piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Luzandro (2025-02-12 16:43:11+00:00): allg. Fahrverbot bedeutet vehicle=* und nicht access=*

access würde den Zugang für ALLE verbieten, incl. Fußgänger. Es mag zwar in diesem Fall nicht wahnsinnig einladend sein, dort zu Fuß zu gehen, tatsächlich verboten ist das allerdings in den wenigsten Fällen (z.B. Tunneln)

Bei agricultural gibt es auch einen subtilen Unterschied, ob es als key oder value verwendet wird. agricultural=* als Key ist eigentlich eine Beschränkung für langsame Fahrzeuge (Traktoren), die es so in Österreich nicht wirklich gibt. Ein Fahrverbot mit Ausnahme für landw. Verkehr ist dagegen vehicle=agricultural siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:agricultural

Somit sind die Beschränkungen schon korrekt erfasst mit

vehicle=agricultural
bicycle=yes
psv=yes
Lisa_PB (2025-02-20 08:19:24+00:00): Alles klar, vielen Dank!
infeeeee (2024-12-20 11:42:47+00:00): Szia!

Az a tűzcsap tuti nincs ott, amit töröltél? Fél évvel ezelőtt még módosítottak rajta helyszíni felmérés alapján, azóta elbontották?
SonOfZenMaster (2024-12-20 15:11:58+00:00): Szia!  Újra ellenőrzöm január elején, mert a Blahán jelzett mini szobrok miatt egyébként is arra fogok járni ismét. Amennyiben tévedtem, visszaállítom.
vt100 (2025-07-15 12:38:30+00:00): Hello DF45,

I just wanted to let you know that with this Changeset, at least two nodes 
( https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12412754822 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12412754821 )
received quite an interesting shop tag 
shop=vacantauth.defense.gouv.frauth.defense.gouv.fr - could you have a look at those, please?

Thank you for your work with OSM and best from Vienna
Peter
DF45 (2025-07-15 16:19:26+00:00): Vielen dank für ihre Aufmerksamkeit.
Leider sind es nur shop=vacant tags 
in diese verlorene kleine Städchien.
vt100 (2025-07-18 06:29:03+00:00): Merci pour votre réponse et votre correction
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-13 16:09:22+00:00): Partly reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160172534
JhowieNitnek (2024-12-19 18:05:51+00:00): Wolf takes the whole floor of the building that is why I expanded the area
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-07 23:47:31+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164656046
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-13 16:09:30+00:00): Revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160172098
woodpeck_repair (2024-12-17 15:12:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 160304789 where the changeset comment is: unglaubwürdige Elektrifizierungsplanungen entfernt, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16987
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-12-12 14:00:04+00:00): Thanks for the update. However, we should keep the crossings there, because otherwise routing cannot access the pedestrian street since both Avenue Girouard and Avenue Earnscliffe have foot=use_sidepath. I added them back. Thanks!
felipeeugenio (2024-12-12 15:51:03+00:00): Hello
The changeset comment says that you added a path, but you really added a track.
There is a big difference between both: a path does not hold a 4-wheel vehicle, a track can.
So, is this a path or a track?

regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160173093
HappyMapper2020 (2024-12-12 16:51:07+00:00): Thank you and sorry for the confusion. It is drivable with a 4x4 and the track is right. The comment is wrong. Thanks for the clarification!
felipeeugenio (2024-12-12 17:22:07+00:00): Thanks for your response. 
Phrase, if you know the road, always provide surface= and access= if it applies.
Regards
martinst (2024-12-11 19:41:56+00:00): Telefonnummern bitte so angeben, z.B.:
phone=+49 8821 51662
Danke und Gruß,
Martin
pebepebe (2024-12-11 15:33:08+00:00): rewert zestawu zmian 159265874 zgodnie z dyskusją https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/pytania-poczatkujacych/52707/6406
oraz rozmową pod zestawem 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/159265874#map=15/51.10118/20.34213&layers=N

Obiekty odzyskane rewertem będę modyfikował zgodnie z ustaleniami z dyskusji z ww linku - może to potrwać kilka dni bo jest to spora ilość.
LorenzoPesci (2024-12-11 19:13:07+00:00): perché aggiunere una seconda area archeologica intorno a una esistente? (il Mausoleo di Pomponio Grecino)
E in che cosa consiste la seconda area?
nevw (2024-12-12 06:37:37+00:00): Can you recheck the relation you have edited. It makes little sense to me.
nevw (2024-12-12 13:17:41+00:00): I reverted this
CaHein (2024-12-11 17:48:23+00:00): Habe die Routen der superroute 35 zugeordnet und zudem die Übergänge der Wegabschnitte durchgängig gemacht. Bitte mal prüfen.
osm-user12 (2024-12-12 09:12:48+00:00): Könntest Du den 35B in Hohegeiß ggf. noch komplettieren? Er endet zwar in Hohegeiß, aber sicher an einer zentralen Stelle. Ich musste ihn am Ortseingang enden lassen, weil ich in Zweifel war, wie er tatsächlich weitergehen könnte in Hohegeiß. Man kann sich leider auf keine Quelle zu 100% verlassen, weder Karte noch harzinfo.de. Ich bin leider zu weit weg, als dass ich mal schnell ...
CaHein (2024-12-12 10:15:32+00:00): Der schlechte Zustand der Quellen kommt daher, dass der Harzklub keine digitalen Routen bereitstellen kann. Auch ist die Revision der Wegabschnitte noch nicht umgesetzt. Kurz: ich notiere mir das zur Bearbeitung.
SomeoneElse (2024-12-12 13:57:32+00:00): Hello,
In this changeset you've deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26579103 , which was a cycleway between the bridge over the railway and Market Street.  Is that really no longer there?  If not, how does the Isle of Anglesey Coast Path join now?  You can see that there are two gaps at https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/374890#map=19/53.309924/-4.632099 .
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2024-12-12 14:01:31+00:00): Hello,
One more thing - you've deleted some things that were previously mapped here such as the Co-Op https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158249037/history and remapped it with far less detail at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341830684 .  Was the previous detail wrong, or should the old tags be transferred to the new building?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2025-01-10 11:21:27+00:00): I've re-added the deleted cycle path in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161201098 .  If that's wrong, please do let me know.
BCNorwich (2024-12-25 07:56:16+00:00): Reverted in order to return dragged AED to it's original position.

Regards Bernard,
ssummoner1 (2024-12-11 18:08:18+00:00): Nem hiszem hogy ez a leírás egy felesleges címke lett volna:

Leírás: A keleti és a nyugati szárnyat sohasem fejezték be, a középső részben egy darabig tartottak "misét", de később ezt a részt ismeretlen tettesek feldúlták a berendezési tárgyakat eltulajdonították. Az épület jelenleg templomként nem üzemel. 2021-12-12

Bár kinek mi a felesleges.
ssummoner1 (2024-12-11 18:09:01+00:00): Egyébként továbbra sem üzemel templomként.
infeeeee (2024-12-11 21:24:27+00:00): @ssummoner1: fotókat te csináltad? Ha igen, nem akarod feltölteni wikimedia commons-ra? Úgy lehet a legigényesebben több fotót linkelni egy elemhez, hogy ott létrehozol nekik egy kategóriát, és a kategória mehet a wikimedia_commons címkébe. Balázs gondolom az image:0 címke alapján talált rá erre, azt akarhatta elsősorban megszüntetni.
urbalazs (2024-12-11 21:26:27+00:00): Az OpenStreetMapen az ilyen leírások feleslegesek. Ennek a projektnek az a célja, hogy elhelyezze az objektumokat a térben. Kanonizált adatokhoz a Wikidata, hosszabb leírásokhoz a Wikipédia való.
infeeeee (2024-12-11 21:36:19+00:00): Wiki ilyeneket ír példának, ami itt szerepelt, az szerintem is még belefért: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description

Ha nem ide való, akkor ezt átmásoltad valahova wikipédiára? Vagy majd valakinek egyszer ki kéne bogozni az elem történetéből? 

"Az épület jelenleg templomként nem üzemel."-t azt disused:amenity=place_of_worship címkére lehetne cserélni a törlés helyett, a dátum check_date címkébe, 
és akkor a leírás már is nem annyira hosszú.
urbalazs (2024-12-11 21:50:08+00:00): Rátettem a disused:amenity=place_of_worship címkét.
chrdou (2025-12-19 00:14:57+00:00): Le bon nom est Vignal et non Vignat (cf. url)
karr4s (2025-12-19 01:19:27+00:00): En effet. Merci de la correction. ;)
IvanBabić (2024-12-11 17:04:02+00:00): Reverted because node was made by mistake and wrong segment is tagged #OptimoRoute

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160176840
trigpoint (2025-10-12 17:59:30+00:00): Really? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341839495/history/1 is a sidewalk?
Cheers Phil
trigpoint (2025-10-12 19:09:53+00:00): Also note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/485337 suggests it doesn't exist.
Maybe you should have visited when you went walkabout
trigpoint (2025-10-13 15:25:23+00:00): I have removed this footway because after going for a walk I found it is a private area.
It is certainly artificial but its not intelligent.

Cheers Phil
Pada (2025-01-22 15:07:39+00:00): Erreur : le sens de la circulation a été changé il y a plus d'un an et il ne fallait donc pas le remettre dans sa version antérieure.
gscholz (2024-12-19 10:11:41+00:00): Hi flibuste,
this changeset has destroyed the boundary relations of "Albi-1" and "Albi-2":

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=2.13974&lat=43.90723&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=ring_not_closed%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways


https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160176282

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2024-12-24 09:27:24+00:00): Hi flibuste, 
due to your missing feedback, I have reverted this changeset to fix those issues.
Guido
flibuste (2024-12-24 18:09:54+00:00): Thanks, i didn't see my mistake.
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2025-04-04 16:07:05+00:00): Please attach speed cameras to the road. 
Or make a enforcement relation.
evod (2024-12-18 08:56:23+00:00): Hey, thanks for updating the junction! However I noticed, that you cut the bicycle route through the junction -  for the future please try to avoid breaking the continuity of routes.

I know that during construction the mapped situation may be wrong, but I believe it's better to not map temporary changes / closures but wait until construction is finished.

Otherwise e.g. routing providers may use a snapshot of the intermediate state.

Thanks and happy mapping!
qyanu (2024-12-18 10:27:09+00:00): Hello evod,
i understand your concerns, and as the situation on the ground already gives rise to how the new situation looks like, the comment "only partial update" was intended to communicate that i needed to get up from the pc and thus could not finish; but also didn't want to loose the invested time&work.
i'll continue shortly.
qyanu (2024-12-18 10:32:20+00:00): PS: in this particular instance, "they" made really large changes to this intersection/junction. any old snapshots would be useless anyway, i guess.
evod (2024-12-18 10:48:42+00:00): Hey! Yes I get notification emails, thanks for the quick reply!

It's great that you follow the construction site and map the progress, my only issue is that even during construction bicycle traffic was (probably?) still possible. I went there yesterday cycling into Rebhanngasse is allowed (they put up a temporary sign).

I guess there is not a single opinon regarding this topic in the community, but I just wanted to sensitise you to try not to break existing routing.
qyanu (2024-12-19 12:57:55+00:00): I came by that intersection again, and i saw more hoarding was removed. now it's possible and clear, that the new foot+cycle path will go from
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/472604246
and over the street at
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341853334
until https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/782473326

also now the grass has been planted, so i removed construction-tag.
qyanu (2024-12-19 13:00:42+00:00): this path here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/891795089
is rendered as "Rebhanngasse" in https://www.openstreetmap.org/ but i think this error is not from something i did.
anyway, the new lane markings make it clear: coming from north driving south-wards on Nordbahnstraße, there is now only a possibility for going straight through or right (into Taborstraße).
So guess this specific path
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/891795089
is to be deleted?
evod (2024-12-19 13:21:17+00:00): Both sounds good! With the new turning restriction it makes sense to delete https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/891795089
evod (2024-12-19 13:22:45+00:00): By the way, does https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/102949866 still exist?
qyanu (2024-12-19 13:25:26+00:00): i think yes. it just so happens, that i will walk through this intersection later today again and i will have a look.
qyanu (2024-12-19 16:17:31+00:00): Hello evod,
yes you where right. the right-turning is possible as before, but now the right-turning is not a separated path anymore. When driving on Taborstraße coming from south-west, then there are two lanes. the left lane is marked "straight" (and then goes left into Nordbahnstraße), and the other lane goes right into Nordbahnstraße.
I have updated:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160401376
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:09:41+00:00): Znów nie stosujesz się do zasad (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments) nazywania zestawów zmian - o co cię już kilkakrotnie w imieniu społeczności OSM prosiłem. Czy naprawdę tak trudno w trzech słowach skomentować to, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś?
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2024-12-17 19:31:48+00:00): landuse=winter_sports should be used instead of landuse=commercial
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:09:30+00:00): Znów nie stosujesz się do zasad (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments) nazywania zestawów zmian - o co cię już kilkakrotnie w imieniu społeczności OSM prosiłem. Czy naprawdę tak trudno w trzech słowach skomentować to, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś?
benoitdd (2025-01-14 20:22:25+00:00): hello, pour info, pas besoin en France d'ajouter les infos addr:city et addr:postcode, ces valeurs sont déduites des limites de communes
icluf (2025-01-15 06:49:44+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour ton message et ton rappel. Quand j'ai fait ça il y a un mois, je ne comprenais pas bien l'adressage, mais je me suis renseigné et j'ai mieux compris depuis. Je compte reprendre ce que j'ai fait. Notamment en privilégiant l'adressage à la limite public/privé plutôt que directement sur les bâtiments. Et effectivement en laissant vides les valeurs qui sont déduites.
MaliMrav (2024-12-12 07:38:22+00:00): You were already warned not to put names on junctions, and yet you continue to do so [2]. I will revert your changeset.

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160102086
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4031394922
smichae (2025-01-03 22:03:07+00:00): This ramp was open as of 1/1. Just wondering if this was tagged for upcoming construction or if it is already complete and this should be marked as open again?
eggie (2024-12-11 19:25:59+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback   Tip Geef concreet aan wat je hebt gedaan . 'Extra'zegt niemand iets. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Tomas09 (2024-12-11 20:19:18+00:00): ik onthoud dat. Ik heb meer paden toegevoegd naar het skatepark
eggie (2024-12-11 19:28:50+00:00): Dag Tomas,

Mag iedereen hier zomaar komen?
Wellicht juist access=private?

MVG
eggie
Tomas09 (2024-12-11 20:18:23+00:00): iedereen mag er komen
eggie (2024-12-12 09:02:37+00:00): Oke... Je hoeft niet de weggebruikers toe te voegen. Dat is default op wegen. 
Alleen wie er niet mogen komen heeft nut. 
Verder niet naar de daklijsten kijken en dan gebouwen aanpassen. Daar staan ze niet.
Groet,
eggie
eggie (2024-12-11 19:29:40+00:00): Tip Geef concreet aan wat je hebt toegevoegd.
MVG
eggie
Tomas09 (2024-12-11 20:20:06+00:00): een paar huizen wat beter neergezet en wat speeltoestellen toegevoegd
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-12-12 13:43:53+00:00): Hi!

Please do not realign buildings that were aligned using official geodesic data. Bing and other aerial imagery are not aligned correctly in this area.
Linda Buono (2024-12-12 14:35:17+00:00): Thank you for the feedback. however I do not know what this means, how to see buildings that are using 'official geodesic data. Can I ask you to provide this feedback to the team (Emilie Gamelin) so they can add it to the training that is provided?  Thank you
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-12-12 14:57:17+00:00): As a rule of thumb, you should never align anything on map that is already there unless you are sure that your aerial imagery is calibrated. The one we use is (Géodésie Québec), but we cannot share it with the community because the servers cannot handle more than a few requests. What is the team Emilie Gamelin? Where can I find contact information for this team? Thanks!
Linda Buono (2024-12-12 16:26:27+00:00): Hi , Emilie Gamelin is with the Canadian Red Cross, and is Manager Corporate Partnerships.  I work for Canadian Tire and she leads the Mapping sessions for us. Thanks
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-12-12 16:57:47+00:00): OK, can you send me a private message with her contact information? Thanks!
Linda Buono (2024-12-13 23:39:14+00:00): hi .  I actually dont have it, I work for Canadian Tire and she joins our meetings virtually, so her email address does not stay in the chain.  no worries, I will share the details with our corporate contact and ask her to share with Emilie for next time. thanks!
ika-chan! (2025-04-24 23:58:58+00:00): Why are you deleting E-roads from the map?
conradoos (2024-12-29 08:27:26+00:00): Hi, you made edit with OSM Relatify. This tool duplicate ways, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341886499, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341886500, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341886501 etc.
NorthCrab (2024-12-29 14:03:30+00:00): This has just been fixed (https://github.com/Zaczero/osm-relatify/issues/32) sorry for that!
cyril31 (2024-12-29 14:58:13+00:00): I just fix this 3 one but I must verify all my work
NorthCrab (2024-12-30 02:23:25+00:00): I think it would be better to setup a global bot for detecting such issues. Overlapping roads is also a common mistake among new OSM mappers.
conradoos (2024-12-30 06:14:44+00:00): There is a Maproulette challenge https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/50055
NorthCrab (2024-12-30 07:38:44+00:00): O!! Loving it
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:09:03+00:00): Znów nie stosujesz się do zasad (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments) nazywania zestawów zmian - o co cię już kilkakrotnie w imieniu społeczności OSM prosiłem. Czy naprawdę tak trudno w trzech słowach skomentować to, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś?
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:08:47+00:00): Znów nie stosujesz się do zasad (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments) nazywania zestawów zmian - o co cię już kilkakrotnie w imieniu społeczności OSM prosiłem. Czy naprawdę tak trudno w trzech słowach skomentować to, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś?
M!dgard (2024-12-22 18:17:41+00:00): Dag Jakka

De vorm van ref:level_crossing suggereert dat je de Infrabel-data aan het gebruiken bent. Ik zou willen vragen om dat niet te doen, aangezien ik de kwaliteit van de Infrabeldata aan het beoordelen ben aan de hand van recent gemapte OSM-data.

Eens dat voorbereid is, leg ik dan aan de community voor een automatische import te doen. Tags op bestaande overwegen toevoegen is zeer eenvoudig, en quasi alle overwegen zijn al gemapt, dus deze tags handmatig toevoegen is ook gewoon verloren moeite.

Tevens is L-69-114 niet het formaat dat we in OSM gebruiken. Dit moet nog omgezet worden naar railway:ref=L69 ref=114.

Groetjes, Midgard
M!dgard (2024-12-22 18:33:20+00:00): (De source=AIV+PICC+survey+mapillery+notes is ook misleidend indien je bron Infrabeldata is. Bij zulke externe databronnen is het wel nuttig om de source in te vullen.)
M!dgard (2024-12-22 18:37:25+00:00): * ref:railway=L69
M!dgard (2024-12-22 18:39:22+00:00): Nee wacht, er is eigenlijk geen tag voor de referentie van de bijhorende lijn. Die wordt enkel op de ouder (railway=rail) gemapt.
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:08:38+00:00): Znów nie stosujesz się do zasad (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments) nazywania zestawów zmian - o co cię już kilkakrotnie w imieniu społeczności OSM prosiłem. Czy naprawdę tak trudno w trzech słowach skomentować to, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś?
AndyB_66 (2024-12-11 19:26:21+00:00): Znów nie stosujesz się do zasad nazywania zestawów zmian - o co cię już dwukrotnie w imieniu społeczności OSM prosiłem. Czy naprawdę tak trudno w trzech słowach skomentować to, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś?
woodpeck (2024-12-11 19:46:46+00:00): Hello Дарья134, please don't use "дом" as the name of buildings you add; it is not a name but a description. If you want to highlight that people live there, use building=house - no need to set a name.

Also, you can draw many buildings in a session and upload them altogether, you don't have to upload every single building.

Please use the "Q" key to make your buildings rectangular.
Bobropiton (2024-12-12 08:44:56+00:00): А зачем дорогу было сносить?
NorthCrab_upload (2024-12-11 19:41:00+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/12413406058

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Syl (2024-12-12 08:16:22+00:00): Bonjour, il y a un soucis avec votre modification du nœud  12293544161. Vous avez changé son type alors que le poste électrique était déjà sur le bâtiment : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65626037
Du coup maintenant il est en double.
jbcharron (2024-12-12 08:36:53+00:00): Bien vu, c'est corrigé :)
AndyB_66 (2024-12-11 21:19:33+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
rempshaener (2024-12-12 18:59:25+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Zum Tagging: das sieht sehr gut aus, ich habe keine Anmerkungen.
Zur Geometrie: der Umriss ist nicht ganz rechtwinklig. Das kannst du einfach beheben. In iD markieren und "Q" drücken  - fertig.
Wenn du noch Fragen hast, bitte einfach melden.
Vielen Dank für deinen Beitrag.

Viele Grüße
lastcommodore (2024-12-20 22:47:38+00:00): Hello,

You are making duplicate station platforms by turning the footways into platforms, is there a reason for that? The area is already marked as a platform.
mashdash (2024-12-20 23:58:56+00:00): Oh I didn't realize it would have that effect. I did it because the routing application I use was marking them as two separate paths (leading no connections from the edges). What I've done at other stations is connect the path to the edge of the platform way, would that be better?
lastcommodore (2024-12-21 16:19:26+00:00): Yeah, that would be better. I think the routing issue seems to be on the app's end, as it should be treating the platform as an area and not a way.
trial (2025-09-23 20:37:05+00:00): Bonjour, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/950245869 devrait être deux polygones : la forêt ne couvre pas la rivière ;-)
AndyB_66 (2024-12-11 21:18:53+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
user_20523254 (2024-12-11 21:25:02+00:00): source: survey and aerial imagery
Fizzie-DWG (2024-12-11 22:59:36+00:00): Think you need to also update the start & end dates! :-)
aharvey (2024-12-11 23:01:15+00:00): I missed your comment Graeme. I just updated them to match the months listed on the website, exact dates would be better if you know that flaming heart?
❤️‍🔥 (2024-12-12 19:57:45+00:00): good point, thanks for fixing it andrew. I'll check the signage next time I walk past, in case there's more accurate dates
Fizzie-DWG (2024-12-12 22:33:02+00:00): Just wondering about it. Is it set-up in the same spot each year? If so, it may be better to use lifecycle tags (disused maybe?) when closed, rather than deleting it all, then remapping it again?
❤️‍🔥 (2024-12-13 07:28:11+00:00): I'd hope that by next summer the construction here will be finished, but who knows. I guess we can decide in 5 months when it closes
eggie (2024-12-11 22:01:16+00:00): Dag Tomas... Alle gebouwen zijn import vanuit het Kadaster.
Beter niets aan veranderen.
Niet naar daken kijken bij schuin genomen luchtfoto's.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-12-11 22:04:46+00:00): Wat is shop=yes zonder verdere naam?