piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2023-07-27 06:47:04+00:00): Dag fester.. 
Bijna goed..
highway=crossing moet het zijn ipv footway
Groet
eggie
eggie (2023-07-27 06:48:41+00:00): Ik heb het aangepast.
eggie (2023-07-27 07:39:48+00:00): Door de tag traffic_calming	island zal het niet renderen als een oversteekplaats. 
eggie
fester7 (2023-07-27 18:48:54+00:00): Dank voor de aanpassing eggie! Vanuit de wiki kwam ik er niet helemaal uit
hrhino (2023-07-26 21:46:17+00:00): hey, looks like you forgot to tag these ways... it looks like w1192511252 may be a pool? could you please re-check? thanks
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139057913
Hoàng Tuấn Việt (2023-07-27 15:25:21+00:00): i've reported your case to the admins because you keep adding false information. NO BRIGDE IS BEING PLANNED TO BUILD HERE, AT THIS MOMENT.
Bvonter23 (2023-07-27 19:31:26+00:00): ADMINSTRATION PERMISSION DENINED: Okay Please I Want A F*****g Bridge Project Because The Population Is Increasing, And I Want To De-Islanding Cat Ba! Please I Swear This Is A Real Bridge Project!
MitchBarnett (2023-07-26 21:22:03+00:00): Change was updating opening hours of shops on Fore Street & Trinity Street
hrhino (2023-07-26 21:47:21+00:00): looks nice!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139058249
LockOnGuy (2023-07-26 23:07:15+00:00): Hello Ahmad-0772, please do use meaningful changeset comments - “(U-turn)” does not help other mappers understand what you are doing.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Regards.
gscholz (2023-08-16 07:58:22+00:00): Hi FlGa57,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-0.31888&lat=49.16914&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=139058666

Can you please fix this?

Kind regards
Guido
Hopla57 (2023-08-17 20:24:09+00:00): Hi,
I think I fixed the errors.
Could you review?
See you soon.
gscholz (2023-08-18 06:59:01+00:00): Hi FlGa57,
looks fine now, thanks for your quick response.
Guido
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2023-07-27 19:19:41+00:00): Hi and welcome!

To indicate that something is no longer open, it's better to use lifecycle prefix
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
for example like so
was:amenity=stripclub

Note that OSM is not a historical database, these prefixes are useful when you need indicate to other mappers that something indeed got closed while there is still a sign for that place or a building was removed, but it's still on aerial imagery so that no one would retrace it again.

As the strip club website is still up and nothing is mentioned about it closing, it would be correct to use lifecycle prefix. I assume you've verified it somehow.
JeroenHoek (2023-07-27 09:46:26+00:00): Dit is niet correct. Een parkeerplaats bij een POI kan uit meerdere delen bestaan, maar dat maakt het niet meerdere parkeerplaatsen.
JeroenHoek (2023-07-27 09:47:52+00:00): Ook dat boerenerf is één boerderij, niet twee. Ook al zijn het twee vlakken.
JeroenHoek (2023-07-27 09:48:38+00:00): Het speeltuintje bij het Bataviaplein is er ook maar één, ook al is het in twee delen opgesplitst.
JeroenHoek (2023-07-27 09:49:56+00:00): Data verbeteren is goed, maar multipolygons zijn een valide manier om één entiteit over meerdere ingetekende vlakken te verdelen. Zou je deze changeset willen terugdraaien? Delen ervan kunnen correct zijn, maar ik pik er nu zo meerdere fouten uit.
Friendly_Ghost (2023-07-27 20:46:12+00:00): Die wijzigingen waren bewust.

Meerdere parkeervakken/-plaatsen hoeven niet in een MP alleen omdat ze naast elkaar liggen. De fysieke nabijheid van de parkeervakken is voldoende om dit aan te geven. Leeuwarden is ook de enige plaats waar deze manier van mappen veel voorkomt.

Met landuse is het vergelijkbaar: de twee vlakken zijn wellicht wel onderdeel van hetzelfde perceel, maar OSM is geen percelenkaart. Ik kan ook geen documentatie vinden die zegt dat 1 landuse=farmyard voor 1 boerenerf moet zijn.

Wat die speeltuin betreft, zowel de rendering van JOSM als de beschrijving in 3 verschillende menu's aan de rechterzijde in JOSM gaven aan dat het om gras ging. Toen zag ik gras en verdeelde ik het "gras" in tweeën. Dat krijg je als je dubbel tagt. Ik heb nu de speeltuin conform de Wiki met surface=grass getagd om deze fout in de toekomst te voorkomen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139106807
Friendly_Ghost (2023-07-27 21:24:21+00:00): Ter referentie, dit is wat ik zag bij de speeltuin die ik opsplitste omdat ik 'm als gras beschouwde: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/787052316649848832/1134234552500502681/grass.png
JeroenHoek (2023-07-28 05:56:05+00:00): Blijft alsnog dat die huisarts niet twee parkeerterreinen heeft. Dat is bewust zo ingetekend. Je kan niet op basis van een overpass-query besluiten dat al dit gebruik onrechtmatig is. Ook het boerenerf is één entiteit. Regelmatig vind ik later de naam van de boerderij; die kan daar dan op.
Friendly_Ghost (2023-07-28 06:06:02+00:00): Als je het als 1 parkeerterrein ziet kan dat in misschien beter 1 grote parking=surface zijn dan een multipolygon van parking=street-side, en de naam van de boerderij past soms beter op het hoofdgebouw, en anders ben je 1 knop verwijderd van het maken van een multipolygon met een naam.

Dat heeft meer met onze keuzes in het mappen te maken dan met Overpass. Overpass vertelt ons namelijk niet hoe we iets op de kaart moeten zetten en niemand doet ook alsof dat wel zo is.
Friendly_Ghost (2023-07-28 06:16:45+00:00): Daarmee bedoel ik dat ik het nog steeds zelf bekeken heb.
JeroenHoek (2023-07-28 06:46:10+00:00): Bij Kapenga Wonen viel je anders niet op dat die parkeerplaats uitgebreid was en dat de voormalige twee delen nu aansluiten (zie mijn bewerking).

Boerderijen hebben nou eenmaal hun naam op hun erf, niet op een van de gebouwen. Als je het hoofdpand sloopt op opdeelt is het nog steeds dat boerenerf.

Er is niks mis met het gebruik van multipolygons an sich. Soms komt het beter uit wanneer één entiteit in meerdere stukken ingetekend is. Die vrijheid is er ook gewoon.
Friendly_Ghost (2023-07-28 06:56:51+00:00): Tja, dan heb ik een paar keer gewoon een inschatting gemaakt die ook anders gemaakt had kunnen worden. Dat gebeurt ook wel eens.
arcanma (2023-08-04 16:56:41+00:00): Salve famigliapileri,
hai inserito il sottopasso di Piazzale Marinai d'Italia come ciclopedonale, sicuro che è previsto sia per bici che pedonale? Mi sembra che almeno da un lato ci siano delle scale...
user_5359 (2023-07-27 07:00:16+00:00): Hello! 
Please take a look at the way https://www.osm.org/way/103578802. You have changed the key id_parjard to ref:MZ:parjard (this is very good in terms of clarity). 

However, I noticed some other points: 
* The key category is meaningless without further description.
* The values of addr:* result in a different value than the addresse value.
* the value of opening_hours should be a time period and not just the start time.
* The value of start_date is written in year-month-day not in day/month/year.
MxxCon (2023-07-26 23:18:29+00:00): Hello.
It looks like there are some tagging mismatches where you tagged crossing way as "crossing=marked", but its intersecting node as "crossing=traffic_signals".
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139059714
VLD190 (2023-08-28 22:14:34+00:00): Hello MxxCon, thank you for reaching out to me about the tagging issue of the crosswalks. I've gone back and corrected the tagging for the crosswalks with traffic signals. I appreciate you reaching out about this, thank you again and please feel free to reach out if you have anymore comments, questions, or concerns. Thank you!
Patrickov (2023-07-27 03:15:46+00:00): Thanks, I didn't notice that the node was not connected to the north side pathway
tastrax (2023-07-27 11:23:21+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap - Nice work on the buildings but its best to edit existing building outline instead of deleting and redrawing (saves the history that way). You can also use the Q key after assigning a building which will 'square' the building corners.

Have fun mapping!
AriGeo (2023-07-27 11:26:22+00:00): Thanks, This will definitely help!
AriGeo (2023-07-27 11:33:14+00:00): I decided I would start with a less populated area to start!
BCNorwich (2023-07-27 05:38:43+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

There were three house numbers 128, I've made an amendment.

Regards Bernard.
Tractor (2023-07-27 07:15:18+00:00): Hei! Dalene i Oslo ligger allerede i Openstreetmap (lagt inn som en linje som følger dalbunnen). natural=valley vises ikke på det vanlige kartet, men vises på en del andre kart som bruker data fra OSM, f.eks. dette: https://en.mapy.cz/zakladni?x=10.8537023&y=59.8669256&z=12
kims_p (2023-07-27 07:28:29+00:00): Takk for tips! Jeg la tilfeldigvis merke til det nettopp. Jeg bruker OsmAnd. Jeg ser at dalene i blant er synlige i dette kartet og iblant ikke. Noe tips til hvordan man kan få disse dalene synlige eller er det lite å gjøre med?
Tractor (2023-07-27 08:15:15+00:00): Nei, dessverre, det vet jeg ikke. Jeg bruker ikke OsmAnd selv. Du kan forsøke å spørre på forumet eller i IRC-kanalen. På IRC er terskelen terskelen for å spørre lav og man får ofte svar nesten med en gang.
AntMadeira (2023-07-27 10:28:31+00:00): Olá, hf_santos.
Sê bem-vindo ao OpenStreetMap.

Vi que neste conjunto de edições alteraste a posição de um vértice geodésico, que está na torre de uma igreja de Santa Catarina da Serra. Os vértices geodésicos nunca devem ser mudados de posição, pois as suas coordenadas são oficiais, tiradas pelo Exército e servem de referência para ajustar a imagem aérea, que tem sempre algum desfasamento.
Qualquer dúvida, estou ao dispor.
Convido-te também a participar no canal Telegram da comunidade OSM Portugal:
https://t.me/OSMPortugal

Cumprimentos e bons mapeamentos,
António Madeira.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139060831
AntMadeira (2023-08-18 16:53:55+00:00): Informo que este changeset foi revertido por falta de uma resposta.
5m4u9 (2023-07-27 09:22:38+00:00): Hi, "living_street" around Plaza San Lorenzo is wrong, I use these streets driving a bicycle and sometimes on foot, and cars don't respect the supposed priority. 

In general in Cochabamba (and maybe in Bolivia) there are no streets with equal priority (living_street), maybe in some private condominiums. I only found a few streets with equal priority, but they are pedestrian sidewalks that neighbors use to enter their homes (Parque Carlos de la Torre).
alix_geovelo (2023-10-19 08:49:28+00:00): Bonjour
On me signale sur cette note https://amenagements-cyclables.fr/fr/contributions/47689 que le pont n'est pas autorisé aux vélos, et que c'est un site propre pour le tramway. Je vois que vous avre récemment mofié, peut-être connaissez vous la zone ? 
Merci
Alexb60 (2023-10-19 11:36:55+00:00): Bonjour,

Ce pont est bien celui du tramway, toutefois je n'ai vu aucun panneau indiquant une éventuelle interdiction d'accès aux piétons et cyclistes c'est pour cela que je l'ai cartographié comme cela. Vous pouvez toujours le modifier si vous trouvez que cela ne convient pas vous pouvez toujours le modifier.
Bonne journée
alix_geovelo (2023-10-19 12:05:28+00:00): Bonjour
Merci pour votre retour
Je vais me permettre de le passer en bicycle yes et non designated suite à la remarque sur la contribution, et je laisserai la note ouverte pour une vérification potentielle d'un contributeur local.
Merci
Benfaitduvélo (2023-12-05 13:04:18+00:00): Bonjour,
Le pont n'est peut être pas interdit aux piétons et cyclistes car le code de la route ne l'interdit pas. J'avais eu des contacts avec le SIMOUV (Syndicat de transport sur Valenciennes) pour qui c'était interdit mais je n'ai pas le doc. Ce qui est sur c'est que la voie verte des Gueules Noires ne passe pas par le pont du Tramway mais sur le pont routier juste à côté. Bonne journée,
SomeoneElse (2023-07-31 07:05:39+00:00): Please don't add personal note data like this.  See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability .

Openstreetmap is a map of the world as it is, not as we'd like it to be.
SomeoneElse (2023-07-31 07:06:31+00:00): Also, in what way is it "official"?
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2023-07-31 10:07:46+00:00): These are ways that are proposed to the municipalities to fix missing pedestrian and cycling accessibility and in some case also reduce the probability of accidents. We are trying to build a separate database for these, but for now, this was the best solution to transfer this information to all the municipalities and autorities in the region. Also, if you check the official OSM wiki on notes, it says that personal notes and public information notes are quite valid. That is the exact purpose of notes: adding notes for personal or public usage. The main issue when using an external database for this is that researchers and government officials cannot use routing engines to test the effect of adding these missing links, because we can't update it live after every changeset so as time goes by, the connectivity of the links are being damaged. I wish there was a better solution, turst me, but there isn't as of now.
SomeoneElse (2023-07-31 17:45:52+00:00): > Also, if you check the official OSM wiki on notes,

It says "Don't use notes for yourself in a way which is useless to others. Although you can use notes as a reminder to yourself, you are also inviting others to look at it. "

You are no more an "official" representative of OSM than any other of the 2 million or so other OSM contributors.  

If you want to build a "what if" model based on OSM as well as some other data it's pretty straightforward to do so.  I'd suggest asking how to create what you need over at the forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/ .
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2023-07-31 18:49:37+00:00): These notes are not useless and are used by many of our partners (Ministry of transportation, transit agencies and cities). We are currently trying to build a repository of osm data with enhanced data layers but it will take a while and in the meantime, we wanted to include missing links to encourage them to build the sidewalks and cycleways.  Sometimes only 10s of meters are missing.
SomeoneElse (2023-07-31 20:23:38+00:00): > These notes are not useless and are used by many of our partners (Ministry of transportation, transit agencies and cities). 

My first thought here is "Can you link to any evidence for that, or must we just take your word for it?".  Regardless of that, adding things to OSM that _literally do not exist_ is NOT what OSM is for.

Plenty of options are there for enhancing OSM's "in reality" data with other things that you'd like to be there, and the place to start with that is surely the community forum, as I linked above.  If you ask there I can certainly help point to examples that combine OSM data with "imaginary" data, and update an OSM rendering database with external data directly.

To be clear we (OSM's Data Working Group) have received a complaint that this data doesn't really belong in OSM, and as far as I can see, it doesn't.  If you don't revert it; we will - but I'm sure that lots of people across OSM (including me) would be more than happy to help you achieve your goals.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2023-08-01 11:28:44+00:00): Please be advised that people use this for routing using OSRM to test for better accessibility. We are building a better solution, but it will take time. I hope we can keep them in the short term until we find a better way to host these informations. I've seen notes like this and even a lot of more personal one that doesn't add any useful information that were kept and didn't bother people. I don't see why ours are creating problems, since they are not rendered on tiles anyway. however, if you decide to delete them all, I will acept your decision without any complaint. However, some researchers and official will have their scripts fail.
SomeoneElse (2023-08-01 13:27:37+00:00): You still haven't answered who actually uses this "data" and how they use it.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2023-08-01 13:33:50+00:00): Researchers + cities and transit agencies employees. I am a researcher myself. We use the missing pedestrian and cycling paths to simulate routing for better accessibility using OSRM. We convert these ways to footways and cycleways so the routing engine can use them and then we can compare with existing network and send propositions to cities so they can choose which link should be built in priority. This has real effect on the ground and will even more in the future.
SomeoneElse (2023-08-05 11:42:18+00:00): The way data with a "note:chaire_mobilite" tag on it as of 12:00 UTC today can be found at https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1ywN .  That list won't ever go away, and you can amend that query however you like (for example, https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1ywP is similar for nodes).

I'll remove the data that says e.g. only "it'd be nice if there was a cycleway here".  OpenStreetMap servers are not for that; I suggested above that you might want to ask how to create what you need over at the forum https://community.openstreetmap.org , but you have not done that yet.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2023-08-05 11:46:52+00:00): No problem! I already downloaded the historical data for this tag for backup. Please refer to the revert changeset here if possible. Thanks!
SomeoneElse (2023-08-05 13:26:28+00:00): Done, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139476169 through https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/139479407 .
PaoloLombardi (2024-02-09 18:17:21+00:00): Anche qui cancellati i ref (es. refSP211) ma solo su porzioni di highways.
E' possibile sapere come mai?
Grazie.
toponomastica_comune_arenzano (2024-02-12 07:29:08+00:00): Josm segna come warning e propone correzione automatica la duplicazione della ref se è già presente nella relazione, ecco il motivo della correzione.
Se tale soluzione non và bene bisognerebbe segnalarlo agli sviluppatori di Josm.

Ciao e buon lavoro
trial (2026-03-07 21:48:55+00:00): Das Haus ist 1192 m hoch? ele=?
canfe (2023-11-17 07:43:22+00:00): Non mi pare che sia tutta 	heath anche solo dal fatto che qualsiasi foto aerea si vedono boschi all'interno.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139061760
Fedurli (2024-01-03 01:14:49+00:00): La riserva nasce proprio per la particolare caratteristica di essere "heath", caratteristica presente in poche aree del nord Italia. Quelli che vedi come boschi sono arbusti e la differenza è evidente anche dalle foto aree dove inizia la mappatura "verde"
canfe (2024-01-03 07:11:27+00:00): E allora non è heat. E' scrub se son arbusti.
Fedurli (2024-01-04 00:58:22+00:00): è definita "brughiera" e io l'ho mappata come tale. Se è stato tradotto erroneamente in origine il termine "heath" non ne ho idea. Ma la brughiera si differenzia dagli arbusti.
canfe (2024-01-04 06:05:12+00:00): Bravo, anche qui ti contraddici. Se dichiari che ci sono arbusti non è brughiera.
Fedurli (2024-01-04 16:34:39+00:00): Dovresti prima conoscere cos'è una brughiera, poi commentare.

Uno è un termine generico (arbusti), uno è un termine specifico e particolare. I pini possono essere sia classificati come alberi che come aghifoglie che come sempreverdi, ciò non significa che non siano una cosa o l'altra. Da Gdizionario: "Terreno pianeggiante spesso argilloso e sabbioso e povero di humus, dove attecchiscono solo arbusti come brughi, ginestre, ecc." e siccome OSM prevede la categoria specifica "brughiera" ho messo quella.
canfe (2024-01-04 17:57:46+00:00): E anche qui la stessa tattica: mischi le carte. Non attacca: non devi usare un dizionario, per quanto illustre, ma ciò che la comunità OSM ha cristallizato sulla wiki. E sulla wiki c'è scritto: "low-growing woody vegetation"
Low vuol dire bassa, meno degli arbusti.
Fedurli (2024-01-04 19:48:21+00:00): Direi che qui lo spiega proprio la wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:natural
canfe (2024-01-05 06:14:34+00:00): Ma io non ti ho contestato il natural, ti ho contestato il heat.
Se leggi in inglese (che è quella che fa riferimento) è spiegato un po' diverso anche il natural.
Ma cliccando su heat poi spiega il significato. Bisogna sempre approfondire.
Segnarla tutta brughiera quando all'interno dell'area mappata ci sono scrub e boschi non va.
Fedurli (2024-01-05 06:24:17+00:00): Leggi la tabella https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:natural di quando va usato "scrub" e quando va usato "heath"; ti renderai conto che è il tag corretto: alberi quasi nessuno. D'altra parte la riserva nasce proprio dalla peculiarità di essere brughiera.
canfe (2024-01-05 07:35:04+00:00): Ho appena scritto che non contesto il natural ma il suo valore di heat
Fedurli (2024-01-05 20:26:39+00:00): E io ti sto dicendo che secondo le linee guida nella Wiki sopra, heath è il tag corretto; heath=brughiera
canfe (2024-01-06 05:49:23+00:00): Ed è esattamente quel che dico io, MA fin dal primo post ti sto dicendo che non è TUTTA brughiera e che mappata tutta brughiera è un errore dato che hai ammesso che ci sono zone di arbusti e altri di bosco.
Altrimenti cita le fonti che dicono che è tutta brughiera.
Fedurli (2024-01-07 00:54:22+00:00): Si ho capito la questione, ma gli arbusti sono parte della brughiera! Sarebbe errato mapparli come arbusti generici, perché non è presente la macchia mediterranea ma arbusti/cespugli costitutivi della brughiera!
Famlam (2023-07-30 15:13:10+00:00): Ben je toevallig de highway=* tag vergeten op weg 1192526570? :)
A67-A67 (2023-07-30 18:50:14+00:00): Bedankt. Ik heb de tag nu toegevoegd.

Gelukkig was het geen weg die belangrijk was door de routering.
mk2k22 (2026-06-20 18:10:46+00:00): Hi, 
do you have any evidence that this track is private for all?? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1192528490
MxxCon (2023-07-27 04:31:23+00:00): Hello.
For this basketball court you added hoops=1, but satellite imagery shows there are 2 hoops, one on each side of the court.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139062037
PatrickStar1 (2023-07-27 18:03:09+00:00): Hello, 
I added hoops=1 because when I visited the basketball court there was only 1 hoop. The other side of the court has a metal pole where the hoop should be, but it isn't there.
MxxCon (2023-07-27 18:08:33+00:00): Ah, thanks for clarifying. 👍🙂
dónal (2023-08-06 10:46:47+00:00): Thank you for adding bicycle infrastructure!
trigpoint (2024-01-29 15:34:37+00:00): This seems kind of unlikely, what is the source of these edits?
adrianojbr (2023-07-27 01:46:34+00:00): Olá, fernandosouzabnu!

Eu não sei se você já sabe, mas se deve evitar o alinhamento de elementos exclusivamente com base em imagens de satélite. Há distorções devido as fotos serem em 2D representando um mundo 3D.

Não encontrei problemas nessas alterações, mas fica o alerta.

Mais informações em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Align_aerial_imagery_before_tracing.

Ainda, é possível adicionar os traços Strava com mais qualidade para avaliar qual imagem mais bem posicionada ou corrigir o posicionamento da imagem, conforme https://erickdeoliveiraleal.medium.com/tutorial-strava-openstreetmap-josm-or-id-2e2003f4aea3

Cabe lembrar que é o registro principalmente de ciclistas e pedestres, então tem que ter atenção ao mapear as vias por essa camada. Mas, sem dúvidas, são ótimos para conferir o alinhamento das imagens de satélite.

Abraço!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139062408