piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Adze1 (2024-07-17 19:18:38+00:00): Lost my first reply. Here's a 2nd attempt:-

No, it's a mistake. I added it because EveryDoor showed no gates at all in that area. I would have added the other 2 nearby ones, but didn't have their exact locations.
After some investigation I've found they're defined as wicket gates, as opposed to gates. Not my idea of a wicket gate, but the english language is notoriously imprecise. EveryDoor seems to completely ignore wicket gates - I'll get in touch with the developer. But I also notice some other software does the same e.g. OrganicMaps (I forget where I first noticed this behaviour).
gurglypipe (2024-07-18 08:18:31+00:00): Thanks for looking into it. It’s a shame EveryDoor is buggy around this, but at least that explains things.

I’ve removed the duplicate gate in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154088786

Cheers :)
VictorIE (2024-08-31 02:16:39+00:00): Hi,

Are you certain about:
bicycle=no
foot=no
horse=no ?
kre777 (2024-07-23 17:32:48+00:00): Mit deinem "culvert" (Durchlass/Rohr) Eintrag https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1301830833 wird ein von Menschen erschaffener künstlicher Kanal beschrieben. Das wäre mir neu. Woher hast du das Wissen um ein solches Bauwerk zwischen dem Lödensee und dem Förchensee?
mcliquid (2024-07-23 17:56:25+00:00): Das ist mir bewusst, der Tag steht momentan als Platzhalter mit entsprechender Beschreibung, bis hier https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/is-there-a-common-tag-for-underground-infiltrated-watercourses/111558 oder hier eine bessere Alternative gefunden wurde: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rfc-deprecate-use-of-waterway-pressurised-on-anything-not-artificially-built/115222

Du kannst dich gerne mit einbringen!
kre777 (2024-07-24 08:54:59+00:00): Dein Eintrag soll also (später) einen unterirdischen natürlichen Wasserlauf darstellen. Stichwort: Grundwasser.
Mir scheint, die community-Diskussion dreht sich um größere versickernde Wasserwege/Wassermengen. Deine Lödensee-Förchensee-Verbindung könnten 50 Verschiedene "Rinnsale" sein. Grundwasser eben! Niemand weiß so genau wo es sich seine Weg bahnt.
Und außerdem: Wer nützt/beachtet/benötigt solche OSM Einträge? Und - Willst du den gleichen Kanal auch zum Bergener Moor verlegen? (-Bitte nicht-) M.M.n. sollte Grundwasser nicht eingetragen werden sonst wird dies ein "Fass ohne Boden". 
>Auf jeden Fall ist dein Eintrag unkorrekt und sollte so geändert werden. Entweder löschen (nur meine Meinung - vermutlich nicht deine) oder bis zur besseren Alternative den aussagekräftigeren Vorschlag waterway=subterranean (ohne tunnel:culvert) übernehmen.
kre777 (2024-11-02 15:25:39+00:00): Wie sieht es nun mit deiner "besseren Alternative" aus? Der "Platzhalter"-Eintrag ist immer noch vorhanden und fällt auch anderen als "nicht existent" auf. https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4462524
mcliquid (2024-11-03 12:32:17+00:00): Hast du dich dort eingebracht?
kre777 (2024-11-03 16:13:28+00:00): Nein. Nicht mein Thema. Spielt aber auch keine Rolle. Die Frage ist, wann der inkorrekte "culvert" nicht mehr in der Karte zu sehen sein wird?
woodpeck (2024-07-16 21:10:37+00:00): Dear ziki0405, in this changeset you have modified the boundaries of Germany and the Czech Republic, as well as 18 others. I would expect more information about this than just "NEW POINT". Please use changeset comments that describe in a little more detail what you edited, and also what source the edit was based on.
user_177389 (2024-07-17 14:02:08+00:00): reverted
eggie (2024-07-17 04:47:40+00:00): Beste karazz..
Je hoeft prive wegen niet te verwijderen.. maar je kunt wel bv access= private toevoegen bij een verbodsbord... of access=permissive als het een Eigen Weg betreft.
Mvg
eggie
karazz (2024-07-17 05:56:47+00:00): Goedemorgen Eggie,

Zou kunnen, maar wat is de meerwaarde? Op die manier zou iedereen zijn/haar oprit ingetekend kunnen worden en als privé weg worden aangeduid. Lijkt me ook niet de bedoeling.

Zijn er ergens afspraken over dergelijke 'kwesties' vastgelegd eigenlijk?

Groet,
Rick
eggie (2024-07-17 06:05:32+00:00): Hoi Rick,
De consensus is dat we 'alles' kunnen toevoegen... mits verifieerbaar en met de juiste accesstags.
Verwijderen ligt gevoelig bnnen OSM.
Er zijn micro - en macromappers.
Zelf teken ik ook zo'n erf niet snel in, maar verwijderen doe ik ook niet.

Verder kan het van belang zijn voor hulpdiensten zoals bv Brandweer (gebruikt LiveNav!) , ambulancediensten en bezorgdiensten (vaak met eigen routingapps. ) 

Good practice    

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Good_practice 

Natuurlijk kun je het ter discussie stellen op het forum. 

Mapse
eggie
eggie (2024-07-17 06:08:58+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Limitations_on_mapping_private_information

In kaart brengen van private gebouwen, privéwegen (inclusief oprijlanen), privé parkeerplaatsen wordt als volledig acceptabel beschouwd. Voeg, waar toepasselijk, access=private toe aan wegen, parkeerplaatsen, etc.

Heb je hier wellicht iets aan?
karazz (2024-07-17 07:13:25+00:00): Duidelijk, dan zal ik de volgende keer de weg niet inkorten maar als private markeren. 

Dank voor de feedback :)
eggie (2024-07-17 07:31:59+00:00): Top!
canfe (2024-07-17 05:53:54+00:00): Ma perché un semplice posteggio come multipoligono con due outer e nessun inner??
Basta fare un'area no?
way 1301834152
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154031767
mcliquid (2024-07-16 20:27:56+00:00): Ach wie traurig, mit dem Hienerwadl geht eine Ära zu Ende :(
vacanziere (2024-07-17 04:39:35+00:00): Genau, ein echter Verlust für Radfahrer.
literan (2024-12-20 13:34:29+00:00): а здесь точно такое гигантское здание строят? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1301836661/history
aTarom (2024-07-17 06:24:27+00:00): Hola, bienvenido, puedes confirmarme, por favor, de que la Calle Alameda
no existe y por ello la has eliminado?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/390287528/history
Saludos
galen8183 (2024-07-16 20:59:44+00:00): Please write changeset comments descriptive of your changes: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Is this road actually publicly accessible? The changeset below says it was restricted to public transport vehicles, can you confirm that's no longer the case? https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144931930
KlopanRin (2024-07-25 13:42:08+00:00): Can confirm. I was in the area on a repetitive basis.
Robert Whittaker (2024-10-27 12:00:44+00:00): Hi pjdebruin,

It's a bit difficult to tell from the OSM history information, but am I right in thinking that in this changeset, you removed part of the path along the river at https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.305605&mlon=0.654126#map=17/52.305605/0.654126 and diverted it around the sewage treatment works?

The official route of the Public Footpath follows the rive there. So did you move the path on OSM because the riverside path is no longer accessible? Do you recall if there any official 'diversion' or 'path closed' signs on the ground?

Best wishes,
Robert.
pjdebruin (2024-10-28 15:19:12+00:00): Yes, the former path is no longer accessible; a concrete wall is blocking it on the NW side, which I drew on the map. From the SE side one can enter the area but the path is fully overgrown.
There were some sort of signs along the new route, but I don't remember any details. I suppose they were not official.
pjdebruin (2024-10-28 15:24:38+00:00): By the way, parts of the path along the Lark were heavily flooded; I had to take my shoes off
une abeille (2024-07-16 22:30:44+00:00): Thanks you! I heard about this on CBC today myself and was just about to add it. :)
adamwer (2024-07-17 00:58:30+00:00): My pleasure! Also... omg, a talking bee! :)
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-07-26 22:25:46+00:00): It seems like you're making these up
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154032980
Filip009 (2024-07-17 19:41:26+00:00): Zdravím, prosím opravte si gramatiku.
aTarom (2024-07-17 06:49:53+00:00): hola, bienvenido, en OSM es preferible modificar antes que eliminar y crear de nuevo, para así conservar el historial del elemento
el eliminado, con historial de 7 años
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/482523948/history
por el nuevo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1301846235/history
saludos
aTarom (2024-07-17 06:52:37+00:00): hola, bienvenido, en OSM es preferible modificar antes que eliminar y crear de nuevo, para así conservar el historial del elemento
el eliminado, con historial de 8 años
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/406734547/history
por el nuevo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1301846600/history
saludos
diacriticalhit (2024-08-08 21:59:30+00:00): Hi Zol87, I am going to revert this changeset. The outline you made is accurate to the current Bing aerial, but there is actually a wholly new building, and the imagery is out of date right now.
MatthewBeckler (2024-07-16 21:47:51+00:00): Sorry, used the wrong changeset commit message. This should be "USA:WI - Coon Fork County Park, Eau Claire County - Improvements from GPS traces and local survey."
dienachteule (2024-07-16 22:02:25+00:00): danke!
Udarian (2024-07-16 22:43:08+00:00): crossing:signals=no is implied on crossing=uncontrolled, please stop adding these tags.

Happy mapping 
Udar
haycam (2024-07-16 22:50:34+00:00): Thank you for reviewing this. I am editing using Rapid 2.3 and it gives me error messages when crossing:signal tags are not clarified. I believe one of my supervisors is trying to contact you about this. He is user geocruizer.
Udarian (2024-07-17 05:20:17+00:00): Then don’t “fix” those errors since they are incorrect.
emersonveenstra (2024-07-19 11:37:39+00:00): Hi there,

Unless the aerial imagery is out of date, I don't think this is a building: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1298941621/history#map=19/32.71876/-109.72600

Could you find a better tagging for it? Thanks!
Tomas Straupis (2024-07-18 06:04:45+00:00): Kas čia atsitiko? Kodėl tokie didžiuliai miško plotai panaikinti?
DaanLT (2024-07-18 07:53:18+00:00): Įrenginėjamas/vystomas poligonas:
https://kam.lt/naujo-lk-poligono-projektas/
DaanLT (2024-07-18 07:55:32+00:00): galima būt ir pažymėti, kad čia yra poligonas
Tomas Straupis (2024-07-18 11:12:04+00:00): O tai tie plotai realiai iškirsti? Nes poligonas tai čia kito lygmens informacija, poligonas gali būti ir miške.
DaanLT (2024-07-18 12:01:13+00:00): Kiek random foto mačiau, tai daug ploto valoma
Tomas Straupis (2024-07-18 16:47:46+00:00): Oho, ačiū už info. Snaiperis atsiuntė dar ir foto: https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser/?zoom=13&lat=54.3879&lng=25.05758&themeId=DEFAULT-THEME&visualizationUrl=U2FsdGVkX18FhPpBJk6SfFaT6cSHcLvAmVJAFy1C8cx20v2CkEWoEmaaJjr5aXv1pXUvP1Afo60%2F1bU4StEhGWWqM4bR69SXG7wAXkFSeeTxkgDT2oSG5nlRpbo4mScl&datasetId=S2L2A&fromTime=2024-06-27T00%3A00%3A00.000Z&toTime=2024-06-27T23%3A59%3A59.999Z&layerId=2_TONEMAPPED_NATURAL_COLOR&demSource3D=%22MAPZEN%22
archpdx (2024-07-17 05:00:07+00:00): Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap! I notice that this changeset adds `foot=no` to some segments of Scholls Ferry and Shattuck. This tag should only be added in places where foot traffic is illegal and explicitly marked with a sign indicating so, which doesn't seem to be the case here. The existing `sidewalk=no` tag on its own should be adequate to convey that it might be dangerous for pedestrians.
waindt (2024-07-24 15:54:47+00:00): Thanks for the feedback! I did not know that is how this is handled. Looks like someone else already changed it back.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-16 23:40:24+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/12058109774

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-17 07:45:36+00:00): Hello Colin Fay, and welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits, particularly those concerning the names you've added or modified.

It seems that some of these names are a bit unusual.

#NameCheck
Colin Fay (2024-07-17 15:42:33+00:00): Names are taken from the most recent set of paper maps from the local Borough, and trail forks data from the local mountain bike club.
rskedgell (2024-07-22 14:17:23+00:00): Setting access=yes on the road to Imber is not only incorrect, but is incredibly irresponsible and potentially dangerous.

Reverted.
scratch_a (2024-08-03 10:28:50+00:00): Hallo. Welcher Weg wurde hier gelöscht?
Laut https://map.geo.admin.ch/#/map?lang=de&center=2798640.6,1138874.18&z=10.153&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pixelkarte-farbe&topic=astra&layers=ch.astra.mountainbikeland-sperrungen_umleitungen;ch.astra.wanderland-sperrungen_umleitungen;ch.swisstopo.swisstlm3d-wanderwege&featureInfo=default&catalogNodes=astra,3019 sollte hier eine offizielle Umleitung des gesperrten Weges oberhalb von Geri da Palü gehen.
MS320 (2024-08-03 10:46:27+00:00): It should indeed, thank you. I'll do the hike this week to confirm in person the trail's path and the existence of a bridge. I will then update the map.
scratch_a (2024-08-03 11:01:48+00:00): Thank you. I'll wait for an update from you. :)
scratch_a (2024-08-13 18:36:02+00:00): Hi. Have you already been there to check the trail?
MS320 (2024-08-14 11:19:01+00:00): Yes! I'm sorry for the delay, I arrived home today, but the trail is indeed there and follows essentially the published path. It is mostly steep rocky terrain with some flatter dirt parts. The crossing of the stream has to be done through rocks as there is no bridge. I've updated the map, changes should come into effect soon.
NeisBot (2024-07-16 23:52:38+00:00): Hi davidkrammer, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1301861278

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-17 06:31:00+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154041901
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-17 06:33:28+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154042017
NeisBot (2024-07-17 00:00:38+00:00): Hi davidkrammer, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1301862049

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-17 06:33:42+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154042028
NeisBot (2024-07-17 00:10:38+00:00): Hi davidkrammer, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1301864941

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
Fizzie-DWG (2024-07-17 03:48:27+00:00): Private message sent. Graeme Fitzpatrick
Moderator, OSMF Data Working Group
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-17 06:33:59+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154042037
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-17 06:38:11+00:00): Hallo davidkrammer, willkommen beim OpenStreetMap Projekt!

Ich habe die erstellten Changesets, (sprich Kartenänderungen) von dir zurückgesetzt, da sie meines Erachtens Objekte enthalten, welche so nicht in den Luftbildern Vorort zu erkennen sind. 

Bitte melde Dich bei uns, sollte ich hier falsche Annahmen getroffen haben.

Danke & Viele Grüße
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-17 06:40:50+00:00): PS: Deine Kartenänderungen sind zu knapp 95% in ein Muster für Pokemon-Spieler gefallen. Vielleicht waren die erstellen Strände hier ein Gedankengang von Dir oder reiner Zufall?
CoyKoi (2024-07-17 07:42:37+00:00): Hi Alex, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thank you for your updates to the map. Note that the Mount Albert Aquatic Centre was already mapped as a building at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/60846989 . Because it already exists as a building, it is not necessary to add it as a node. This concept is called "one feature, one OSM element": https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

Cheers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154036023
CoyKoi (2024-07-17 09:05:59+00:00): Similarly, you added Marist School as a point (by adding detail to the address node). This is fine, except that the school is already mapped as an area: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24532021

So now the school is duplicated
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154036023
Alex Tjahjana (2024-07-17 12:15:21+00:00): Thank you CoyKoi. Amended the map as suggested.
dieterdreist (2024-07-26 14:31:35+00:00): Ciao, ho visto che hai inserito questo deposito, ammetto che non ne ero a conoscenza, interessante. 
Credo che possiamo migliorare il tagging però, il "nome" mi sembra una descrizione, e forse "locality" non è il tag migliore? Di tratta di un deposito strutturato (archivio) oppure sono stato "gettate" i resti lì? Quest'ultima situazione forse sarebbe mappabile come landuse=landfill, disused=yes?
Saluti
Martin
user_11609320 (2024-07-17 01:53:10+00:00): https://gis1.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public
user_11609320 (2024-07-17 01:55:11+00:00): https://gisopendata-countyofriverside.opendata.arcgis.com/search?q=transportation
user_11609320 (2024-07-17 01:59:08+00:00): https://rcprojects.org/cajalco-road-widening
blacx (2024-07-17 12:46:43+00:00): arreglat, estava com a portal i restaurant a la vegada
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154037354
nevw (2024-07-17 04:11:52+00:00): Hi, there is later Esri imagery to use and I have redrawn the house shape. Is this house a duplex with part as 
addr:housenumber=1
addr:street=Silvereye Street
and another part fronting Thornbill Street with a different address or is the whole building 1 Silvereye Street.  
If there is another address on Thornbill Street side can you tell me the housenumber.
Willeth (2024-07-17 06:19:03+00:00): Yes, 1 Silvereye Street and 31 Thornbill Street. A duplex but each address is on different streets.
I updated it as my address shows incorrect on every delivery app.
nevw (2024-07-17 07:01:51+00:00): Thanks for replying so promptly Willeth.
I will add two nodes within the building and add both addresses to separate nodes.
nevw (2024-07-17 07:29:34+00:00): Navigation seems ok on GraphHopper already.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car&route=-34.47848%2C150.76499%3B-34.47777%2C150.76521#map=18/-34.47789/150.76370
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car&route=-34.47848%2C150.76499%3B-34.47787%2C150.76510#map=19/-34.47789/150.76351
Willeth (2024-07-17 07:39:47+00:00): Amazing thank you!
citrula (2024-07-17 21:28:21+00:00): Hi, I can't find anything that calls this location "Mount Nungaray" online - maybe you could provide a source for this edit?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154037636
JunoTehPlanet (2024-07-18 00:02:51+00:00): Hello, citrula, I came up with this name myself. I wanted to name the hill "Mount Nungaray" in honor of Jocelyn Nungaray because I feel very sad about her death a month ago. I just wanted to name this feature that as a memory for remembering her and the life she had.
JunoTehPlanet (2024-07-18 00:04:04+00:00): And besides, I am a namer of mountains and hills. I'd always like to come up with names for hills and mountain peaks.
citrula (2024-07-18 02:59:40+00:00): I heard about that on the news, it's very sad. However, on OSM we follow the principle that edits must be verifiable - if someone else wouldn't be able find out that it's called this, it doesn't belong on the map.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability
KL Teh (2024-09-01 01:41:14+00:00): Hi I saw your edits on Taman Pertama. I'd like to tell you that the building is drawn wrongly as it doesn't follow the actual building outlines. Secondly, the building is tagged incorrectly with the layer being -1, which shouldn't be required if you do not draw the building incorrectly. Anyways, please refer to the wiki for any edits to avoid any mistakes: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building

Thank you.
klfb75gxiy21tjrh (2024-07-17 03:13:53+00:00): Hola Josuer, antes me enviaste un mensaje, pero después de que te respondí, no me contestaste. ¿Por qué? Creo que podríamos ser buenos amigos y además, también tengo algo de interés en Kaart 😥
Andrea Musuruane (2024-07-17 08:19:35+00:00): Ciao. Possiamo evitare di mettere feature a caso? Ad esempio qui non c'è nessun ponte: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1301886353 Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154038154
user_177389 (2024-07-17 14:02:18+00:00): reverted
Lumikeiju (2024-07-17 07:55:36+00:00): Hi! Thanks again for your contributions, and also for the very descriptive changeset comment!

The house you added looks well-traced to me. My only suggestion would be to press "Q" to square up the angles a bit after drawing the outline - and feel free to add more details to the address (like zip code and city) though just the housenumber and street is definitely better than nothing!

In this case, it is true that the surrounding buildings are the ones that are offset, so you've done nothing wrong! The geometry of these buildings is mostly untouched since their original import 11 years ago. It's standard practice here to use the Bing imagery for alignment, as you have correctly done.

Happy mapping!
silversurfer83 (2024-07-17 08:49:07+00:00): Moinsen :)

kurze Frage zu dem neuen "Radweg":
Auf Straßenbildern von 2024 kann ich dort nur eine sogenannte Suicide Lane (also auf den Asphalt der Straße gemalte Strichlinie) erkennen, die entlang der Brakeler verläuft. Diese Art des "Radweges" ist schon am Verlauf der Brakeler als "cycleway=shared_lane" korrekt erfasst und sollte, da nicht baulich getrennt, auch nicht als eigener "Radweg" erfasst werden.
Hat sich denn dieses Jahr etwas geändert? Wurde dort ein baulich getrennter, mit einem VZ237 markierter, Radweg gebaut? Wenn nicht halte ich es nicht für eine gute Änderung, da auch die Geradeausspur der Brunnenstraße in meinen Augen korrekt eingetragen war, da diese durch die Verkehrsinsel baulich als eigene Spur angelegt ist.

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154038628
user_10799485 (2024-07-17 10:46:58+00:00): Die sogenannte T-Kreuzung wurde umgebaut. Das sind sogenannte Schutzstreifen mit gestrichelten Linien auf der Straße. Die sind auf beiden Seiten der Straßen. Aber soweit bin ich noch nicht gekommen die auf alle 3 Straße komplett einzuzeichnen. Wichtig war mir erst einmal die Einmündung der Brunnenstraße in die Lange Straße / Brakeler Straße. Wenn da Buslinienmäßig etwas kaputtgegangen sein sollte, bitte reparieren. Denn das kann ich nicht.