piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MxxCon (2024-05-03 04:20:23+00:00): Hello.
If a sidewalk is straight, it should be mapped as such, without extra nodes. 
Why did you map one crosswalk as "traffic_signals" while another as "uncontrolled" when you can clearly see traffic light gantries extending from 2 corners of this intersection.
Why did you tag corner of crosswalk and sidewalk as an intersection? That doesn't make any logical sense.
Additionally, why did you a curb of 60th st as "flush", when it's supposed to be lowered?

This problems must be corrected.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150591452
ryleeisosm (2024-05-03 19:13:58+00:00): Thank you!! I labeled it as completely mapped so I'm not able to edit
matheusgomesms-import (2024-04-28 18:08:50+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Standard_Dashes
matheusgomesms-import (2024-04-28 18:08:42+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Standard_Dashes
tekim (2024-04-28 19:22:43+00:00): reverting a changeset that added fake data

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150633425
tekim (2024-04-27 22:34:38+00:00): Hello, the "beaches" you have added do not appear to be beaches in the available imagery.  Could you clarify why you believe these are beaches.  Also, beaches should be mapped as areas.
tekim (2024-04-28 19:20:46+00:00): reverting a changeset that added fake data

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150633351
Colbertson (2024-04-27 18:26:23+00:00): Couldnt add some due to demolished or weirdly mapped buildings, oh well.
richlv (2024-04-29 17:27:14+00:00): Weirdly mapped could be fixed, demolished wouldn't fit in OSM, I guess :)
elsy1 (2024-04-28 17:40:01+00:00): چرا بلوار داخل شهر رو تگ ترانک میدی دوست عزیز
elsy1 (2024-04-28 17:40:32+00:00): جواب کامنت ندهید گزارش حسابتون رو خواهم داد
elsy1 (2024-04-28 17:42:09+00:00): با این کار شما بلوار ولی عصر رو هم تراز با بزرگراه یا کمربندی قرار میدی امیدوارم بفهمید
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-04-29 01:28:16+00:00): Reviewed
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150593045
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-11-04 16:24:55+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5030891237/history - have you wanted to map it as an empty vacant space?
gormur (2024-11-05 18:18:13+00:00): Yeah. There were no shops there at the time. Vacant is correct tag.
MxxCon (2024-05-03 05:02:45+00:00): Hello.
Please note that when adding website address, it must include https:// or http://.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150593852
Nakaner-repair (2025-02-14 09:37:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 162495782 where the changeset comment is: Revert various changesets by FrankRosenthal because we do not have the permission to use maps by DB InfraGO as data source.
Nakaner-repair (2025-02-14 09:37:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 162495782 where the changeset comment is: Revert various changesets by FrankRosenthal because we do not have the permission to use maps by DB InfraGO as data source.
Jordi MF (2024-05-03 00:22:33+00:00): Hello Helcherd

Thank you for your mapping. But be careful when you modify some POIs. 'Lago Aceración' is a pond full of water and it should not be mapped as a 'beach'. I solved the mistake.

Regards
TrickyFoxy (2024-04-29 23:11:48+00:00): Дубль или их действительно два?
Frans S (2024-05-06 13:07:04+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper. (I informed you already about your mapping skills.
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)

Inaccurate mapped.
Buildings not squared.
Connected nodes to other features.

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/150594946
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-04-29 01:31:25+00:00): No feature tags
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150595400
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2025-04-04 10:49:21+00:00): This is a speed_display, there is no camera.

And it should be attached to the road.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-04-29 01:30:57+00:00): untagged way
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150595448
yrtimiD (2024-05-04 02:28:42+00:00): Hi, why would you add such a joke description?
"הרצל עלה על מגדל מים כדי לצפות במכוניות בכביש החוף."
george1201 (2024-08-16 19:44:36+00:00): Zur Sulzbacher Straße: vehicle=no + motor_vehicle=yes + bicycle=designated. Welche Fahrzeuge dürfen die Straße jetzt nicht benutzen?
Nakaner (2024-08-20 06:15:07+00:00): Kutschen dürfen die Straße nicht benutzen. Siehe hierzu Anlage 2 zur StVO lfd. Nr. 23 Ziffer 1. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvo_2013/anlage_2.html
george1201 (2024-08-20 08:11:58+00:00): Danke, an die habe ich überhaupt nicht gedacht. Kommen in meinem Verkehrsalltag auch so selten vor. Wenn ich das nächste Mal eine Kutsche in der Sophienstraße sehe, werde ich an diese Regelung denken.
Hufkratzer (2024-04-27 22:15:39+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/603507617 is a riding arena and not a riding centre and therefore should better be tagged leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian. Compare: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4487952 .
In JOSM you can use the preset for sport=equestrian to do that.
mweper (2024-04-27 23:25:09+00:00): Fixed. Thanks!
tekim (2024-05-08 17:55:41+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068883
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-04-29 01:30:40+00:00): Nodes not tagged
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150595825
tekim (2024-05-08 17:55:05+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068865
tekim (2024-05-08 17:54:41+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068836
tekim (2024-05-08 17:53:00+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068782
tekim (2024-05-08 17:52:12+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068751
itineris (2024-05-30 06:42:19+00:00): Szia!

Erre a "87-es út fejlesztése" kapcsolatra szükséged van még? Az ellenőrző eszközök igen sok okból sírnak miatta.

Üdv:
Ákos
tekim (2024-05-08 17:51:31+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068716
tekim (2024-05-08 17:51:07+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068699
tekim (2024-05-08 17:50:27+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151068667
citrula (2024-04-29 05:58:14+00:00): Welcome to OSM. I have removed this beach because it's obviously not a beach from aerial imagery. Please don't make fake edits for pokemon go :)
MxxCon (2024-05-03 05:13:01+00:00): Hello.
Areas such as school should be mapped to their actual physical boundaries, not extend into the roads. They should not extend beyond the public right of way such as sidewalks..
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150596396
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-03-31 14:55:24+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11860705300/history - you wanted to map a vacant office here, right?

or maybe it is something else?
CMS168 (2025-03-31 21:00:13+00:00): Yes, one of the suites is vacant
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-03-31 22:20:29+00:00): I tried to improve tagging a bit
literan (2024-04-28 10:12:27+00:00): небольшая путаница. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/515343220 тут на пешеходной дорожке стоит motor_vehicle=private - хотя для пешеходки в принципе нет проезда для motor_vehicle

access=yes это значение для дорог  (и для POI) по умолчанию, его в принципе не нужно нигде ставить, лишь в особых случаях

ну и рядом примыкает https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/515343222 - и там уже foot=private почему-то
literan (2024-04-28 10:13:48+00:00): судя по панорамам https://yandex.ru/maps/-/CDV9mCk8 - тут в принципе никакие access=теги не нужны - никаких запретов нет, т.е. действует по умолчанию все.
NeisBot (2024-04-27 22:04:03+00:00): Hello huskminer, thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.Please see https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
Geo-Tobi (2024-05-03 05:43:11+00:00): Im Bereich der S-Bahn wurde der Fußweg auf bicycle=designated geändert. HW=footway mit bicycle=designated ist aber gemäß WIKI keine gültige Kombination. Eine Beschilderung, die dem entspricht, gibt es nicht. Bitte um kurze Erläuterung, warum das so geändert wurde.
A35K (2024-05-03 12:54:07+00:00): Hallo, ich wusste nicht wirklich um welchen der 6 footways es sich hier handelt aber ich habe das Gebiet ein wenig angepasst da ich damals versucht habe die bereits bestehenden Wege anzubinden anstatt es von neu auf richtig in der Gegend zu machen. Gibt es jetzt wieder Fehler oder ist es besser?
Geo-Tobi (2024-05-03 17:35:19+00:00): Stimmt, das war etwas unpräzise meinerseits. Es ging um diesen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1279336602  Ist jetzt irgendwie in neuer Version vorhanden und als Pfad. Prinzipiell nun ok. Ich persönlich setze auf einen Pfad kein bicycle=yes, denn es ist implizit vorhanden. Ist aber kein "Fehler". Danke
A35K (2024-05-03 19:07:51+00:00): Das bicycle=yes dient dazu, dass die Fahrradwege auf OSM so verbunden sind wie sie es in Echt sind.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-27 22:20:25+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/11860890577

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
GinaroZ (2024-04-28 14:27:29+00:00): What was inappropriate about these access tag? It is a core path therefore non-motorised access is allowed
andrum99 (2024-04-28 18:38:23+00:00): Non-motorised access is allowed anywhere in Scotland, with some exceptions, per the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 - the fact a path is a core path has no bearing on this. The particular aspect of the access tag which I considered to be inappropriate was 'bicycle=yes', since these are informal unmade paths on private ground. I therefore judge it to be inappropriate to have them appear as cycle paths on maps, since this encourages cyclists to use them, and tends to imply that they are suitable for general use by cyclists. I would argue that it is better to tag these ways as paths and leave the access tags ambiguous than have them appear as blue lines on cycle maps. Having said that, do feel free to revert the changeset if you disagree - I won't be offended ☺️
Jim Crumpler (2024-06-07 06:45:13+00:00): As an introduction to osm, I'll see if I can work out how to fix this.  Way 1277680295 is a private driveway on the title for 38 Hillcrest Rd, not public land, and the block for 38A Hillcrest Rd is the same residential zone as the rest of the blocks in the street - it shouldn't be segmented into different zone.
citrula (2024-04-28 05:05:16+00:00): I reverted these changes because they added natural=coastline to a lake. See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=coastline?uselang=en#What_about_lakes?

If there is an issue with this lake I would be happy to help you resolve it.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150603671
lucumon (2024-04-28 14:18:38+00:00): Porque eliminas las áreas que definen la forma de las tapas de registro de R Cable? Restas precision al mapa.
ricardosval (2024-05-04 14:37:16+00:00): Olá, o mapa tinha um alerta que o tipo de elemento deveria ser um ponto em vez de área. e foi isso que fiz.
Não achei que retirasse detalhe ao mapa. os pontos continuam identificados. 
Se necessário pode-se reverter as alterações, apenas segui o alerta do mapa.
silversurfer83 (2024-04-28 20:45:42+00:00): Hallo nach Kassel :)

Hinweis zum Thema "Fahrradwege": Bei OSM wird zwar immer ein wenig hin und her diskutiert, jedoch sind wir uns ziemlich einig, dass ein Weg nur dann als reiner "Fahrradweg" (highway=cycleway), so wie du das hier gemacht hast, getaggt wird, wenn dort das Verkehrszeichen 237 steht.
Bitte sieh dir, gerade im  Bezug auf diese Änderung hier nochmal folgende Artikel im Wiki an und kontrollier, ob das alles so stimmt, was du hier bzgl. highway und surface Eigenschaften gesetzt hast:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:surface

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dcycleway

bei Fragen immer raus damit

happy mapping
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150599221
catdreamer (2024-05-27 06:01:13+00:00): 請維持山名單純的標示，勿再括號增加其他註記
Innertia (2024-05-27 16:53:18+00:00): 你是指菜公坑山(反經石)？因為菜公坑山步道會引導遊客到反經石的山頭，在那裏國家公園也立有菜公坑山的標記柱，而它的確也是個相對高點，符合 natural=peak 的定義。但它的確也並非菜公坑山的最高點，所以分開標示我認為是合理的。
catdreamer (2024-06-16 14:05:32+00:00): 我看半天終於搞懂，先提醒您原菜公坑山標示存在已久，您在認為該高點的地方另標一個菜公坑山，把原有的加括號會引起使用者的混亂。
另已有圖客發現類似以最高點改動山頭位置會讓使用者的混淆，誠心建議請再想想
Innertia (2024-06-27 18:36:17+00:00): 呃... 也許表達方式有改進空間，但我原本那樣改的出發點就是為了要避免混亂。

菜公坑山最高點的雜木林中是有布條和山名牌的，至少在這個案例並不是我隨性改的 XD
catdreamer (2024-06-28 09:22:50+00:00): 以此例來看，若官方有立牌以官方為主。至於林子裡的山名牌，誰都可以放，不宜以此當繪製依據
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-27 23:20:20+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"kpt. Józefa Dambka":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11860945803
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11860945804
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11860945806

"prof. Witolda Andruszkiewicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11860945805

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
czebureks (2024-04-27 23:25:27+00:00): Skorygowano w zestawie #150599534
silversurfer83 (2024-04-28 20:48:14+00:00): HI :)

wenn du diese Information für Nutzer diverser Apps besser sichtbar machen möchtest solltest du die "description=*" nutzen, da diese in vielen Apps angezeigt wird. Gerne dann mit "Stand $Datum", damit die Menschen sich ein besseres Bild machen können
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150599508
Bruno M Maia (2025-05-06 11:50:11+00:00): Não há praia no local
4004 (2024-05-02 17:15:21+00:00): Witam. natural=beach to raczej na morzu, nie w parku; to natural=sand
ivanbranco (2024-04-28 10:35:48+00:00): Stop adding fake beaches.
julcnx (2024-04-28 14:30:52+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contributions! Could you please provide the documentation for your mechanical edits? It's difficult to grasp the context, especially when the changes are across multiple countries. Also, are dashes standardized across languages? Thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150600589
matheusgomesms-import (2024-04-28 16:34:06+00:00): Hi julcnx, thanks for your message!

The edit was heavily discussed here https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/automated-edit-proposal-convert-non-standard-dashes-to-standard-dashes/110206 and the wiki page for that is available here and in my profile page, with all the details about the edit: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Standard_Dashes

Please let me know if you need any other detail!

Best,
Matheus
julcnx (2024-04-29 01:19:44+00:00): Thank you Matheus!
matheusgomesms-import (2024-04-28 16:42:00+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Standard_Dashes
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-17 08:20:49+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11860984026/history  have you tried to map that there are three steps here?
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-24 14:54:04+00:00): Good and accurate mapping. Keep contributing #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150601011
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-24 14:52:13+00:00): Good and accurate mapping. Keep contributing #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150601060
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-24 14:50:48+00:00): Good and accurate mapping. Keep contributing #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150601118
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-24 14:24:12+00:00): Good mapping, but it would be better if you could just add a short changeset comment about the added feature .#OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150601194
felipeeugenio (2024-04-28 12:47:41+00:00): Hola Rodrigo, buenos días. 
Una duda: los callejones tienen esos "dos" nombres? si es así está ok, pero si se llamaban de una manera y ahora de otra, entonces dejar el antiguo como old_name=

saludos
Rodrigo Peña Cartes (2024-04-28 14:11:00+00:00): Hola Felipe, así es, se conocen por el número y por su nombre. De hecho los letreros públicos figuran tal como los agregué al mapa. Saludos.
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-24 14:22:51+00:00): Good and accurate mapping. Keep contributing #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150601395
felipeeugenio (2024-04-28 12:51:01+00:00): Hola.
Este camino se ve claramente en el satelite y aunque no clasifica como residencial (es un track, con suerte un service dependiendo de en qué termina)
Pero la duda es porqué se borró? se trata de un error?
Es normal errores de este tipo entre quienes comienzan, no pasa nada. Es solo para saber.
Se recupera fácil.
saludos
Rodrigo Peña Cartes (2024-04-28 14:12:40+00:00): Hola Felipe, ese camino lo borré pues es camino privado, sólo dejé el callejón hasta el portón del vecino. No encontré un tipo de camino de tipo privado como para hacer la diferencia. Gracias por la revisión!
felipeeugenio (2024-04-28 14:15:36+00:00): ok, gracias por tu tiempo de responder y por la actitud.
los caminos si son privados, públicos o de otra naturaleza, se caracterizan por su nivel de acceso. access=private en este caso

Eso si el nombre del camino publico llega hasta el portón, para dentro me da la idea de que es un track. Yo lo arreglo.

saludos
Rodrigo Peña Cartes (2024-04-28 14:18:38+00:00): yaa perfecto, ahora entiendo.
M141 (2024-04-28 01:59:20+00:00): I probably messed this up... probably a better label. Feel free to yell at me
citrula (2024-04-28 05:05:17+00:00): I reverted these changes because they added natural=coastline to a lake. See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=coastline?uselang=en#What_about_lakes?

If there is an issue with this lake I would be happy to help you resolve it.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150603671
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-30 07:45:40+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1277690149/history has surface = steps that was added in this edit
It should have highway=steps, right? With surface tag for actual surface...

Unless it is not steps at all then surface=steps should be removed
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-24 14:19:26+00:00): Good and accurate mapping. Keep contributing #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150602084
matheusgomesms-import (2024-04-28 16:41:55+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Standard_Dashes
matheusgomesms-import (2024-04-28 16:41:50+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Standard_Dashes
tekim (2024-04-29 14:54:27+00:00): Hello, Thanks for your edits to the map.  Unfortunately, when editing OpenStreetMap we are not allowed to use Google Maps, Google Earth, Google Street View, or any imagery from Google in any manner.  It doesn't matter if you are "directly tracing" or "roughly interpreting", you are still using Google imagery in a manner that is prohibited by Google's Terms of Service.
tekim (2024-04-29 14:55:21+00:00): Reverting changeset 150602203 because it used a source that is not allowed

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150667635
citrula (2024-04-28 05:07:50+00:00): You accidentally mapped this as a nursery for human children, not plants :) I fixed this for you
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150602721
citrula (2024-04-28 05:07:51+00:00): You accidentally mapped this as a nursery for human children, not plants :) I fixed this for you
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150602721
DressyPear4 (2024-04-28 15:23:36+00:00): Olá, adicionar uma rota de ônibus é feito através de relação nas vias existentes. Pode ser um pouco complicado para novos usuários, por isso peça ajuda nos fóruns de discussão.
Adicionar linhas sobrepondo as outras está errado.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150602922
DressyPear4 (2024-04-28 15:27:09+00:00): Como nesse exemplo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3337464
kikihadwiyanti (2024-05-25 23:47:43+00:00): Good mapping, Thanks fot the contribution.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150603005
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-04-28 15:38:04+00:00): Hey friends, looks like you've made your first changeset on OpenStreetMap, congratulation! But I noticed they are……a bit mass. Looks like you drag some point offset from their original position while move your view.

I've revert them in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150624513
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150603036
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-24 14:18:28+00:00): Good and accurate mapping. Keep contributing #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150603091
Glassman (2024-05-01 17:13:17+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

I did notice the service road connecting to 61st Ave NE has 3 no u-turn restrictions. Can you take another look at it? I'll send you more info on OSM via a message.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150603168
RawwrBag (2024-05-01 18:32:02+00:00): Hey there, I appreciate the review! I just did a spot check and I didn't see any remaining U-turn relations on any of the service roads connected to 61st. Maybe I fixed it in one of my later patches? I've been making tons of little changes as I learn how this stuff works.
Taktaal (2024-05-04 09:28:06+00:00): This turn restriction https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10587467 doesn't make sense. you cannot turn into a oneway road anyway, so there's no need to map it separately as a turn restriction
RawwrBag (2024-05-05 22:13:48+00:00): Thanks, I took care of it. I guess the vestigial restrictions from before only show up when looking at the relationships, and not in the turn restriction editor. That's why I didn't see it. Should I be using something other than the web-based editor to catch these kind of errors?