piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-16 08:30:27+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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/428831769

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
LockOnGuy (2023-03-16 16:30:42+00:00): Reason?
little_maper (2023-03-22 07:31:43+00:00): 
Hi, thank you for reaching out. Our team and Maxar have an agreement that allows us to use Maxar’s most recent nonpublic imagery for updates in OpenStreetMap. We always prioritize the use of public imageries, but at some locations where new changes are not seen in public imagery options, we will use Maxar’s nonpublic imagery to ensure the map is up to date, I used Maxar SecureWatch Imagery 2022-11-27 to remove this link.
Regards
little_maper
LockOnGuy (2023-03-23 18:45:52+00:00): Thank you for the reply, I would appreciate it if you added all of that in future edits, for example with this changeset it would be something like:    
Changeset comment: #digitalegypt Remove highway not showing in recent Maxar sat image
Source= Maxar SecureWatch Imagery 2022-11-27      
Regards.
little_maper (2023-03-26 07:39:14+00:00): Thank you and for sure I will.
MxxCon (2023-03-16 23:44:29+00:00): Hello.
When merging data please make sure that duplicate data is not combined.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133738100
MxxCon (2023-03-16 23:44:36+00:00): Hello.
When merging data please make sure that duplicate data is not combined.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133738100
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-16 08:30:25+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/301094748
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/301094763

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2023-03-16 09:33:03+00:00): I added back ways that were originally roads in subsequent changesets.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-16 08:30:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1162762638
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/100572725

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o miejscowości. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, zastosuj kombinację addr:city + addr:street. Jeśli nie, przekaż nazwę miejscowości w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1154689638

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
MxxCon (2023-03-16 23:45:21+00:00): Hello.
When merging data please make sure that duplicate data is not combined.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133738267
linux-lover (2023-03-16 23:52:57+00:00): very good catch!  And thank you for fixing it!
surveyor54 (2023-03-16 08:31:39+00:00): Source des CS:
Hessische Verwaltung für Bodenmanagement und Geoinformation - Digitale Verwaltungsgrenzen (Shapefile)
Gaetanl (2023-03-17 19:43:22+00:00): Bonjour, pouvez vous me dire pourquoi ces landuse étaient erronés? Sur la page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover il est écrit que landuse=grass correspond a un landcover, ce qui est représentatif de la réalité.
Truchin (2023-03-20 09:20:13+00:00): Le landcover, c'est "résidentiel"
En théorie, il n'est pas sensé y avoir de superposition. D'ailleurs, il y a un débat actuellement dans la communauté pour déprécier ce "landuse=grass".
Gaetanl (2023-03-20 09:32:20+00:00): D’accord. Quand je vois la carte de Apple Maps par exemple ces zones apparaissent en vert pour bien signifier que c’est une zone d’herbe et d’arbres. Je pense que c’est utile pour se repérer. Auriez vous une suggestion d’un autre tag pour garder ces zones?
Truchin (2023-03-20 09:38:49+00:00): Tout est dans le wiki :) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgrass

Tout en sachant que les tags de substitutions s'appliquent sur des zones beaucoup plus précises/détaillées. Mais c'est également détaillé dans le wiki.
Gaetanl (2023-03-21 12:49:30+00:00): Si je comprends bien vous trouviez que les zones d’herbes étaient trop grandes et trop globales? Si je retravaille ces zones en faisant bien attention de ne pas empiéter sur les bâtiments ça sera mieux?
En ce qui concerne le tag, celui qui serait le plus adapté semble être leisure=garden. Autour des immeubles ce sont des espaces verts entretenus je pense à la fois par la ville est les copropriétés accessibles à tout le monde.
Truchin (2023-03-22 08:52:48+00:00): Effectivement, les bâtiments et voiries ne sont pas de la pelouse.
"garden" est plus adapté pour des emprises qui contiennent autre chose que de la pelouse. Mais attention, le wiki précise "Les zones ne doivent pas inclure des éléments (par exemple des maisons d'habitation) qui ne font pas partie du jardin lui-même."

Bonne continuation

Thomas
MxxCon (2023-03-16 23:56:55+00:00): wheelchair=yes;no?🤨
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133738482
StC (2023-06-07 20:40:04+00:00): Hi,

it's kind of you to try and help with E12 in France, but:
 - could you please tell what your source is?
 - are you aware that ways must not be added directly to a super-relation, but to one of the sub-relations?
 - do you understand that ways must be split so that only their appropriate parts are added to relations?
Currently, the result of your 19 contributions on this route is not very usable.

Please advise at how you'd like to proceed (fix yourself and provide the source, ask us to revert, ask for guidance, etc)

Cheers,

StC
Harel M (2023-05-09 11:39:21+00:00): Hi!
Thanks for all the edits that you made as part of this changeset!
It seems that the imagery is a bit off according to the GPS recording I do.
I've seen that you removed some lines and added new ones.
Is there a way to better adjust the mapping to be more accurate?
I'm living in Ramot Menashe and do a lot of recording there for tests, so I see the diff between the recording and the mapping.
This can be seen with https://overpass-api.de/achavi/
The red lines are a bit to the north of the yellow lines
BMM994 (2023-05-09 11:52:39+00:00): One of the most difficult tasks in the Editor is the adjustments. I tried to fix it every time I start my editing. apparently some of my edits are not in the exact location that in the future I hope to correct better.
Le Petit Léo (2026-01-18 09:58:55+00:00): Bonjour,
Vous avez ajouté un ruisseau/caniveau  couvert qui traverse le Pâtis de Ravières et vous l'avez connecté à un chemin piéton à l'angle de la Place Edmé Dauphin et des Promenades du Pâtis.
Sur quelle source avez eu connaissance de ce ruisseau ? (je ne le vois pas sur le Cadastre ni sur BD Carthage).
Bonne journée.
Hallios (2026-01-18 19:11:41+00:00): J’habite sur place, c’est un tunnel l’évacuation des eaux de pluie du village.
J’ai valide précisément sa position avec les plaques d’égouts et témoignages d’habitants. ja canalisation maçonnée fait 1,3m de hauteur, elle servait a désengorger d’eau le bas du village lors des crues, et a été raccordé au réseau de pluie dans les années 70
Le Petit Léo (2026-01-19 12:13:30+00:00): Parfait.
Éventuellement peut-être le préciser en ajoutant par exemple
source=connaissances locales
Bonne journée
MxxCon (2023-03-17 00:14:43+00:00): opening_hours:signed=no, yet have opening_hours=?🤨
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133738716
SomeoneElse (2023-03-21 12:37:10+00:00): Hello,
"fixing value to follow convention tagging schema" doesn't explain what you did or why you did it here.  Your actual change ( https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/4627396 ) was to add a wikipedia tag.  Why not say what you did in the changeset comment?
Best Regards,
Andy
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-16 08:50:22+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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/node/10738750810

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2023-03-16 09:32:45+00:00): I added back ways that were originally roads in subsequent changesets.
Devdatta (2023-03-20 07:15:17+00:00): Why is your OSM changeset so big? Please limit it to a smaller area: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Also keep a meaningful Changeset message.
josmougn (2024-10-15 22:13:33+00:00): Lu dans https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:crossing_ref :
"Cet attribut, largement utilisé en France dans le passé, est déprécié au profit de crossing:markings=*"
frosm (2024-10-16 06:44:39+00:00): ce qui est faux puisque cela ne raconte pas la même chose, merci me l'avoir signalé, je corrigerai le wiki à l'occasion
MaciekMma (2023-03-20 10:39:46+00:00): no w sumie tak lepiej
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:39:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 137412856 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-16 09:20:24+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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/1154698113

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Frans S (2023-03-16 09:37:59+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please check your knowledge about tagging highways. You tagged a connection road to a settlement as a service road instead of unclassified.
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133740125
Frans S (2023-03-16 09:38:26+00:00): About highway tagging:

Please apply the rules described in this wiki
Most common taggings.
Rural areas : Unclassified,  track , path, service
Urban areas: unclassified, residential, path.


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways

Read also the remarks about tagging of tracks in the instructions.
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133740125
Jakka (2023-03-16 10:13:56+00:00): Is dit de officiële naam van het naambordje ?
Heb de indruk dat pad door sportveld loopt ?
aceman444 (2024-08-11 15:29:16+00:00): Zdravim, ako ste prisli na to, ze na https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/105300151 treba opravit adresu? Je to asi spravne (aj ked v katastri je tam stale 15, ale to ma aj dom nalavo), len ze ci mate nejake kontrolne mechanizmy voci registru adries.
Dodko (2024-08-11 16:49:19+00:00): V katastri je 17 vedľa
https://zbgis.skgeodesy.sk/mapka/sk/kataster/detail/kataster/parcela-c/810703/1142_2?pos=48.134014,17.844107,18
aj na budove je tabuľka vedľa
https://maps.app.goo.gl/smGcYdw7phnSd75U7
aceman444 (2024-08-11 16:56:11+00:00): To suhlasim, ale ako ste prisli na to, ze mate takto preverit tuto adresu.
Dodko (2024-08-11 17:28:20+00:00): To netuším po takom čase, ako som to našiel.
Patchanka (2023-03-20 17:15:01+00:00): bonjour 
j'ai des petits soucis avec les modifs faites sur les allées Paulmy.
D'une part vos modifications ont "cassé" plein de relations (itinéraires de bus), d'autre part la manière dont elles étaient représentées auparavant était cohérente par rapport au wiki : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:highway%3Dbusway
"ce schéma de clés ne s'applique pas aux voies de bus peintes sur des routes accessibles au public, souvent confondues". On utilise alors busway=lane sur le highway principal et non un axe séparé.
Est-ce en connaissance de cause que vous avez fait ces modifs ?
Patchanka (2023-03-21 17:08:23+00:00): bonjour
j'ai annulé le changeset avant que d'autres modifs ne soient faire et que ça complique encore plus les choses.
On en discute à l'occasion :-)
Bonne soirée
EdLoach (2023-03-16 10:55:51+00:00): Would the parish council website that you've added to the village node by more appropriate on the parish relation? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/76861
silversurfer83 (2023-03-16 14:06:42+00:00): Hi
du hast in der Änderung darum gebeten, dass nochmal jemand drüber guckt.

Sieht gut aus :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133741779
silversurfer83 (2023-03-16 14:08:44+00:00): Hi
Hier passt die Webseite nicht mit dem Namen der Bäckerei überein. Kannst du das kontollieren?
Grüße
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133741810
silversurfer83 (2023-03-16 13:58:55+00:00): Moin
ich habe nichts gegen Deine Arbeit, ich finde das, was ich sehe, eigentlich sogar vollkommen in Ordnung :)

Ich halte deine Weigerung auf meine Kommunikation zu reagieren jedoch für ausgesprochen unfreundlich und respektlos.

An JEDE Änderung einfach nur "Ortsangaben geändert/ergänzt" zu schreiben ist nicht hilfreich und kommt einem leeren Kommentarfeld gleich.

Bitte reagiere, wenn du von anderen Gemeinschaftsmitgliedern kontaktiert wirst.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133741821
canfe (2023-03-17 16:17:37+00:00): Come già detto sarebbe bene non usare sempre lo stesso commento, per di più errato "Soprallugo" che non specifica bene l'attività svolta.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133742173
Usoei (2023-11-20 10:19:39+00:00): ok
mavl (2023-03-24 10:30:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 134051515, 134045911, 134058112 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: incompatible source - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6981].
literan (2023-03-16 17:04:19+00:00): и зачем вы рисуете дубли зданий?
GinaroZ (2023-03-16 11:54:14+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/231753981 should really also be a service road+driveway if vehicles are allowed on it?
osmuser63783 (2023-03-16 12:17:33+00:00): Thanks for checking the changeset. Yeah this is a bit of an odd one and I wasn't sure if I should change the highway tag. See also
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3574754 and https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1460163174375779

It *looks* like a footway, it *feels* like a footway and it functions as a footway 99.9% of the time (that is, the entrance to the park from the Dumbiedykes area). It's just that some vehicles are allowed on drive on it, presumably to access the lodge (though I've never seen anyone drive there).

It's not someone's private driveway that happens to be open to pedestrians.

But I'll defer to your experience if you disagree!
osmuser63783 (2023-03-16 12:22:53+00:00): I did also check on Overpass because I wasn't sure and found quite a few other examples of highway=footway, motor_vehicle=private
JayTurnr (2023-03-16 10:31:27+00:00): It worked!
Lejun (2023-03-16 13:59:29+00:00): Par curiosité, pourquoi crossing_ref et pas crossing:markings (pas forcément exclusif) ?
frosm (2023-03-16 14:28:08+00:00): quand la discussion sur cet édition de masse a commencé, crossing:markings n'existait pas encore, j'ai donc préféré faire ce qui avait été proposé, cela a le mérite de virer le plus vieux schéma déprécié/controversé.
comme tu dis ce n'est pas forcément exclusif (même si j'ai du mal à voir la pluvalue de décrire le nombre de bande du zebra... ceux-ci étant dans mon environnement tous identique)
Il faudrait aussi récupérer tous les crossing=traffic_signal crossing=uncontrolled écrasé par cette décision controversé d'iD, mais c'est pas au point niveau technique
Lejun (2023-03-17 06:59:13+00:00): Ça roule !

La clé n’est pas tant là pour indiquer le nombre de bande du zebra mais plus généralement pour décrire la manière dont la traversée est indiquée. Je n’ai pas non plus d’idée d’application, mais ça a le mérite d’exister.

La voie d’iD est impénétrable.
gmar5 (2023-03-16 11:37:52+00:00): Hi, thanks for spotting this! I was able to trace back the changeset that deleted it — it was unrelated, so I assume the user did it by mistake. I've restored that original object, which had a more accurate geometry and better tags, and deleted your new replacement.
semiotic-waters (2023-03-16 12:32:59+00:00): Perfect!  Thank you :)
mavl (2023-04-25 08:59:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
silversurfer83 (2023-04-07 09:54:27+00:00): Hello matejh123,

After welcoming you a couple of days ago I saw your first changeset which says you used Google StreetView.
I'm sorry to say but that's an "illegal" source.
We are only allowed to use sources which have a fitting license or which explicitly allowed the usage in osm. Neither applies to anything you can find at Google.
There are two or three streetside image sources which can be activated in the editor. If I remember correctly there's mapillary, kartaview and Bing which gave permission to be used with OSM.

Since I'm not sure what happens now I have alerted the DWG (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group) to this changeset. But don't worry, this looks like an honest mistake by a new mapper :) 

Your best source is always your own survey on the ground :)

Maybe this helps https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice 

Happy Mapping
Silversurfer83
Polarbear-repair (2023-04-12 20:43:28+00:00): This CS has been reverted in Changeset: 134836333 with the comment:
 
EU: revert CS https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133743712 copying from google services. Reverting conflicts were manually resolved for ways, but automatically for relations. In other words, this necessary revert might have broken some Flixbus rels
mavl (2023-04-25 09:06:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
4004 (2023-03-19 22:44:22+00:00): здравствуйте, спасибо за правку,
зависит от карты, но вообще нужен тип обьекта, чтобы он где то показывался. поправил
Frans S (2023-03-19 09:33:19+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

In iDeditor, zoom in so far that the hidden objects are visible.(blue note on bottom line warns about hidden objects)
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133744053
Frans S (2023-03-21 17:22:58+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

In iDeditor, zoom in so far that the hidden objects are visible.(blue note on bottom line warns about hidden objects)
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133744096
Frans S (2023-03-19 09:07:14+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

In iDeditor, zoom in so far that the hidden objects are visible.(blue note on bottom line warns about hidden objects)
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133744200