piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2023-02-24 11:46:01+00:00): Voorlopig knooppuntwandelroutes hersteld. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-02-24 11:48:13+00:00): Zie https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=16.0/51.2452/4.0341
Wandelroute omgeleid over nioeuwe pad. 
Laat svp weten hoe de routes echt lopen.

MVG
eggie
bbosmap (2023-02-24 12:30:59+00:00): Dag eggie,

Ik had al verschillende keren opgemerkt tijdens het wandelen dat het pad aan knooppunt 89 helemaal niet bestaat. Misschien is het er ooit geweest, maar nu is het zeker niet toegankelijk. Het loopt zelfs gedeeltelijk door een vijver. Ik had tot jouw bericht ook niet door dat het tot een wandelroute behoort. Ik stel voor dat we het bij het oude behouden, ik kan eventueel volgende week nog eens ter plekke kijken waar het knooppunt zich exact bevindt. Bedankt voor de reactie, en ik hou je op de hoogte.

Groeten,
bbosmap
eggie (2023-02-24 13:11:08+00:00): Oke .. laat maar weten...
Met editor iD kun je overigens geen routerelaties aanpassen. Met josm wel.
Nu alleen even de onderbreking opgeheven... anders krijg je foutmeldingen.
De route kan natuurlijk ook over dat andere pad lopen. Laat het voorlopig even zoals het nu is aangepast.

Bedankt voor je reactie..
eggie
kortgodt (2023-02-24 12:23:55+00:00): https://jyllands-posten.dk/jplokal/jphorsens/ECE15151159/se-billederne-nu-er-havnebadet-vaek/
kortgodt (2023-02-24 12:36:47+00:00): Havnebadet har aldrig været taget i brug og har dermed været oprettet forkert til at starte med.
osmviborg (2023-02-24 12:53:46+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:removed:*
kortgodt (2023-02-24 13:32:13+00:00): Hvad med "under konstruktion" når det tidligere var tilfældet?
kortgodt (2023-02-24 16:23:37+00:00): Selv om konstruktionen aldrig er blevet færdig skulle det nok også have været tagget som “flydende” om den var blevet færdigbygget.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-05 21:19:51+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10690475024/history has bicycle:repair = yes that was added in this edit
service:bicycle:repair is much more common way of expressing the same info as one from bicycle:repair key. Would you be fine with changing this tagging to a more popular version?

I think that in this case difference in key names are minimal, and benefit from easier use of data would be greater

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle:repair and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service:bicycle:repair
Voirie_3M (2025-12-09 07:38:46+00:00): Hi, OK it's done.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-09 08:38:57+00:00): thanks!
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-01-22 07:32:04+00:00): "activity agreed with OSM board members" which OSM board members you mean?

OpenStreetMap Foundation board or some other entity?

When this agreement took place?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-01-22 07:32:54+00:00): Also, what you mean by horse=nou at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10690497932 ?
JasmineRanasinghe (2024-01-22 15:19:06+00:00): Hi Mateusz, thank you for reaching out and flagging the spelling error. 'Horse=nou' should have been 'horse=no'. This has now been amended in OSM. 

Additionally, we recognise that the changeset comment could be clearer, and this has been reflected in the lessons learned of the National Trust's Paths Project. 

To clarify, we have been in regular contact with the OSM UK board from the outset of this project and presented at the AGM in London in 2019 in the hopes of gaining feedback on our paths mapping initiative. The OSM UK board have provided invaluable advice in niche mapping scenarios and reviewed our mapping schema. Additionally, we have had support from the OSM Data Working Group. However, no formal 'agreement' has taken place. Rather, the changeset comment referred only to their support for the project. 

I hope this helps to clarify the original changeset comment. 

Thanks.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-09-21 09:50:55+00:00): A jest tam legalny wjazd?
BCNorwich (2023-02-28 08:03:21+00:00): Hi, It's usual practice to add a lately tag to bridges so that the render and route properly, please see:- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge#Layers
I've added layer=1 to this bridge.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2023-03-01 07:21:34+00:00): Sorry for the spelling mistakes.
rskedgell (2023-12-29 07:58:34+00:00): Correct use of highway=living_street is quite rare in the UK and in urban areas is designated (and signed with TSRGD diagram 881) as a Home Zone.

This is not the case here, as it is explicitly signed as a pedestrian zone (TSRGD diagram 618.3, pre-2016) in the Bing street side imagery.

The argument in your early changeset #132874014 the a pedestrian way cannot have separate sidewalks seems a little flawed.

Adding access=yes and motor_vehicle=designated to an explicitly signed pedestrian zone, will have caused routing errors.

Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145649086
rskedgell (2023-12-29 07:59:17+00:00): Incorrectly. Reverted.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-09-21 09:50:09+00:00): Jesteś pewien co do bicycle=yes wzdłuż Pigonia?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/122219673

I Kluzeka?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/180964184
silversurfer83 (2023-02-24 13:10:44+00:00): Moin :)

Kleiner Hinweis: Wenn du Objekte so fein verschiebst wie hier (also dich an Haltelininen orientierst) wäre es vielleicht nicht schlecht, wenn du das bestmögliche Bildmaterial nutzt und das ist in Hessen der Hintergrund HesseDOP20. Erhältlich in allen guten Editoren ;)

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/132964023
Taya_S (2023-02-26 06:18:34+00:00): Wouldn't it be better to use the change key:image to Key:wikimedia_commons instead of just deleting the image tag? 
Considering they image tag already used wikimedia commons?

Its also basically what the wiki page says should be used instead https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:image
ivanbranco (2023-02-26 09:12:29+00:00): Hi Thiskal, 

I'm not sure I understood your suggestion. Have you opened the links I deleted? Those images do not exist anymore on Commons.
Taya_S (2023-02-27 12:23:41+00:00): Ah my apologies then. All is well.
Warin61 (2023-02-24 23:52:34+00:00): Hi,
Error in relation  	15526451
Way: 1149122465 cross itself - duplicated nodes... see https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=150.82254&lat=-33.88005&zoom=19&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

Ill leave this alone so you can see it.
kurisubrooks (2023-02-25 02:40:10+00:00): Hi Warin, thanks for spotting that one.
Fixed in changeset 32991116.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-05-08 08:59:13+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/288062324 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/293191231 - skąd tutaj bicycle=no?
Frans S (2023-03-08 12:30:20+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator, during the validation process
I noticed that you are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.
We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.
Please map each building accurate over the rooflines.
Square each rectangular building with the Q key.
Nodes of buildings may NOT  connect to other buildings or features.
The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 
Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.




See also this documenthttps://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/132964630
NorthCrab_upload (2023-02-24 13:00:25+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/1149137743

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2023-02-24 13:00:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/417046554
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/417046781

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Ropino (2024-01-04 17:16:10+00:00): Hi,
please check/correct: 
"maxspeed=zs" ?
Thx in advance
sheldonelectric (2024-01-05 10:37:46+00:00): Well spotted! Fixed :-)
NorthCrab_upload (2023-02-24 13:10:21+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149139561
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149139562

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Patalakki (2024-08-23 11:49:42+00:00): Moro! Miksi olet vaihtanut liittymärampit takaisin luokkaan highway=tertiary ainakin kahteen eri kertaan? Yleisten periaatteiden mukaan oikein olisi merkata ne luokkaan highway=trunk, koska liittymärampit pitäisi merkitä aina ylimmän risteävän tieluokan mukaan.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link
habi (2023-02-28 13:20:38+00:00): Ciao Tursiops33
You've added `lanes=2` to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/37323359/ in this changeset and specified that there's a lane-marked cycleway.
But you've also added the cycleway as separate way (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149145824/) in changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/132967424

This does *not* make sense and I corrected it by removing the cycleway-tagging on the main road.
michael_ua (2023-06-20 15:29:36+00:00): Звідки ви взяли ці кольори?
Tomas Straupis (2023-02-27 19:26:36+00:00): Negerai, jei yra pastatas, tai reikia tada perkelti adreso žymas pastatui, nes dabar gavome daug klaidų „pastatas pastate“.
Tomas Straupis (2023-02-27 19:38:12+00:00): Matau aklai sudėtos building=yes žymos, net ten, kur pastato nėra, tai atšaukiau visą pakeitimą.
pyram (2023-02-25 12:16:26+00:00): Hi!

Hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10690724850 war wohl Hausnummer 1 und nicht "!" gemeint!?
(gefunden mit https://nominatim.org/qa/#map=19.27/48.14/10.44&layer=addr_housenumber_no_digit )

Gruß
pyram
user_12500175 (2023-02-25 12:19:24+00:00): wohl war, habs geändert.

Gruß
Danfost
emersonveenstra (2023-02-25 18:06:02+00:00): Hi,

You changed the boundaries of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/468472168/history#map=17/42.21272/-85.59250 very drastically, as can be seen in version 5-8 here: https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/468472168
Please give a source for these changes or fix them
MarcoR (2023-02-25 17:32:18+00:00): Salve!
Questa stazione di ricarica non mi sembra sia presente in questo momento. È stata programmata la sua installazione in un futuro prossimo o magari la posizione è approssimata?

Cosa si può ricaricare in questo tipo di stazioni? Ne ho vista una che aveva delle prese USB quindi presumo smartphone e dispositivi elettronici similari.

Buon mapping,
Marco.
kartler175 (2023-02-24 22:31:22+00:00): One feature - oneOSM object (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element):
cycleway  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149145825#map=17/46.98683/6.91676 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149145824#map=16/46.9850/6.9129 already exist tagged as cycleway=lane on primary highway. Please adjust.
habi (2023-02-28 13:58:44+00:00): I've stumbled over this changeset while trying to fix https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3574244

As an avid user of cycle.travel I'm quite keen on having 'correct' bicycle-tagging,  corrected the changes from Tursiops33 and improved both the alignment of the primary highway and it's bicycle-tagging in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133130031
Frans S (2023-03-08 12:26:55+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator, during the validation process
I noticed that you are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.
We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.
Please map each building accurate over the rooflines.
Square each rectangular building with the Q key.
Nodes of buildings may NOT  connect to other buildings or features.
The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 
Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve 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/132967436
MitteloberrheinischerWaldameisenschreck (2024-09-13 16:50:43+00:00): Moin
Ist die Landnutzung von
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149153860
aus dem Luftbild geraten oder mit Insiderinfos hinterfüttert?
Aus dem Luftbild heraus würde ich bei den für die Fläche teils relativ großen Gebäuden zumind. teilweise auf gewerbliche Nutzung oder so tippen ... Hintergrund ist, dass ich mir das wegen des geplanten Radschnellwegs, ursprünglich auf dieser Seite, inzwischen auf der anderen Seite via bestehender, dafür m.E. ungeeigneter Unterführung nördlich davon, genauer anschaue wollte, was so einfach gar nicht ist ...
Gruß M.
Scout Jens (2024-09-17 05:08:34+00:00): Ich bin auf der anderen Seite der Bahn mit dem Rad gefahren. Da hat man aber eine Lärmschutzwand, die die Sicht über die Bahnlinie versperrt. Ob das wirklich ein Kleingartengebiet ist? Ich habe das vermutet. 
Der Verlauf des Weges bei der Unterführung ist eingetragen, wie gesehen. Grüßle, Jens
Nakaner (2024-09-17 14:18:34+00:00): Schaut euch mal meine Mapillary-Bilder aus dem Jahr 2016 aus einer fahrenden Stadtbahn heraus an. Vielleicht erhaltet ihr dann Durchsicht durchs Dickicht. :-) https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=48.95067026999999&lng=8.388478279999958&z=11.695934622378475&pKey=296904145398806&focus=photo
woodpeck_repair (2023-03-03 00:51:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 133232206, 133232218, 133232224, 133232227, 133232225, 133232208, 133232216, 133232213, 133232177, 133232229, 133232203, 133232220, 133232198, 133232180, 133232189, 133224701, 133232215, 133232214, 133232188, 133232199, 133232207, 133232205, 133232182, 133232222, 133232186, 133232200, 133232191, 133232223, 133232209, 133232169, 133232230, 133232194, 133232197, 133232210 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed import with unclear licensing in Madagascar
eggie (2023-02-24 14:16:50+00:00): Hi porr...

Welcome to OSM..  No building hier Mandelahuisje
I merged your info with addressnode 27 on the other building Herberg Het Mandelahuisje.
Greetz,
eggie
emersonveenstra (2023-02-25 18:04:23+00:00): Hi,

You modified the boundaries of this park very drastically, as can be seen in the Changeset #6 map here: https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/468467535. Please give the source for this change or fix it please
eggie (2023-02-24 14:23:46+00:00): Dag porr


name=Hondenspeelveld zal hoogstwaarschijnlijk niet de geografische naam zijn. Dus beter verwijderen.
Ook zal het geen adres hebben. 
Weet jij toevallig waarom die paden op Verboden toegang staan access=no?
Lijkt me er lastig komen dan. 
MVG
eggie
porr (2023-02-24 14:29:01+00:00): Klopt. Zo stond het in Google Maps. Officieel heet het Hondenspeeltuin Willem I. Bron: https://www.doggydating.com/honden-los-in-hondenspeeltuin-willem-i-te-amsterdam

Daar kan ik het adres ook vandaan halen.

Tot slot qua toegang: je kan van de zuidkant komen. De noordkant is dicht omwille van werken aan de nieuwe fiets/voetgangersbrug.
eggie (2023-02-24 14:33:49+00:00): Oke.. duidelijk , maar dan dus name=Hondenspeeltuin Willem I

Dat kun je dus nog even aanpassen. 

Dat is de naam .. losloopterrein is een functie . Dan gebruiken we dus niet name=..

Het adres zou je kunnen laten staan.

Let wel op. Het is in OSM niet toegestaan om Google als bron te gebruiken of te noemen.

Veel plezier met mappen. 

eggie
Tomas Straupis (2023-02-25 05:43:53+00:00): Pakeitimai atšaukti. Pastatų tipai nurodyti neteisingai. Adresus suvedame pagal oficialią informaciją.
Andrea Musuruane (2023-02-25 14:43:16+00:00): Ciao. Sono passato di lì oggi, ma non ho visto alcuna stazione di ricarica. La situazione è la stessa che c'è su Mapillary: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=767607091363687 Puoi spiegare? Grazie, Andrea
Pradella Sistemi Srl (2023-05-30 09:08:19+00:00): Buongiorno Andrea,
grazie per le segnalazioni. Abbiamo preso in mano da poco l'attività di censimento delle nostre colonnine di ricarica. Stiamo prendendo in considerazione i vostri commenti per rispettare le linee guida.
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2023-03-01 03:32:45+00:00): Smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
foreigner037 (2023-03-02 16:33:20+00:00): Hi,

may I ask why you have removed the speed limits on some sections? Please add them back or I'll be forced to revert the changesets.
foreigner037 (2023-03-02 16:36:01+00:00): You also removed a number of tags for no reason.
foreigner037 (2023-03-02 16:43:03+00:00): I'm reverting the changesets. If you want to add more detailed speed limits, please do so without removing any existing information.
sheldonelectric (2023-03-02 21:18:00+00:00): The speed limit was wrongly tagged 140 where the sign says 120.
sheldonelectric (2023-03-02 21:21:06+00:00): And where there was a sign that the 120 speed limit is over, i removed the tags.
sheldonelectric (2023-03-02 21:27:50+00:00): On second thought, where the maxspeed=120 is over, I should have used BG:motorway
I'll do it now.
foreigner037 (2023-03-02 22:00:37+00:00): Please do not set the speedlimit as BG:motorway and return it to 140. Where it is 120, use 120. You also removed other tags, which are completely unrelated to speedlimits and should not have been removed.
sheldonelectric (2023-03-03 01:37:18+00:00): We only tag what can be verified on the ground, and since there is no 140 speed sign so we cannot put maxspeed=140

If there is no explicit maxspeed, we put the implicit maxspeed BG:maxspeed.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed#Implicit_maxspeed_values

If we wrongly put 140 and the law changes, then we must re-tag all the country. BG:motorway keeps us safe from law changes.
foreigner037 (2023-03-03 06:38:46+00:00): Don't worry about retagging, okay? The local community will continue maintaining the network like it has done. You are still purposefully ignoring my questions for the removed tags, why?
foreigner037 (2023-03-03 06:42:36+00:00): 140 can very easily be identified on the ground, i don't know why you claim otherwise.
foreigner037 (2023-03-03 06:48:25+00:00): On a second thought, ignore the last comment.
foreigner037 (2023-03-03 07:00:35+00:00): On the page for the tag it says that this value is only optional and not mandatory. Since it is not used anywhere else in the bulgarian road network, i would advice against its usage and the broken consistency that follows. Regarding the retagging that eventually can be needed - it can be done with a few clicks in JOSM. The government has no plans to change the speed limit anytime soon anyway.
sheldonelectric (2023-03-03 09:11:52+00:00): 1) There's example of other country which surprisingly changed the maxspeed without notifiying cartographers first. You will not hear of the plans until they happen. 

2) Please send me mapillary (or google street view) which proves the street sign maxspeed=140 and then I will re-tag as you say.
GrabMY_FaizDjamil (2023-04-10 02:26:26+00:00): Please do not add back the small intersection road
(inactive) WarpathPeacock (2023-04-10 11:26:18+00:00): Hello GrabMy_FaizDjamil,

Are you referring to this piece of road way 1149163721 that I added back more than a month ago? What you like me to remove it, and if so what sources do you have that I can cite that show it as nonexistent?
(inactive) WarpathPeacock (2023-04-10 11:29:43+00:00): Do you have local knowledge of this road. Please be more specific and I can make the necessary corrections.
GrabMY_FaizDjamil (2023-04-12 01:42:17+00:00): hi yes, im living in Kuala Lumpur Malaysia and a local
Langlaeufer (2023-02-24 14:50:29+00:00): residental road mit motor_vehicle=no halte ich für nicht sinnvoll? service? track?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/132970489
Langlaeufer (2023-02-24 14:53:15+00:00): hab ich auf Track geändert, passt dann zu den kreuzenden Feldwegen
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/132970489
nick-28 (2023-02-24 17:27:08+00:00): OK, hatte ich nicht gesehen, dass da noch Residential Road drauf war. Ist ein Feldweg mit VZ 252, wenn ich das richtig notiert habe. Track/Access Road also völlig richtig

Danke für den Hinweis.

Nick
asd2762 (2023-02-24 14:30:00+00:00): Aceitem
Allroads (2023-02-28 00:32:44+00:00): Ik ga deze set en andere terug draaien.
Het is toegestaan in OSM om de trottoirs in tekenen, extra detail is toegevoegd. Vooral om de oversteken goed aan te sluiten.
Het verwijderen van deze is niet juist.
Van kruispunt naar kruispunt heb ik langs de weg het goed ingetekend, structureel langs de N278.

Met vriendelijke groet Allroads.
multimodaal (2023-03-09 20:00:20+00:00): Eens met Allroads, 
zie https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133212532
CurlingMan13 (2023-02-27 08:36:09+00:00): Please use more details in your changeset comments.  What did you change, and why?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/132970801
eggie (2023-02-24 14:38:23+00:00): Hoi..
access=no (Verboden Toegang) icm foot=yes is bijna altijd fout.

Ik heb access=no nu overal verwijderd.

Mapse
eggie
porr (2023-02-24 14:39:55+00:00): Goed om weten 👍
eggie (2023-02-24 14:43:07+00:00): porr Weet jij als lokale mapper of die plannen voor die fietsbrug ooit werkelijkheid gaan worden?
Ik heb bij Frees Bes een opmerking op z'n changeset gezet. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127269138#map=19/52.38518/4.91070&layers=N

Groet
eggie
eggie (2023-02-24 14:45:41+00:00): Ahhh   Het krijgt vorm zie ik nu
https://www.satellietdataportaal.nl/?base=openstreetmap&res=0.5&datemin=24-02-2022&loc=52.38511%2C4.910953%2C19z&overlay=mos-0&marker=loc&acqdate=2022-12-01&acqid=20221201_105512_SV2-01%2C20221201_105514_SV2-01&sensor=SuperView-1
porr (2023-02-24 14:54:53+00:00): @eggie: ja absoluut. De brug staat, maar mankeert nog wat railings. Ik weet niet precies wanneer dat op de planning staat maar het zou ergens dit voorjaar klaar moeten zijn.
Tombula (2023-04-27 07:16:28+00:00): Moin, ich glaube du hast fälschlicherweise Weg 103064722 zur Relation hinzugefügt. Dabei handelt es sich um einen Wassergraben.