piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-12 23:45:00+00:00): Please do not delete features that are clearly observable on aerial imagery.  This changeset has been reverted in part or full.

I also advise against using profane language.  It goes against website policies.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148570972
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2024-03-16 10:00:58+00:00): Hi, was there a street sign on the ground or how did you determine this road name?
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-12 23:43:11+00:00): Please do not delete features that are clearly observable on aerial imagery.  This changeset has been reverted in part or full.

I also advise against using profane language.  It goes against website policies.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148570933
Land Owner (2024-03-12 23:51:58+00:00): I will continue to use language that you simpletons understand and is FCC approved as long as I have to deal with this issue that you created.

Rather than respect our privacy, you expect me to turn over and allow you to do what you want. This will not happen.

How hard is it in this day to find something else to occupy your time. But, nooooooo! You have to chip away at a families privacy and safety.

The trails, tracks or whatever name you use are not correct in the info they contain.

I will not stop. You can regulate yourselves and this will all come to a close.
SilkBlue (2024-03-13 04:18:54+00:00): 경계 수정 시 오류가 그대로 일어나고 있는데, 수정을 요청드립니다. 오류지역이 매우 방대해, 제가 터치가 안되나보네요.
morago (2024-03-13 04:35:51+00:00): 다시한번 확인해 보겠습니다. 
오전에 고친다고 고친거 같은데....
알려주셔서  감사합니다.
gscholz (2024-03-15 07:57:07+00:00): 

Hi ASDASDADDASDASDASDASD,
your recent changesets have created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-65.58976&lat=-27.09350&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=148571019

Can you please fix this?

You may also like to educate yourself about how to edit multipolygones properly:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon_Examples

Kind regards
Guido
ScottWalkerAU (2024-03-21 07:22:23+00:00): Thanks! I've updated the access tag for cars to be more correct & prevent vehicle routing. Foot & bicycle are still "yes"
SpecializedRider (2024-05-26 13:19:02+00:00): Hi Hannah, in the future please don't delete ways without first understanding the relations that they are in. Some of the sections of trail that you're deleting then re-creating are part of bigger relations, and you're not adding them back in. Eg The East Link Trail is a group of paths (ways) which make up one long trail which is called a relation in OSM. I'm fixing the ones I find but can you please look up how to do it correctly oherwise some of your change sets may need to be reversed. Thank you.
Hannah_F_ (2024-05-27 02:18:29+00:00): Hi SpecializedRider, I am not deleting or recreating any ways or editing any relations - only updating the tags to include cycling infrastructure information. Perhaps those changes were in a previous version? Thanks - Hannah
hauke-stieler (2024-03-13 19:04:14+00:00): Moin, nur eine kurze Bitte: Changesets sollten möglichst übersichtlich sein und sich nicht über große Gebiete erstrecken. Danke :)
localhorst (2024-03-14 03:32:21+00:00): Ist alles in Niedersachsen. Wann ist ein Gebiet zu groß für ein Changeset? Ich dachte mir, ein Changeset für jede einzelne Änderung ist auch blöd.
hauke-stieler (2024-03-14 11:38:17+00:00): Gute Frage, das ist immer etwas subjektiv und hängt von den Änderungen ab. Aber bei POIs sollte er nicht mehr als ca. ein Straßenzug groß sein. Klar gibt es generell Ausnahmen, z.B. Changesets, die eine ganze Buslinie bearbeiten, aber insgesamt gilt: So klein wie möglich. Vor allem sollte ein Changeset möglichst nur zusammenhängende Änderungen enthalten. Meist werden schon Changesets, die sich über eine ganze Stadt erstrecken eher ungerne gesehen (gerade bei nicht zusammenhängenden Änderungen).
localhorst (2024-03-14 16:46:56+00:00): Hmmm ... wenn ich, wie in diesem Fall, defekte Links (website, contact:website) korrigiere, dann sind das ja nie zusammenhängende Änderungen. Aber pro einzelner Änderung ein Changeset ist doch auch nicht ideal? Ich versuche, die Changesets auf kleinere Regionen zu beschränken, z. B. Landkreise, was in dem Fall leider nicht möglich war, weil meine Fehlerliste sich auf ein ganzes Bundesland erstreckt hat.
Frans S (2024-03-18 14:14:37+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. Your mappings are rather accurate !
Just a remark. When you map paths, or roads, please try to connect them to each other. That creates a network.
Best regards
JoshIzBored (2024-03-13 21:34:21+00:00): Forgot to say: New York Style Pizza was closed and replaced with The Curry Culture.
BlueRooftop10 (2024-03-13 01:33:54+00:00): A fantastic place to visit.
uknown-gryphus (2024-03-13 04:43:40+00:00): Hi, thank you for your changeset. I believe this road should be tertiary since it serves a thoroughfare function, and it is an urban road in the RMP as well. Based on this the previous tertiary classification was accurate.
Pavans (2024-03-13 05:51:40+00:00): Thank you for giving valuable suggestion/feedback. I had reverted the changes.Regards, 
Pavan
Ser9ei (2024-10-01 13:54:20+00:00): Ну ОК, добавляете информацию. А геометрию-то зачем двигать? Особенно у построенных корпусов? Их положение выверял по трекам, страве и нескольким подложкам. А вы на основе каких данных сдвинули?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148572764
anastasia_ (2024-10-01 21:58:28+00:00): Было уже давно, точно не скажу, всегда использую все, что можно. Судя по этому ченжсету, скорее всего, выравнивала по вашим же севернее нарисованным жк
Ser9ei (2024-10-02 05:40:43+00:00): Всё равно не понимаю, зачем. Тем более в ЖК севернее один корпус тоже один маппер зачем-то отредактировал. Раньше они были чётко выровнены, теперь уже нет. Зачем это делают люди, когда вокруг есть куча объектов с кривой геометрией и значительным смещением, где можно разгуляться, не понимаю.
Land Owner (2024-03-20 23:40:11+00:00): This is not a parking lot
Supaplex (2024-03-14 16:40:56+00:00): 已經有了
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/444264088#map=17/25.04023/121.43144
也繪製醫院建築了
emersonveenstra (2024-03-14 11:46:16+00:00): Reverted for vandalism in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148637478
tekim (2024-03-13 14:14:20+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap(OSM)!  Thanks for editing the map, however, when editing OSM we are not allowed to use Google Maps due to Google's terms of use.  Doing so could have serious consequences for OSM.
emersonveenstra (2024-03-14 11:51:36+00:00): This changeset created https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11726182278 on top of the already existing place=village node, might want to check that out
emersonveenstra (2024-03-22 12:55:22+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6685254023 is the already existing one, btw
ZeLonewolf (2024-04-04 12:28:57+00:00): Not quite sure how that happened but I agree the nodes should be merged
jeslop (2024-03-13 10:59:05+00:00): Hi Jenny177. Please read: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Keep changesets local.

Regards

Jesús López
Data Working Group
OpenStreetMap Foundation
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-03-13 16:43:01+00:00): Hi!
Would it be possible to update the swimming pools with the tag: access=private ?
By default, the access is yes, so anyone can access.
Thanks!
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-13 03:11:51+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/1223561928

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2024-03-13 11:22:41+00:00): Dodałem nazwę
NorthCrab (2024-03-14 17:48:14+00:00): 🚀
Glassman (2024-03-15 00:23:37+00:00): Good catch. That road is mostly alley and is tagged as highway=service +service=alley.
ForestFurnace (2024-03-13 03:25:09+00:00): Source: Aerial imagery and Centre County Public Parcel Viewer: https://gissites4.centrecountypa.gov/java/publicparcelviewer/
os-emmer (2024-03-13 16:43:53+00:00): Hello Axman6 and welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've seen that you added two SES-stations here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262048405
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262048409

Are these realy seperate stations directly next to each other or is it one station with two buildings? For me it looks more as if the fenced area is one station. Is that the case?
Axman6 (2024-03-14 00:15:45+00:00): Thanks os-emmer, yes they are two buildings for the same SES unit, so I guess the fenced area is more appropriate to have the details on. I can make that change in the next day or so hopefully.
os-emmer (2024-03-14 15:47:10+00:00): Thanks for your response. That sounds like a good plan. If you need further help feel free to ask.
os-emmer (2024-03-14 15:51:48+00:00): Hi Axman6,
I've just found this changeset. The situation is probably similar to the other one:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148574189
The details of the station should probably be applyed to the whole area and not to the buildings.
nevw (2024-03-13 04:21:32+00:00): Hi, you are expected to map the outline of the building before tagging and uploading to the osm as a house.
akimapbuilder (2024-03-13 08:52:05+00:00): Hi!
You are right, this is way off alignment of true building position visible on Esri imagery.
nevw (2024-03-13 04:20:00+00:00): Why is this marked as a single industrial building. It appears to be two separate residential buildings instead.
akimapbuilder (2024-03-13 09:01:52+00:00): Yes indeed. This should be two separate buildings, they don’t look industrial either.
nevw (2024-03-13 09:12:59+00:00): Thanks for your usual prompt and diligent qc with the Map builder edits
BR_pebble (2024-07-18 08:09:18+00:00): Hello Kingsley AMANKWE
Thank you for mapping!
I have created the missing highway way 1262498292 and changed classification as residential way, way 1260083778 for consistency.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
pesticides (2024-03-13 05:42:56+00:00): I intentionally disconnected KC Metro Routes 892, 891, and 216 in this changeset. Those routes were discontinued, so I removed them in changesets 148575909, 148576018, and 148576287.
elsy1 (2024-03-13 16:29:55+00:00): درود به شما، نیازی به درج کلمه "خانه" وجود ندارد، تگ ساختمان مسکونی بیانگر همان خانه است تشکر.
Kovoschiz (2024-03-13 09:30:40+00:00): 1. Please don;t add projects that are only plans now as `=construction` 
2. Please don't add descriptive labels to `name=` , which is for proper name only https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Subject#Examples
TrickyFoxy (2024-03-16 20:51:56+00:00): Не дублируйте линии. Уточняйте уже существующие
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-06 04:27:20+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262066814 - note that names are for actual names of given object, not for marking who mapped object or for their description

can you remove it?
Marek-M (2025-02-21 09:36:16+00:00): Ścieżka istnieje ale czy są znaki zakazu ruchu po niej? Jeżeli nie ma znaków zakazujących, to `access=no` jest nieprawidłowy.
maciek697 (2025-02-21 13:47:14+00:00): Są znaki zakazu. Teren Wolińskiego Parku Narodowego, nie można poruszać się poza szlakami.
mga_geo (2024-03-15 07:21:32+00:00): Bonjour,
Attention en "améliorant" l'intersection cela casse les 7 relations route=bus qui empruntent ce rond-point.
Pouvez-vous rétablir la continuité de ces relations ?
Merci d'avance
Marc
mat (2024-03-15 10:57:08+00:00): Corrigé dans https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148681964
pyrog (2024-03-15 07:16:59+00:00): Salut Fabrice,

Les tags to et from dans les itinéraires de réseaux sont optionnels.
Idem pour mettre les poteaux comme membre de la relation itinéraire.
En pratique one ne le fait pas car ça demande un travail trop important pour un faible bénéfice. On préfère créer et compléter les réseaux existants.

Par contre les Carrefours" sont obligatoires.

Je corrige pour ces itinéraires : 
https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/analysis/route/17340823
https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/analysis/route/17340824
...

Cordialement,
Yves

PS: je supprime le tag symbol=barre jaune
Il n'apporte rien aux randonneurs (pas de traduction automatique possible), complique la saisie et n'est pas utilisé par les logiciels.
tontonfabrice (2024-03-15 10:46:38+00:00): Ok je prend note
OSM_RogerWilco (2024-03-14 16:32:07+00:00): Hallo Maddin83,

weißt Du ungefähr wie lange die Sperrung sein wird? Tage/Wochen/Monate/Jahre?

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
Maddin83 (2024-03-15 14:11:58+00:00): Moin. Weiß ich tatsächlich nicht. Aktuell wird dort ein Regenrückhaltebecken gebaut, vermutlich dauert die Sperrung nur ein paar Wochen.
Ich hab hier allerdings ein Auge drauf und pflege Infos zeitnah ein bzw. korrigiere den Status ;)
Eman_Mehrez (2024-03-13 12:59:45+00:00): Hello Jad200908;
I noticed you added some streets operational, but they didn't appear in any satellite images.
Examples:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262070299
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262070518
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262070520 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262070519
Could you please share with us the source that you used to add these streets?
Regards
Eman_Mehrez
DD1GJ (2024-03-13 08:12:45+00:00): Wieso zeichnest Du in der Münchener Straße auf beiden Seiten Gehwege ein? Nach den Luftbildern grenzen die Grundstücke auf der nördlichen Straßenseite direkt an die Fahrbahn. Da ist kein Bürgersteig.

Dies ist der beste Beweis, dass Deine Eintragungen oft nicht mit der Realität übereinstimmen. Hör bitte sofort mit Deinen Bearbeitungen auf bis sichergestellt ist, dass solche eklatanten Fehler nicht mehr passieren.
DD1GJ (2024-03-21 07:07:07+00:00): In Abstimmung mit dem Auftraggeber (prospegaGmbH) wurden alle Gehwegänderungen dieses Accounts zurückgesetzt. Hauptgrund war, dass die pauschal halbautomatisch erstellten und importierten Gehwege oft nicht mit der Realität nicht übereinstimmten. Bereits vorhandene Gehwege wurden nicht berücksichtigt.

Siehe auch https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148537609
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-06 04:24:24+00:00): Hello!

    Note that you do not need to add description of feature type as a name.
    For example when mapping tree it is enough to specify that it is a tree, no need for putting that name of this specific tree is "Tree".

    So for buildings it is not needed to put house as their name.

    Or do you maybe know that this specific object mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1256687459 is specifically named with such name?

    Do not worry too much about this issue - I made way worse mistakes when I was starting. Maybe some tool or explanation is confusing? Why you added this name? Note that I am asking as maybe something can be fixed to be less confusing.

    And if it was mistake - can you edit map to remove this name?
Eman_Mehrez (2024-03-13 13:01:04+00:00): Hello Jad200908;
I noticed you changed the classification to the proposed road but some roads became floating.
Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/354267548
Examples of some floating roads:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/494488909
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/494488923
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/494488918
Could you check it and fix it, please?
Regards
Eman_Mehrez
Zaneo (2024-03-15 08:10:28+00:00): Is the "Lyft-owned aerial imagery" compatible with OSM license?
A_Prokopova_lyft (2024-03-18 11:13:53+00:00): Hi Zaneo!
I’m Anastasia, an OSM communications specialist on the OSM mapping team at Lyft. 
Many thanks for reaching us.
I want to assure you that the Lyft mapping team takes the OpenStreetMap rules seriously and that all of our resources are compliant with them. As "Lyft-owned aerial imagery" for now, we use Nearmap imagery. They do allow us to use their imagery for OSM edits by license. That means our evidence fully complies with the OSM requirements. This data is updated frequently, and we try to make edits based on the most recent data. 
This information is in the description of my profile in the "Lyft’s-owned sources (ex.proprietary sources)" section.
Best regards!
aceman444 (2024-03-17 22:09:34+00:00): Tento bankomat nie je vovnutri budovy. Je tak maximalne kryty (covered=yes). Davajte prosim pozor.
sen_takeya (2024-03-14 02:41:23+00:00): こんにちはミイポンさん、4か月ぶりですね！
私からあなたに送るのはこれで6度目です。

何故、架空の病院を作成したのかお聞かせください。
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1262079172
AndyB_66 (2024-03-13 14:05:58+00:00): Widzisz - można. Dzięki w imieniu społeczności OSM.
literan (2024-03-13 20:12:18+00:00): так вы смотрите, что удаляете, там же стоят теги was:amenity=restaurant (т.е. бывший ресторан)
brujerizmo (2024-03-14 03:16:12+00:00): Не совсем понимаю зачем оставлять точку бывшего ресторана? Я создал новую точку, теперь там новое заведение.
literan (2024-03-14 06:08:39+00:00): 1) кто-то может вспомнить "о, я там был два месяца назад, и надо поставить туда этот ресторан". А он уже закрыт

2) удобно, когда видишь в блогах "на месте "Слета" открылся "Алхимик" - сразу ставишь на его место, а не тыкаешь куда попало.

Но если несколько лет отсутствует, то, конечно, нужно удалять.

Нет, вы, конечно, все правильно удалили, но вы удалили не точку ресторана, а точку БЫВШЕГО ресторана, и ошибки в карте не было.
BR_pebble (2024-07-18 08:12:04+00:00): Hello Kingsley AMANKWE
Thank you for mapping!
You created ways are isolated so i have provided the connectivity way 1262534776.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Frans S (2024-03-22 10:31:45+00:00): 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. 

Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
No buildings squared. (80)
buildings wrong tagged. Default for OSM projects i building=yes



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/148580249
sbaido (2024-03-22 11:38:01+00:00): Thank you Frans S, I will review my work and be more cautious for next time editing.
BR_pebble (2024-07-18 08:11:04+00:00): Hello Kingsley AMANKWE
Thank you for mapping!
I have changed classification from track to residential way 1262086145 for consistency and extended the way way 1262840201 till node 11733513370.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
aceman444 (2024-03-17 21:29:46+00:00): Preco je male=yes + female=yes lepsie nez unisex=yes ?
Podla wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:unisex by to pri kadernictvach malo byt spravne. Mozu tam ist vsetky pohlavia (pokial sa nezameriavaju len na niektore).
Frans S (2024-03-22 10:32:57+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
A remark about mapping highways
How to decide when a trace is a path or an unclassified highway
First, look what they connect.  Houses, settlements, villages. Then measure the width of that trace.
In iDeditor 

Shortcut : Ctrl+⇧ Shift+M – toggle  opens measurement panel
Draw a line between the shoulders of a trace (zoom in very far) and read the distance.
If a trace is max 2 meters wide, tag it as a path.
Wider and connect hamlets, houses and villages should be tagged as unclassified.
Tag residential in urban areas (villages, towns)
In JOSM, use the measure tab, or draw a circle (round building, shortcut Alt-Z when the building plugin is installed)) between the shoulders of a trace and read the distance on the lower toolbar. (remove the circle after that)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations

Quote: Tracks are roads of agricultural purpose. They usually connect fields to farms. The surface sometimes makes them inaccessible for regular cars, or at least limits the speeds to a very slow pace. Tracks should always be avoided for through-going traffic or within urban areas.
sbaido (2024-03-22 11:36:01+00:00): thank you for the comment and guidelines for my future mapping. I took into account that the "road" or "path" are/is passing between the houses or settlement. will take care better for next times
Xvtn (2024-03-19 15:23:47+00:00): Hello again! (I've been going through your changesets for which you requested review.) In this one, that "extra line" you removed was part of the administrative boundary [1] for Tanasbourne. Even if a feature has no tags, it might be part of a multipolygon or other relation. [2]
Fortunately, in this case it was easy to restore, which I just took care of. Arguably you were following the OSM good practice of "be bold". :)

Let me know if you have any questions about that, and thanks for your contributions!!

[1] More info on admin boundaries: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3aboundary=administrative

[2] More info on multipolygons: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon
GOwin (2024-03-19 08:50:08+00:00): Hi A. I have a few comments for this changeset.

The building=school tag you added need not be added on the school grounds. You can trace and tag the 4 other individual schools building separately.

A concise alternative to an FB url is to simply tag it like contact:facebook = pnhs.depedbataan
agd1027 (2024-03-26 04:02:18+00:00): Got it. Thanks :)
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-03-19 07:43:48+00:00): Please don't add fake data. This can be considered vandalism
victor-valencia-vasterbottenost (2024-03-13 15:11:39+00:00): Hejsan, som vi talat om privat så tycker jag inte din bedömning här är korrekt, och vill gärna att du hänvisar till de design-riktlinjer du talar om.

Just nu (efter din redigering) så saknas cykelinfo på dessa vägar. Detta innebär att vägarna inte dyker upp i cykelläget på OSM.

Jag gjorde redigeringar a med Street Complete, och vad jag kan läsa så stämmer deras riktlinjer överens med OSM:s riktlinjer.
Kovoschiz (2024-03-13 09:16:45+00:00): 1. Please notice this object is for the whole phase including both the mall and estate, which have different identities. `name=` is for the proper name only. Don't add descriptive labels, with commas. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
2. `layer=` should
Kovoschiz (2024-03-13 09:18:27+00:00): 2. `layer=` should not be added to an `amenity=` . `=-1` is only a relative order, doesn't mean it's underground or lower than ground. `parking=underground` already expresses enough meaning.
rarad74 (2024-03-13 09:19:24+00:00): Hi. Why you put another 69 adress number, when already exist on the map? Please check again in the future if the adress exist. Thank you.
HeiKue (2025-07-01 14:30:44+00:00): Hallo EBSerKartler, der Zaun https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39026159 läuft jetzt quer durch die Rednitz, was vermutlich nicht der Realität entspricht und bei mir Fehler beim Josm wirft. Ich kann mir auch nicht vorstellen, dass der Zaun so lang ist. Kannst Du das bitte prüfen/korrigieren? Grüße, Heiko
EBSerKartler (2025-07-01 17:37:30+00:00): Hallo HeiKue,
danke für den Hinweis. Ja, es sieht wirklich unplausibel aus.
Ich war letztes Frühjahr allerdings im Bereich Fuchsstraße unterwegs und habe dabei nur diesen Teil des langen Zaunes bearbeitet. Wie der genaue Verlauf ganz im Norden kurz vor der Siebenbogenbrücke ist, weiß ich nicht. Wäre ein Anlass, da mal nachzuschauen...
HeiKue (2025-07-01 19:38:15+00:00): Ich habe das erstmal stumpf gefixt, indem ich den Zaun geteilt und über die Rednitz entfernt habe. Woanders gab es mit gleichem Zaun weitere Kollision. Ich habe keine Erfahrungen mit dem iD, aber meckert dieser da nicht, wenn ein Zaun über einen Fluss geht?
Harald Hartmann (2024-03-13 15:35:55+00:00): Hallo OMME-OSM vielen Dank zunächst für deine Änderungen. Bei manchen habe ich aber Rückfragen:
Warum hast du bei der Fleischerei (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388108731) die Daten vom Umriss als neuen Node in das Gebäude verschoben? Und nebendran beim Schönheitssalon aber nicht?!