piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2026-06-06 13:58:33+00:00): Hello,
What was the source of your change here?  Looking at the history https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12749774034/history , it was originally mapped as "shop=fish", changed by someone remotely without survey, and changed back following a complaint to the DWG.
If you've been there and verified that "shop=seafood" really is correct here then obviously that's fine, but if not mechanical changes really do need to go through https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct .  There are exceptions - something like "shop=pirmary" can be changed to "shop=primary" because it's obvious what was meant.
Changing "fish" to "seafood" may also be somewhat problematic because a "fish shop" in many parts of the UK is colloquially a fish and chip shop.
An image search https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ftsa&q=fish+shop+glasgow&ia=images&iax=images for "fish shop glasgow" returns mostly fish and chips, a fishmonger and also an aquatics shop!
Best Regards,
Andy
NorthCrab_upload (2026-06-06 05:46:00+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawną składnię. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres strony internetowej zawiera powtórzone protokoły.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9833833815

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
morkovkin (2026-06-05 22:47:02+00:00): Извиняюсь за эти мусорные правки, случайно куда-то не туда тыкнул(я даже не отвечал на эти квесты)
Bastian Greshake Tzovaras (2026-06-07 03:45:07+00:00): qué lindo, buen trabajo! 

Sin querer el perímetro de la escuela era marcado como un edificio también, yo arreglé en https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183762445
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-06-08 18:10:08+00:00): Just checking: is there a mention in the wiki that sidewalk=no is deprecated in favor of sidewalk:both=no? I have not seen a lot of sidewalk:both=no before, so I was wondering for the rationale. Thanks and have a nice day!
VLD319 (2026-06-08 18:43:18+00:00): Hi ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy, 

Our team typically prefers to use sidewalk:left/right/both=* since they are a bit more specific. However sidewalk=no is not deprecated and remains a valid option as well. 

Wishing you a pleasant day too! 
-VLD319
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-06-09 15:11:16+00:00): OK no problem, thanks!
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-05 23:21:34+00:00): Please remember, in OSM it is not mandatory to follow government regulations regarding road status, because in OSM the mapping is based on direct field surveys, not based on government regulations.
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-05 23:27:37+00:00): Open Street Map does not have the same policies, especially road classification based on government regulations (SK) because OSM this terminology is different. Okay...??
NaufalFarras (2026-06-06 11:21:48+00:00): Then what's your reasoning for this? Almost all roads in your edits do not belong to highway=primary. What's your definition of highway=primary? Do you create you own definition? Does that mean I can change all roads into motorway because I want to? I am forwarding this to OSM Data Working Group. Thank you.
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-06 12:33:07+00:00): Sorry in advance, I deliberately changed this classification because it is based on direct field observations, not based on GPS or existing government regulations. Currently, there are many connecting roads between districts through other sub-districts in Ngawi which are vital routes for all traffic, including expedition transport that passes through the road that I edited. I deliberately changed this not based on government regulations, but based on its current function, its function can be seen from field monitoring by going directly to the streets and based on local knowledge.

So next time if you intend to change the road classification, please read the source first, if the source says "local knowledge and field observation survey" then don't deny it anymore. Because the data is based on real-time, not based on government regulations or digital globe/gps.
NaufalFarras (2026-06-06 15:38:17+00:00): > "if the source says "local knowledge and field observation survey" then don't deny it anymore."

That is a valid way to confirm physical attributes of an object, such as road surface material, lighting conditions, or number of lanes. However, it is not a sufficient basis for classification. You cannot classify a road as primary simply because it seems important to you. Classification cannot be determined by direct observation alone. You cannot tell a road's classification just by looking at it or reading markings on the surface. Classification requires understanding network context, which field observation alone cannot provide. Satellite imagery, GPS traces, and in this case, government regulation are necessary references to understand the broader context.

Classifying roads as highway=secondary or highway=tertiary does not mean those roads are considered unimportant. Each classification is meant to distinguish function. highway=trunk forms the national network, highway=primary links cities and major towns, highway=tertiary links districts and villages. If every "important" road is tagged as highway=primary then what is the point? The classification system loses its meaning.

Let's look at this one by one. OSM defines highway=primary as a "major highway linking large towns." As I stated in my changeset, all links between Ngawi and nearby towns and cities are already accommodated by national or trunk roads. There are also some streets in Ngawi's center of activity that may qualify as primary roads due to its importance in urban road network context. Another thing, almost all of the ways you tagged as highway=secondary could be downgraded to highway=tertiary, as they only connect district to district or district to village. Please refer to other regions as a reference for how the OSM Community classifies roads. The current classification around Ngawi and Sragen is overinflated.

I have helped the Indonesian community write a more comprehensive guide on road classification in OSM. I use government regulation as a reference because it has gone through a proper scientific and legislative process. I have also verified this against common classification practices in Indonesia, which are documented on the OSM Wiki. I am sure you have read that documentation.

I have seen other contributors discussing this issue with you, but no resolution was reached in the end. So please join the OSM Indonesia Telegram group for better communication with the community, or post your arguments on the OSM Community Forum.
edvac (2026-06-08 18:36:57+00:00): Dear Gaung Tebono,

Thank you for your contributions to improve the OpenStreetMap database.

As user NaufalFarras has pointed out in the last comment of this changeset, you should discuss major changes with the Indonesian community.

As a Data Working Group member, I am not taking any side in this discussion (for the moment), but edit wars (two or more users reverting each other changes) are completely unacceptable in OSM, for obvious reasons.

I see you are engaging in changeset discussions educately and respectfully. Therefore, I kindly invite you to engage with the overall Indonesian community, so you can reach a consensus over this issue.

Best regards,

Rafael Avila Coya, on behalf of the OpenStreetMap Foundation, Data Working Group.

DWG Ticket#2026060610000205
Sammyhawkrad (2026-06-06 17:24:01+00:00): Hi Nsumba Joshua, 
Welcome to OSM. The name=* tag is for the name of the object mapped, but not the name of the mapper. Take note and avoid doing that in future edits.
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-05 23:43:35+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 183659807, 183659966, 183660269, 183660449, 183661833, 183665043, 183665186.
AgusQui (2026-06-08 21:48:29+00:00): ¿Pudiste confirmar que va por Patricios?
Sino la opción para mi es que lo desvíen por: R21- De La Unión - Autopista
Leo Slager (2026-06-07 12:29:26+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
skfd (2026-06-28 01:41:18+00:00): Please double check your work — i noticed that youncreates three duplicates of the 6068 bus stop, and their might be others. Cheers!
FajrAl (2026-06-06 13:30:27+00:00): harap melihat wiki mengenai tag highway=*
btwhite92 (2026-07-01 15:46:04+00:00): Hi there,
This changeset added an aerialway tag to a protected area boundary, would you mind correcting this please?
NorthCrab_upload (2026-06-06 06:42:46+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2264378377
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/937526206

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2026-06-06 06:42:53+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawną składnię. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres strony internetowej zawiera powtórzone protokoły.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/896822584

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
StreetSurveyor (2026-06-16 11:33:45+00:00): Can you explain your reasoning for changing Munson St to access=private?

 I recently completed an on-the-ground survey of the street and did not observe any signs, gates, barriers, or other indications of restricted access. Based on my survey, there was nothing suggesting the road is private or that public access is prohibited.
cubbe8 (2026-06-16 12:21:56+00:00): Street sign says private street.
StreetSurveyor (2026-06-16 12:36:54+00:00): Thanks for the clarification. One thing to keep in mind is that a “Private Street” or “Private Way” sign does not necessarily mean access is restricted. In many parts of Boston and Massachusetts, roads are signed as private because they are privately owned or maintained rather than accepted by the municipality, but they remain openly accessible to the public. 

In OSM, access=private indicates that the general public is not permitted to use the road. That tag should ideally be supported by evidence such as “No Trespassing,” “Residents Only,” gates, barriers, or other explicit access restrictions. Based on my recent survey, I did not observe any indications that public access was prohibited on Munson St.
mga_geo (2026-06-06 18:37:29+00:00): Bonsoir,
Dans cette opération nettoyage, l'attribut highway = bus_stop sur des public_transport = stop_position est aussi superflu.
Je me trompe ?
Marc
bhietsch (2026-06-18 14:08:27+00:00): Hi - can you please provide some context to these tag changes? Storm King Art Center has many of the characteristics that meet the definition of leisure=park, tourism=museum and museum=art. Seems unnecessary to have removed these tags.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=park?uselang=en
aq123 (2026-07-22 11:15:46+00:00): Hi! 
May I know the data source of these changes?
I've tried to find the [way](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1526643500) on the ground and saw no visible path there, just a slope with vegetation.
Some of the other ways also look very doubtful:
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1526643498 is completely invisible on satellite imagery and looks too steep for a track
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1526552650 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1526552651
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183720601
aq123 (2026-07-30 07:16:08+00:00): I've deleted obviously missing tracks: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/186626963
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183720601
BubbaJuice (2026-06-06 04:27:37+00:00): Joseph, 

The light shrubbery makes this area heath. You can see my guide: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:BubbaJuice/Heath_vs._Scrub. This shrubland may not be very dense, yet it is not natural=sand.
natural=sand should be reserved for bare sand or sand covered by seasonal grasses. I will be changing this back, if you don't oppose.

Thank you,
BubbaJuice
Joseph R P (2026-06-06 05:10:33+00:00): I feel like in a case in a more barren landscape like the Mojave desert, it would be more important to tag the ground based on what the majority of the surface is, what you would be walking atop/through, and what is primarily visible from above, and that natural=heath would be more applicable to more densely vegetated areas like way/1456316943. I've been mapping and re-tagging this area on this basis—the flatter areas like this particular feature as sand since the ground is mostly just desert sand, fine gravel, rocks, and whatnot (and also to distinguish this area from patches like the previous example, and other more densely-vegetated regions in the state like Northern Nevada) and the mountains like the Las Vegas Range as scree to represent the surface that is mostly consistent of loose rock—both kinds of features with sagebrush and yucca scattered throughout.
BubbaJuice (2026-06-06 20:18:39+00:00): Would you be okay if this was discussed in a channel with more users to give their opinion on the matter? We could do it on the Forum, US Slack, or OSM World Discord. (I see that you have asked in the Slack before but there wasn't too much input). I understand the issue though and OSM doesn't have enough diversity in landcover to classify these areas as one extreme or the other.
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-06-06 20:53:18+00:00): Maybe the area could be divided into "sand" areas and "heath" areas? I mean, look at the landcover around Sunrise Landfill: It's super detailed. Also, this multipolygon is MASSIVE simply because it hasn't been detailed enough, and I went ahead merging overlapping sand polygons.
BubbaJuice (2026-06-06 21:20:56+00:00): Yes, this multipolygon is massive and I really don't like these large polygons because, especially in desert landscapes, there is a lot of variety in landcover. However, this one isn't that bad because all of this area (with a few exceptions) is covered by low-density shrubland (unlike some areas that tag entire mountain ranges with complex forest-scrub areas as a general tag).

There's a lot of purposes that landcover serves but regardless I think that OSM should reflect the ground truth. This area is not sand, but an "Open Shrubland" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_cover#Types) and I think that OSM has adopted natural=heath for this landcover. To show the complexity of this environment, you could use density=* and surface=* or something similar and document the nature of this landscape.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-15 09:56:36+00:00): Reverted adding SEO POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags, possibly sourced from Google Maps, in changeset 184128891

https://osm.org/changeset/184128891
mavl (2026-06-07 07:02:09+00:00): Здравствуйте. Подскажите, пожалуйста, почему у дорог был изменён класс с service на unclassified?  
  
Например:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1279672287
begezyan (2026-06-07 09:12:01+00:00): Здравствуйте. Потому что service это второстепенный проезд, либо проезд внутри какой-то территории. service не отображается на масштабах где дорогу всё ещё должно быть видно. 
Так же я исхожу из сложившейся практики unclassified для промысловых дорог.
mavl (2026-06-07 14:40:02+00:00): Не обязательно проезд внутри территории. Это может быть проезд к территории. Например, дорога  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1279672286/history  

типичный highway=service. Имеет длину 240 метров и ведёт от дороги к территории.  
Масштаб отображения дороги значения не имеет. Так как на разных картах, которые используют данные OpenStreetMap, объекты отображаются по-разному.
begezyan (2026-06-07 17:13:57+00:00): way/1279672287 о которой была речь изначально это дорога с твердым покрытием, отсыпанная песком на болоте, 10 метров шириной, 1.5 км длинной. До площадки куста она представляет из себя единое целое. 

На вики OSM написано "Дороги для обслуживания (дороги, которые специально существуют для обеспечения доступа к сбору мусора или к парковке, дороги в палаточных лагерях) должны быть помечены highway=service."

Как будто бы промысловые дороги не совсем попадают под это определение?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:highway%3Dservice
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Highway_classification
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_classification

Может быть есть ссылки на какие-то обсуждения на других ресурсах? Или более формализованные требования к классификации?
mavl (2026-06-08 02:26:14+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/56721  
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/56721
mavl (2026-06-08 02:26:36+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/57222/15
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-06-07 14:37:33+00:00): Thanks for review of my note!
カシオペア (2026-06-08 17:24:43+00:00): No problem, it was a good catch!
AjBelnuovo (2026-07-19 15:03:43+00:00): Próximo a este ponto, na Rodovia Açoriana, em frente ao NEIM Anna Spyrios Dimatos, há um ponto de ônibus, com o nome Tapera 07 e o outro ponto que mapeou na Rua José Correia - Juca não existe.
anderson_schmitt (2026-07-26 17:42:20+00:00): Olá. Obrigado. Só para confirmar, você já deletou o ponto que não existe, certo? 

Sobre o Tapera 07, conferi na base da prefeitura e ele só consta no shapefile de Abrigos e não no shape de Pontos de Ônibus (que deveria ter todas as informações, incluindo os abrigos)... No shape de Abrigos não consta também nenhum número de referência.. Enfim, estou vendo que não dá pra confiar muito na base do Geoportal. 

Adicionei para o Tapera 07 o  stop_position e a stop_area.

Abraços,
Anderson
anderson_schmitt (2026-07-27 13:39:20+00:00): É esse o ponto que não existe? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4566650678
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183724804
AjBelnuovo (2026-07-27 13:50:09+00:00): Não. O que não existe e removi é o ponto em frente ao Ponto 01 da Rua do Jucá., que aparece no OSM dependendo do zoom dado.
Colbertson (2026-06-06 08:29:05+00:00): The building was glued to the road and not squared, fixed that.
Also if its an active synagogue it should have amenity=place_of_worship and related tags.
Kovoschiz (2026-06-07 10:06:58+00:00): "N" is used for vehicular bridges. "NT" is used for signals.
kingkingHK (2026-06-07 11:30:07+00:00): It has been changed. Traffic light is N now. Proof: go to any traffic light in NT and see what's marked on the pole.
Nkhk_KMG (2026-06-06 17:42:10+00:00): 你好，其实并不存在“昆玉河线”这条线路，这条铁路仅为俗称，为昆玉城际+玉蒙线+蒙河线组成的，线路标注应以工务标志为主，所以“中老昆万线”在工务中也是被称为昆玉城际和玉磨线，希望你能了解，感谢！
Nkhk_KMG (2026-06-06 17:43:50+00:00): 等一下不好意思中老那个我搞错了
yoyoshka (2026-06-08 21:32:09+00:00): Пожалуйста, читай, что обозначает классификация, которую ты ставишь, перед тем, как отправить правки на сервер. Устал уже править за тобой.
CAM-Gerlach (2026-06-06 22:13:32+00:00): Hi Ygramul, thanks for refining the geometry here. Unfortunately, it seems like the way the turning loop was attached to, correctly tagging this as a private driveway, was completely removed, and instead this was tagged as part of the public right of way of Heritage Lane. In fact, VBMP aerial imagery, VGIN property lines and street-level imagery all confirm that this turning circle is in fact part of the private driveway of the house at 2804 Heritage Lane, as it was tagged previously.

I went ahead and restored the removed way and tagging, as well as further refined the way's tags and geometry, in changeset 183757424 , so this should be fixed now. Just wanted to give you a heads up about that.

https://osm.org/changeset/183757424

Happy mapping!
Ygramul (2026-06-07 07:17:26+00:00): Eep; sorry for that, and thanks for fixing. I typically try to retain as much of the original nodes and ways as possible, merging new geometry with the existing one. It seems in this case, since the TL attaches directly to the public road, this must have eliminated the old driveway. Sorry again.
CAM-Gerlach (2026-06-07 07:29:41+00:00): No worries, thanks for the response--just wanted to give you a heads up. Cheers!
henils (2026-07-28 09:22:59+00:00): Hi Jonaes, hast du einen Tipp für mich, wo ich die Quelle für ETCS L2 finden kann?
Jonaes (2026-07-28 10:45:10+00:00): Hallo, das war im Rahmen einer Ausschreibung mal öffentlich einsehbar, siehe hier, z.B: S.15: https://we.tl/t-twuzekthgxD5z1tt
henils (2026-07-28 11:04:44+00:00): Cool, danke dir!
ڕاستی (2026-07-23 10:58:51+00:00): کوڕە بۆکانی ڕاوەستە لە دانانی ناوی هەڵە و نافەرمی لۆ کۆران و جادان. دەنا ناچار دەبم بەرزی کەمەوە لۆ دەستەی چاودێری.
lankapuhelin (2026-07-14 19:04:06+00:00): Hyvin kartoitit Haltialan kotieläinpihan alueen https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/690731219, vaan mitä sanoisit siihen ajatukseen, että Kuninkaantammentien eteläpuoleista osaa supistaisi? Vaikka siellä kauempana joitain aitauksia onkin, ei ne alueet oikein hahmotu samalla tavalla lähestyttävänä ja koettavana osana muuta kotieläinpuistoa.
nevw (2026-06-06 11:23:55+00:00): Hi, is the cafe at unit 2, 122 Kingston Road?
Joseph R P (2026-06-07 04:02:30+00:00): Very short sections of arterial roads like this generally don't need expressway tags, especially since access control doesn't always indicate an expressway as I've previously explained.
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-06-07 04:38:08+00:00): Interesting. Sunset Road does something similar over I-15. Should I remove expressway tags from that one, too?
Joseph R P (2026-06-07 18:34:09+00:00): Yeah, that one's not really an expressway either. If a road is only consequentially access-controlled because of a grade separation like an overpass, it's not necessary to tag it as an expressway since it's just an arterial road with an overpass.
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-06-07 18:58:38+00:00): Okay, I'll remove those tags.
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-06-07 19:17:08+00:00): I have removed those tags here: https://osm.org/changesets/183795800
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-06-07 19:18:00+00:00): Sorry, wrong URL: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183795800
NorthCrab_upload (2026-06-06 08:21:43+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13913932942
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13913932940
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/281927092
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/281927089

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-16 10:57:25+00:00): Reverted adding SEO POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags, likely sourced from Google Maps, in changeset 184175835

https://osm.org/changeset/184175835
FajrAl (2026-06-06 13:03:31+00:00): Akun baru? Terdapat batasan dalam jumlah unggah. Sebaiknya komunikasikan hal ini di forum komunitas.

Selain itu, data yang diunggah sekarang hanya berupa `node`, dan tidak ada garis. Dan ini malah nanti dapat dikategorikan sebagai vandalisme.
De mammoet (2026-06-06 08:33:31+00:00): In de changeset comment staat onterecht dat dit in Helmond is, maar het klopt dat er alleen varkens worden geslacht hier.
Frans S (2026-06-06 09:32:46+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. 
A remark.
You often connect nodes of adjacent buildings to eachother. Please map each building individually and without nodes connected to eachother.
Please square each rectangular building as well.
Best regards
matteobott (2026-06-06 09:47:36+00:00): Hi Frans, thx for your feedback. I'll try to keep them separate as much as I can and to square every building.

Thx and keep up the good work!
limes11 (2026-06-06 09:19:51+00:00): Hallo Yorvik Prestigitator, 

hat der Bücherschrank tatsächlich diesen englischen Eigennamen ?

Schöne Grüße
Yorvik Prestigitator (2026-06-06 09:35:19+00:00): Hallo limes11

Ja, es ist in weißen Buchstaben auf schwarzem Hintergrund über der Tür geschrieben. Vielleicht haben sie sich für die englische text/name entschieden, weil es sich früher um eine englische Telefonzelle handelte. War die Telefonzelle ein Geschenk der Neuwieder Partnerstadt Bromley?

Schöne Grüße
limes11 (2026-06-06 09:42:03+00:00): Spannend, danke!

Im Netz finde ich nichts zu diesem Bücherschrank, möglich ist es natürlich. Die Stadt sollte es wissen. Diese englischen Telefonzellen zu Bücherschränken umzufunktionieren, ist allerdings recht gängig, sieht man immer wieder.

Schöne Grüße