piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mavl (2025-05-13 15:05:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
josmougn (2025-03-16 12:06:43+00:00): to answer your fixme "Line without tags - this is causing issues with the ID Editor. Likely can be removed.", on the way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41841083
It is an outer way of a multipolygon, it's normal that it doesn't have tags.
joel56dt (2025-02-27 17:20:57+00:00): Thank you, I couldn't find a good tag to use. This is much better.
eggie (2025-02-27 13:09:23+00:00): Dag Pim,
De nolen is hier al getagd op het gebouw zelf. Dubbel taggen is dan niet correct.
Je tag windmolen heb ik weer verwijderd.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-02-27 15:56:25+00:00): nolen?  typo > molen
mavl (2025-05-13 15:07:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
Jakka (2025-02-27 13:36:22+00:00): Bij beschrijving best steeds de richting vernoemen van x Collegestraat naar x Kaaistraat Zodat deze niet terug omgedraaid wordt thx
NeisRevert (2025-03-13 12:45:33+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163568872
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:03:26+00:00): Hi Dodo47, and thank you for your contributions to the OSM project!

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

For collaboration within the OSM community, it’s helpful to provide comments that explain the changes you’ve made. This helps others follow your work more easily. You can find some useful tips for writing clear and effective changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks for your attention to this.

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

#ClearComments
s777n (2025-02-28 09:07:28+00:00): Здравствуйте этот хостел не находится. Ести ли у него сайт или что-нибудь где можно перепроверить что он реально существует?
Hufkratzer (2025-02-27 21:16:45+00:00): Hi, if https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1363324313 is a riding arena, it should be labelled leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian (like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/344275187), but I'm not sure if it is; it looks different on different satellite views.
蕉饼电脑 (2025-02-27 19:12:47+00:00): 你好，请做出以下修改以修正此变更集的绘制错误：
请删除重叠的道路；
请修改错误的道路等级(highway=primary; primary=unclassified -> highway=service)；
请将覆盖整个建筑群的建筑范围(building=yes)删除或修改为土地利用要素(landuse)，并为每一个建筑楼绘制独立的建筑范围；
一条连续的道路，请使用一条线段连接，而非将两条路在交叉口合并成一条线段再将道路另外一段绘制为独立的线段；
请不要使用layer=-1解决错误提示；
相交的道路，请用节点/桥梁/隧道等连接。
此致
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-02-28 10:11:34+00:00): 你是哪个大学的，把你导师名字发一下
shu0410 (2025-02-28 17:08:36+00:00): already revert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163060256
ChrissW-R1 (2026-04-21 20:03:03+00:00): Please check https://osm.org/note/5260303
Fizzie-DWG (2025-02-28 00:50:10+00:00): 👋 Hello & welcome to OSM! Thanks for your work, but a few things to mention. 

You've marked building levels as 0 which means it's flat on the ground! A 1-storey building is level=1 etc. 

You have a power line across the front of the market but it doesn't connect to any other power lines? 

Do the markets have a name?

Thanks!
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 01:53:49+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164657651
gurglypipe (2025-02-28 01:34:08+00:00): Hi, I’ve reverted this change (as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163033751) because your ‘fix’ looks incorrect. The map previously had a bypass gate next to a cattle grid, which is a common rural road layout in this area. The gate allows horse-drawn traffic to bypass the cattle grid.

I’m not sure what maproulette issue you were trying to fix (it’s not mentioned in the changeset comment) but I don’t think this was the right fix.

Have you surveyed this area in person?
Archi_Ma (2025-02-28 13:13:37+00:00): Hi gurglypipe,
thank you for reverting the changeset, based on your knowledge and experience.
Regards!
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:19+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
philippschuetz (2025-02-27 18:57:41+00:00): The edits I made were intentional.
luiswoo (2025-02-28 09:02:31+00:00): Причина "motorway_link → secondary_link"?
pavvv (2025-02-27 18:18:13+00:00): Ale się trafiło czasowo :)
dvdhoven (2025-02-27 15:15:17+00:00): Ik heb deze changeset reverted.
A67-A67 heeft 6 dagen geleden de situatie aangepast mbv een zeer recente satfoto
Ik heb zelf ook nog even de satfoto opgezocht en op de satfoto van 16-02-2025 is duidelijk de situatie te zien zoals A67-A67 die heeft ingetekend.
Jij hebt overduidelijk een oudere foto gebruikt.
Hugoren Martinako (2025-04-16 16:31:05+00:00): Un elemento poblado con 130 habitantes (los Ausines), no es place=village, si no place=hamlet
Hugoren Martinako (2025-04-16 17:38:44+00:00): Ya he visto lo que pasaba, lo he corregido. San Juan estaba marcado como la capital del municipio de los Ausines, cuando en realidad es la entidad singular los Ausines (mismo nombre), la cual contiene tres entidades, que ya marcaste como barrio perfectamente.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-18 03:06:42+00:00): DWG revert – undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165094267
eggie (2025-02-27 19:11:52+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
ivanbranco (2025-02-27 14:46:14+00:00): Ciao, rimuovo il nome "Parco dei Colli di Bergamo" in quanto identifica l'area protetta (già mappata qua: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13854526 ) e non questa porzione di bosco in particolare.
ivanbranco (2025-02-27 14:48:30+00:00): Inoltre non mi risulta sia composto unicamente da alberi aghifoglia sempreverdi.
Lyon-St-Clair (2025-05-12 19:15:48+00:00): merci de faire attention à ne pas taguer un bâtiment sans "building=yes".
trucbidule (2025-05-13 07:10:06+00:00): bizarre que j'ai oublié ça, ok
MihaelIvanjek (2025-02-28 08:23:03+00:00): Reverting because of an unnecessary split #OptimoRoute

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163041358
Glassman (2025-03-01 01:06:10+00:00): Just to let you know the park was already mapped.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163015405
Diagon (2025-03-04 06:35:39+00:00): Thanks.  I actually did that before I had an account.  I didn't know it'd be uploaded.  I'll have to figure out how this whole thing works! ...
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163015405
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-29 21:49:07+00:00): Probably should be name=K-9 Resorts branch=Westbury.  Name should only be the name.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163015786
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:22+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
eggie (2025-02-27 15:29:50+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback... Daar ga je helaas op deze manier niets van zien, want pedestrian ligt altijd boven.
Je zult dan met multipolygonen moet werken.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Multipolygon_Examples
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-02-27 15:53:57+00:00): Even als voorbeeld alles als inner in een mp gezet.
CTRL f5 voor het effect.
Groet
eggie
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:23+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
NeisRevert (2025-03-13 12:43:14+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163568767
NorthCrab_upload (2025-02-27 15:42:19+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/241547948

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Fizzie-DWG (2025-02-28 00:52:58+00:00): Please try to use better comments to let everybody else know what you've done: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Fizzie-DWG (2025-02-28 00:53:46+00:00): Here you've added a building that doesn't appear on the imagery you said you've used?
Dawid2849 (2025-02-27 15:29:38+00:00): Niestety dnia, gdy tu byłem, kierowałem i nie miałem okazji się dokładniej przyjrzeć. Dodałem parkingi z orto, strefę zamieszkania (zwróciłem na to uwagę). Wygląda na to, że na osiedlu znajdują się różne firmy, ale to już ktoś inny musi zmapować (szkoda, że Zamość nie ma aktywnych maperów, ja rzadko tu bywam)
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2025-02-28 22:14:34+00:00): Hi, could you explain why was this POI removed?
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2025-03-05 21:33:53+00:00): I've surveyed the tap. It doesn't seem to work at the moment. Still, it exists and should be tagged a disused: lifecycle prefix and maybe disused=yes tag. Maybe it only works in the summer.
NeisRevert (2025-03-13 12:44:02+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163568806
mcliquid (2025-02-27 19:58:17+00:00): Hi, bei dem Parkplatz hast du quasi zweimal access=yes angegeben, vermutlich müsste das conditional no sein oder?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/610528057
pittrichimica (2025-02-28 14:42:42+00:00): Jein, ich hatte die Zeiten zwar vertauscht, damit die Logik stimmt. Aber um Dopplungen zu vermeiden, hab ich jetzt sicherheitshalber auf no gesetzt und die Zeiten auf 02:00-06:00. Jetzt sollte es passen.
mcliquid (2025-02-28 15:10:07+00:00): Danke dir!
Larmax (2025-03-01 22:26:38+00:00): Et sitten merkannut parkkitalon vieräistä pätkää valmiiksi, josta tunnelin yksisuuntaisuus johtui
Larmax (2025-03-01 22:27:14+00:00): Eikun olitkin :)
anttit (2025-03-03 18:55:53+00:00): Joo, pieni viive siinä t toki uli. Itse aikanaan muutin vain tunnelin enkä ollut huomannut että tuo risteyskin oli muutettu jonkun muun toimesta.
HellMap (2025-02-27 17:26:05+00:00): Čau, neesmu sen bijis ap https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4470336 un https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38749145 - kas tur par izmaiņām ar veloceļiem? Agrāk bija neatdalītas velojoslas. Ja tagad atdalīti ceļi, tad uz paša ceļa `cycleway=lane` jāpielabo. Un uz tādiem kā https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303678631 un https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/932979863 tad arī jāatstāj birka, bet tikai kā `separate` līdzīgi ietvēm. (Te gan arī ietvēm birkas šķības.)
somehundred (2025-02-27 17:36:23+00:00): "cycleway=lane" ir pareizi, velojoslas joprojām neatdala fiziskas barjeras no ceļa. No dažām līnijām noņēmu, jo domāju, ka nav jēgas atstāt, ja es zīmēju atsevišķu veloceļa līniju, bet vēlāk sapratu, ka varēja atstāt, jo tehniski bija taču pareizi, bet slinkums bija atlikt atpakaļ.

Visparīgi, man nepatīk ņemties ar neskaitāmām birkām pie galvenā ceļa, es labāk visus ceļus zīmēju atsevišķi. Tad ir pārskatāmi, kartē renderējas un nav jāņemas ar birku haosu.
HellMap (2025-02-27 18:08:51+00:00): `cycleway=lane` nav pareizi, ja ir blakus iezīmēts atsevišķi ceļš. `cycleway=lane` nozīmē, ka šim ceļam ir atsevišķi neiezīmēta velojosla. Tā pat kā `sidewalk=yes/both/left/right` nozīmē, ka ir atsevišķi neiezīmēta ietve. Tiem tad jābūt `separate`.

Ja slinkums, var jau protams uz `separate` tās vērtības nemainīt un nodzēst pagaidām, kāds cits kādreiz nomainīs (es pats reti kad zīmējot ietves to daru un bieži nepamanu nepareizas vērtības uz ceļa (un es protams piekrītu, ka tās 1000 birkas uz ceļa ir tizlas)). Ja noņems, tad visādi StreetComplete par šo ceļu atkal sāks jautāt. Bet atstāt `cycleway=lane` vai `sidewalk=yes` gan nevajag - jo tad tā ir kļūda, jo ietve/josla ir dubultā ievadīti datos. Piemēram, Cycle Map tagad renderē divreiz [1].

Ja ceļi nav fiziski atdalīti, tos gan ar atsevišķiem ceļiem nezīmē. Zulipā arī par to un tieši par Rīgas velojoslām bija. Rīgā velojoslas ir iezīmētas atsevišķi tikai tur, kur tās ir ar vismaz ar kaut kādām fiziskām barjerām. Tādās vietās, kur ir ilglaicīgi tikai krāsas līnija, man tomēr liekas nevajadzētu radīt priekšstatu, ka šeit ir kaut kāda infrastruktūra. Piemēram, tas pats Cycle Map ļoti labi renderē ceļa birkās norādīto cieši pie ceļa, kas dod skaidrību, ka te nav nekas atdalīts.

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/56.945661/24.124837&layers=C
somehundred (2025-02-27 18:41:18+00:00): Labi, var noņemt cycleway birkas no ceļiem, kuriem blakus ir uzzīmēta atsevišķa velojosla. Bet tehniski, tā ir tikai un vienīgi Cycle Map renderētāja vaina. Dati kā tādi nav nepareizi.

Vai kaut kas salūzīs, ja veloceļi tiks zīmēti atsevišķi?
HellMap (2025-02-27 19:15:54+00:00): `cycleway=lane` nozīmē, ka ceļam blakus *nav* atsevišķi iezīmētas joslas.[1] Ja blakus iezīmē `highway=cycleway` joslu un uz ielas paliek  `cycleway=lane` - tad datos šai ielai ir 2 velojoslas - viena norādīta bez ģeometrijas ar birkām ceļam un otra iezīmēta kā ģeometrija blakus. Cycle Map renderē pareizi, jo jābūt vai nu vienam vai otram. (Un teorētiski var būt vietas, kur veloceļš ir paralēli ceļam ar velojoslu.) Te iepriekš bija iezīmēts pareizi.

Vai nu:
* `cycleway=lane` bez atsevišķa ceļa
* atsevišķs ceļš un `cycleway=separate`

Par `cycleway` vispār nelikšanu es minēju tikai kā pagaidu variantu, jo tu minēju, ka bija slinkums uz to brīdi. Bet tai vērtībai datu pilnībai ir jābūt. Kā minēju, visādi SC to šeit atkal prasīs (un tur ir pareizā opcija "mapped separately").

Par atsevišķi vai nē zīmēšanu labāk Zulip tēmā turpināt.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dseparate
somehundred (2025-02-27 19:33:36+00:00): Tad lai saliek pareizas "cycleway" birkas tie, kuriem rūp.
habi (2025-02-27 15:52:25+00:00): https://qa.poole.ch/addresses/ch/missing/355.geojson; https://qa.poole.ch/addresses/GWR/355_all.osm.zip
sheldonelectric (2025-03-06 08:38:06+00:00): Καλημέρα, ήθελα να σε ρωτήσω για τη χρησιμότητα του payment: εφόσον βρισκόμαστε σε χώρα που από το 2015 υποχρεώνει τα καταστήματα να δέχονται πιστωτικές κάρτες
ivanbranco (2025-02-27 16:26:00+00:00): Hi CS_COAS,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1363353010/history

you deleted and redraw this part of bridge, so there are now three interrupted relations. Could you take a look at it?

Also, the part before and after are called "Ponte Velha do Marnel" but this part isn't? Do you confirm it?
CS_COAS (2025-02-27 17:19:02+00:00): I redid this part of the bridge because it doesn't have an interruption like it did before. I redid it and added two excerpts, because I don't know how to join them, but they have the same characteristics.
s777n (2025-02-28 18:01:35+00:00): Здравствуйте. Вы  не ошиблись? На спутниковых снимках и панормах здесь никакой запраки не видно
dpolovinkin (2025-04-09 10:12:59+00:00): добрый день, а вы понимаете что надобавляли зданий которых не существует на местности (например https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1363355349)? можете объяснить? в чем проблема была просто добавить точки адресов?
dpolovinkin (2025-04-09 10:14:09+00:00): к слову пишите пожалуйста что именно вы добавляете, оставлять неинформативные комментарии аля "исправлена" в OSM нельзя
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:25+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
NeisRevert (2025-03-13 12:42:25+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163568731
Glassman (2025-03-01 01:22:23+00:00): We typically do not remove informal trails, instead we mark them as informal and access=no. Could you review your edit?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163020191
spiregrain (2025-02-27 21:42:14+00:00): In this changeset, you remived the ref:GB:uprn=6650051 tag from the old childcare building.  Has the unique property reference number for the building changed or been somehow revoked?  Or can that tag be reinstated?
honapak (2025-03-01 00:48:46+00:00): It got moved to the address node 12623581004 but if you think it's better kept on the building itself we can put it back on that, thanks
spiregrain (2025-03-01 08:13:06+00:00): Oh! Fair enough, didn't spot that.   Happy mapping!
Glassman (2025-03-01 01:28:29+00:00): Why the access=destination? access=destination is typically used on private property to allow people to get to a destination. I don't think I've ever seen it in public spaces.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163020462
NorthCrab_upload (2025-02-27 17:11:09+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/way/1363362281

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
BR_pebble (2025-04-24 11:08:27+00:00): Hello judithmurage
Thank You for your contribution.
Make sure to use imagery sources mentioned in a project - while quality checking I found incorrectly created buildings, for example ways: 1363363057, way 1363363056, way 1363363052.
Happy Mapping!
SekeRob (2025-03-01 11:11:13+00:00): Ciao,

Perché hai eliminato questo nodo di hamlet. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3924006274/history. Come già notato nel mio altro commento su CS, se elimini oggetti devi spiegare nei tuoi commenti su CS. Ci sono anche i tag del ciclo di vita. Se un edificio esisteva ed è stato demolito, devi contrassegnarlo come demolished:building=yes per indicare ad altri mappatori che non è più lì, così non lo ricreeranno in base a immagini obsolete che potrebbero utilizzare.

Saluti
NorthCrab_upload (2025-02-27 17:21:25+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/way/1363363434

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
thopf (2025-02-27 17:50:31+00:00): ETCS onstruction is finished yet! Test runs were sucessfully completed yet: https://www.styria-mobile.at/home/smf/index.php/topic,1035.0.html
hlfan (2025-05-06 23:25:33+00:00): ETCS will be armed for the whole area around Graz at once in mid/end of August from what I've heard:
https://youtu.be/e4CfBPCnTiQ?t=900
thopf (2025-06-15 00:09:25+00:00): Pictures from another test run: https://www.styria-mobile.at/home/smf/index.php/topic,1216.msg25377/topicseen.html#msg25377

ETCS is now in operation.
Negjana (2025-06-18 09:54:42+00:00): ETCS is in operation for testing purposes but not yet for general use, that will happen in August, also ETCS on Südbahn will go into operation from Frohnleiten to Spielfeld-Straß. For me it is logical to keep it as under construction until August.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 00:09:05+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164656299
codll (2025-02-27 20:44:54+00:00): please keep changesets local https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-03-01 10:52:08+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
Jochen Topf (2025-02-28 08:30:49+00:00): This changesets moves the coastline in a huge area away from the original coast to the wrong place. Looking at the aerial images this looks to me like a marshy area affected by tides and therefore part of the ocean.

See https://osmdata.openstreetmap.de/internal/coastline/ and https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=coastline&lon=67.81567&lat=24.12069&zoom=9&overlays=coastline for the affected area.

Please revert this change.
mapwitch (2025-02-28 19:54:15+00:00): Vielen Dank für Deinen Kommentar. Es wäre schon nett gewesen, kurz zu fragen, warum ich das gemacht habe. 

Hier also meine Erklärung: 
Auf allen herkömmlichen Karten sind diese Areale nicht als Teil des Meeres abgebildet, sondern als Landfläche, die regelmäßig von Salzwasser überflutet wird. Da aber auch auf den Satellitenbildern in diesem Bereich dennoch immer wieder Bebauung zu finden ist, halte ich es nicht für richtig, den Bereich als Meeresfläche auszuweisen. So werden auf TPC-Karten diese Gebiete anderes dargestellt als z.B. das deutsche Wattengebiet, das dem Meer zugeordnet wird (Mouth of Indus: TPC J-8A, Wattenmeer: TPC E-2B). Auf der JOG-Karte NF 42-2 sind auch populated places gekennzeichnet, sowie Höhenangaben, die zwischen 10 und bis an die 40 ft betragen.

Wenn diese Areale als Meer klassifiziert werden, nur weil sie von Salzwasser überspült werden, müssten genauso die Salzwiesen der Friesischen Inseln Meeresfläche sein, denn auch diese werden regelmäßig von Salzwasser bedeckt. Aber diese werden auch in OSM nicht als Meer gekennzeichnet. (Beispiel: https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=53.4882&mlon=6.2433#map=12/53.4882/6.2433)

Zudem trug die frühere landeinwärts gelegene Küstenlinie den PGS-Tag und sah auf den Satellitenbildern auch entsprechend  "falsch" aus. 

All das habe ich zum Anlass genommen, das Gebiet zu überarbeiten.
Jochen Topf (2025-03-01 09:34:46+00:00): First, we should discuss this in English. Second, it doesn't matter what other maps do, we have our own rules in OSM.

If there is a difference in opinion of how something is to be mapped, that's okay, then we should discuss that. But a change of this magnitude isn't something that you can just do without discussion.

As a side effect of this change the coastline processing is currently stalled which means that most OSM maps worldwide will not get updates to any coastline worldwide until this is resolved. That is not a good situation. So please revert this change and then start a discussion on the community forum about the different interpretation of where the coastline should be.
km2bp (2025-02-27 19:32:21+00:00): Widzę że poprawiałeś po mnie. Taki sposób targowania  podpowiada mi edytor przeglądarkowy z którego korzystam. No i kiedyś aplikacje mobilne nie pokazywały mogił. Teraz to działa bez kombinowania.  Mapę robię dla ludzi aby była jak najbardziej praktyczna i funkcjonalna. Nie złość się jeśli będziesz musiał zmieniać targowanie grobów na innych cmentarzach. Troszkę tych miejsc odwiedziłem i z pewnością jeszcze odwiedzę zanim sam się położę. Pozdrawiam.
szydzio (2025-02-28 21:51:18+00:00): Cześć! Nie złoszczę się, że mapujesz groby, jeśli chcesz to w porządku, mam jedynie zastrzeżenie, abyś nie wymuszał ich wyświetlania na głównej warstwie mapy OSM poprzez tagowanie ich jako budynków. Poza bardzo nielicznymi wyjątkami jak tutaj: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1333352004 groby NIE są budynkami. Jeśli będziesz zwykłe groby tagował jako cemetery=grave nie będzie problemu. Pozdr!