piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mueschel (2023-09-24 09:52:20+00:00): You and your colleagues introduced new tags here: 

maxheight trimble
maxheighttribble
maxheighttrimble
maxweighttrimble
hgvtrimble

Please explain what all these tags mean.
devasen (2023-09-27 09:40:28+00:00): Hi mueschel,
Thank you for taking the time to look over the changeset. These tags are applicable only for our internal edits, however owing to a technical error they got published on OSM. 
We have identified all the changesets belonging to these tags added by the editors and have deleted the incorrect attributes/syntax in the changesets #141790368 ,#141790142 & #141790274. We apologize for this error and will be cautious while contributing on OSM.
Regards,
devasen
PikeUK (2024-03-06 20:15:11+00:00): This changeset changed the gate at node 11052482001 to locked=yes. This has prevented some routing software (e.g. plotaroute.com) from routing along the Weavers' Way (which passes over the path this gate is attached to). Can someone confirm if the Weavers' Way really is blocked by a locked gate or was this an error? Thanks.
Pink Duck (2024-03-07 08:42:06+00:00): It was pad-locked when I surveyed the route on 21st Sept 2023, with locked=yes to indicate 'usually locked'. Having just checked back to photo the path actually deviates to the left of the vehicle gate and to the right of another left-most post. I have tweaked the mapping accordingly.
PikeUK (2024-03-07 18:56:36+00:00): Thanks for the quick response and fix, much appreciated.
Dawid2849 (2023-09-21 16:27:19+00:00): Operator ucięło
kubahahaha (2023-09-21 20:13:18+00:00): Poprawione
GeoAndi (2023-09-21 14:06:57+00:00): Hallo AkitoX,
du hast den Spielplatz wieder auf zugänglich gesetzt, indem du den Tag "leisure=playground" ergänzt hast. Bist du sicher, dass der Spielplatz derzeit benutzbar ist? Ich habe ihn vor zwei Tagen deshalb auf "disused" gesetzt, da er wegen der Baustelle eingezäunt war/ist.
Viele Grüße, GeoAndi
Coirib (2023-09-21 18:03:28+00:00): Hi,

Where have you seen that this is 110kV? 
It looks like a typical 38kV station and there is two 38kV lines coming into it.
randomer68 (2023-09-22 07:20:22+00:00): Hi,
I based it on the absence of this sub-station from the "Availability Capacity Map" of ESB substations https://www.esbnetworks.ie/new-connections/generator-connections-group/availability-capacity-map

I may have jumped the gun and will switch it back while I investigate further.
Coirib (2023-09-22 09:37:35+00:00): Yea no bother. It is actually on the map you linked but it’s located a little more to the north west. (The pins on that map aren’t always accurate) 

I’ll also point out that unfortunately I don’t think we can use the information from that site to add data to OSM.
randomer68 (2023-09-22 11:28:26+00:00): Okay see it now. Good to know the locations are not accurate, was been way to trusting in the review I am doing for work. Thanks of the feedback.

I have not being adding data from the site, but using it a QC on the OSM data. OSM data more useful to me as it has all substations. And as you now pointed out looks like it is more accurate as well. 
Thanks again for the feedback will be more careful in future.

Best regards
Padraic
Coirib (2023-09-22 11:57:34+00:00): Ah no worries so, there is a site called OpenInfraMap.org that may be of use to you. It has more of a focus on power infrastructure and gets its data from OSM
randomer68 (2023-09-23 08:29:30+00:00): Oh, was not aware of that, very useful, its like someone did the work for me. Thanks much appreciated.
Artha14 (2023-09-22 06:58:23+00:00): The Ferry route you created is wrong, you entered the tag "Motorcar and Motorcycle" there. Please be more careful.
FenyMufyd (2023-09-22 17:07:18+00:00): Thank you for correcting!
JayTurnr (2024-08-02 10:11:28+00:00): In what world is the roof below the road?
astradotblue (2024-08-02 19:58:54+00:00): I had meant to set the roof as layer=1 but was told to set the road as layer=-1 and somehow messed up and selected the roof. Thank you for fixing it and pointing it out :)
aTarom (2023-09-23 09:21:12+00:00): hi thanks for editing, is this relation
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16358497/history
something experimental with Mapbox? sorry if it's documented somewhere, just to keep it in mind for future revisions.
Best regards
di5order (2023-09-23 10:44:37+00:00): Hi, thanks for this question. Yes, such edits documented here (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:manoeuvre) and may use on complex/discuss intersections for routing.
aTarom (2023-09-23 11:16:00+00:00): Thanks, then according to the wiki it should be
"manoeuvre"
not "maneuver"?
di5order (2023-09-25 05:55:06+00:00): The engine supported both versions and according to the wiki it may be in both too "The British spelling manoeuvre=* is preferred, but OSRM also supports the American spelling maneuver=*".
I can change tagging for this relation, if it preferable for this region.
Thanks
aTarom (2023-09-25 07:07:54+00:00): My personal opinion is
"manoeuvre" please
it's more widespread in Europe.
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1AZy
thank you very much for the kind cooperation
di5order (2023-09-25 07:35:38+00:00): Welcome.
I modified this relation.
Andrea Musuruane (2023-09-26 16:46:15+00:00): Ciao. highway=living_street è una tipologia di strada che in Italia non esiste. Cosa volevi inserire? Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141559466
literan (2023-09-21 16:46:00+00:00): access=yes это тег по умолчанию на дорогах, он не нужен
literan (2023-10-23 11:45:18+00:00): и зачем вы здесь https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30425675

тег здания удалили? это вандализм
MarinaKuzko (2023-10-23 13:16:13+00:00): Извините. Я это сделала не специально. Возможно тег был удален случайно, а я этого не заметила. Впредь буду более внимательной.
kapazao (2023-09-21 14:08:48+00:00): Hi, have you asked spanish community about the importations you are making in Alquife?
I have not found any reference about what you are doing and I see a lot of mistakes, so it would be good if you stop making changes if you have no permission. You are doing it in a wrong way and your changesets could be reverted.
Regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141559796
dieghernan (2023-09-21 14:29:40+00:00): Hi,

I am working just right now on this fix. This is due to non-touching points on buildings, as provided by the Spanish Cadastre. I'll take me an hour o so to fix it.

Additionally, just let me say that I know the place as I lived there, if that can help as a guarantee that I am doing the right thing.

Regards
Jordi MF (2023-09-22 21:17:16+00:00): Hola dieghernan,
Algunos usuarios han detectado errores en la importación que estás realizando.
Para importar los datos del Catastro hay que usar la herramienta adecuada y el procedimiento establecido por la comunidad española de usuarios de OpenStreetMap (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Catastro_espa%C3%B1ol/Importaci%C3%B3n_de_edificios). Consulta la información y, si tienes dudas, pásate por el grupo de Telegram 'OSM ES Catastro'. Allí hay gente que te podrá guiar para seguir los pasos correctos.

Saludos
dieghernan (2023-09-23 09:10:50+00:00): Ok, gracias Jordi MF. Ya están resueltos los fallos (pasan las validaciones JOSM) y me he mirado la wiki. Disculpas por los errores de carga inicial
osmuser63783 (2024-10-22 15:39:20+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding to OSM. May I ask what exactly the source was for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/501186954, which you added, and how sure are you that there is actually a path there?

I have been in touch with another mapper who received a GPX file from Dave Brovy who went there 5 years ago. Brovy writes “I would be rather worried putting the section around Molun Pokhari (leg 22 in my trail notes) on OSM without a good warning… Me and also separately a friend of mine both got stuck in that area and needed helicopter rescues… definitely need some disclaimers and a bit of understanding of the risks before following that route!” You can read more on Leg 22 here: https://www.wildernessprime.com/expeditions/great-himalaya-trail/trail-notes/ 

Brovy’s GPX track looks a lot like the path you added.
osmuser63783 (2024-10-22 15:40:55+00:00): Hang on, I've just realised I didn't look at the way history properly: you didn't add the path but you were the last person to touch it. Do you know any more about it?
osmuser63783 (2024-10-23 17:47:01+00:00): Left a note at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4491592
DD1GJ (2023-09-21 23:21:46+00:00): Löschung rückgängig genacht, Zuganswege als privat gekennzeichnet.

Hallo Stadt Markkleeberg, willkommen bei OSM. Bei OSM serden auch Straßen und Wege auf Privatgrundstücken erfasst und bei Bedarf mit privatem Zugangsrecht (access=private) gekennzeichnet. an solchen Informationen sind z.B. Rettungsdienste sehr interessiert.

Ich habe daher die Löschung rückgängig gemacht.
Rico557 (2024-02-20 07:03:25+00:00): location fixed, POI upd
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147678226
kate_rocketdata (2024-02-20 07:11:40+00:00): Добрый день!
Принято. Спасибо!
Bienson (2023-09-21 16:39:59+00:00): Am besten auf disused:shop=* setzen, solange das Ladenlokal noch vorhanden ist. Bei Neubezug kann das neue Geschäft schneller eingetragen werden und StreetComplete fragt Nutzer danach, ob das Ladenlokal immer noch leer steht.
mueschel (2023-09-22 17:54:16+00:00): Hi,
I had to revert this and two more changesets of yours. All the objects uploaded are duplicates of existing ones.

This happens if you load a geojson or similar file into JOSM and then try to upload it. You have to load data directly from the API or Overpass - every other way will lead to duplicates and not to editing the already existing objects.
mueschel (2023-09-22 17:55:34+00:00): PS: I'm not sure if I caught all problematic changesets - please have a look if there is anything else. You can usually notice these objects by their @id tag - but I see that you already removed many of them.
Superadlen (2023-09-24 06:44:03+00:00): Thank you.. I did not realize this.. I will correct the errors
GeoAndi (2023-09-21 19:32:14+00:00): Hallo,
wahrscheinlich meinst du mit Doppelhaus eine Doppelhaushälfte. Das wäre dann der folgende Tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:building%3Dsemidetached_house
Viele Grüße.
pyram (2023-09-30 12:08:55+00:00): Review &
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3863577

Danke für den Versuch.
Ich habe jetzt einmal das Doppelhaus #11 und #13 beispielhaft aufgeteilt ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31276569/history ).
Man sollte vermeiden Adressen aufzulisten (11;13). Besser ist es, die Gebäude einzeln zu erfassen oder alternativ die Adressen einzeln als Punkte zu erfassen. Letzteres auch gerne direkt am Hauseingang. Kann sehr hilfreich sein - insbesondere, wenn es sich nur um ein Gebäude handelt, wie z.B. Glogauer Straße 52 und 54 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/49.40171/11.13854

Den kleinen Stummel Amselschlag habe ich auch nachgebessert ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31276577/history ). "driveway" sollte nicht in Kombination mit "residential" genutzt werden. Ersteres ist eine Untergruppe von "service" und beschreibt, dass der "service-way" nur für *ein* Grundstück (zum Beispiel als Garagenzufahrt auf Privatgelände) genutzt wird. Siehe auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:service%3Ddriveway
"Service" alleine hat eine Zwischenbedeutung zwischen öffentlicher Wohnstraße und rein privaten Wegen.

Danke auch für die Bilder - sehr hilfreich!
Ansonsten: Nicht verunsichern lassen. Wir alle haben mit Fehlern angefangen :-)

Gruß
pyram

PS: Man muss nicht jede Aufgabe von SC lösen. Da gibt es einige überflüssige Aufgaben, wenn man kurz darüber nachdenkt ;-)

PPS: Bitte nicht (nur) die zwar sehr scharfen, aber hoffnunfslos veralteten Bilder von Esri (Clarity) nutzen. Zumindest noch einen Blick auf neuere Bilder, wie BayernDOP80 werfen. Habe die Scheune
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3743967364/history
wieder aktualisiert.
GeoAndi (2023-09-30 12:41:09+00:00): Danke für die Verbesserung und den ausführlichen Kommentar. Hab ich auch wieder was neues gelernt :). Viele Grüße, GeoAndi.
HAmap (2023-09-30 12:44:25+00:00): Hallo @GeoAndi,
den tag für Doppelhaushälften hätte ich gebraucht, ganz genau. Ich frickel mich gerade erst ein, habt Geduld mit mir ;-)

Hallo @pyram,
gut, dass du die Scheune wieder aufgebaut hast, die ich nach falschem Luftbild niedergerissen habe ;-) 
Danke für deine Hinweise und Korrekturen, daran lerne ich :-)
Gerne mehr davon!
Beste Grüße
HAmap
GeoAndi (2023-09-30 13:03:33+00:00): Kein Problem, wie haben alle mal mit Osm angefangen und mussten uns erst einarbeiten. Das wird mit der Zeit schon :). Bei Fragen immer gerne melden.
Pavel-Y (2023-09-21 15:10:02+00:00): it might be a good idea to revert this specific changeset. it  seem to have removed a big grassland
divaddivag (2023-09-22 05:50:01+00:00): Salut Baduf, non il ne s'agit pas d'une 'piste cyclable'. Au sens OSM, il est adapté aux voies séparées qui sont réservées aux vélos et indiquées comme tel sur le terrain via des panneaux type C113 ou B22a ou picto aux sols. De mémoire, rien de tel pour celui-ci, seulement aux restriction pour les véhicules à moteur. Le terme 'piste cyclable' est (trop) souvent galvaudé dans l'imaginaire collectif ou de nos politiques, relayé ainsi par la presse sans que cela se matérialise sur le terrain. Or dans OSM, celui-ci prime! De même on ne mappe pas pour faire plaisir aux appli vélo. Aux plaisir d'en discuter. David
BaDuf (2023-09-22 06:59:49+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour ta réponse rapide et  toutes ces précisions. J'ai emprunter ce "chemin" hier, il y a bien des pictos aux sols en début et fin (zebra blanc + symbol vélo) ainsi que des petits panneaux blancs et verts avec le symbole vélo (mais pas les bleus type C113). Question bête, les appli d'itinéraire vélo vont-elles proposer ce chemin dans leurs itinéraires avec les infos actuelles ? Pour les usagers, c'est le point important : profiter d'itinéraire adaptés et sécurisés. Bonne journée
eggie (2023-09-21 20:15:57+00:00): Dag GG Je vraagt feedback...  
Klopt . Daar staat geen gebouw meer.
Groet
eggie
Pink Duck (2023-09-21 15:01:37+00:00): A changeset per edit, really?
Robert Whittaker (2023-09-21 16:04:42+00:00): If I don't know that the next edit will need the same changeset comment and source tags, then generally I save straight away. This avoids, either overly general comments, or accidentally attributing the wrong comment/source to an earlier edit.
map per (2023-09-21 18:33:58+00:00): Wegen review_requested: Die Änderung sieht gut aus, danke!
Argbjorn (2023-09-22 05:52:48+00:00): Hi, vojtechzaboril! I disagree about access=no. As wiki says, 'Access values describe legal permissions/restrictions and should follow ground truth'. There're no restriction signs at both sides of the bridge.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141564592
vojtechzaboril (2023-09-22 08:51:05+00:00): Hi, I understand you. I removed access=no. Do you have any ideas how to map the fact, that crossing this bridge is dangerous? Thanks
skifans (2023-10-16 18:33:57+00:00): Just came across this bridge and yeah it's an an absolutely abismal state and needs something. Calling it a bridge almost feels like an exaggeration. I forded the river rather then using it.

I'd like to make the suggestion of removing the highway=path tag but leaving everything else as is? It isn't a path - most of the path has long fallen into the river!

How does that sound?
vojtechzaboril (2023-10-16 18:45:04+00:00): In that case, add abandoned:highway=path and highway=abandoned
skifans (2023-10-16 20:03:26+00:00): Sounds good to me, I'll give it a bit to see if Argbjorn or anyone else has a view
Argbjorn (2023-10-16 21:01:25+00:00): Hi there! Your proposal would make the bridge invisible for routers and, consiquently, for hikers who don't think the bridge is so dangerous.
I believe description tag is enough. Out local community suggests to add condition=dilapidated or condition=poor. There isn't perfect decision, so in my opinion, it's better to guide people to the bridge and give them an opportunity to decide by themselves.
And I know that local hikers are going to fix this bridge soon )
skifans (2023-10-16 21:55:33+00:00): Hi! Honestly doing that was sort of my intention. It would still result in 2 seperate paths either side of the river - if people want to look and investigate what crossings there are then that is up to them. And the bridge is still in the data - complete with note. Most of the path has fallen into the river - it isn't there on the ground. Just the remains of a bridge, which you could if you were so inclined walk across. Just in the same why you could walk over lots of things - but it doesn't mean there is a path there.

Particularly if someone is heading West to East it would also be a very long way round (and quite a bit of climbing) if someone was not comfortable with the bridge. And I think calling it a path really oversells its current condition!

Good to hear there are some plans for fixing it! It's a beautiful place down in the gorge.

That said though if its a decision that's been made to have it like this by several local OSM Georgia then absolutely leave it as is if you'd prefer. Just wanted to offer my opinion (and extreme surprise!) as a tourist and I wasn't aware it had been discussed wider then you 2.
jeslop (2023-11-06 16:50:03+00:00): Changeset reverted due to fictional mapping

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143701922
michael_ua (2023-09-24 18:48:30+00:00): Reverted in

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141695400
SomeoneElse (2023-09-21 16:49:35+00:00): @GPSMAP67 You have now promised again (by OSM PM) not to edit https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1086252957.  You did this previously on 30/05/2023 and then broken that promise just now.
To be clear, all that anyone is asking for is some evidence that this is, in OSM terms, a "path".  Next time you're there, take a photo or three so that we can discuss with everyone else what the best tagging for it is.
user_16720371 (2023-09-21 17:33:04+00:00): Noted. I'll grab some pics next time I go for reference if it isn't in cloud.
silversurfer83 (2023-09-22 15:40:54+00:00): Hallo Ufi

schön, dass du hilfst die Karte zu verbessern.

Ein Hinweis für dich als Freund des MSFS und auch allgemein, auch wenn es in diesem Fall passt, was du gemacht hast: Wir erfassen die Dinge so, wie sie vor Ort zu sehen sind, nicht so, wie wir sie in unserer bevorzugten Software sehen möchten ;)
Beispiel Kirche: Nicht jedes Gebäude, welches als Kirche genutzt wird, ist als klassische Kirche gebaut. Daher gibt es bei OSM verschiedene Eigenschaften. Einmal für das Gebäude (building=*) um das Gebäude zu beschreiben, dann gibt es "building:use=*" um zu beschreiben, wofür ein Gebäude genutzt wird (in Usseln gibt es ein entweihtes Kirchengebäude, welches jetzt ein Restaurant ist) und dann hier noch "ameniy=place_of_worship" um zu beschreiben, dass hier tatsächlich Gottesdienste stattfinden.

Aber nicht abschrecken lassen und bei Fragen immer raus damit :)

Grüße und allzeit guten Flug
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141566143
Ufi (2023-09-23 09:41:21+00:00): Der Einwand ist berechtigt. Andererseite stand da vorher building=Yes statt building=church. Das schien mir eine erlaubte Verbesserung zu sein.
Grüße
silversurfer83 (2023-09-23 12:07:34+00:00): Hi :)

Klar. Das meinte ich mit "auch wenn es in diesem Fall passt". 
Es soll nur ein freundlicher Hinweis sein, mehr nicht, da es eine Fülle an Spielen und Simulationen gibt, die ihre Welt aus der OSM Datenbank ziehen und entsprechend gibt es eine Menge Menschen, die versuchen die Daten zu ihrem Vorteil anzupassen, ohne auf die Regeln der osm Community zu achten. 

Von daher: unter wiki.openstreetmap.org findest Du alles, was Du wissen musst und mehr. Und bei Fragen immer raus damit :)
Frans S (2023-09-24 10:40:34+00:00): Hello. See my comments on another changeset.
Please map buildings rather than just adding a residential area.
And ! square the rectangular buildings.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141566391
Protoxenus (2023-10-28 21:24:23+00:00): Der Hinweis am Kreisverkehr in Stralsund (K.-Marx-Str., Frankendamm, Werftstraße, Greidswalder Chaussee) ist richtig und sinnlos. Der Kreisverkehr ist richtig kartiert. Wenn eine Routing-Software mit einem highway=service nicht klar kommt, ist das kein Problem von OSM. Da sollte die Routing-Software nachgebessert werden.
Gruß Protoxenus
streckenkundler (2023-10-29 10:33:37+00:00): @Protoxenus du beschuldigst hier den falschen...
die vor richtigerweise kritisierte Note kam mit einem anderen CS von einem anderen User rein: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/137635600
Protoxenus (2023-10-30 08:26:55+00:00): Ja, Streckenkundler, du hast recht.
Sorry, bin in der falschen Ebene der history gelandet. Habe es korrigiert.
Gruß Protoxenus
messpert (2023-11-15 21:55:24+00:00): Why do you think that this is heath rather than grassland?
I have surveyed much of the area which I have known for a great many years. Such a large area contains a variety of vegetation, but it is mainly grassland.
mkopinsky (2023-09-22 02:07:52+00:00): Could you explain what changed in this changeset?
BAGgeraar (2023-09-21 18:12:21+00:00): Let op, deze weg is onlangs verbreed/verlegd; zie Satellietdataportaal. Ik heb de locatie weer gecorrigeerd.
Kasey2 (2024-07-23 19:30:26+00:00): Czy aby na pewno Żabka way#370337028 jest otwarta od 06:09?
Paul Scriven (2025-07-02 15:01:31+00:00): Good addition! Typing skem into google maps just works so OSM should support it
NorthCrab_upload (2023-09-21 16:50:18+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/455562578

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
WieKo68 (2024-06-11 13:06:14+00:00): poprawiono
Kovoschiz (2023-09-22 09:30:50+00:00): Can you please explain what you are trying to do?
LockOnGuy (2023-09-21 20:39:57+00:00): Thank you so much! keep up the great work!
CurlingMan13 (2023-09-21 16:58:41+00:00): Duplicated features were removed
InfosReseaux (2023-10-22 16:57:24+00:00): Hello Matt,

Regarding this particular changeset, landuse=reservoir shouldn't be used anymore despite rendered. natural=water + water=reservoir sounds better and consistent with other natural=* features.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreservoir

Cheers
Matt_ (2023-10-22 19:10:31+00:00): I understand, thank you. Since this edit, I've tried to do a better job using natural=water+water=reservoir. I'll probably go back at some point to fix everything I've touched. Most of it has been expanding GNIS-imported nodes that only had landuse=reservoir.
evod (2025-02-24 14:38:11+00:00): Hi, unfortunately you removed oneway:bicycle=no from Inge-Konradi-Gasse. This seems to be a common error when using StreetComplete, please be careful! I added the missing tag again. Best regards!
l0cKy (2025-02-24 15:15:26+00:00): Oh das ist mir wirklich durchgegangen.

Eigentlich suche ich nach Taggingfehlern auch durch Abgleiche mit den OGD Daten der Stadt, interessant dass mir der Fehler nicht aufgefallen ist
evod (2025-02-25 14:24:19+00:00): OK kein Problem :) Mir ist es auch nur aufgefallen weil ich gerade OGD vs OSM vergleiche für die Radlobby (https://github.com/markusstraub/radlobby/tree/master/oneways falls es dich interessiert)
ssundell (2023-09-30 20:43:43+00:00): Just a note: "gravel" is typically considered as pretty coarse material with large rocks, diameter several centimeters. The more typical surface for cycleways is "fine_gravel", which has smaller grain size; not quite sand, but more in the millimeters-1 cm area in diameter.

It's a bit misleading since "gravel" is a concept as in "gravel roads", where the correct surface in OSM is most often actually compacted... :P
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141569635