piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Innertia (2024-07-02 04:40:21+00:00): 我先確認一下，你主要是因為基點的資料格式不同，造成某種不便(比如說心中的潔癖發作或是某些運用基點資料的軟體會出問題)，所以要改回去對吧？那請問你對那些 peak 有什麼想法？是覺得應該加回去還是只是改基點的同時就順手加回去？

因為我是在做 peak 的改動，所以比較在意的也是 peak 怎麼處理。那些被我拿掉的 peak 是我「判斷」認為現場應不是局部高點 (當然可能有錯)。如果你 in general* 也能接受的話，那我覺得我們之間沒什麼衝突。如果不能，那就比較麻煩一點，需要再討論怎麼解決。

*in  general 是指鍵盤前作業能接受我的做法。那如果是人去過現場，覺得應該要有 peak 而改回去，那我沒有意見。

不論你能不能接受，基點 name 的格式我之後還是會去修的。我本來的想法是先暫時改成這樣再來討論怎麼呈現，你很在意而先去改回去我也沒有意見。或者如果你認為這個很重要有某種急迫性，那我晚一點可以先處理把全國範圍被我改過的改回去。只是改回去的話我原本想像的用基點name來救濟認地點的效果就沒了，可能就會換成有別的抱怨出現在某處 XD
Edison Wen (2024-07-02 08:46:06+00:00): 先跟您說聲抱歉，我可能因為太急，沒有表達好意思語氣也不佳，因為我一開始以為又是那些破壞地圖的怪客(最近不少，譬如把路名變成奇怪的字，或者亂改時速為不是十的倍數)或是不知道魯地圖的用戶，非常抱歉
您可能會看到我的變更集中，改回來的同時也在基石旁加了一個山峰，原因不是我不知道山峰不一定以基石作為最高點，因為我本人也有在爬山，還喜歡到處找基石，原因是
1.我不確定這些山峰的節點是不是被合併(在您回覆我之前)
2.您提到若這樣很難搜尋，不過一般我們登山也會知道基點號碼等，所以其實不用過度擔心
3.而且既然基石跟山峰是分開的，那基石名稱大多都是山名，感覺像被合併過的感覺

我今天在送出昨天晚上的編輯時發現全部遭遇版本衝突，您應該已經全部改回來了，謝謝您
Edison Wen (2024-07-02 08:53:07+00:00): 關於桃園虎頭山山峰，則是場勘覺得應該要加回來
rskedgell (2024-05-23 13:00:14+00:00): Please could you explain what this continent-spanning changeset is about.

Please also supply a meaningful changeset comment for future updates and limit your edits to a smaller area.

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

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Badr_Bni (2024-05-23 13:16:04+00:00): I present my sincere excuses, I had an unexpected error on JOSM and I uploaded it without rechecking.
halloschorle (2024-05-23 14:18:07+00:00): The question ist, what need to be done if something like this happened?
ivanbranco (2024-05-23 14:35:22+00:00): Is this an import? It created lot of disconnected and overlapped highway.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285918059/history
This highway is not connected and overlaps a building

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285918748
This is a track inside an airport, it overlaps an already mapped aeroway=taxiway

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11928191666/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11928192000/history
these nodes are tagless and share the same coordinates, other tagless nodes where added

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285918779/history
this way is just weird, it has a "M" shape, it overlaps already mapped highway and is not connected to anything

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285918680
this residential partially overlaps a railway

ecc.ecc.
AndersAndersson (2024-05-23 17:12:48+00:00): This road is very close to an existing driveway. And the nearby house created in the same changeset is very offset.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285918053

I think this changeset should be reverted.
b-holdet (2024-05-24 11:37:45+00:00): I will vote for a revert.
Eg.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285918048
This seems to be an overlap of existing paths and is clearly not checked.
rskedgell (2024-05-24 15:11:51+00:00): As @Badr_Bni has replied but not explained the purpose of their changeset, reversion and a reminder of the import guidelines seems appropriate.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
Leo Slager (2024-05-23 22:02:57+00:00): Dag Jaap,
Bij het busstation Stadion Goffert zijn er wat highways zonder tags op de kaart gezet. Als gevolg daarvan krijg ik een foutmelding voor de route van bus 12.
Kun je nog even naar die wegen kijken ?
jaap de vries (2024-05-24 06:56:08+00:00): Buslijn 12 heeft een tijdelijke halte plek gekregen maar verdwijnt per 2025 helemaal hier.
Leo Slager (2024-05-24 15:05:27+00:00): De route van bus 12 is aangepast.
NeisBot (2024-05-23 12:10:03+00:00): Hi Ared2021, 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/node/11928149302

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 (2024-05-23 19:11:16+00:00): Merci pour votre plage cartographiée, voulez-vous parler de la zone suivante ? 
---
Thank you for your mapped beach, did you mean the following area? 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228737713
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-31 12:57:07+00:00): Partly reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/152080131
BR_pebble (2024-07-02 08:20:31+00:00): Hello Arjun khotodkar
Thank you for mapping!
I have added missing buildings -37.8652616, 144.9780804;
-37.8651374, 144.9779657;
-37.8651435, 144.9780729;
-37.8653685, 144.9781817;
-37.8657802, 144.9784407;
-37.8658353, 144.9785172;
-37.8658829, 144.9793715;
-37.865892, 144.9797753;
-37.8651645, 144.9798642;
-37.8652126, 144.9796823;
-37.864733, 144.9795842;
-37.8646213, 144.9795087;
-37.8646101, 144.9795724;
-37.8646694, 144.9794832;
-37.8647144, 144.9794912;
-37.8646943, 144.9793846;
-37.8649706, 144.9787027;
-37.8649521, 144.9786756;
-37.8649042, 144.9787549;
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-23 13:51:23+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

Sollte wohl eher "Eingang Gebäude A" heißen, oder? Siehe https://osm.org/node/11928186361
T_Welter (2024-06-21 06:56:41+00:00): Hab den Kommentar leider erst jetzt gesehen. Danke! Hab ich korrigiert!
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-21 07:29:09+00:00): Danke für die Antwort und Korrektur.

#HappyMapping
eggie (2024-05-23 12:53:18+00:00): Dag Martian,

Dit zijn officieel uitgegeven adressen.

Je kunt bij de BAG een terugmelding doen met de vraag of het adres nog steeds bestaat.
Ligplaats adressen hebben niet te maken of er wel of niet een schip ligt.
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/?searchQuery=Slaaghsloot+2&objectId=0546200000006471&theme=BRT+Achtergrond&geometry.x=95030.5625&geometry.y=465167.396&zoomlevel=15

Het adres zal ik voorlopig nog even terugzetten op de mooring=private

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-05-23 12:56:10+00:00): Adres ligplaats teruggezet.
Doe je zelf een terugmelding anders komt de bulding ='houseboat' weer automatisch terug bij een periodieke update.
MVG
eggie
fs_LT (2025-06-23 09:50:48+00:00): node für den Kindergarten ein Haus weiter exisitiert seit 2021; https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8768825432; bite zusammenführen/überarbeiten
eggie (2024-05-23 12:44:42+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
infeeeee (2024-05-23 22:51:32+00:00): Szia!

Harangtornyokat a man_made=tower, tower:type=bell_tower címkékkel kell jelölni: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tower:type%3Dbell_tower

Se a name, se a building=yes címke nem kell ezek mellé.

Ha kérdésed merülne fel, a magyar szerkesztő közösség elérhetőségeit megtalálod ezen az oldalon: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Közösség

További jó térképezést!
Telementor (2024-05-28 18:53:05+00:00): Köszönöm, javítottam.
eggie (2024-05-23 12:59:41+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback  Lijkt me oke zo. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
Hidoo00 (2025-01-06 15:48:54+00:00): Hi,

I'm correcting footway tagging around the world and stumbled upon your edits here. I'm a little confused as to what is going on. All these highway=footpath that look like highway=service_road (which another user already corrected some to), and then a path with vehicle=yes (then it wouldn't really be a path, again, a service road or another road type), and disconnected sidewalks next to the paths... Is there a particular reason you are not correcting the warnings that come up and tag the ways according to the presets?

Best regards,
Hidoo
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-24 00:52:14+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Please add something like 'added buildings' instead of buildings only. It clarifies other mappers as well. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151721886
Roman Braunschweiger (2024-05-24 18:11:23+00:00): Yes, you are right. Just "buildings" sounds too general. Thanks for suggestion.
rskedgell (2024-05-23 13:19:48+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding bus=yes here, although the psv=yes which was already present should cover both buses and taxis. I've added taxi=yes for added clarity.

Unusually for a traffic restriction in Newham, motor_vehicle=permit applies as the original experimental  traffic order granted an exemption for holders of A1 access permits, granted to local residents. I've changed it to motor_vehicle=private + private=residents and added a source tag pointing to the traffic order.

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3347560
quantenschaum (2024-06-21 18:18:45+00:00): Just out of curiosity, how did you pull this information out of Bing Maps Aerial?
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-24 00:33:55+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151722291
TheLocalDragon (2024-05-24 02:12:16+00:00): Thanks!  I recently found out about RapiD editor and so I've been trying to fill out a lot of the buildings around town over the past couple days.  I still hit some rough patches here and there, but I think I'm getting the hang of this now.
rskedgell (2024-05-23 13:29:18+00:00): A parking aisle is a road in the OSM sense, so instead of deleting a feature which clearly does exist, it should be tagged correctly. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle

I have added the car park and tagged both car park and parking aisle as private in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151723739
d_berger (2024-05-23 17:34:25+00:00): Da ihr regelmässig Stockwerkangaben verwendet, bitte beachtet, dass 'level=*' nicht als Freitextfeld konzipiert ist und Angaben in Form einer Ganzzahl/integer erfordert – oder gegebenenfalls als Halbstockwerk (z.B. "2.5"). Auch Angaben wie MVE und ähnliches sind nicht zulässig, können aber zusätzlich als "level:ref=*" erfasst werden.

HTH
miluethi (2024-05-23 17:09:11+00:00): Prathnachawla,

Please reduce the size of your building shapes to the satellite imagery. I had to delete a few shapes, they are far to big.

Thank you for contributing to OSM Nicaragua.
bigbug21 (2024-05-23 20:29:14+00:00): Die Überreste des Gleisanschlusses waren im Mai 2024 vor Ort noch erkennbar. Sie waren mir beim Vorbeigehen aufgefallen, weshalb ich den Anschluss neu als stillgelegte Gleisanlage erfasst hatte.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-02-20 04:13:34+00:00): Hello!

You used
place=plote
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/914969650/history

Have you maybe meant
place=plot
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?
DD1GJ (2024-05-23 17:45:48+00:00): Doppelten Klinik-Eintrag entfernt. Bitte keine unwahren Eigenschaften wie z.B. Spielplatz eintragen, nur damit auf der (rechtlich irrelevanten) Bubatzkarte etwas angezeigt wird.

Ist das Gebäude KJ 51 52 53 54 wirklich ein Kindergarten in klassischem Sinne? Falls nein, dann das falsche Attribut bitte wieder entfernen .

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf
Klinikum am Weissenhof (2024-05-24 07:27:34+00:00): Es ist eine Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie. Attribut ist wieder entfernt.
eggie (2024-05-23 14:17:10+00:00): Dag Comino.. 
Tip..
Beter de bestaanse adresnode gebruiken.
Mvg
eggie
eggie (2024-05-23 15:34:35+00:00): Info samengevoegd met de adresnode
BCNorwich (2024-05-24 07:01:56+00:00): Hi, Sorry to say that you've got several sections of duplicated highway here, one highway mapped directly atop another highway. This would disrupt highway routing and doesn't conform to OSM practice.

The way to map this situation of multiple trails with sections duplicated is by route relations. The underlying single trail/track is mapped. Then sectioned up so that each named route can be mapped using it's own sections of the underlying trail/track. Thus no section of trail is a duplication. Please see here:- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Multiple_routes_sharing_the_same_ways

These duplications should be removed/corrected. If you need help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2024-05-24 07:07:00+00:00): I've unjoined the cycle paths from the wood and heath outlines
Alice Baddeley (2024-05-28 09:52:02+00:00): Hi Bernard,
Sorry about this - thank you for pointing this out - I hadn't realised I'd done this. Thank you for correcting, much appreciated. Alice
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-23 13:27:54+00:00): sorry, it should be "no response from mapper establishing that this matches on the ground border"
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-23 13:29:33+00:00): See also https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151084278

This appears to be part of that edit involving boundary dispute
Jakka (2024-05-24 07:34:51+00:00): Zijn er daar twee restaurants in zelfde gebouw ?
Thelone1986 (2024-05-23 20:06:53+00:00): Bonjour, ce sont d'anciennes rues qui ne sont plus là (on les voit sur les plus vieilles images ici) et déjà enlevées il y a quelques mois
Jean-Louis Stanus (2024-05-23 21:15:45+00:00): Rue de la forgée en partie.
Par contre, les autres sont des rues nouvellement cadastrée et visibles sur le picc. 
Elles peuvent prendre le tag highway=construction si pas encore opérationnelles
Thelone1986 (2024-05-23 22:40:15+00:00): À terme, ce tronçon de l'Avenue des Acacias devrait disparaître (si ce n'est pas déjà fait sur le terrain) et être remplacé par la rue qui est marquée en construction (et l'est toujours vu les déviations de bus en cours), donc je doute vraiment qu'il y ait un projet pour reconstruire ces rues à l'identique (on est en Belgique après tout, mais bon 🤷‍♂️)
Jean-Louis Stanus (2024-05-24 05:16:59+00:00): OK. Le mieux est de voir dans le Pv du conseil communal. Normalement,  ce genre de point y est mentionné.
Jean-Louis Stanus (2024-05-24 05:19:33+00:00): Ou bien est ce l intercommunale qui est responsable des travaux ?
Thelone1986 (2024-05-24 15:02:34+00:00): C'est un chantier de la SOWAER
citrula (2024-05-24 11:52:37+00:00): Hi Sydney, could you explain what "The Splitting Chapter 2 Lane" is? On streetside imagery it looks like it was signed as Ribbon Court.
Gazer75 (2024-07-25 04:45:18+00:00): Please don't map this as 3 circuits. 1-2 form one circuit and 3+4 is one. Thus the line only contains 2 circuits. (1+2) and 3, so technically 1.5 circuits as 4 is in the ground. Bipolar HVDCs are considered as a single circuit even though they technically can run at reduced capacity using electrode if one pole is down.
eggie (2024-05-23 14:41:18+00:00): Dag Skaapi.

Wees svp voorzichtig met de coastline. 
Beter niet aan beginnen als startende mapper.
Hier ligt natural =water als vlak op natural = water. Dat geeft een foutmelding.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-05-23 14:46:03+00:00): De naam van de haven staat al op een polygoon hier.
Beter niet aan de coastline komen.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-05-23 14:47:17+00:00): reverted by changeset #151727329
eggie (2024-05-23 14:52:39+00:00): De havens bij Vlissingen Oost maken geen deel uit van de coastline.
Groet
eggie
Skaapi (2024-05-23 14:53:06+00:00): Hallo eggie,

Excuses! Ik dacht hiermee een incorrectie op te lossen wat niet in OSM direct visueel te zien is maar wel in een afgeleide (Openbasiskaart). Maar gezien de afhankelijkheden (zoals de coastline) ook aangepast worden blijf ik hier beter van af :) Eerst nog maar eens wat meer verdieping in hoe het editeren werkt. Bedankt voor de oplettendheid!
eggie (2024-05-23 15:00:56+00:00): Hoi,

Dat zal wel de reden zijn geweest van de voorgaande ervaren OpenSeaMapper om die haven met rust te laten. De kustlijn multipolygoon volgt gewoon de havendijk. 
Voor ingewikkelde landuse en water kun je beter mappen met de betere editor JOSM. (en inderdaad een berg ervaring)
editor josm stap voor stap 

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/editor-josm-stap-voor-stap/75047 

 Mapse
eggie
halloschorle (2024-05-23 14:21:46+00:00): Hi,

Why has the Changeset have to be so big? Did something wrong or mistake? 

Normally Changesets should be local.
Schramme (2024-05-23 14:37:17+00:00): Oh sorry. I took the changeset with GoMap. I missed to upload the last change. Normally it‘s local, that‘s right. Mea culpa. Sorry.
Schramme (2024-05-23 14:40:00+00:00): Hmm. Hätt‘s ja auch auf deutsch schreiben können. Da war noch ein Punkt noch nicht hochgeladen vom letzten Spaziergang.
Das war jetzt auch mein größter Change - zumindest von der Entfernung.
dadavid (2025-03-26 11:29:36+00:00): Hi, 

bist du dir hier [1] sicher mit der Fahrbahnbreit von 1 Meter auf der Brücke? :) Das kommt mir ... kompakt vor :D 

Vielen Dank und viele Grüße

David 

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/331179111
silversurfer83 (2024-05-24 07:11:50+00:00): Hi :)

eine Frage und eine Bitte:
warum hast du hier den Rundwanderweg B4 gelöscht?

Und hier meine Bitte: Du hast aktuell zwei Kommentare, die leider null hilfreich sind. Hier ist es ja sogar eine Falschaussage, da du ja eine ganze Relation gelöscht hast. Auch die Quellenangabe ist immer die Gleiche. Das ist alles leider wenig hilfreich. Daher wäre es schön, wenn du einen Blick auf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments werfen könntest und in Zukunft bitte besser kommentieren könntest. Danke

silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151726118
VictorIE (2024-05-24 09:02:13+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285973569

These locations are turning circles, not parking areas. :) Yes, they are much abused.

The way can be tagged like the rest of the highway=*

The 'junction' is tagged like this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11687931360

If there are dead ends, they can be tagged like this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11687931359
ViriatoLusitano (2024-05-24 15:11:55+00:00): Hey Victor,

Thank you so much! Haven't seen these mind of triangular turning circles before.
ViriatoLusitano (2024-05-24 15:12:19+00:00): Will fix asap.
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-24 00:48:59+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. But then the roads are never a single floating lines that is joined nowhere. Please consider that. The mapping of buildings looks great though. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151726624
canfe (2024-08-18 08:31:43+00:00): L'area Roncet che è un barerock si sovrappone ad un'aera identica e non è corretto.
philippec (2024-05-23 18:48:49+00:00): wat is pf ?
U mengt talen.
Gebruik :en voor engels.
naitwa_felixx (2024-05-23 19:25:15+00:00): Sorry, I did it with Street complete APP.
The defi is right next to the automatic cashier oft the parking lot. It is reachable 24/7.
rskedgell (2024-05-24 07:37:48+00:00): You appear to have tagged a section of the A46 North of Park Hill Lane as foot=no in response to a StreetComplete task asking "Are pedestrians forbidden to walk on this road here?"

I have checked the available Bing Streetside and/or Mapillary imagery for evidence that there really is a (signed) pedestrian prohibition here. I cannot see any TSRGD diagram 625.1 "pedestrians prohibited" signs on the imagery, so do not believe that a prohibition exists and have therefore reverted your edit.

The wiki states that access tags reflect legal access. Subjective opinions about whether it would be pleasant, a good idea, safe, etc. for a particular transport mode are not relevant to legal access.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:foot

As real pedestrian prohibitions on public roads other than those tagged as highway=motorway or motorroad=yes in the UK are quite rare and are always signed, this quest is probably better left disabled.
AKTheKnight (2024-05-24 17:07:00+00:00): Thanks for pointing this out, you're completely right.
Apologies for causing this, and thanks for cleaning it up!

Agreed, I'll be disabling this quest unless I can see  a very clearly signposted pedestrians prohibited sign.
rskedgell (2024-05-24 17:18:27+00:00): Many thanks. StreetComplete is a great tool and I use it most days, but it's just this one quest which isn't a really good for for how things work (or don't) in the UK.
eggie (2024-05-23 15:09:01+00:00): Ho Ken, You removed the maintag amenity=parking
For what sake?

I restored the street_side parking.
You changed a path into a cycleway to the Willem de Zwijgerlaan. There is no traffic_sign ,..  so I restored the path.
Greetz,
eggie
Ken Woods (2024-05-23 15:47:47+00:00): I removed it because it's no longer a public parking area.  
Do you live here?  Can you look out the window and see the parking area?
eggie (2024-05-23 15:53:19+00:00): No, I don't live here, but I validate edits from starting mappers. Mostly to help with mapping. 

Your edits

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=151727660

In case this is a private parking you may add access=private but not remove the parking area. 

Wanneer dit een priveparking is geworden kun je access=private toevoegen.
De P  zal dan minder prominent renderen.
Mvg
eggie
Ken Woods (2024-05-26 08:34:25+00:00): I have now officially closed this parking area.  It is no longer available to anyone.   I will be removing this feature now.
CurlingMan13 (2024-05-23 15:26:21+00:00): Do not partially overlap areas.  Before making further edits please review:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=Overlapping%20green/fairway/rough%20polygons%20(see%20graphic%20below).

I have fixed it for you for just this changeset.  Please try to avoid this in the future.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151728080
5m4u9 (2024-05-24 04:53:05+00:00): thank you for your edits!
rskedgell (2024-05-23 16:07:40+00:00): If the signage at the bus station entrance is unchanged from that in the Bing street side imagery (no entry except local buses), the access tags should probably be:

vehicle=no + bus=designated + emergency=yes

It shouldn't have motor_vehicle=yes or bicycle=yes tags, as both are explicitly forbidden by that sign.

https://www.bing.com/maps?toWww=1&redig=0E61462A315B4089ADF0DBB49CFAA9E5&cp=51.062492%7E-0.333052&lvl=19.5&mo=om.1&pi=1.2&style=x&dir=30.2
matt_ellery (2024-05-23 20:11:00+00:00): I'm 99% sure that the Bing Street side image hasn't materially changed and I can see no reason why it would have done so. The BUSES ONLY paint on the road is also on the Bing aerial images. I can check tomorrow to make certain.
rskedgell (2024-05-23 20:16:50+00:00): @matt_ellery Thanks.
matt_ellery (2024-05-25 18:21:43+00:00): Yeah, it's not changed. Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151823387
Filip009 (2024-05-24 19:46:26+00:00): Dobrý deň, v zmenách máte veľa chýb:

- zmenil ste adresy budov v katastrálnom území Ľubotice na Prešov

- adresy v Prešove už boli pridané, nie je nutné ich pridávať na každý bod prevádzky, vytvárajú sa tak duplicity (písal som vám to aj minule)

- pri univerzite vybudovali cyklochodník, alebo sa jedná o cyklopruhy? Pokiaľ sa jedná len o cyklopruhy, tak tie sa značia priamo do cesty, nie zvlášť https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dlane

Pokiaľ v najbližšej zmene pridáte adresu na bod POI, ktorá je už existuje v budove bude váš profil nahlásený.

Prosím reagujte na komentáre, nereagovanie na komentáre je tiež jedna z vecí, pre ktorú môže byť používateľ zablokovaný. Reagovať sa dá jednoducho tak, že napíšete text a dole je tlačidlo "Okomentovať".

Prosím vykonávajte zmeny s uvážením, pokiaľ si neviete s niečím rady kontaktujte slovenskú OpenStreetMap komunitu https://groups.google.com/g/osm_sk.