piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
flohoff (2024-07-27 12:37:07+00:00): Moin,
es geht mir um was anderes. OSM hat eine strikte Regel das wir nur das und exakt das Mappen was wirklich vor Ort durch jedermann verifizierbar ist (Mit wenigen ausnahmen). 

Deshalb ist der Wortlaut der Schilder - Der exakte Wortlaut - extrem wichtig. 

Wissen alleine mappen wir nicht. Denn dieses Wissen ist durch niemanden verifizierbar. 

D.h. wenn da ein Schild steht (oder 2) dann sollte der Exakte Wortlaut sich in OSM wiederfinden. Also "Betreten verboten" oder "Privatweg" oder "Durchfahrt verboten".

Und Privatweg oder nur weil das keine öffentliche Straße ist wird halt nicht in access tags ausgedrückt.

Privatweg ist nur ein Ausdruck das der Straßenunterhaltungspflichtige jemand anders ist.

Und access=no/private sagt das auch der Postbote nicht rein darf/kann. D.h. dann sollte der Briefkasten auch ausserhalb dieses Bereiches sein.

Und dein "Privatgrundstück - Durchfahrt verboten" ist _nicht_ access=private.

Fahren kann man nur mit Fahrzeugen, und DURCH ist quasi "Anlieger frei".

D.h. das sollte als "vehicle=destination" auf der Straße sein (Und am besten den Wortlaut als note:access=)

Flo
Dawid2849 (2024-07-25 11:33:26+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1297331729/history

Czy na pewno ta droga nie istnieje? jest ona widoczna na BDOT500
Yunkers (2024-07-25 12:15:55+00:00): Nie istnieje. Jechałem tamtędy ostatnio i jej nie było, ale są też aktualne zdjęcia na mapillary
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?menu=false&lat=49.95449199999999&lng=19.89000199999998&z=18.984721778980962&pKey=1737381143737079&focus=photo
Dawid2849 (2024-07-25 16:09:32+00:00): https://www.mapillary.com/app/?menu=false&lat=49.95548500000001&lng=19.889635999999996&z=18.984721778980962&pKey=1223301905511398&focus=photo&x=0.32351951961181835&y=0.6323789694672666&zoom=0.6047805169757214

Wygląda na to, że obszar jest, tylko zagrodzony barierkami, podobnie do przejazdów awaryjnych na drogach A/S. Ja bym to zmapował w podobny sposób jak na tych drogach.
Dawid2849 (2024-07-25 16:11:27+00:00): I dzięki za informację o Mapillary. Nie przyszło by mi do głowy, że tak szybko pojawią się tam jakieś zdjęcia :P
Yunkers (2024-07-25 17:00:18+00:00): Moim zdaniem to nie są te "zdejmowalne" barierki. To jest zagrodzone na stałe, a asfalt jest, bo był wcześniej, a drogi nie przebudowywali. 

Tak, zdjęcia są nowe, może się skuszę "przejechać" na mapie i sprawdzić czy oznakowanie jest aktualnem. Z moim tempem, ok. 3 lata czekania xD
Dawid2849 (2024-07-25 21:14:26+00:00): Faktycznie. Na zdjęciach z budowy widać, że ten fragment nie był ruszany, więc można co najwyżej abandoned:highway=tertiary zostawić. 

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?menu=false&lat=49.95567715216714&lng=19.889380771878905&z=18.56392192351325&pKey=3797378633809001&focus=photo
Są też zdjęcia z drugiej strony, jakbyś chciał coś mapować. Też o tym myślałem, ale wtedy nie było jeszcze tych zdjęć i mapowałem na podstawie BDOT500 (na którym ten kawałek asfaltu istnieje). Lecz chyba nie będę Ci zabierać tej przyjemności :P
Yunkers (2024-07-26 05:46:28+00:00): Możesz dodać jeśli cię to razi, ja nie ukrywam że jak czegoś nie ma to po prostu kasuję.

Nawet nie zauważyłem że są też zdjęcia drugiej strony. No i teraz będę musiał to zmapować :(
Baloo Uriza (2024-08-01 16:22:10+00:00): Did this building get chopped in three?  I'm not entirely clear why the remap?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154320654
eggie (2024-07-23 19:37:06+00:00): Lijkt me perfect zo. Dat paard heb ik nog even verwijderd. horse=no (unknown is dus bekend) is default op fietspaden en trottoirs. 
De oprit vanaf de Westduinweg zou ook verdwijnen. 
Leuk dat stukje Scheveningen. Hier ligt m'n jeugd. Radio Holland zat hier vroeger. 
Groet
eggie
Fizzie-DWG (2024-08-24 02:21:27+00:00): Reverted by DWG for poor mapping & not following OEG rules

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155677455
Adam Dunn (2024-07-25 05:03:58+00:00): Did you just update this because of DirtyTesla ;)
blacx (2024-07-25 09:07:22+00:00): Yep :)
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-05-15 10:12:02+00:00): Hi FanMentzena, 
can you please check relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17868724 it it is valid and fix the boundaries or to remove it if it is not a valid admin_level=8 relation
Soder_ (2024-07-23 19:29:52+00:00): Är detta ok när man har några betalda parkeringsplatser för besökande?
eggie (2024-07-23 19:39:03+00:00): Lijkt me okay
literan (2024-07-24 18:46:10+00:00): не надо вносить фальшивые объекты
eggie (2024-07-23 20:32:11+00:00): Dag Dirco   
Ik heb even naar je edits gekeken. Al eerder een account, maar nooit de welkomstmail ontvangen zie ik. Ik zal je deze per PB doen toekomen. 
Je hebt alle landuse uit het park verwijderd. Dat triggert wel mappers die valideren. 
'k Neem aan dat je het spoedig afmaakt. De foutmelding hierboven geeft aan dat wegen elkaar overlappen of kruisen.. en dat ergens een weg niet vastzit aan een andere weg.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-07-23 20:35:24+00:00): De foutmelding over losse wegdelen en de overlappende wegen heb ik opgelost. 
Mapse
eggie
HellMap (2024-07-25 11:18:48+00:00): Sveiki,

Atsevišķi zīmētas velojoslas ir pareizi uz galvenā ceļa norādīt kā `cycleway=separate` (un `cycleway:left/right` variantus, ja atšķiras virzienos). Lūdzu nedzēst šo vērtību, kā arī pēc iespējas labot esošās nepareizās nevis dzēst pilnībā. Piemēram, šeit bija pareizi https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4370011 .

`bicycle=use_sidepath` attiecas tikai, ja šajā posmā ir ar zīmi apzīmēts veloceļš, pa kuru ir obligāti jāpārvietojas. Latvijā tas attiecas tikai uz veloceļu (413.) un sadalītu kopīgu veloceļu (421.) Tas neattiecas uz velojoslām vai nesadalītu kopīgu veloceļu (417.). Šeit https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1290154786 nekur nav jānorāda `use_sidepath`.

Pieminēšu, ka `bicycle:forward` uz https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/266233218 bija norādīts nepareizajā virzienā.

Paldies
Syl (2024-07-23 22:57:16+00:00): Bonsoir, tu fais également partie de cette guerre d'édition et tu continues de l'alimenter avec cette modification, merci d'arrêter de faire des modifications de ce type en attendant d'avoir une réponse du DWG.
(Pour info j'ai déjà demandé à la personne ayant fait les modifications précédentes d'arrêter).
SomeoneElse (2024-07-24 19:12:14+00:00): Hello gileri,
Given the recent discussions about naming practices in both the French and the International forums in which you were in a minority of one, do you have any evidence (such as a photograph) of the name change that you made here?
Unfortunately the nearest Mapillary photo https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=4591703150843883&focus=photo&lat=45.703077642222&lng=4.8209509344444&z=18.40251517474563&x=0.2074063598698993&y=0.4774464840223054&zoom=3 is not great.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2024-07-24 19:12:28+00:00): Bonjour Gileri,
Compte tenu des discussions récentes sur les pratiques de dénomination dans les forums français et internationaux dans lesquelles vous étiez en minorité d'un, avez-vous des preuves (comme une photographie) du changement de nom que vous avez effectué ici ?
Malheureusement, la photo Mapillary la plus proche https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=4591703150843883&focus=photo&lat=45.703077642222&lng=4.8209509344444&z=18.40251517474563&x=0.2074063598698993& y=0,4774464840223054&zoom=3 n'est pas génial.
Cordialement,
Andy Townsend, au nom du groupe de travail sur les données d'OSM.
gileri (2024-07-24 19:24:00+00:00): Hello Andy, please consult the recent discussion you said your read, you have all the elements you need to see what the real-world situation there is, and that the name is present. Multiple people that are against mapping the name have corroborated the claim.

I've never misrepresented the truth, real-world data or sources, so please do not suggest I would do so without proof. I took a photo there, but it is unneeded here.

If there is something in the thread I can help you with please reach out here for example.
trial (2024-07-24 19:24:49+00:00): Andy, a better photo is https://cutjhqvjma.cloudimg.io/https%3A%2F%2Ftelemaque.orpi.coop%2Fagence%2F857%2F20231204193424%2Fphoto?p=agency-home&ci_url_encoded=1&ci_sign=a93972573a6c344f7b7e8d58bc09857d5a14cf4f (present on orpi website given on this node), if on the ground it would have been different, Éric would have given a better picture of the place I guess.
SomeoneElse (2024-07-24 19:49:28+00:00): That photo certainly does not back up the long name used in this changeset.
gileri (2024-07-24 19:52:46+00:00): Here is a clearer picture I took a few days ago, perhaps it'll be easier : https://imgur.com/a/2NsHgZN
gileri (2024-07-24 19:57:17+00:00): That corroborates the name chosen by the shop, visible in the website and other maps.

I don't know if you are familiar with them, but Orpi is a national brand of real estate, it's not their name.

As explained in the thread, sometimes shop, for stylistic reasons, may shorten a bit the name. It doesn't mean that the name is necessarily different. There is no conflict on the name, as the owner both chose the name in the storefront, and everywhere.
SomeoneElse (2024-07-24 20:03:18+00:00): As noted at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/restructure-wiki-page-key-name/110631/148 the "name on a website" is not guaranteed to be the name. It might just be some descriptive information about location.
SomeoneElse (2024-07-24 20:05:43+00:00): More seriously, OSM is a shared project.  If "everyone else" thinks one thing and you think another, then it does not matter if you think you are right or wrong, you have to tag it as the majority of mappers would. By all means find some other obscure tag to store "descriptive name as found on the website".
gileri (2024-07-24 20:16:25+00:00): That was already answered in the thread in the last messages.

>you have to tag it as the majority of mappers would

Can you point me to rules that prescribe that ?

To the contrary, OSM is a healthy community of diverse mappers. Diversity, in opinion here, is paramount to the project, to allow it to adapt to local specificity and grow. And that is reflected on multiple OSM wiki pages. 

Sure, some contributions actively harm the project and usability, but you'll agree that's absolutely not the case, it's a minor disagreement.

Having the name chosen and displayed everywhere by the shop, and used by local people on the ground is the best one to use.

The "use the biggest name [not brand]" suggestion is targeted where there is "real" disagreement on the name (local vs government choices, multilingualism etc.).

There is no downside to using the name chosen by the shop. The renderer and consumers can make any choice they want.

Here the commenters prefer rendering the brand instead of the name on the map; they can do so easily. I'm available if they need help configuring their map style for that.
trial (2024-07-24 20:17:34+00:00): Thanks for the picture.
So correctly tagged before you changes:
alt_name=Millet Immobilier
inscription=Orpi
old_name=Millet Immobilier

And not:
name=Orpi Millet Immobilier Pierre-Bénite
gileri (2024-07-24 20:21:21+00:00): No, the v21 version is corretly tagged as explained above.

Why would "Millier Immobilier" be an old name ? It is used everywhere in the shop.

Also, the inscription is incorrect, for reasons explained already.

alt_name can be okay, I have no opinion on it.
SomeoneElse (2024-07-29 15:40:16+00:00): It certainly seems that "Orpi Millet Immobilier Pierre-Bénite" is NOT considered by most people as the best name to use here.
I've noted that no-one has changed it back; are people waiting for me to do that?
gileri (2024-07-29 15:47:31+00:00): I'm not sure the "most people" you refer to here are relevant. Multiple of those demonstrated that they did not go on the ground, and ignore both on-the-ground reality, and wiki best practices.
SomeoneElse (2024-07-29 16:06:00+00:00): @gileri In this example that argument is clearly rubbish.  Here we have numerous photos including one from you that does not support your choice of name!
gileri (2024-07-29 16:15:50+00:00): I already explained why would using the name from the website, which is only slightly different from the ground, makes most sense.

But sure, let's use what is printed on the storefront, it's not really important here.
Syl (2024-07-30 11:53:10+00:00): @SomeoneElse Hello, I'm waiting for the conflict to end before editing again here.

@gileri Bonjour, après une pause je reviens vers cette discussion. Mais avant de me mettre à rédiger plus, je voulais te demander si tu es partant pour relancer une dernière fois cette discussion (avec moins de tension de chaque côté) avec pour objectif de trouver une résolution à ce conflit ?

Sinon j'ai l'impression qu'on va une nouvelle fois rester sur un statu quo et tout recommencera la prochaine fois qu'une personne ne comprendra pas la raison de tes modifications.

Bonne journée. syl
gileri (2024-07-30 16:35:09+00:00): Bonjour Syl, Je ne comprends pas bien ta requête :

Ma position est claire, alignée avec les bonnes pratiques OSM, le wiki, le terrain, les usagers. Les arguments ont été présentés sous plusieurs angles, et plusieurs langues.

Malheureusement il a été montré que la plupart des intervenants soit ne lisaient pas, soit choisissait sciemment d'ignorer les contre-arguments dans la discussion, soit répondaient pas.

Je ne vois pas comment une nouvelle discussion améliorerait les choses de ce côté-là, mais je n'ai aucun moyen d'action de ce côté-là.

Je me tiens à la disposition de quiconque de suffisamment bonne foi pour répondre à des points qui n'ont pas été déjà répondus, ou pour apporter de nouvelles informations.

En attendant, tant que les arguments présentés ne sont pas contrés, le status-quo accepté globalement (cartographier les noms, pas les marques seules comme nom) est à conserver.
Syl (2024-07-30 20:30:31+00:00): Je voulais remettre à plat la discussion car mon ressenti est identique au tien mais te concernant (non respect du terrain et des principes, non réponse aux questions, suspicion de mauvaise foi...). Cela ne donne pas une situation saine et je souhaitais sortir de cette impasse.
Je te propose que je vienne à Lyon pour discuter, je me dis que changer de cadre aiderais peut-être à améliorer la situation.
(P.S. : je ne propose pas de se rendre dans un commerce, comme dis pas une autre personne sur le forum ça ne réglerait pas le problème de fond : https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/conflit-sur-le-nommage-de-magasin-dune-chaine/23821/33).
gileri (2024-07-30 20:49:46+00:00): En refusant d'aller sur le terrain, de s'ouvrir aux usagers, ignorant mes précédentes réponses (tu demandes de "tout remettre à plat"), ce n'est pas du tout respectueux. Ça ne présage rien de bon pour la "discussion".

Merci pour la proposition, mais je pense que la seule issue que t'accepterait, c'est que j'arrête de cartographier le terrain, que j'aille à l'encontre des usages d'OSM, mais surtout contre les usagers OSM (déjà expliqué, pas envie de le refaire).

Tout comme tu n'accepterais pas un tel engagement, je ne pourrais pas l'accepter.

Merci quand même pour l'invitation, et bonne soirée.
gileri (2024-07-30 20:51:13+00:00): Peut-être une prochaine fois pour des échanges plus constructifs ;)
Syl (2024-07-30 21:13:15+00:00): Ma demande de remise à plat concernait le cadre que tu donne à la discussion (accusation de mauvaise foi, de manque d'honnêteté, d'avoir du temps à perdre, de ne pas lire, de ne pas penser aux usagers et maintenant de présumer de mes intentions). Voilà le cœur de ma requête et quelque chose sur lequel tu as une capacité d'action.
Mais si effectivement ce n'est pas possible nous échangerons la prochaine fois que je modifierais quelque chose à Lyon en me basant sur le terrain, je l'espère de façon plus constructive.
Bonne soirée.
gileri (2024-07-30 21:49:12+00:00): Ma proposition pour aller sur le lieu concerné et échanger avec les usagers est toujours ouverte, mais si c'est pas possible pour toi aucun problème.
Syl (2024-08-03 12:56:18+00:00): Je pensais qu'on avait déjà répondu sur le fait qu'aller demander sur place ne réglerais pas le désaccord de fond. Si j'acceptais ta proposition cela reviendrais à dire que je suis d'accord avec toi et que ce ne serait qu'un problème de connaissance du terrain, ce qui n'est pas le cas.
Baloo Uriza (2024-08-01 16:21:27+00:00): Looks like the parking is only at the east end of the church, not surrounding it.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154323726
Athalis (2024-07-24 17:23:59+00:00): Hi Cintia, I could not find the task you mapped in the HOT tasking manager, so I'm commenting here. I notice that you mapped the buildings too large. Please try to mark the outline of the building's footprint, but not the area surrounding a building. Also, just tag it as `building=yes` and do not tag it as `name=Building` - the "name" tag should be used only when a building is known by that name, like "Burj Khalifa".
osmviborg (2024-07-24 06:07:31+00:00): amenity=community_centre
thebrad1111 (2024-07-23 20:59:33+00:00): Also used streetside imagery to double check solar panels.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-23 21:10:30+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/node/2451695556

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Frans S (2024-08-02 11:00:13+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------

A: Often Inaccurate mapping.

E: Buildings not squared.



Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154324302
Frans S (2024-08-02 11:03:58+00:00): Please tag the highways in accordance with this wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India/Tags/Highway#Local_Roads
Best regards
eggie (2024-07-24 05:53:49+00:00): Dag Prefix

Kijk nog even naar je tagging 
Lijkt me niet consistent.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=154324409

brand=Bakker van Maanen? cuisine?

MVG
eggie
gszkr (2024-09-14 16:03:09+00:00): Rondo Baszty Kaszanej to już w ogóle herezja! Dzielenie skrzyżowania na skrzyżowania i drogi? Gdzie sens? Gdzie logika? Jak już na upartego robić nazwany węzeł, to jest nim całe rondo, a nie kawałeczki odrębnymi węzłami, a kawałeczki "obszarami drogi".
Scout Jens (2024-08-12 11:56:03+00:00): Super, dass Du mithilfst. Bitte schaue Dir noch einmal die Doku zu straßenseitigem Parken an. Das hat nicht gepasst. Viele Grüße
mueschel (2024-07-24 16:37:39+00:00): Hi,
could you check the city_limit signs like this one? They got a strange tag:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/47625044
BCNorwich (2024-07-25 06:19:51+00:00): Hi, You've got two number 14 Barleyfields, could you please check the house numbering?

Regards Bernard.
maw444 (2024-07-25 21:53:02+00:00): Thanks for pointing that out. I have looked and gone back to the site and corrected the numbering
rskedgell (2024-07-24 04:38:35+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You don't need to add house numbers using the name tag, because they are not names and they are already tagged (and displayed on the map) with addr:housenumber

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name#When_not_to_use
Udarian (2024-07-25 18:59:35+00:00): crossing:signals=no is implied on crossing=uncontrolled and thus shouldn’t be added, please stop adding these. The fact that it is uncontrolled means that it doesn’t have crossing signals.
VLD302 (2024-07-25 20:19:52+00:00): Hi Udarian,

Thanks for the feedback! I apologize for the confusion. You're right that crossing:signals=no is implied on crossing=uncontrolled and shouldn't be added explicitly. I'll make sure to keep this in mind and avoid adding unnecessary tags in the future. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Regards,
Reza
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-23 23:10:37+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Dąbrowskiej":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8085959518

"Żeligowskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8410074463

"Daszyna":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9436383332

"Krasickiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9436799380

"Łukasiewicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9474116330

"Piłsudskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9476423707

"Reymonta":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10557796388

"Czarnieckiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11096928456

"Osiedle Słoneczne":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11406979602

"Marii Skłodowskiej Curie":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11494815791

"Mickiewicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11608780734

"Aleja Wojska Polskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11755467856

"Osiedle Zachód":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11766547003

"Żwirki i Wigury":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12070665256

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
maro21 (2024-07-31 14:03:42+00:00): 1. Paczkomaty nie mają adresów.
2. Mógłbyś podać link do strony dotyczącej tego importu paczkomatów?
IreuN (2024-07-31 14:07:03+00:00): 1. Tak wiem
2. ATP
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-07-30 00:08:52+00:00): What happened here? All roads were changed to motorways.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154327164
marczoutendijk (2024-07-30 08:48:33+00:00): There have been many reverts here, see this:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/please-help-revert/116475
But additional reverts took take place since that discussion as there was a huge vandalism attack in that area.
If you check the history you see that not all roads are motorways, like here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132986296/history
Emilius123 (2024-08-04 14:30:25+00:00): Thank you!
gurglypipe (2024-07-24 07:25:25+00:00): Please can you split changesets like this up. One changeset which covers over half of the UK is hard for others to review. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Ryan Underwood _01 (2024-07-24 07:44:35+00:00): Hi Gurglypipe, I have no control over the changeset size. They are generated by the pic4review website and roll multiple changesets into one, much like StreetComplete.
gurglypipe (2024-07-24 08:09:46+00:00): Whoever authored that mission on pic4review needs to make it more geographically specific. https://pic4review.pavie.info/#/mission/2724 is currently scoped to the entirety of the UK. aiui pic4review missions should really be scoped to a single city.
gurglypipe (2024-07-24 08:12:19+00:00): I’ve messaged RaccoonFederation (the mission author) about it
Ryan Underwood _01 (2024-07-24 09:08:13+00:00): Gotcha, thanks for the head-up.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-24 00:00:30+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9471088100

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Mattu73 (2024-07-24 07:39:13+00:00): Ma pan rację, teoretycznie, ale proszę też wziąć pod uwagę, że z systemów nawigacji bazujących na open korzystają służby ratunkowe itp.
JacekMarek (2024-07-24 07:44:37+00:00): Nie, służby ratunkowe mają swoje systemy do nawigacji niezależne od OSM i specjalną warstwę GIS z drogami pożarowymi od Parku, jest to sprawdzona informacja. Proszę cofnąć te zmiany.