piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
woodpeck (2024-08-20 20:42:10+00:00): Dear SarahMThomas86, please consider using changeset comments that are readable by other human beings. "#hotosm-project-17204 #LACH_VC_TC_2024 #BERYL_VC_TC_2024" does not mean anything to the majority of OpenStreetMap contributors :(
SarahMThomas86 (2024-08-21 13:19:38+00:00): Hi Woodpeck, 
Thanks for the advice. I think those hashtags were entered by default. I didn't realize I could edit them.
Metzor (2024-08-21 05:28:18+00:00): Ho R0bst3r,

Ist dieses Stück jetzt auch offen?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1181472353#map=18/48.820803/10.028683&layers=N

Gruß
Metzor
R0bst3r (2024-08-21 05:42:21+00:00): Ja, bin gestern darüber gefahren.
Abfahrten sind noch bis Mitte September in Überarbeitung und das Teilstück bei "Lobo" soll dann auch fertig sein. 

Trotzdem, man sollte noch die Tags vereinheitlichen. Hier herrscht inzwischen viel Wildwuchs durch die ganzen Änderungen durch die mobilen Apps.
habi (2024-08-21 07:16:33+00:00): Detailkommentar: `addr:country=CH` ist unnötig, da kein offizieller Bestandteil der Schweizer Addressdaten.
Aufgrund der Geografie ist es ja klar, dass der Addresspunkt in der Schweiz ist :)
kitsee (2024-08-21 12:10:33+00:00): Hi there,
`managed` is not the correct tag here. I think the one you want is `operator`
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155529197
Metzor (2024-08-21 05:30:53+00:00): Hi!

Muss die Einbahnstraße nicht in die andere Richtung zeigen?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1248929531#map=17/48.822574/10.045945&layers=N

Gruß
Metzor
geisthugo123 (2024-09-23 17:56:31+00:00): Warum benutzt du zum genauen Erfassen der Gebäudegrundrisse das Hesse ALKIS. Ist ja frei zugänglich und wohl so ziemlich das genaueste
geisthugo123 (2024-09-23 17:57:35+00:00): Warum du nicht das Hesse ALKIS benutzt*
Dodko (2024-08-21 06:54:45+00:00): Tie značky z toho bodu ste mali pridať sem
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1309038811
takto je to rozdelené na dvoch objektoch a neplní svoj účel
NorthCrab_upload (2024-08-20 21:20:39+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12123046905
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12123046858
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/392183724
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/392183638

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Filip009 (2024-09-09 18:12:05+00:00): Máš tu čiaru bez tagov https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1309128394
FiveWho (2025-11-23 21:58:03+00:00): Molba za proveru i korekciju. 
Navigacija mi je za polukružno kod SNP-a iz pravca Šafarikove, nazad ka Šafarikovoj pokazla da se prestrojim u skroz desnu traku ka Jevrejskoj i tamo polukružno ka SNP-i. 
Nije zgodno za nekog ko ne poznaje mesto.
Nisam vičan da sam promenim. ;)
Hvala unapred.
Erelen (2025-12-05 03:54:10+00:00): What navigator do you use?
Erelen (2025-12-05 04:03:53+00:00): ...And what kind of transport?
FiveWho (2025-12-05 05:55:41+00:00): Organic Maps, car
Erelen (2025-12-07 00:50:34+00:00): Hopefully fixed in 175606339. Let's wait for the next OMaps release.
Erelen (2025-12-19 21:53:00+00:00): New Organic Maps already in Google Play now. You can check your maneuver.
FiveWho (2025-12-20 07:13:11+00:00): Yes, everything looks correct now. The turn has been fixed properly and the update is already visible in Organic Maps.
Thanks.
eggie (2024-08-21 07:10:44+00:00): Dag MM, 
Je hebtmet je actie een wanderoute Waterliniepad vernield. Je kunt geen routeralties bewerken met editor Vespucci. Dat kan alleen met editor josm.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-08-21 07:12:36+00:00): De aansluiting van de fietspaden klopt hier ook nier meer. 
Ik kijk even naar die route en de aansluitingen
eggie (2024-08-21 07:17:06+00:00): Waterliniepad hersteld
eggie (2024-08-21 07:41:58+00:00): note toegevoegd dat de oneway=yes is aangepast naar oneway=no  Anders krijg je in een mum de oude situatie terug.
De fietsverbindingen kloppen. 
Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-08-21 07:55:18+00:00): Het zal denk ik een andere mapper geweest zijn die de routerelatie had aangepast door de  nieuwe situatie aan te passen.
Mapse
eggie
MiniMax42 (2024-08-21 10:32:10+00:00): Hey Eggie,

Dat was niet de bedoeling inderdaad! Het leek mij dat als ik de tags kopiëerde dat ik dan de weg op de juiste manier gesplitst had maar blijkbaar is er verder nog een concept met de naam routerelaties.

Wel bijzonder dat er telkens pavingstones staat bij de voetgangersoversteekplaatsen want die zitten alleen op de stoep zelf en lopen niet door over de weg maar daar zal vast iets achter zitten.

Goed dat je mijn bijdrage hebt weten te verwerken op een manier dat het niet het wandelpad verpest.

Max
eggie (2024-08-21 10:40:22+00:00): Hoi Max..
Die wandelroutes lopen nu via de voetgangersoversteekplaats.
Dat was eerst een uitstapje naar het fietspad platolaan.
Nu klopt het weer.
Groet.
eggie
MiniMax42 (2024-08-21 11:53:12+00:00): Hey Eggie,

Het KAN in principe wel via die kant van het kruispunt omdat er dus een klein stoepje is dat die twee stoplichten met elkaar verbindt langs het fietspad, maar eigenlijk is het niet logisch om zo te lopen.

Groet,

Max
SafwatHalaby (2026-03-03 21:48:20+00:00): Just verifying. Is this a public bomb shelter?

I am asking because I am in the process of normalizing the tags. See https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/how-to-map-public-shelters/52966/17
NeatNit (2026-03-03 21:51:16+00:00): Yes. Thanks for doing god's work :)
NeatNit (2026-03-03 22:05:01+00:00): By the way, I think you're allowed to check other sources (in this case https://www.nesher.muni.il/130/ and the GIS link on the bottom) for the purpose of verifying details like this, assuming they have already been mapped. This is not a copyright violation because you're not copying anything, you're just verifying information that was already mapped independently. At least, that's how I remember it being explained.
Orblivion (2024-08-20 22:46:43+00:00): This toilet is a facility of the campground. It has shower stalls as well. I was thinking of making two separate amenities but it's all one room. Will my current approach show up in apps?
Orblivion (2024-08-20 22:47:44+00:00): Sorry, the campground toilet is 10975458380, not the other one.
Orblivion (2024-08-20 22:50:04+00:00): The historic buildings are in a large museum of sorts. Afaik they were all transported there. So they're not in their historic locations.
Orblivion (2024-08-20 22:54:36+00:00): I guess that's all I want to clarify.
StefanHRT (2024-08-21 03:24:32+00:00): Hallo wermak,
Nur als Info, Zeichen 250 (roter Kreis) beinhaltet alle vehicle, auch Fahrräder, oder hat sich die Straßenverkehrsordnung geändert? VG Stefan
YomanNH (2025-05-27 11:58:54+00:00): Cześć,

obszar tego landuse=residential https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17956189 to spora przesada. To powinien być obszar, gdzie jest zabudowa mieszkaniowa, a nie cały obszar miejscowości razem z parkami, cmentarzami, polami, nieużytkami i nie wiadomo czym jeszcze...
PlayGuide (2024-08-21 20:12:38+00:00): Bonjour,
Bravo pour la cartographie de la zone suite aux travaux, c'est du super boulot !

Je vois que vous n'avez pas inclus l'aire de jeux dont nous avions discuté avec d'autres dans cette note :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3797299

Pourriez-vous la rajouter ?

Je crois que le marqueur de la note est bien placé, mais je pense que la localisation sera plus précise si c'est vous qui l'ajoutez vu que vous connaissez bien le terrain.

Merci !
Etienne, pour PlayGuide
PlayGuide (2024-08-21 20:30:57+00:00): Rebonjour,
En fait, en regardant par hasard les relations signalées dans ce changeset, j'ai l'impression que vous ne les avez pas mises à jour pour que les lignes de bus passant par le nouveau rond-point restent "complètes". Elles se retrouvent toutes avec un trou à ce niveau là.
Hélas je ne maitrise pas ce sujet donc je ne pourrai pas vous aider. Si besoin vous pouvez venir demander de l'aide sur le forum https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/
E.
marc__marc (2024-08-22 01:26:38+00:00): Merci pour votre contribution !
les relations de route se résoudront car c'est possible à distance si on connait par oü les bus passent :)
esmenard (2024-08-22 09:30:23+00:00): Bonjour,
Malheureusement ça ne sera pas possible pour les aires de jeu, je n'ai fait qu'une visite rapide pour repérer les principaux éléments (rues, pistes cyclables et cheminements piétons), et je ne suis maintenant plus sur place. Pour ce qui est des lignes de bus, je m'en occuperai dans les prochains jours.
mga_geo (2024-08-26 05:36:38+00:00): Bonjour,
Je ne sais pas la qualité de vos autres modifications mais vous avez cassé la continuité de la relation r13692523, pouvez-vous la rétablir ?
Marc
mga_geo (2024-08-27 05:17:05+00:00): Bonjour,
Pouvez-vous répondre svp ?
Marc
mga_geo (2024-08-29 06:20:55+00:00): Bonjour,
Je vois que vous continuer à contribuer mais vous ne répondez pas à mes messages !
Marc
Yukiro (2024-09-01 10:19:21+00:00): I'm sorry, have been out on vacation. I will fix it.
Yukiro (2024-09-01 10:26:52+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156047777
eggie (2024-08-21 06:56:20+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
SirCowMan (2024-08-20 23:28:52+00:00): Note, St. John's is given as an example when not to expand abbreviations on OSM Wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abbreviations); additionally, the city self-styles as "St. John's", legal and official local buildings, etc. use "St. John's", and the local (at city, provincial and country levels) convention is styled "St. John's". 

Another Atlantic Canadian city is "Saint John", New Brunswick; proper use of "St. John's" helps distinguish.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-08-21 11:39:43+00:00): Is this section now separated from the road with a barrier or curb? If not, please follow wiki and keep the old tags which were correct?
pitfire (2025-01-01 09:56:02+00:00): Hi Larshei,

The “Path: 1309146147” requires a node connection to the bridge surface.

Connect all paths that run on the bridge bridge=yes with a node on the outer outline.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dbridge#Bridges_with_more_than_one_level

Groetjes pitfire
ValidDistress (2024-08-21 00:27:09+00:00): No review requested (marked the checkbox by accident)
woodpeck (2024-08-21 07:21:59+00:00): Dear TayNiels, thank you for your contribution. We have an esablished tagging scheme for golf courses https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course and cart paths https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:golf%3Dcartpath - it would be appropriate to amend the existing incorrect "path" tagging accordingly. The outright deletion of paths that you have attempted in this changeset is not the correct solution. I have reverted the deletion and opened a marker here https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4394627 asking the local community to look into this. Of course you're welcome to do this yourself but seeing that you're new I thought maybe it might be too taxing!
gpserror (2024-08-21 12:25:57+00:00): Agree with above, they should not be deleted, thank you woodpeck for reverting.  I am curious as to what your use model that would require these paths be omitted?  Perhaps it's best to change your software to simply avoid walking paths that cross over golf courses much like crossing over military bases, private industries, etc. which are likewise marked on the map?  Please do let us know and maybe we can think of a solution that would help you.
TayNiels (2024-08-22 14:53:22+00:00): These are not local paths nor cart paths.  These are maintenance pathways for machinery use. We have people trying to use them and having interaction with machines and golfers.  These paths need to be removed.
woodpeck (2024-08-22 15:06:21+00:00): (Many of) these paths are clearly visible on aerial imagery and therefore will certainly not be removed; but we should endeavour to record them correctly. If these are really off limits even for golfers then they should be recorded as access=no, but if customers are welcome to use them then they should be access=customers.
TayNiels (2024-08-22 15:13:59+00:00): Do you mark private driveways?  I am uncertain as to why you would continue to make machine pathways and other related items associated with golf course operations and not allow the changes to be made to the pathways.  I understand the desire to mark the asphalt ways with use for customers only, but when requesting to remove access paths, why is this a concern?
gpserror (2024-08-22 15:48:03+00:00): Yes private driveways should be marked.  Anything seen in life or satellite imagery gets drawn.
gpserror (2024-08-22 15:53:59+00:00): Access=no is clearly incorrect as well, these paths you are editing are indeed used for walking from hole to hole as well as for golf carts.

You're making the map solely for your use instead of making the map available for everyone's use and this is problematic.
woodpeck (2024-08-22 17:59:27+00:00): In your latest edit you wrote "paths are allowed to be used by customers" but then you have put access=no instead of, as I suggested above, access=customers!
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-13 02:20:09+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164877420
eggie (2024-08-21 07:06:27+00:00): Hi 
Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de adresnodes omdat er meer instellingen in dit gebouw zitten. 
I merged your info with the addressnodes otherwise overlap schools.

Greetz,
eggie
jmarchon (2024-08-21 04:00:49+00:00): Looks good!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155534128
MrMoehritz (2024-09-04 08:00:47+00:00): Hallo huschdegutzl,

ich wollte dich nur wissen lassen, dass du einen Knoten im Neuenheimer Feld verschoben hast, der zwei Wege verband. Diese Wege erstreckten sich dann über das ganze Feld: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=155534141

Macht nix, kann passieren und wurde hier schon korrigiert: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155557764
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=155557764

Aber ich wollte dir trotzdem Bescheid geben, damit du beim nächsten Mal drauf achten kannst.

Gruß

Mo
streetsurvma (2024-08-21 13:01:47+00:00): Hi Cubbe8.  What is the purpose of changing all these Boston Metro roads away from Trunk Roads?  North Shore Road is split highway, with no pedestrian access/sidewalks.  Changing them from Trunk is going to indicate to walk/run tracking sites that it's ok to acces, which it's not.  Your changes are going to put people at risk.
cubbe8 (2024-08-21 13:11:32+00:00): According to OSM definition, a trunk road in the US in a densely populated area is a road that connects a trunk road to a motorway or another trunk road. In this case North Shore Road simply ends at Lynnway, which is a primary road. In order to prevent walking directions from using this road, it should be tagged as “foot=no”.
cubbe8 (2024-08-21 13:14:09+00:00): This is standard practice, look at Soldiers Field Road west of Eliot Bridge.
streetsurvma (2024-08-21 13:38:23+00:00): Can you send the link swhere it says that description?  The description for Trunk says "important roads that are not motorways".  Primary roads are "highways linking large towns".  Trunk actually appears more appropirate for North Shore and Soldiers Field Road as well.  As a site, editing every road to say if it (or any section) for pedestrians or not is  beyond burdensome.  Again since Trunk seems more appropriate anyways, it solve the problem if you just left the streets as they were.  I can see a lot of people are making comments on your edits, so I'm not the only one questioning your edits.  I hope to avoid an editing back and forth here between you and the running community.
cubbe8 (2024-08-21 13:43:29+00:00): It’s under international equivalence, scroll down to United States. Soldiers Field Road was originally tagged as a trunk road however another editor changed it to primary. He told me that it doesn’t qualify as a trunk road based on the criteria under international equivalence.
streetsurvma (2024-08-21 14:58:36+00:00): Just because someone else edits something does not make them right. The editor is from VA.  Making edits to roads is MA, obviously without surveying them, is inappropriate.  I visit the roads that I edit, do you?  In any case, please do not change any more trunk roads in the Boston metro area, as they have already been designated appropriately.  Thank you.
jmarchon (2024-08-21 17:39:00+00:00): Thanks for getting this added!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155534242
user_5359 (2025-09-17 07:30:45+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/node/12123309707. What is the mean of the tag religion = museum? Did you mean religion = muslim?
tyfi (2024-08-21 02:09:21+00:00): Common mistake
Enock4seth (2024-08-24 17:11:53+00:00): Hi, thanks for mapping, I don't think these are steps https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1309166853 , if you are not sure about what a tag means please look at the wiki page, in iD editor you can click on the "i" to see further details when selecting.
Taya_S (2024-08-21 05:02:23+00:00): Hi, I have reverted this changeset. The quarry landuse is reserved for where the actual digging takes place, something that is already tagged  (if somewhat outdated) with seperate landuse=quarry for this mine operation

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155537505
SturtDesertPea (2024-08-21 12:38:37+00:00): No worries. Thank you for the explanation
adiatmad (2024-09-01 04:34:53+00:00): Halo Pak Dodiksetiawan,

Editannya udah oke banget, cuma satu saran: tag "name=Rumah" sebaiknya dihapus karena udah ada tag building=yes/house yang mewakili informasi itu. Jadi, tag "name=Rumah" bisa dihilangkan aja. Oh ya, kalau Bapak belum tahu, ada komunitas OSM Indonesia di Telegram (https://t.me/OSMIndonesia) yang bisa diikuti. Selamat berkarya!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155535557
adiatmad (2024-09-01 04:42:34+00:00): Ini ada diskusi publik terkait nama deskriptif seperti itu.

- (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/cleanup-of-name-fields-describing-buildings/99591)

- (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions)
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-10 01:18:26+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164747276
emersonveenstra (2024-08-27 17:30:39+00:00): Hi there,

On https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17975526, you added sidewalk:both=separate, but there was a sidewalk=no already tagged. Could you please double check the existence of the sidewalk and remove the sidewalk=no tag if there is a sidewalk? Thanks!
RedGreenBlue09 (2024-08-27 02:23:34+00:00): Please do not use Google Maps as your source. It is very inaccurate and is NOT LEGAL to do so.
MKnight (2025-03-13 17:43:29+00:00): Moin, https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4662570#map=19/50.982700/11.327108&layers=N meint, dass es das nicht mehr gäbe, kannst Du da ein weiteres Mal nachschauen?
KriFu (2025-03-14 05:35:53+00:00): Ja, das Schild wurde entfernt. Aufgrund von Informationsmaterial in den Fenstern scheint dort aber immer noch eine religiöse Gemeinschaft zu sein.
Warin61 (2024-08-21 05:18:49+00:00): Hi,
Relation 17953279 (marsh) has problems ... 
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.99086&lat=-37.64228&zoom=17&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

The outer ways cannot share segments with inner ways ... Zoom in on the Esri imagery and it looks like the marsh area is larger. In bing it looks like a construction zone...
Warin61 (2024-08-29 00:45:59+00:00): How about fixing this???
Jack Boschert (2024-08-29 03:40:24+00:00): All done, thanks
keithonearth (2024-09-10 20:20:25+00:00): Thanks for updating this. It was closed for some time during construction of the new road to the north, but I passed this way again a few days ago, and it is open again.
sbedwal_Lyft (2025-08-05 11:21:23+00:00): 
Hi keithonearth,

My name is Santosh, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment.
Sorry for such a delayed reaction, there was some issue with comment notice on our side.
We are grateful for the on ground confirmation of our edits. Happy mapping!

Best regards,
Santosh
tyfi (2024-08-21 04:54:42+00:00): This was an instance of geofiction whereby the City of Chaffee, Missouri, was replaced with a fictitious town called Truesdale. A railroad was fixed up by another user, and I kept those fixes. Other than that, this was a clean rollback
❤️‍🔥 (2024-08-26 09:23:27+00:00): hey, if not construction, how would you tag this? https://0x0.st/XtHN.jpg
aharvey (2024-08-26 22:13:18+00:00): hmm admittedly I made this change based on the towers being complete, which I was thinking shouldn't be marked as construction if complete. Based on your photo I think we should at least convert https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1068760239 back to construction landuse. Do you think that works?
aharvey (2024-08-26 22:15:02+00:00): Just looking on their website
> Residences One – Construction complete, ready to move in 
> Residences Two – Construction to be completed September 2024  
> Watermans Residences – Construction to be completed December 2024
❤️‍🔥 (2024-08-28 10:44:39+00:00): sounds good, thanks for updating it
BCNorwich (2024-08-24 07:42:08+00:00): Hello,

There are many warnings given above, several of these warnings could be mapping that could cause disruption to routing. Could you please look at and try to fix some of the problems? 

Regards Bernard.
dadavid (2025-03-07 14:07:07+00:00): Hi fx99, 

du hast hier [1] ein maxweightrating von 7.5 tonnen eingetragen, das kommt mir iwie komisch vor. Wie ist das denn beschildert? Da sollte ja im Regelfall Anlieger frei sein oä, oder? :) 

Vielen Dank und viele Grüße

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/132757493
fx99 (2025-03-07 17:35:11+00:00): Da hast Du recht, da gehört ein
hgv=destination dazu.
Am Kreisverkehr nördlich steht ein 
DE:253,1053-33,1020-30
dadavid (2025-03-08 23:04:21+00:00): alles klar, super, danke für die Info und danke fürs mappen :) 
VG
dadavid (2025-03-08 23:11:40+00:00): hm, ich habe nochmal über das tagging maxweightrating=7.5 und hgv=destination nachgedacht. 
Bildet das wirklich die Beschränkung ab? hgv unter 7.5 tonnen sind ja nicht auf destination beschränkt. 

Wäre hier maxweightrating:hgv=7.5 mit maxweightrating:hgv:conditional=none@destination nicht eigentlich besser? 

Bin da sehr an deiner Einschätzung interessiert, das von dir verwendete Tagging ist ja durchaus verbreitet. 

Grüße

David
fx99 (2025-03-09 07:52:36+00:00): Ob Dein Vorschlag besser ist, kann ich nicht sagen. 
Ich habe die entsprechenden Verkehrszeichen an 2 Knoten an der Straße gemappt:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/130619484
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10872803333
Gabibá (2024-08-21 06:39:58+00:00): Mindkét végén folytatni kell. Ugyanitt a Darnyai túra is tök más helyen fut, mint az jelölve van