piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2024-01-18 14:12:20+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks has been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers  high quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Some buildings are not accurate mapped. (not following the tree lines.
check this page please
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=146407339


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146336088
NeisBot (2024-01-17 00:31:04+00:00): Hi Ichbinvonhier 👋

your recent changeset has been marked due to a temporary or permanent block from further map edits. 

If you have any questions or if there's anything you'd like to discuss regarding the mapping, feel free to reach out! 

Best regards, 🤖

Details https://osm.org/user_blocks/15582
#ContributorHasBeenBlocked
spiregrain (2024-01-16 21:44:12+00:00): Tah!  I've made some other updates to the area, so if you know the road, please do have a check.
Dodko (2024-01-17 08:24:33+00:00): Podľa možnosti vlož adresy do budovy alebo dokresli budovu.
vlakos555 (2024-01-17 09:28:49+00:00): Musím to pozrieť. Čo si pamätám, doplnil som adresy z Minvskaddress a ak niekde v blízkosti boli žlté čiary pre budovu, tak som budovu dokreslil (aj keď nemala ADRB). Neviem v čom je chyba.
gendy54 (2024-01-17 16:15:34+00:00): Localisation du magasin à améliorer. Je ne pense pas qu'il soit situé dans l'herbe sans bâtiment
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146336996
gendy54 (2024-01-17 16:16:53+00:00): les marques 	EOVOLT, SHIMANO, BOSCH, MAGURA ne doivent pas être écrites en majuscules sauf 1ère lettre et séparées par un ;
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146336996
Cessy Vélos (2024-01-17 17:36:30+00:00): Le magasin est précisément là.
gendy54 (2024-01-18 09:46:15+00:00): Il y a un bâtiment qui a été construit sur ce qui ressemble à un parking du centre équestre ?
Cessy Vélos (2024-01-18 13:11:16+00:00): C'est un grand un conteneur maritime qui est aménage en magasin et atelier. Il est là depuis Mai 2022.
gendy54 (2024-01-18 13:20:41+00:00): OK ca marche. C'est en effet très peu courant.
Filip009 (2024-01-18 19:36:18+00:00): Zdravím, chodník má prístupové práva na pozadí nastavené automaticky tak, že motorové vozidlá po ňom nenaviguje. Preto nie je potrebné explicitne udávať, že všetci majú vstup zakázaný a chodci a cyklisti povolený. Navigácia bude fungovať aj keď tieto informácie vymažete.
janolezab (2024-01-16 20:42:29+00:00): Ja, eventuell waren die sogar schon geschlossen als ich sie eingetragen habe ....
eggie (2024-01-16 21:13:07+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback  Probeer je editgebied klein te houden.  Dus je edits eerder uploaden. Dan is controle makkelijker.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=146338727
access=private taggen we alleen als het aangegeven staat middels een bord. 
foot=no ook alleen bij een verbodsbord  anders evt foot=use_sidepath gebruiken.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
wouternieuwerth (2024-01-19 19:31:59+00:00): Hi Eggie,

Bedankt voor het welkomstbericht en de tips. Ik leer graag hoe ik de wijzigingen het beste kan doorgeven en zal niet meer zoveel wijzigingen groeperen.

Voor wat betreft de stukken die ik had gemarkeerd als foot=no ben ik oprecht verbaasd dat dit bord er niet staat, maar wel voor trekkers, brommers en fietsers. Weer wat geleerd. :)

De stukken die ik als "private" had gemarkeerd zijn opritten en geen openbare wegen. Zou ik die op een andere manier moeten markeren?

De stukken die ik had gemarkeerd als "permit" zijn gesloten voor publiek, omdat het kwetsbare natuur betreft. Dit is officieel aangegeven met bordjes.

Alvast bedankt!
Wouter.
eggie (2024-01-19 21:12:29+00:00): Dag Wouter..
Accesstagging is lastig..
Paden die middels een bord verboden toegang zijn afgesloten kun je taggen met access=no ipv permit. Bv bij art 461 wvs

Opritten kun je inderdaad taggen met access=private hoewel de eigenaar dat formeel moet aangeven. Dat is vaak niet het geval.
Voor bezorgdiensten zal het ook niet meer routeren.

Boeren veldwegen waar niemand iets te zoeken heeft zet ik vaak op access=private om ook ongewenst routeren te voorkomen. Ook daar zou eigenlijk verboden toegang moeten staan.

Een Eigen Weg kun je met access=permissive taggen. Daar is geen verbod. Dat routeert dan wel.

.. foot=no tag ik alleen bij een voetgangersverbod.
Vaak kunnen wandelaars via de berm lopen. Bij =no routeert t niet meer... ook niet via de berm.
Foot=use_sidepath kun je wel taggen als er een fiets en of fietpad langs loopt..

Lastige materie dus.
Er lopen op het forum regematig draadjes over.
Mapse..
eggie
eggie (2024-01-19 21:15:02+00:00): Hier wat leesvoer..
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Key:access
Geo-Tobi (2024-03-29 22:36:18+00:00): Hi Flo. Du hast hier ein Gebäude eingetragen, aber drum herum offenbar den Acker im Landuse stehen lassen. Etwas abwegig, oder?
flo2154 (2024-04-02 21:00:56+00:00): Nein, hab ich nicht. Das Gebäude wurde vor 2 Jahren von opendcc in den Acker gesetzt, vor 3 Monaten von MaXxGrr als Wohnheim getagged und kurz darauf von mir als Mehrfamilienhaus umgetagged. Siehe https://osm.org/way/1051427893/history und die dazugehörigen Changeset-Kommentare.

Dass man hier drumrum natürlich aufräumen kann – keine Frage. Aber lass uns das in https://osm.org/note/4172482 weiterdiskutieren.
Geo-Tobi (2024-04-02 21:06:49+00:00): Ach, OK. Kein Problem. Danke für's prüfen.
Myazyk (2024-02-06 14:18:28+00:00): Маю підозру, що цей водоспад називається не Під Комином, а Під Каменьом
Де брав назву?
Myazyk (2024-02-06 14:20:43+00:00): А нє, таки Під Комином
https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%96%D0%B4_%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC_%D0%92%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%85%D0%BD%D1%96%D0%B9
Ewen Hill (2024-01-17 07:46:35+00:00): Hi Joeydd - Thanks for mapping and please check the website URL you added as it is not working. The name Rank1Bitcoin also doesn't appear in searches
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146339153
fortera_au (2024-01-17 09:51:04+00:00): Joeydd, do you have a source for this change?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146339153
emersonveenstra (2024-01-18 13:22:20+00:00): Hi there,

On https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9273406399 you have "crossing=unmarked,uncontrolled", but in both Bing and Esri imagery i see markings and the shadows of traffic lights. Could you double check that those tags are correct? Thanks!
Allison P (2024-01-18 23:06:23+00:00): Yes, it is a new pedestrian traffic signal. I did not add those tags, but I fixed to reflect the new construction. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
emersonveenstra (2024-01-19 21:33:57+00:00): Awesome, thanks!
yawfle (2024-01-16 23:42:37+00:00): Haha, you're deep down the rabbit hole now, my friend. Your guess looks a lot better than the previous location, for sure. Turns out that NID has a pretty decent website, and they mark it within the park, but a little further north: https://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/dams/system/CA01079/description

BTW, nice work on that Beverly Johnson "park" along Whitnall - I ride past it fairly often and never knew it had a dedication/name.
HeyRayReh (2024-01-17 15:27:03+00:00): Look I really hope I never go hunting for a dam location again but hoo boy that site would have made it a lot simpler! All the coordinates provided by the City of Glendale I could find weren't precise enough and put the dam in people's houses haha. As for why I discovered that wayward point...did you know you can buy undeveloped land in Glendale and Shadow Hills and Tujunga, etc. for under $25k?? Maybe it's a good thing I don't have a job right now or I might own a useless hillside somewhere...
EneaSuper (2024-01-19 11:08:04+00:00): Ciao Cirobob e grazie per quanto fatto, ero in dubbio da troppi anni per quanto riguarda questa strada.

Posso gentilmente sapere quali sono le tue fonti?
Cirobob (2024-01-22 23:04:15+00:00): Ciao EneaSuper, ti ringrazio! Da che io ho memoria (metà/fine anni Novanta) quella rampa non è mai stata utilizzata. 
Pochi anni prima la costruzione di tutti i viadotti con gli impalcati di colore rosso, che io infatti ricordo come nuovissimi all'epoca, aveva rivoluzionato le connessioni città / aeroporto / autostrada. La vecchia configurazione, di cui mi ha parlato mio papà e verificabile dalle foto storiche, era diversissima: l'accesso all'aeroporto avveniva (unicamente?) da quella che adesso è solo rampa di discesa dall'autostrada verso Sestri e che un tempo invece penso fosse a doppio senso. L'attuale rampa di Via Pionieri e Aviatori d'Italia che si diparte da Via Siffredi direzione ponente verso l'aeroporto era invece per certo percorribile solo in senso opposto, dall'aeroporto, e si immetteva sull'Aurelia con un incrocio. La rampa in questione era lo svincolo che si dipartiva da questa per portare direttamente dall'aeroporto al casello.
EneaSuper (2024-01-23 13:09:48+00:00): Di niente, e grazie del racconto molto interessante 😊
Xvtn (2024-01-24 16:43:25+00:00): I'm just now seeing that you've made a bunch of changes/additions to this new apartment complex. In this case, if all the buildings have the same (397) address, I would create an outer area that encompasses the whole complex. Then add the address tags to that, and remove them from the individual buildings.
Thanks again for your contributions!
Jbell4588 (2024-01-24 17:14:57+00:00): Corrected.
emvee (2024-01-16 22:57:44+00:00): De bbox is veel groter dan wat er eigenlijk verandert is door enkele wegen die ik veranderd had maar waarbij ik die verandering weer heb terug gedraaid voordat ik de changeset heb opgeladen.

Een beter overview met https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=146340032 (links boven)
Allison P (2024-01-16 22:00:57+00:00): Source for town's existence?
Xvtn (2024-01-24 16:40:39+00:00): Hi! Since you requested a review here I looked over your changes. There is some debate to be had regarding what these "inner apt complex" type roads should be classified as. In this case I think I agree with you that they should be parking aisles. Thanks for your contributions!
Jbell4588 (2024-01-24 16:52:36+00:00): Thank you!
Yunkers (2024-01-17 16:24:13+00:00): Hej, wygląda na to, że cała parafia stała się budynkiem.
WieKo68 (2024-01-17 18:00:50+00:00): POPRAWIONO :)
Marek-M (2024-01-17 07:00:58+00:00): Cześć, tutaj https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/223706743 nieprawidłowo zmieniłeś układ drogowy. Zjazd w prawo na skrzyżowaniu powinien zaczynać się blisko wysepki a nie tam, gdzie zaczyna się linia ciągła między pasami. Dodatkowo kąt drogi zjazdowej nie może być zbyt mały, bo nawigacje wtedy nie dadzą rady wygenerować komunikatu w stylu 'skręć w prawo' tylko informują w sposób 'trzymaj się prawej strony'.
d3mol3k (2024-01-17 15:21:50+00:00): OK. Dzięki za info
aTarom (2024-01-17 07:38:56+00:00): Hello, thank you for editing, please do not use Bing images for geometries in Spain, they are not well aligned, use PNOA Spain or in this specific case ICGC, which should appear as the first option in the layers of the iD editor, I correct the displacement.
Also try to be more descriptive in the changeset comments please.
Cheers
CurlingMan13 (2025-02-07 01:33:01+00:00): Why would you not add the cartpath bridges over the water?  Seems like an odd thing not to map with all the other details.

Also, do not "lollipop" areas to simulate holes.
Joseph R P (2024-01-16 23:09:02+00:00): Hello, it looks like you created a duplicate node for Centralia. One previously existed here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/158546647
trial (2025-09-02 18:55:12+00:00): Bonjour, il me semble y avoir un drôle de panachage ancienne/nouvelle numérotation.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2170301#map=19/48.378660/-4.309368&layers=N
Le 315 n'est pas dans la relation, l'ancien numéro si.
Pipeton (2024-01-17 17:56:03+00:00): Hello. It's very weird for a building to have a layer tag. And a house like this does not need one.

If you don't know how to fix these kind of interesections do not fix them.
archie (2024-01-16 22:57:53+00:00): Totalt hela Sverige: 

addr:city="NNNN" : 1463 (nwr)

addr:city="Nnnn" : 539723 (nwr)
gpserror (2024-01-17 13:13:52+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4072832 brought to attention that there seems to be some connectivity issues with this or some related edit.  I'm not sure which edits introduced it but this was mentioned.
It looks like the upper and lower decks of the bridge are connected which is a bit problematic.  TBH, OSM is not very well suited for overlapping layers so having the two layers slightly offset is better than having them connected but of course it's not exact.  What are your thoughts?
gpserror (2024-01-17 13:17:14+00:00): BTW https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11523691778 is a specific example where it's not quite right to have the upper and lower decks of the bridge connected.
Jayden26 (2024-01-31 12:54:18+00:00): Shoot, I didn't know that. Im just amateur at 11 years old. Maybe I could disconnect those nodes or what should I do
gpserror (2024-01-31 17:58:34+00:00): I can try to revert the change if possible, but were there other changes in this changeset that should be kept.  They could just be disconnected but I suspect someone may reconnect them in the future by mistake so perhaps the revert to parallel slightly offset lines would be best?
ChehrehBargi (2024-08-19 19:51:40+00:00): hello
You have not registered the phone tag correctly. Fix it.
Xvtn (2024-01-24 16:38:04+00:00): Hi, and thanks for your contribution! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. In this case, it seems to me like you meant to add an apartment complex (meaning the outer area) but you actually added a very large apartment building. In this case the critical part is building=apartments. That should be landuse=residential, residential=apartments.

Let me know if you'd like me to change that for you, or if you have any questions. Thanks again!
Jbell4588 (2024-01-24 16:51:55+00:00): Hey, thanks for reviewing the changes. If I understand you correctly, a solution to this would be to update this change to be specific to the actual structures, instead of covering all the land owned by the apt. complex?
Xvtn (2024-01-24 18:15:21+00:00): Yep, you got it - your fix looks great!
wolfy1339 (2024-01-17 21:32:12+00:00): La fusion avait déjà été faite auparavant dans les données ici.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145511054

Aussi, la relation contient `admin_level=9` qui devrait etre 8
Filip009 (2024-01-18 19:45:38+00:00): Zdravím, ako meriate tú rýchlosť, resp. máte tieto informácie z tabúľ obmedzujúcich rýchlosť?
aceman444 (2024-01-24 14:53:55+00:00): Hi, if you try to add railway speeds, why did you need to damage an adjacent street at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207011621, removing trolley wires and nodes from it, thus worsening its geometry?
Marek-M (2024-01-17 06:51:52+00:00): If the store does not occupy the entire building, a point should be added within the building area (preferably near the entrance to the store) and this point should contain information about the store. POI can also be used as a node even when the store occupies the entire building.

Your edit also needs additional proofreading. You have added too much data as the store name:
tag name="VAN THORN Trójmiasto - garnitury szyte na miarę" should be replaced with the following tagging:

name=Van Thorn
strapline=garnitury szyte na miarę

and possibly what you entered as the name can be put into the tag:
description=VAN THORN Trójmiasto - garnitury szyte na miarę

I corrected your edit here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146349315
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=146349315
Udarian (2024-01-18 16:02:28+00:00): What’s the source for this, I don’t see any signs prohibiting bikes in these ways. Also “ not specified” is a nonstandard tag, use something else.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146342554
Udarian (2024-01-28 05:12:47+00:00): as mentioned above there doesn't seem to be any signage prohibiting bikes from using these ways so what is the source for these edits. also this uses a non standard tag that implies yes, if it isnt specified whether or not a certain for of transportation has access to a footpath it is assumed to be the default for the way, which in the case of sidewalks is yes. so please stop using this non standard tagging, the OSM community has agreed upon and uses certain tags for certain purposes for a reason, please stop using this non standard tag and respond as to what the source for this is.
Udarian (2024-02-12 23:55:52+00:00): please respond
Udarian (2024-02-18 02:55:53+00:00): Can you please respond
Udarian (2024-03-08 04:51:59+00:00): I have left multiple comments asking for why you made these changes and given you allot of time to respond, I have also left follow up comments to remind you of these issues and set you a private message though OSM. you have been completely unresponsive. since these edits are substantially erroneous I am reverting them. if you feel like any of this is wrong please feel free to comment

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148367875
Udarian (2024-01-18 15:59:20+00:00): What’s the source for this, I don’t see any signs prohibiting bikes in these ways.
Udarian (2024-01-28 05:06:55+00:00): please respond
Udarian (2024-01-28 05:14:07+00:00): what is the source for this edit,, I see nothing that would imply that bikes aren't allowed on these ways.
Udarian (2024-02-12 23:55:29+00:00): please respond
i2004 (2024-01-17 00:21:24+00:00): te deje mas paradas del 60
canfe (2024-01-17 07:28:00+00:00): Ti invito nuovamente a non togliere i prefissi come borgata ai nomi di certe località.
Ho già dimostrato, contrariamente a quanto affermavi, che Borgata Baima è riconosciuta dal Comune di San Carlo con tanto di cartellonistica ad esempio.
Se fosse come pensi, allora ti toglierei "cascina" da Cascina Margherita che hai inserito.
Ti invito ad aprire un posto sul forum italiano in modo da sentire il parere della comunità OSM.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146342830
Fedurli (2024-01-17 14:48:53+00:00): Invito declinato. Laddove ci sono nomi errati, è giusto correggerli. Quelli che evidenzi tu, "Chiarabaglia", "Sant'Antonio" non presentano il nome "borgata", come si può tranquillamente dai cartelli stradali che riportano "Chiarabaglia (borgata di Favria)".
Stesso discorso per San Carlo, dove abbiamo visto che il comune afferma esattamente il contrario di quanto tu sostieni, ovvero che il nome "borgata" o similari non sono presenti in nessuna località del comune.
SomeoneElse (2024-02-21 13:52:05+00:00): Where there is a difference of opinion, I would definitely suggest discussing it with the wider Italian community, on the forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/it/60 .
SomeoneElse (2024-02-21 13:52:29+00:00): Laddove ci fosse una divergenza di opinioni, suggerirei sicuramente di discuterne con la più ampia comunità italiana, sul forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/it/60 .
Fedurli (2024-02-24 01:29:00+00:00): Purtroppo c'è poco da discutere, in questo particolare caso l'utente sta attribuendo nomi al limite della fantasia a determinati luoghi, senza che vi sia alcuna prova in tal senso. Non esistono "Borgata San Giuseppe", "Borgata Sant'Antonio" e "Borgata Chiarabaglia" nemmeno nella cartellonistica stradale. Dunque di cosa dobbiamo discutere? Di un utente che continua ad effettuare modifiche a sproposito?
Se vuole andare contro le regole di OSM forse è il caso che ne discuta prima sul forum lui, anziché "rovinare" la mappa. Tant'è che le zone da lui "toccate" sono le uniche d'Italia ad aver questo problema.
lakedistrict (2024-01-17 00:18:01+00:00): Additional source: pol_branch_list_2023‑09‑27
NeisBot (2024-01-22 01:31:04+00:00): Hello Nicolò Cassandra, thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
Xvtn (2024-01-24 16:34:14+00:00): Hi, and thanks for your contribution! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great generally, except for one issue with the opening hours tag. This should use a 24h format, e.g. instead of 2pm you should put 14:00. So, the full opening_hours value should be

Su 09:00-14:00,17:00-21:00; Mo-Th 17:00-21:00; Fr 17:00-21:30; Sa 09:00-14:00,17:00-21:30

Writing hours tags can be really tricky and frustrating, so I sometimes use this tool to make sure I've got it right:
https://openingh.openstreetmap.de/evaluation_tool/

Anyway, thanks again and let me know if you have any questions!
Xvtn (2024-01-24 16:27:52+00:00): Hi, and thanks for your contribution! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. Everything looks good to me here. The only minor suggestion I have is that the reference number should not be appended to the name. (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1240334736) Especially if it's already under the ref tag.
Thanks again, and let me know if you have any questions!
woodpeck (2024-06-20 17:27:52+00:00): Any indication that this "cycleway" actually exists?
jakecopp (2024-06-20 23:49:47+00:00): I’m not familiar with the area, and I can’t tell from the imagery (I wasn’t confident to remove the way without local knowledge). Should we add a fixme tag for someone to check on the ground?
CurlingMan13 (2025-02-07 01:34:14+00:00): Do not tag large water bodies as golf hazards.  They are creeks, rivers, etc.  not water hazards
CurlingMan13 (2024-01-18 03:48:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted in part or full.  The feature is still visible in aerial imagery.  Access tags should be used instead of deleting the feature.  You can read why deletion is not the solution here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

Please don’t do that; in OSM, if a trail/road exists but is not usable (due to being closed, private or simliar) we use the so-called “access tags” to record the fact.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146388271
alexwohlbruck (2024-01-18 16:39:24+00:00): I had added those and then removed them in a second edit since they seemed to clutter the map and aren't useful to the public or for navigation. I can update these as private, but should I do them along the entire shoreline?
Fizzie-DWG (2024-01-17 06:51:45+00:00): OSMへようこそ！ありがとうございます。通常、"Tree rows "は一列に並んだ木にのみ使われ、"natural=wood "は一塊の木に使われます。名前に関しては、その公園が実際に標識で示されている名前である場合のみ、name=neighbourhood parkを使うべきです。そうでない場合は、名前を空白にしてください。
__________________________
Welcome to OSM! A couple of things to mention thanks. "Tree rows" are usually only used for a single row of trees, while natural=wood is used for a clump of trees. With regard to names, you should only use name=neighbourhood park, it that is it's actual signposted name. If it doesn't have one, please just leave the name blank.
meongseolin (2024-01-17 03:26:06+00:00): 你确信部分路径是铁路吗
NeisBot (2024-01-18 00:31:03+00:00): Hello IJNSena, thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar