piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 08:58:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183960337, 183960380, 183960341, 183960408, 183960275, 183960389, 183960221, 183960319, 183960306, 183960280, 183960292, 183960414, 183960349, 183960228, 183960252, 183960358, 183960240, 183960299, 183960267, 183960399, 183960370, 183960328, 183960364 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
rajdhani (2026-04-21 18:27:04+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:181640701
agilenewt21 (2026-04-20 13:47:24+00:00): I've left fixme=continue on the northern end to show it needs "closing off"
Tomas09 (2026-04-20 15:58:52+00:00): Heya! While it definetly isn't your fault since there's no way you could've known. I'm mapping this area currently but not yet removing some overlapping areas as to not delete tons of still valid landuse. I'd like to request if you could avoid changesets like this one here as this reallllyyyy messed up a pending changeset :P
Swihail (2026-04-20 16:04:00+00:00): Hi Tomas09, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.
Swihail (2026-04-28 12:20:34+00:00): Hi Tomas09, thank you for letting me know about your ongoing works. I’m reverting my changesets so you can perform your updates.
For future references, if you explicitly mention the ongoing work and partial edits on your changeset comments, it would also enable other editors to be aware so your ongoing work would not be interrupted.
Please let me know how I can support you on this work.
Tomas09 (2026-04-28 13:08:58+00:00): Reverting now isn't necessary don't worry. It's only when I'm working on one changeset that the elements I'm editing being edited by someone else before uploading can mess things up.
lyctkel (2026-04-20 13:56:38+00:00): Hoi Peter Elderson,
ik heb zojuist een kleine wijziging aangebracht bij de rotonde op https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943034235. In een bepaald gedeelte tusen node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8732288938 en https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8732288931 zijn fietsen enz. verboden. Op Mapillary zijn hier ook gloednieuwe foto’s van te vinden.
Ik hoop dat deze bewerking je uitgebreide relation niet in de war brengt. Laat het me anders even weten.
Groeten,
lyctkel
Peter Elderson (2026-04-20 18:16:06+00:00): Hoi lyctkel. geen zorgen over die relatie, die kan alles hebben wat je kan verzinnen! Ik zie dat op die rotonde bicycle=use_sidepath stond, dat staat gelijk aan no, maar op het stukje wat jij beschrijft is er geen  side path! Het stukje vlak daarvoor trouwens ook niet, maar dat zit vast aan een stuk wat wél een sidepath heeft, dat zal de reden zijn.  Het lijkt erop dat mofa's en mopeds ook niet allemaal goed getagd staan.  In deze rotonde-missie kijk ik soms naar de bicycle/mofa/moped tagging, maar niet systematisch want daar heb ik de tijd en de middelen/bronnen niet voor.
lyctkel (2026-04-22 08:02:51+00:00): Ja, deze rotonde is niet zo eenvoudig. Bij https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8732288981 staat nog een G12a-bord, dus vanaf daar geldt use_sidepath, maar het fietspad eindigt bij https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=8732312531 en het pad loopt uit op een straat. Dat is lastig in kaart te brengen.
Ik heb geprobeerd alles volgens de wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Overzicht_Nederlandse_Verkeersborden) in kaart te brengen, bij de rotonde bicycle=no en foot=no aangegeven en hoop nu dat het klopt.
Peter Elderson (2026-04-22 11:27:53+00:00): Goed bezig!
StC (2026-04-20 17:48:23+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là. Je m'occupe de la réparation. Au passage, un commentaire plus précis aurait pu m'aider à comprendre ce qui s'est passé.
Max-Kritic (2026-04-20 18:57:43+00:00): Salut,

Je corrigerai des landuses avec des relations complexes. Je n'ai pas vu que j'avais cassé d'itinéraire.
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:11:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 183960779 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
eggie (2026-04-20 14:21:38+00:00): Dag Zeerover,

Probeer in het vervolg op de adresnode bij te taggen.
De openingstijden gebruiken de OSM format in Engels.
Gebruik anders deze tool.
openingsuren-tool

http://projets.pavie.info/yohours/
De Ouwe Zeerover (2026-04-20 20:37:41+00:00): Eggie, openingstijden aangepast
De Ouwe Zeerover (2026-04-20 20:41:59+00:00): Eggie, aangepast
Reinhard12 (2026-04-20 20:45:52+00:00): Hallo Carsten,
dieser SB-Waschsalon heißt nicht "fressnapf". Bitte zurück ändern.
GaborKemsei (2026-04-20 14:10:28+00:00): Forgot to link the source:
This an official Hungarian map:
They are Sas street 1/D and 1/E here.

https://www.oeny.hu/oeny/hrsz-kereso/?state=JTdCJTIydHlwZSUyMiUzQTMlMkMlMjJ4JTIyJTNBNTkzMTA4LjIzNSUyQyUyMnklMjIlM0E4NzEwOS4xMTA5Mzc1MDAwMSU3RA==
eggie (2026-04-20 14:16:40+00:00): Hi Ouwe Zeerover.
Please comment your uploads in English or Portuguese. 
Greetz,
eggie
De Ouwe Zeerover (2026-04-20 20:27:42+00:00): Hoi eggie, done.
AndyB_66 (2026-04-20 19:43:55+00:00): Zapoznaj się, proszę, z zasadami nazywania zestawów zmian: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
pitscheplatsch (2026-04-20 14:24:11+00:00): Should re reviewed. Thanks.
eggie (2026-04-20 14:29:54+00:00): Hoi,
Hier gewoon de regel met openingstijden verwijderen. 

Denk verder dat tag geen politie hier is, maar office=government. 
gr eggie
eggie (2026-04-20 18:24:01+00:00): Als bovenstaand aangepast. 
opening_hours verwijderd
mueschel (2026-04-21 13:53:45+00:00): Something went wrong here. All these objects have a strange "alt-piso" tag. You're also missing the mandatory documentation of the import.
HantDX (2026-04-21 07:44:54+00:00): Это забавно, учитывая, что Grove и вправду должен произноситься как Гроув, а не Грув :)
HantDX (2026-04-21 07:45:47+00:00): А название на бел. языке тоже официальное? Если нет, то по идее тогда будет правильнее Груў.
gpserror (2026-04-20 17:52:05+00:00): IMHO I don't think trees should be part of a relation for a residential area even though it might not be a place to live.  By the fact that the tree area is "inside" the polygon for the residential area, by default they are related since they can't move...
Also the two springs park is now no longer a residential park as it's "not part" of the residential neighborhood (implying people not part of the neighborhood are free to drive there and use it) so I'd also leave that out of the multipolygon relation.  But that's my two cents.
greatnameguys2472 (2026-04-20 19:07:54+00:00): True, though I've found that not using a multi polygon for natural wood within residential areas can create overlapping issues sometimes. I'll go ahead and remove the park from the relation since that was put in there a while ago
eggie (2026-04-20 14:35:26+00:00): Dit is een lastige...  De taal hoort in ieder geval Engels te zijn, maar OSM moet er wel iets mee kunnen.
De Ouwe Zeerover (2026-04-20 20:48:15+00:00): Waarom lastig? Moet ik hier nog iets aanpassen? Welk gedeelte van de info behoort in de Engelse taal te zijn
eggie (2026-04-20 20:55:33+00:00): Nou.. zat weer twee dingen tegelijk te doen. 
Was commentaar voor een medemapper 😀
eggie (2026-04-20 20:58:00+00:00): Hier zie je wat ik screen bij startende mappers.
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussions?c=Netherlands#7/52.093/5.164
Trouwens ook wel leerzaam wat er allemaal wordt gecommuniceerd.
vectorial8192 (2026-04-20 14:44:54+00:00): Note:

The exits are created without names, partly due to me not remembering them, but also partly as an opportunity to let newcomers try out OSM editing.
FajrAl (2026-04-27 11:54:52+00:00): Would you mind looking at this: relation/19141308 from changeset/166384463
FajrAl (2026-04-27 11:57:59+00:00): I noticed this has admin_level=1 and looks like a duplicate of node/254074050. Would love to get your take on it.
literan (2026-04-20 18:55:24+00:00): здесь тоже здания и проезды черти куда посдвигали. Тоже откат
mueschel (2026-04-26 14:13:12+00:00): Hi
you used a strange 'Nro' tag here. Is this the house number?
Carnildo (2026-04-21 08:41:55+00:00): Something you can do to improve the precision of a location while leaving the building outline accurate is to create a point of type "address" to hold the address information, and then put that somewhere within the building outline.  You can look at my changes to the building to see how it works.
literan (2026-04-20 18:52:50+00:00): Здравствуйте. Зачем вы здесь здания и проезды сместили на 20 метров к югу? Откатываю
weblogdryads (2026-05-03 18:06:07+00:00): Hello! It looks like many buildings were added with their shape not matching up to imagery. Were you planning on fixing these?
Strongthany (2026-05-04 04:04:45+00:00): Hello, many of these were added as a best attempt with the guidance provided by the rapid editor. I apologize if my attempt did not line up well. If you'd like to take on refining or redoing them, that'd be great. Sorry if I created unnecessary extra work.
tomhukins (2026-04-20 16:17:12+00:00): Hi, I suspect the "building=unspecified_building_typem" tag on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1501457899 is a mistake - what tag did you mean to use here?
TomJeffs (2026-04-20 16:39:52+00:00): fixed, thanks
maro21 (2026-04-20 21:12:54+00:00): Zmapowałem tak jak jest w terenie. Na tym krótkim odcinku nie ma drogi rowerowej, zaczyna się w tym punkcie. Myśłałem nawet o usunięciu drogi rowerowej z https://osm.org/way/311876885, no ale stoi znak...
Fizycznie jednak rowerem się po tym nie da jeździć ze względu na krawężniki, tory tramwajowe, wąską drogę i pieszych.
Ten absurd drogowy jest raczej do zgłoszenia do urzędu miejskiego.
maraf24 (2026-04-20 22:15:21+00:00): W to miejsce kieruje "wpust"  z Kazimierza Wielkiego. Dlatego dałem to fixme, chcę się temu dokładniej przyjrzeć w terenie.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-04-23 01:52:54+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/626256563

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
HellMap (2026-04-20 15:32:55+00:00): This reverts:
181318104 - large number of invalid fords
181319563 - multiple invalid fords
181326370 - couple invalid fords
181328946 - huge number of invalid fords
181329124 - badly-fixed fords
181385638 - multiple invalid fords
181385842 - multiple invalid fords
181431035 - multiple invalid fords
181431135 - couple invalid fords, overlapping/duplicate waterways
181431481 - multiple invalid fords
181472762 - large number of invalid fords, bad waterway layer
181479807 - large number of invalid fords, bad waterway layer
181480373 - multiple invalid fords
181480457 - badly-fixed fords, new issues introduced
181497170 - multiple invalid fords
181497376 - overlapping/duplicate waterway
Kovoschiz (2026-04-20 17:01:07+00:00): Why is this correct? There's a car parked on it from Bing, and Esri Clarity.
sheldonelectric (2026-04-22 19:42:27+00:00): Hello, what is the source for the name:ru?
KeyTV (2026-04-23 05:44:20+00:00): https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Прокопион
MNbrn (2026-04-20 16:01:15+00:00): Степной тұйық көшесі - это неправильное название улицы?
dellared (2026-04-20 17:00:24+00:00): These ways are not lit
aharvey (2026-04-21 00:06:14+00:00): hi, why was the tree coverage reduced here, around the buildings? On the imagery you've used, it does appear the tree coverage extends into the residential area as it was previously mapped.
vogelfreier (2026-04-21 09:13:54+00:00): Hi,
Looking at your local DCS NSW aerial photos, I see that I didn’t want to do all the work for you, so I haven’t marked the buildings yet. I don’t want to cause any boundary disputes, but I’d like to see a distinction between the forest https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/138280435 , residential area https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/218206724 and the park https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/815796655 above it would look better.
From above, we can only see the tree canopy. The tree trunk is underneath. Connecting the forest area to the building, or placing it on top of it – something I’ve done several times before – results in errors during post-processing, both on my part and by other users.
Do we even know who owns the trees by the house? If they’re already on the property, that is!?

Regards

Translated with deepl.com
vogelfreier (2026-04-21 09:24:53+00:00): Note: It wasn’t me, but other users who linked the forest to the building – translation error
aharvey (2026-04-22 00:15:44+00:00): I'm just talking about the change that moved the natural=tree area outside of the landuse=residential area.

> but I’d like to see a distinction between the forest way/138280435 , residential area way/218206724 and the park way/815796655 above it would look better.

Why? A residential area can be covered in natural=wood, the two areas may overlap.

> Do we even know who owns the trees by the house? If they’re already on the property, that is!?

If you enable the DCS NSW Land Parcel Lot layer you can see the property boundaries, trees within that are owned by the property.
ItsAlyx (2026-04-21 16:08:36+00:00): Hi, most of this changeset is solid, but minor issue: please don't delete footway=link ways connecting two nearby features unless something else is added to connect them. Footway=link does not generally correspond to a physical feature, so it can be left in place as long as it is reasonably traverseable and useful for routing purposes, even without a physical footway.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dlink
VLD319 (2026-04-22 15:51:52+00:00): Hi ItsAlyx, 

Thank you for reaching out. The footway link at North Colonial Avenue has been recovered in changeset 181680160.  I appreciate your feedback regarding these links and will keep it in mind going forward! 

Cheers, 
VLD319
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-04-22 22:20:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 181693288 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20171
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-04-22 22:20:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 181693288 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20171
HellMap (2026-04-20 18:55:22+00:00): Hello,

Could you clarify what exactly has changed here? Is the building demolished and parking built in its place?
RobertOS2026 (2026-04-20 20:45:34+00:00): Hello,

Thank you for your comment.
This is not a newly built parking replacing a demolished building. The parking already existed at this location.

There is a new operator/owner who has upgraded the facility. I have updated the data to reflect the current situation, including:

new name
updated payment information
automated entry and payment system
lighting
CCTV surveillance

The geometry/location was not changed - only details were updated to match the current on-site situation.
Based on local knowledge and recent observation.
Let me know if anything should be adjusted.
HellMap (2026-04-20 21:00:42+00:00): What happened is you removed the building tag, which means this is no longer tagged as a building, but only parking. And additionally parking=surface means it's parking with a view of the sky, basically an open parking lot. Those were presumably not intended, so I can fix those, but I'm not sure I understand where the parking actually is (and was before). Is it underground? Looking at street imagery, I don't really see any signs or underground parking entrances. Do you perhaps have a photo or something to show the situation?
markalex- (2026-04-21 05:03:56+00:00): Based on the address changes, I'm thoroughly convinced that actual parking that needed to be updated was this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/45068139
I reverted this edit, and applied all the same changes to that parking
RobertOS2026 (2026-04-21 07:42:50+00:00): Hello,
Thank you for the clarification.
Yes, you are correct - this is an open-air parking (parking=surface) with a barrier and an automated entry/exit and payment system. It is not underground.

The parking existed before, but it is now operated by a new owner with updated infrastructure (barrier, payment system, lighting, CCTV).

It seems I may have incorrectly removed the building tag — that was not my intention. Thank you for fixing/reverting it.

The actual parking location you referenced (way/45068139) is correct.

Please keep the building if it exists and apply the updated parking details to the correct parking area.

Thanks for your help and correction.
RobertOS2026 (2026-04-21 07:51:44+00:00): Hello,

Here is a photo of the parking area:
https://imgur.com/a/dNyK2IX
It shows the open-air parking with barrier and automated system.

Let me know if more details are needed.
kitsee (2026-04-20 17:41:15+00:00): Hello avi,

I've reverted your recent changes as your usage of pedestrian highway areas is incorrect. pedestrian highway areas are used to define the extent of a pedestrian road. St Mary Street is a good example of this. Wood St is not a pedestrian road. I would strongly suggest making smaller scale changes in lest dense areas until you get more experience with OSM.

Kind regards,
kits
SekeRob repair (2026-04-21 12:21:25+00:00): Will be reverted shortly. Deemed vandalism.
Vinber-Pro (2026-04-21 07:07:37+00:00): Bonjour,
si je comprends bien ici, tu es de la team adresse sur le building et pas POI séparé c'est cela ?

moi je ne touche pas aux adresses :)

à plus
Dilys (2026-04-21 12:24:51+00:00): Bonjour,

Exactement, surtout parce que cela permet d'obtenir une plus grande précision que si tu utilises simplement les positions d'entrée de la BAN. 

Exemples :

https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/carte-base-adresse-nationale?id=32462_0908_00019
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/680857522/

https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/carte-base-adresse-nationale?id=32462_0279_00010
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/195810486/

https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/carte-base-adresse-nationale?id=32462_nkatu2_03940
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/195810314/

https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/carte-base-adresse-nationale?id=32462_iuy8fj_00204
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/195812739/

https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/carte-base-adresse-nationale?id=40331_0053_00661
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/401214262/

https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/carte-base-adresse-nationale?id=32049_vsucva_00519
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1193589729/

Un autre avantage lorsque l'adresse fait partie du bâtiment : les adresses ne se perdent pas, car mappeurs utilisent souvent des nœuds d'adresse pour des POI et les suppriment ensuite. Si j'avais pu attribuer l'adresse au bâtiment ici (ce qui n'était pas possible, car il y a deux adresses différentes), elle serait encore là aujourd'hui. Excuse-moi, mais cet exemple illustre bien la situation ;) .

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/110284234/history
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=180766401

Dilys
Vinber-Pro (2026-04-21 14:08:15+00:00): merci pour ce retour détaillé, il y a tellement de position autour de l'adresse !

c'est vrai que le point adresse qui est utilisé comme base pour ajouter le commerce est un classique !

je dédouble souvent avec du contact: pour les commerces.

effectivement les bâtiments qui donnent sur 2 rues ... Faut-il les découper pour mettre l'adresse sur chaque ?

à plus
Dilys (2026-04-22 11:54:23+00:00): Oui, les adresses, c'est un vaste sujet...

Si un bâtiment a plusieurs adresses, je consulte le cadastre. S'il s'agit de bâtiments distincts, je les sépare ; sinon, je ne le fais généralement pas.
osmviborg (2026-04-21 06:24:10+00:00): Vej arbejde der kun er kortvarigt registrere vi ikke. Hvis du endelig vil så brug: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions
jmapb (2026-05-03 18:34:07+00:00): Changed this to building=construction -- fence is up but the building is still intact, and the only posted permit is for renovation of open space. I'll keep an eye on it of course.
TheBestIdea (2026-05-04 20:08:37+00:00): Make sense. Thanks!
iandees (2026-04-20 16:27:53+00:00): Hello! I noticed that nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13746025729, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13746025883 were moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181591720, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
DietJetFuel (2026-04-22 16:11:51+00:00): Hello! My adjustment was not an error, it was intentional. The boundary adjustment I made better reflects the true boundaries of the airport property. I will be readjusting these points.
iandees (2026-04-22 16:25:57+00:00): Yep, looks like I messed up the revert. There was a node drag on this changeset, but my fix didn't help. Apologies, and thanks for fixing my mistake.
DietJetFuel (2026-04-22 16:36:47+00:00): No worries! Appreciate you double-checking my initial adjustment :)
kishy-maps (2026-04-20 21:04:56+00:00): this was infact not for any tomtom event, the hashtag was used unintentionally with the permanent custom tags in vespucci
George Sears (2026-04-21 16:40:22+00:00): Ciao, secondo le convenzioni di mapping italiane, dato che l'indirizzo si riferisce all'accesso esterno che dall'area di circolazione (strada, piazza, via, ecc) immette direttamente o indirettamente alle unità immobiliari, i dati dell'indirizzo si aggiungono ad un punto e non a tutto l'edificio. 
maggiori informazioni sulla wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Addresses#Regole_specifiche_per_l'Italia

Inoltre ho visto che hai semplicemente aggiunto un nome all'edificio, penso per indicare che ci sia un'attività? in questo modo però non è corretto e non risulterà l'officina sulle mappe, verrà visualizzato solo il nome sull'edificio. Anche in questo caso bisogna aggiungere le informazioni su un punto separato nella posizione più appropriata
Se hai bisogno di aiuto o di consigli per qualunque cosa c'è un gruppo telegram molto attivo su cui puoi chiedere, saluti.
https://telegram.me/OpenStreetMapItalia#
dellared (2026-04-20 16:57:38+00:00): Thank you for your contribution, however some of the changes are incorrect. You have identified some buildings as detached when they are actually garages, or sheds.
George Sears (2026-04-21 16:32:08+00:00): Ciao se vuoi indicare l'impossibilità di attraversare questa strada per i mezzi pesanti, potresti aggiungere i tag "maxheight" e "width"
dai un'occhiata alla wiki per maggiori informazioni
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:maxheight
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:width
AoiAihana (2026-06-03 10:02:45+00:00): 二拨子桥和北农路没有自行车道吧
Summer200101 (2026-06-17 15:08:46+00:00): 有的，只是没有硬隔离
BjörnSc (2026-04-20 18:39:04+00:00): Hey, thanks for adding the charge_points. You can add the information about the CCS cables and the power rating with socket:type2_combo=2 and socket:type2_combo:output=200 kW. 
Greetings
PS You already added the charging station as a node; next time you could just draw an area instead and add the information to it.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181593121
Juke9573 (2026-04-22 17:53:25+00:00): Thanks for the help, and the advice! 

I've only been mapping for a few weeks, using EveryDoor and Streetcomplete on mobile.
Those can't draw areas 😅
The charging node was already present, I merely updated it. 

Editors: I've tried opening ID on the phone, but my every second drag-to-scroll accidentally became a drag-a-node-into-oblivion.. So I'm punting on area-mapping for now (at least on-the-go).