piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
piepero (2025-03-07 09:32:36+00:00): Danke für die Erklärung!

Bitte investiere nicht noch mehr Zeit in die Sache.

Ich dachte, ich hätte eine einfache Lösung für das "potentielle Problemchen" gefunden, dabei aber die Komplexität der Zusammenhänge unterschätzt.
Ein überwiegender Teil der Sendungen kommt an, und für die anderen ist nicht sicher, ob es überhaupt an der Verwendung des OSM-Materials liegt.

Grüße aus dem Kuckhof, und vielen Dank für deine Arbeit an OSM!
Oliver
rempshaener (2025-03-16 11:29:38+00:00): Hallo,
so schnell wollte ich dann doch nicht aufgeben.
Ich haben den Relationstyp auf Multipolygon umgestellt, das ist eigentlich auch "richtiger", es ist schließlich ein Gesamtensemble. Die einzelnen Teile habe ich auf building:part umgestellt.
So ist es konzeptionell besser getroffen und löst auch gleichzeitig noch das Adressproblem.
Viele Grüße
piepero (2025-03-18 08:29:05+00:00): Oh, das ist fantastisch!
Ganz schön komplex, die Materie. Prima, dass du eine Lösung gefunden hast.
Ich bin gespannt, ob es eine spürbare Auswirkung auf die Paketlieferungen hat.

Vielen Dank für deine Mühe!
habi (2025-03-12 09:16:45+00:00): Ciao brebre_shrooms
You did not 'add' an element here, but removed the playground.
You could have added the slide in the playground.
Greetings,
habi
habi (2025-03-12 09:17:15+00:00): Reverted removal of playground

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163518505
aharvey (2025-03-05 23:03:43+00:00): I had added this to map the two bicycle route signage indicating from Havilah to turn to Victoria and vice versa from Victoria to Havilah. Perhaps instead we should just extend https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6282345 to include Havilah as well? Then remove this relation I added.
inas (2025-03-06 00:57:40+00:00): Yea.  I figured that was the case.  I'm going to check out the signage from Havilah this weekend, to see if I can find a route from there.  It didn't seem to be the right thing to add this to a Chats -> Crag relation, but that might be the least worst thing ultimately.  Give me a couple of days.
aharvey (2025-03-06 02:00:24+00:00): No rush. There was also a discussion recently on when lcn=yes should go on a way vs using a route relation at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/lcn-tagging-in-australia/123529/25 but I still not sure it's resolved.
aharvey (2025-03-06 06:46:01+00:00): I just checked on the ground and it's clear that the existing route that we have coming down Hercules then into Victoria continues onto Havilah, as the signage is continuous throughout.
NeisRevert (2025-03-05 12:54:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163243884 where the changeset comment is: 
Remove test data
mcliquid (2025-03-08 18:33:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted because it contains only empty nodes.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163375337
rempshaener (2025-03-05 18:02:46+00:00): Hallo,
ich habe die Berechtigungen auf das üblichere access=private angepasst.
Viele Grüße
piepero (2025-03-05 20:12:13+00:00): Danke, ich hatte mich an irgendwelchen Wegen der Umgebung orientiert.
Da es sich um ein Privatgrundstück handelt, ist "alle" jedenfalls falsch, wenn ich das richtig interpretiere.
Gruß
Oliver
rempshaener (2025-03-05 20:29:13+00:00): Hallo,
das access=no hieße grundsätzlich „niemand“, was dann eigentlich auch z.B. für die Post gilt. Das wird dann zwar wieder durch das foot=private neutralisiert, da aber der „footway“ die Nutzbarkeit ohnehin einschränkt, ist ein access=private die deutlich einfachere Variante.
Viele Grüße
berndw (2025-03-31 08:06:10+00:00): Hallo, willkommen bei OpenStreetMap

Du hast mit diesem Änderungssatz ein kurzes Teilstück der B83 unsichtbar gemacht, weil du die Eigenschaft highway=primary entfernt hast.

Das ist korrigiert.

Nur so als Info, mach was draus.
espelicht (2025-03-31 08:21:31+00:00): Danke, keine Ahnung, wo ich da wieder draufgekommen bin.
Jrachi (2025-03-06 07:43:23+00:00): Ciao.
Come fai a decidere se un sentiero è abandobed guardando le mappe di Strava?
I sentieri che hai modificato, andando a rompere due relazioni di percorsi a catasto nazionale, esistono.
Per favore ripristina la situazione precedente o dimmi che hai percorso quei sentieri personalmente e discutiamone.

Ivo
vojtechzaboril (2025-03-06 07:54:56+00:00): Hi, we got it reported by our (mapy.cz) users. I checked it on Strava.com Heatmap with this idea: If there is a marked path, at least someone (with Strava) will use it. As there were no Strava.com records, I decided that the path (and definitely not the markings) are there, and thats why I marked it as abandoned.
Best regards.
V
Jrachi (2025-03-06 08:20:59+00:00): Quindi vorresti dichiarare ogni way non percorsa da (uno? molti?) utenti di Strava come inesistente?
Non mi sembra una maniera corretta per mappare!
Ad esempio io, e nessuno che conosco, non mando a Strava i sentieri che percorro abitualmente.
Se non conosci la zona personalmente, per favore ripristina la situazione precedente.
Grazie
vojtechzaboril (2025-03-06 08:30:38+00:00): Hi,
its not as you say, you simplified it too much. I just want to mark as abandoned the path, where our user told that it doesn exist and I verified it on strava. Give yourself a question: why all strava users choose the other path than this one (the one i marked as abandoned)? The obvious solution is that it simply doesnt exist.
Simply: A marked path which is not visible on Strava is suspicious, together with user report, I’m 100 percent sure it is abandoned.
If you can check it in terrain, please do it. It’s always the best solution
V
Jrachi (2025-03-06 10:05:16+00:00): Dimenticavo...
Se vuoi essere utile alla comunità,  e non solo alla cartografia da remoto, ti chiedo di specificarmi quali sarebbero i percorsi A e B che dici.
Se devo mandare qualcuno a revisionare i percorsi è un'informazione utile.

Ivo
Jrachi (2025-03-06 11:22:16+00:00): Non ci siamo ancora capiti.
Hai spezzato due relazione hiking lasciando dei buchi che devono essere colmati.
Se hai il dubbio, spero ti sia venuto in mente, che i sentieri che hai dichiarato abandoned ( tag molto discutibile su un sentiero su un terreno naturale), perché non usi il tag trail_visibility?

Ti chiedo un'ultima volta: rimetti a posto le relazioni hiking.

Ivo
vojtechzaboril (2025-03-06 12:20:04+00:00): Hi,
I changed it to highway=path and trail_visibility=no.
Details: User reports that this path (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1102150845) is not existing, there is also no marking.
If you got someone to forward this issue, please do it. Thanks.
V
Jrachi (2025-03-06 07:44:36+00:00): Come segnalato sul changeset 163239411.
Spiegami se hai basato le modifiche solo guardando le mappe Strava.

Ivo
vojtechzaboril (2025-03-06 07:59:29+00:00): Hi,
the idea was same. If there is a marked route in OSM (at path A) and Strava says that the nearby path (path B) is used a lot more (actually path A is not used according to strava). This leads to a conclusion, that path B is marked and not path A.
Also it was reported by user, which walked this part of marked route, so I have no doubt about it (reported by user, verified on Strava).
Now I can answer your question: I was not modified based only on Strava but primarly on user report.
Best regards.
V
Jrachi (2025-03-06 10:02:32+00:00): Grazie delle risposte, che mi lasciano ancora con molti dubbi.
Se un sentiero per raggiungere una località è poco usato significa che l'ente competente regionale (IPLA) deve valutare se fare manutenzione su un sentiero o cambiare il percorso.
Per cui ti chiedo ancora di ripristinare le relazioni che hai rotto.
Se un tratto di sentiero è poco visbile o poco frequentato non significa in automatico che deve essere tolto da una relazione.
Infine, ti informo, se non ne sei a conoscenza, che non tutte le persone che frequentano le montagne usa Strava. Gli abitanti ed i margari non ne hanno bisogno e nemmeno i loro animali...

Ivo
vojtechzaboril (2025-03-06 12:14:41+00:00): Hi,
I know that not all people use Strava. But when looking to those who use, why they don't choose that path?
I also have the report from user, which were on that place and told us, that there is no path.
If you can send it to someone, who will review it and fix it (renew the marking or reroute the marked route) I will be happy when send it to him/her. If not, just tell me, I've got a contact from different part of Italy, but he always helped me (by sending it to someone else, who is reponsible for marking in that area).

I see no reasons for revert, all changes were made according to the evidence (user in terrain and strava).
BR.
V
Jrachi (2025-03-06 12:44:12+00:00): Grazie!

Ivo
vojtechzaboril (2025-03-06 12:46:37+00:00): Can you send it to someone to review the situation of marking? If not, just tell me. Thx
V
Jrachi (2025-03-06 15:54:41+00:00): Si, avviso la sezione CAI competente.
Come referente OSM per la SOSEC Piemonte è uno dei miei compiti.

Ivo
vojtechzaboril (2025-03-06 15:59:38+00:00): Thanks,
my question is what to do next time (when I find somethink is not correctly marked)? Is there a list of people as you, who can “fix” it? List together with areas of responsibility would be the best.
V
Jrachi (2025-03-06 16:20:19+00:00): Al momento sono, più o meno, l'unico che controlla tutte le route hiking in Italia, con un occhio particolare ai percorsi nel catasto nazionale.
Quando trovo dei problemi li risolvo, mentre se necessario andare sul territorio posso contattare referenti regionali o sezionali.

Ivo
Ci stiamo attrezzando ma al momento è così.
SekeRob (2025-03-06 07:50:42+00:00): Hi,

Did you verify those admin relations are whole and complete? Currently and same as a couple of week ago e.g. the main one shows as broken in OSM Inspector and if loaded into OSM, the missing parts show in absence of red line highlighting. Please see

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4016746#map=12/45.2530/14.3760

(Possibly this is may have been caused by the same mapper who was doing data imports and broke the Adriatic Sea, in amongst half a dozen other boundaries and coastlines which we noticed in Italy too.

ciao
Jerry Jorts (2025-03-06 10:24:34+00:00): Hi there! 
Im not quite sure what whole and complete means, i just added the relations to the islets same as they were on the other parts of the county.
SekeRob (2025-03-06 11:31:32+00:00): Since you were the last to touch these outlines, islands too have multiple, 'assumed' you may not have checked the other relations, Turns out another mapper touched on the same relations and forgot about the larger ones. He fixed it after a general ping on the community forums.

cheers
VictorIE (2025-03-06 07:08:27+00:00): Hi,

Welcome to OSM.

If you are using the iD editor for OSM, you can go to  Background > Backgrounds > Esri World Imagery and see the nearly-complete roads. :)
Dimcik97 (2025-03-06 08:08:59+00:00): Hi,

Thank you.
FajrAl (2025-03-06 12:48:17+00:00): Ada fitur layer, supaya objek lain tidak diperlihatkan. Jadi bisa hanya terlihat objek jalan.
Frans S (2025-03-05 11:41:52+00:00): Hello
Please look at this webpage which shows the adjustments I have to make.
Best regards
JJIglesias (2025-03-05 17:48:52+00:00): Hi. Is there any given reason that #adt team just edit and make hundreds of small editions in Santa Cruz de la Sierra? Are you being paid to just do minor changes in Santa Cruz? There is no other cities in Bolivia with errors? I easily could find thousands of errors in any given city or road in our country, but #adt team just correct peanuts of "errors" and mostly of them are not even errors in SCZ.

Please clarify.

Thanks
ErieCanal (2025-03-06 16:44:28+00:00): Hey JJIglesias!
Following global and local OSM editing standards and guidance is very important to our team. One way that we apply OSM best practices in our mapping is by grouping similar changes together into a single changeset. Usually that means separating edits targeting specific issues or features in a localized area into individual changesets. We’re engaged in maintaining and improving OSM data in many areas within Bolivia, including Santa Cruz de la Sierra. Cities such as Santa Cruz tend to have denser data and so that’s where our editing tends to be the most focused as well. If you find any specific #adt mapping that you believe is incorrect please comment on the changeset with the issue or directly to the user that made the edit. You can also always reach out directly to our editing team at osm-feedback@group.apple.com. Thanks!
JJIglesias (2025-03-06 18:23:57+00:00): Thanks for the replay, but as far as I remember looks like #ADT just edit in SCZ, most of the changes are not really significant for routing porpoises and all other cities with real routing problems are totally disregarded.

I am not the one to tell you what to map and what not to map (well just correct, mostly your team do not add on); 

But is interesting, and to be share with the OSM communities, how all your "help" is focused in just a particular city, I guess there are more Iphones users there.

Thanks and best Regards
ErieCanal (2025-03-10 21:37:02+00:00): You're correct that most of our work has been focused in Santa Cruz, however we've also done a lot of editing in cities all across Bolivia, including Cochabamba, La Paz, Tarija, Sucre, and Potosí. If you're familiar with specific and significant issues with OSM data, in Santa Cruz or elsewhere in Bolivia, we'd be interested in hearing about them and potentially collaborating on solutions. We strive to be as communicative as possible, and I'd encourage you to reach out either on individual changesets if you find specific issues with our team's mapping or at the address I left above for more general feedback.

We do our best to prioritize major errors when resources allow, but we also try to make smaller improvements along the way. Minor classification tweaks and alignments can help enhance geo-accuracy and keep OSM data more consistent. We share the goal of improving OSM, and while our methods or focuses may differ, it's that unified aim and diversity of perspectives/techniques that's allowed OSM to get to the place it's at today. Thanks again for reaching out, and happy mapping!
woodpeck_repair (2025-03-05 11:15:39+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 156219627, 156219687, 156221777, 156270172, 156271574.
Arflha (2025-07-18 08:31:31+00:00): Salut,
L'aubette du parc Crombez va devenir un kiosque à journaux ?

Si pas c'est une erreur alors car il s'agit de l'ancienne aubette des trams vicinaux.
Amicalement
surveyor54 (2025-03-06 18:06:15+00:00): Hallo WW Langenselbold,
willkommen bei OSM.

Die Streuobstwiese sollte man nicht als Park taggen, siehe:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:leisure=park

Ist der Name der offizielle Name der Streuobstwiese?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen#name_ist_nur_der_Name
Ich würde es wie folgt eintragen:
description=Streuobstwiese unterhalb Wasserturm
landuse=orchard
orchard=meadow_orchard

Dann ist die Streuobstwiese einmal  als node eingetragen und noch mit zwei übereinanderliegenden  Linien.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/585163540

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1364733978

Ich würde 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1364733978
wieder löschen und 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/585163540
umtaggen.

Wenn du Fragen hast, melde dich ruhig.

Gruß
surveyor54
WW Langenselbold (2025-03-06 19:12:26+00:00): Vielen Dank für die Unterstützung.
Mit der Änderung bin ich einverstanden und finde ich gut.
Bitte wie vorgeschlagen ändern.
Danke,
W.Weinrich
pitfire (2025-03-09 11:24:16+00:00): Hallo VRS-Auskunft,

einen Tipp zu Überwegen:

In diesem Fall "Weg: 1364734790" mit "Knoten: 9623828352" sind alle Attribute im Knoten erfasst und der Weg bekommt nur noch-highway=footway & footway=crossing) ohne die Attribut!
Dieses Attribut beschreibt einen Fußgängerübergang, der markiert ist, aber nicht durch Ampel oder Personen geregelt wird.

VG pitfire
Hadi Omid (2025-03-05 12:15:03+00:00): سلام، لطفا فیلد تاریخ تاسیس رو طبق استاندارد وارد کنید.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start%20date?uselang=en
NeisBot (2025-03-05 11:39:46+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was flagged because your added description contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-14 15:42:31+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163615427
NeisBot (2025-03-05 11:42:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was flagged because your added description contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2025-03-05 12:01:21+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element https://osm.org/changeset/163241664
lankapuhelin (2025-03-13 09:52:20+00:00): Pyöräyhteydet Koksikadulla Redin suuntaan olivat jääneet arvolle use_sidepath, poistin ne, kun PP on nyt poissa käytöstä
stasiu512 (2025-03-17 12:20:29+00:00): Od dzisiaj ruch tramwajowy został wznowiony, masz info na temat tego łącznika, czy jest on już przejezdny?
kornad (2025-03-17 12:46:36+00:00): Nie wiem, niestety nie znalazłem żadnego info na ten temat.
CJJ2501 (2025-03-06 13:36:55+00:00): Hi AVRiskscape!

I guess something went wrong when naming that one street?
I'm pretty sure it's not called "-34.014604,18.706037".

Cheers
AVRiskscape (2025-03-06 14:32:32+00:00): Oops! Fixed it - thank you!
CJJ2501 (2025-03-06 20:49:34+00:00): Nice!
NeisBot (2025-03-05 11:51:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was flagged because your added description contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-06 17:11:45+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163254029
user_5359 (2025-03-06 15:09:49+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1364738065. What is the mean of the tag 10x9 = yes? Did you miss the key building=yes?
NeisBot (2025-03-05 12:21:08+00:00): Hi M Akash, and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

I've noticed that over the past few hours, you've made several changesets with comments that might be unclear, difficult to understand, or consistently repetitive.

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments.

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment
user_5359 (2025-03-06 15:18:13+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1364738727. Please use the english colour keywords (like red) [or html notation]. Also the key has only a number (measure unit is meter), not "Comprimento 12x10".
user_5359 (2025-03-06 15:19:30+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:height.
Taya_S (2025-03-05 14:40:32+00:00): Hello housern,

Why did you change the tag value here to "yes!"?
ohmanger (2025-03-06 15:09:05+00:00): Hi, I've changed the the highway=construction to highway=proposed as not under construction. I'm not really sure this is suitable for inclusion on OSM, especially so early in the scheme
philippec (2025-03-05 16:14:29+00:00): U tekent de AED wel binnen.
philippec (2025-03-05 16:15:26+00:00): Ik bedoel buiten
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12638530001#map=19/50.740285/4.183120&layers=N
philippec (2025-03-05 16:16:07+00:00): En de location kan ook beter.
NeisReview (2025-03-06 05:54:16+00:00): #NameCheck

Hello and welcome to OSM.

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits, particularly those concerning the names you've added or modified.

Some of these names caught my attention as they are quite unique or a bit unusual. Could you please confirm if these additions were intentional or if they might have been added mistakenly?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
NeisRevert (2025-03-21 20:18:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163923177 where the changeset comment is: 
Remove data due to lack of quality and no response
Beka Beka (2025-03-06 18:08:39+00:00): ჰმ, შეიძლება რაღაც არასწორად გავაკეთე...
როცა უცხო უბანში ვარ რუკაზე ნორმალურად არ ჩანს მიკრორაიონების ნუმერაცია, რაც საქმეს აძნელებს.
საჭირო ხდება სხვადასხვა რუკის ერთმანეთთან შედარება...
რაღაც უნდა გაკეთდეს რომ მიკრორაიონების ნომრები ჩანდეს რუკებზე.
empty_child (2025-03-07 09:54:29+00:00): They are, but not on all renders. This render doesn't process place=city_block (too small place in hierarchy). But geocoders show all info, you can push right click -> show address. OSMAnd shows them.
But, in general, it's not a good practice to assign names to landuse=residential, because, in this case, it's officially recognized city block name
empty_child (2025-03-07 09:56:34+00:00): And, for understanding, try to zoom out a bit and imagine all these names on the map. It will be simply messy and unreadable. Unfortunately, it's kinda a victim for a good user experience
habi (2025-03-05 12:33:17+00:00): Test changeset for https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/weird-changeset-comments/126887/8 ;)
user_5359 (2025-03-06 15:34:55+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1364744533. What is the mean of the tag oDUMAN ZONGO JUNCTION = path?
Did you mean highway=path and name=Duman Zongo junction?
user_5359 (2025-03-06 15:21:36+00:00): Welcome to OSM (again)! What is the mean of the tag height=0 (could be building doesn't exist!)
橘ヒカリ (2025-03-05 15:34:22+00:00): 您好，“银西高速铁路”是否应为线编号为3100的“西银客专线”？
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163243219
Vannapha (2025-03-05 13:14:14+00:00): This location is wrong but i dont know how to change
mini-me (2025-03-05 21:59:57+00:00): Этот перекрёсток недавно перестроили, спутниковые снимки не актуальны.
Откатил изменения
synfarer (2025-04-03 16:47:21+00:00): Hi Visaman. This changeset seems to have set waterway=pressurised on a bunch of nodes, in addition to the ways. I assume this is a mistake? Could you fix it?
Visaman (2025-04-04 09:21:30+00:00): These are tunnels that leads to turbines,- so they are correct.
The problem is,- if one uses waterway=canal these will show up on the surface. They are under ground.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Waterways_millrace.png
synfarer (2025-04-04 20:13:54+00:00): I'm not arguing changing from waterway=canal to waterway=pressurised on the ways is wrong. I'm saying that in addition to that you also added waterway=pressurised to nodes that previously were untagged, and that seems like a mistake.
Gazer75 (2025-04-04 22:38:19+00:00): Unless its a penstock the tunnel=flooded should be used
Gazer75 (2025-04-08 06:40:57+00:00): You going to revert or do some else have to do this? Big changes like this need to be discussed first.
Visaman (2025-04-08 08:53:26+00:00): reverted.  Gazer75, please fix the  waterway =canal issue. It looks bad with canals on the surface when they should be under ground. I have left remarks on that long ago,- but nothing was done with it.
Gazer75 (2025-04-08 09:51:54+00:00): Got links to the ways that are on surface?
Gazer75 (2025-04-08 09:58:37+00:00): All tunnel=flooded canals should render as a tunnel on the map and that is normal.