piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
APneunzehn74 (2025-01-12 19:51:00+00:00): Hallo, kannst du näher beschriebenen was hier ist. Ist das vielleicht ein: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:waterway%3Dsluice_gate
So wie ich das lese kann hier die Feuerwehr Löschwasser entnehmen. Das fällt dann unter emergency.
Grüße Andreas
APneunzehn74 (2025-01-12 19:52:22+00:00): Eine Saugstelle wird so eingetragen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:emergency%3Dsuction_point
eggie (2023-08-08 14:24:56+00:00): Je pad zal niets doen, want het leidt nergens heen. Jwe hebt het vastgemaakt aan het bos. 
Volgens de BGT lopen hier meer paden, maar die lopen allemaal anders. Zijn die paden er niet meer?  Anders nog genoeg te doen hier.
Je edits
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=139614613

MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-08-08 14:25:55+00:00): Het pad heb ik een verbinding gegeven met de Kajuit.
silversurfer83 (2023-08-09 06:58:29+00:00): Hello :)

as mentioned in an earlier comment: Please don't add POIs that are already in the database. Crolla's is already well mapped so I removed your entry.

Please do not use the "add place to map" (or whatever it's actually called) feature to make personal favourites.

cheers
silversurfer83
lyctkel (2024-04-20 18:52:14+00:00): Bedankt voor de fixme vraag.  Bib DOK bestaat niet meer. Ik heb het verwijderd.
ڕاستی (2023-08-08 22:03:08+00:00): Hello BaghdadiMapper why you deleted NODE: 6949734186 on changeset: 139615058?
Regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139615058
BaghdadiMapper (2023-08-08 22:59:42+00:00): Hi ڕاستی,

node 6949734186 is already mapped as way 788269398

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
ڕاستی (2023-08-08 23:06:38+00:00): is that a reason to delete the node 6949734186?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139615058
BaghdadiMapper (2023-08-08 23:15:42+00:00): Hi ڕاستی,

Erbil Engineering Technical College was mapped twice, as both https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6949734186 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/788269398 , and that goes against the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

>Examples of bad situations:

>An area object with a point object inside, both with the same tags representing the same real-world feature.

So I deleted the node so that only 1 element corresponds to the real world object.
alxGS (2023-08-08 15:19:42+00:00): Hi,
bitte vorsichtig bei so großen Edits, und alles auf Plausibilität prüfen. In Scheibbs wurde das gesamte Grundstück als Gebäude markiert. Bitte Überprüfe dein Changeset nochmal.
zacki41 (2023-08-09 06:56:59+00:00): Hallo alxGS, 

danke für Deine Mühen und den Hinweis. Konnte den Fehler in meinem JOSM nachvollziehen, das war eine Schlamperei meinerseits. Ich hab die Features schon heruntergeladen gehabt (emergency:ambulance_station), da bereits dort im gesamten Grundstück (anstatt dem Gebäude) die Ambulance_station getagged wurde, hab ich einfach die veränderten Tags gemacht, ohne zu überprüfen, ob das aufs Gebäude gehört. Ich danke Dir für den Hinweis und dass Du das mittlerweile korrigiert hast. 

LG
wolfgang8 (2023-08-09 09:36:33+00:00): Hallo zacki41,
es gibt auch einige Fälle, bei denen überlappende Gebäude entstanden sind, da du Gebäude neu eingezeichnet hast, obwohl sie bereits vorhanden waren - z.B. in Spitz:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1196072384
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/490315179

Bevor du etwas einzeichnest, bitte immer zuvor die Daten vom Server herunterladen. Damit ist leicht erkennbar, was schon vorhanden ist und was nicht.
zacki41 (2023-08-09 14:51:24+00:00): Danke für die Info. Tatsächlich ist die von mir gewählte Herangehensweise problematisch, weil ich nach den jeweiligen Tags gefiltert die Elemente bearbeitet habe. Wenn ich nämlich einen Point Feature in einen Polygon umgewandelt (z.b. weil ein Rettungsstützpunkt eigentlich klar ein Gebäude hat und nicht nur ein Punkt darauf) habe, hab ich das nur im Josm gemacht. Da ist natürlich dann klar, dass das dahinterliegende Gebäude nicht mitbearbeitet wurde.
zacki41 (2023-08-09 14:52:20+00:00): Welche Möglichkeit habe ich das jetzt nachzuvollziehen, wo Gebäude überlappen ohne alle >100 gemappten objekte nochmal durchzugehen ?
zacki41 (2023-08-09 15:55:45+00:00): Ich hab nochmal die alte JOSM Datei durchgearbeitet und sollte alle doppelten Gebäude wieder richtig gestellt haben. 
Danke für die Hinweise !
wolfgang8 (2023-08-09 17:37:00+00:00): Danke fürs Bereinigen! 
In Spitz hab ich noch das "layer=1" beim Gebäude entfernt.
Frans S (2023-08-11 12:49:41+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
A remark:
* Tagging of buildings. For HOTOSM projects, the standard tagging is 'building=yes' No text adding.  Please keep that in mind at further mappings.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-08-14 10:47:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 139865433, 139862649 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some poor quality 'delete and remap' that broke many existing features inc LDPs.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139626415
divaddivag (2023-08-09 07:58:55+00:00): Salut Florian, l'ortho dans le 14 date de mai/juin 2020 et donc les réaménagements récents dans le centre de Grainville n'y apparaissent pas. Il y a d'autres choses en cours, en attendant j'ai modifié sur la base d'ESRI: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139645167. Tu reviens quand tu veux! David
overflorian (2023-08-10 05:44:00+00:00): super, merci pour ce boulot. je n'ai fait que mapper à distance, la connaissance locale est toujours bien meilleure :)
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-08 14:34:49+00:00): Thanks for reviewing this notes! Hopefully it was useful to report that.

Should I open similar notes if I find more cases similar to this one? Or maybe I should prepare list of such cases and share it somewhere?
Supaplex (2023-08-08 16:42:04+00:00): It is ok to inspect and let the OpenStreetMap Taiwan community know about the non-usual tag usage. But might take some times for mappers to fix it due to there already various tasks available to do
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139616492
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-19 06:34:57+00:00): Can also post it on Taiwan country forum if you have it somewhere...
iigmir (2023-08-19 18:07:25+00:00): Thanks. I don't have an account on the forum, but I post it on Telegram.
https://t.me/OSMTaiwan/10870
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-20 06:27:16+00:00): Thanks, hope that it will be useful!

If some new values need to be documented then https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creating_a_page_describing_key_or_value may be useful

(for example shop=motorcycle_accessories looks like a viable value)
Frans S (2023-08-11 12:50:24+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
A remark:
* Tagging of buildings. For HOTOSM projects, the standard tagging is 'building=yes' No text adding.  Please keep that in mind at further mappings.
Frans S (2023-08-09 07:36:01+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this task
Please remember:
* Tagging of buildings. For HOTOSM projects, the standard tagging is 'building=yes' No text adding.  Please keep that in mind at further mappings.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-08-14 10:46:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 139865433, 139862649 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some poor quality 'delete and remap' that broke many existing features inc LDPs.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139626415
user_5359 (2023-08-08 18:27:08+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I remove your SEO SPAM entry (mostly foreign keys).
MxxCon (2023-08-08 23:34:06+00:00): Hello.
Instead of outright deleting a closed biz, it's much better to use lifecycle prefix as documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
Or at the very least delete only biz-specific info, but leave address info as is. Doing that allows that address to still be searchable/routable, and preserves history information of this object if there's ever a need to refer to it in the future.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139617145
Wineclaw (2023-08-08 23:58:41+00:00): Thank you for the information! I'll trend a bit more carefully with future edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-08-14 10:46:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 139865433, 139862649 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some poor quality 'delete and remap' that broke many existing features inc LDPs.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139626415
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-08 15:05:30+00:00): is it selling primarily/only areca? In such case inventing and documenting new value like shop=areca or shop=betel may be a good idea

shop=kiosk seems to be for different things, though in Europe they also commonly sell tobacco which has a similar use
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-08 15:05:44+00:00): re https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3803910
iigmir (2023-08-12 14:37:42+00:00): As the [note](https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3803910) mentioned, most betel nut stores are primarily, but not only selling areca nuts. I got the idea behind tagging betel nut stores as "shop=kiosk" when looking at kiosk pictures:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dkiosk
https://www.google.com/search?q=shop+kiosk&tbm=isch
https://www.google.com/search?q=檳榔攤&tbm=isch

Although types of betel nut stores (檳榔攤) might vary, so I understand why you ask the question:
https://www.google.com/maps/@23.0470289,121.1637067,3a,75y,342.58h,99.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ClfYXwk1Va-PSLy77H3fw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ClfYXwk1Va-PSLy77H3fw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D189.84804%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.0658754,121.201141,3a,75y,58.32h,94.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK5YJ9NNT5lF5u015alTXiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.0291505,121.5539487,3a,90y,78.97h,99.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26PebvP2PCoDP5PawwFBSg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@24.110879,120.6965527,3a,75y,301.4h,90.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDyNYiujURfw2uwqMRBMwEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I am still open to the issue since some other people are interested in it.
https://t.me/OSM_cultural/6/656
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-15 07:55:25+00:00): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Betel_girl01.JPG - would it be a good example of such shop?

Note that not all building=kiosk will have shop=kiosk inside: for example kiosk building with shop selling raw meat inside would be shop=butcher (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dkiosk )

I would really recommend inventing and tagging a new shop value
iigmir (2023-08-19 17:53:49+00:00): Sorry for the late response. The image you provide ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Betel_girl01.JPG ) is good enough to illustrate, though I consider another one ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%E5%BE%8C%E9%BE%8D%E9%84%89%E6%9D%91%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E6%AA%B3%E6%A6%94%E6%94%A4_-_panoramio.jpg ).

Maybe we can post a new value as a proposal?
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-19 22:04:10+00:00): I would be happy to help, but I lack any local knowledge on this topic.

But it definitely deserves separate value from shop=kiosk
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-10-17 08:31:00+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/inviting-suggestions-for-indian-pois/104836 and https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/inviting-suggestions-for-indian-pois/104836/5 has appearance of betel shop topic
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-06-03 07:34:58+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1196079081 - is this tream really named RC 6?
moje_konto (2023-08-08 19:15:54+00:00): www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193558462/history

Czemu usunąłeś świeżo dodany budynek? Był zgodny z ewidencją, więc nie widzę powodu, by uznać go za błędny.

https://wyszukiwarka.gunb.gov.pl/wniosek/b7dde4cd-7b2d-4221-8529-2b8dc7a96bff/
jslawin2 (2023-08-09 03:04:44+00:00): To są plany nie rzeczywistość.
moje_konto (2023-08-09 15:47:08+00:00): Decyzja jest z 2021-11-25, więc jest jak najbardziej możliwe, że już wybudowano.

Z satelity widać, że są tam zmiany, więc budowę na pewno rozpoczęto:
https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/sentinel-playground/?source=S2L2A&lat=52.34214995739729&lng=16.69694423675537&zoom=16&preset=1_TRUE_COLOR&layers=B01,B02,B03&maxcc=100&gain=1.0&gamma=1.0&time=2023-07-09%7C2023-07-09&atmFilter=&showDates=false
m@rio (2023-08-09 20:41:22+00:00): Kolego jslawin2,
przy okazji budynku usunąłeś również zgody z ewidencją punkt adresowy - proszę o przywrócenie.
emersonveenstra (2023-08-08 16:07:17+00:00): Hi,

Are you sure you meant to make all of these roads access=no? These look like roads to public buildings, right?
DowGardens23 (2023-08-08 16:33:09+00:00): Yes, not all drives are accessible to the public.
emersonveenstra (2023-08-09 10:30:49+00:00): Okay, so the correct tag for that should be access=private, not access=no. access=no is saying nothing is allowed to use it
Geo-Tobi (2024-09-28 09:25:27+00:00): Hier wurde surface auf asphalt gesetzt, aber grade2 belassen. Das klingt nun unstimmig. Absicht?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/108857751
Langlaeufer (2023-08-12 12:12:46+00:00): Hallo Handfest,
access=privat heißt Nutzung nur nach individueller Genehmigung durch den Eigentümer. privater Grund (owner:type=private) begründet noch kein Nutzungverbot, es sei denn, es ist ausdrücklich kenntlich gemacht (z.B. Betreten oder Befahren verboten)
Handelt es sich hier wirklich um eine Verkehrsberuhigte Zone mit entspl Verkehrszeichen? Diese würde sich auch nicht auf privaten Grund erstrecken!

Grüße und frohes Mappen
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139618645
Handfest (2023-08-12 14:05:43+00:00): Hallo Langlaeufer,
Beschildert sind beide Abzweige mit „Privatgrundstück Befahren nur durch Eigentümer mit PKW gestattet!“
Die verkehrsberuhigte Zone erstreckt sich nur bis zur Wendeschleife einschließlich dieser.
Langlaeufer (2023-08-12 14:40:25+00:00): Dann mache ich mal vehicle=private draus
Handfest (2023-08-12 14:45:32+00:00): Danke
mcliquid (2023-08-11 10:26:32+00:00): Hi, where do you get the translations / what is the source of them? Thanks
Vas111 (2023-08-11 10:54:04+00:00): Hello, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_names_of_cities
Tomas Straupis (2023-08-09 04:58:31+00:00): Hello. This data is from microsoft which explains its poor quality and bad positioning. I it is not useful as people will have to do actual work and review all of this.
dpolovinkin (2023-08-09 08:14:08+00:00): Hi! Before there were no buildings there at all, and I mostly reviewed and changed the location of the suggested buildings to make it correct, didn't add everything it suggested.

Not sure that most the 49 buildings I added with the help of MS had bad quality and positioning, it's mostly really small buildings, how "bad" can it be?
dpolovinkin (2023-08-09 08:25:18+00:00): And I took a look - quite some buildings in this neighbourhood which were created before already have meh positioning, like:
ways: 570516341, 384944456, 570516467.. A lot of buildings are missing completely.

There is a neighbourhood with addresses which you created 2 years ago btw, but there there are no buildings at all - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8145744579. 

All I'm saying that it's not a perfectly mapped place, mildly saying hah, and it's a bit strange to say that adding small buildings with AI (even if some of them may have somewhat not exactly correct position) is "not useful" when there were no buildings there at all before, which is like 100% useless, as there is no info at all.
Tomas Straupis (2023-08-09 09:04:36+00:00): I'm just saying that we analysed microsoft data and identified it as unusable. Their data is only as good as their imagery is and microsoft imagery is total crap unfortunately. So unless you verify all building footprints according to ORT10LT - there is no point of adding it.
dpolovinkin (2023-08-09 13:06:02+00:00): Got it. I try to verify, not adding everything, because some/most? suggestions are indeed very bad.
Bobropiton (2023-08-09 17:48:25+00:00): Очень интересный способ исправления ошибок путем внесения кучи ошибок в маршруты, сносом светофоров и неправильной разметкой полос
OrionX (2023-08-10 09:27:41+00:00): Маршруты позже будут актуализированы и возвращены обратно. Светофоры не трогались.
OrionX (2023-08-10 11:27:09+00:00): Вижу маршруты вернули обратно. Спасибо
DD1GJ (2025-01-04 19:41:21+00:00): lt. Tagging und Historie der Änderungssatzkommentare wurde die Notrufsäule spätestens 2022 abgebaut. Ich habe daher diese Korrektur rückgängig gemacht.
emersonveenstra (2023-08-12 13:00:54+00:00): Hi,

Looks like you connected the traffic signals to the boundary ways instead of the road ways here https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4033274115

Could you fix that please? Thanks!
MxxCon (2023-08-08 23:42:18+00:00): Hello.
As documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description the description field MUST NOT be used for advertisement. It must be neutral tone description of this feature. As such, information that you entered will be deleted. You are welcome to submit a proper description that follows OSM rules. 👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139620106
AndyB_66 (2023-09-11 06:22:18+00:00): Please do not add features to the map. that you are not sure about or are not officially approved. For highways in Poland you may refer e.g. to https://ssc.siskom.waw.pl/. BTW - there is no such value as "planned" for the "highway" key - you should use "proposed" instead, together with e.g. "proposed=trunk" tag (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway). I'm reverting your changeset.
luisforte (2023-08-09 11:35:18+00:00): Viva,
Repus o paredão (waterway=dam), pois é a tipificação correcta para este tipo de estrutura. Acrescentei o nome "Barragem de Albergaria dos Fusos", o que permite fazer busca sobre este nome, sem retirar o nome oficial, Barragem de Alvito.
Luis
Paul Berry (2023-12-04 14:03:26+00:00): I'm going to change this to addr:housenumber=16. Then you won't have numbered it 🤨
woodpeck_repair (2023-11-06 23:56:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 143714006, 143714008 where the changeset comment is: revert von edits eines benutzers nach selbstlöschung
amir ghobbeh (2023-08-10 20:26:33+00:00): please create my location please
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 04:58:55+00:00): 국가지원지방도 구간은 1차 도로 태그가 맞습니다. 98번과 39번이 있습니다. 격하하시는 이유가 뭔가요?
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 05:01:57+00:00): 혹시 무슨 기준이 있는지 알 수 있을까요?
aaei924 (2023-08-09 09:43:46+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ko:한국의_도로

위 문서의 기준대로 편집중이었습니다. 원래 국가지원지방도도 2차 도로로 분류한다고 되어 있었는데, 오늘 내용이 수정되었네요...
aaei924 (2023-08-09 09:55:08+00:00): 개인적으로는 국가지원지방도가 지방도의 한 종류인 점, 국토관리사무소가 아닌 도에서 관리하는 도로라는 점, 국도를 보조하는 기능을 한다는 점을 감안하면 2차 도로로 분류하는 것이 적절해 보이기는 합니다만.. 혹시 분류 기준에 대해 기존에 합의되어 있던 내용을 찾아볼 수 있는 방법을 아시나요?
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 10:25:03+00:00): 39번 국지도의 경우 39번 국도의 구간으로 편입할 계획이 있었으나 대신 국지도로 남았던 사례처럼 국도를 보조하는 노선으로 저는 1차 도로가 맞다고 생각합니다.
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 10:29:14+00:00): 또한 19번, 27번 지방도가 19번, 27번 국도로 승격하는 경우가 있고 일반 지방도는 서울에 들어가지 않지만 국지도는 서울을 거치는 노선이 있습니다.
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 10:34:24+00:00): 개인적인 의견이지만 지방도와 국지도 모두 2차 도로로 태그하면 특색이 없어 보입니다. 국지도는 지정된 도로가 지방도에 비해 적고요.
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 10:38:16+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ko:Map_Features
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 10:38:32+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Korea_tagging
rhtb0 (2023-08-09 10:39:31+00:00): 도, 특별자치도 관내에만 설치할 수 있는 지방도와는 달리 국지도는 도, 광역시, 특별시, 특별자치시, 특별자치도 등 모든 행정구역에 설치 가능합니다.
JAAS (2023-11-08 19:28:19+00:00): Hola FS Patagonia,
Ahora corregí el formato para la interpolación de las alturas para este poblado, en la parte norte (intersección de 'Napoleón Uriburu' con 'Coronado Villegas`), para que lo puedas corregir eventualmente. Tampoco hace falta agregarle las etiquetas de `addr:*` a las líneas de las interpolaciones (solamente se requiere agregar si son pares o impares), ya que estos datos se colocan a los nodos a cada extremo de éstas. Las etiquetas de `addr:city` y `addr:country` tampoco se hacen necesarias - estos datos usualmente son tomados de los polígonos creados para el poblado y el país respectivamente. 

Gracias por el esfuerzo agregando datos al mapa!

Para cualquier duda, puedes contactarme por este medio o a través del Telegram: 'JAAS_K'.

Atentamente,
JAAS - Jorge Aguirre
emersonveenstra (2023-08-12 12:55:02+00:00): Hey,

I'm not sure what this tag is supposed to be, but i don't think it's right https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11099785430
Fazzel (2023-08-09 23:41:01+00:00): Hallo Zrop,

weshalb der Tag emergency ambulance_station?
Es handelt sich nicht um eine Rettungswache sondern eher um ein Katastrophenschutzzentrum.
Deshalb habe ich anhand dieses Vorschlags https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Emergency%3Ddisaster_response emergency disaster response getaggt.
Hier meine Forum Nachfragen hierzu:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/bevolkerungsschutz-und-regeldienst-darstellung-von-wachstandorten/102075/4
VG
Zrop (2023-08-10 10:42:09+00:00): Hallo Fazzel,

ich bin erst mal davon ausgegangen das der Hauptaufgabenbereich hier eine Einrichtung für Rettungspersonal mit Fahrzeugen und Ausrüstung für die medizinische Versorgung und den Transport von Personen ist.

Vielleicht wäre es besser, wie auch im Forum vorgeschlagen, hier 2 Nodes anzulegen.

Auch sollte diese Station eigentlich noch mit "construction" getaggt werden, da hier ja noch eine Baustelle ist und nicht in Betrieb.

Gruß
Zrop
Fazzel (2023-08-10 11:02:56+00:00): Guten Tag,

es handelt sich um eine reine Nutzung für den Katastrophenschutz. Rettungsdienst des Regel- und Spitzenbedarf ist hier nicht untergebracht.
Vor Ort konnte ich evaluieren, dass der Bau bereits abgeschlossen ist. In Betrieb geht das Gebäude ab nächster Woche.
VG
Fazzel
Mishael Ochu (2023-08-08 17:22:22+00:00): #btcmap
0rcio (2023-08-10 07:55:55+00:00): W takim razie Cechowa i Pucka pomiędzy pasami kierunkowymi Wejherowskiej też jest nieprawidłowo, jak poprawiasz to przynajmniej zgodnie z zasadami, które sam przytaczasz
Akrimullah (2024-01-30 09:20:49+00:00): Hi, Could you please elaborate what this "square natural=wood" indicates for ?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-08 18:20:38+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25340456/history has surface:note = Holzstufen that was added in this edit
surface:note=Holzstufen ? Maybe surface=wood on highway=steps would be better?

Or highway=steps + material=wood + surface=dirt (or gravel or something else) if steps are built from wood, but surface between them is dirt or similar.
Neuwessi11 (2025-05-08 19:32:44+00:00): I didn't know having made such a key ... :)
I guess I was looking for something describing what's there, but was not suggested by StreetComplete. 
By the way, I often meet steps StreetComplete is asking for the surface. But SC doesn't suggest stone steps.
But anyway, your last suggestion is very good fitting to the steps you asked for.
Neuwessi11 (2025-05-18 13:15:14+00:00): I fixed it now like you suggested, because I think it's describing best the actual situation. Let's see if someone will be complaining about the somewhat weired combination of surface and material ... :)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-19 10:12:03+00:00): Thanks!

It is listed on wiki for some time, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=steps (note: I added it after https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dsteps/Archive_1#trail_steps )
eggie (2023-08-09 06:11:43+00:00): Dag Pyronick...   
Je vraagt feedback.
Er is hier al een adrenode. Meestal geven we vlakken dan niet nogmaals een adres. 

MVG
eggie
marc-cologne (2023-08-08 17:39:13+00:00): fußweg ebenfalls ausgeschildert..
Sandal man (2023-08-08 19:28:32+00:00): Gracias por tus ajustes al OSM, pero ¿puedes también prestar atención a los mensajes de error?
es por ej. tram_level_crossing  no crossing;tram_crossing
Saludos Sandalman
eggie (2023-08-08 20:19:17+00:00): Top! 😀
eggie (2023-08-08 20:15:21+00:00): Ron.. in dat geval kun je de uitzondering voor fietsers verwijderen.
Regel oneway:bicycle=no verwijderen.
Groet..
eggie