piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Jordi MF (2023-11-06 23:57:22+00:00): Hola Marc,

Recorda que, encara que l'etiqueta principal "name" tinga el nom en valencià també s'ha d'afegir l'etiqueta d'idioma "name:ca". Sobretot, açò és important si hi ha una altra etiqueta d'idioma (en este cas, "name:es").
Salut
woodpeck_repair (2023-11-14 23:33:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 144029864 where the changeset comment is: revert von edits des Users Steinlechner3
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-06 11:25:52+00:00): Thank you for mapping. Please add related changeset comments for the applied modification and deletion. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143707325
user_5359 (2023-11-07 19:37:07+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1221603118. Please use lowercase keys and values.
silversurfer83 (2023-11-07 08:22:52+00:00): Moin Björn,

von den Eigenschaften her sieht der Hydrant ok aus. Die zwei wichtigsten hast du schon erfasst.
Falls möglich, kann an Hydranten noch wesentlich mehr Info gepackt werden. Das Wiki erklärt, welche das sind:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant

Bei Fragen immer raus damit

grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143707689
BjörnMöser (2023-11-07 18:59:09+00:00): Hi, 
danke für den Hinweis. Ich denke aber das die Pflege aller Eigenschaften bei den Hydranten den Rahmen sprengen wird :-)
Ich werde aber im Nachgang bei den Löschwasserbehältern mal bissi was dazu machen ;-)
Grüße
JJIglesias (2023-11-06 22:05:44+00:00): Saludos. Favor revisar

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres
NorthCrab_upload (2023-11-06 20:00:26+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11329830634

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
silversurfer83 (2023-11-07 08:06:45+00:00): Hi :)

könntest du die Öffnungszeiten am besten nochmal vor Ort kontrollieren?
(ich kenn mich mit dem maps.me interface nicht so gut aus, vielleicht war es auch nur ein Versehen von dir, aber so, wie du es eingetragen hast ist von Sonntag bis Donnerstag geöffnet...)

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143708013
Glassman (2023-11-07 21:27:23+00:00): If the building is named 500 square then it's appropriate to have a name. We don't like descriptive names like name=Apartments.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143708281
user_2061236 (2023-11-09 05:35:40+00:00): V téhle změně jsi posunul I/20, prosím o opravu.
user_2061236 (2023-11-09 05:36:27+00:00): Bing mapy bývají posunuté, používej CUZK ortofoto nebo si Bing mapy podle něj zarovnej.
user_5359 (2023-11-13 07:23:31+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/856660405 (one of eight objects). What is the mean of the tag Van = Haelenstraat.
FraserKp (2023-11-13 09:44:21+00:00): Lots of number 11's, assume these are a copy/paste error?
Craig Murdo (2023-11-30 19:49:42+00:00): Yes my mistake. Update incoming.
lipuma (2023-11-07 14:37:28+00:00): Set as vacant with StreetComplete
emersonveenstra (2023-11-06 21:16:49+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143710581, please only edit the areas that are assigned to you
NorthCrab_upload (2023-11-06 20:30:31+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1221610128

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2023-11-06 20:30:33+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9349399140
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9349399141
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9349399142

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Olaf der Mapper (2023-11-06 21:45:21+00:00): Danke!
Allison P (2023-11-06 22:02:47+00:00): What is your source for the spelling of "Touch'N'Go"?

Also, the street has a predirectional of Northwest.
AndyB_66 (2023-11-08 10:27:31+00:00): I to jest dobry opis zestawu zmian 👍
Glassman (2023-11-07 21:31:10+00:00): I'm not sure why but it looks like you modified the existing bldg - maybe an accident. I went ahead and fixed it.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143709274
felipeeugenio (2023-11-06 21:00:33+00:00): Hola. Por favor tener cuidado con el duplicado de colegios
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143709392
Routt County Planning (2023-11-09 19:45:59+00:00): Thank you again!
Glassman (2023-11-07 21:32:39+00:00): The node for Clover Creek Reserve is nice but if you know the boundaries, a polygon would be better.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143709579
Routt County Planning (2023-11-09 19:43:09+00:00): Thank you for updating this!
Qaiser Hussain M (2023-11-07 07:12:00+00:00): Hello
mcliquid (2023-11-07 07:48:38+00:00): Hi,

Welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing :-)

One general recommendation: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:

• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)

• keep changes within the same country

• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
user_5359 (2023-11-07 20:14:11+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/550986854/history (one of four ways). What is the mean of the tag yes=no?
VLD190 (2023-11-07 21:25:19+00:00): Hello user_5359, thank you for reaching out to me! I apologize for the confusion on the "yes=no" tag. It was an accident on my end. I've gone ahead and removed the tag from the feature. Thank you for reaching out again, and please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns! I went ahead and removed the tag, per changeset 143755187
user_5359 (2023-11-08 08:09:06+00:00): see also https://www.osm.org/changeset/143767746 (for the other three ways).
VLD190 (2023-11-10 21:11:58+00:00): Hello user_5359,

Thanks for pointing these other features out to me as well. I appreciate that you fixed the tagging error I made, I will be more mindful in the future. Thank you again, and please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any other comments, questions, or concerns!
gscholz (2023-11-08 07:05:53+00:00): Hi alisari55,
your recent edits have left behind a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=35.92493&lat=41.52759&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Your new landuse areas also overlap with already existing landuse areas. Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Tomas_J (2023-11-08 21:13:26+00:00): Ahoj,

pozadoval si skontrolovat tvoju sadu zmien. 

Za mna: skvela praca. 

Dakujem, ze sa podielas na zlepseni mapy Openstreetmap. Pokracuj v mapovani a ak by si mal akekolvek otazky, mozes napisat do diskusnej skupiny https://groups.google.com/g/osm_sk.

Tomas
gscholz (2023-11-08 07:25:01+00:00): Hi elpequenyosaltatapias,
this changeset has created a mess of self intersecting and displaced ways:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=143710706

I have reverted it to fix those issues. Please be careful editing the map.
Kind regards
Guido
Tomas Straupis (2023-11-08 06:33:55+00:00): O tikrai buvo reikalas taip stipriai visoje Lietuvoje sukelti kelių klasifikacijas? Nes dabar rezultatas ne toks siaubingas, kaip Kaune, bet į tą pusę. Niekam neįdomūs pravažiavimai į pramonines zonas pasidarė tertiary. Smulkiame mastelyje dabar gauname nereikalingų makaronų makalynę. Kaip pavyzdį galima imti pramoninius kelius Kėdainių pietryčiuose. BP yra orientacinis dalykas, mes jau Vilniuje pastebėjome, kad jo tiesiogiai taikyti negalima. Sakyčiau dabar rezultatas ne tik ne geresnis, nei buvo, bet stipriai blogesnis.
Kirstukas (2023-11-11 13:45:59+00:00): Dėl pramoninių kelių Kėdainiuose pilnai sutinku, jog kaip ir nėra reikalo turėti juos aukštesnės kategorijos. Tačiau dėl kitų kelių klasifikacijos būtų galima padiskutuoti. Kaip suprantu, dėl Lietuvos teritorijos užmiesčio kelių žymėjimo specifikos labai nenorima miestų gatvių žymėti tertiary. Nors paminėjote smulkiame mastelyje kažkokią makalynę (ir kad Kaune blogai), tačiau manau, jog yra atvirkščiai, kituose miestuose persistengta su didesnės kategorijos keliais (primary ir secondary), pvz. Vilniaus centre. Jos NĖRA pagrindinės, priešingai nei teigia toks žymėjimas.
Tomas Straupis (2023-11-11 15:18:33+00:00): Kažkada va šitą buvau padaręs, kad geriau matytųsi kelių hierarchija: https://openstreetmap.lt/map/keliu_hierarchija.html
Kirstukas (2023-11-12 19:56:04+00:00): Naujai pasinagrinėjau skirtumus tarp OSM numatytojo atvaizdavimo ir jūsų pateikto Lietuvai „tinkančio“ atvaizdavimo. Pasistengsiu nebekelti kelių kategorijų kur tikrai nereikia (Kėdainių pavyzdys), bet pažeminsiu esamus kelius, kaip dariau Biržuose. Pavyzdžiui Panevėžyje vien secondary gatvės, dalį jų galima padaryti tertiary, o hierarchija nelabai pasikeis openmap žemėlapyje mastelio atžvilgiu. Taip pat Panevėžio vidinis aplinkkelis (Šiaurinė-Pramonės-Vakarinė g. ir V. Alanto-Beržų g.) turėtų tapti primary.
Tomas Straupis (2023-11-12 20:56:00+00:00): Šiaip galima būtų kelti šitą pokalbį į paštą (tomasstraupis@gmail.com). Taip, šitą hierarchiją pirmoje eilėje aš siūliau, bet aptarinėjama buvo su visais, kas tuo metu buvo talk-lt sąrašyne. Mintis yra turėti gražią hierarchiją, kuri gražiai/aiškiai/prasmingai atrodo skirtinguose masteliuose. Čia svarbiausia dalis, kad kiekviename mastelyje kelių tinklas neprarastų jungumo ir nebūtų nei perkrautas, nei tuščias. Ir nėra tai įkalta akmenyje - galima derinti, tik visada geriau iš pradžių pasiklausti (galima manęs, galima visų talk-lt), nes kategorijas mes Lietuvoje keitėm ir ne vieną kartą, tai gali būti, kad siūlomas sprendimas jau buvo išbandytas ir turėjo kažkokių problemų, dėl ko jo buvo atsisakyta.
Dawid2849 (2023-11-06 21:29:31+00:00): Cześć! 
Proszę, nie używaj podkładu Bing w Polsce. Jest on kiepskiej jakości i przesunięty o kilka metrów.
citrula (2023-11-07 00:23:47+00:00): Hi Tristan, what source are you using for these edits?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143710927
Tristan_COB (2023-11-07 16:49:21+00:00): I am a GIS Analyst with the City of Bryan and use a combination of aerial photography and survey plats!
citrula (2023-11-08 01:32:38+00:00): Sounds good as long as you have permission, or the data sources are licensed in a way that's compatible with OSM. Welcome to OSM :)
citrula (2023-11-08 01:32:43+00:00): Sounds good as long as you have permission, or the data sources are licensed in a way that's compatible with OSM. Welcome to OSM :)
vng_me (2023-11-07 19:10:54+00:00): Coastlines are broken after your edits ..
Patalakki (2023-12-19 21:18:09+00:00): Why have you added rivers inside the lake Alajärvi? Rivers should end on the edge of the lake.
Stahlmann (2023-12-20 19:39:43+00:00): So that the rivers can be routed continuously. I know this as valid tagging. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a tagging rule in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:water%3Dlake or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rivers. Do you have the tagging rules for me, please? Then I would revert it myself.
Stahlmann (2023-12-20 19:56:17+00:00): Compare e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/145041304 as part of the Rhine River Relation. Flows through a well-known lake that many mappers tend to pass by. The route is 12 years old without contradiction. I guess both options should be possible.
Patalakki (2023-12-22 08:45:04+00:00): I don't really know the exact case with Rhine, as this may be vary between countries and it could also depend on the scale and importance of the river and the lake in question.

In Finland, rivers should end on the edge of the lake at least then, when the river flowing into a lake and the one leaving from it are different. This is the case with Alajärvi, as Kuninkaanjoki and Levijoki flows into it and Kurejoki departs from it. All of these three rivers should be connected to the edge of lake Alajärvi, but not any further in to middle of the lake.

Sometimes the ending or starting point of a river is tough to pinpoint, such is the case with large deltas for example. One thing is for sure though, you can’t randomly assign a point in the middle of the lake Alajärvi where Levijoki turns into Kurejoki. For example Mustionjoki/Karjaanjoki (Svatån in Swedish) run through a small lake or body of water called Kyrksjön (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24163675). As the body of water is small and the river is the same on the both ends of it, it is suitable that the river polyline also runs through it any breaks.
Patalakki (2023-12-22 08:49:30+00:00): *...it is suitable that the river polyline also runs through it without any breaks.
Stahlmann (2024-01-03 16:20:48+00:00): I map in different countries and am therefore used to different mappings. However, it is noticeable that over the years many things have been harmonised as much as possible, e.g. to enable third party users (OSMAND etc.) to create secure representations (the principle of not mapping for the renderer remains unaffected). In the case of rivers, for example, I was previously only familiar with the version in which the rivers pass through the lakes, as the routers would otherwise run along the edge of the lake.

If this is different in Finland, I can of course reset my changeset. You just have to tell me to do it. Of course, I would still appreciate a source.

And as I said via PN: I apologise for the delay in my reply.
Patalakki (2024-01-03 22:58:22+00:00): Because you insisted, here is some info regarding this:
The Wikipedia pages lists the coordinates for the starting and ending points of Kurejoki. These starting and ending points are literally at both ends of the river. Kurejoki don’t start from the middle of lake Alajärvi.  This document by the officials (https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/134134/LSUra%201_2008%20red.pdf?sequence=2) confirms this view, as it points out on the page 131: “Kurejoki laskee Alajärvestä Lappajärveen” (Kurejoki flows from [lake] Alajärvi to [lake] Lappajärvi). As I pointed out in my previous comment, mapping the river through a small body of water makes sense when the river at the both ends is the same, such as in the case of Kyrksjön in Karjaa ((https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24163675). Though, this is not the case with lake Alajärvi and its three different rivers.

Artificially connecting the river itself to the other rivers in middle of a prominent lake is a prime example of mapping for the renderer (or router). Router engines should recognize a larger body of water and find an optimal route through it when the river’s starting or ending node is connected on the perimeter of the lake. If you absolutely insist that you need to connect the rivers with each other, you should do it via doing similar relation as this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10977421#map=9/62.3645/29.9550.

Please, revert the changeset. Dragging the rivers’ starting or ending points to the middle of lake is the wrong approach.
Stahlmann (2024-01-10 14:16:11+00:00): I have now worked through several points that I would like to address first:

- I have reviewed the linked document. Also the page mentioned. It is mainly about living organisms in the ecosystems involved. It also remains questionable whether the publisher has consented to its use as a source for OSM.

- Wikipedia is not a valid source. The Wikidata object is also questionable at this point. The coordinates sometimes refer to the coordinate points from the OSM itself. If the coordinates are measured by an official authority, it would again be questionable whether the OSM can use this data as a source. (Example: I currently have several mountain peaks that I cannot transfer to the OSM because I am not allowed to use the existing sources)

- I have asked the OSM community for advice.  Pls reffer to "How to map" at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Driver. It says the following "Just as with highways, it is important that the topology of rivers is correct. That means, if you can go from one part of the river to another part of the river via the water, there has to be a piece of waterway=* between them. This implies that a way tagged as waterway=river should not stop on the riverbank of another river, but should proceed to the central way of the other river." - But don't worry, I caused a two-day discussion with this question.

I would suggest the following compromise: The waterways remain in place to follow the guideline of the OSM wiki. But they will be separated and are without names within the lake.
Patalakki (2024-01-14 16:53:47+00:00): Yes I'm very well aware of the problems with the sources that I linked. As I told you, I don’t have any better sources to offer, as the stuff that I have previously mentioned comes from the local knowledge, which is quite impossible to source. I haven’t used the linked document or Wikipedia as a source for my mapping, I linked those just to back up my local knowledge, which without them comes out to you just as “because this is how it is done in Finland”. So no need to criticize those sources, as they were only for you to better understand my local knowledge.

Also, are you aware that OSM Wiki is also crowd sourced, and anyone can write whatever they want to on it? Yeah, I get that this is a childish claim, as I often refer to the OSM Wiki as the omniscient source myself, but that’s just a remark to you that you can’t completely write off Wikipedia and lean on OSM Wiki as they both operate on the same principles.

"Just as with highways, it is important that the topology of rivers is correct. That means, if you can go from one part of the river to another part of the river via the water, there has to be a piece of waterway=* between them. This implies that a way tagged as waterway=river should not stop on the riverbank of another river, but should proceed to the central way of the other river." I’m pretty sure you interpreted this incorrectly. I think that refers to situations like in this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/476661363#map=19/63.10703/23.15727. So Hirvijoki needs to be connected to Kauhavanjoki-waterway, connecting it only to the river area polygon is not enough. This citation, though, doesn’t say a single thing regarding lakes. I still firmly believe, that the correct way of mapping this is similar to the already linked relation example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10977421#map=9/62.3645/29.9550.

Either way, your compromise suggestion suits me, as hence the rivers start and end correctly. Thanks for the conversation and co-operation.
Stahlmann (2024-01-15 14:16:14+00:00): Hi,
the local knowledge thing was not an accusation. Actually, it doesn't make me happy that I am now probably like the people who "criticized" me in my first OSM years.

However, the OSM wiki is managed by the OSM community. Wikipedia is managed by a completely different group of users ;) - but yes, that's a general issue with wiki software.

Regarding the interpretation in the wiki: We actually had a heated discussion about this. The fact that the example of lakes was not actively mentioned was also an issue. So it's more a case of "we" interpreted it that way. In the end, it was more or less a mutual agreement. Of course, the collective can also be wrong.

I also thank you for the exchange
Matt_ (2023-11-06 21:50:19+00:00): Please see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_National_Inventory_of_Dams
Buraddo (2023-11-06 22:38:35+00:00): Hello,
I do not think that this representation of the intersection is better than before. For example turning right from Madach Imre towards Dorobanților now involves 2 railway crossings according to your mapping, while it was correct before (can be done without crossing). Again, street Liviu Rebreanu was straight before, now it is crooked towards the intersection.
Can you explain why do you think this is an improvement over the previous representation? I agree that it is simpler for data users, but it is not that correct...
Carto_Ferret (2023-11-07 22:38:41+00:00): Hello Buraddo,

The reason for the remodel was to correct an issue with where Strada Madách Imre (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23577963) intersected with Strada Dorobanților (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/825489356) at (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/258199141), where the previous oneway was blocking routes through here.

I now see your concern about the railway crossings and was also able to confirm this with Bing StreetSide imagery. I have now updated this junction in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143756084 to better represent ground truth and thank you for reaching out about this!

Carto_Ferret
Buraddo (2023-11-07 23:14:47+00:00): Thank you for investigating the issue. The oneways were recently modified (Madach Imre was reversed, Dorobanților is now new oneway), probably the restriction that you mentioned remained by mistake from the old configuration.

The intersection looks good now!
gscholz (2023-11-08 07:07:58+00:00): Hi alisari55,
your recent edits have left behind a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=35.92493&lat=41.52759&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Your new landuse areas also overlap with already existing landuse areas. Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Hugoren Martinako (2023-11-12 10:42:30+00:00): Bones Jordi,

No unifiqueu coses com aquestes: els place es defineixin millor com un node situat pel mig, i l'àrea envolupant haurìa de ser només el landuse=residential.

En aquest cas, hi ha dues opcions:
1. Convertir https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33076062 a landuse i esborrar cadascú dels landuses interiors (Urbanova 1,2,3,4...) deixant-los com nodes neighbourhoods.
2. Esborrar https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33076062 i deixar-ho com el node que era abans.

IMO, prefereixo 1. Crec q tenir els landuses de manera individual no té cap sentit, llevat que foren de diferent tipus: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:residential

Salutacions
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143711781