piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
houtari (2026-06-30 06:27:53+00:00): Ei ole ehkä erisnimi, mutta uskoakseni se on kuitenkin nimi jolla tämä rakennus yleisesti tunnetaan? Itse kyllä säilyttäisin tuon nimen jossain muodossa name tagin takana mm. jotta ko. kohde löytyisi erilaisilla nimihauilla
AndyB_66 (2026-02-22 12:04:04+00:00): Bitte halten Sie sich an die Regeln: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
psmr (2026-02-22 14:01:11+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis... wer bist Du, dass Du denkst, hier anderen Vorschriften machen zu müssen, wie was zu tun ist, anstatt für jede Korrektur oder Änderung dankbar zu sein? Man könnte auch höflich darum bitten, Änderungen zu kommentieren.
NeisBot (2026-02-22 12:12:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13589509457 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Eco resort"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-02 17:33:02+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/179266372
(No visible changes after review)
TheSwavu (2026-02-22 21:44:36+00:00): Hi,

This is already mapped as https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13457737367 If you want to update information about this POI then please edit the existing node.

I deleted this one.

Happy mapping.
NieWnen (2026-02-22 13:46:59+00:00): Warto coś więcej napisać, bo wszystko sugeruje, że oświetlenie jest. Nawet jak ktoś odpali filmik na chwilę, to zobaczy, że jest i wyłączy.

Zabrakło informacji, że w konkretnym momencie mówi, że lampy są, ale nie działają.
hfs (2026-05-11 07:08:19+00:00): Hi echatoss,

herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!

Du hast hier das Einkaufszentrum „Alleen Center“ in einen Supermarkt „Kaufland“ umgewandelt. Dadurch ist leider die Eigenschaft als Einkaufszentrum verloren gegangen. Das ist inhaltlich nicht richtig, weil es hier noch viele andere Geschäfte gibt. Außerdem ist Kaufland bereits als Knoten https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1429718568 erfasst.

Ich habe die Änderung in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182496385 rückgängig gemacht.
whitepanda (2026-02-23 11:27:27+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: 178931315
Henry572 (2026-03-14 08:20:26+00:00): Hallo foeveaos,

Willkommen bei OSM und danke für deine erste Bearbeitung! Ich habe zu der Stele noch ein paar Informationen hinzugefügt.

Viele Grüße,
Hendrik
NeisBot (2026-02-22 13:06:44+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/9041170563 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Meeting point"
---
Zum Beispiel könnte eine neutralere und sachlichere Version deines Textes lauten: "Treffpunkt"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-02 17:33:02+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/179266374
(No visible changes after review)
whitepanda (2026-02-23 11:24:42+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:178926805
007Transformer (2026-02-23 09:49:01+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 178934169
silversurfer83 (2026-02-22 20:29:06+00:00): Hi :)

sehr schicke Arbeit.

Kleine Anmerkung: Deine "Gärten", sind das Grasflächen? Ich empfehle idR sowas wie landcover=grass oder alternativ landuse=flowerbed. 

cheers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178898345
Germini (2026-02-27 21:44:28+00:00): Hi 

vielen Dank für die Rückmeldung! 😊

Bei den Gärten war ich mir tatsächlich nicht ganz sicher.
Der Vorschlag landuse=flowerbed klingt sinnvoll, das ändere ich so.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1272062421450191
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1417434336515071

Gruß
Germini
silversurfer83 (2026-02-27 23:19:55+00:00): Nach den Bildern würd ich sagen: optimal 👍🏻
007Transformer (2026-02-23 11:41:15+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 178939361
welzheimerwald (2026-02-22 13:32:54+00:00): In einer Changeset-Diskussion wider Erwarten auf fundiertes Kontra zu stossen und daraufhin einen Edit-War vom Zaun zu brechen, ist ein ganz schlechter Stil, für den du dich noch Jahre später schämen wirst!
silversurfer83 (2026-02-22 20:27:03+00:00): hier muss du nochmal gucken. Da passt was nicht
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178898762
rempshaener (2026-02-22 18:23:54+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Ich habe zwei Anmerkungen:
- Neben andere Informationen wäre vor allem der fire_hydrant:type wichtig. Ich vermute, es handelt sich um einen Unterflurhydranten? Dann wäre das  fire_hydrant:type=underground. Dann ergäbe aber die Farbangabe keinen Sinn, da Unterflurhydranten in der Regel keine Farbe haben.
- Hydranten sollten nicht mit Straßen, Gebäuden u. ä. verbunden werden. Das lässt sich leicht beheben: im Editor markieren und „E“ drücken – das löst den Hydranten von der Linie. 

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
VictorIE (2026-05-01 13:39:03+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/366982385/

You've added: fixme=Anyone know what this is?

That line is the boundary between the townlands of Ballycurreen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5456643/ and Curraghconway: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5457270/

There may be hedges, drainage ditches and / or a stream along that line.
RunJennyRunUSA (2026-02-23 12:42:28+00:00): I uploaded my photo to confirm that Sunny Court is signed on-site at Lamartine St.

Photograph taken 2026-02-22, looking north, with Roy St & Lamartine St intersection sign in the background:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sunny-Ct-Boston-2026-02-22.jpg

100% of my OSM edits are based on direct survey (while running). Please let me know if you have on-the-ground evidence to the contrary.
StreetSurveyor (2026-02-23 13:46:15+00:00): Thanks for sharing the photo and the on-the-ground confirmation. I’ve reverted the changeset. The signage appears to be a recent addition, as I didn’t observe it during my survey (also typically while running) or in available street-level imagery. Appreciate the follow-up—happy mapping!
mweper (2026-02-24 12:52:45+00:00): Hola @lalluby6782.
¿Los nombres "Calle 1477" y "Calle 1479", no corresponden a esas calles? ¿Porque se quitaron?
lalluby6782 (2026-02-26 02:10:57+00:00): La calle que se llamaba 1477 ahora es Carre y la 1479 es Giacomelli. El segmento que aparecia etiqueado como 1477 está marcado como Pasaje Peatonal en el mapa, planos municipales y en la calle con carteles, pero parecen circular autos y tiene un ancho similar a las calles del barrio. Aunque el 1479 tambien parece estar marcado como Pasaje Peatonal las representaciones del municipio lo muestran más al norte de lo que en realidad está, al sur de la plaza.
NeisBot (2026-02-22 14:00:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 108 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1481462314 v2 | 31 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1481770938 v1 | 16 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1481770939 v1 | 14 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=178899851
NeisReview (2026-03-02 17:33:10+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/178903725
MappingMore (2026-02-25 05:41:25+00:00): Revert of 178895298
Wildsharky (2026-02-24 03:46:08+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:178927901
Fraxi (2026-07-13 08:52:37+00:00): Тук следва да остане или vacant, или razed
Dimitar155 (2026-07-13 08:57:53+00:00): Аз го писах razed, понеже не е имало вид като да се отдава под наем тогава. А иначе коментара ти не е за тази промяна :)
Fraxi (2026-07-13 09:07:34+00:00): Ти най-добре можеш да прецениш какъв таг да остане, защото в момента има дублиране на "shop". И двамата сте го видели.
eggie (2026-02-22 14:53:56+00:00): Hoi..
Tip.. Probeer als het kan de adresnode te gebruiken.
ALDI wordt in Nederland met hoofdletters gespeld.
Mvg
eggie
grzegorzmilosz (2026-02-22 14:20:39+00:00): wprowadzone przeze mnie wysepki są zgodne z definicją z OSM wiki mówiącą iż traffic_calming=island służy do oznaczenia obszaru który na krótkim odcinku rozdziela dwa różne kierunki ruchu. Wyspa ta rozdziela co najmniej dwa pasy ruchu od siebie na niewielkiej odległości. Szerokość jej jest zazwyczaj do kilku metrów i powinna być mniejsza niż 10 metrów. Wszystkie oznaczone przeze mnie wysepki posiadają wysokie krawężniki i fizycznie rozdzielają ruch zgodnie z ww. definicją. Nie oznaczałem wysepek plastikowych przykręcanych do asfaltu czy też wysepek o znikomym krawężniku gdyż takie nie zapewniają fizycznej separacji. oznaczone zostały przeze mnie tylko wysepki permanentne.
NeisBot (2026-02-22 14:27:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13589783412 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Computer store"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-02 17:33:03+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/179266375
(No visible changes after review)
MappingMore (2026-02-24 05:17:53+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:178970743
k2101 (2026-02-23 06:53:18+00:00): Cześć, 
czy nazwa tego potoku to na pewno „Rakowiec”? A może „Rokowiec”?
RaNo99 (2026-02-23 08:38:15+00:00): Sam nie wiem, która forma jest tu bardziej właściwa. W lokalnej gwarze ptak to ptok. Rak to rok. Zatem Rakowiec to Rokowiec. Nazwa wywodzi się od raków, które faktycznie tu licznie występowały.

Za chwilę cofnę jednak moją zmianę, gdyż zaczerpnąłem szerszej wiedzy lokalnej i okazuje się, że niewłaściwy ciek wodny określany jest mianem Rakowca.
k2101 (2026-02-23 09:41:21+00:00): Okej. Pytam, bo teren ten jest określany jako Rokowiec. I tak jest w TERYT. Także ostatnio nazwano tak ulicę.
silversurfer83 (2026-02-22 20:26:16+00:00): Hi

you asked for review. 

I guess you clicked "edit" while the map was centred somewhere in England because you dragged a bicycle parking ~200m NE. I fixed that. When you dragged that node the counter in the top right corner of the editor should have gone up so you see you changed something. Keep an eye on that when in edit mode.

Then you went to work in China / Taiwan and there you also dragged nodes around town. Thos are fixed, too. These should have given you warnings when you tried to upload your changes. Please read each warning and think hard about the choices the editor presents. 

Then you changed the courtyard which looked to me like it needed no changing and I guess someone else changed it back already. The sports centre looks good :)

If there are any questions please reach out at c.osm.org or have a look at wiki.osm.org

cheers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178901322
Norbert Dichter (2026-02-22 18:01:14+00:00): Hello, thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT. Thank you for your contribution. The buildings you mapped are well done as to their location. But pay attention to the squareness of the corners. Always draw buildings as square and precise as you can. Then add the Building feature type. And last, right click it and click the square icon. Or just hit the Q-key.
Also please keep in mind: many buildings are very close but do not actually touch each other, try to map them close to each other without letting them connect or share nodes with each other, roads, or residential area outlines. In the iD web editor, holding down the "alt" key will keep nodes from "snapping" to each other and accidentally connecting.  Thanks so much for your contribution, Norbert 'Nodi' Dichter, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178901415
NeisBot (2026-02-22 14:42:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 17 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1408911285 v2 | 6 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1408911284 v2 | 4 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1481869288 v1 | 3 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/12947456334 v2
https://osm.org/node/12947456335 v2
https://osm.org/node/12947456339 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=178901633
Rainero (2026-03-13 14:21:09+00:00): Revert mit changeset/179812829
(unzulässige Quelle)
NeisBot (2026-02-22 14:48:46+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/178277588 v7

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Ferienwohnungen"
---
Zum Beispiel könnte eine neutralere und faktischere Version deines Textes lauten: "Ferienwohnungen"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-03-02 17:33:05+00:00): 🤔 The text has been updated, though I’m not entirely sure it’s an improvement.
MappingMore (2026-02-23 10:15:45+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:178935642
literan (2026-02-23 09:53:58+00:00): KPMG, если быть точным, не то чтобы ушла, а отозвала бренд. Компания осталась и переименовалась в https://kept.ru/

добавлю их
NeisBot (2026-02-22 15:00:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/178277588 v8

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "apartments with balconies"
---
Zum Beispiel könnte eine neutralere und sachlichere Version deines Textes lauten: "Wohnungen mit Balkonen"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-03-02 17:33:07+00:00): 🤔 The text has been updated, though I’m not entirely sure it’s an improvement.
eggie (2026-02-22 15:11:07+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback   Je info heb ik verplaatst naar de al bestaande adresnode. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
SjoerdvH (2026-02-22 16:05:11+00:00): Dank je Eggie. 
Wist niet dat dat beter is.

Fijn, nogmaals dank!
scarapella (2026-07-24 13:39:01+00:00): Hello @heiglandreas,

Thank you for your contributions to openstreetmap.  In this changeset you changed several several waterway=link from canoe=yes to canoe=portage

for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1222514682

canoe=portage on a waterway technically means that you cannot use that waterway for boating and should portage.  In all these cases I think that canoe=yes is/was the more accepted tagging.  

Cheers,
scarapella

P.S. While canoe=portage on waterways is documented as a way to indicate the waterway is not suitable for canoeing, it is rare and I am not aware of any implementation that supports it.  canoe=no is much more widely used and supported in several implementations including https://paddlemap.net/  https://opentrailmap.us/
heiglandreas (2026-07-26 11:59:03+00:00): Canoe=portage means that this part of the waterway is used solely when you are porting a boat. When you take a detailed look at the changeset you will see that those canoe=portage changes only affect links that connect an egress/pution with the main waterway.

Canoe=portage also implicitly means canoe=yes - but with an added information that this link is used for a portage.

OSMAnd is for example using that information for routing - and uses that when one does not want to use locks or when a lock is closed or when there is a weir or ...

I interpreted Canoe=portage on a waterway *not* to mean that the waterway is not suitable for canoeing. For me it is an information that this part is to be used for porting. The only way to mark a waterway as unsuitable for canoeing is IMO to set canoe=no 

But the information in the docs you provided - that I seem to not have been able to find when I did the changes (I always have to check how to do those mappings) - definitely says otherwise. I'll then just change them to canoe=yes
heiglandreas (2026-07-26 12:14:36+00:00): Changed the information - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/186395847#map=12/50.5490/8.4711
scarapella (2026-07-26 18:55:38+00:00): Hi heiglandreas,

Let me preface this by saying I don't really like the canoe=portage tagging.  I much prefer canoe=yes or canoe=no on waterway=* or nodes such as waterway=access_point and portage=yes on highway=*  However, I am trying to see what the use is to see how/if I should interpret it in a project I am working on.

Your comments made me go back and re-read the documentation for canoe=portage on the wiki.  I realize now it is... totally inconsistent.  

On one hand it says 
* "For a waterway=* that is not navigable, but that can circumvented by carrying the canoe over land, add canoe=portage to indicate this — do not tag the waterway=* leading up the portage detour with this tag though! "

on the other hand, 2 lines later, it says has this contradictory statement:
*  "For boat trolleys and pulley systems Connect the end of the portage (the rails or pulley system) to the waterbodies' center line with the tag waterway=portage to add the possiblity of routing along this connection."

Globally there are only 14 waterways attached to highways with canoe=portage https://maps.mail.ru/osm/tools/overpass/?q=W291dDpqc29uXVt0aW1lxIHEgzMwMF0vKltiYm94Ont7xJjEmn19XSovOwoKLy8gMS4gR2F0aGVyIGFsbCB3xLDEs8S6eXMKxL1bY2Fub2U9cG9ydGFnZcSJxLp0xLxheV0tPi7EtmxXxLtyxL1zxKbEqMSqMsStRXh0cmFjdCBPTkxZIMSxZSBzxYzFi8S1bmQgZcW6IMWFZGVzIG9mxbJob3PFtMWRxZPEvgrGgGUod8WZxLfFnMWSxZ7FlHM6MSwtMSnFly7GjMaYeV_FvWTFiWludMWgxKfEqSAzxK1oaWdoxZ_EtXTFjGPEssW7dG_Gh8aJxbTGpyDGqcarxL_EvShibsaixZ3EvcamxbrHhcasKVvGs8a1xL3FlsWYx5XGtsaZxaHFoiA0xK11bmnEh8aExobGkMaDxqogx5rGtyvEuceNxZTFvMeQb8aqxqzGj2_GgcaSLsesxpkpx4zGl8eOxqfHkXPGocajyIHHs8e1c19jxIduZcWrZWRfxr5fx7zEvsWhxq81xK3IhsaZIMiMbsiOyJDGvca_yJbHh8WUx4nHi8icxqXIgse0x4bIi8iNyI_FksiSyJTIpceTyKpdxaHEjyDEjcWMxKY-xKbIunNrZcS4cXQ7&c=BRVLjDlGDF

So I'd guess most people only read the first line and not the second (like me). 

Cheers,
Sean
heiglandreas (2026-07-26 19:12:45+00:00): Hey Sean.

Thanks for the feedback.

But I don't see that it is inconsistend.

* canoe: portage - should be used on highways that are used to carry a boat around an obstacle. The connection between the water-stream and the egress/input should *not* be marked with canoe:portage
* waterway:portage shall be used when connecting the water-stream and the egress/input of a highway that is marked with "canoe:portage"

So when I understand that correctly we should use - coming from the main waterway create a line from the main waterway to the egress/input with
  waterway: portage
  canoe: yes
Then the egress/input and then the highway with 
  canoe:portage

 Thanks for mentioning this! So I'll replace the "waterway:link" (which technically is correct as it links 2 points) with "waterway:portage" - when I stumble upon them again

So "canoe:portage" should - to my understanding after reading the docs - indeed not be used on waterways, only on highways. And on waterways the connection between main waterway and egress/input should be tagged as waterway:portage - an added canoe:yes doesn't hurt

Does that make sense?

Cheers

Andreas
scarapella (2026-07-27 05:09:55+00:00): Hi Andreas,

You are absolutely correct, the documentation is consistent. I went too quickly in my (re-)reading and conflated waterway=portage with canoe=portage. Sorry about that. 🤦

While the canoe=portage documentation is consistent, the problem is that waterway=portage is almost entirely unused (14 way instances) and probably should be deprecated if it's not already. The de facto standard here is waterway=link (>14,000 way instances) with canoe=yes as appropriate. 

Apologies again for any confusion caused by my inattentive reading. 

Cheers,
Sean
Константин Гам (2026-05-28 11:37:56+00:00): Здравствуйте!

Вы зачем то продублировали уже нарисованную велодорожку вдоль Коменданского, не надо так пожалуйста, дубль я удалил.
user_23034906 (2026-05-28 11:57:14+00:00): Пошёл к чёрту, мерзкий выродок. Тебе лишь бы удалять всё подряд. Сделай одолжение - просто сдохни. Без тебя, тупого ублюдка, osm будет только лучше.
Константин Гам (2026-05-28 12:29:22+00:00): У вас кто-то умер? 
Держите себя пожалуйста в руках. 
Обычная рабочая ситуация не должна вызывать такой негатив.
蕉饼电脑 (2026-03-11 08:12:02+00:00): 你不得以质量差为由删除事实上存在的元素。若元素节点位置有误，应当在既有数据基础上修正。若不希望修改这些元素，可以选择不不修正，但不得删除。在同一个变更集内删除并重新创建同一个元素都属于不良编辑习惯，更不必说这种无限期（不知道要等到什么时候）搁置的情况。这个"pending redraw"怕是待到年后也依旧是"pending"。既然选择了删除这些元素，又为什么不尽数删除？为什么残留着两端断头的道路？
eggie (2026-02-22 19:13:36+00:00): Dag Iodoc,

Het routeerde hier niet meer correct voor tweewielers. Ik heb de uitzondering voor tweewielers toegevoegd aan de afslagbeperking.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-02-23 08:55:40+00:00): Aangepast naar alleen rechtdoor
eggie (2026-02-22 15:44:39+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
eggie (2026-02-22 15:48:30+00:00): Dag PWeder,

Wanneer er een C14 bord staat dan taggen we bicycle=no  Staat er geen bord dan bicycle=use_sidepath en zo stond het al correct getagd.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-02-22 15:50:45+00:00): Tip Tagging verschillende fietspaden:
G11: mofa=yes, moped=no, traffic_sign=NL:G11
G12a: moped=designated, mofa=designated, traffic_sign=NL:G12a
G13: moped=no, mofa=no, traffic_sign=NL:G13

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway
eggie (2026-02-23 08:18:14+00:00): Dag S Bouwmans,

historic=monument wordt in een andere context gebruikt.
Denk aan bv de Taj Mahal in India.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument

MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-02-23 08:19:44+00:00): Svp ook geen name= gebruiken om iets te beschrijven.