piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
LouisXIV (2024-09-04 19:58:41+00:00): Oui mais c'est juste la personne qui l'a ajoutée qui a décidé de l'appeler comme ça. Si je l'avais ajouté en l'appelant simplement "Bibliothèque", vous l'auriez donc supprimé aussi. "municipale" c'est son statut, cette bibliothèque n'a pas de nom officiel, alors en pratique, oui, on lui trouve un nom et la plupart des gens disent juste "bibliothèque". La cantine et la garderie sont municipales aussi.
user_5359 (2023-08-02 06:55:27+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please check the position of the node. The address is part of the (main) building and is not located at the junction of the driveway.
DabMK (2023-08-05 07:39:46+00:00): Ciao, io avevo mappato l'edificio dell'INPS dividendolo in tutte le sue parti con relativi tag sui piani e sui tetti. Come mai hai cancellato tutto per mettere questo? Credo che sia anche abbastanza sbagliato
ivanbranco (2023-08-05 08:07:55+00:00): Per completezza questo è il changeset che ha cancellato le building parts: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139307985/
io sarei per revertarlo e ripristinare la situazione precedente

Il multipoligono creato ora è sicuramente errato, l'edificio risulta essere il buco in quanto impostato come inner invece che outer, mentre il cortile che dovrebbe essere un inner è mappato come outer

Aldo potresti considerare l'uso di descrizioni ai changeset che aiutino a capire agli altri mapper cosa hai modificato? "Siena" non è di molto aiuto, vedi: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Good_changeset_comments
aldoct (2023-08-06 06:16:26+00:00): @DabMK: Ciao, chiedo scusa se alle volte uso l'accetta al posto del bisturi! Lo confesso, è una mia prevenzione: quando vedo gli edifici con le quote li ritengo frutto di import di massa e li guardo con diffidenza. Con JOSM(che ti consiglio di usare al posto di ID), sto utilizzando le mappe al 2.000 ritenendole più affidabili (posso fornirti l'indirizzo WMS) e proprio per l'INPS ho trovato un guazzabuglio che non sono riuscito a risolvere; decidendo, alla fine di reinserirlo da zero. Mi dispiace non averti avvisato (anche tu hai fatto il revert senza aspettare la mia spiegazione!) ma la massa di dati che tratto è ingente ed alle volte non mi consente di essere corretto come mi picerebbe. Però, insisto, usa JOSM ed i layer WMS che sono gli strumenti, a mio avviso, più idonei
@ivanbranco: a causa del revert non vedo il multipoligono di cui parli (era mio?) Per la descrizione generica hai ragione ma non saprei come fare altrimenti: tratto una ingente massa di dati che descriverli con esattezza è impossibile. Cercherò, però, di essere più preciso. 
Grazie a tutti per la collaborazione 
Aldo
silversurfer83 (2023-08-02 07:08:57+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM

this rather expansive edit invites some questions:
Since you edited 811 nodes in one changeset I'd like to point you towards https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits before you continue your work. Please read this article and the article on data imports carefully and consult with the community before commencing.

Also I'd like to point you to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice

Should you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me or the community at community.openstreetmap.org

cheers
silversurfer83
silversurfer83 (2023-08-02 07:12:23+00:00): Sorry, this is the better link
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

and also it does look like you really might wish to read this also:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines
Qerko Developers import (2023-08-03 12:36:21+00:00): @silversurfer83 Thanks for the information. I'll read it as soon as possible. I expect that this huge initial change is the last one at the same time. We just need automatically switch some tags related to bitcoin payments when restaurants enable/disable btc payments over Qerko app. The frequency of these modifications will be very low.
SomeoneElse (2023-08-06 09:24:43+00:00): Hello,
Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here.
This appears to be a large undiscussed import (see e.g. https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/9484230089 ).  I'll revert this, and would suggest that you follow https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines , including discussing with the community before trying to re-import it.
Best Regards,
Andy
uvi (2024-03-04 16:44:40+00:00): Hallo derLandsmann,
du hast vor 7 Monaten zwischen Langenstriegis und Bockendorf 4 WEA erfasst. Diese sind vor Ort aber nicht vorhanden. Wie erklärt sich das?? Ich weiß, dass es ein Antragsverfahren gibt. Dann dürfen diese jedoch nur mit dem Zusatz proposed (siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:proposed) erfasst werden. Bitte passe das enstprechend an. Danke Uwe
derLandsmann (2024-03-05 17:07:10+00:00): Danke für die Information Uwe, ich glaube, ich habe es bestimmt nicht richtig gemacht.
uvi (2024-03-05 17:10:34+00:00): Schön, dass du dich meldest! Passt du es selbst an?
derLandsmann (2024-03-05 17:23:06+00:00): Ich hatte erst mit power=proposed und proposed= generator dargestellt. Damit erkenne ich aber nicht das Windrad. Kannst du mir das bei der WEA 1 mal zeigen, ich würde dann den Rest korrigieren. Danke
uvi (2024-03-06 06:12:23+00:00): ich würde es so machen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081434003
uvi (2024-03-06 06:12:48+00:00): ob das tatsächlich korrekt ist, kann ich nicht sagen
derLandsmann (2024-03-07 15:12:56+00:00): Bei mir zeigte es als Fehler an. Mmmhhh
derLandsmann (2024-03-07 15:14:06+00:00): Ich versuche mal weiter das "proposed" zu verstehen.
uvi (2024-03-08 12:27:51+00:00): Nun wieder zurück? Die Windräder sind immer noch nicht vorhanden und die Planung soll sogar (Gerüchten zufolge) abgebrochen sein.
Wenn es keine andere Lösung gibt, das "proposed" unterzubringen, dann sollten sie vielleicht lieber gelöscht werden. Nicht vorhandene Dinge gehören nicht in die Datenbank!
uvi (2024-03-08 12:34:56+00:00): Gerne hier weiter: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/geplante-windkraftanlagen/110293
derLandsmann (2024-03-08 16:44:17+00:00): Danke für die verständliche Erklärung, gelesen, verstanden, gelöscht. Bis die Tage.
Jayden26 (2023-08-05 16:56:43+00:00): Why is it in Europe
SK@ (2023-08-05 17:22:41+00:00): Hmmm, I must have mixed different location edits into one changeset. I'll review it tomorrow when using my computer (on phone now).
SK@_TT (2023-08-08 13:23:32+00:00): Well Jayden turns out I have mae an honest mistake. I didn't realize the changeset was so large and included EU and US neighborhood edits. Adding missing streets and updating road class to be more consistent. Is it fine to leave as is or  do you feel strongly it should be reverted and then I recreate the changes in 2 or more changesets?
SK@_TT (2023-08-08 13:24:54+00:00): Clarifying: I'm a bonehead...not that I'm being snippy or anything. Realizing it is hard to read tone when you read comments. Making sure you don't think I am giving you attitude. Just wondering what you recommend as next steps.
geow (2023-08-01 18:57:52+00:00): mueschel, danke fürs berichtigen 🖖
danieldegroot2 (2023-08-01 16:54:59+00:00): Reverted own edit manually in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139309566
user_5359 (2023-08-03 05:22:18+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please take a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1193818881. What is the mean of the tag q=q? There are also 74 nodes with this tag. What is the reason to name an undefined area ? Are there also longer name like s1..s3?
user_5359 (2023-08-06 13:18:13+00:00): I have reverted this change set.
NorthCrab (2023-08-01 19:59:23+00:00): Dzięki!
CurlingMan13 (2023-08-01 17:03:22+00:00): Removed features that don't exist (post office), old railway and added new features, including apartment complex.  this was confirmed from an in-person survey.
5m4u9 (2023-08-04 19:29:03+00:00): Hi, I would like to know what is the criteria you use for the classification of roads in cities?

The local traffic office has a hierarchy of roads (primary, secondary, tertiary and residential) going from the city centre.

Now the OSM map partially applies that hierarchy, but I'm still investigating if there is any recent change, then I want to go ask personally to check any new update. Maybe by the end of the month I will ask the local community about the change.

On the side roads to the departmental road "Avenida Blanco Galindo" I think they are residential, but in some sections I agree as it is now.
JJIglesias (2023-08-06 02:20:59+00:00): I guess there is mistake with the name is Carlos Blanco Galindo, not "Blanca Galindo"...
(Inactive) hayduke1275 (2023-08-07 15:28:39+00:00): As far as classification we typically go with the OSM standards which are easily found on the Wiki
(Inactive) hayduke1275 (2023-08-07 15:29:21+00:00): I added a name from a sign to a tertiary road, as can be seen here: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-17.39303800000002&lng=-66.185632&z=17&focus=photo&dateFrom=2017-01-01&pKey=720365209852790&x=0.5274500505107801&y=0.5461681484402918&zoom=0
(Inactive) hayduke1275 (2023-08-07 15:30:38+00:00): It would seem that the name might be incomplete on the adjacent trunk road
JJIglesias (2023-08-07 17:51:57+00:00): Well yes the complete name is Carlos Blanco Galindo, The Trunk road (F4) is best known as Avenida Blanco Galindo (omitting the Carlos). The Non Trunk roads aside are also known as Blanco Galindo. Please note that BLANCA GALINDO is totally incorrect....
(Inactive) hayduke1275 (2023-08-07 17:54:01+00:00): Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
JJIglesias (2023-08-07 17:58:59+00:00): I guess this could be easilly solved using the tags name= and official:name=.
Please note that along the ways (this and many others in Bolivia) the names could slightly changes in the spelling and depiction. However being in essence the "same" name.
JJIglesias (2023-08-07 18:01:23+00:00): There is no a National Standard about, neither one is enforced at all...
JJIglesias (2023-08-07 18:04:04+00:00): So we use Avenida and Calle in very "loose way" when the dictionary differentiate between them...
(Inactive) hayduke1275 (2023-08-07 18:16:43+00:00): I see. Our standard of editing is to add or update names based on what we see in ground imagery, such as the sign I linked above. (I have fixed the misspelling you pointed out earlier). I was also not aware of the local practice of omitting the Carlos. I do agree that the whole name should be somewhere in the tagging scheme.
5m4u9 (2023-08-07 21:59:24+00:00): I think it is better to use on the road and side streets "Avenida Carlos Blanco Galindo" (as it is on the street signs) and for the shortened name used locally, loc_name = "Avenida Blanco Galindo".

Given the trend that street names are being "renamed" with the full names and since we don't have many mappers to map/check, it is preferable to look ahead.
JJIglesias (2023-08-08 01:20:46+00:00): Marco Antonio, I agree with that. name=the full name and loc_name=our way of calling the element.
For sure the street signs will take years to even be "there" less alone being correct or consistent.
5m4u9 (2023-08-08 02:26:31+00:00): Okay, I will prepare a message for the mailing list, for the record. I think it can be applied in other neighbourhoods.
JJIglesias (2023-08-08 05:15:14+00:00): Thanks. Santa Cruz is quite particular as well because some circular avenues are called ANILLOS (Ring + number) but some portions also have individual names. Likewise with several Radial avenues from the center that have the name RADIAL + number, but also have names in portions...
JJIglesias (2023-08-08 05:17:18+00:00): Quite "Folkloric" we are
(Inactive) hayduke1275 (2023-08-09 22:47:27+00:00): If the circular feature has a specific name we will leave as is. It has been our practice to remove names from circular features that match the incoming/outgoing way. This follows what is on the wiki. I think using the full sign for name= and the local name for loc_name= is also good practice and follows the wiki very nicely.
Vinber-Pro (2023-08-02 06:58:53+00:00): Si elle n'existe plus, il faut supprimer les attributs de la banque, en gardant les attributs du bâtiment
joel56dt (2023-08-01 17:19:43+00:00): Hi nyanpsyche,

I wouldn't add two amenity=fire_station areas, instead I would tag the building itself with building=fire_station while still tagging the area as amenity=fire_station. Thoughts?

Joel
nyanpsyche (2023-08-01 18:27:05+00:00): That makes sense to me; will revise.

Nyan Saik
joel56dt (2023-08-01 19:38:30+00:00): Awesome. Thanks for your work!
HellMap (2023-08-04 14:23:45+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139444467.
user_5359 (2023-08-03 05:05:18+00:00): Hello! Please take a look on https://www.osm.org/way/668200533. Why do you add the tag layer=-1 to the street? The bridge has the tag layer=1.
cat3t2 (2023-08-03 08:35:49+00:00): Thanks for noticing, i must have accidentally accepted the iD editor automatic suggestion without noticing, i fixed it
Yunan973 (2023-08-01 18:11:13+00:00): where are my changes ???
HellMap (2023-08-04 14:23:47+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139444467.
Britzz (2023-11-24 17:24:37+00:00): Hello, i disagree about "added crossing tags" on a node like this one : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11044421772 as there is no crossing at all at this place. Mapping in Paris from Colorado is a little bit strange I think. Anyway, if you do add  crossing if this kind, please add crossing=unmarked, at least.
VLD273 (2023-11-27 16:50:56+00:00): Hello! Thank you for the feedback. I will keep this in mind for future editing.
limes11 (2023-08-01 17:55:09+00:00): Hi

Bei den opening_hours bitte englische Abkürzungen verwenden, We, nicht Mi. Das können Applikationen sonst nicht auslesen.

Hab hier jetzt alles korrigiert

VG
trigpoint (2023-08-03 16:43:23+00:00): Hi again
This is also not a roundabout, its not a junction=circular either. Imagery shows give way markings so just a oneway road.
On streetside imagery you can see there is a parking lane on the right, which confirms it is not a roundabout.

Cheers Phil
Carto'Cité (2023-12-28 16:58:35+00:00): Bonjour Kam,
Merci encore pour tes améliorations sur les aménagements. J'ai à nouveau un problème de connexion avec cette piste (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193826486) à ce niveau :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6704056341
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6704056340
Est-ce que tu passes dans le coin de temps en temps ; des photos seraient idéales pour comprendre les situations. Je viens de voir ta précision de bicycle=dismount sur cette traversée qui est effectivement problématique :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/698111709 ; J'avoue que ces situations sont compliquées à décrire. Je pense que bicycle=yes sur ces footway=crossing seraient ok sachant que justement bicycle=yes et pas bicycle=designated est déjà la marque d'un défaut sur le terrain. Tu me diras ce que tu en penses.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
Kam (2023-12-29 18:46:42+00:00): Bonjour,
Il n'y a pas de marquage cycle sur les passages piétons mais je ne serai pas choqué de voir un bicycle=yes sur ces passages piétons pour satisfaire les calculateurs d’itinéraires cyclo.

Concernant le bicycle=dismount le panneau "cyclistes pied à terre" a été retiré depuis, il peut donc également changer en bicycle=yes pour le routage.

En effet ce n'est pas simple, sur le terrain ce n'est pas toujours très claire et dans OSM c'est pareil, le wiki est vague sans être représentatif des pratiques et tout le monde y vas de sont avis perso (cycleway+foot vs path+foot+bicycle). Pour le cycle il n'y a pas encore de consensus qui permet d'avoir quelque chose de suffisamment stable sur les tags.
C'est pour cela que j'évite de contribuer aux piste cyclable et voie verte.
Carto'Cité (2023-12-30 07:58:07+00:00): Au super j'ai répondu à un autre message de ta part avant de lire celui-ci 😅
Merci encore pour tes retours et le temps que tu y passes !
Je suis d'accord avec toi sur les pratiques qui diffèrent. J'essaie de suivre le wiki et je suis obligé de faire quelques dérives. Par exemple le bicycle=yes est un abus car cela ne devrait exprimer qu'un droit explicite, hors pour le vélo un droit explicite est bien plus explicite avec bicycle=designated ce qui permet de reléguer le bicycle=yes à des cas particuliers comme avec l'association d'un footway ; c'est censé être l’exception et cela permet de révéler les anomalies du terrain.
Une très bonne pratique en tout cas est de préciser la signalétique pour avoir des éléments solides de compréhension de la situation. De plus en plus souvent quand j'ai les photos Panoramax ou Mapillary, j'ajoute au tag la photo qui pointe la signalétique et l'aménagement.
N’hésite pas à me solliciter si tu as la moindre remarque ou question.
Charles
SomeoneElse (2023-08-01 18:04:54+00:00): Hello,
Quick question - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/290261947/history has four nodes - the junctions with the road and the footpath, and then the turning circle (fair enough), but after that there's another one for an extra node with "noexit=yes" on it, which seems to be in almost exactly the same place as the turning circle.  Is that deliberate?
Best Regards,
Andy
obyrnegps (2023-08-01 21:40:02+00:00): Not exactly deliberate.  I’ve noted that the https://hdyc.neis-one.org and https://osmstats.neis-one.org websites flag a level 3 issue of concern between a turning circle and a node on any way, be it a driveway, footpath or even steps.  This disappears if a noexit node is placed by the turning circle.  As https://hdyc.neis-one.org and https://osmstats.neis-one.org  represent a measure of Quality assurance for OSM mapping, a lower level 3 issues of concern has merit.
SekeRob (2023-08-02 06:55:43+00:00): Level 1-2-3 is actually an Osmose flag, yup,

You can hit ignore on the pins. It's true, have a turning circle which one would expect for that to be the end of the way near an another way and that warning pops up. Most of the times there's actually a footway of some kind to continue but if the top (say northbound) of the turning circle e.g. has a guard_rail east west and then a road east west, and that's within 15 meters, the analysers want the assertion that it truly is the end, no foot or other connection that could be used to continue. I look for any path and else put the noexit=yes just on the turning_circle in that case, nothing nefarious as intentionally hiding.
5m4u9 (2023-08-02 05:07:46+00:00): Hi, in this photo appear the name of tunnel and road... https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-17.38206580000002&lng=-66.1513473&z=19.243399386914778&dateFrom=2023-01-01&pKey=552286227051986&focus=photo
Pegasus21 (2023-08-02 13:15:22+00:00): Hi 5m4u6, 
I moved the name of this tunnel from description to tunnel:name. 
Pegasus21
NorthCrab (2023-08-01 19:36:05+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193828296
Tutaj nie ma separcji dróg, to jest jedna droga, nie rysuj każdego pasu oddzielnie.
NorthCrab (2023-08-01 19:37:57+00:00): Coś takiego oznaczamy area:highway=emergency
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193828299
NorthCrab (2023-08-01 19:38:34+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4426889687
Tutaj usunąłeś poprawnie zmapowany znak.
NorthCrab (2023-08-01 19:39:24+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193828312
To nie jest abandoned skoro jest tam działający service road.
NorthCrab (2023-08-01 19:41:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081614551
Takie zastosowanie noexit jest błędne, proszę przeczytaj dokumentację tagu przed jego stosowaniem.
B-Rabbit (2023-08-01 18:39:23+00:00): Hallo CHBO23,
willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!

Mit deinen Änderungen willst du wohl das Areal und die Wege darauf als Privatgelände markieren. So wie du das aber gemacht hast funktioniert das nicht. Für Einsteiger empfiehlt sich ein Blick ins Wiki, das bei den ersten Schritten weiterhelfen kann, z.B. hier https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Beginners%27_guide

Zum Thema Zugangsbeschränkungen findest du hier die richtigen Infos: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:access

Bei deinen Bearbeitungen sind einige Wege kaputt gegangen und kreuzen sich jetzt, das repariere ich gleich noch.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-08-01 18:21:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834895919
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834895929
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028423313
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428687

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Olimpii Skórzewskiej":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681287
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/474052539
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/474052540
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428708

"Hipiczna":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681291
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681311
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193829930

"Dąbrowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681292
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681293
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681294
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681295
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681312
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681313
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681314
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028427936
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028429012
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028429034
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193829931

"Bartnicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681296

"Pszczela":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11081681309

"Dębina":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834895915

"Przy Lipach":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834895917
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834895918
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428685
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1137065258

"Lawendowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834895921
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/892452160
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428704

"Przylesie":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834895923

"Radosna":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/892451318
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428705
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428706
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1137065270

"Sezamkowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428682
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028428698
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1137065267

"Moczary":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1028429222

"Jana Krzeszewskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193829891

"Zielona Polana":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193829933

"Amurowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193829934

"Miodowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193830064

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
mueschel (2023-08-08 09:54:57+00:00): Hi,
hier stimmt etwas nicht - das gesamte Klinikum und eine Feuerwache sind jetzt als Dieseltank getagged. Die Tags müssten wohl auf ein eigenes Objekt.
plennert (2023-08-08 10:06:41+00:00): OK, ja, lieber ein Node irgendwo auf dem Areal eintragen? Das Aggregat gilt ja für alle Gebäude.  Bin mir da auch nicht so ganz schlüssig wie man dies darstellen kann ... Gegenvorschlag?
rskedgell (2023-08-01 18:48:31+00:00): Thanks - I meant to take a walk down there and check, but never got around to it.
Vinber-Pro (2023-08-02 06:52:42+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap,

Le nom doit être le nom spécifique au magasin, pas la description. Le nom doit être aussi accompagné d'un attribut, pour préciser l'activité.

Bonne carto
5m4u9 (2023-08-03 00:57:16+00:00): Hi, these streets are too narrow to be residential, even though they call them "streets".
Toddtodd (2023-08-03 14:56:51+00:00): Thanks for bringing this to my attention.  I had changed them because they seemed wide enough to me and had names, but I consulted with someone else and we decided that they do make more sense as service roads.
5m4u9 (2023-08-03 21:07:12+00:00): Hi, service is fine.

The main definition in the wiki doesn't apply in Bolivia, I think another definition "alley street" fits better.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dalley#Alley_streets