piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2025-04-16 06:03:32+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback.. Alle begin is moeilijk.
Hier is het middelste paaltje omklapbaar en van metaal. . Dat is van belang voor hulpdiensten. Het is ook geen voetpad hier met een G7 bord.
fixed heb ik vervangen door foldable met emergency=yes.
Hulpdiensten rijden ook op OSM via LiveNAV. 
De andere paaltjes zijn wel vast.
Kleur=Bruin doet niets. Ik heb er =red van gemaakt en de andere paaltjes =brown. 
Die code werkt.
Of ze van hout zijn... denk 't niet. 
Die heb ik allemaal ingetekend hoewel dat niet nodig is. Meestal kunststof. 
Van het wegdeel heb ik weer residential gemaakt.
Nog een tip.. geen motor_vehicle=no en bicycle=yes op paaltjes zetten.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dbollard

Implies

    access=no
    foot=yes
    bicycle=yes
    horse=yes
    mofa=yes
    moped=yes

Useful combination

    maxwidth:physical=*
    bollard=*


MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-04-16 06:08:05+00:00): maxwidth:physical=* is used to record the maximum width something can be when the barrier is open fully.
Dus de opening heb ik op 3.5 gezet er van uitgaande dat het paaltje dan geklapt is omdat de brandweer een sleutel heeft. . 
Je ziet er komt nog wat bij kijken bij een simpel paaltje. :)
laptopleon (2025-04-16 12:22:56+00:00): Ah, ik dacht dat de breedte van het pad zelf bedoeld werd. Ja, er is een klappaaltje, maar ik vrees dat de brandweer dan nog de bocht niet kan maken omdat het paaltje dicht op de weg staat.
eggie (2025-04-16 12:50:37+00:00): Wel of geen bocht maken lossen ze zelf op in hun app.
Voor ambulance werkt het weer wel en zo'n kunststofpaaltje rijden ze in de praktijk gewoon plat. 
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/livenav-liveop-beinvloeden-hoe-gaan-we-hier-mee-om/121253
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:13:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 165008686 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert - fictional game editing
jcarlson (2025-05-02 01:39:07+00:00): what happened here? i see you already fixed these with real footprints, but i'm curious what this was about
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165004479
felipeeugenio (2025-04-16 12:39:43+00:00): Hola. Qué es ITC?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165004535
felipeeugenio (2025-04-16 12:41:20+00:00): Hola. Gracias por sus ediciones. Por favor no usar contracciones, Hay políticas para eso en los mapas. Si nos puede explicar mejor podemos ayudarlo. Gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165004733
eggie (2025-04-16 06:34:37+00:00): Leon,
Tip geen vlakken aan wegen plakken in OSM.
De kaart wordt dan onwerkbaar.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-04-16 06:36:39+00:00): Verder geen gebouwen op gebouwen plakken. Zet dan de functie op een node.
laptopleon (2025-04-16 07:26:57+00:00): Bedankt voor de tip, maar hoe voorkom ik dat wegen en vlakken aan elkaar plakken, want anderzijds lopen die natuurlijk vaak precies langs elkaar..
eggie (2025-04-16 07:40:34+00:00): Bij editor iD kun je dan de linker Alttoets gebruiken tijdens intekenen.
Bij Josm de linker CTRL toets.
Dan plakt er niets aan elkaar.
alesarrett (2025-04-16 14:35:53+00:00): Ciao, ho visto che hai cancellato il tag del bar ma non il nome: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4081702487
È chiuso (e quindi andrebbe tolto anche il nemo) o è un errore la cancellazione?
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:13:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 165008686 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert - fictional game editing
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:13:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 165008686 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert - fictional game editing
aharvey (2025-04-16 02:44:30+00:00): why did you delete this? looks like a driveway to me based on the sources you used.
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:13:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 165008686 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert - fictional game editing
silversurfer83 (2025-04-16 15:26:22+00:00): Hi :)

Gute Arbeit in Feld und Wald. Freut mich immer wenn es ein paar Leute gibt, die auch außerhalb der Orte nach den Details schauen.

Einen Hinweis hätte ich an dich: Achte bitte darauf, dass du Wege nur mit Objekten verbindest, die auch verbunden gehören. Zb andere Wege, Gewässer, wenn es eine Furt ist, Barrieren wie Zäune, Gatter, Tore.
Wege sollten nicht mit Landnutzungsflächen, Stromleitungen, Grenzen, Gewässern wenn keine Furt vorhanden ist, verbunden werden.

Hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1377920899 hast du den Wald erwischt. 

Keine Katastrophe, aber bitte möglichst vermeiden. Danke und weiter frohes Kartieren :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165005676
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:13:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 165008686 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert - fictional game editing
bxl-forever (2025-05-08 11:32:31+00:00): Hello,

It looks like you added another bag shop with the same name a few days earlier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12751721901

Either there really are two RSVP Paris facing each other, or one of them should be removed. Can you please review your edits and fix the map accordingly.
BCNorwich (2025-04-16 06:23:04+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

OSM says "One feature, one OSM element" Thus I've reinstated the buildings original tags. The building serves more than one purpose so it's tagged in a general way. The business is only one use of the building. 

Please see:- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

Regards Bernard.
jcarlson (2025-04-29 21:53:01+00:00): make sure to change your changeset comment when you're doing different kinds of work
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165006476
Xavizard Knight (2025-04-18 15:53:45+00:00): Bones! Benvingut a OpenStreetMap! Moltes gràcies per tunes contribucions!

No sabia que el Carrer del Call també se l'hi diu Corraló dels gats. Sempre està bé aprendre coses noves!

En tun changeset has comentat que falta d'etiquetar-hi uns escalons al començant del carrer que connecta amb el Carrer dels Jueus; però aquests escalons ja estan mapejats a OSM. Estan posats com tres trams separats d'escales, amb vies peatonals del mig. És possible que no els hagis vist perquè són força curts. Si no recordo malament, els vaig mapejar en base al mapa topogràfic de l'ICGC.

El Carrer del Call està dividit en 9 vies; enumerant-les d'esquerra a dreta, aquestes vies són les següents:
- La primera és el petit tram que connecta amb el C/Esglesia fins al començament de la casa-pont.
- La segona via és la que passa per sota de la casa-pont.
- La tercera via és el tram més llarg del carrer, al descobert i sense ser escales, que és la via que has editat en aquest commit.
- La quarta via és el tram superior d'escales
- La cinquena és un tram enmig de les escales
- La sisena és el tram intermedi d'escales
- La sèptima és un altre tram entre les escales.
- L'octava via és el tram inferior d'escales.
- I la novena via és el tram final que connecta amb el C/Jueus.

Els escalons a què et refereixes són les vies 4, 6 i 8 ja existents o són unes altres que no hi són al mapa?

També has afegit les etiquetes tunnel=yes i layer=-1 al tram que està al descobert en lloc del tram que passa per sota la casa-pont.

Ha estat això un error o han fet modificacions recents que han tapat el carrer? (Fa uns quants mesos que no hi tombo per aquest carrer, així que corregeix-me si m'equivoco).
webfil (2025-08-11 19:55:31+00:00): Bonjour. Il me semble y avoir une bonne quantité de superficies attribuables à des corps de ferme, notamment dans des zones résidentielles. Avez-vous vérifié avec la page de wiki [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=farmyard] si landuse=farmyard était un attribut approprié pour ces superficies?
webfil (2025-10-21 17:07:25+00:00): En l'absence de réponse de votre part, j'ai renversé les changements et ôté les superficies attribuées à des corps de ferme qui ne correspondaient pas à l'usage prescrit.
itineris (2026-02-03 12:54:33+00:00): Mosonmagyaróvár és Máriakálnok között is 6-7 méterrel kellett odébb húznom utánad a 1406-os utat, hogy igazodjon a FÖMIhez és a Magyar Közúthoz.
PierZen (2025-04-16 19:06:49+00:00): contacter responsables projet #hotosm-project-17604;#CanCross;#CRC;#MissingMaps;#OPSGIS2025 pour réparer bâtiments non rectangulaires et connectés aux lignes décrivant les séries d'adresses
gewentz (2025-04-16 11:51:12+00:00): Moro na cidade a 8 anos já, trabalho no CRAS e faço rotas de entrega de cestas básicas em toda cidade!
Joseph R P (2025-04-21 01:39:10+00:00): Please do not tag roads based on their classification. A state route number is merely a number in the grand scheme of things and only reflects who maintains the road as opposed to its role in the road network. Bonanza Road has less traffic than Washington Avenue and lacks a direct I 15 connection unlike Washington does. Casino Center Boulevard is not as important of a Downtown link as Las Vegas Boulevard is and sees far less traffic as well.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-04-21 04:33:10+00:00): Okay, thanks for informing me. Again, where can I get sources for traffic info? I'll need to check it out before retagging roads again. Thanks once again.
galen8183 (2025-04-16 05:27:39+00:00): Hi, I noticed Esri World Clarity has a pretty clear view of these paths taken in 2022, you might like to trace them out more accurately

happy mapping :-)
Redspark2000 (2025-04-16 06:33:20+00:00): Покрытие ( рыхлое ) не соответствует реальному , нанесено на водную поверхность .
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:13:46+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 164997178, 165004309, 165005104, 165005175, 165005299, 165005788.
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:41:54+00:00): Hi, if this is actually private property, the ways should remain and be tagged as such. You've removed a segment and left another part named Frenchmens Road disconnected from other roadways.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165008766
msleath (2025-04-16 03:55:29+00:00): Hi,
this is my private property. the parts of frenchmans road are disconnected because the road reserve has not been developed. why has this easement been labeled frenchmens road? why is my driveway marked up? how can i find out who is making these mistakes?
fortera_au (2025-04-16 03:57:56+00:00): There's a note on the highway=residential section that does mention that it differs from the road reserve in the DCS NSW base map, however what's there is what's been mapped. YOu've also removed a driveway that does exist from the looks of aerial imagery, and should still remain, but be marked as access=private.
msleath (2025-04-16 04:07:35+00:00): how then can it be frenchmans road? how is prvate prperty-no access indicated? why is my driveway mapped and others not? are you a staff member with openstreetmap?
msleath (2025-04-16 04:12:38+00:00): the labelling of this easement as part of Frenchmens road is highly misleading - locally and for the public.
fortera_au (2025-04-16 04:14:13+00:00): You'd have to ask whoever mapped it as such, if you check the history of that item, you'll be able to see that changeset, and you can comment on it.

For private property, you'd tag it as access=private.
Driveways get mapped as people choose to, someone most likely was mapping the area and saw it on aerial imagery and drew it in.

I'm part of the Data Working Group as a volunteer moderator, however I commented on this outside of that role.
msleath (2025-04-16 04:29:58+00:00): can i ask about your interest here? surely the aim is for accuracy rather than someone with no local knowledge looking at s satellite image and saying that looks about right? can you help identify who has made the changes so i can contact them? as before this kind of mistske causes a lot of problems. i’d like to feel i don’t have to keep coming back to this tool to make sure its correct.
fortera_au (2025-04-16 04:35:38+00:00): Mapping it as it exists is the best way to do that, which would probably be to keep the ways there, but tag them to reflect that it's not actually part of Frenchmens Road and that it's private.
msleath (2025-04-16 04:45:40+00:00): it should not be labeled frenchmans road this is wrong. And it should be identified as a track not a resdential road. i am not highly skilled in use of the app - i have done my best to correct the information albeit clumsy. is there a complaint line i can contact. i’m actually surprised and alarmed about the ease of misinformation here.
msleath (2025-04-16 04:46:31+00:00): not to mention lack of accountability by casual observers of satellite imagery.
aharvey (2025-04-16 06:05:04+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap, we are a collaborative volunteer project. Mapping works best when done via a ground survey as there's so much that can be missed on misinterpreted from satellite or aerial imagery. Ground surveyed data is given higher preference, so it's great you're contributing here to improve the data in OpenStreetMap to better reflect the ground truth.

As for why your private driveway is mapped, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

If it's ever the case that emergency services needed to access your property or those that live further down the road, having these private roads mapped out may help.

Considering this section is on your property, you can also see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access?uselang=en#List_of_possible_values on other possible access values and what they mean. eg. permissive (access granted, but may be revoked anytime), private (no access permitted), you can also further restrict my mode of transport depending if you restrict all modes include foot, or if you permit walkers but not vehicles, all possible to tag accurately with the right tagging.
aharvey (2025-04-16 06:12:59+00:00): Also highway=track is meant for fire trails or forestry roads. Gravel or dirt roads which function as access roads or driveways to access residences, even in the bush, should still be tagged based on their function as either highway=residential or highway=service + service=driveway. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads#Road_Hierarchy
msleath (2025-04-16 07:38:04+00:00): thank you aharvey, its still a worrying model for me where maps can be based not on ground surveys but only observation. observation by ordinary folk without any qualifications in property is assumed. clearly that serves some purposes and not others. i do not believe the mapping of our driveway is of significant benefit to emergency services given its proximity to roads and balanced against our privacy - and i am well aware of the nature and extent of threat in this area. I have made best efforts to get our easement correctly tagged. it is an improvement on the previous misinformation, the easement is a service road for Sydney trains. my use of the app is very narrowly about how my property is shown so a masterclass on correct tagging is likely overkill. maybe you shoild consider a section for owners of property who can then work with someone to correctly map their property - with surveys and easement information to hand. given this is the base map for local council it is vital that it is accurate.
radiotrefoil (2025-04-16 09:44:15+00:00): Hi, I am a local mapper who surveyed this area on 24th March. I appreciate your clarification here msleath. I didn't find any indication of private property aside from the mailbox for 1 Frenchmens Rd at the left fork - this is probably the same reason past mappers have mistakenly thought that Frenchmens Road continued eastward, providing access to number 14 and the Bunjaree Cottages. I have removed the Name tags for the easement past the intersection at Waterfall Road, tagged it as private and made it more clear that the cottages are to be accessed from Railway Pde.
Hopefully this solves the issue.
msleath (2025-04-16 10:49:14+00:00): so, not having a go at you because this is the model for the app, you came into the area looked for or at the signposts and then without reference to the council website clearly showing the unformed frenchmens road and without looking at any title information, you’ve uploded info you think might be correct? did you also label waterfall road which is also an error? for future can i suggest a look at the council mapping tool at the least as it has correct overlays.
radiotrefoil (2025-04-16 11:09:52+00:00): As the others have said, the best practice is to map the ground truth because that is the objective of OSM, rather than cloning the council GIS.
See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ground_truth
I did the survey to specifically check whether the Waterfall Road sign was still on the pole (it is) which is why that name was reinstated by user nevw. I didn't touch any of the Frenchmens Road ways.
I understand there is no official road reserve for Waterfall Road, but still support the decision to retain the name. Generally we also do not mark ways as "private" unless they are specifically signposted as such; in this case there is no indication on the ground that any of these easements are private. As volunteers we don't go through title info for every ambiguous road reserve, of which there are plenty in the mountains. The best way to alert us to possible problems is to discuss it as here, where we can fix it quickly easily, or you can right-click the map and choose "Add a note here" with your concerns expressed clearly.
msleath (2025-04-16 11:58:07+00:00): so, possibly very many mistakes such as these across the mountains. the reason i mention council mapping layers is that both frenchmans road and waterfall road reserves are both clearly shown so i’m not quite understanding why there is not one simple extra online check to ensure observed road signs are the truth. it would not matter so much if council did not use these maps as their base layer. i understand this is the work of volunteers but the whole model seems to rely on a random discovery and active correction of errors by those with knowledge of local land titles. if there is not certainty why present as truth. why not mark up as unverified. not much in property law is ambiguous. understand this is not for you to answer.
msleath (2025-04-17 00:03:19+00:00): One more observation. The access to Bungaree Cottages is not marked as a road - access. This one can clearly be seen on the aerials and in fact there is a sign on Railway Parade showing the track as the entrance to Bungaree Cottages. This is inconsistent with other roads marked in this small area.
radiotrefoil (2025-04-17 00:10:46+00:00): Good morning. Last night I moved the name tag for Bunjaree Cottages towards the Railway Pde entrance. The track itself should remain unnamed but it should now be clear that that is the correct access rather than via Frenchmens Rd (those tracks are now marked private). Note that it might take some time for the map tiles to update and display correctly.
msleath (2025-04-17 00:48:15+00:00): ok so that track will appear as a road similar to the marking for a driveway?
aharvey (2025-04-17 00:58:54+00:00): I've changed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228339555 to driveway, since it's for access to the cottages, only past Wattle Cottage it becomes as land management track (eg. access to power lines, fire trails, forestry, farm roads)
msleath (2025-04-17 01:05:23+00:00): so the road from railway parade to bungaree cottages will appear as a road consistent with the road labelled waterfall road or the road to 14-18 frenchmans road?
aharvey (2025-04-17 01:44:13+00:00): how it appears depends on how consumers of OSM data choose to display it, I'm just concerned with how it's tagged here.
msleath (2025-04-17 01:56:56+00:00): ok i have chosen the standard view and one road is represented as a thick white band and another as a brown dotted line. i have not altered the view. can you let me know why there is a difference in presentation many thanks
aharvey (2025-04-17 02:14:57+00:00): 2hu4u mentioned earlier it may take time for the map tiles to update. There may be style differences based on the tags used, residential, service, driveway or track, and then again based on the road surface tags and access tags.
msleath (2025-04-17 02:25:00+00:00): thanks, other changes seen to have happened immediately. can you let me know an approx time for the change? if it doesn’t happen who should i contact to get it changed to match existing representation of driveways and tracks? i’d do it myself but that doesn’t seem to work.
msleath (2025-04-17 02:26:18+00:00): can you also enlighten abot the difference between a brown dotted line and a thick white line - just for further reference many thanks
aharvey (2025-04-17 02:35:26+00:00): I don't know, but you can always check the live date in an editor (Edit). I'm not concerned with how it looks on the map, it's more about how it's represented in the data.

I posted this link earlier which documents different road classifications and tags https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads#Road_Hierarchy
radiotrefoil (2025-04-17 02:37:26+00:00): The line weights generally represent the importance of a road. Railway Pde is a tertiary road. Frenchmens Road is residential road which is your normal street. Waterfall Road is an unspecified service road (speckled appearance indicates unpaved) which usually indicates a graded access road, and often these are used for roads that do not have formal reserves. The brown dotted line is a "track" which is typically an ungraded access track that is possibly unsuitable for regular traffic/low clearance cars. Aharvey has changed the Bunjaree cottages access track to a "driveway" service road, which is emphasised lower than Waterfall Road but higher than "track".
I understand there may be some overlap and ambiguity between some of these classifications, it's really up to individual discretion in most cases.
msleath (2025-04-17 02:47:07+00:00): Great thank you so much. I can now advise our easement is ungraded access road and sometimes difficult to cross for two wheel drive vehicles so on this basis it’s a brown dotted line and the track to Bungaree cottages is the access to a registered business so more than a track do you think?
msleath (2025-04-17 02:49:30+00:00): Also I had the idea that mapping was all about the visual representation of  geographical details so how could it be that how things look is not important? Rhetorical no need to answer
msleath (2025-04-17 02:50:46+00:00): Thanks for changing I can see that now. I think we’re very close to an accurate map of this little corner of the world
radiotrefoil (2025-04-17 02:54:29+00:00): Sounds good msleath, I think that matches up with how it is now.
Regarding the visualisation;
OpenStreetMap under the hood is more like a "database" rather than a finished map.
What you see on the standard view of this website is just one possible representation ("rendering") of the data, kind of like a font. Many organisations use OpenStreetMap data and then create their own map style.