piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
tux67 (2026-07-01 15:12:57+00:00): Danke - good catch ..
vsandre (2026-07-01 16:17:00+00:00): nominatim.org/qa/ for more ;-)
DressyPear4 (2026-07-07 12:47:58+00:00): Este changeset foi revertido com changeset/185263413
RandomThighsEnjoyer (2026-07-01 16:01:57+00:00): Der ID-Edor hat den Changeset-Kommentar anscheinend falsch auto completed. In diesem Changeset wurde die Sparkassenfiliale Sparkasse Duisburg - Geschäftsstelle Wanheimerort bearbeitet. Kitas wurden hier nicht bearbeitet
RandomThighsEnjoyer (2026-07-01 17:37:11+00:00): Korektur (nicht Wanheimerort): Sparkasse Duisburg Geschäftsstelle Hochfeld
eggie (2026-07-01 15:10:16+00:00): Commentaar moet zijn uitzonderingen tweewielers toegevoegd
mueschel (2026-07-20 09:58:26+00:00): Hi,
you added a strange 'recycling:gft' tag here - is that a spelling mistake?
DressyPear4 (2026-07-07 12:47:57+00:00): Este changeset foi revertido com changeset/185263413
JJIglesias (2026-07-02 01:11:57+00:00): Por favor recordar Escuadrar las edificaciones apretando la letra Q o en el Mouse click derecho.

Las imágenes pueden distorsionar las edificaciones pero el 99% de ellas tienen ángulos a 90 grados y son simétricas y ortogonales. Las imágenes satélites son angulares NO verticales.

Por favor activa la opción ISSUES en el panel derecho de tu editor, para q te aparezcan tus errores, si los hubiera

Te sugerimos poner multiples edificaciones por cada conjunto de cambios (Changeset) y NO poner Nombres a las construcciones a no ser que tengan un Nombre real.

Gracias
blef (2026-07-01 15:45:30+00:00): Commentaires sur mon CS:
J'ai parcouru l'itinéraire jusqu'ici référencé V86 et intégré à la superroute 'La vallée du Lot à vélo". Le tronçon situé entre Banassac et Rouffiac emprunte des pistes de débardage en forêt en forte pente, encombrées de gros cailloux, ne répondant absolument pas à la définition d'une véloroute. Avec mon vélo équipé de sacoches, ce passage n'a pas été de tout repos, et encore il faisait beau et le terrain était sec. Le SNV indique un projet vers La Bastide Puylaurent via Mende. Le schéma régional y ajoute une liaison Mende - Le Bleymard - Villefort https://www.laregion.fr/Dispositif-regional-des-amenagements-cyclables .
La première est partiellement cartographiée en proposed (relation 15670220), la seconde pourrait l'être de même. Je le ferai quand j'aurai le temps.
LordGarySugar (2026-07-07 00:18:55+00:00): Thanks for updating, is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1534311346 a new crossing? As it approaches Grange Gardens it crosses a retaining wall so something isn't quite right there. Also, where where crossings go over roads they should share a node at the point they intersect. Usually the editor should flag this as an error for you to resolve. Let me know if you need any help making any further changes, I will be happy to help.
Digitaleo (2026-07-09 13:04:21+00:00): Bonjour Lisapple,

Merci pour ton travail d'enrichissement autour d'Aix-en-Provence.

Une remarque sur le node Interaction Intérim (12262787401) modifié ici depuis les données INSEE : tu as ajouté addr:housenumber=90, alors que le node portait déjà contact:housenumber=115 (contact:street=Rue Claude-Nicolas Ledoux). Du coup l'objet a maintenant deux numéros de rue différents.

L'adresse commerciale confirmée par le site officiel de l'agence est le 115 Rue Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, 13290 Aix-en-Provence (https://www.interaction-interim.com/agences/interaction-interim-aix-en-provence). Le 90 correspond sans doute à l'adresse de domiciliation administrative INSEE/SIRENE, qui diffère de l'emplacement réel.

Serait-il possible d'aligner addr:housenumber sur le 115 (ou de retirer le tag en doublon) ? Je peux aussi m'en charger si tu préfères. Merci !
Lisapple (2026-07-13 16:01:30+00:00): Bonjour Digitaleo.
Effectivement, c'est une erreur de ma part, je n'avais pas vu que `contact:housenumber` était déjà présent, j'ai donc utilisé celui de l'INSEE.
Je l'ai donc supprimé.
Merci de me l'avoir signalé.
santamariense (2026-07-01 16:59:21+00:00): Olá GabiruX_,

O que você quer dizer com "A via está em acidente"?
Marvk (2026-07-01 23:06:05+00:00): Hallo mein_kla4 und willkommen auf OSM!

Bei kürzlich abgerissenen Gebäuden ist es hilfreich, das gebäude mit demolished:building=yes zu taggen, anstatt es komplett zu löschen. So verhinderst du, dass Mapper, die das Gebäude auf noch nicht aktualisierten Satelitenkarten sehen, es wieder hinzufügen.

Ich habe das mal übernommen, du musst dich um nichts kümmern. 

Beste Grüße
Marv
FajrAl (2026-07-01 22:28:25+00:00): Lumayan lengkap, tapi ada tag yang kurang untuk kantor pemerintah:

office=government
government=administrative

opsional:

amenity=community_centre
community_centre=village_hall
official_name=Kantor Kepala Desa Nama
operator=Pemerintah Desa Nama
operator:type=government
addr:village=Nama Desa
addr:district=Kecamatan
addr:city=Kota/Kab
addr:province=Provinsi
DwarfNebula_ (2026-07-01 17:02:25+00:00): Meeste kunstenaars, houtbewerking dingen passen wel in de craft=* groep.
molensteen (2026-07-04 13:16:26+00:00): gezien hier zoveel kantoortjes/plaatsen zijn weet ik niet of je dit hele gebouw met verschillende craft tags kan toevoegen, bovendien kunnen die verouderen, is het beter om het zo te laten?
eggie (2026-07-04 13:28:44+00:00): Hoi.. Zou het zo laten.

Groet,
eggie
db-ak (2026-07-01 18:05:03+00:00): Droga rowerowa jest poza jezdnią, równolegle i nie przebiega na pełnej długości. Nie poprawnie zastosowano ten tag. Jak już to coś w stylu ,,zaznaczono osobno" lub jak to ta aplikacja tłumaczy. Poprawiam
Yog Sot (2026-07-01 20:37:44+00:00): `separate` jbc, ale ja uważam iż to tag bez sensu
eerib (2026-07-02 04:43:34+00:00): Hello BC Hiker,

I understand the confusion here as it's a bit of a complicated situation.

The problem is that the portion of the dike in this area exists on private land and therefore Metro Vancouver Regional District has created a legal trail/route below the dike on their property. However, very few people actually take the legal trail even though it does exist and is signed.

Here is a photo from 2025 of the Metro Vancouver signage advising users to use the legal trail below the dike.

https://imgur.com/a/6atFYwp

It may be possible that the situation has evolved since by previous review of the situation in this area in 2025 so please disregard if that is the case.

Cheers, eerib
BC Hiker (2026-07-02 13:04:13+00:00): I'm unable to read the sign in the link you posted due to image size. Being there is no signage on the dyke restricting access to this section and no physical barriers. Along with the city of Pitt Meadows listing this land as parks and open spaces, I'm not seeing this as private land. May be under Pitt Meadows jurisdiction vs Metro Vancouver... Have a look at the pedestrian tunnel next to the Pitt Meadows Airport, this section of dyke is owned by the airport and is indicated this way on Pitt Meadows Mapview: https://www.pittmeadows.ca/homes-development/zoning-land-use/pitt-meadows-mapview
(Last time in this area was on June.29 2026)
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-02 14:11:10+00:00): Reverted series of changesets adding SEO POI and blatantly promotional description=* and other malformed tags to it

https://osm.org/changeset/184978326
Digitaleo (2026-07-21 09:37:55+00:00): Bonjour Lisapple,

Dans ce changeset, addr:housenumber du way 153563933 (boulangerie Aaron's, boulevard Romain Rolland, 13009 Marseille) est passé de « 349 » à « 349 b », avec la source « INSEE - 2026-06 ».

Or « 349 b » semble erroné : la base SIRENE elle-même donne « 349 BOULEVARD ROMAIN ROLLAND » pour le SIRET 81343211900010, sans indice de répétition, et la BAN ne connaît que le « 349 » (pas de 349 bis). L'adresse était d'ailleurs « 349 » depuis les versions précédentes (cadastre).
EdLoach (2026-07-01 16:38:13+00:00): Thanks David. The footpath actually went around the locked gate until this changeset decided to change things (which I didn't notice at the time). https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=169491422
silversurfer83 (2026-07-01 19:28:10+00:00): Hi there :)

three things:

- why did you delete the tag highway=footway here? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/345

- please keep edits local to make checking them easier.

- most importantly: The "AI" behind Rapid is rather crappy. No everything it proposes is a building. *Always* check every single proposed building against all available imagery *before* you commit it to the database. With just a quick glance I found several really bad buildings in this changeset. This is not what we are looking for in OSM. Please be better. Thank you
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184924762
Sharko_MV3 (2026-07-02 10:43:44+00:00): Yet another world-spanning changeset... for fuck's sake
JJIglesias (2026-07-02 00:53:04+00:00): Por favor recordar Escuadrar las edificaciones apretando la letra Q o en el Mouse click derecho.

Las imágenes pueden distorsionar las edificaciones pero el 99% de ellas tienen ángulos a 90 grados y son simétricas y ortogonales. Las imágenes satélites son angulares NO verticales.

Por favor activa la opción ISSUES en el panel derecho de tu editor, para q te aparezcan tus errores, si los hubiera

Gracias
eggie (2026-07-02 06:09:13+00:00): Hoi..
Probeer op de bestaande adresnode bij te taggen svp.
Het adres is nu niet compleet.

Mvg,
eggie
JochenOSM (2026-07-15 17:33:57+00:00): Hallo Rotflamingo2, du hast das Haus als fertiggestellt eingezeichnet. Gibt's einen Grund warum du das umgebende construction= gelassen hast?
JochenOSM (2026-07-15 17:35:57+00:00): (am Streckfuß)
Rotflamingo2 (2026-07-16 15:09:51+00:00): Hallo JochenOSM, das habe ich mit Absicht gemacht. Das Gebäude ist zwar fertiggestellt, jedoch aktuell ohne Innenausbau. Das Grundstück ist noch Baustelle, Hausnummern sind keine ersichtlich
ajmat (2026-07-05 11:26:00+00:00): Partially Revert of https://osmcha.org/changesets/184894666
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-02 14:12:17+00:00): Reverted series of changesets adding SEO POI and blatantly promotional description=* and other malformed tags to it

https://osm.org/changeset/184978389
JJIglesias (2026-07-02 00:52:45+00:00): Por favor recordar Escuadrar las edificaciones apretando la letra Q o en el Mouse click derecho.

Las imágenes pueden distorsionar las edificaciones pero el 99% de ellas tienen ángulos a 90 grados y son simétricas y ortogonales. Las imágenes satélites son angulares NO verticales.

Por favor activa la opción ISSUES en el panel derecho de tu editor, para q te aparezcan tus errores, si los hubiera

Gracias
Supaplex (2026-07-02 05:13:44+00:00): 請問民宿地址是否正確，因為桃園市政府的地址並非在該位置
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-18 01:16:59+00:00): DWG revert - unsatisfactory source for changing National boundaries

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185935340
yelisey90 (2026-07-21 22:14:59+00:00): partly reverted: judging by street-level photos, through passage for cars along way/196951974 is impossible. Unless barriers and access are properly mapped, better to leave it as footpath

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/186143342
JJIglesias (2026-07-02 01:11:28+00:00): Por favor recordar Escuadrar las edificaciones apretando la letra Q o en el Mouse click derecho.

Las imágenes pueden distorsionar las edificaciones pero el 99% de ellas tienen ángulos a 90 grados y son simétricas y ortogonales. Las imágenes satélites son angulares NO verticales.

Por favor activa la opción ISSUES en el panel derecho de tu editor, para q te aparezcan tus errores, si los hubiera

Te sugerimos poner multiples edificaciones por cada conjunto de cambios (Changeset) y NO poner Nombres a las construcciones a no ser que tengan un Nombre real.

Gracias
Xoán Iglesias (2026-07-02 08:45:19+00:00): Según o que dis ti das administracións é correcto, pensaba que alguén o puxera mal querendo poñer o río. Non sei cal é a razón de que sexa así, porque aquí de toda a vida a fronteira entre Muxía e Cee é o Castro, despois alí máis arriba cerca de Trasufre a fronteira si que fai unha cousa rara, pero esa sabéa todo o mundo, que según o río Trasufre, Calo e A Farrappiña tiñan que ser de Dumbría, sin emabrgo son de Muxía.
Hugoren Martinako (2026-07-02 09:13:30+00:00): O tema das lindes ven de lonxe, discusións moi vellas, que a saber as razóns.... por iso é preferíbel perguntar as administracións. Estou ollando que nos catastrones antigos do IGN (tamén atópanse na súa web) a fronteira corre polo río, e se agora non, é un erro das proxeccións xeográficas. Vou informar ao respecto.
Hugoren Martinako (2026-07-13 17:27:16+00:00): Só para a túa información, escribín ao IGN e xa contestaron:

"Efectivamente la línea de término discurre por el eje de las aguas corrientes del río Castro. Así se describe en el acta de la operación practicada para reconocer la línea de término y señalar los mojones comunes a ambos términos de fecha 25 y 30 de junio de 1920.

Tomamos nota de este error e iniciamos el procedimiento de rectificación de la geometría de la línea para adecuarla al acta mencionada.
Aprovecho para agradecerle su correo que nos ayuda a corregirlos errores de inscripción en los límites municipales."

Iso quere dicir que o corrixirán nas próximas actualizacións.... uns 6 meses ou así... entón actualizaremos a fronteira.
gurglypipe (2026-07-01 18:09:08+00:00): Hi, there was no geometry missing here and the road layout was correct. We do not map motorway on/off ramp lanes separately unless they are physically separated, and these ones are not (only separated by paint).

I have reverted this as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184930254

Please check the wiki and editing guidelines, or talk to local editors, before making incorrect changes like this. Thank you
rajdhani (2026-07-08 11:24:13+00:00): Hi gurglypipe, thank you for reverting the changeset and also for your feedback.

Available satellite imagery clearly shows that the motorway links merge into the main highway at two distinct locations, which significantly impacts routing and traffic flow. That is why I performed the edit. Would you then rather suggest managing this routing & connectivity issue with adding lane level tags? 

Thanks again for your guidance on this.
gurglypipe (2026-07-08 15:15:35+00:00): The two lanes are only separated by paint, so they should be mapped as a single way. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link#Link_geometry.

People can (and do) change between the lanes as they come down the on-ramp, and that could not be represented if it was drawn as two ways.

I don’t see how it can affect routing or traffic flow at all — could you explain what specifically you mean by that?

I think the tagging is already correct on this way: it is tagged as having two lanes.
AriAlvarez (2026-07-01 17:25:39+00:00): My source was aerial imagery
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-15 05:20:02+00:00): DWG revert - unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185761159
LordGarySugar (2026-07-04 21:39:03+00:00): Please make sure to sense-check buildings suggested by rapid/mapwithai - some of these buildings don't exist on aerial imagery and are just paved areas in back gardens.
felipeeugenio (2026-07-01 19:55:52+00:00): Hola. Gracias por sus ediciones.
Por favor cuidar la ortografía. agregar los tildes.

Gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184928583
willkmis (2026-07-23 14:12:28+00:00): Was there a reason to delete the old one and replace it with a new object? That seems to have violated the "keep the history" principle of OSM. I agree with the name change though
JJIglesias (2026-07-02 00:52:31+00:00): Por favor recordar Escuadrar las edificaciones apretando la letra Q o en el Mouse click derecho.

Las imágenes pueden distorsionar las edificaciones pero el 99% de ellas tienen ángulos a 90 grados y son simétricas y ortogonales. Las imágenes satélites son angulares NO verticales.

Por favor activa la opción ISSUES en el panel derecho de tu editor, para q te aparezcan tus errores, si los hubiera

Gracias
MappingMore (2026-07-05 06:44:41+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185125122
silversurfer83 (2026-07-01 19:23:00+00:00): Oder so. Danke :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184929280
TrickyFoxy (2026-07-01 18:39:33+00:00): 👋 You don't need to write the object type in the name:*= tag. name:en=cemetery and other tags are redundant when landuse=cemetery is already present

https://osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-15 05:20:03+00:00): DWG revert - unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185761159
smeòrach (2026-07-09 12:13:14+00:00): Etymology =/= Gaelic name
silversurfer83 (2026-07-01 19:22:00+00:00): hast du alles hier am Lohfelder Rüssel von Ticki reverted? Wenn ja, bitte in jedem zugehörigen CS einen Kommentar lassen, damit ich nicht unnötig Konflikte auflöse ;)
jengelh (2026-07-01 20:13:10+00:00): nur 2 Stück (kommentiert). Da sind noch ein paar weitere in den letzten ~6 Tagen in/um Kassel, die man sich ansehen müsste, u.a. nen Edit bei Ikea.
silversurfer83 (2026-07-01 20:19:57+00:00): OK. Danke. (bin jetzt erstmal im Bett)
Nakaner (2026-07-01 20:54:35+00:00): Aufgrund der Vorgeschichte des Users würde ich da wenig Mitleid zeigen und direkt alles, was seit meinem letzten Revert gemappt wurde, revertieren. Wenn man Kritik im Forum bekommt, darauf niveaulos (KI-Slop zum Trollen) reagiert und danach etwas anderes löscht, hat man jegliche Mühe Revertierender, bestimmte Änderungen zu erhalten, verwirkt.
Nakaner (2026-07-02 07:59:50+00:00): Ich kümmere mich jetzt darum.
impiaaa (2026-07-01 19:15:49+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap! OpenStreetMap documents only verifiable facts about the real world. Please do not use gemini or ChatGPT to guess the heights of buildings!

欢迎来到OpenStreetMap! OpenStreetMap 仅记录有关现实世界的可验证事实。请勿使用 gemini 或 ChatGPT 来猜测建筑物的高度!
Geofs User (2026-07-03 13:27:08+00:00): That's correct,i let them search for the info of the building
impiaaa (2026-07-03 15:39:32+00:00): Please do not use them at all!
dcapillae (2026-07-01 20:42:06+00:00): Hola.

¿Está seguro de que el parque canino ya no existe?
erlenmeyer (2026-07-02 10:30:04+00:00): Sí, he estado paseando por esa zona y toda la parcela pertenece a la nueva universidad
dcapillae (2026-07-02 10:43:11+00:00): Gracias. Justo he pasado esta mañana por la zona para comprobarlo.

Han pasado el parque canino al otro lado de la acera, dentro del parque de Santa Ana. Lo añadiré más tarde.

Gracias de nuevo.
ajmat (2026-07-03 11:28:59+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185034836
Wildsharky (2026-07-06 10:41:01+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185035029
a-sav (2026-07-01 20:35:54+00:00): To the reviewers - this commit somehow created two points at each tree instead of one. I can see errors "Tree too close to Tree". Not sure how this happened, because I definitely didn't copy-paste them. Perhaps internet connection issue, and it was sent twice?
a-sav (2026-07-01 20:37:16+00:00): I think this change needs to be reverted...
a-sav (2026-07-01 20:40:16+00:00): Or I could manually delete the copied ones - tedious but possible. Please let me know
gurglypipe (2026-07-04 10:18:31+00:00): Looks like someone else has used JOSM to delete the duplicates in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185075834
a-sav (2026-07-05 13:42:04+00:00): To whoever did the remove duplicates change - massive thanks!
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-02 06:01:41+00:00): Hi Gregg,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Your address and building tagging was correct, thank you!

Unfortunately, I cannot make any sense of the relations you added, as one has no tags at all and only one member without a role, the house way, while a second has only has type=enforcement (which describes traffic rule enforcement https://osm.wiki/Relation:enforcement ) with no required tags describing what is enforced, and only the previous relation as one of its members, which I cannot make any sense of.

In addition, while not appropriate for name=* in any case, mapping the owner name of private homes is not in scope for OSM, see private owner name from private home (see osm.wiki/Mapping_private_information#General_rules 

Therefore, I removed the two relations and the name=* tag for you in changeset 184954840 . 

https://osm.org/changeset/184954840

If you can explain what you were trying to achieve with the relations, I would be happy to guide you on how to achieve that, if possible and appropriate with OSM.

 Thanks, and happy mapping!
Wildsharky (2026-07-06 10:35:44+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185023777
ajmat (2026-07-03 08:30:40+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185026266
FajrAl (2026-07-03 14:23:33+00:00): Pemetaan selanjutnya jangan menyingkat "Jl." ya, gunakan "Jalan".
rajdhani (2026-07-03 07:55:23+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185024881
JJIglesias (2026-07-02 00:52:16+00:00): Por favor recordar Escuadrar las edificaciones apretando la letra Q o en el Mouse click derecho.

Las imágenes pueden distorsionar las edificaciones pero el 99% de ellas tienen ángulos a 90 grados y son simétricas y ortogonales. Las imágenes satélites son angulares NO verticales.

Por favor activa la opción ISSUES en el panel derecho de tu editor, para q te aparezcan tus errores, si los hubiera

Gracias
Frans S (2026-07-02 09:28:09+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
You often connect noded of buildings to  eachother. 
Please don't. Each building needs to be mapped as an individual building.

Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
Be careful to not let buildings overlap each other to other mapped features like roads. If an overlap occurs and you see this a message in issue trianle of the iDeditor, do not select "tag this as higher/lower. Instead select 'ignore this issues'and move the building you are mapping to ensure it does not overlap with the other mapped object.



Buildings shouldn't share nodes with each other or other features. When it happens accidentally, you can use the disconnect option ("D") in the iD editor to 'unglue' the nodes from each other (nodes that are shared are grey instead of white). To avoid it happening, hold the ALT key down while you are placing a node near another building, it will prevent nodes from snapping together

Best regards and keep mapping
LinusBj (2026-07-04 20:24:49+00:00): i accidentally flagged this as "review requested" and now I have no idea how to get it in..
mikini (2026-07-02 20:32:02+00:00): Hejsa.

landuse=farmland er til opdyrket landbrugsjord.
Hestefolde tænker jeg skal være:

landuse=animal_keeping
animal_keeping=horse

Og så kan typen (midlertidigt/mere permanent ophold) angives som;

animal_keeping:type=paddock
animal_keeping:type=open_stable

At bruge attraction på en privat hestefold mener jeg er misvisende, det er beregnet på forlystelsesparker og zoologiske haver.

-- 
Hilsner,
Mikkel
Martin Jepsen (2026-07-03 10:20:29+00:00): Takker, opdateret i https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185031618 :-)
mikini (2026-07-02 20:58:14+00:00): Hejsa.
Hvis du kigger på [dokumentationen for usage][1] så er den eksisterende brug til angivelse af den konkrete anvendelse af hhv. jernbaner, rørledninger, vand og lufthavnsveje

Dermed får du nok ikke meget ud af at sætte et tag som usage=equestrian, da ingen dataforbrugere vil genkende og tolke det som noget anvendeligt i denne kombination. Ikke at det er ulovligt eller ugyldigt at tagge sådan, men et tag skal give generel mening og være tilpas udbredt før det bliver noget der f.eks. vises i [OSMs standardlag][2] eller de store korttjenester.

I lige netop dette tilfælde synes jeg også at anvendelsen er angivet implicit i hovedtagget (animal=horse_walker) og derfor ikke behøver yderligere kvalificering. I andre tilfælde hvor hovedtagget er mere generelt angives hestesport ofte med sport=equestrian (f.eks. for leisure=pitch).

-- 
Hilsner,
Mikkel

[1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:usage
[2]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap_Carto
Martin Jepsen (2026-07-03 10:20:18+00:00): Takker, opdateret i https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185031618 :-)