piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Tomas Straupis (2023-01-06 06:26:16+00:00): Gyvenamoji žemėnauda eina iki pat gatvės. Žolytė prie gatvės tikrai nekeičia žemėnaudos. Taigi visi šitie pakeitimai yra blogi. Na bet Kaunas yra Kaunas...
PovilasDew (2023-01-08 18:27:26+00:00): Nemokat aiškiai dėstyt minčių
PovilasDew (2023-01-08 18:28:29+00:00): O už rašymo stilių, kuriame bent jau man jaučiasi "Kas tau yra? Kas neaišku?" tai labai susirūpinčiau jūsų asmenybe.
PovilasDew (2023-01-08 18:30:02+00:00): Aišku tai Lietuvos yda, kad žmonės nekultūringi, nemoka gražiai rašyt, lipa ant galvų. Atsiprašau, bet rimtai žiūrėt negaliu. Ačiū už ORT10LT ir adresus, daugiau nieko neprašau, aš neauklėju žmonių.
PovilasDew (2023-01-08 18:31:01+00:00): Tai ne vienetinis atvejis, tai ne jūs vienas, tai žmonės per se. Baisu dėl tų, kurie yra tokie kaip jūs, kurie už mane žino geriau. Man ne dėl vieno jūsų baisu.
PovilasDew (2023-01-08 20:23:21+00:00): Atsiprašau, susinervinau.
Stengiuos tvarkyt pagal standartus, kiek išeina.
Tomas Straupis (2023-01-08 20:46:10+00:00): Ramiau. Nereikia prisigalvoti savo „standartų“ ir tada bus mažiau problemų. Viskas labai paprasta: padaryk grynai gyvenamosios žemėnaudos žemėlapį ir pažiūrėk, ar sąmonė gausis Kaune? Pilnai visas plotas tarp gatvių turi gautis gyvenamoji žemėnauda, be visokių metro pločio „pievų/meadow“ gabaliukų. Visokiems mažiukams mikromappinimo žolės plotams yra landuse=grass (braižomas ANT residential/commercial/industrial).
marc__marc (2023-06-07 02:29:24+00:00): hello and welcome
the building have 2 numbers 114 ?
take care that the relation associatedStreet have counter intuitive value : street for the highway (you made a typo)
and house for any addr:housenumber
and no role entrance
Regards,
Marc
NathanE (2023-06-07 13:13:01+00:00): Sorry, I'm having trouble following what I did wrong. It's a single building residence with two addresses (110 and 114). Each address has two entrances, for a total of four entrances. They are represented by nodes 10309415610 and 10309415612 for 114, and nodes 10309415611 and 10309415613 for 110.
marc__marc (2023-06-07 20:47:34+00:00): Thanks for the feedback
I've never seen 2 entrances with exactly the same address (for me the address of an entrance is unique, either by adding the unit number or by putting the address on a part of the building) but if you think that's the case, I'll leave it to you, you know this location.

however, there are some errors in the relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15090006
the type is wrong -> type street (associatedStreet is something else entirely)
the name is not the same for the relation as for the street: W Lafayette St <> Lafayette Street
there is a t missing in sreet at the bottom left before the last field
Regards,
Marc
NathanE (2023-06-07 21:32:59+00:00): Yes, it is a bit of a strange setup. It's probably mostly accurately described as a paired house (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplex_(building)#Paired_home). Each unit has a front entrance on Lafayette St and a rear entrance on the alley. The rear entrances may have historically led to a back yard which was later sold off to be developed into businesses, at which point the alley was built. That's speculation, though.

I see what you mean with the typo in "street/sreet" and after reading the wiki I see that the relationship type "associatedStreet" is controversial at best, outright incorrect at worst. I'll correct both of those.

The Street is "E Lafayette St" to the southeast of North Riverfront Drive, and "W Lafayette St" to the northwest of North Riverfront Drive. I'm not sure if I should change the relationship to match the street names already present on the map, or if the streets need to be corrected.
VLD549 (2023-01-17 14:48:51+00:00): It seems to be Schietstand Sint-Jansgilde, according to Google results. Can you let me know which source is used? Thank you.
Eebie (2023-01-17 21:09:10+00:00): Naam is aangepast volgens Belgische Staatsblad en niet volgens https://www.vlaamseschuttersgilden.be/2/index.php/nl-be/leden/limburg
"Schietstand" is ter plaatse niet gespecifieerd. De tags 'sport=shooting' en 'mast=popinjay' zijn voldoende.
VLD549 (2023-01-24 10:50:43+00:00): Ik zie het, bedankt voor de reactie. Ik ben het ermee eens, dat 'Schietstand' niet gebruikt dient te worden, maar inderdaad Schuttersgilde Sint-Jan Thiewinkel.
Bedankt voor de uitleg!
wkdgs (2023-01-06 14:54:39+00:00): Hi,

du hast beim bearbeiten aus Versehen einen Punkt von einem Pfad verschoben: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25708694

Könntest du den wieder an die richtige Stelle setzen?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130922453
hsc666 (2023-01-07 17:31:58+00:00): Habs erledigt.
Carto'Cité (2023-03-21 13:33:25+00:00): Salut Mathieu,
J'avaie discuté avec des contributeurs de l'intérêt de cartographier les petites bandes telles que celles-ci :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1127589995
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1127589997
Et on m'avait expliqué que cela s'appelait les bande d'amorçage et que c'était peut-être un peu trop de détail de les décrire mais honnêtement si tu préfères les décrire je n'ai pas vraiment de bons arguments 😅
Charles
emersonveenstra (2023-01-21 20:53:03+00:00): Hi,

Street names must not be abbreviated in OpenStreetMap, please fix the street names you added in this changeset (and any other changesets). thanks!
MacLondon (2023-06-06 17:10:04+00:00): It looks as though you might not have got the southbound primary 'route' on Puddle Dock as you had intended. Worth having another look at it.
rskedgell (2023-06-06 17:40:37+00:00): That was an odd one. USRN 8100895 (Numbered Street record, presumably A3211) only extends up the southbound carriageway between the service road under The Mermaid and Upper Thames Street, but covers all of the other carriageway.

Possibly better to map it all as highway=primary, but without adding ref=A3211 to the bit between Queen Victoria Street and the service road?
MacLondon (2023-06-06 18:25:39+00:00): It might be related to the Tideways works, as the current (long-term diversion) two-way cycle link between C3 and C6 resulted in the sliproad from Victoria Embankment becoming exit only... until the previous layout gets restored.
Vas111 (2024-09-02 17:20:53+00:00): I will restore primary status to both carriageways on Puddle Dock; regardless of the official status, it connects two primary roads and right turns from QVS are allowed southbound. Besides, there is still a primary stub at the bottom of the southbound carriageway.
rskedgell (2024-09-02 19:06:24+00:00): @Vas111 feel free
nevw (2023-01-06 12:04:57+00:00): Instead of deleting this street it would have been more helpful to instead re-tag  to highway=service + service=driveway + access=private
I expect the name was fictitious so that should be deleted if so.
HellMap (2023-01-05 21:40:04+00:00): Sveiki!

Ar šo izmaiņu izdzēsās vairākas līnijas/ways - piemēram, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/150523735/history vai https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1078995073/history, un pāri palika punkti/nodes.

Te var apskatīt, kas pazuda: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130923109

Izdzēstas līnijas var dabūt atpakaļ ar JOSM Undelete funkciju.
HellMap (2023-01-07 12:32:00+00:00): Sveiki vēlreiz. Gribēju pateikt, ka problēmas ir izlabotas.
eggie (2023-01-05 21:07:28+00:00): Beste nl   Een adres floept niet automatisch naar de andere kant van het land als je de node gaat wijzigen. De procedure is om hier de adresnode leeg te maken en in Dordrecht opnieuw de info bij te taggen op de juiste adresnode.

Je edits

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=130923219
MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-01-05 21:09:14+00:00): De adresnode heb ik hier hersteld
eggie (2023-01-05 21:15:23+00:00): Info op Energiehuis geplaatst
Groet
eggie
jb54osm (2023-01-05 22:41:06+00:00): Een paar jaar terug 'verhuisde' Animae zo vanaf de Binckhorstlaan - als ik me niet vergis.
Kwam ook goed ;-).
eggie (2023-01-05 22:50:28+00:00): Het komt altijd goed 😀
treestryder (2023-01-11 01:50:28+00:00): No need to add horse=no. The path has already been designated for unsegregated bicycle and foot traffic only. Though... there are probably no signs stating those restrictions (we are supposed to only map ground truth).

Have a look at the Michigan Wiki for a nice primer.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Michigan

While you are there, we would be glad to have you join the meetup tomorrow night mentioned in the Community section.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130923493
Dawid2849 (2023-01-05 21:14:58+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/330541471
Chyba błąd się wkradł, tu raczej nie ma mostu, a na pewno nie jest tak długi :P
Nick Pettazzoni (2023-02-20 05:31:42+00:00): Why was the access:private attribute removed from this road?
StreetSurveyor (2023-02-20 14:36:29+00:00): I edited Marblehead when I ran it. If a street was marked private, but open/accessible to be ran, I changed it. I only mark a street private when it has a gate and/or you are prohibited to run it.
Nick Pettazzoni (2023-02-20 15:38:48+00:00): I think "private" indicates more to people using the map than just whether pedestrian access is physically blocked
ivanbranco (2023-01-09 10:51:10+00:00): Hi fritzmimi,

why did you delete https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9674819 ?

The wiki page for heritage=* says that it's ok to use type=site relations to such cases: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:heritage
CurlingMan13 (2023-01-11 06:49:39+00:00): The names of the fairways shouldn't be added.  Since there is no official name for a fairway or a teebox, it should be omitted. Descriptive names should not be used.
staka_sghm (2023-02-27 15:01:26+00:00): Der Fahrradweg an der Oberen Hildener Straße Richtung Westen ist Teil der Straße - nur mit einer Linie abgetrennt. Wird also mit cycleway=lane bei der Straße getaggt und nicht als einzelner Weg angelegt.
Und "Minor Fixes" ist überhaupt nicht aussagekräftig und hier auch falsch.
user_3022894 (2023-03-28 18:36:10+00:00): Hallo Stadtverwaltung der Klingenstadt Solingen,

hallo Streetview247,

ich habe das im betroffenen Fall für die Obere Hildener Straße soeben rückgängig gemacht.

In Raum Solingen müssen dem User Streetview247 leider derzeit einige andere Mapper*innen "hinterherputzen".

Wir versuchen gleichzeitig, mit ihm/ihr in Kontakt zu treten und nach und nach alle aufgetretenen Issues zu lösen. Das kann aber etwas dauern. Aufgefallen ist es aber auf jeden Fall schon.

Viele Grüße
Lukas
Nakaner (2023-01-18 10:49:04+00:00): Hallo,

vielen Dank, dass du den Bahnsteigzugang eingetragen hast.

Der Zugang führt über einen gesperrten Privatweg? Ist das immer noch so zutreffend?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/521855884

Viele Grüße

Michael
Josch28 (2023-01-18 22:15:16+00:00): Hallo,
nein, das ist vermutlich nicht richtig. Mindestens foot=yes ist bestimmt erlaubt. Ich hatte aber vor Ort nicht auf die exakten Schilder geachtet und den Zufahrtsweg unangetastet gelassen. Ohne Überprüfung vor Ort kann ich es nicht korrekt ändern …
Josch28 (2023-02-26 19:16:07+00:00): Hallo Michael,
ich habe es inzwischen überprüft: Keinerlei einschränkende Beschilderung vor Ort, also kein access-Tag notwendig. War vermutlich immer schon falsch (Einfahrt zur Kirchengemeinde und einer Trafostation). Ich habe es mit Änderungssatz 133042439 entfernt.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:06:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:03:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:05:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:03:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:10:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
Lejun (2023-01-10 17:32:16+00:00): Salut, je viens de voir tes modifications récentes, je pense pas que la clé name soit la plus adaptée pour renseigner l’entité exploitant un lieu. Peut être operator serait plus pertinent ?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:09:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
eggie (2023-01-06 07:20:09+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:03:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
ElliottPlack (2026-07-28 20:45:00+00:00): Hi there, I saw your edit here which deleted the Genesse Valley camp that I'd mapped. While it may not be a camp per se, updating the tag to summer camp or similar would be the better call, or at least discussing it with the mapper (me). Thanks!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:10:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
raphaelmirc (2023-01-15 23:28:51+00:00): Boa Noite Amigo(a)!

Esse mapeamento não está em conformidade as regras do Openstreetmap, o correto seria estrada de serviço.

para estrada em locais privado se usa estrada de serviço. 

fiz a devida correção!!
ivanbranco (2023-01-06 22:16:14+00:00): Ciao AdG2002, benvenuto su OSM! :D

Solo un appunto: su OSM Italia mappiamo gli indirizzi come nodi in corrispondenza dell'ingresso/targhetta del numero, non come attributi dell'intero edificio.

Grazie per la modifica e buon mapping!
nevw (2023-01-06 11:56:56+00:00): There is no need to delete peoples driveways. All roads are mapped and those that are driveway are tagged with highway=service + service=driveway and if private also tag access=private.
I have reverted this edit.
MxxCon (2023-01-11 05:01:34+00:00): Hello.
I'm not sure this relation has correct tags..
building=roof means a building is open at least at two sides. This is most definitely not the case here.
Also unless I'm mistaken, the way you tagged inner and outer means that the building is just a narrow sliver around the perimeter rather than the whole building..
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130926612
ivanbranco (2023-01-06 22:19:56+00:00): Ciao Unkreativefrog, benvenut su OSM.

hai cambiato Piscina San Martin con Piscina S. Martin, ma per convenzione su OSM scriviamo i nomi delle vie senza abbreviazioni, quindi era giusto prima.

Inoltre perché hai cancellato i portici del Palazzo Ducale?
limes11 (2023-01-07 02:24:21+00:00): Hi, 

sicher, dass es erlaubt ist?

Von Norden steht ein entsprechendes Schild und auch von Osten, siehe

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=52.385314900946355&lng=13.529099096178697&z=19.688248922627842&pKey=749047745764646&focus=photo

Oder wurden die abmontiert?

VG, Limes
Candid Dauth (2023-01-07 02:34:57+00:00): Ich bin gestern auf dem Radweg von Norden her gekommen (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1000742460556415), und von dort aus kann man zur Kreuzung fahren, ohne an einem Verbotsschild vorbei zu kommen, und kann dann auf der Kreuzung die Jürgen-Schumann-Allee in beide Richtungen befahren. Richtung Süden beginnt auch ein neuer benutzungspflichtiger Radweg, der noch nicht gemapt ist, der aber nach ein paar Metern auf die Wiese abbiegt und aufhört.

Ich vermute, dass hier noch weitergebaut wird und die Beschilderung im Moment nicht konsistent ist. Ich hab mir noch nicht die Mühe gemacht genau nachzuschauen, wo überall Verbotsschilder stehen, aber meine Interpretation der Beschilderung wäre, dass die Jürgen-Schumann-Allee ab der Kreuzung in beide Richtungen befahren werden darf, man darf nur nicht aus Richtung Osten in die Kreuzung einfahren.
limes11 (2023-01-07 03:02:07+00:00): Ah, verstehe. 

Eine Verlängerung in Richtung Süden entlang der Jürgen-Schumann-Allee ist bereits vorhanden, beginnt hier:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/603492389

Wird da noch ein Radweg gebaut?

Du hast recht, wenn man vom Radweg aus kommt, dann sieht man das Verbotsschild nicht. Ergibt so natürlich wenig Sinn, das Verbotsschild soll natürlich die Benutzung der Jürgen-Schumann-Allee verhindern, sonst würde es dort nicht stehen.
Vielleicht ist das Schild älter als der Radweg? Naja, vielleicht meldet sich ja noch jemand, der sich hier mit der Vergangenheit auskennt
Candid Dauth (2023-01-07 03:08:28+00:00): Ja, da wird noch ein weiterer Radweg gebaut, westlich der Straße ab der Kreuzung richtung Süden. Wo der genau hinführen soll, hab ich nicht ganz verstanden, er biegt nach ein paar Metern bereits richtung Westen ab und ist ab dort gesperrt.

Ich denke mal die Beschilderung wird sich im Laufe der Zeit eh noch ändern. Im Moment scheint die Straße ja nirgendwo hin zu führen und nur von Bussen verwendet zu werden.
NorthCrab (2023-01-06 16:20:33+00:00): Witaj, poprosiliście o weryfikację.

Zamieniłem ten obrys na punkt ponieważ był słabo wykonany, nie zgadzał się ze zdjęciami lotniczymi oraz danymi ewidencji budynków. Prawdopodobnie nie ma tam oddzielnego budynku.

Pozdrawiam!
felipeeugenio (2023-01-05 23:20:14+00:00): Hello. Do you see a footway in this way? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/545327978
erickdeoliveiraleal (2023-01-05 23:56:48+00:00): no
felipeeugenio (2023-01-06 00:08:14+00:00): That´s the immense damage the strava-based mapping has done in Chile. You must map what is on the terrain. The fact that someone walked that route does not mean there is a way on there, therefore, it should not be mapped.
In the north of Chile, you and robram2004 made a huge impact and to this day we continue deleting non-existing roads all over the place. Same in central south. PLease do not expand this.
Your mapping does not even intend to match what you are actually seeing. 
Please map your surrounding, or at least places you know.
thanks
erickdeoliveiraleal (2023-01-06 00:26:00+00:00): but it wasn't me who defined this way like this.  I was just the last editor of it.  you are wrong.
felipeeugenio (2023-01-06 00:55:39+00:00): Once again totally ignoring the main topic. You have added ways on your own.

Please map your surroundings. The quality of your mapping is totally below average.

Regards
Hans Thompson (2023-01-08 06:20:52+00:00): Great edits!
balint36 (2023-01-06 00:39:47+00:00): Szia!
Ugyan standardizáltad a MÁV-HÉV üzemeltetőt, viszont iD-ben nem szabályos címkének kezeli.
Ezt nem azért írom, mert a szerkesztésedben van a hiba, hanem azért, hogy tudj arról, hogy az iD-ben hiba van, és emiatt bármikor átírhatják "MÁV-HÉV Zrt" alakra (merthogy az iD ezt tartja helyesnek).
A legjobb az lenne, hogy ezek a szabályos címke dolgok javítva lennének az iD-ben (hogy az általad általad megadott MÁV-HÉV alak legyen a standard, mert az logikusabb is), de ezt nem tudom, hogy kell véghezvinni.
leveskockaa (2023-01-06 11:34:29+00:00): Szia!
Tudom hogy ez sajnos az iD hibája, nem világos ugyanakkor számomra, mit lehetne vele tenni. Egyelőre elvagyok azzal hogy néhány havonta javítom amikor valakinek automatikusan ,,kijavítja" az iD. Gondolom egy az egyben át lett véve a Wikipédia, vagy ilyesmi.
CurlingMan13 (2024-01-29 07:07:46+00:00): Please see and respond to note left regarding this C/S.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3506634
literan (2023-01-06 11:05:09+00:00): там постригаемые газоны, а не дикие луга. Верну обратно.
eggie (2023-01-06 07:16:12+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
olehz (2023-03-03 13:16:14+00:00): поясни какіє ето ти ашибкі паісправлял? я от бачу лише, що ти взяв і повидаляв мою роботу, на яку я витратив годин 5. відкати назад як було! 

Я використовую ОСМ + AMDB (https://nanopdf.com/download/ed-99-mapping-to-aixm_pdf) для рендерінгу діаграм для авіасимулятора. Спасибі тобі, Жуляни тепер покоцані.
olehz (2023-03-03 13:22:33+00:00): Ок. Я ревертнув. Попрошу більше не вандалити!
spughetti (2023-10-09 19:37:46+00:00): Hi Tyler, please make sure not to upload abbreviated street names to OSM :)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abbreviations
orthocircular (2023-01-06 00:40:48+00:00): Hi and thanks for your contributions! I'm guessing you probably didn't intend to tag one-way=-1 on one of these hiking paths node #1127631556 ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130928560
Grayfox88 (2023-01-06 01:04:37+00:00): This is intentional. The hike is designed and posted to be oneway.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130928560
orthocircular (2023-01-06 03:31:52+00:00): Sure, and I guess it's valid (presumably iD told you this is how to tag, so I guess it's not wrong), it just might be clearer if you reverse the way and make it oneway=yes. But I guess it's not required as long as the arrows point the right way.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130928560
archie (2023-01-06 00:50:17+00:00): Jag skulle vilja be dig om att låta bli  att tagga om helt korrekt taggade gc-vägar. Jag har reverterat din cs.
Đuro Jiří (2023-03-18 18:19:16+00:00): Bonjour Denis 4l,
il y a deux mois tu as changé de type de route, mais cette route est résidentielle.  J'ai déjà corrigé.  voici quelques photos du lieu.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3602460

Salut
Đuro Jiří (2023-05-28 19:37:48+00:00): Rue Cité Docteur Fournie 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/92051708/history

a été cartographié comme "résidentiel" et vous l'avez remplacé par "piéton".  J'ai donc corrigé.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=residential?uselang=hr

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=footway?uselang=hr
dcskobuffs (2025-05-08 18:23:30+00:00): Hello again,

I wanted to ask you about the classifications on the arrival and departure lanes at Aeropuerto Internacional El Dorado. Service seems too low of a classification for lanes such as (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/488705452, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/609023005), as they are the same classification of the adjacent parking lot lanes. How would you feel about these being unclassified since other airports in Colombia such as José María Córdova International Airport (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/175757629) and Alfonso Bonilla International Airport (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/87607224) also use unclassified for their arrival and departure lanes?
In addition, it would make sense for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/344733306 to have name=departures added for consistency.
Facalderonm (2025-05-08 20:41:51+00:00): Hello,

That's a great idea. Although I have adjusted the geometry of some of these roads, the classification wasn't my doing. So feel free to change them as suitable.
dcskobuffs (2025-05-08 21:35:09+00:00): Thank you for your input. I have made the Departures and Arrivals lanes unclassified.