piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
silversurfer83 (2023-04-12 14:46:42+00:00): Hi
dein Karussel ist aktuell ein großes vom Rummel. Die Spielplatzkarussels bekommen playground=roundabout :)

(bin übrigens großer Fan von detaillierten Spielplätzen. Danke)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:playground
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extended_playground_equipment
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134816825
Nüsschen (2023-04-12 15:22:04+00:00): Hi, 
ich hab´s zurückgebaut! ;-)

Danke für die Info.
Nüsschen
silversurfer83 (2023-04-12 15:26:05+00:00): Fleißig, fleißig ;-)

Immer gerne. Alme hat Glück einen guten Mapper gewonnen zu haben
Nüsschen (2023-04-12 15:30:29+00:00): Danke! ;-)
RedEyedVireo (2023-04-12 19:05:04+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM,

It looks like you tried to add addresses to this multi-family house. When adding addresses to buildings in OSM there are certain rules that need to be observed in order for that data to be useful to navigation programs and things of that nature. The complete documentation on adding addresses can be found here :https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:*

However, if you (like me) don't enjoy reading a bunch of boring documentation just to figure out something trivial you can use this multi-family house that I mapped as an example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1066702889

Let me know if you need any help or clarification.

RedEyedVireo.
Allison P (2023-04-12 22:03:06+00:00): Another good (widely used) option is to just create a node/point with a single house number and place it over the individual unit. One for each unit.
RedEyedVireo (2023-04-16 18:22:19+00:00): Since it has been 4days since attempting to contact this mapper and there has not been any reply or further activity on OSM I just went ahead and fixed the incorrectly mapped addresses. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/134986732
emersonveenstra (2023-04-12 18:48:06+00:00): Hi,

I'm not sure I agree with changing this to place=suburb. The wiki says "Use place=suburb to identify a major area in a place=town or place=city with a distinct and recognized local name and identity" but these are not part of another city, they are cities (or towns, etc) on their own. Could you provide more rationale as to why you are changing so many of these to suburb?
mrhercli89 (2023-04-12 19:41:51+00:00): Sure. There are a lot of places in Michigan that are unincorporated, and are therefore not cities, villages, or townships (the three legal entities recognized as political jurisdictions by the State). All other places are either Census Designated Places (CDPs) and/or a simple hamlet - in which case the place isn’t recognized by the State, nor the Census. In Jenison’s case, it is simply a CDP. It has no political jurisdiction as it doesn’t exist as a political entity. Georgetown Charter Township is the only political entity that exists for that area. Therefore, I classified it as a suburb instead of hamlet. But if you believe hamlet is a better term for Jenison, I wouldn’t disagree.
emersonveenstra (2023-04-13 16:18:32+00:00): You're right, I forgot that Jenison is only a CDP. That's fine to have it as a suburb then
Mahdi Nameghi (2023-04-12 18:44:48+00:00): سلام
برای نامهای داخل ایران تگ
name
برای نام فارسی و برای نام انگلیسی از تگ
name:en 
استفاده کنید
F777 (2023-04-12 20:56:37+00:00): سلام 
لحاظ میکنم
ممنون
user_1566574 (2023-04-30 20:41:14+00:00): Salut !
Pour https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1161696922, area=yes n'est pas nécessaire (redondant avec landuse), je supprime donc.
Merci ! :)
user_5359 (2023-04-14 05:55:29+00:00): Hello! Please notice your typo: use isced:level instead of iscde:level. I have correct this.
tracker51 (2023-04-19 20:29:56+00:00): Hallo,
leider konnte ich mit dem Vorschlag, die "note" durch ein "fixme" zu ersetzen, auch mangels entsprechenden Wissens nichts anfangen. Ich habe aber kein Problem damit, wenn ein Expertte diese Änderung vornimmt ...
eggie (2023-04-12 18:55:29+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback...
Dit zal een een leisure=picnic_table zijn en niet een park Ik heb het aangepast.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
MxxCon (2023-04-14 02:00:39+00:00): You should really updated your StreetComplete version. It's now up to v52 and you are still using v45
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134819762
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-07 08:05:54+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam tags for Underwood Law Firm - Sacramento POI in changeset 183767605

https://osm.org/changeset/183767605
cartofy (2023-04-13 03:38:44+00:00): Hello! Could you please explain what you fixed exactly?
user_14062769 (2023-04-13 04:34:50+00:00): Added Wikidata, brand and operator information for common stores and brands.
user_14062769 (2023-04-13 04:38:48+00:00): And in some cases, I have updated website & opening hours information to follow the expected format.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-04-12 14:41:09+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8831583175
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8831589707
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802153785

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
G_P_J (2023-04-13 10:50:07+00:00): Poprawione.
map per (2023-04-13 10:58:19+00:00): Wegen review_requested:
Danke für den Eintrag, habs zu einer Sozialeinrichtung gemacht.

Viele Grüße
map per
eggie (2023-04-12 15:07:19+00:00): Dag Brw  

Best lastig zo'n stukje.. 
 Kun je niet meer van de Laan Hart van Zuid met de fiets of lopend naar de Weth Kampstraat?
Het voetpad aan de westkant eindigt in het niets. Kan dat niet beter worden doorverbonden met de Breemarsweg? 
De verbindingen van het voetpad met de Boekeloseweg Zijn volgens mij opritten. Dus highway=service service=driveway

Kijk je nog even?

Gr eggie
Verder
warnings:crossing_ways:highway-highway
felipeeugenio (2023-04-13 14:07:40+00:00): Hola Sergio. Tan solo para aclarar. Estamos al tanto de que hay muchas fuentes y que los roles de los caminos han ido cambiando en el tiempo. No obstante, la única fuente es el MOP y los archivos que liberan. Esa ruta se llama N-42.

saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134821424
Olga_Kovalevskaya (2023-04-13 10:39:59+00:00): Added street names 'Beco Padre Ferreira da Silva'. Source - Bing, Highway Performance Monitoring System NHS and local user feedback. #mbx_editing
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134821602
user_12500175 (2023-04-14 11:36:27+00:00): Hallo,
wie vermutet gibt es in Reifersbrunn keine Straßennamen, ich habs korrigiert und addr:street=* zu addr:place=* geändert.

Gruß
Danfost
eggie (2023-04-12 19:23:17+00:00): Dit is correct, maar ik heb wel nog  foot =use_sidepath verwijderd. Het zou anders niet routeren.
Warin61 (2023-04-15 01:27:26+00:00): Hi,
Way 1161718396 is on error... 
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=115.06417&lat=-33.55837&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Looks like these are 2 separate buildings - so should be 2 separate ways. 

Side note: The changeset comment is not very helpful. Take a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Warin61 (2023-04-21 00:48:31+00:00): No response - deleted.
mariotomo (2024-07-30 13:37:43+00:00): ciao. riguardo la linea 70. ce n'è una versione estiva, che si allunga fino a Marina di Vecchiano. sono solo tre corse al giorno, andata e ritorno. 
dopo Pontasserchio passa per Vecchiano-Nodica-Migliarino, sotto la linea ferroviaria, prende la Via del Mare e finisce alla rotonda https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219147448, dove ferma, spegne il motore, aspetta l'orario di ripartenza.
mariotomo (2024-07-30 13:42:03+00:00): https://rd-sftp-data.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/autolineeToscane/IVU/OUTPUT/TIMETABLES_SUMMER/UPI/70.pdf
DnaX (2024-07-30 13:57:33+00:00): Se hai voglia di tracciarla tu fai pure :) e collegala al route master.

Tra le mia priorità ci sono molte linee ancora mancanti e la separazione di alcune dopo i cambiamenti da parte di Autolinee Toscane.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2024-09-09 11:56:31+00:00): Hi Russ, 
is this Amazon Web Services datacentre, because there is no info about this is belonging to Amazon?
Russ (2024-09-09 12:09:06+00:00): There's a mention of it here: https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/psc/rg12-1hn-amazon-data-services-uk-limited/
user_12500175 (2023-11-05 09:39:29+00:00): Hallo, du hast hier vier Hydranten mitten im Feld eingetragen oder ist dies ein Neubaugebiet das im Bild noch nicht ersichtlich ist?
Ist die Position korrekt?
Grüße
cache-gnome (2023-11-05 10:19:40+00:00): Hallo, ja es ist wirklich ein Neubaugebiet. Die Positionen sind auch noch nicht genau.
Ich nehme in absehbarer Zeit die GPS Koordinaten und aktualisiere die Positionen.
Gruß Christian
user_12500175 (2023-11-06 07:52:12+00:00): Alles klar, dann weitehin frohes mappen.

Gruß
Danfost
user_5359 (2023-04-14 06:31:28+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/node/10804781761. What is the mean of the tag abial = Area de Delizamneto 08.04.2023
?
gscholz (2023-04-18 07:15:17+00:00): Hi natalia_acosta,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-57.40962&lat=-25.33425&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
impiaaa (2023-04-13 01:06:02+00:00): Are you sure about this? I was under the impression that highway=busway is only for BRT roads, and service=busway should still be used for bus-only service roads, like the ones here.
clay_c (2023-04-13 01:34:54+00:00): My understanding is that highway=busway is for bus-only roads that are of high importance to bus passengers, and shouldn't be used for service roads that lead to a bus maintenance facility, for example. Roadways within bus stations are commonly tagged this way in the Netherlands, another major adopter of highway=busway tagging.

I picked the wrong time to do this—I'm leaving for vacation tomorrow. I'll respond to any more comments next week.
Tetryk (2023-04-15 12:19:43+00:00): Proszę nie powielaj tagów z wartością "platform" dla przystanków. Tagowanie ich w Warszawie zostało omówione tutaj https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/bus-ztm-warszawa/5105/31
willkmis (2023-04-12 16:41:32+00:00): Hi, for what reason have you removed the service=alley tag from this way? It sure seems like a typical alley to me.
bhavanrf (2023-04-14 11:33:47+00:00): Hi,

Thank you for looking into my changeset and flagging the issue. The alley was changed to service road because there were parked vehicles visible in Bing overlays.

We have reverted the changes and modified the highway tag from service road back to alley, kindly refer the changeset 134898530 for the edits.

Looking forward to learning more from you.

Thanks & regards,
Bhavanrf
NieWnen (2023-05-01 12:33:11+00:00): Czy przy skrzyżowaniu Nowolipki/Andersa porobili jakieś krawężniki w celu separacji pasów ruchu?
Jeśli nie, to zmiana jest nieprawidłowa i jest to tzw. mapowanie pod render, czego unikamy.
gscholz (2023-04-18 07:18:02+00:00): Hi lujazruizf55,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-57.40962&lat=-25.33425&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2023-04-21 06:53:52+00:00): Hi lujazruizf55, 
due to your missing response I have reverted this changeset to fix those issues.
Guido
patrick noll (2023-04-15 23:19:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted. There isn't a single valid change. Please review your work before uploading.
aTarom (2023-04-13 06:01:10+00:00): please check this park in the sea
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10805010909/history
and please if you can put a descriptive text in the changeset, a comment like "." does not help to review
Best regards and thanks for editing
u4Dy46Xe (2023-04-13 10:50:23+00:00): Sorry, my mistake and then I forgot to delete it.
a_runner (2023-04-13 01:30:01+00:00): Maybe, Im missing something, but why cant these trails have the name in the relation AND in the trail name? The Hop River State Park trail to the north has a Name Tag and Relation, so why cant these trails have it too? This is the official map from DEEP: https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/stateparks/maps/DayPond2015rpdf.pdf 

In the OSM documentation it also says:
"Here are the usual sources of primary names:
The most prominent name on a sign posted on the feature itself, especially for a feature in the built environment.
The name of the feature on a sign elsewhere, such as a fingerpost.
Common or official usage, especially for a feature in the natural environment."

The official trail name seems to satisfy the requirements to add it to the actual Name in OSM.

For the Salmon River trail, just try using any of the popular outdoor apps/websites like GaiaGPS or Strava to create a course following only the Blue trail here. I bet that you cant unless you have already been here before and know the trails. Thats because those platforms only show the name tag and not the relation info. For example, on Gaia, you can even select the individual trail, but the only information that it shows is "Unnamed Trail". Therefore in areas with a lot of trails, it is super difficult to determine which trail is blazed or official until you actually go there. So while I would still agree we could include the Relation information, it seems WAY more important to also show the official name (which often includes the color) as a Name tag in OSM. I explored a lot of these trails and it would have been much easier for me to initially plan routes on the different platforms if I knew which trails were blazed and which trails were the official trails that matched the state park maps. By naming these trails, I was hoping to help other people that have never been on these trails before, so they could plan their routes and navigate effectively and safely.

Sorry for the long rant, I guess I am just frustrated that I spent hours over the past week naming all of the trails I have explored and then you just reverted all of them today. I think we should be able to label both the Relation and the Name. It seems that more data in this case would help more users (using different platforms that may not have relation info). Let me know if you think we could do both. Id like to contribute with my local knowledge and help end users, but I dont want to waste my time if you are just going to revert all my work.
a_runner (2023-04-13 16:23:45+00:00): After doing some reading, I see where my mistake was. I found documentation saying that the name tag "should not describe or label the feature" and should instead be the common name of the feature. So although it seemed counterproductive to me, it now makes sense that the blaze color should not be the trail name.

However, I still think there is somewhat of a grey area if the trail has an official name and if that should be used in the Name tag. The documentation also says that one source of a primary name is "The name of the feature on a sign elsewhere, such as a fingerpost".  In the case of the blue Salmon River trail, there is a posted sign by the covered bridge saying the official name of the trail. On the other CFPA trails, there are also official signs with the trail name. For example, on the Shenipsit trail, there are blue sign posts and/or wooden signs with the trail name posted at almost every road crossing. Why wouldnt this be official enough to include as the Name tag based on the definition of the Name tag? This grey area could also extend to places that have official trail maps, as the trail name on the official map is the common name. This seems to be analogous to road names, where the common name tag is what is posted on the street sign and visible on official maps.

There are already many cases of the trail name being the Name tag in OSM. For example, most of the trails in the White Mountains in NH have both Relation AND trail name. This information exactly matches what is on the wooden signs at the trailheads/junctions and also matches what is on the official paper maps. The Relation info provides the detailed trail info and the Name tag provides the official, signposted (or mapped) trail name. Just like a Relation could be used for a bus route to connect Named roads, a Relation is used for a hiking route to connect Named trails.

In addition to having the correct Relation information, I think it still makes sense to have the trail name as a Name tag (ONLY if its an official named trail with signage and/or an official map). What are your thoughts on this?
Mashin (2023-04-15 08:51:15+00:00): Hi, I can see the good motivation behind this, but those maps made a choice not to show the hiking trails and using name= tag for this purpose is kind of like hacking the information in. This will then also cause problems for other maps that do not expect this. Generally there is a rule 'one feature, one OSM element' and so it's better to keep those as hiking relations.

You can add this layer to Gaia that will show the hiking trail overlay: https://www.gaiagps.com/maps/source/openhikingmapHD/

Or use other apps that were designed to show the trail information like Mapy.cz https://en.mapy.cz/turisticka?x=-72.5859911&y=41.5193115&z=15), OsmAnd (https://osmand.net/blog/routes/) or Waymarkedtrails https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=16.0/41.4531/-72.9287)
ezekielf (2024-03-06 01:57:21+00:00): Forum discussion about this here: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/trails-use-name-and-or-hiking-route/110106
Halfix (2023-05-26 19:41:02+00:00): Hi, ich verstehe von der Theorie der Postleitzahlengrenzen rein gar nichts, aber ich editiere gerade zahlreiche Details im Bereich des neuen Siemens Campus Erlangen und dabei fällt mir ständig die Postleitzahlengrenze auf, die entlang Paul-Gossen-Str. teilweise im Zickzack mitten durch die neuen Gebäude läuft. Logisch erscheint mir das nicht, denn Gebäude haben ja normalerweise nur eine Adresse und damit auch nur eine Postleitzahl. Nach meinem Verständnis sollten alle Gebäude im Campus in der 91058-Zone liegen. Darf ich das selbst einfach so geradeziehen oder greife ich bei Postleitzahlengrenzen in Prozesse oberhalb meiner Gewichtsklasse ein?
pyram (2023-05-26 21:15:29+00:00): Wenn Du genau hinschaust, dann lagen meine Änderungen nicht dort ( http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=134828021 ). Mir ist aber der Hintergrund des dortigen Verlaufs bekannt und er ist richtig.
Zum Verständnis: Es ist ein Grundfehler zu glauben, dass Gebäude nur eine Adresse haben sollten/können. Insbesondere im urbanen Kontext ist das durchaus regelmäßig nicht der Fall.
Zum Anderen gibt es eigentlich gar keine "PLZ-Grenzen". Die PLZ wird von der Post für einzelne Adressen vergeben. Das kann für ein ganzes Grundstück (nicht! Gebäude) gelten, muss aber nicht. Die "Gebiete" fassen diese Adressen nur grundsätzlich zusammen und können daher im Grunde irgendwo zwischen den jeweils benachbarten POI's verlaufen.
Das simple Geradeziehen würde daher sicher diverse Fehler verursachen. Wenn dich das Thema interessiert, dann solltest Du eher einzelne PLZ an POI's in Erfahrung bringen und die Grenze gegebenenfalls entsprechend anpassen - nicht umgekehrt!.
( https://wambachers-osm.website/Postcodes.html?map=14/49.937605/11.570148&base=OSM&data=PCBDE,WPCDE )
Die Grenze an der von Dir beanstandeten Stelle wurde übrigens vom Kollegen Larend korrigiert ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/439852511/history#map=15/49.5804/11.0091 - Version #18. Er hat genaue Ortskenntnisse!).
Benoît C MdP (2023-04-13 07:41:05+00:00): Bonjour Nicolas

Pourquoi avoir supprimé le tracktype de la voie ? 
Je le remplace, mais plutôt par du grade2 car la voie est en stabilisé (et non pas sans revêtement).

Bonne continuation

Benoît
Nicolas Bétheuil (2023-04-13 07:54:45+00:00): Bonjour, aucune idée pourquoi streetcomplete a supprimé ce tag. la question portait sur le revêtement. j'ai imaginé qu'il n'était pas précisé. je constate qu'il était présent avant. j'avoue que les nuances entre les différentes valeur et cohérence entre chaque me rends très perplexe. limite je reverterai tout pour revenir à la valeur d'avant qui semblait pas si mal.
Benoît C MdP (2023-04-13 07:59:02+00:00): Le revêtement en stabilisé, c'est fine_gravel. Du coup, j'ai modifié.
Ensuite pour les track, le tracktype permet de définir assez simplement la qualité de roulement de la voie (compacité du revêtementà. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:tracktype

Benoît
NorthCrab_upload (2023-04-12 17:20:26+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1018922017
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/233435785
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/233435708

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/233435784

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
AndriesWijma (2023-04-14 22:05:30+00:00): Beste Seat Ibiza,

Je hebt een vorige week door mapper Gwynner toegevoegd voetpad/trottoir over de Bassinbrug verwijderd en bijgetagd op de weg. Als het een eenvoudige situatie met trottoir langs een weg zou betreffen dan zou ik daarmee instemmen. In dit geval vind ik dat er detail is verwijderd die een goede weergave van de (toch al wat onduidelijke en verouderde) werkelijke infrastructuur op en bij de Bassinbrug onmogelijk maakt.

Langs de weg lopen aan weerszijden paden die lijken op trottoirs maar (ook) als fietspad in gebruik zijn. Aan de zuidzijde loopt daarbij nog een voetpad/trottoir achter een muurtje. De positionering van die paden ten opzichte van elkaar en het verloop ten opzichte van de weg is op dit moment onmogelijk te bepalen met de huidige intekening en tagging.

Ik stel aldus voor dat de drie paden (1x noordzijde, 2x zuidzijde) juist apart worden ingetekend, waarbij meteen de onterechte aansluiting van het noordelijke (fiets)pad met het pad langs de Commandeurslaan kan worden gecorrigeerd.
gscholz (2023-04-18 07:07:37+00:00): Hi PAMELALVALLO,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-57.40962&lat=-25.33425&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2023-04-23 05:50:28+00:00): Hi Hi PAMELALVALLO,
due to your missing response I have reverted this changeset to fix those issues.
Guido
gscholz (2023-04-21 06:54:36+00:00): Hi natalia_acosta,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-57.40962&lat=-25.33425&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Piagno (2023-04-12 17:34:10+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3639053
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3639054
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3639055