piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-07-07 02:22:21+00:00): I apologize severely. I used Overpass Turbo and JOSM to edit them. I used a Python script to find all highways in a bounding box (in this case, Weld County) to create new road route relations. As I only had data from that box, I had no idea that I was adding these routes to different relations, so I deeply apologize; I did not mean to break half the world. I will fix the script to make the relation IDs negative so they don't mess up any existing relations. Once again, I'm very sorry, and I hope you understand. Thank you.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-07-07 02:25:04+00:00): @limes11 It was a wrong sign error, as I completely forgot that new IDs should be saved with negative numbers.
Lumikeiju (2025-07-08 01:14:10+00:00): Thank you for providing the details on what caused the issue! :) We all make mistakes, and that's okay.
Happy mapping!
Everteal (2025-07-13 17:14:33+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci de votre contribution à OpenStreetMap !

Cet edit ajoute beaucoup d'adresses invalides (manque de tag 'addr:street', mauvais usage de 'addr:unit' pour indiquer les bis et ter qui devraient être indiqué dans le 'addr:housenumber'), et les adresses sont indiquées sur les bâtiments contrairement à toutes les autres déjà présentes dans le coin en nœuds au niveau des entrées. J'ai réalisé un patch pour résoudre ces problèmes.

Dans Every Door, il faut bien faire attention de remplir le champ 'rue' avec le nom de la rue à laquelle l'adresse appartient, et de rajouter les 'bis', 'ter' et autres dans le champ du 'numéro de l'adresse' et pas dans un autre champ. En cas de doute, il faut mieux se référer au wiki (voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:addr:* pour les adresses).

L'aspect de mettre les adresse sur le bâtiment plutôt qu’en nœuds est moins important (elle est conforme à la spécification), mais on essaye de garder une cohérence locale pour éviter de causer des ennuis aux autres contributeurs 🙂
tordans (2025-07-07 05:41:08+00:00): Hi DannyM, danke für die Korrekturen zu https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3873241

Zu deiner Note in https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1412832745

Es sieht auf der Karte so aus, dass der Weg im Westen auch ein Fußweg ist und dort keine Autos… einfahren können. Dann wäre es ja richtig, nur die Östliche Seite mit dem traffic_sign=DE:239 zu versehen (nebenbei: Gerne so taggen), da nur von da Autos informiert werden müssen, dass es als Fußweg gedacht ist. Dann sollten wir daraus IMO einen einen highway=footway machen bzw. analog zu den anderen Fußwegen im Westen.
VG
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168576934
dannyM (2025-07-07 07:33:25+00:00): Hi tordans, danke für deinen Kommentar. Das Problem mit dem Weg im Westen (also der, der Am Weiherhof mit der Bürgerhalle verbindet) ist, dass hier überhaupt keine Verkehrszeichen angebracht sind. Insofern dürfte der in Frage stehende Feldweg von der einen Seite mit allem befahren werden, was ankommen kann, von der Jakobstraße her nicht. Andererseits sind sämtliche Eingänge zu dem Weg im Westen als auch zu diesem Feldweg her (auch an der Jakobstraße) mit einem Poller versehen (die nirgends gemapped sind). De facto können also keine zweispurigen Fahrzeuge einfahren, aber sehr wohl Mofas. Ob das allerdings so in die Intention ist? Ich habe die Verwaltung angeschrieben und um Klärung gebeten.
Puxan (2025-07-08 08:15:48+00:00): En este set de cambios se crean 34 edificios circulares de menos de 1 metro de diametro formados cada uno por 299 nodos, muchos supepuestos. ¿Se trata de un error o hay alguna explicación?

This set of changes creates 34 circular buildings, each less than 1 meter in diameter, made up of 299 nodes, many of which are overlapping. Is this a bug or is there an explanation?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168577088
Kateregga1 (2025-07-14 07:06:50+00:00): Changeset to be reverted, the mapper created many fixtional very tiny non existed small buildings each with 300 nodes.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168577088
Kateregga1 (2025-07-14 07:04:36+00:00): Changeset to be reverted, tiny non existed small builings mapped each with 300 nodes
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168577111
Pawelaa (2025-07-07 07:26:55+00:00): @bartgron
W takim wypadku to niezrozumiale. obwodnica klodzka ma nizszy standard, a jest oznaczona jako trunk, bez sensu...
evgenykatyshev (2025-07-08 08:01:58+00:00): Hello! Thanks for adding the place. But image you've provided is placed on yoy private Google Drive and it isn't available for public. I deleted it.
aharvey (2025-07-07 00:54:04+00:00): I think a better changeset comment would be "remove name from river area as it covers tributaries of the river with other names", I assume that's the reason for removing the name?

I think this change is okay for this reason, though I think it would be better to split up the area so we can have a named river area for "Georges River" then another named water area for "Salt Pan Creek" etc.
Badojo (2025-07-07 10:19:11+00:00): Yes, that's what I originally wrote in the description but I misclicked and it replaced it with a previous changeset description.
Jožo Schwarz (2025-07-16 10:43:15+00:00): Ahoj, všimol som si, že si prehodil vzájomnú polohu cyklotrasy a chodníka na križovatke Mlynské nivy - Karadžičova, konkrétne na východnom ramene cez Mlynské nivy.
Tak ako si to nakreslil to platilo pred prestavbou križovatky, po stavebných úpravách sú teraz cyklisti bližšie ku stredu a chodci ďalej. Teda opačne, než to bolo predtým a než je to po tvojej úprave.
aceman444 (2025-07-16 15:12:25+00:00): Nie, ja som to tak videl ako som to zakreslil. Ale boli tam este nejake zatarasy, mozno sa to zmeni.
aceman444 (2025-07-16 20:30:48+00:00): Bol som to pozriet a trochu to upravili, ale stale ta stredna cast je podla mna spravne. Tie spojky ako https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/204022536 su opacne ako mame v OSM. Otazka je, ci to treba takto kreslit oddelene ako dve cesty, ked tam nie je bariera.
Jožo Schwarz (2025-07-16 22:45:36+00:00): Toto je fotografia z 2.7. https://www.skyscrapercity.com/attachments/img_4294-jpg.9517897/?auto=webp&fit=bounds&format=pjgp&height=1920&optimize=high&width=1920
V čase jej vzniku už bola nejaký čas prehodená poloha cyklotrasy a chodníka. Teraz je už určite prehodená celá trasa, akurát vodorovné značenie ešte nesedí, ale stavebne je to už tak, ako som to nakreslil.
Chodník a cyklistickú časť by som kreslil oddelene, je tam bariéra z mačacích hláv: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/attachments/img_2067-jpg.9399341/?auto=webp&fit=bounds&format=pjgp&height=1920&optimize=high&width=1920
aceman444 (2025-07-17 05:19:42+00:00): No neviem, ci tie macacie hlavy povazovat za barieru (aj pesiak aj bicykel ju moze prejst), ale ak je to tak myslene tak nech. Potom by bolo vhodne ju zakreslit. Obrazok ale ukazuje, ze cyklopriechod v strednej casti krizovatky (kde je semafor) je vychodne od zebry pre pesich, tak ako som to urobil v OSM. Usek https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/643951733 je v OSM opacne ako je namalovany v realite (cykloprechod ma byt zapadnejsie).
Jožo Schwarz (2025-07-17 18:54:41+00:00): Tu je fotka z utorka: https://cyklokoalicia.sk/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/IMG_4809.jpg, ale rovnaký stav tam už bol nejakú dobu predtým.
Stavebne je už cyklistická cestička bližšie ku križovatke v celej dĺžke (vidno to podľa asfaltu na cyklotrase, dlažby na chodníkoch a semaforov pre chodcov a pre cyklistov). Na fotke je ešte staré vodorovné značenie, ktoré nesedí so zvyškom, čiže to môže miasť (a možno to za tie dva dni už premaľovali). Ale inak je cyklotrasa bližšie k stredu križovatky už dávnejšie a v mape máme zachytený neaktuálny predchádzajúci stav. Zopakujem: tak ako som to nakreslil, je to aj v skutočnosti a bolo by dobré vrátiť moju zmenu :)
aceman444 (2025-07-17 19:46:05+00:00): Ale vtedy ked ste to robili, tak to tak este v skutocnosti nebolo. A ak si vsimnete, ani teraz to este nie je tak ako hovorite, lebo sice mozno podla dlazby je to ako pisete, ale podla zebry je to ako pisem ja. Proste znacenie cez cestu nesedi na to co je na chodniku (zebra konci na cykloceste a ciarkovany prechod na chodniku pre chodcov). Dobre, pockam par dni ci to premaluju a potom to opravim. Dakujem.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-06 21:30:47+00:00): 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/12827170232
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1385447852

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
AndreaDp271 (2025-07-06 22:33:29+00:00): Ciao, il tag route_ref non l'ho mai visto nelle guide osm per le relazioni o per i trasporti con il sistema v2. mi spieghi da cosa deriva?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168579579
gigi2037 (2025-07-06 23:40:26+00:00): Ciao dove lo leggi quel tag ??
AndreaDp271 (2025-07-07 00:27:48+00:00): Qui: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12967815275/history/2
gigi2037 (2025-07-08 21:09:05+00:00): Capito se guardi quando dai il nome alla fermata ce quel tag che ti chiede quale linea si ferma li possono essere più di uno ciao
StC (2025-07-07 16:59:13+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
Andrew Chadwick (2025-07-06 21:52:53+00:00): * so that it sorts together with the Lion 4
Fizzie-DWG (2025-07-06 23:16:16+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18420
patadune (2025-07-08 10:02:35+00:00): Bonjour Félix, merci pour ta contribution, mais je ne suis pas certain qu'il soit judicieux de tracer 2 ways séparés se chevauchant. On reste dans le cas d'une bande cyclable sur trottoir, donc highway=footway + footway=sidewalk + bicycle=designated +  segregated=yes (cf. cas N3 décrit par https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Bande_cyclable_sur_trottoir)
DressyPear4 (2026-07-14 20:32:27+00:00): Um comentário nas edições ajudaria outros a entender melhor o que você está editando

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Good_changeset_comments

O ideal é usar construction em vias que ainda não estão concluídas para evitar roteamento de veículos.
NeisBot (2025-07-06 23:46:27+00:00): Hi Sieradzkiewsie, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Modified node geometry."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #NoComment #AIgenerated
Glassman (2025-07-08 00:02:23+00:00): Private usually means that the local government does not own or maintain the road. For that you can add the tag ownership=private. If the road has a no trespassing sign then the access=private is appropriate.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168581033
Glassman (2025-07-08 00:02:40+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168581071
Glassman (2025-07-08 00:04:35+00:00): BTW street side imagery just says private driveway, no exit. Can you review this edit?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168581071
Fizzie-DWG (2025-10-11 23:20:15+00:00): DWG revert, apparent sockpuppet, poor quality mapping, unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173158841
Glassman (2025-07-08 00:05:50+00:00): You can change the road east of the fence to highway=path or highway=track. A path is for people while a track is typically used by farm vehicles.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168581253
aharvey (2025-07-07 00:48:24+00:00): thanks, I also added informal=yes to mark it as informal.
Warin61 (2026-02-08 01:35:02+00:00): Hi,
Comment? It looks to me like your trying to replace tree relations with tree ways. 

In this changeset relation 19329027 is some 243 km north to south while you r new way1412902847 is 3 km north to south and is almost fully contained in the relation. 

I have restored the relation to a fully closed outer and deleted your way.
pavvv (2025-07-08 07:33:10+00:00): Nie lepiej po prostu acess=yes?
olo81 (2025-07-08 22:32:28+00:00): Tutaj też tak jest, wydaje się ok.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12697400672
pavvv (2025-07-09 06:04:34+00:00): Mapperzy Bolta mają bardzo często błędne edycje. Proponuję zmienić w obydwu na access=yes.
olo81 (2025-07-09 06:27:34+00:00): Możesz zmienić. 
Z tego co wczoraj patrzyłem to jeszcze coś jest nie tak z routingiem na tych drogach dla osrm. Ciężko stwierdzić co.
dieterdreist (2025-07-11 21:24:48+00:00): Ciao Gigi2037, cosa vuol dire "invalid routes"? Ho notato che hai rimosso le stazioni mappate come aree che avevano il ruolo "stop", e creato doppini di stazioni ad esempio a Villa Bonelli,

saluti,
Martin
dieterdreist (2025-07-11 21:25:04+00:00): doppioni
gigi2037 (2025-07-11 21:44:05+00:00): https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=12.52904&lat=41.91728&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=ptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes
prova con osm inspector erano stazioni non fermate
dieterdreist (2025-07-16 12:13:14+00:00): Ho visto che le fermate erano state cambiate in stazioni da un'altro utente, invece qui si erano creati doppioni. Per ogni fermata / stazione ci dovrebbe essere un solo oggetto con "railway=station" (oppure "halt").
gigi2037 (2025-07-16 15:47:18+00:00): https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=12.54383&lat=41.91100&zoom=12&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=ptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes
gigi2037 (2025-07-16 15:48:02+00:00): Errorneous nodes platform without proper tags  
node_id 	610235161 non le accetta le stazioni come stop e platform
dieterdreist (2025-07-16 15:58:37+00:00): Se non sono mappate le banchine, non le inserire, non sono necessari: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route=train?uselang=en
Avere le "stop" dovrebbe essere sufficiente, e le "stop" sono le stop position sui binari.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-06 23:50:51+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/way/992156360

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
無限の刃 (2025-09-23 02:34:22+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpitch
Zaneo (2025-09-23 12:57:59+00:00): Thanks for fixing!

However about: 35.5230808/139.6894337

I disagree, there is clearly a baseball field. I think it's okay to have multi and overlapped but if we can recognize a pitch outline we can add it.

We can clearly see the baseball shaped fence and base lines at the coordinates I linked.

Overall I agree with your modifications to my changeset though! Let's work together.
無限の刃 (2025-10-14 08:17:49+00:00): This area did not "designed for practising a particular sport". Because those white lines are line powder. Japanese students have played multiple sports on ground in school. (e.g. soccer, baseball or running)
SomeoneElse (2025-07-11 19:20:59+00:00): Hello 
You've written "added tags" in the changeset comment here, but that doesn't really help other OSM mappers understand what you changed and what the source was.
It would be great if you could use a bit more detail!
Best Regards,
Andy
user_5359 (2025-07-08 14:18:01+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/234338864. What is the mean of the tags
Duża = produktywność, szczególnie na start
Silna = konwencja, mniej elastyczności
Wiele = rzeczy zintegrowanych „z pudełka” (ORM, panel admina, auth)
?
grzegorz75jan (2025-07-08 18:54:10+00:00): He made a mistake due to fatigue. He's corrected it now.

Thank you for your attention.
AndyB_66 (2025-07-07 07:32:26+00:00): Czy nie warto by w tym momencie Krochmalną (wraz z fragmentem Cukrowniczej od skrzyżowania z LL80) przeklasyfikować na "residential"?
022 (2025-07-07 01:46:39+00:00): It's unclear to me why these were tagged the way they were in the first place; Grand Manan was tagged as admin level 2 (the international border is on a separate boundary to the west, so this is obviously not correct), and part of the shoreline along Saint John was tagged as admin level 4 (which is used for provincial boundaries... and there's already an existing admin level 4 provincial boundary (NB-NS) across the bay of fundy.)

I reviewed the wiki for guidance on tagging maratime borders as well as compared it to the tagging scheme for nova scotia to the south... and concluded that the tagging for these shoreline boundaries is only applicable to the local counties/municipalities/parishes so I decided to remove the admin level tagging altogether to make it consistent with the rest of NB's tagging scheme. 

Feel free to revert this if you think I've made a mistake. I did NOT touch the international border. 

Cheers
022 (2025-07-07 01:51:29+00:00): just to clarify, I removed admin levels & tagging for the boundary members themselves, as the proper admin levels are still present in the various relations (county, municipal, parish level) that refer to them.
InsertUser (2025-07-07 15:31:04+00:00): Where was this mechanical edit discussed?
iandees (2025-07-07 15:59:36+00:00): (This was reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168584060)
zby-cz (2025-07-09 14:16:34+00:00): Hi, thanks for your contributitions to #climbing in osm.

I just noticed, that your description on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1412929399 got probably unintentionally cropped to 255 characters.

Kind regards, zbycz from openclimbing.org
BHSPitMonkey (2025-07-09 16:32:26+00:00): Thanks, I've shortened it now!
zby-cz (2025-07-10 06:24:55+00:00): 👍
phoenixsaigon1698 (2025-07-07 03:36:10+00:00): vì tuyến đường ngô quyền đoạn từ cầu t43 trước số 292 ngô quyền là tuyến đường độc đạo.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-14 18:00:14+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1412944435/history - są jakiekolwiek ślady tych torów?

jak tak to jakie i gdzie?
SD Mapman (2025-07-08 16:01:54+00:00): I think this made a bunch of duplicate road relations
SD Mapman (2025-07-08 16:02:00+00:00): just FYI
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-07-08 16:43:24+00:00): I noticed a bit too late...
I'll manually check every road route relation in the county and remove the duplicates.
tekim (2025-11-10 00:08:28+00:00): Somehow https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1426397619 is not a member of a relation for CR 14 1/2, and I think it should be (SD Mapman removed the ref tag so now there is no indication in OSM that this is part of that county rounte).
SD Mapman (2025-11-10 13:39:53+00:00): So when I was investigating the area, I noticed that the addresses along that road were all "14th Street" so that's what I set the 'name' as. Did some further investigation this morning and found streetblade signage for County Road 14 1/2 so I added a segment after the last driveway: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174463722
SD Mapman (2025-11-10 13:54:09+00:00): Note that the county road relations were determined to only be needed where the pentagon signs are (mainly along I-25) since everything else is streetblades. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:network=US:CO:Weld which I updated to reflect the discussion.
tekim (2025-11-10 15:04:27+00:00): Thanks.  I was contacted by a local resident who indicated that the parts inside the city are both CR 14 1/2 and 14th Street.  I am not personally familiar with Fort Lupton, but in other parts of Colorado this isn't unusual, and prior to the edits in September, it did have a ref=CR 14 1/2 tag.
SD Mapman (2025-11-10 15:29:53+00:00): West of US 85 it's a bit confusing too, just updated that as well: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174469148
tekim (2025-11-10 17:02:39+00:00): Thanks again.  It is the bit East of 85 that is the issue for this local data user.
NeisBot (2025-07-07 03:45:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-18 05:02:31+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169089127
user_5359 (2025-07-08 15:01:12+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/129223718. What is the mean of the tags
copieur = Toshiba
eni speechi = 2
tni - defectueux = 2
Please notice we use british English for the keys.
Don't add any private information (which are not visible).
Jacksonville (2025-07-29 01:03:39+00:00): Bro, Burki Road sari primary road hai. Lahore shehr se lekar Bhikhiwind tak jaati hai.
Jacksonville (2025-08-09 16:50:43+00:00): And please stop blocking the roads from the Pakistani side.
rempshaener (2025-07-07 17:11:49+00:00): Hallo,
ich möchte nur noch einmal auf die Hinweise zu den vorherigen Changesets hinweisen.
Viele Grüße
Andre Hahnenberg (2025-07-08 06:14:13+00:00): Das bedeutet?
rempshaener (2025-07-08 10:19:34+00:00): Hallo,
vielen Dank für deine Rückmeldung.
Ich beziehe mich auf zwei Punkte:
Zum einen wäre es schön, wenn du die Hydranten und die Straßen “entkleben” könntest.
Zum anderen steht noch die Frage im Raum, ob die Hydranten wirklich rot sind.
Viele Grüße
Natsu_ (2025-07-07 06:16:10+00:00): 公交线路变更：删除E5路。调整12路、58路黄木岗片区走向。
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-07 06:30:46+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12985088144

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
literan (2025-07-07 20:35:46+00:00): прошу не приклеивать площадные объекты к линейным

также, footway=sidewalk это тег для тротуара. Надеюсь, знаете отличие тротуара от просто пешеходной дорожки?
RicoElectrico (2025-12-10 11:23:27+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5035333 oraz https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12985105701

Wydaje mi się, że ten AED został dodany przez przypadek. Proszę o potwierdzenie, to go skasuję.
DeFra85 (2025-07-10 13:26:48+00:00): Ahoi, hast du hier das Stück Weg am Ufer gelöscht?
Darauf sind nämlich mehrere Wander- und Radwege, deren Relation unterbrochen ist.
Wie ist deren neuer Verlauf???
Crow187 (2025-07-10 13:44:08+00:00): Moin, der Weg am Ufer existiert nicht mehr, den habe ich gelöscht, korrekt.
Stattdessen ist nun ein Stück Schotterweg (west-ost) entstanden, der auf den früher schon existierenden weg (nord-süd) führt.
Darüber werden (wohl auch in Zukunft)  die Wander und Radwege führen (zurück zum Weg am Ufer)