer to changeset comments and continuous to enter systematically wrong data I would say it's reasonable to report the user. The Data Working Group can then put a "0-hour block" on to the user which ends immediately after the user reads the messages.

Another option would be to revert the whole changeset with the justification that changeset comments haven't been answered.

Best regards
RR
Hufkratzer (2024-03-05 21:36:05+00:00): @Road–Runner
Thank you. The DWG and the "0-hour block" would be a possibility (which I didn't know about yet); but these mistaggings I criticised are not so serious that I want to bother the DWG about them or revert his changesets. What I criticised can always be easily corrected later if he continues with that. I have now corrected the things I criticised so far myself and perhaps he will see that by chance at some point.
Michele Aquilani (2024-04-20 19:04:01+00:00): Hi Hufkratzer,
I didn't see that there was also  "riding arena". I'll try to be more careful next time.
Thanks for letting me know and sorry for the late reply.
fortera_au (2024-03-03 08:59:04+00:00): Forgot to set source, survey.
fortera_au (2024-03-03 09:08:04+00:00): Hi, the address should be placed on the main object, not the entrance node.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148157257
tekim (2024-03-05 19:23:47+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.  Thanks for the edits.  However, for legal reasons, we are not allowed to use Google Maps when editing OpenStreetMap.
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-03-03 09:09:01+00:00): 这么荒凉的地方画多了就真觉得自己像在搞土地普查了，自然资源部还不快来发奖（bushi
Supaplex (2024-03-03 10:27:02+00:00): alt_name=建築系館
Winston Sung (2024-03-03 13:35:09+00:00): Thanks!
Winston Sung (2024-03-03 13:35:20+00:00): Done.
eggie (2024-03-03 11:07:49+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Tip  Het beste kun je bijtaggen op de bestaande adresnode.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
Dimitar155 (2024-03-03 14:20:21+00:00): Thank you!
silversurfer83 (2024-03-03 14:47:30+00:00): Thanks for catching that :)
did you already write an eMail to DWG?
foreigner037 (2024-03-03 15:05:00+00:00): I reported the user for vandalism, nothing else.
silversurfer83 (2024-03-03 17:36:22+00:00): Using the report button or did you write to data@openstreetmap.org?
foreigner037 (2024-03-03 17:59:49+00:00): Using the report button. Writing to data@openstreetmap.org is not the first thing that comes to mind when trying to report someone.
silversurfer83 (2024-03-03 18:34:08+00:00): No problem :)
Looks, like people were quick on the uptake.

Trouble is: it looks like a troublemaker. Created the next account and kept going. closed at least a hundred notes before being blocked
foreigner037 (2024-03-03 18:51:33+00:00): Ugh, these guys are the worst. In the SSC forum we have a very similar stubborn user that just does not want to give up.
Luzandro (2024-03-30 18:47:09+00:00): Hi,

the qualitiy of the road is already described by surface=asphalt + tracktype=grade1
You can refine it further by specifying smoothness or width

The highway tag specifies the type and purpose of the way, although the distinction is not always so clear, see also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dunclassified#Abgrenzung_von_highway=unclassified_und_highway=service_und_highway=track_tracktype=grade1

Teichwiesenweg is open to the public to access the driver school course. All the other tracks are intended for agricultural use and cyclists only.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148158308
SekeRob (2024-03-05 14:08:26+00:00): Hi,

No, it's NOT a natural=sand, that's tagging for renderer, it's a depot where sand is stored!

Kindly reverse.
mapperue (2024-03-05 14:25:39+00:00): Hi,
tag landuse=depot is used to describe an area used as a depot for vehicles and other equipment.  That's why I made this change.
SekeRob (2024-03-05 14:58:30+00:00): Well, the correct way is actually landuse=industrial + industrial=depot + depot=material + material=sand (the original mapping an early effort of mine). While this wiki is quite restrictive, depots are used for lots of things, and are actually called that here... deposito, Zero natural for sure. I'll make the correction in a little.

ciao
Mathias_ADAV (2024-04-08 14:59:47+00:00): Bonjour,

vous avez tracé des pistes cyclables (highway = cycleway) le long de la D937 alors que cette route est déja équipé de bande cyclable et cette information est déjà renseigné (cycleway = lane).

Pour les aménagements cyclables, merci de vous référer au wiki dédié : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle   Vous pouvez aussi me contacter : carto@droitauvelo.org.

Bon mapping !
Mathias
JLZIMMERMANN (2024-03-15 08:08:29+00:00): Bonjour, Ces numéros d'adresse seront-ils recalés ?
chrizy (2024-03-15 19:14:20+00:00): Bonjour, je ne sais pas, ils proviennent de https://adresse.data.gouv.fr, connaissez-vous une source plus fiable/à jour pour cette rue ?
Les numéros ne semblent pas complètement correspondre à l'emplacement des bâtiments de la Rue des Jonquilles, les personnes connaissant mieux cette rue pourront je l'espère les déplacer plus précisément.
JLZIMMERMANN (2024-03-15 22:59:19+00:00): Je viens de regarder via l'éditeur ID et la couche BANO permet de voir différente source bleu, rouge (cadastre) et permet de recaler les points. Cette couche prend du temps à s'afficher.
J'ai fait un bout, il y a encore de l'affinement nécessaire.
totera (2024-03-03 15:20:43+00:00): Ciao dp7, questo percorso fa parte di un multipoligono (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3171821) e i tag sono su quello
dp7 (2024-03-03 15:28:11+00:00): Ciao Totera, so che la way fa parte di una relazione, ma la parte in alto a destra era priva di etichette, mentre il resto era correttamente taggata come "boundary"="protected area". Me ne sono accorto con una query overpass perchè avevo esigenza di esportare il tracciato con i confini del parco in geojson e non mi veniva chiuso il poligono.
totera (2024-03-03 15:56:14+00:00): Che utilità ha però avere i tag di confine su una way non chiusa? Con la singola way non si può determinare neanche da che lato è l'area protetta, sarebbe necessario scaricarle tutte e ricostruire il poligono... ma per questo c'è già la relazione in OSM!  
(è vero che abbiamo ancora i confini amministrativi con i tag sulle way, ma questo perché i primi import risalgono a quando non era ancora ben stabilito l'uso dei multipoligoni)
dp7 (2024-03-03 17:53:59+00:00): Posso essere d'accordo, ma a questo punto i tag andrebbero rimossi anche dal resto delle way che definiscono i confini del Parco (comprese quelle che coincidono con le strade). Siccome era solo una piccola parte quella mancante (meno del 20%), ho preferito aggiungere l'informazione piuttosto che eliminarla, anche perchè non mi sembra possa comportare problemi particolari; al contrario, mi ha agevolato con Overpass e potrebbe essere utile ad altri.
Lasciare le cose a metà sarebbe stato sicuramente meno corretto di adesso !
Dodko (2024-03-03 11:18:02+00:00): Vinotéka má svoju značku
shop=wine
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:shop%3Dwine

adresa sa nedáva do bodu ale budovy
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147123127

ak je fyzicky jedna budova nemá sa nasekať na samostatné budovy kvôli obchodom, ale obchody dať ako body.
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-03 17:24:52+00:00): Aha rozumiem, radšej sa ešte do takýchto úprav nebudem púštať, kým v tom nemám uplne jasno ako to správne urobiť.
Ďakujem opravím to. Pekný večer prajem.
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-03-03 11:35:26+00:00): Hello, looks like you are travelling in China and download a organicmap app, this map can let you regist a OSM account and add information to the map. And you add your found place. 

First of all, congratulations on your first encounter with OSM.

Please note, however, that any edits you make to OSM will be written directly to the globally shared online database, so edits should conform as much as possible to the requirements in wiki.osm.org. In addition, the name should be in the local language whenever possible and the real name should be recorded. It is not the same as TripAdvisor/openplacereview, so please avoid using a name like "Foreign Business Hotel" that does not look like a normal name. (Don’t increase the price either. On the one hand, OSM does not provide commercial information and will not help you book a room. On the other hand, it may change frequently)

If you need help, we'd be happy to help. I wish you a happy journey in China!

(Detected via OSMCha RSS feed)


laoshubaby from OSMChina Community
archie (2024-03-03 10:21:02+00:00): kommer det som en överraskning att crossing=unmarked inte har crossing:markings?
CjMalone (2024-03-06 20:09:44+00:00): Looks ok to me, Thanks
CjMalone (2024-03-06 20:04:51+00:00): Looks good to me, thanks.
maraf24 (2024-03-08 23:37:52+00:00): Piwnica została. Ja bym powiedział, że budynek jednak jest, tylko w ruinie :)
kuhni74 (2025-05-06 05:59:31+00:00): Are you sure the way goes through to the east? This is very steep and dangerous terrain. Have you been there or just mapping using aerial imagery?
-=|MisterY|=- (2025-05-06 06:03:36+00:00): Hi! This one is based on the aerial imagery.
I'm planning to go there in the future and check out the climbing routes.
kuhni74 (2025-05-06 06:10:54+00:00): I'd suggest checking on the ground first and mapping afterwards. It should also be tagged with sac_scale - currently, it looks like a safer route than Gretchensteig, which includes wire ropes.
-=|MisterY|=- (2025-05-06 10:52:03+00:00): Right. That part is hard to say from this perspective. But the path is clearly visible on the latest aerial imagery.
This is a Klettergebiet so I assume it is full of approach paths.
Luzandro (2025-05-06 10:52:47+00:00): Completely agree with kuhni. Besides that, my interpretation of aerial and strava heatmap is that the path leads to Gretchensteig at this point: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9978410921
-=|MisterY|=- (2025-05-06 11:09:49+00:00): ah, yes, you're right. I've adjusted it to follow the light visible path.
I will eventually get to examine this area in the near future. Last weekend I was on the opposite walls, going over Königschusswandsteig and Bismarcksteig.
Mikey Co (2024-04-25 16:56:04+00:00): Ditto there was a permissive path here, why has that been removed?
rskedgell (2025-09-04 08:09:45+00:00): Also, not your decision to make. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
SomeoneElse (2025-09-14 23:47:35+00:00): Hello,
You've deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1215964867 (see https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2bEM ) here.  Although it's in the trees, it is still somewhat visible in imagery, so if you want to prevent anyone re-adding it I strongly recommend that you ensure that it remains in OSM either with access tags saying "this is a private path" or lifecycle tags saying "this was a path but is no longer".  Failing to do either risks someone adding it back to OSM without any access tags at all.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
mat (2024-03-04 07:26:27+00:00): J'ai remis la route en primary.
mcliquid (2024-03-05 08:51:23+00:00): Hallo, dürfen wir die Daten aus der API lizenzrechtlich verwenden?
fdemmer (2024-03-05 11:46:09+00:00): FAQ auf https://www.myflexbox.com/de-at/faq/ nennt die REST-API "offen". Ich habe nun noch deren Support um Auskunft gebeten.
mapperich (2024-03-27 19:16:24+00:00): Ich hab "Myflexbox" vor Monaten in den name-suggestion-index hinzugefügt. Ehrlich gesagt bin ich kein großer Fan wenn Markennamen gänzlich in Großbuchstaben geschrieben werden. Erregt nur unnötig Aufmerksamkeit. 

Um die Daten in Zukunft dennoch einheitlich zu haben sollte man sich auf eine Schreibweise einigen. Was meint ihr?

https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/blob/579cb6751035523211c1df974a52ec6e7ce0839b/data/brands/amenity/parcel_locker.json#L470
mcliquid (2024-03-27 19:33:37+00:00): Im Wiki werden Namen in Großbuchstaben sogar das keine Großbuchstaben verwendet werden sollen.
Aber ich bin ehrlich gesagt immer noch der Auffassung, das die Daten nicht hatten importiert werden durften. "freie" Daten sind nicht zwangsläufig ODbL kompatibel.
fdemmer (2024-03-27 20:31:55+00:00): I reverted the changeset.

Thanks for mentioning the name-suggestion-index!
Luzandro (2024-03-28 06:30:57+00:00): Ich habe 2 Standorte wiederhergestellt, die mir bekannt sind, und bei einem waren die offiziellen Koordinaten auch um ein paar hundert Meter falsch

https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/11687545081
emersonveenstra (2024-03-04 13:03:42+00:00): Hi there,

When you're creating roads, make sure to always connect the roads together, otherwise if there's a gap like there is here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11687555533#map=19/48.15868/-104.16000

then no software understands that they are connected and the road is basically unusable
osmviborg (2024-03-03 12:01:00+00:00): Hej. Inden du tilføjer en separat cykelsti, så check om stien allerede er tagget på den vej stien løber langs, du ser det som 'cycleway=track'. Det var tilfældet i denne situation. Jeg har slettet din cykelsti.
Kovoschiz (2024-03-03 16:16:54+00:00): 1. Please don't use upload comments to debate. Actually reply on changesets. 
2. What's not represented by https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13324778/ ?
Kovoschiz (2024-03-03 16:21:05+00:00): 2. The original works fine
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=22.34210,114.19834;22.34234,114.19904
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_valhalla_car&route=22.34210,114.19834;22.34234,114.19904
JesperJJR (2024-03-03 22:08:11+00:00): Hoi,

Ik heb de contouren van de tijdelijke fietsenstalling even aangepast/vergoot. Afgelopen week hebben ze nog meer rekken toegevoegd.
Filip009 (2024-03-04 19:01:46+00:00): Ahoj, vďaka za prispievanie do OpenStreetMap.

Mohol by si prosím vysvetliť, čo si chcel s touto zmenou dosiahnuť? Nakreslil si budovu cez budovu. Pokiaľ si chcel pridať stanicu HZS, tak stačilo pre ňu vytvoriť bod a do toho bodu pridať všetky informácie.

Odpoveď prosím napíš tu pod sadu zmien a nakoniec stlač tlačidlo "Okomentovať".

Pokiaľ máš nejaké ďalšie otázky neváhaj kontaktovať slovenskú OSM komunitu https://groups.google.com/g/osm_sk.
Dawid2849 (2024-03-08 20:55:11+00:00): Cześć! Mam drobną uwagę do Twojej edycji. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/960026162
Ta droga może i biegnie przez pola i ma głównie taki charakter, ale z tego co widzę to prowadzi też do adresów. Jeśli jakaś droga prowadzi do adresów to powinna być co najmniej oznaczona jako service.

Pozdrawiam,
Dawid
olsols (2024-03-08 23:52:39+00:00): Dzięki za zwrócenie uwagi, poprawiam!