piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
GBAB (2023-12-15 08:40:51+00:00): Kedves Hungarian_user!

A wikin az oldal a place=* címkéjű pontok elhelyezéséről szól, ami itt pl. a place=village pontra is érthető. Ezeket szoktuk a település központjába helyezni. („Olyan lakott hely esetében, ahol van egy központi fekvésű városháza, tér vagy hasonló, akkor oda.” – fogalmaz a wiki.)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Usage

A településközpont nem elvont fogalom, nagyon is kézzel fogható. De ha elvont lenne, akkor is lehetne definiálni. Azon természetesen lehet vitákat folytatni, hogy egy adott falu központja a községháza előtt, a fő utcák metszéspontja mellett vagy valamelyik templom előtt van, annál is inkább, mert a központ végeredményben egy terület, mi pedig egy ponttal jelöljük. Abban viszont feltehetően elég széles körű a konszenzus, hogy a központ nem az előbb említett objektumoktól kilométernyi távolságra, a falu melletti réten található.

Ha a place=* címkét a településközponttól messze helyezzük, attól még természetesen valóban az adatbázis része marad. Az adatbázis esetében ugyanakkor nem csupán az adatok megléte a fontos, hanem a minőségük is. A minőséget pedig – egyéb megoldás híján – leginkább úgy mérhetjük, hogy mennyire felel meg a wikiben található normáknak.

Az útvonaltervező nem megjelenítő. Az útvonaltervezők már meglévő rendereléseket használnak alaprétegként, s arra rajzolják rá az útvonalat. A https://openstreetmap.org oldalon is le lehet futtatni különféle útvonaltervezőket, vagy pl. a https://graphhoppers.com/maps oldalon jobbra fönt megadhatjuk, hogy milyen térkép szerepeljen a felrajzolt útvonal alatt.

Amennyire tudom, az útvonaltervezők esetében szintén eléggé konszenzusos megoldás, hogy – megintcsak egyéb híján – ha egy bizonyos helyre akarunk velük navigálni, akkor az adott place=* címkéjű helyhez fognak minket vinni. (Ami egyébként akár egy kapcsolat admin_centre szerepű tagja is lehet, de nem feltétlenül az.) Tehát ha Hárskútra szeretnénk menni, akkor keres egy place=* és name=Hárskút helyet, s talán szerencsésebb, ha ez a hely a falu központja felé található, mintha mellette az erdőben. Annyi eszük egyébként tényleg szokott lenni, hogy csak járható úton vezessenek, s ha az adott pont nem járható úton van, akkor a hozzá legközelebb lévő útpontig visznek, vagyis pl. a mező mellett futó út azon helyéig, amely a legközelebb található a célponthoz.

(Mindazonáltal valóban nem volt szerencsés példa részemről az útvonaltervezőket felhozni, hiszen azok is csak felhasználói az adatbázisnak. De mindez mit sem módosít azon, hogy a térképezők között lévő viszonylag széles körű konszenzus alapján, s az ezt rögzívtő wikibejegyzés nyomán a települést jelző pontot a település központjába szoktuk helyezni.)

Üdv:

Gábor
BáthoryPéter (2023-12-15 09:55:05+00:00): # How to map
Place a node at the center of the village, like the central square, a central administrative or religious building or a central road junction and tag it place=village.

Nem hiszem, hogy ebben a témában túl sok megvitatni való lenne.

Iván: legyűjtöd az összes elvándorolt place node-ot?
kogutowicz-mano (2023-12-15 10:05:34+00:00): > Tudatosan szoktam szerkeszteni, úgyhogy erre a sértésre inkább nem írok semmit. 
Mellesleg nem látok semmi sértést az eredeti felvetésben.
Kádár Iván (2023-12-15 13:47:48+00:00): Péter:
JOSM távirányító link:
https://pastebin.com/n4ZtHAcf
Településlista:
https://pastebin.com/buPYrJLg

Semmi szűrést nem végeztem, csak a pozíció nem egyezik meg.
arjunaraoc (2023-12-28 15:21:50+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).

Please ensure that each changeset covers a smaller area of changes for easier review.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145063852
osmviborg (2023-12-13 08:01:37+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145051571
Kovoschiz (2023-12-21 06:00:39+00:00): Please don't include objects inside as  `inner` . They are part of it.
arjunaraoc (2023-12-17 00:31:37+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia) I have resolved tag errors for newly added load by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145201364
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145064609
martianfreeloader (2024-01-28 14:34:39+00:00): Seems to resolve https://www.osm.org/note/3972249
NorthCrab_upload (2023-12-13 08:31:09+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Krokusowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414312748
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414312749
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414320687
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414320731
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414320732
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414320755
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414320756

"Łokietka":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414320726

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
mcliquid (2023-12-13 11:52:40+00:00): Hi,

just a general recommendation: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:

• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)

• keep changes within the same country

• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
bxl-forever (2023-12-13 12:32:47+00:00): It looks like another maps.me edit containing useless or duplicate POI.

Restaurant Luciano (11414342369, v1) is a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11367975172

Wood house (11414342969, v1) does not seem like a real name, and the user only set name:en and no name

Sway (11414342769, v1) is a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11010605573

Amnia (11414342770, v1) is a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11014712790

…and probably more.
Nakaner (2023-12-13 16:37:59+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145081870
NorthCrab_upload (2023-12-13 08:40:57+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414343073

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
arjunaraoc (2023-12-29 02:16:02+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145065625
alexnder (2023-12-14 05:47:33+00:00): Salut,

Văd c-ai adăugat aici trotuar separat; pentru ăsta trebuie adăugat și pe drumul de care depinde `sidewalk:left=separate` sau `sidewalk:right=separate` , in funcție de partea pe care se află. 

Deasemenea, văd că o parte din ce-ai adăugat e trecută ca highway=path, aia nu e tot sidewalk?
Stian Cristian (2023-12-14 08:16:44+00:00): Salut!

Am rezolvat path la sidewalk

O să mă uit și la detalii pentru Elena Văcărescu.
MainFlag0681 (2025-03-24 14:22:04+00:00): Seems to be an overlapping road here

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1230799036#map=19/33.843921/-87.251473
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2025-03-25 22:44:27+00:00): Hi, MainFlag0681! 
My name is Yuliya, and I am the Quality Control Lead on the OSM team at Lyft. 

We apologize for not having corrected the building's form. Regrettably, as of our edits in late 2023, our policy did not mandate the correction of the building's form. However, it has been revised, in part, thanks to your feedback, and we now ensure that we adjust buildings if they intersect with the roads we have added. 

Based on the October 2024 Lyft-owned aerial imagery: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jBFxsxTlDl9qpPbT696Rc0KUegwDAPUW/view?usp=drive_link, it appears that no further modifications are currently necessary here.

Thank you very much for your input to OSM, as well as your edits and insights.

Best regards, Yuliya
adreamy (2023-12-17 05:27:26+00:00): 편집에 참여해 주시고 최신 정보를 반영해 주셔서 고맙습니다.
공사 중이거나 폐기된 지물의 경우에도 지물이 남아 있는 경우에는 그 내용을 표시할 수 있습니다.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Construction
- https://t.me/OSMKorea
eggie (2023-12-13 09:14:34+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback Format phone=  in OSM +31

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
pyrog (2024-01-06 08:28:08+00:00): Bonjour,

En fusionnant 2 ways, tu as créé une discontinuité dans les itinéraires "GR 2" et "Tour des Maquisards" (et indirectement le "E5" qui réutilise l'étape du GR).

C'est visible dans Waymarked Trails ou dans le moniteur d'itinéraires de Knooppuntnet.

Je corrige.

Cordialement,
Yves

https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=16.0/48.0197/4.4918

https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/monitor/groups/fr-nwn/routes/GR%20%20%202/map?sub-relation-id=8413153&mode=osm-segments&reference=false&matches=true&deviations=true&osm-relation=true&position=48.01847369,4.49724251,14&selected-osm-segment=2
Patchanka (2023-12-15 17:31:48+00:00): merci de respecter les contributeurs et contributrices bénévoles qui traitent ces notes en n'envoyant pas d'informations inutiles ou erronées.

Bonnes pratiques : https://www.openstreetmap.fr/les-bonnes-pratiques-pour-contribuer-a-openstreetmap-en-snt/
Patchanka (2023-12-15 17:59:43+00:00): j'ai annulé cette modification. Merci de ne pas ajouter d'informations personnelles
user_17222985 (2023-12-13 09:25:35+00:00): ALSO REMOVED DUPLICATE SCHOOL + LANDUSE=INDUSTRIAL
limes11 (2023-12-13 10:43:42+00:00): Hi, 

hier ist noch eine hw=path-Brücke

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135304972

Wenn man die nicht mit einem KFZ überqueren kann, dann helfen die hw=service auf der anderen Seite nicht. 

Sollte die Brücke hw=service sein?

VG
NorthCrab_upload (2023-12-13 09:30:29+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414324260
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414402485

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
ivanbranco (2024-02-29 16:08:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148045806
eggie (2023-12-13 11:32:23+00:00): Dag Array,

Je hebt van oneway=yes > no gemaakt, maar de uitzonderingen op oneway=yes voor tweewielers laten staan.
Je hoeft overigens geen oneway=no te taggen, want dat is default op reguliere wegen.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-12-13 11:35:01+00:00): De uitzonderingen op oneway=yes heb ik verwijderd van dat tussenstukje.
Was nu toch bezig. 
MVG
eggie
Array9762 (2023-12-13 12:40:46+00:00): Hi eggie,

Dank, ik heb dat waarschijnlijk over het hoofd gezien. Het is dan ook een van mij eerste wijzigingen in OSM.

Groet!
osmviborg (2023-12-13 09:52:20+00:00): This is not the name of a 'isolated_dwelling' it's the name of the farm 'place = farm'
Carto'Cité (2024-02-07 13:05:49+00:00): Hello.
Please have a look at the history of an object before applying a "minor fix". https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/957874728 is still a railway platform – physically – however it is no longer a public_transport platform as no train stops here any longer.
Regards,
Antoine on behalf of SNCF
user_5589 (2024-02-07 19:25:08+00:00): Well in that case it was tagged incorrectly. If it's no longer used by passengers then it is disused and should have been tagged as such.

This has now been corrected.
Carto'Cité (2024-02-08 08:56:58+00:00): Thanks for the answer. I'm not too sure about the proposed fix though. The platform is still there and should show up on the map, however it is no longer used for public transport and should not be used by the public transport model.

Another example would be a railway platform used to load and unload goods. It seems to me it should have the tag railway=platform (what else otherwise ?) but not public_transport=plaform. Regardless of its history (lifecycle prefix) and of its access tag.
Xvtn (2023-12-13 22:29:07+00:00): Hi, thanks for your contribution! Since you requested a review, here are a few tips:

- The Description tag should be a concise description of the feature rather than a free-form ad space.
- Opening hours and address tags follow a specific syntax. It can sometimes be a little tricky but using this format makes it machine-readable, meaning apps and whatnot can parse it reliably.

I went ahead and made those changes. Thanks again, and welcome to OSM!
spiregrain (2023-12-13 16:13:52+00:00): Hi there - thanks for your edit.  You've removed 'platform lift' tags here.   Do you have knowledge of the station, or are you just fixing the inconsistency in the tags?

I'm asking because your changes have prompted me to look at the station (which is local to me).  I think it should have wheelchair=yes set, since there are lifts to all platforms and to the street level.   See https://images.nationalrail.co.uk/e8xgegruud3g/jo1LzSAAWKYEWhZQDTZh4/056fd6a54a7c528f160c5b11bc60e52a/Maryland_station_map.jpg  & https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/maryland/
wielandb (2023-12-13 18:23:02+00:00): Hey, thanks for reaching out! I am working on behalf of OPENER, the project that developed the App that initially made this change. 
Due to a bug, the App set the tags "platform_lift=no;platform_lift:portable=yes" when the user selected that there is no platform lift. 
This was wrong, and I am going around and fixing all wrong tags the app has set since the update was released. 

So yeah, I have no local knowledge of the platform, I only set the tags according to what the (deleted) user answered. 

Also note that a platform may very well be wheelchair=yes if there is no platform lift. The "platform" in platform_lift refers to the kind of wheelchair lift, not to the public transport platform. There are articles on the wiki that I wrote that should clear up any confusion. 🙂

Best,
Wieland (on behalf of OPENER)
wielandb (2023-12-13 18:24:55+00:00): (Sorry, posted this with my private mapping account by accident. *This* is the proper account where I make changes for OPENER.)
wielandb-paid (2023-12-13 18:26:24+00:00): Holy cow, **this** is the proper account. 
(Note to self: Do not respond to CS comments on mobile. 😅)
spiregrain (2023-12-14 09:54:07+00:00): I've been reading up on Platform Lifts on the OSM wiki - confusing at first, but I think I understand it now in general and what you and OPENER have done here.  Thanks for taking the time to respond in full.  Maryland certainly has 'normal' 'elevators' to all platforms, and (if I remember correctly) some temporary ramps for certain train types "ramp:portable=yes"?   I'll add all that and wheelchair=yes next time I have eyes on the site.
OSM_RogerWilco (2023-12-18 12:41:22+00:00): Wenn die Strecken als Nordic Walking Strecken ausgewiesen sind, dann sollten sie auch so erfasst werden. Hast Du Dir die Wege vor Ort angesehen oder machst Du die Änderung nur aus der Ferne?
m-h-a (2023-12-21 08:33:35+00:00): Hallo, ich kenne die meisten der Strecken um Neuenkirchen von vor Ort. Die Strecken sind sowohl als Wander UND als Nordic Walking ausgewiesen. Die Strecken waren ursprpnglich route=hiking. Ich wollte route=nordic_walking hinzufügen, habe dann aber gesehen, dass die Strecken dann in den meisten Wanderkarten nicht mehr gerendert werden (der tag wird auch so gut wie nicht benutzt, siehe die Strecken in der Heide). Dieser Änderungssatz ist dann nur das rückgängigmachen meiner Änderung plus zahlreiche Ergänzungen wie OSMC-Symbole.
Wunjo Aydınlatma (2023-12-13 09:58:43+00:00): Anka Pet Otel & Akademi
b-holdet (2023-12-13 13:42:50+00:00): Please stop putting in names that does not exist!!!
NorthCrab_upload (2023-12-13 10:10:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Podana kombinacja addr:city + addr:place jest nieprawidłowa.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11414441853

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
glibbertorsten (2023-12-15 12:14:37+00:00): Hallo! Was immer du an den Toren ändern wolltest - Autobahnraststätten sind es nicht. Habe den Änderungssatz rückgängig gemacht. Bei Fragen stehe ich gern zu Verfügung. Gruß https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145148440
arjunaraoc (2023-12-18 06:07:37+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145069108
arjunaraoc (2023-12-18 01:42:23+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia). Please follow naming guidance (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names) Check my update https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145233973
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145069116
arjunaraoc (2023-12-18 01:38:35+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145069165
AndersAndersson (2023-12-18 11:20:35+00:00): Hej!
Strax söder om Tobo station sticker järnvägsområdet ut ur skogspolygonen så att multipolygonen kraschar.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15611528#map=16/60.2575/17.6408
02JanDal (2023-12-18 12:07:59+00:00): Yes, la märke till det häromdagen i renderingen, tror det var något mer ställe det det glappade också . Ska ta en tur med JOSM och fixa till problemen ikväll.
02JanDal (2023-12-18 19:20:11+00:00): Förhoppningsvis fixat: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145263733
AndersAndersson (2023-12-18 21:40:51+00:00): Ser bra ut. Tackar!
BCNorwich (2023-12-14 07:57:35+00:00): Your duplicated highway removed.
arjunaraoc (2023-12-18 01:37:17+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145069482
yawfle (2023-12-16 00:34:49+00:00): Hi! I'm reverting this change, because this section of street still exists. It has a barrier in place to restrict normal automobile traffic, but still allows bicycles, etc. and even some large vehicles in an emergency. Here is a photograph:

https://i.imgur.com/6lJitoF.jpeg

I will try to use better tags when I restore it, unfortunately I'm not aware of any that are a perfect match. If you have any suggestions about how to prevent edits like this one in the future, please let me know. Cheers!
ashybko_lyft (2023-12-18 13:42:29+00:00): Hi, yawfle!
My name is Anna, and I’m a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for paying attention to this. You are absolutely right, removing a mentioned segment could block traffic for cyclists.
In order to more reliably block unwanted routing at this intersection, let's inspect one of the following options:
1. We can add the tag motor_vehicle=no to the segment with barrier, that will block car routing;
2. Based on your knowledge that the cycle and emergency traffic is allowed, we can add a combination of tags to the node with planter: access=no + bicycle=yes + emergency=yes.
We will be glad to know your opinion on this matter. 
Best regards,
Anna
yawfle (2023-12-18 22:34:52+00:00): Thank you for the suggestions! I posted a longer response here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145069988
Đuro Jiří (2023-12-14 06:34:43+00:00): "Stranddusche" è nome descrittivo. Doccia sulla spiaggia probabilmente non ha proprio nome.
lumixa112 (2023-12-14 10:12:41+00:00): Dankeschön für die Bearbeitung und den Hinweis.
mangerlahn (2024-01-06 00:03:35+00:00): Warum wurde das hier geändert?
Lutz Herrmann (2024-01-08 11:13:46+00:00): Es war ein Test im Rahmen meiner Ausbildung von Geomatikern. Kann gelöscht werden.
MFG
Lutz Herrmann
BFW Leipzig
habi (2024-01-08 11:30:04+00:00): Bitte füge *keine* Test-Daten in OpenStreetMap ein, die Daten werden weltweit verwendet.
Wenn du unbedingt etwas testen möchtest, gibt es https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_the_dev_server
habi (2024-01-08 11:30:35+00:00): Revertiert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146025178
yawfle (2023-12-16 00:35:36+00:00): Hi! I'm reverting this change, because this section of street still exists. It has a barrier in place to restrict normal automobile traffic, but still allows bicycles, etc. and even some large vehicles in an emergency. Here is a photograph:

https://i.imgur.com/6lJitoF.jpeg

I will try to use better tags when I restore it, unfortunately I'm not aware of any that are a perfect match. If you have any suggestions about how to prevent edits like this one in the future, please let me know. Cheers!
kmarkish_lyft (2023-12-18 13:36:06+00:00): Hi, yawfle! 
My name is Kate, and I’m a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. 
Many thanks for sharing the photo and informing us about reverted changes.
In this case, I decided to disconnect roads, because the passage through this barrier by cyclists or someone else looks unsafe in my view. I suggest applying tag motor_vehicle=no to the segment  with barrier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1231579385/history to exclude it completely from navigation for cars.
Another option is a combination of tags ‘access=no’ +’emergency=yes+bicycle=yes’ on the way. Perhaps, it would be also useful to add turn restrictions from alleys to North Cordova Street in order to provide a more comprehensive and accurate representation of the real situation on the map. Please, let me know if any suggestions will be acceptable for you.
 
Regards, Kate.
yawfle (2023-12-18 22:32:31+00:00): I forget about turn restrictions, that's a good idea. It seems like a good routing algorithm should only need the motor_vehicle=no tag on the barrier itself, but I'm not opposed to also tagging the section of way if that will help. As for the safety of cyclists, there is room for riding to the side of the barriers, as they don't fill the whole width of the street. I'm sorry, my picture doesn't show this very well... it also doesn't show the large rocks placed on the grass to prevent creative motorists from attempting the same thing. Incidentally, this strange situation is a compromise between the resident's concerns about increased traffic from a large business and the concerns about emergency vehicle access. It's unusual even for that area.

Thank you for the suggestions, I will implement them soon unless you prefer to do it yourself.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-05 09:41:09+00:00): Cleaned up name=* for SEO spam POI Chappelle Roofing - Sarasota in changeset 183685851

https://osm.org/changeset/183685851
maraf24 (2023-12-13 11:24:29+00:00): Fundament:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1230817823
NorthCrab (2023-12-13 15:09:40+00:00): Zapisałem na https://github.com/Zaczero/osm-budynki-orto-import/issues/3 i oznaczyłem jako building=construction
maraf24 (2023-12-13 21:40:57+00:00): 1 przypadek na 66 to bardzo dobry wynik, na pewno nie gorszy od człowieka - niektórzy mapujący też tak tagują fundamenty.
NorthCrab (2023-12-14 11:41:54+00:00): Bot skonfigurowany jest na 1 błąd na około 300 przypadków: https://github.com/Zaczero/osm-budynki-orto-import/blob/18130f899a820220d658b27f6c87c58385fd84a3/config.py#L56
OSM_RogerWilco (2023-12-14 12:33:11+00:00): Hallo shinekrabby,

warum hast Du den POI verschoben?

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
shinekrabby (2023-12-14 12:42:01+00:00): Hey der Poi ist wieder auf seinen Platz zurück gezogen. Brauchte denn da nur mal aus dem Sichtfeld für etwas anderes 😉. Hoffe das ist jetzt nicht so schlimm 🤗