piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
PL 2188677 (2026-06-28 18:53:29+00:00): @Ed_slv isto não é uma questão de dicionário. A Quinta em questão não abrange só essas casas como refere. Abrange toda a área à volta e até zonas sul e grande parte da área de painéis. Senão tinha de chamar a cada um dos bocados dessa quinta esse nome, a cada zona cultivada. Não tem sentido. Aliás, na cartografia histórica que acabo de rever o nome dessa quinta aparece muito mais abaixo já junto à estrada alcatroada 2 km abaixo. E com isso está a excluir os edifícios dos referidos painéis fotovoltaicos que têm o mesmo nome. É uma questão de rigor.
PL 2188677 (2026-06-28 19:17:50+00:00): Portanto, confirmei agora mais uma vez, e isto está bem explícito em todo o cadastro predial: o endereço de cada um dos painéis e infraestruturas de apoio aos painéis é a referida Quinta. Isto até à estrada alcatroada 2 km a sul. Da estrada alcatroada para baixo estamos a falar da Quintas do Falcão de Cima e de Baixo
PL 2188677 (2026-06-28 19:19:11+00:00): Aliás se vir o castro/registo predial vai até para lá da estrada alcatroada. Os painéis estão nos registos prediais de duas quintas, e portanto esse é o endereço
PL 2188677 (2026-06-28 19:19:21+00:00): *o cadastro
Ed_slv (2026-06-28 21:01:10+00:00): Uma vez por todas
O Mapa do OSM assinala o que está no terreno, não o que diz o Registo Predial, o cadastro ou o testamento do seu Trisavô. Mapeamos o que está visivel e usamos os nomes actuais, do dia a dia. Para nós a quinta do Bom Palreu existe até à vedação da central solar. Depois da vedação mudou de nome e o terreno faz parte de uma outra entidade. Pela minha parte a argumentação está definitivamente encerrada. Irei continuar a editar a zona de acordo com os principios do OSM. Recomendo-lhe a leitura do D Quijote no original, para ter noção do ridiculo em que se coloca
PL 2188677 (2026-06-28 21:44:12+00:00): @Ed_slv isso não é assim... Se é morada é a do registo predial oficial, não pode ser outra. Até porque da simples observação das imagens da satélite não tira endereços. O seu entendimento está errado. Não é o senhor que, com todo o respeito, decreta mudanças de nome. Se eu lhe estou a dar os nomes oficiais que estão no registo predial e no cadastro, são esses que valem, porque é essa a documentação oficial do país. Não é achismos de cada um... por amor de Deus... Depois, referências a Dom Quixote e conversas laterais, não são para aqui. Eu não o desrespeitei, agradeço que não me desrespeite. O senhor está a violar a lei e os princípios do Open Street Map, além dos registos oficiias,e terá a minha oposição. Não faz sentido falar de Dom Quixote e tal, quando eu conheço a zona e o senhor não conhece... e está a repetir erros em permanência. Não pode ser. O mapa tem de ser correto. Não é V. Ex.a que faz as leis e diz que os limites do terreno são aqui e são acolá. Isso é irresponsável e uma violação da lei
osmviborg (2026-06-29 05:14:53+00:00): Areas should not include features (for example residential houses) which are not part of the garden itself. https://lgms.nl/p/osm/cached-wiki/?page=Tag:leisure%3Dgarden
notmyproblem1 (2026-07-06 16:55:15+00:00): Cosahaicambiato_?
notmyproblem1 (2026-07-06 16:55:33+00:00): Cosahaicambiato_2?
notmyproblem1 (2026-07-06 16:55:45+00:00): Cosahaicambiato_3?
notmyproblem1 (2026-07-06 16:56:00+00:00): Cosahaicambiato_4?
yelisey90 (2026-07-14 16:31:06+00:00): merged https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/21040903 into https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18976681 : definitely no need for two relations describing the same street. If you really need it, change 18976681 from street to associatedStreet
ffmp (2026-07-24 08:27:28+00:00): One relation is better. I meet relation:street for the first time, so avoid editing.
BTW, as I understand, need to add sidewalks to this relation also.
notmyproblem1 (2026-07-06 16:56:10+00:00): Cosahaicambiato_5?
anon726 (2026-07-06 17:08:21+00:00): Ho aggiunto dei sentieri secondari che prima non c'erano. In realtà ce ne sono di piu, prossimamente li aggiungo
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-28 18:24:06+00:00): Hi, thanks for your contribution! I noticed that some `name` tags appear to describe the current status or planned construction of the feature. In OSM, the `name` tag should only contain the official name as it appears on-site. For construction or proposed features, please use tags like `construction=*`, `proposed=*`, or `status=*`.
StubSubs (2026-06-28 19:02:17+00:00): Hi and thanks for the input! Any help gratefully received :-) I've amended the names to the name of the new area.
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-29 06:07:08+00:00): Thanks! 👍
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-29 14:16:25+00:00): User has been blocked https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20876
YomanNH (2026-07-02 12:09:24+00:00): Hej, co to jest surface=KO dla https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13972869176? ;)
Bartek444 (2026-07-03 16:28:29+00:00): miało być kostka (surface=paving_stones)
poprawione
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-28 18:00:18+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 184719963, 184720059, 184720165, 184720166, 184720168, 184720169, 184720184, 184720201, 184720202, 184720204, 184720206, 184720207, 184720209, 184720210, 184720212, 184720214, 184720215, 184720245, 184720253, 184720258, 184720266, 184720270, 184720277, 184720281, 184720286, 184720295, 184720311, 184720319, 184720332, 184720336, 184720345, 184720352, 184720361, 184720370, 184720372, 184720382, 184720388, 184720396, 184720402, 184720409, 184720418, 184720422, 184720430, 184720436, 184720452, 184720459, 184720469, 184720478, 184720489, 184720492, 184720496, 184720505, 184720512, 184720525, 184720529, 184720537, 184720548, 184720567, 184720578, 184720586, 184720592, 184720601, 184720608, 184720613, 184720616, 184720621, 184720628, 184720637, 184720644, 184720650, 184720656, 184720662, 184720671, 184720675, 184720683, 184720700, 184720701, 184720706, 184720708, 184720712, 184720716, 184720721, 184720731, 184720732, 184720733, 184720736, 184720737, 184720739, 184720742, 184720744, 184720745, 184749625, 184749652, 184749653, 184749655, 184749656, 184749657, 184749660, 184749662, 184749663, 184749664, 184749666, 184749668, 184749671, 184749672, 184749673, 184749674, 184749677, 184749678, 184749680, 184749684, 184749686, 184749688, 184749689, 184749692, 184749696, 184749699, 184749700, 184749701, 184749703, 184749706, 184749707.
vrix (2026-07-01 14:08:39+00:00): Hello kokokoki, could you please review this changeset? something must be wrong because the relation is not on Nominatim anymore https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/ui/details.html?osmtype=R&osmid=112057
BCNorwich (2026-06-29 04:37:34+00:00): Hi, bicycle=yes is correct on the service road, I also added it to two bollards.
Triston2017 (2026-06-28 18:29:19+00:00): Also corrected pie4rce drive to being a One-Way.
Frans S (2026-06-29 09:20:42+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please do not collect multiple buildings  as 1 building. Each building needs to be mapped as an individual building!!
And: Don't connect nodes from buildings to eachother.
About high buildings
heck this footage please 
How to map high and high-rise buidings
https://youtu.be/u31wPYWkm3E?si=lDbvDutpUyZWQXXL

Best regards
F De Sousa (2026-07-01 13:13:43+00:00): Hi! sorry it's my fisrt time mapping here, but with the video now I understood better. But, I noted that the map is correct. So I don't want to touch it until you can confirm this. I would like to collaborate in other tasks. Best regards.
Frans S (2026-07-01 14:53:35+00:00): Hi
We continue to review and validate tasks, so this task is completed.
Feel free to join in on other tasks, however they can be rather difficult to map. 
Change to an easier task where possible

Best regards
felipeeugenio (2026-06-28 22:03:57+00:00): Hola Pablo. Ok con que los locales no existan, pero las direcciones siguen existiendo. Las voy a recuperar.

Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184756117
Strubbl (2026-07-04 21:30:04+00:00): I disagree. How is the bike parking reachable then?
Demowa (2026-07-06 07:47:55+00:00): Normally people who are biking also have feet. and can walk the 3 meters.
DressyPear4 (2026-07-16 06:07:20+00:00): Este changeset foi revertido com changeset/185825440
iuvi (2026-06-28 20:23:12+00:00): Пожалуйста, рисуйте здания ровнее и выпрямляйте углы. Если вы рисуете в веб-редакторе iD это можно делать клавишей Q после выбора типа здания. Иначе придётся все перерисовывать
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-04 02:53:29+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20904
LordGarySugar (2026-07-04 20:41:39+00:00): Hi, if you are going to import buildings from microsoft/BuildingFootprints, please make sure to split semidetached and terraced houses respectively. I have split some along Winton Road and Stamford Road according to property boundaries.
dstansby (2026-07-12 21:09:56+00:00): Historically, even if I've been tracing by hand, I've outlined the building, even if it's split into multiple houses, and then added (or expected to add) building=terrace to the single area (as per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dterrace) - is doing that not okay?
LordGarySugar (2026-07-19 01:51:05+00:00): If an entire terrace has been drawn as a single building polygon, then yes, building=terrace is the right tag. (an individually drawn house as part of a terrace is building=house + house=terraced). My comment is more to suggest that where cadastral parcels are available and the imagery is clear, we should make every effort to split terraced and semidetached houses according to their property boundaries. Having multiple houses grouped together isn't particularly useful for navigation and makes it particularly difficult to add addresses when surveying. For example, where you have surveyed this terrace, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022193765, we do not know in which order those housenumbers appear. All unsplit terraces and semidetached houses will have to be divided up eventually, so it makes sense to do it as the buildings are being drawn in at the first instance. Splitting them straight away makes life a lot easier for other mappers down the road :)
MoinMoin99 (2026-06-28 20:18:43+00:00): kartiert*
DaveF (2026-06-28 23:22:14+00:00): What evidence have you that this has closed?
thx811 (2026-06-29 17:50:28+00:00): Hi DaveF, 
Colerne was withdrawn from the UK Military AIP in March 2025 (https://www.aidu.mod.uk/aip/pdf/enr/ENR-6-19.pdf) and the crosses painted on the runways and taxiways indicate it is not in use. However, on checking further it appears that RAF Brize Norton Gliding Club began using the airfield for gliding this year. I've adjusted the tags to change the site back to a military airfield and added aerodrome:type=gliding.
Baloo Uriza (2026-07-07 22:48:14+00:00): Do you have a picture of this installation?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184761573
jellyfish twink (2026-06-29 00:23:19+00:00): no?? 123 is NOT a trunk road
cubbe8 (2026-06-29 00:25:58+00:00): It is per the classification guidelines. I’ve noticed you are changing a lot of road classifications lately. I suggest you read over the MA classification guidelines. Most roads are already tagged correctly.
jellyfish twink (2026-06-29 01:11:03+00:00): where is the ma classification guideline?
SomeoneElse (2026-07-07 11:57:09+00:00): Hello,
I'm not in thr USA myself, but do knoe that there has been an awful lot of discussion about road classification in the USA and elsewhere in the forum, and people there have said that the USA doesn't tend to map official designations onto OSM `highway` values.
Before doing more of this (and especially before doing any reverts) I'd suggest discussing your proposed changes there.
Best Regards,
Andy
cubbe8 (2026-07-07 16:22:24+00:00): This is the official classification scheme. I am not sure what you are talking about.
SomeoneElse (2026-07-07 21:48:01+00:00): The way that people choose which `highway` tag to use in OSM varies around the world.  It doesn't always follow that an "official" classification will map onto exactly one OSM highway tag.  If you look down https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/us/78 (the USA forum) you'll see quite a bit of chat about this sort of thing.
pwbriggs (2026-06-29 07:27:24+00:00): A more specific tag is sidewalk:both=no (or, if the two sides are different, you could use, say, sidewalk:right:separate and sidewalk:left=no)

Happy mapping!
Frans S (2026-06-30 15:00:23+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please place hi-rise buildings on their footprint.
Check this footage,
How to map high and high-rise buidings
https://youtu.be/u31wPYWkm3E?si=lDbvDutpUyZWQXXL
palamito (2026-07-02 20:27:58+00:00): Hello, thanks for the feedback, appreciate it, although, I think there has been quite of a misunderstanding, since the ways of buildings that I have personally mapped were done taking into account footprint and not the roof as reference, if anything, it might have to do with allignment of aerial imagery, having moved a way that was wrongly mapped, or confusion with other mappers

Best regards, palamito
swinetown (2026-06-28 21:44:37+00:00): ...*landuse*
aharvey (2026-06-29 00:27:51+00:00): hi https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1469131821/history was changed to amenity=school, without any details.

Were the tennis courts demolished? A new school built, or is this part of Cammeraygal High?
nortonweb (2026-06-29 02:44:11+00:00): So these are no longer tennis courts. Don't know when but we moved into the area in December 2025 and these were and still are attached to the High School and used for general sports even tho they are Basketball courts.
aharvey (2026-06-29 03:08:50+00:00): If it's part of the middle school campus of Cammeraygal High, it should be combined into a multipolygon.

In the iD editor, you can Shift + select both ways, then right click Merge.
nortonweb (2026-06-29 03:25:07+00:00): Cool away you go then because as far as I can see those school buildings have also not been marked and if you want to check out the map you can see they are not in any way shape or form tennis courts. Have at it my friend!
kadiwa (2026-06-28 22:19:11+00:00): Ich bin für Diskussionen oder sogar einen Revert offen, falls sich die Änderung als kontrovers herausstellt, aber wahrscheinlich ist es nicht kontrovers.
Henry Wilde (2026-06-28 22:36:39+00:00): The correct entrance for all traffic is the Main Mate on Liberty Ln (40.6723589, -80.1996307).  Please mark the Back Gate (40.6722734, -80.1959772) as closed to vehicle traffic and route all traffic to the Main Gate instead.
GeoSylvaris (2026-06-30 14:42:00+00:00): A very precise edit—nice work!
ieguy3 (2026-06-28 22:47:19+00:00): they are also going to construct two parking lots on middle fork as well. there is a hidden waterfall near the boy scouts camp on middle fork
Frans S (2026-06-30 13:24:10+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.,
Please take a look to this footage how to map tall buildings

How to map high and high-rise buidings
https://youtu.be/u31wPYWkm3E?si=lDbvDutpUyZWQXXL

Best regards
frydzio (2026-06-29 08:06:51+00:00): Cześć,
Widzę, że chyba rysowałeś ten chodnik na oko. Nie widać go jeszcze na żadnej ortofotomapie ani warstwie BDOT. Problem z nim jest taki, że jest przedłużeniem narysowanego przeze mnie płotu, a dodatkowo w takiej formie nie ma żadnego znaczenia na mapie - nie jest połączony z żadną inną drogą więc nie będzie używany przez żaden silnik do nawigacji. Na przyszłość zwróć uwagę na jakość wprowadzanych danych.
dcapillae (2026-06-29 10:48:32+00:00): Hola.

Gracias por los cambios.

¿Qué es este nodo? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5856694189 ¿Es otra sede en Málaga de la misma empresa?
McKulkin (2026-07-20 22:15:58+00:00): I'm about to revert this changeset. It's a trodden trail running through a forest with barely any work done on it. It's inconsiderate to remove a trail's physical tags. Thanks.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184767852
Enock4seth (2026-07-30 00:44:54+00:00): Hi BinkalB,
Kindly watch out for existing features before adding new ones, which results useless and overlapping features.
Glassman (2026-06-29 16:31:26+00:00): I never knew that bicycles could charge at charging stations. Thanks for the heads up.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184769088
Fen <3 (2026-06-29 20:55:21+00:00): not super common on this side of the pond yet but hopefully soon!
NeisRevert (2026-06-29 06:00:51+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/184777183
Comment: "Remove vandalism"
Marcos Dione (2026-06-29 10:32:51+00:00): Hola, si "Calle 1202" es un nombre viejo, podés ponerlo como `old_name`.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184769221
Marcos Dione (2026-06-29 10:33:12+00:00): El resto muy bien, gracias.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184769221
ChrissW-R1 (2026-07-03 20:30:19+00:00): Please check https://osm.org/note/5373737
VLD0251 (2026-07-09 14:32:44+00:00): Arabic is not used on local signs in Burkina Faso. adding name: ar, brand:ar, and operator:ar tags does not comply with OpenStreetMap guidelines. please remove these tags to reflect local usage.
Frans S (2026-06-29 10:01:53+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she deliver high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (See attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping. 

C: Collected adjacent buildings and mapped it as 1 building.
D: Connecting nodes to other features.
H: Included a yard of clearing.


Explanation can be found in this document, which might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards, and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184769723
World_Winner (2026-06-30 12:37:39+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184852131
okadatsuneo (2026-06-30 01:10:54+00:00): こんにちは。
OSMにようこそ。
「未登録の建物を追加」とありますが、OSMにすでに建物データがあるところに重ねて登録されています。重ねての登録はご遠慮下さい。
また、すべて？の建物にbuilding:levels=2と入れているように見えますが、そんなことはないですよね??
不確実な情報は入れないで下さい。
よろしくお願いします。
Glassman (2026-06-29 20:33:31+00:00): Looks like you acidentially dragged a node at the car wash.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184771422
Glassman (2026-06-29 20:33:40+00:00): It has been fixed
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184771422
76484 (2026-06-29 02:52:27+00:00): I'm new to OSM and may have incorrectly added a sub-relation to the Bruce Trail relation. Can someone review and correct if needed?
76484 (2026-06-29 03:14:43+00:00): What I was trying to do was to capture the Canterbury Falls Side Trail (a side trail of the Bruce Trail). The side trail looks mostly accurate except it's missing a small piece at the west. However, I seem to have added this loop to the main Bruce Trail, which it most certainly should not be. Could someone help me to correct this error?
Glassman (2026-06-29 20:38:47+00:00): A unclassified is basically the same as a residential road in urban areas. Since this isn't shown on the counties iMap, it should likely be a highway=service. Can you please change it back to a service road. I do agree it is not a driveway. See https://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/iMap/
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184771802
LordGarySugar (2026-06-29 21:53:31+00:00): according to the wiki, highway=unclassified is for 'minor public roads'. These are clearly not that. The fact they are named or part of a bus/taxi route does not affect the highway classification. They do not serve through traffic, they are only for the exclusive use of the Boring Company.
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-06-29 23:06:26+00:00): Per the Wiki:
"The highway=service tag denotes ways used for vehicle access to a building, parking lot, service station, business estate, beach, campsite, etc. Service ways are usually not part of the public street network and may sometimes be inaccessible to the general public, which can be specified explicitly by adding access=*."
LordGarySugar (2026-07-07 00:53:34+00:00): These tunnels are a one-of-a-kind system, highway=service is the most accurate classification considering their size and private usage. I wouldn't use busway either considering Teslas are hardly buses.
felipeeugenio (2026-06-29 14:29:44+00:00): Hola, Belén. Gracias por tus ediciones.

Puedes cuadrar los edificios con la letra Q.
Además, por favor no agrupar casas. Da la impresión de que dibujaste polígonos donde veías algo, pero sin velar por el hecho de que eso que veías eran casas separadas. Muchas otras están montadas también.
Vamos a ver cómo corregirlo.

Saludos
pwbriggs (2026-07-02 05:01:04+00:00): Thanks for the contributions. When a business name and information is mapped on the building outline, it shouldn't be duplicated onto a point. Let me know if you have any questions.

If you're having trouble seeing the data updates you made, try hard refreshing your browser.

Thanks!
okadatsuneo (2026-06-30 01:21:11+00:00): こんにちは。
OSMにようこそ。
多くの建物に "building:levels=2" と入れていますが、何の情報に基づいていますか？
不確実な情報は入れないで下さい。
よろしくお願いします。
okadatsuneo (2026-06-30 01:20:44+00:00): こんにちは。
OSMにようこそ。
多くの建物に "building:levels=2" と入れていますが、何の情報に基づいていますか？
不確実な情報は入れないで下さい。
よろしくお願いします。
kojima98 (2026-06-30 08:20:44+00:00): 申し訳ありません。水理学の研究（豪雨による氾濫の解析）のために住宅の情報が必要でして、住宅の断面積を近似的に出すために、住宅などの建造物は2階建てに収束すると考えて2階建てにしています。身勝手な行動をお許しください
okadatsuneo (2026-06-30 14:19:18+00:00): ご返信ありがとうございます。
そのような研究は専用のシステム/環境上でやると思うので、そちらで属性値を持ってもらう方がよいと思います。
OSMは全世界の人が利用する共通基盤ですので、個人的な目的で値を持たせることはご遠慮下さい。
自分が入れた値でも、他の人がおかしいと思えば勝手に修正/削除される可能性があります。
ご理解のほどよろしくお願いします。
okadatsuneo (2026-06-30 14:31:11+00:00): 金沢市であれば、Rapid_Plateauという、Plateauで公開されている建物データをOSMに登録するツールがあります。
こちらを活用して建物を登録してもらった方がはるかに楽だし他の人にとってもベターだと思います。
全部かどうかはわかりませんが、building:levels や height 情報も入っています。
ご検討下さい。

サイト：
https://rapid.nyampire.info/#map=19.28/36.55853/136.67028&background=gsi.go.jp_seamlessphoto

説明wiki：
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:MLIT_PLATEAU/Plateau_RapiD
Alt9800 (2026-07-01 12:11:41+00:00): OpenStreetMapにようこそ、また、コメントに気づいてくださってありがとうございます！

OSM、コミュニティ活動が盛んではありますが、マッピングの知見がソフトウェアエンジニアリングの周辺に偏在していて、周辺の工学領域からだとリーチしにくいかもしれませんね〜！

今回の件に関しては、金沢大学角間キャンパスをリサーチ中に、「金沢大学の建物フットプリントが多重化している」という問題として発覚しました！

つまり、なんらかのタイミングで、すでにある建物に対して同じ位置に建物が描画されています。
マナーというより、システム整合性の面から、すでに存在する地物の情報をもとにして、新しい地物をどのように入れるかという吟味を行わないと大変なことになりがちです。

現状の問題として、建物が重複して存在していると、OSMの標準タイル(https://www.openstreetmap.org)や、これをもとにして地図を作成しているシステムにも影響してしまいます。

例えば金沢市が作成している観光案内地図(金沢市観光デジタルマップ : https://platinumaps.jp/d/kanazawa-city)もOSMのデータベース作成された地図を利用しているため、中央データベースへの影響が反映されてしまいます。

OSMは地図である以上にコミュニティデータベースとしての性質が強いので、ぜひガイドラインを参考にしながらマッピング活動をなさってください。

草の根のネットワークだけでなく、会社組織や研究法人でも大規模な地図作成が世界中で行われているので、講義やゼミの一環として利用されるのはとても良いことだと思いますが、
他のマッパーの編集を妨げるような機械的な作業があれば、これらは検知されリバート(差し戻し)されることもあります。
これらマッピング活動をサポートすることを目的の一つとしてOSM Fundation Japanも組織されています。

https://www.osmf.jp

また、機械的にデータをインポートする場合は、データの著作性に気をつける必要があります。

もし、講義でこの活動を指導していらっしゃる先生がいらっしゃれば、OSMデータベースへのよくない形でのインポート作業が検知されているという旨をお伝えいただけますと幸いです。

OpenStreetMapのオンラインエディターであるiDにも編集後のThanksメッセージとしても記載されていますが、日本ロケールで編集をするメンバーはDiscordなどで活発にディスカッションを行っています。もちろん研究者も参画しています。
もし、作業の進め方に疑問点などあればこちらでアドバイスしてくださる方が大勢います。

https://discord.gg/P89pQTR9R

長くなりましたが、上記にリアクションいただけますと機械的なBANなどを防げてより良い形で関わっていただけると信じています。どうぞご一考くださいませ。
yelisey90 (2026-07-14 20:06:01+00:00): service=parking_aisle should only be used for connecting roads withing a parking lot, that is between roads that are used to get in and out of the parking lot. This one is not such a case. Please read the wiki page