piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
t_ja (2025-11-02 19:35:10+00:00): Ahoj,
predpokladám, že tieto zmeny sú vykonané skriptom, preto by ho bolo vhodné upraviť, aby k otváracím hodinám pridával vždy "PH off". Napr. tu si pred dvoma rokmi pridal aj "PH off", ale teraz si ho pri aktualizácii zmazal: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/358508189/history/9 . A takých POI je viac.

Inak dobrá práca 👍
Dodko (2025-11-02 19:43:10+00:00): Myslel som, že je zbytočné pridávať PH off, nabudúce ak sa budú meniť hodiny môžem pridať.

Všimol som si, že u nás zmenili na pošte otváracie hodiny tak som aktualizoval už celé slovensko.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-05 23:50:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 174264337 where the changeset comment is: Revering more 'castles'.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18926 and linked blocks.
amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️‍⚧️ (2025-11-03 15:37:47+00:00): Hello there!
I notice here that you have extendeded the Shannon to flow much father into the Atlantic than before. Specifically this way ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1446958027#map=12/52.5283/-9.8407). But there's an unnamed gap upstream of that <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1446958026#map=13/52.57383/-9.70054>. So the whole Shannon river name is interrupted. I also notice that you have extended the Feale to join the Shannon <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1446958030#map=14/52.52001/-9.71398>.

I think this is all a bit strech to say that the Feale is a tributary of the Shannon... I know the end point of the shannon is contested, but I think this is a bit of a strech. 🙂

I hope you don't mind, but I've brought the shannon back a bit in <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174153725#map=11/52.5749/-9.6471>
amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️‍⚧️ (2025-11-03 15:48:18+00:00): BTW, if you like rivers, you may like my site WaterwayMap.org: https://waterwaymap.org/ or the River Database: <https://waterwaymap.org/river/> which is how I noticed this break in the names

PS: I'm Irish.
ion_chi (2025-11-03 16:17:26+00:00): Hey Nick,
What's the intention with highway=footway + cycleway=path? cycleway=path doesn't look to be a common tag https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Dpath
nickvet419 (2025-11-03 16:39:32+00:00): was just merging some features of the unmarked bike path,  missed fixing that tag that was attached
ion_chi (2025-11-03 16:43:40+00:00): makes sense, thanks
gurglypipe (2025-11-02 19:39:18+00:00): Are you sure this isn’t a duplicate of the two masts already mapped either side of it?
gurglypipe (2025-11-07 10:49:57+00:00): I’ve reverted this as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174327623 because it’s not visible on aerial imagery and duplicates the two masts next to it.

If it’s a newer mast which hasn’t appeared on imagery yet, please point to the RF survey! Thanks
Traffikant (2026-01-02 13:25:33+00:00): Hallo Emil1887, warum hast du den separat gemappten Poller-Radweg hier (Spandauer Damm) entfernt? 
Ist es nicht sinnvoller, hier eine durchgängige Radweg-Linie in der Karte zu haben?
MaliMrav (2025-11-04 08:11:41+00:00): Zdravo Badojo,

Da li su pojedini nazivi na ovom delu ulice:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/822366194

obrisani namerno ili slučajno?

Pozdrav
Badojo (2025-11-04 08:27:05+00:00): Pozdrav,

to sam zaboravio obrisati jer na highway=secondary_link i slično ne bi trebala ići imena ulica
MaliMrav (2025-11-08 14:58:28+00:00): Ok, obrisao sam ih.
Matt McCutchen (2025-11-02 19:54:26+00:00): Forgot source = shop web pages
Sayed  Ali Bayan (2025-11-02 20:06:43+00:00): Added agricultural landuse polygons and updated road classification in Bamyan
gurglypipe (2025-11-02 19:43:09+00:00): There’s no mast visible on Bing aerial imagery here, and there also isn’t one listed on https://mastdatabase.co.uk/gb/sites/. What RF survey did you use?
gurglypipe (2025-11-07 10:50:21+00:00): I’ve reverted this as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174327623

If it’s a newer mast which hasn’t appeared on imagery yet, please point to the RF survey! Thanks
user_5359 (2025-11-03 07:08:39+00:00): Welcome to OSM! 
Please be careful! You moved the node https://www.osm.org/node/4636761046 more than 100 meters over streets and buildings. 
I moved the node back to the original position.
Fraxi (2025-11-02 20:53:06+00:00): Наличието на вход може би няма отношение към навигацията. Митко може по-добре да Ви обясни, аз не съм толкова наясно. Но знам, че като се тестват маршрутите след извършена промяна, трябва да се изчакат няколко дена. За да се обновят данните. Тоест, това, което сте си мислил, че е неработещо, след няколко дена, да се окаже работещо.
Fraxi (2025-11-02 20:53:45+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Checking_your_fix
Dimitar155 (2025-11-05 22:30:48+00:00): Потвърждавам, наличието на вход не пречи на навигацията. Просто тя се обновява с 5-6 дена закъснение, поради което не отразява веднага всяка промяна.
tordans (2025-11-03 14:15:45+00:00): FYI ich habe beim Vorbeifahren den Eindruck, dass die meisten der Poller  schon wieder weg sind. Gut, dass wir frische Fotos hatten, dann können wir die bald schon auf "razed:*" setzen.
SomeoneElse (2025-11-04 23:36:35+00:00): Hello,
Do you fancy having a go at adding the roads to the west to the NCN so that it is continuous again?  Currently there is a gap: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/167055#map=17/50.317603/-5.082389
Best Regards,
Andy
quilkin (2025-11-05 12:56:30+00:00): Andy - Yes, of course, I should have done that. Thanks for pointing this out.
All the different crossing points along the new A30 are in such a state of flux it's difficult to keep up!

Chris
Sylabowy Kot (2025-11-02 20:56:21+00:00): No była ścieżka i została zepsuta. Opis zmiany nie mówi, jaki był zamiar autora, który chyba nie zobaczył efektu. Wycofałem: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174121498
brdrsrsu (2025-11-02 20:55:15+00:00): Can you please clarify what this changeset is trying to accomplish? Just a short "ok" doesn't tell us much. Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
DZSOKIJUING (2025-11-02 21:00:36+00:00): Hi! The OK stands for its ok by me! Noother significant meaning, but it ask for comment!
DZSOKIJUING (2025-11-02 21:02:26+00:00): By the way the other user who paint literally on this map is making things up and adding some fantasy markings! If not on the web interface, how can i filter him out from my dataset!?
brdrsrsu (2025-11-02 21:36:28+00:00): OSM is a collaborative map editing project, meaning everyone is working on the same dataset - OpenStreetMap. One cannot filter out another mapper, but users who are consistently making bad edits can get blocked or banned. In this case, members of both the Serbian and international OSM communities were questioning the validity of your changesets, considering that you are still a new user, and many of your edits up to this point have been deletions. That is why your recent changes ended up getting reverted as potential vandalism. Serbian OSM community is most active on Telegram (channel: osm_sr ), so if you'd like to reach out and meet, you are welcome to join. You can also post on the OSM community forums, though Telegram is easier for frequent or "minor" questions, and forum better reserved for topics possibly needing discussion.
DZSOKIJUING (2025-11-02 21:42:37+00:00): Ok, no problem! I'll just download the dataset and will make my changes offline! How can i revert all my changes that was before me? Best regards!
NorthCrab_upload (2025-11-02 20:41:45+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/13276307124

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
brdrsrsu (2025-11-02 20:52:07+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM! Landuse is not the same as building, so if you believe landuse=industrial is no longer applicable, please consider updating landuse accordingly, so if the area is now commercial / used for retail, change the landuse to commercial. You can read more about commercial landuse here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dcommercial and in general about landuse here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse
DZSOKIJUING (2025-11-02 21:07:24+00:00): This one is a plane commercial store and it's nothing special, today store tomorrow a house !Best Regards!
HellMap (2025-11-03 14:06:51+00:00): Ja tiek dzēsti masveidā koku punkti, tad tos vajadzētu aizvietot ar koku rindu vai meža/koku laukumu kā piemēram https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1447140490. Es nedomāju, ka visi šie koki šeit ir nozāģēti. Tie bija neprecīzi un pēc skaita aptuveni iezīmēti, bet dzēst gan tos pilnībā nevajadzētu citādi neiekartējot.
HellMap (2025-11-03 14:09:27+00:00): Vai šis celiņš https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311080389 caur https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311080396  tiešām ir pazudis? Vai te kaut kas ir pārbūvēts, pārstādīts vai mainīts?
EFL2025 (2025-11-02 20:26:57+00:00): The devices leading into BJ's are Motorola
HellMap (2025-11-03 14:12:00+00:00): Vai šie koki tiešām šogad ir nozāģēti? Tie bija veloceļa malā starp stāvvietu un zāles gabalu/dobi.
yelisey90 (2026-01-21 02:47:56+00:00): Tremendously expanded construction area:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177501627
yelisey90 (2026-01-21 02:53:12+00:00): Whole new neighbourhood... https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20121748
aharvey (2025-11-03 00:23:02+00:00): "Saturday: Closed,Sunday: Closed" can be added with "Sa off; Su off" this makes it explicit that it's closed on the weekend.
Julysfire (2025-11-02 20:45:13+00:00): Will be using something like this in the future, will be fine tuning this soon.


Ways that were added had these tags: {'building': 147, 'natural': 22, 'leisure': 2, 'location': 2, 'swimming_pool': 2, 'waterway': 76, 'tunnel': 32, 'barrier': 7, 'landuse': 33, 'highway': 2, 'name': 2, 'name:left': 2, 'name:right': 2, 'name_2': 2, 'name_3': 2, 'surface': 2, 'tiger:name_base_2': 2, 'tiger:name_base_3': 2, 'tiger:name_base_4': 2, 'tiger:name_direction_prefix_2': 2, 'tiger:name_direction_suffix_2': 2, 
'tiger:name_direction_suffix_3': 2, 'tiger:name_direction_suffix_4': 2, 'bridge': 1}
Ways that were modified has these tags: {'highway': 16, 'name': 12, 'surface': 10, 'bicycle': 1, 'cycleway': 1, 'name:left': 1, 'name:right': 1, 'name_2': 1, 'name_3': 1, 'tiger:name_base_2': 1, 'tiger:name_base_3': 1, 'tiger:name_base_4': 1, 'tiger:name_direction_prefix_2': 1, 'tiger:name_direction_suffix_2': 1, 'tiger:name_direction_suffix_3': 1, 'tiger:name_direction_suffix_4': 1, 'waterway': 4, 'natural': 1, 'building': 1, 'landuse': 1}
HellMap (2025-11-03 14:18:10+00:00): Šie ceļi nebūs `service=drive-through`, bet vienkārši `highway=service` vai arī `driveway`, ja tiešām tikai pie teritorijas. Šajā gadījumā, šeit ir vairākas teritorijas, stāvvieta, u.c. `drive-through` tie ir reti sastopami ceļi gar piemēram ātro ēdienu logiem vai automazgātuvju caurbrauktuvēm.
fortera_au (2025-11-10 03:21:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 174443403 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: incompatible source
WindStream (2025-11-04 17:33:34+00:00): Здравствуйте
Зачем удалили данные по ВСМ-3?
El'ton (2025-11-04 23:03:06+00:00): Здравствуйте. Ее там нет.
WindStream (2025-11-05 08:06:31+00:00): Изучите теги жизненного цикла в OSM (proposed:, construction:, disused:, abandoned:, was:)

В базе OSM хранятся не только существующие объекты
MikiDi (2025-11-20 12:57:04+00:00): Beste,
Mogelijks is er een vergissing geslopen in het toevoegen van de AED's aan de sporthal.
Er zijn nu 2 AED's gemapt aan de sporthal.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13276408202 en https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13283690409
Beide Mapillary foto's lijken echter te verwijzen naar de locatie van https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13283690409 (vijver te zien door de deur in de achtergrond).
philippec (2025-11-20 16:46:59+00:00): gefixt, zonder foto's zou ik het ook niet meer weten
MikiDi (2025-11-22 15:48:46+00:00): ok. dankuwel.
Frans S (2025-11-04 13:29:07+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. 
We welcome you as a new mapper.
Please map more accurate and square each rectangular building with the Q key.
Best regards
mueschel (2025-11-06 11:20:55+00:00): Hier sind zwei Bänke mit "bind=yes", das sieht nach einem Fehler aus:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13276435441
HellMap (2025-11-03 14:48:22+00:00): Šis velo posms ir vienvirziena, ja te nekas nav mainījies.
ToniE (2025-12-11 15:11:57+00:00): Hi,

Wenn die Bahnsteigkante oder die Bushaltestelle 'member' einer PTv2-Relation ist, ist 'public_transport' = 'platform' oder = 'stop_position' gefordert.

Eigentlich müsste man den gesamten Changeset rückgängig machen.

Gruß
Toni
bbqman (2025-11-02 21:41:10+00:00): also source: local knowledge
marmara_editor (2025-11-02 22:40:19+00:00): Merhaba, değişikleriniz için teşekkürler, lütfen Tarım Orman Müdürlüğünün alanını eklerken building= tag'ini kullanmamaya, yaya geçitlerinde yaya yolunu diğer yaya yoluna bağlamaya, işletme isimlerini yazarken büyük harfle yazmamaya dikkat edelim.
HellMap (2025-11-03 14:54:17+00:00): Šī posma ielas nosaukums pēc kadastra ir "Akāciju iela" nevis "Aviācijas iela", kas ir perpendikulāri. Piebrauktuvēm ielu nosaukumi OSM netiek piešķirti un tikai retos gadījumos kā šeit ielu nosaukumu līnijas šķērso īpašumus, kas nav pašas par sevi ielu teritorijas.
HellMap (2025-11-03 15:00:34+00:00): Ja iepriekš bija pielikts `noname=yes`, tad lūgums pievērst uzmanību kādēļ šādi bija norādīts pirms to dzēst un likt nosaukumu. Šajā gadījumā te kadastrā nav ielu nosaukuma līnijas, kas šo savienotu. Izmaiņā, kas šo pievienoja bija norādīts avots. Tagad šo mainot tad arī vajadzētu skaidru avotu norādīt, jo "Mainits statuss" neapraksta, kāpēc iepriekšējā izmaiņa tiek atcelta.
gurglypipe (2025-11-03 10:28:50+00:00): Good morning Pete.

The wiki documents that bicycle=dismount has exactly the same meaning as bicycle=no, so the tagging I used was correct. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Ddismount

Given the equal choice between bicycle=dismount and bicycle=no for a bridge which is explicitly signposted as “cyclists dismount”, bicycle=dismount reflects the on the ground situation better. Both tags are correct though.

To reiterate: bicycle=dismount means cycling is not allowed on the pavement.

Why do you keep changing this?
Pete Owens (2025-11-03 23:47:52+00:00): Nobody else interprets the tag in that way. Note how the cyclOSM rendering treats it differently. Cycle routing algorithms include "dismount" sections - so it is important not to use this tag for places where cycling is prohibited. 

"dismount" is used for stretches of legally designated cycleway are dangerous to ride (eg the Lancaster Canal tow path by the Water Witch). Not places where it is illegal such as pavements or motorways. 

The most common use of the cyclist dismount sign  in the UK is to mark the end of a cycleway (as is the case here) where cyclists must rejoin the carriageway. 

So the more relevant question is why a mapper who claims that "dismount" and "no" mean exactly the same thing would be at all interested in which tag was used.

And since the restriction on pavements is identical to that on motorways (in both cases riding a bike is illegal - in both cases a legal user of the way can transport a bicycle so long as they don't ride it), I am anticipating you "correcting" the cycle access tags on the M6 in the near future.
gurglypipe (2025-11-07 11:44:03+00:00): > Nobody else interprets the tag in that way.

The wiki is the canonical source of how tags are interpreted. There are multiple consumers and renderers of OSM data. They need a place to document and agree on how tags are interpreted. That’s the wiki. If a renderer like cyclOSM is going to deviate from what the wiki says, they’d better have a good reason for it — and engage with people on the wiki and other renderers to improve the tagging schema so it’s unambiguous.

You’ve probably not seen anyone else interpret the tag that way because there are very few renderers which cater for cycling. My guess would be that most renderers basically ignore the bicycle= tag.

> Cycle routing algorithms include "dismount" sections - so it is important not to use this tag for places where cycling is prohibited. 

I think this gets to the crux of this particular issue. Perhaps some additional tagging is needed to disambiguate between “this way is part of a cycle route but you have to dismount for a bit” and “this way is a footpath but connects to a cycle route so cyclists are reminded that now is the time to dismount”.

I think the distinction between highway=cycleway bicycle=dismount and highway=footway bicycle=dismount would be sufficient?

I don’t know why you’re talking about motorways, they’re obviously not relevant here.
JassKurn (2025-11-07 19:54:09+00:00): The designated UK square blue sign "cyclists dismount" does NOT have the same meaning as the OSM tag bicycle=dismount

The sign is only an advisory, which by itself effectively lets you know that you may continue riding. Historically used to show it was legal to ride, but the upcoming highway had an adverse condition that could not be improved. (low height, narrow, poor visibilty).
I repeat, it did not mean "must not ride." It advised you of an issue.

It also was allowed, confusingly, to be used where a cycle way ended, but a pedestrain way continued.  The intent to draw attention to an actual prohabition on cycling that is not clearly marked. (eg Pedestrian Zone).

The meaning has been updated. The original intent of advising of adverse conditions has been removed. It may only have been advise, but advising disabled people to walk breaks UK disability laws. The adverse conditions should now be signed to show the specific issue (eg Low Height (2m)). It is now only to be used together with other signs to confirm "No Cycling" exists at locations where it may not be apparent.

Now things get complex. In the situation your discussing. It is clear the intent is that the Cycle Track ends and you're not to ride over the foot bridge. But there appears no prohabition on cycling over that foot bridge.

Although we commonly say that "cycling on a pavement" is illegal in the UK. That is wrong. The prohabition is for vehicles, and objects with wheels, or animals, being taken onto a "footway" that is part of a road, but forms a lane in the road seperate from the carriegeway. (There is a legal difference between footway, footpath, and walk way). The bridge is seperate from the road, and therefore a footpath. Since it is a legislative Footpath and not a legislative Footway, there is no prohabition on non-motorised vehicles. A Traffic Order would be needed, and signed with a No Cycling sign at both ends of the bridge. 

In my experience the Highways Authority can't be bothered with creating a Traffic Order, and has chosen to acheive their aim by misleading with the advisory Cyclists Dismount sign. Putting up this advice sign does not require a Traffic Order with associated cost. 

There may be no prohabition of cycling over that bridge, but I would accept the intent of the sign and make the bridge bicycle=no.
Pete Owens (2025-11-08 09:41:11+00:00): Motorways are perfectly relevant since they are identical to pavements  (which this is) in terms of legality of cycling. In both cases cycling is illegal so the appropriate tag is bicycle=no. Simple, unambiguous and understood by everybody.

The only difference is that you personally seem to have a problem with the law with regard to pavement cycling evidenced by multiple examples of you mapping pavements (and even places where cycling is explicitly prohibited) as cycleways - and taking issue at great length when that is corrected.
Pete Owens (2025-11-08 23:40:27+00:00): Highway Code
Rule 64
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.
gurglypipe (2025-11-17 16:12:05+00:00): @JassKurn: Thanks for your detailed input. Would you be interested in modifying https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Ddismount to add (or link to) a ’bicycle signage in the United Kingdom’ section which covers what you’ve said above?

The wiki page currently pretty clearly implies that bicycle=dismount is appropriate tagging for this sign in the UK, although it does not have a picture of this sign. Other people will draw the same conclusions as me about its relevance. It would be good to have guidance about this sign on the wiki so that not everyone who edits OSM has to read all UK highway law first. :)

---

@Pete I am happy to discuss my edits with you if you want to discuss them. There are various points and possible ways forward regarding this pavement tagging which I gave in my previous comment, but you have chosen to ignore those and talk about motorways instead. I am not going to talk about motorways.

If you continue to make ad-hominem insinuations against me, then I will happily refer you to the DWG again. As a reminder, last time they banned you, they asked you to apologise to me for calling my edits “vandalism”, and to provide sources for your edits in future. I have received no such apology, and I have not seen any sources for your edits since.

If you think I’m being unfair here, you are of course welcome to refer me to the DWG. But in any case, I think they would prefer us to come to an understanding ourselves. We are all here because we want to make a map which accurately and unambiguously reflects ground truth.
Pete Owens (2025-11-17 19:29:16+00:00): The sign does NOT refer to the pavement - it is advice to cyclists re-joining the carriageway from what is clearly the END of the shared use section. (indicated by painted markings and tactile paving)

IF it was meant to apply to the bridge then there would be signage at the other end. There is no such signage.
gurglypipe (2025-11-23 14:36:02+00:00): I think we’re in agreement that the sign applies at the transition point between the shared use section and the pavement.

If you really want to push forward an interpretation of bicycle=dismount tagging that means the way it’s on is necessarily part of a cycle route, you’ll need to get consensus amongst the community to change these wiki pages:

 - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_the_United_Kingdom#966
 - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Ddismount

---

As a note, often putting words in CAPITALS when typing on the internet is interpreted as shouting, and shouting generally doesn’t help a discussion. A less shouty way of emphasising a word is to use *stars* or _underscores_ around it.
HellMap (2025-11-03 15:04:37+00:00): Šis ceļš nav piebrauktuve, bet ir parasta maza iela un to nevajadzēja mainīt uz `service`. Šeit ir daudz dzīvojamo īpašumu un šāds publisks ceļš noteikti vismaz `residential`. Šeit arī kadastrā šis posms ir izdalīts kā iela.

Arī `maxspeed=20` nav gluži skaidrs no kāda avota. Šeit, cik zinu, nekādu zīmju nav, ja nekas nav mainījies un nav uzstādīta kādas jaunas zīmes.
Ltrlg (2025-11-04 09:21:02+00:00): Tu as mis les points d’adresse sur la voie, ils devraient plutôt être en limite de propriété.
HellMap (2025-11-03 15:07:44+00:00): Vai šie divi ceļi https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1446997431 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1446995413 nesavienojas? Tie iezīmēti gandrīz viens otram klāt. Vai šeit ir sēta vai kas tāds?
NorthCrab_upload (2025-11-02 22:31:08+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4457314690
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1446996382

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Mxdanger (2025-11-04 02:08:44+00:00): Thanks for the changeset! However, make sure you don't glue the parking lot area to the perimeter of the paths. It makes future editing difficult. I've gone ahead and fixed it with changeset #174172943