piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2025-08-27 15:55:34+00:00): Het is een trucje om die BAG te omzeilen en toch de Kadaster gegevens te behouden. Bij herimpot wordt gekeken naar de BAG gegevens. Je krijgt anders import bovenop import.
eggie (2025-08-27 15:58:31+00:00): Jan Geen idee of het kan met die app, maar wanneer je de bestaande adresnode selecteert dan kun je daar op bijtaggen.
Ik heb de info nu samengevoegd. In de postcodes geen spatie in OSM format.
gr eggie
Kamphoes (2025-08-29 16:34:24+00:00): Eggie,
Bedankt voor je (re) actie.
Vr.gr. Jan
WoSoe (2025-08-28 04:48:11+00:00): Moin!

Änderungssatz verursacht massig Geometriefehler.

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=11.67080&lat=48.26568&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=1.00&overlays=ways_with_long_segments%2Clong_segments%2Cself_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

In JOSM werden mir 50 (!) »selbst überschneidende Linien« als Warnung ausgegeben.

Gruß
WoSoe
CommanderStorm (2025-08-29 13:16:33+00:00): Thanks for raising this issue.

In josm I fixed this issue class so long until the validation button did not raise any more related errors (only false positive warnings).

As a matter of fact, I cannot reproduce the warnings you have noted by downloading data of said bbox.
The validation panel does only show a self-intersecting lines warning.
It shows a "ways at the same place" warning, but that is to be expected for indoor, they have a different level.

It is pretty difficult to notice this class of issue and where it is wrong.
Do you use a different overlay/plugin/.. in josm?
LudovicG (2025-12-29 15:31:38+00:00): je me suis permis de modifer la "ref" car on attend le motif A9A9A9 et là il semblerait que ça soit plutôt les départements de la fente.
neluj (2025-12-31 08:48:45+00:00): Bonjour 
C 'est bien noté, je vous remercie
eggie (2025-08-27 15:51:08+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback   De naam heb ik aangepast. De barrier heb ik verwijderd. Wat is dit voor een afzetting?  barrier=gate? Op een kruising kan die eigenlijk fysiek niet staan. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
jajanja3 (2025-08-27 15:24:50+00:00): and updated the area around the High Street aswell.
eggie (2025-08-27 15:53:30+00:00): barriers verwijderd. Die kunnen nooit op een kruising staan. 
Dan routeert niets meer.. ook niet het niet privepad. 
Wel op het pad en wat is het dan barrier=gate? met access=private. 

MVG
eggie
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-27 16:56:23+00:00): przed zmianą na highway=trunk - skonsultuj się na forum ( https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/pl/40 )

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171091958
aceman444 (2026-03-16 00:44:18+00:00): Hi, 'level' tag must be numeric. Thus the value was correct (but should probably be 0, ground level). If the locals call it "P", then that goes into level:ref tag, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:level:ref .
eggie (2025-08-27 16:01:17+00:00): Je vraagt feedback .. Lijkt me oke.

Groet
eggie
rempshaener (2025-08-27 19:45:21+00:00): Aus den gleichen Gründen wie bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170851165 korrigiert.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-09-17 22:19:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 172087218 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some vandalism in Cairo.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18743
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-08-28 13:41:17+00:00): When there is a dual carriage we usually count the other direction's sidewalk as present. Otherwise it will be impossible to compare presence of sidewalks on different kind of roads (dual carriage vs single). Please consider the other side sidewalk presence. Thanks!
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-08-28 13:51:29+00:00): Also, why remove sidewalk presence tags on service roads? It is perfectly valid and makes routing engine for pedestrian route foot traffic on the sidewalk instead of the road. Thanks!

In general, you should not remove tags before asking the previous editor or the community.
AndyB_66 (2025-08-27 18:27:00+00:00): Zmiany kategorii dróg należy najpierw przedyskutować na forum (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/kategorie-drog-w-miastach/133816) i uzyskać consensus lokalnej społeczności OSM

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171098163
dzamper (2025-08-27 20:03:28+00:00): @AndyB_66:

Dyskutowanie na forum całej polskiej społeczności o zmianie kategorii drogi z `unclassified` (jak już to powinno być `residential`) na `tertiary` to jest zdecydowanie strzelanie z armaty do muchy.

Jeśli już to niezłym miejscem na taką dyskusję byłby właśnie ten zestaw zmian. Nie wiem z jakiego powodu uznałeś że lepiej będzie niezwłocznie odpalić reverter zamiast taką dyskusję zainicjować chociaż tutaj.
AndyB_66 (2025-08-28 06:22:28+00:00): Residential byłoby OK, tertiary - wątpię. To już wymagałoby dyskusji właśnie - wcześniejszej, a nie post factum. User jest świeży, więc powinien nauczyć się zasad - stąd revert.
dzamper (2025-08-28 07:39:54+00:00): Tylko po co uczyć świeżych użytkowników zasad które nie istnieją? ;) Podlinkowałeś wątek na forum ale nawet tam nie ma nic co by stało chociaż blisko tematu konieczności dyskusji na skalę ogólnopolską zmian w klasyfikacji dróg ważnych na skalę dzielnicy
gscscnd (2025-08-29 06:58:30+00:00): Droga jest lokalnie dość istotna, absolutnie nie residential. tertiary mogłoby być, ale ponieważ sąsiednia Podmiejska/Strefowa jest ciut ważniejsza (a tertiary), to unclassified IMO bardziej pasuje.
AndyB_66 (2025-08-29 07:04:07+00:00): No i git - zmiana nie była zatem uzasadniona
Fizzie-DWG (2025-08-29 03:56:48+00:00): DWG revert - sockpuppet vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171162451
Kartibu (2025-09-02 07:00:01+00:00): Beim Antiquariat Bläschke https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3835420170 wirft Osmose jetzt den Error 

Invalid Opening Hours
The `opening_hours` value is invalid and could not be parsed

Die Öffnungszeiten wurden inhaltlich nicht geändert.

Es wurde lediglich die Syntax verändert, so dass sie jetzt fehlerhaft ist, ohne an den Öffnungszeiten inhaltlich etwas zu ändern.

Was ist der Hintergrund?
eggie (2025-08-28 06:35:18+00:00): Dag acurlio,

Alle info heb ik verplaatst naar de adresnode.

MVG
eggie
Lezurex (2025-08-30 19:15:29+00:00): Bilder die via StreetComplete hochgeladen wurden, werden nach einer gewissen Zeit gelöscht. Lade das Bild am besten auf Wikimedia Commons oder Panoramax hoch und verlinke dieses dann.
EuroScout (2025-08-31 08:29:10+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, Lezurex. Die Löschzeit ist mir bewusst, aber wollte zumindest für "Kontrolleure" einen Quellenhinweis dalassen. Die Alternativen schaue ich mir mal an, denn kenne ich bisher noch nicht. Muss schauen, ob sich dann schnell und praktikabel einbinden lässt.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-08-29 03:56:49+00:00): DWG revert - sockpuppet vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171162451
eggie (2025-08-28 06:31:46+00:00): Dag acurlio,

Wanneer een bedrijf verdwijnt dan voortaan alleen de bedrijfsinfo van de adresnode halen. Je hebt nu het hele adres verwijderd. Ik heb het hersteld.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-08-28 08:06:07+00:00): Dag F   
review_requested 	yes
Lijkt me allemaal oke.
Gr eggie
eggie (2025-08-28 08:07:48+00:00): Het noordelijke vak had nog een grote P. Daar heb ik nog street_side aan toegevoegd.
Gregory Peony (2025-08-29 03:12:23+00:00): Hi, the vast majority of buildings you added here are valid and represent those visible in imagery, however they could be more accurate as they are generally oversized and could be more accurately positioned relative to one another.  

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the roofs of buildings, but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag.  Take care to make contributions that others can build upon.

Sometimes it looks like you included a building's walls in its size and shape. Look to the SE at the taller buildings to more easily see which walls of buildings are visible in imagery. 

Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
あじさか (2025-08-29 04:11:42+00:00): Thank you very much for your detailed feedback.
I primarily use the Japan GSI seamlessphoto Imagery as the most reliable source for accuracy, so I believe the building shapes are generally correct.
After that, I refer to Bing and Esri imagery to check for temporal changes, adding or deleting features as needed.
Regarding roof overhangs, since they vary by building, I traced the roof edges as a guideline. I understand your point about overestimating footprints, so I will pay more attention to this in future contributions.
Thank you again for your kind and constructive review.
Gregory Peony (2025-09-13 20:14:18+00:00): You're welcome, and thank you for your response and explanation of your workflow. I have taken a look at the Japan GSI seamlessphoto layer in this area and think that you made a good decision to use it to obtain footprint shapes; the way the scenes are lit make the roofs more visible than in other sources. Beware that this layer seems to be compriesed of many secenes captured at different angles so buildings not too far from one another may have visible walls on different sides.

Do you know the claimed positional accuracy of that layer? you can check the meta data of a lot of the default soueces here https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/wayback/#active=21485&mapCenter=12.05732%2C25.09106%2C1&mode=explore

I agree that the building shapes are generally correct, just that some could have been mapped slightly smaller and moved to the base of the building. 

When mapping with imagery captured at an angle, please position features where they are at ground level. You can map the outline of the roof and then reposition the building to the base of the walls. I recommend you watch this [video about mapping dense urban areas](https://youtu.be/JAPiGntG6fs) and read this [written guide](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roof_modelling#Typical_errors_in_the_interpretation_of_roof_geometry_from_aerial_images). Most buildings here are not as tall as those in the video but their walls are visible.

It's true that we cannot always know the exact ammount of roof
overhang. In situations like this I think there is a range of accurate building sizes. I tend to aim for ~ 95% of the size of a pitched roof in general when I cannot see a building's walls directly. This allows me to map quite quickly as I don't have to be pixel perfect and allows enough room for other features.

I also like to use multiple imagery layers to aid my interpretation. You may already know these, but I wanted to share a few tips; 
1. Lowering the opacity of layer [2] to 50% while aligning it with layer [1] can aid with the process. 
2. You can use the shortcut alt+number to toggle the visibility of layers in JOSM.
3. when working with multiple layers via a tasking manager employ a standard message with the sources you use used and paste that into your task comment; many conrtibutors do not use OSMCha, so will likely not know that you used other sources. If you like you can also post your workflow in a project's comments section if you think it'll help others.

You use the buildingstools and extrude working modes, right?

In future I will be more likely to check the sources attributed to changesets, and the JOSM default imagery layers which are only available in certain areas to gain better understanding of the imagery context.

Thank you for your contribution!
あじさか (2025-09-19 00:05:51+00:00): Noted, thanks.
YomanNH (2025-08-27 19:31:34+00:00): "This feature has been labeled as deprecated. The recommended replacement is: amenity=clothes_dryer."

Źródło: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man%20made=clothes%20line?uselang=pl
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-28 11:13:19+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/amenity-clothes-dryer-to-man-made-clothes-line/134891/

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dclothes_dryer

Note that value for this tag is highly confusing as in English "clothes dryer" refers rather to powered appliance that heats air to remove moisture[1]. It appears that "clothes line" would be less confusing value[2]
YomanNH (2025-08-28 11:23:26+00:00): Tak, wiem, sam dodałeś ten fragment do dokumentacji. Jednak na razie dokumentacja jasno wskazuje, że poprawne jest używanie amenity=clothes_dryer, a nie man_made=clothes_line oznaczonego jako deprecated.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-28 11:24:35+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=ATYL
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-28 11:25:58+00:00): plus zobacz sobie https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/amenity-clothes-dryer-to-man-made-clothes-line/134891/2 - widać że aktualna wersja dokumentacji jest uważana za błędną nie tylko przeze mnie, wadliwe nazewnictwo potwierdziły w tym wątku też inne osoby
YomanNH (2025-08-28 11:38:49+00:00): To w takim razie powinno to mieć odzwierciedlenie w dokumentacji.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-28 12:01:44+00:00): zobacz sobie datę w  https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/amenity-clothes-dryer-to-man-made-clothes-line/134891/ - trwają nad tym prace

zaczęte właśnie po tym jak mapowałem ten obiekt
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-28 12:02:40+00:00): A jeśli chodzi o ścisłość: to jest już https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like

a jeśli brak amenity=clothes_dryer cię boli: możesz go dodać, specjalnie w man_made poszedłem by można było dać oba
Fizzie-DWG (2025-08-29 03:59:17+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18681
JuanElDemografo (2025-08-27 23:44:17+00:00): Looks fine. Are these edits from the Report a Camera form at plateprivacy.com? You might consider mentioning that in your user bio or the changeset's source field.
Institute for Justice (2025-10-21 20:14:36+00:00): Thank you, we will add it to our Bio.
jb54osm (2025-08-27 18:05:59+00:00): Dag OSM4802,

Het lijnnummer staat al in de ref-tag. En komt niet in de naam van de halte. (Zie alle andere haltes in NL).
Ik heb de lijnnummers weer uit de naam verwijderd.
silversurfer83 (2025-08-27 18:07:03+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap Henrik :)

danke, dass du mit OsmAnd hilfst die Datenbank aktuell zu halten.

Eine Bitte: Lass das Feld "Name" bitte frei, wenn es nicht wirklich der Name eines Objekts ist. Das Feld ist nicht für Beschreibungen gedacht.

Details liefert das OSM-Wiki unter
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen

Bei Fragen immer raus damit

silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171091217
GenGap (2025-08-27 18:55:07+00:00): Hi silversurfer, danke für die Willkommensgrüße! Alles klar, weiß ich Bescheid, danke! Ja bin grad am Anfang und muss noch viel lernen 😁

Habe bisher Google maps geupdated, aber möchte aufhören, den Konzernen zu helfen haha
silversurfer83 (2025-08-27 19:37:50+00:00): Da sag ich nicht nein ;)

falls du etwas feinfühliger arbeiten möchtest kann ich dir aber empfehlen auf andere Apps zum Erfassen der Daten umzusteigen und wenn du gerne einfach mal was fragen möchtest gibt es zum Bsp eine Gruppe bei Signal
https://signal.group/#CjQKIDw9atcGlqVHpUOvmQG4nqYBuWWxw44lD0Os5Zoe5A39EhD4z39uaKDvTim-TnNf21RA
silversurfer83 (2025-08-27 19:38:17+00:00): und ansonsten viel unter wiki.osm.org schmökern
GenGap (2025-08-27 19:40:44+00:00): Alles klar. Ja, setze mich bald mal an den PC. Smartphone ist eher nur Spielerei
GenGap (2025-08-27 19:41:23+00:00): Schon dabei 😅
Friendly_Ghost (2026-01-02 18:36:29+00:00): Hi. Please don't cut out waterways at bridges. There is still water under the bridges, this was already mapped correctly. 

Also, please write informative changeset comments.
Gregory Peony (2025-08-29 01:44:07+00:00): Hi Rabina, I'm not sure why you requested a review of this changeset, but the footprints to me look valid though they could be more accurate. See how I mapped this here https://osmcha.org/changesets/171160504

I expanded the NW footprint to its south after cross referencing bing imagery. Map it how you think is most likely in reality and if you really cannot tell then map features assuming them to be seperate to make surveys easier.

I then uploaded that change extending the footprint here https://osmcha.org/changesets/171160596
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171091745
impiaaa (2025-08-27 17:26:36+00:00): I don't think this is a good idea. natural=wood should be for forests, not canopy cover.
pixelpete (2025-08-27 22:20:42+00:00): Thanks for the input impiaaa. What's the best way to designate this kind of suburban tree canopy? There are many groupings of large/mature trees (say 5-20 of them) that can extend over an entire block. Should they just be identified as individual trees? They are beautiful and a defining feature of my neighborhood that I'd like to map.
Taya_S (2025-08-31 18:11:20+00:00): As a general rule of thumb, always try to increase the amount of detail. Removing individual trees and replacing them with blobs of forest is removing detail.

Additionally having a cluster of trees does not necessarily make it a forest. What I see here is just some trees in people's backyard. They're on top of driveways, grass yards, houses. That's hardly what I would call a forest.
pixelpete (2025-08-31 21:51:32+00:00): Thank you for explaining. That makes complete sense. I rarely, if ever, remove data from the map. 

In this case, I was the one who added thousands of individual trees to Menlo Park earlier this year. Honestly, I think I over did it... Now there are so many points (one for each tree) it makes editing other point entities in these areas more difficult. 

My intention was to improve the clarity of the map by replacing tree point clusters into small sections of wood forest canopy. This seemed logical to me since, I created them in the first place and this neighborhood was an extensive oak forest before it was carved up for suburban development.

Going forward, I should probably leave everything as it is in these residential areas. 

I wish I could turn off visibility on trees (and see other points) with the ID editor. That would improve clarity and ease of use for further editing. 

Thanks again for guiding me along on my effort to map trees in Menlo Park. - Pete
Taya_S (2025-09-01 06:40:06+00:00): I do get that. It can look rather messy. What arguably might help is micromapping it further ironically enough. 

If the backyards, fences, hedges, etc are also mapped, the trees stand out less. Though this is of course a lot of work and maybe also a matter of taste :P

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/55.973618/-3.213345
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.345996/4.970495

Best regards,
Taya Snijder
dieterdreist (2025-10-24 11:14:22+00:00): Hi, you added man_made=water_tap to a fountain which doesn’t have a tap. Please check the meaning of water tap, thank you.
Udarian (2025-08-27 20:20:53+00:00): next time please don't delete parking lots that are already mapped
Fan map 2 (2025-10-03 16:54:18+00:00): Błędna nazwa parafii. Wycofane w https://osm.org/changeset/172801509
benoitdd (2025-11-24 12:16:01+00:00): hello, pour le Crous, plutôt amenity=fastfood + fastfood=cafeteria. Sinon, amenity=canteen était correct. amenity=restaurant est plutôt utilisé s'il y a du service à la place.
Pour les amphis, il existe room=lecture_hall qui est plus précis que classroom.
question, est-ce bien amphi Fernat? ou plutôt Fermat?
Paauuuuul (2025-12-16 13:31:48+00:00): Merci pour les suggestions, j'ai appliqué ça. 
Et en effet, c'est Fermat et non pas Fernat !
bartgron (2025-10-04 08:49:15+00:00): Bzdurna nazwa usunięta, proszę o powstrzymanie się od niszczenia mapy
custodiankeyy (2025-08-28 17:01:58+00:00): Merhaba,

İşbirliğini geliştirmek ve düzenlemelerinizi diğerlerinin daha kolay anlayabilmesi için, lütfen değişikliklerinizi yorum alanında kısaca açıklayın. Bu, topluluğun düzenlemelerinizi daha kolay takip etmesini sağlayacaktır. İyi yorumlar hakkında bazı yararlı ipuçlarını aşağıda bulabilirsiniz:

osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Mapwriter5252 (2025-08-29 18:32:56+00:00): Uyarınız için teşekkür ederim. Geniş alanları kapsayan düzenlemelerin uygun olmadığını bilmiyordum. Amacım katkı sunmaktı fakat farkında olmadan gereğinden fazla alanı etkilemişim. Bundan sonra daha küçük alanlara odaklanarak, gerekirse daha fazla ama sınırlı kapsamlı düzenlemeler yapmaya özen göstereceğim. Bu konuyu bana ilettiğiniz için ayrıca teşekkür ederim; dikkat edeceğim.
Mapwriter5252 (2025-08-29 18:38:45+00:00): Ayrıca açıklama kısmını yanlış yazdığıma dair uyarınız için teşekkür ederim. Farkında olmadan böyle bir hata yapmışım, bundan sonra bu kısma daha dikkat edeceğim. Bu arada size iki ayrı yanıt vermem gerekirken yanlışlıkla ikisini birden tek yerde yazmışım, normalde ayrı ayrı yanıtlamam gerekiyordu. Bunun için de kusura bakmayın.
custodiankeyy (2025-08-30 07:12:43+00:00): Hiç problem değil. OpenStreetMap'teki düzenlemeleriniz için çok teşekkür eder; devamını dilerim.

Mutlu haritalandırmalar!
eggie (2025-08-27 18:22:49+00:00): Ook in 2018 heb ik al die parken terugedraaid in Deurne
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/55371756#map=15/51.45845/5.80386&layers=N

Dat was in de tijd van Pokemon om het spel te beïnvloeden. 
Er verschenen overal parken.
Dus hier de landuse svp herstellen.
eggie (2025-08-27 18:24:14+00:00): Om het simpel te houden heb ik landuse=grass bijgetagd naast de functie.
S_Bouwmans (2025-08-27 18:36:47+00:00): Excuses! Dank voor het aanpassen.
mapperich (2025-09-04 19:45:11+00:00): Hey AntSom, 
what is a 'graffiti' and who flagged it as that? 
Your reshaped outline is outdated, the building was demolished last year. 
My outline might now have been perfect but definitely not wrong. I based it on my memory and some photos: https://www.meinbezirk.at/wieden/c-wirtschaft/neues-caf-restaurant-resselpark-hat-keine-rueckseite_a7519615#gallery=null
AntSom (2025-09-04 20:59:47+00:00): Hi mapperich,

Thanks for reaching out to me about this. This was automatically flagged as part of a Map Roulette task and I had adjusted it based on the imagery that I had available to me through OSM. 

This is the Map Roulette that I work off of, it also contains a short summary of what its for: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/51744

Here's a link to a Wiki that goes into some detail about vandalism and graffiti: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism

I can revert my edit, but since the building is demolished, would it be better to remove the feature completely?

-Anthony
AntSom (2025-09-05 14:46:10+00:00): Hi Luzandro,

Thanks for answering my question. I'll try and be more careful when I'm looking at the flagged features for this Map Roulette.

-Anthony
mapperich (2025-09-05 20:46:56+00:00): Hi, 
thanks for reverting it. all good. :)
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-27 17:32:36+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/249359571

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-29 20:05:45+00:00): naprawione
Udarian (2025-08-27 19:25:44+00:00): next time please don't delete existing parking lots.
ParkMagnet (2025-08-27 20:03:35+00:00): I can't figure out how to see older versions, but I'm fairly certain that I had replaced the monolithic parking rectangle with the four actual rows of parking.