piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
b-holdet (2024-04-24 03:58:20+00:00): Denne snak minder utroligt meget om den, hvor du ikke mener at en vej skal have navn, hvis der ikke er et skilt, også selvom kommunen og andre registre har angivet navnet.

Stedet har et anerkendt officielt navn via stednavneudvalget:
https://www.stednavneudvalget.ku.dk/autoriserede_stednavne/
Mere behøver jeg ikke at vide.

Det er fint at du har spurgt folk og selv kender til området. Jeg vil blot sige, at man stadig kan blive overrasket over, at et sted man har boet, faktisk har et navn, som man ikke kender.

Navne fra stednavneregistret er de officiel anerkendte og bruges til at tegne SDFI-kortene. De benyttes også til kommunekort, så derfor mener jeg, at deres værdi er vigtige og valide.

Registret har også angivet større områder med spredt bebyggelse. Disse har jeg lidt mere svært ved at markere på kortet. På samme vis som sommerhusområder, hvor vi har en rimelig afgrænset bebyggelse. De kan godt markeres i OSM, men der er ikke rigtig noget godt tag for stedet.

Men som jeg har skrevet før:
Kontakt selv Stednavneregistret med alle dine spørgsmål og få deres eget svar.
Det gør processen lang hurtigere end at jeg skal stille dine spørgsmål og vi her skal have en snak frem og tilbage.
antonr (2024-04-24 11:26:54+00:00): Hej igen,

Jeg er skuffet over at du ikke vil forholde dig til de forslag til fælles facts jeg fremlægger, eller til de spørgsmål jeg stiller. Jeg synes det er på grænsen til uhøfligt at du beder mig om at læse flere siders PDF, men så ikke vil forholde dig det mindste til det der kommer ud af det?

I din forrige indlæg skrev du at "[d]et vil være den ultimative metode" at "spørge om [alle] beboerne kender navnet på stedet." Nu, efter jeg er begyndt at spørge folk i lokalområdet, mener du tilsyneladende "...at man stadig kan blive overrasket over, at et sted man har boet, faktisk har et navn, som man ikke kender."

Jeg opfatter dit svar udtryk for at du ikke har i sinde at godtage noget som helst argument for at landsbyen Sindbjerg ikke skal være i OSM ("Mere behøver jeg ikke at vide.")... Er det tilfældet?
antonr (2024-04-24 11:32:52+00:00): PS jeg opfattede egentlig din kommentar[1] fra forum som en slags invitation til rettelser af den type jeg har udført her, så jeg er forvirret over den modvilje til at gå i dialog som jeg opfatter...

[1] "Jeg ved godt at jeg har byttet om på betegnelser hist og her, og det skal nok gennemgås med en tættekam.
Navnene er på plads, så det er nok mest erfaringer fra stederne, der skal tilrettes."

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/manglende-byer-og-bebyggelser-i-osm/104954/8
michel60 (2024-04-18 08:36:56+00:00): Bonjour,
Suite à vos modification, la  Relation : RER A4 : Saint-Germain-en-Laye → Marne-la-Vallée - Chessy (2333439) est passée en défaut de continuité : les portions de rails n'était pas connectée.
Il faut utiliser GEOFABRIK OSM Inspector pour vérifier la continuité des lignes de métro, train, bus, tranway:
- https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=2.21520&lat=48.90155&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.94&overlays=ptv2_routes_valid%2Cptv2_routes_invalid
P.S. mise à jour toutes les 13 heures
J'ai corrigé le problème.
Cordialement Michel
eggie (2024-04-15 14:19:12+00:00): 👍
gscholz (2024-04-16 05:24:20+00:00): 

Hi Grannymeg,
your recent edits have left behind a big amount of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-35.77814&lat=-8.23598&zoom=12&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 (2024-04-19 09:53:09+00:00): Hi Grannymeg,
this errors still exist. Can I get your feedback here?
Guido
eggie (2024-04-15 14:44:42+00:00): Je vraagt feedback. Dat zou goed kunnen.
Het is wel zo dat sommige routers tweewielers niet van harte laten routeren over toegangswegen. Daarom zal de vorige mapper gekozen hebben voor unclassified. Dat zou ook goed kunnen... 
Er komt immers een fietspad op uit.
en dan is het stukje achter het hek wel een service.
In dit geval zou ik zelf dus gaan voor highway=unclassified.
Shanthos (2024-04-15 14:46:52+00:00): oke
eggie (2024-04-15 14:50:14+00:00): Je zou de weg kunnen splitsen bij het hek.. Achter het hek is dan service
Shanthos (2024-04-15 14:52:30+00:00): waar moet ik het splitsen?
eggie (2024-04-15 14:55:39+00:00): Ik denk op de node van het hek.
Shanthos (2024-04-15 14:58:09+00:00): oke
eggie (2024-04-15 15:09:58+00:00): Unclassified heb ik teruggezet. Het is openbare weg. De splits zit op het hek.
Shanthos (2024-04-15 15:12:19+00:00): 👍
BCNorwich (2024-04-17 06:58:58+00:00): 

Hi, You have been making lots of duplicated sections of highways by placing a road on top of another road. This will disrupt routing.

There have been a huge number of edits to remove these duplicate sections of highway. But we now see that you are continuing to make the duplications. Please have a look here:- https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=67.22581&lat=36.75090&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas These are the ones now being corrected. as well as joining many unjoined overlapping highways. Could you please try not to make duplicate sections of highways.

Regards Bernard.
gscholz (2024-04-19 09:50:24+00:00): Hi Grannymeg,
your recent edits have left behind a big amount of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-35.77814&lat=-8.23598&zoom=12&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
canfe (2026-05-05 14:31:23+00:00): amenity=device_charging_station
è il tag giusto, sennò ci vanno quelli delle auto e poi protestano con la GaraGeeks
Bienson (2024-04-15 19:42:04+00:00): Node von "Stadion Pizza Döner Dortmund" wieder an die korrekte Position verschoben in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150055697
gscholz (2024-04-19 09:50:20+00:00): Hi Grannymeg,
your recent edits have left behind a big amount of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-35.77814&lat=-8.23598&zoom=12&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
CurlingMan13 (2024-04-19 04:24:36+00:00): Do not "lollipop" features.
NeisBot (2024-04-16 12:34:04+00:00): Hello Tatiana Bo, 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
redd (2024-05-05 14:34:36+00:00): vielen Dank, das loest Hinweis https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3671512
gscholz (2024-04-19 09:50:28+00:00): Hi Grannymeg,
your recent edits have left behind a big amount of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-35.77814&lat=-8.23598&zoom=12&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
Luzandro (2024-07-03 18:44:18+00:00): Hallo,

der Bach ist zum größten Teil oberirdisch, ich habe daher tunnel=yes und layer=-1 wieder rückgängig gemacht und nur bei der Einmündung in den Neubach im Norden zwei kurze Abschnitte mit tunnel=culvert ergänzt.

Darf ich fragen, was die Quelle für den Namen "Feilbach" ist? Ich kenne nur einen Feilbach in Gramatneusiedl und konnte weder vor Ort noch in anderen Quellen diesen Namen finden.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150043692
Luzandro (2024-11-05 17:39:16+00:00): name aufgrund fehlender Rückmeldung entfernt
stadtschamane (2024-11-05 17:49:14+00:00): * Die Benennung Feilbach stammt aus der ortüblich verwendeten Bezeichnung dieses Gewässers. Habe aber keine Aktien das Gewässer unbenannt zu lassen
* Die Änderungen die ich gemacht habe (und wieder rückgängig gemacht wurden) haben sich auf die Möglichkeit des Radfahrens bezogen. Wenn das nicht wieder rückgängig gemacht wurde, passt alles. Ob das ein Tunnel ist oder was anders, war möglicherweise mein Fehler - somit danke fürs korrigieren.
eggie (2024-04-15 15:40:47+00:00): Beste QT..

Graag concreet commentaar bij je wijziging. Medemappers willen graag zien wat hebt aangepast.
Mvg
eggie
eggie (2024-04-15 15:49:49+00:00): De tagging van de bus_way in 's-Heer Hendrikskinderen zit al in de hoofdrijbaan. Daar loopt ook de routerelatie.  DE busway kan beter weg.
Je hebt wel heel veel veranderd in een groot gebied. Het is lastig te controleren. Probeer het gebied te beperken tot één straat en doe dan een upload.
eggie (2024-04-15 15:54:06+00:00): De afslagen op de kruising Albert Joachimikade Ringbaan Oost zijn niet correct.
Wanneer er geen fysieke afscheiding is geen aparte rijbanen intekenen.

Het lijkt allemaal netjes, maar kloppen doet het niet.
De voorsorteerstroken zitten in de rijbaan. Daar gaan we geen rijbaan naast leggen.
groet eggie
dvdhoven (2024-04-15 18:35:08+00:00): rcn route 72-73 is hersteld, die was over een flink stuk weg
dvdhoven (2024-04-15 18:37:28+00:00): Sorry, ik bedoelde rwn 72-73
eggie (2024-04-15 18:42:47+00:00): Kortom graag een reactie... ik heb je eerder ook al een PB gestuurd.
Ook Leo heeft opmerkingen gemaakt en vragen gesteld
Er is al met al veel schade.
Mvg..
eggie
marczoutendijk (2024-04-16 07:42:47+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15949
 
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-04-26 09:01:21+00:00): Please don't connect bridges to underpass
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150044508
kengaroo5445 (2024-04-27 16:22:45+00:00): Noted with Thanks
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150044508
kengaroo5445 (2024-04-27 16:23:01+00:00): Noted with Thanks
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150044508
Frans S (2024-05-01 10:51:53+00:00): 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. 

Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
The main issue and causing much extra work for validators is your choice of how to tag highways and connecting them to each other.

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/150044564
Frans S (2024-05-01 10:53:06+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
One of the validator jobs is to reviews the taggings of highways .  Experience learns that traces of highways are regularly wrong tagged.

How to decide when a trace is a path or an unclassified highway (main choices in rural areas)
First, look what they connect.  Houses, settlements, villages. Then measure the width of that trace.

In iDeditor 

Shortcut : Ctrl+⇧ Shift+M – toggle  opens measurement panel
Draw a line between the shoulders of a trace (zoom in very far) and read the distance.
If a trace is max 2 meters wide, tag it as a path. Use footway only in urban (town) areas.
Wider and connect hamlets, houses and villages should be tagged as unclassified.
Tag residential in urban areas (villages, towns)

In JOSM, use the measure tab or, draw a circle (round building, shortcut Alt-Z when the building plugin is installed)) between the shoulders of a trace and read the distance on the lower toolbar. (don't map that bulding)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations

Quote: Tracks are roads of agricultural purpose. They usually connect fields to farms. The surface sometimes makes them inaccessible for regular cars, or at least limits the speeds to a very slow pace. Tagging a trace as 'track' should always be avoided for through-going traffic, access to houses/farms or within urban areas.

Important. Please connect highways to each other, where obvious,  to get a network which can be used by GPS NAV systems.

Best regards
miluethi (2024-04-15 17:13:18+00:00): Hi Kieren,
I noticed that many of your building shapes are much bigger than the satellite imagery and sometimes include 2 buildings together with free space between them. 

Please just draw building shapes on the size of the sat imagery and use the "Q" key to square buildings.

I also notice building shapes crossing highways. If necessary, adjust the highways, but never draw buildings over it.

Thank you.
tux67 (2024-04-16 06:05:26+00:00): Hallo Cs137,

Hausnummern werden bei OSM nur 1x und nicht pro Gebäudeteil vergeben. Zur Zeit ist die 33 genau da gemappt, wo sie auch bei ALKIs eingetragen ist. Weitere Einträge der gleichen Nummer sind nicht notwendig.

Gruß
tux67
stefil (2024-04-16 10:09:55+00:00): Resticted area for bike and horses
CjMalone (2024-05-01 09:12:55+00:00): This should be prefixed with `https://` or `http://`. However the website doesn't work for me, so I can't check which.
Ignatych (2024-05-01 17:20:46+00:00): Fixed, thank you
CjMalone (2024-05-02 12:59:56+00:00): Thanks
Leo Slager (2024-04-16 09:32:09+00:00): Dag shathossi,
Op het W deel van Veldhoeve tag je nu naast highway=footway ook nog
footway=sidewalk.
Dan zou er naast het voetpad ook nog een trottoir liggen. 
De combinatie van die twee is dus altijd fout.
Als er een stoep naast een straat ligt dan kun je footway=sidewalk op die highway taggen.
Soms lijkt het makkelijk, maar de wiki geeft heel wat regeltjes.
Kijk je zelf nog even.
reigi (2024-04-16 06:23:05+00:00): Du hast in diesem CS den WAY: 1091165467 von service auf unclassified geändert. Dieser Weg endet aber "hinter den Gebäuden". Dem Wiki nach https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dunclassified handelt es sich aber bei einem highway=unclassified um eine für den öffentlichen motorisierten Verkehr freigegebene Nebenstraße und Fahrweg mit Verbindungscharakter. Ist unclassified wirklich hier der richtige Tag? Ich hätte es eher auf service belassen.
tux67 (2024-04-16 06:32:36+00:00): Ja, das sehe ich auch so ... ggf. noch service=driveway dazu
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:service%3Ddriveway
Cs137 (2024-04-16 07:43:40+00:00): vielen Dank für die Hinweise. "Ein- oder Auffahrt zu einem Wohn-, Geschäfts- oder Firmengrundstück." trifft es sehr gut, somit wäre `driveway` der korrekte Tag.
tux67 (2024-04-16 07:47:21+00:00): Prima - änderst du das selbst ..?
Cs137 (2024-04-16 07:51:28+00:00): gerade erledigt :-)
tux67 (2024-04-16 07:53:02+00:00): Prima - danke.
reigi (2024-04-16 07:57:44+00:00): Danke - so soll es sein. Viel Spass weiterhin beim Mappen.
Cs137 (2024-04-16 08:00:12+00:00): Dankeschön - und Sorry für die falsche Zuordnung.
NeisBot (2024-04-15 16:04:02+00:00): Hello DaredbK, 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
user_14366776 (2024-04-25 05:32:55+00:00): Metropolitan city roads(광역시도) are secondary road, but you all changed to tertiary road. :( 
Please read this(Ko:한국의 도로) before edit korea roads
(Search OSM wiki for "Ko:한국의 도로")
Matyáš Richter (2024-04-25 09:22:11+00:00): I've read that article, but I was under the impression that metropolitan city roads are marked by a white octagon symbol, while in this case, essentially every multi-lane road was tagged as secondary. Is the classification not given by the markings? I apologise if I misunderstood the wiki article, next time I will make sure to consult it beforehand...
Đuro Jiří (2024-05-11 06:06:28+00:00): Questo è punto di ricarica solo cellulari? Se si è meglio
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=device%20charging%20station?uselang=hr
martien-176 (2024-08-02 19:04:25+00:00): Hi,  thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT. You requested a review of your mappings. 

You mapped fields as  buildings here. This is understandable, sometimes it is hard to distinguish buildings on imagery.

What you can do next time is to look for shadows, open ground, changes in roof color, size of the shape on the imagery.

Zooming in and out can also be helpful.

Thanks so much for your contribution, Martien, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150046475
miluethi (2024-04-15 17:05:21+00:00): Hi tShimizu,

Can you please square out all your buildings in OSM? There are only a few exceptions, like the one with this triangle you just did. 

Just press the "Q" key when selecting a building shape.

Thank you for contributing to OSM.
tShimizu1019 (2024-04-17 14:58:35+00:00): Hi miluethi,

Thank you for your confirmation.
I fixed it in the following change set.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150133949
xkillah (2024-05-08 04:56:17+00:00): пожалуйста, не создавайте несуществующие на местности объекты
mlysle (2024-04-15 16:16:23+00:00): my comment is incorrect. I only added grasslands in this edit, but it auto completed a previous edit comment
comfyquiettree (2024-04-15 17:26:34+00:00): *dle
NeisBot (2024-04-29 14:34:03+00:00): Hello DaredbK, 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
rempshaener (2024-04-15 17:49:57+00:00): Hallo,
eine Anmerkung wegen https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/145077120: Da sehe ich einen minimalen Anteil an scrub, das ist fast alles Gras. Und verursacht hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/876310147 eine Überlagerung.
Viele Grüße
bollejansson (2024-04-15 18:33:36+00:00): Hallo!
Vielen Dank für deinen Hinweis. Ich habe das Tagging korrigiert.
Viele Grüße
rempshaener (2024-04-15 18:57:45+00:00): Danke dir
tekim (2024-04-15 22:01:27+00:00): Hello, Thanks for your edits to the map!  I see you used Google Street View in the process of making this edit.  Unfortunatly, when editing OpenStreetMap we are not allowed to use Google Street View (or Google Maps, or Google Earth), due to Google's Terms of Service
tekim (2024-04-15 22:01:41+00:00): reverting a changeset that used a source that is not allowed

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150059678
Lauflo (2024-05-17 12:30:23+00:00): Bonjour,
vos modifications ont un impacte sur le passage de nos bus (psv) l'attribut oneway:psv=no ne fonctionne pas.
Nous avons dû trouver une solution alternative. 
Auriez-vous une solution ?

Merci pour votre retour.
d_berger (2024-05-17 14:44:07+00:00): Das hört sich nach einem Applikationsproblem an. Funktioniert es mit 'oneway:bus=no'? Bei DIVA von Mentz war es anfänglich umgekehrt, 'psv' funktionierte, 'bus' funktionierte nicht. Dies erforderte immer ein zusätzliches 'taxi=no'. In einem späteren Softwareversion wurde dies dann erweitert, damit beide Varianten korrekt ausgewertet wird.

Vorschlag: 'oneway:bus=no' setzen. Scheint an anderen Stellen im Kanton verwendet zu werden. Das kann ich sonst auch kurz erledigen.

Nächster Schritt: Softwareentwickler kontaktieren, und darauf hinweisen dass 'psv'-Eigenschaften nicht korrekt implementiert sind.

---- (translator)

Cela ressemble à un problème d'application. Est-ce que cela fonctionne avec 'oneway:bus=no'? Avec DIVA de Mentz, c'était initialement l'inverse, 'psv' fonctionnait, 'bus' ne fonctionnait pas. Cela nécessitait toujours un 'taxi=no' supplémentaire. Dans une version ultérieure du logiciel, cela a ensuite été étendu afin que les deux variantes soient évaluées correctement.

Suggestion: Définissez 'oneway:bus=no'. Semble être utilisé ailleurs dans le canton. Sinon, je peux le faire brièvement.

Prochaine étape: Contactez le développeur du logiciel et signalez-lui que les propriétés 'psv' ne sont pas implémentées correctement.

HTH
felipeeugenio (2024-04-15 21:50:44+00:00): Hola. Agregó peajes en un lugar donde no existen hace 5 años.
ToniE (2024-04-15 17:40:09+00:00): Hallo und willkommen bei OSM.

da ist wohl einiges schief gelaufen.

Die Straße an der Oberfläche heißt nicht "Luise-Kieselbach-Tunnel, sondern "Garmischer Straße". Deine ersten 4 Ways hier sind komplett nun falsch. Ich schlage vor, diesen Edit komplett rückgängig zu machen, so lange das noch geht.

Was wolltest Du mit dem Edit erreichen?

Gruß
Toni
ToniE (2024-04-15 18:01:46+00:00): Sorry, ich musste den Edit ohne weiteres Warten rückgängig machen, da hier einiges an Chaos passiert ist.
Mapiate (2024-04-15 18:44:05+00:00): Hi Scott,

Thanks for your updates. It looks like you may have accidentally dragged a node on Harney Street in this changeset. You can see the start of this near 41.25658,-95.93883. This has skewed the highways and generated a lot of warnings. Can you review and fix it?
Scott Redd (2024-04-15 18:52:14+00:00): Yikes! Looking at that now. Thanks!
Scott Redd (2024-04-15 19:04:12+00:00): I think this is resolved now. Please let me know if you need anything else.
Mapiate (2024-04-15 19:29:53+00:00): Thanks for the quick update. Looks good, much appreciated!
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-15 17:37:19+00:00): Thanks for a fix!

I was not sure enough to make such changes remotely, thanks for catching comment on a dormant account
Baconcrisp (2024-04-15 17:40:11+00:00): You're welcome! I'm happy to help where I can!
JS Bédard (2024-04-15 17:40:51+00:00): source: https://www.foretouverte.gouv.qc.ca/?context=_default&zoom=14&center=-72.00889,47.18378&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=link_droits,linkindex_imagerie,535abba5308489970e409d468fcb3b5f,1da64ddfeaf23710b8a9ad95133fb5d8
heigermue (2024-04-16 09:32:25+00:00): Dieser Wegabschnitt wird dauerhaft gesperrt.
LucGommans (2025-06-22 15:56:17+00:00): Is https://osm.org/way/276571895 nog accuraat nu dat het hier getagged staat?
elot360 (2024-04-17 10:39:50+00:00): Dasz radę "otworzyć" LK131 na odcinku Batory - Stary? Tam szlak jest już otwarty, ale nie wiem czy są naniesione wszystkie zmiany w układy torowe
zuicz (2024-04-17 17:05:21+00:00): Nie wiem czy układ jest git bo np. nie zakłada miejsca na peron przystanku Uniwersytet. Otworzę, najwyżej ktoś mądrzejszy będzie to potem poprawiał
empty_child (2024-04-15 19:44:49+00:00): Добрый день
Не создавайте копии объектов, пожалуйста (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1011060311)
citrula (2024-04-15 20:00:57+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thank you for your contributions!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150052966
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-15 18:30:26+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9182996497

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀