piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Soshal Distan Singh (2024-07-20 03:53:52+00:00): P.S. Ошибок у вас много, все они разные, но корень зачастую один: вам просто лень открыть OSM Wiki и прочитать про тот тег, который вы собрались использовать (зачем, для чего, когда использовать, когда нет, какие есть альтернативы). Отдельный источник проблем это ваша манера приклеивать всё ко всему: любые объекты вы склеиваете вместе вне зависимости от того, соприкасаются ли они в реальности. Рисуете дорогу и за каким-то чёртом втыкаете её во всё подряд: леса, озёра, ЛЭП, дома (и после этого лепите на неё тег layer=-1) и т.п. Заборы у вас тоже проходят сквозь дома зачем-то. Но при этом запросто две пересекающиеся дороги общей точкой можете не соединить. Это заметно затрудняет исправление.

Два пакета правок я исправил (что смог обнаружить), а вот этот сами исправляйте исходя из инструкций выше: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153924598 Пакет огромный, заодно узнаете, каково это. Здесь тоже: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154008335
mystery2008 (2024-07-24 19:12:23+00:00): Здравствуйте, спасибо за разъяснения! Да, я многое ещё не понимаю, и боюсь что даже после прочтения не очень буду понимать. 
[ 1 ] По-моему это необязательно-писать именно что отредактировал. Мне это неудобно, тк часто правлю в organic maps, а там автоматически подсовывает описание правок. Вот я и вставляю его, когда сажусь за комп. А тупо писать каждый раз (или же написать один раз и потом искать-искать из предложенных описаний из органика нужное и тратить время) никому не нужную банальную фразу  "прошёлся по местам похода" или "отредактировал такой-то посёлок"- ну уж нет,это никому не нужно. Никто эти комментарии не читает.
[ 2 ] Нет, я всегда стараюсь сверяться со снимками и рисую дороги на тех снимках, где они лучше видны. Часто там вообще на всех снимках трудно что-то разобрать, но я знаю, что дорога есть, сам по ней ездил.  Использую esri(он новый и самый лучший вроде как), но где-то лучше видно на bing, переключаю его. Прочитал как выравнивать фотоснимки-увы, треков нет. Объекты как раз стараюсь сравнивать с яндексом например. Также иногда есть точные координаты начала дороги (метки в телефоне)
[ 3 ] Тоже знаю про это, почти всегда использую "выпрямить углы".  Но видимо у меня изначально кривое нанесение, поэтому даже после выпрямления углов может получиться какая-то хрень))

[ 4.1 ] да, я частенько пишу "дорога ниже местной" для обозначения более-менее дорог для авто, например подъезды к посёлку, послековые дороги, которые нельзя назвать, или у которые не являются улицами. Но больше всего я ориентируюсь на соседние правки-как другие юзеры называют дороги, так и делаю я. Не понимаю, какой тип мне тогда писать-неизвестная дорога или основная дорога что ли?
[ 4.2 ] Это вообще не понял - то есть я не ставлю точку, когда соединяю одна дорога у меня пересекает другую? Я думал не надо,если что-то пересекает и какая-то проблема, то программа сама в конце предложит (опустить или поднять на какой-то слой, я по барабану нажимаю,тк не понимаю чего от меня хотят). Если надо ставить точки, то буду,ок.
[ 4.3 ] аа, на поворотах надо кучу точек рисовать, не знал. ок, спасибо. Да, должна быть плавной, а не острой, дорога.
[ 5 ] Не понял-тут мне надо понять, что если я наношу улицы, то помимо дороги с типом улицы я и в названии должен писать "улица ..."? Если так, то ок.
[ 6 ] Понял,учту.
[ 7 ] ок, ссылки надо без contact пистать.
[ 8 ] ок, но вот почему тогда надо слово "улица" писать - глупости.

"Рисуете дорогу и за каким-то чёртом втыкаете её во всё подряд" это не очень понял, стараюсь избегать попаданий в лэп и озёра. Заборы сквозь дома это на одном спутнике видимо, а на другом нет. Ну или действительно есть ошибка, много их клёпал тогда.
mystery2008 (2024-07-26 06:54:23+00:00): Ок, спасибо большое что помогаете мне! Понимаю, это тоже отнимает время, поэтому вдвойне благодарен. Буду делать выводы и стараться. Нужно с уважением к каждому объекту, каждой правке походить.

В том-то и дело, что я читал все ваши ссылки, но кое-что не понял. Например, мне иногда предлагает опустить что-либо на слой ниже или выше-мне нажимать выше?
В ближайшее время отредактирую этот пакет, не удаляйте пожалуйста)
mystery2008 (2024-07-26 20:15:21+00:00): так, сейчас посмотрел, этот пакет вроде вы сами отредактировали что надо, спасибо. теперь у меня только вопросы по двум удалённым пакетам.
Hufkratzer (2024-07-08 21:40:41+00:00): Hi,
The areas that you have tagged as horseback riding centers (leisure=horse_riding) don't look like horseback riding centers. They look like outdoor riding arenas or round pens and these are usually tagged differently (compare https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian)). This concerns:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299881848
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299881849
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299881850
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299883103
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299883114
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299883120

Here is an example of a correctly mapped riding centre with a riding arena:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/906634102#map=18/34.41413/-119.87023&layers=P
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-07 22:20:27+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/way/396661625

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Geonick (2024-07-07 23:05:05+00:00): Alternative source=swisstopo.
LGP69KU5LY (2024-07-07 22:33:42+00:00): Here is a village by the name of Dara Gak, we want to add in this map.
akimapbuilder (2024-07-08 07:22:11+00:00): The village is added. Thanks
Cdrik_69 (2025-08-12 12:14:16+00:00): Feel free to post geotagged photos on the Panoramax instance and then add them with the Panoramax tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:panoramax
gabro00 (2024-07-08 06:45:11+00:00): Szia! A sima Esri néhol frissebb, mint a Bing (tippre 1 éves sincs), ez a mocsár pl. már nincs ott az Esri-n, de a többin látszik: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299892985
MarinoBM (2024-07-08 09:17:10+00:00): Hola Benji76: bienvenido y gracias por colaborar en mejorar el mapa de OpenStreetMap.
No sé si sabes manejar las relaciones de restricción de giro. Las que has puesto no son necesarias. Por supuesto que no puedes girar por una dirección prohibida y no puedes volver sobre una calle de sentido único. Hay que eliminarlas.
Puedes consultar las dudas en el grupo de OSM en telegram
https://t.me/osmcyl
Un saludo.
Violaine_Do (2024-11-26 22:02:13+00:00): bonjour et bienvenue dans OSM! Il vaut mieux mettre l'information sous forme de point, pour éviter des superposition de batiment dans le cas ou tu as plusieurs points d'intérêt dans un même bâti. C'est corrigé, mais tu peux t'en inspirer pour les prochaines fois, merci! Bon mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153682616
ElliottPlack (2024-11-27 18:54:34+00:00): nice find on these ones at the new warehouse, thank you! Could you say (via the imagery) if the land here is still accurate to note as being under contruction?
sbedwal_Lyft (2024-12-02 09:55:59+00:00): Hi, ElliottPlack
My name is Santosh and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.

In this changeset, I have added roads based on Lyft-owned satellite imagery (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fwogtnBmIG1qD1HCAZnmgZ3IV57XY82-/view?usp=sharing) as part of the Missing Roads initiative (https://github.com/Test-DCT/OSM-LYFT-DCT/issues/27). It seems that the construction landuse (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1310633877/history) can be removed here. I have done it and rectified the building within this changeset (https://osmcha.org/changesets/159791967). Please feel free to reach out if you have any further questions.

Best regards!
ElliottPlack (2024-12-03 15:44:46+00:00): Bravo! The new update looks good, thank you for the details and all that you and the Lyft team do. I appreciate you.
citrula (2024-07-08 02:12:54+00:00): You dragged some motorway nodes around and marked a random service road as a highway=trunk toll=yes
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153682976
citrula (2024-07-08 02:13:31+00:00): reverted

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153683828
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-10 02:02:35+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164747914
arjunaraoc (2024-07-08 07:21:11+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia). Please check my minor corrections at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153689462
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153683688
Allison P (2024-07-22 18:44:26+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thank you for contributing! Directionals and suffixes in names should be spelled out. For example, Joplin Rd would become Joplin Road. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299904470
OddlyAngled (2024-08-28 14:27:22+00:00): should this be “Forces”? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11189397550
habi (2024-08-28 16:49:23+00:00): Most probably :)
I didn't take a photo, but corrected the name now nonetheless.
OddlyAngled (2024-08-28 20:21:11+00:00): awesome, thank you!
ManuelB701 (2024-07-08 06:56:55+00:00): Kleine Frage: Ist die nutzung von "parking:side" wirklich beabsichtigt? Die Idee ist, dass "side" ein Platzhalter für "left", "both" und "right" ist, was auch am Anfang der Wiki-Seite geklärt worden ist. Da diese nicht-standardisiert sind, können Datenauswerter mit diesen Werten nicht auskommen d.h. sie werden Ignoriert.

Wenn die Infos klar wären, welche Seiten eigentlich gemeint sein (z.B. man kann nur auf einer Seite parken), hätte ich dies aufm Computer gelöst, sonst müsste ich dies vor Ort überprüfen oder Ihr selber behebt dies.
ManuelB701 (2024-07-08 06:58:11+00:00): Ähnliches Problem wie bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153684222

Ihr habt vergessen, die Seite, wo die Einschränkung gilt, einzutragen.
Mostafa Ahangarha (2024-07-08 12:05:55+00:00): الان به جای دوربرگردانی که حذف شده، چه مسیری برای دور زدن وجود دارد؟
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153684899
aliakrami (2024-07-08 18:26:36+00:00): در حال حاضر مسیری وجود ندارد و برای دور زدن باید از دوربرگردان بعدی در فاصله 700 ماری استفاده کرد.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153684899
emersonveenstra (2024-07-10 20:30:56+00:00): Hi there,

Please double check the conditional tagging, months go before days in opening_hours syntax. Thanks!
nender (2024-07-12 00:57:12+00:00): Thanks for the heads up, corrected in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153833801
user_11609320 (2024-07-08 04:36:17+00:00): looks to be a two lane road, but the image is a tad fuzzy, so I am not sure if it is only one lane or two in each direction
pkoby (2024-07-08 22:59:45+00:00): Hello,
I noticed you changed a lot of crossing nodes to 'crossing=traffic_signals'. This suggests there are crossing lights for the pedestrian crossing, or at least the intersection would be controlled by lights, but in most cases these are stop sign intersections. The appropriate value would be 'uncontrolled'.
Thanks!
pkoby (2024-07-09 01:39:55+00:00): I went back through your edits in this area manually and fixed up any incorrect tagging. I'm local and very familiar with these streets.

I'm curious what prompted the tagging to "traffic_signals", though. I couldn't recreate an iD "issue" about it, so I wasn't sure what led to that.

Thanks!
bhietsch (2024-07-12 15:36:09+00:00): Hey there! Can you please advise on how you came up with the naming convention that you're using for the Empire State Trail and its subsections? I'm not finding these abbreviated references (e.g. EST - H - ECa08) on any of the official maps or websites. While I think there may be some room for creative naming on the child relations, they should be more aligned with the official names that are universally accepted by those who utilize the trail. For instance, the main super relation could simply by "Empire State Trail", followed by "Erie Canalway Trail", and then "Erie Canalway Trail (Buffalo to Rochester). Or we could just follow the system developed for the Empire State Trail cycling relations. Please let me know your thoughts. Cheers!
AlwynWellington (2024-07-12 21:26:17+00:00): Hi and thanks for your question
The separate stages come from the Empire State Trails website.  I am currently adding in the details taken from those 28 stages from Buffalo to Green Island and have currently completed to Rochester.
The Empire State Trails website gives the structure or sequence that I am following.  OSM, when discussing walking, cycling and other routes suggests WayMarkedTrails.org is a useful browser tool.  
From my limited observations so far, on the ground there is only the circular Empire State Trails marker with indicators for direction – arrows that point ahead, left etc.
Here is a link that shows the four regional groupings from the EST website.  
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=11486087&type=relation
On selecting “Sections” you should see a structure to the information shown.  
EST = Empire State Trails – the source of the information
H = hiking
Erie Canal in clear – the three letter acronyms (ECa for example) that follow indicate
EC = code for Erie Canalway
a = Buffalo to Rochester
Selecting any one of those four sections will display the stages that EST show in their website.
On selecting ECa and then “sections” you will see your example of ECa08 amongst others.
Here is a direct link for the Brockport to Rochester stage
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=17814735&type=relation
This faceted code (ECa08) enables the structure of the Empire State Trails website to be emulated in Open Street Maps.
A limit to any faceted code in OSM is the upper limit of five characters that WayMarkedTrails will display.
At a big picture level, ADT American Discovery Trail, as shown in OSM, goes some of the way to using a faceted coding structure.
I hope that answers you question as to where the example you gave fits into a bigger picture.
Best wishes
bhietsch (2024-07-12 22:12:14+00:00): Yes, I’m well aware of WayMarkedTrails and use it regularly. Howver, I have not found any reference to this abbreviation system that you are using on the ground or on the official website. The name=* key is reserved for verifiable names, not abbreviated codes that were privately developed for an individual’s convenience. I am ok with the relation names following the format used on the Empire State Trail website or signage on the ground, but I am not satisfied with it’s current state and implore you to reconsider.
bhietsch (2024-07-12 22:16:51+00:00): To ellaborate on this further - if I did a google search of “EST - H - ECa08”, do you think it would provide any relevant information about the Erie Canalway Trail or Empire State Trail outside of the OSM feature? I understand you may find the abbrevation format useful for your own purposes, but I strongly suspect a wider audience would not.
AlwynWellington (2024-07-13 05:08:52+00:00): Thank you again for your observations.

I am quite content to consider how the various sections and stages that Empire State Trails use should be shown.

I continue to look at how the Empire State Trails are signed.  So far the dominant sign appears to be the orange rondel.  This is often supplemented by an arrow showing direction.

At Green Island, for those approaching from Albany, the supplementary signage is the word west or north under a rondel at the point of divergence.

Occassionally, when the EST website inidcates stage point I see a supplementary sign using the word trailhead.

I am not sure these would qualify for use with the key name=*

I have also look at the the terminology shown on the cycling pages for EST EC.

There I note a code number from 1 to 4.
I also note the names for each intermediate section (Fair Ground and Dewitt) do not seem to be names in the EST website as section or stage names.

I would appreciate your comments on how the names used for cycling along the Erie Canal relate to the EST website.
AlwynWellington (2024-07-13 05:10:19+00:00): I have also picked up your observation about searching.

I am testing various alternatives names.  

These  alternatives are taken from the EST website.  

So far, results are promising.

Looking forward to your comments on how the cycling code names are in agreement with the EST website.
bhietsch (2024-07-13 18:15:54+00:00): Looking forward to seeing your alternatives. My comments around the EST cycling relation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11486089) were directed as an example of not using abbreviations in the name=* key. I would suggest reading over the key:name wiki for more clarification: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name?uselang=en

Simply put, abbreviations do not belong under the name and the name should be representative of the real-world. There are other tags that can utilized for the information you are. Take the super relation for example, currently named "EST - H - an Empire State Trail hiking network":
1. "EST-H" can be conveyed via the ref=* key (although I would argue it should just be "EST" due to next argument...
2. "-H" and "hiking" is represented via route=hiking
3. "network" is represented via network=nwn
With these tags already in place, we're left with "Empire State Trail", which is what most individuals would commonly say to refer to this hiking network. Next level of relations could then simply be "Hudson Valley Greenway Trail", "Erie Canalway Trail" and "Champlain Valley Trail" - no need for any other descriptors in the name since it's implied they're part of the EST by being part of the super relation. The next two levels below are where I can see the need for some creative liberties. I think a concise way of doing could be as simple as "Erie Canalway Trail ({Point A} to {Point B}). Hopefully this explanation makes sense, otherwise would be happy to provide an example revision if you agree.
AlwynWellington (2024-07-15 03:33:35+00:00): I am sisncerly indebted to you for raising the difficulties you saw.

I commend you to review the various sections as presented in Way Marked Trails.

Empire State Trails website
This is the source I use.
Consistently using common codes EST, EC, HV and CV are analgous to using US, NY and CR for road numbers.
On the Way Marked Trails cycling page I note codes such as 11, EST and EC are used.  Of course these are from the ref field.
The EST website has references such as CV01 or EC28.
I have used these in the reference field and added them to the name, to assist with understanding.

I have also added as much material from the EST website as OSM will allow.  The point being to ensure users of the material in OSM can leverage of the EST website.

So, rather than create some new structure, references amd names.
bhietsch (2024-07-15 14:22:39+00:00): I reviewed your recent changesets and there is still a lot of unnecessary information in the name key. Again, the name key is reserved for the actual name of the feature. Anything additional would be classified as mapping for the render and is highly discouraged. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

  > Consistently using common codes EST, EC, HV and CV are analgous to using US, NY and CR for road numbers.

Sure, but these codes are not found on the name key for roads, so why should they be on the name key for hiking relations? For instance, name=New York State Thruway and ref=I 87.

  > I have used these in the reference field and added them to the name, to assist with understanding.

OSM's objective is to map what is in the real world, not what we believe is the most appropriate naming convention to assist with understanding. Adding codes and descriptors to the name key is redundant, incorrect and in my opinion even more misleading. The WayMarked renderers are already very robust and will render the ref key over the route and only render the specified route type (hiking, cycling, etc). Is adding this information to the name key really going to assist in understanding what the route is actually named?
AlwynWellington (2024-07-16 21:09:00+00:00): Hi 

Would you please reply with the schema you are proposing.

I suggest the name and reference for first 2 or 3 sections of the Buffalo to Rochester stage.

Regards
AlwynWellington (2024-07-16 21:11:26+00:00): On seconds thoughts, as your original comment was on the last two sections on the approach to Rochester, please provide how you would see the names and reference for them.

Best wishes
bhietsch (2024-07-16 22:49:14+00:00): I wrote out my proposal in a few of my replies now, but I’ll try to describe in a little more detail:

1. Super relation (tier 1): name=Empire State Trail
2. Tier 2: name=Champlain Valley Trail; name=Erie Canalway Trail; name=Hudson Valley Greenway Trail
3. Tier 3: name=Erie Canalway Trail (Buffalo to Rochester); name= Erie Canalway Trail (Rochester to Syracuse); etc.
4. Tier 4: name=Erie Canalway Trail (Tonawanda to Amherst); name=Erie Canalway Trail (Amherst to Lockport); etc.

The existance of the 4th relation tier is a little overkill in my opinion… most national hiking networks stop at 2 tiers. But I’ll concede on that since it is segmented very nicely on the official website. Appreciate the patience and consideration as we try to come to an agreement.
AlwynWellington (2024-07-17 05:21:56+00:00): My observations on the last item (4th tier) first.
1) I have mapped very much longer hiking routes in the one country with three tiers [national (1), regional (10) and local (so many I lost count)]
2) walkers to take 4 or 5 days to cover what a cyclist will do in 1 day.
This is a generalisation based on my experience.
3) my expectation is that most of the Erie Canalaway tier 4 are about right for a daily effort, some (especially after Syracuse) will be a stretch and some might be combines.  By Empire State Trails have made the selection and that is what I will keep to: it is their creation that we are trying to give effect to.
3) In this case the "problem" tier is having three distinct route groups 
4) So, can we consider NOT having that first level Empire State Trail super relation.  I suggest this as a talking point only.

My comments on you substantive points above are in the next post