piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Toni100 (2024-10-20 22:23:10+00:00): Hei! Reipasta kartoittamista, mutta miksi olet poistanut Fixme tageja, mm. Turun ratapihalta? Huomasin myös että olet poistanut olemassa olevia asioita, esimerkiksi toisen kartoittamia huoneita Turun yliopistossa, kauppatorin portaat ja mainospylonin. Älä poista niitä, ja jos poistat, niin perustelethan miksi se on poistettu.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155829043
liljaadeliina (2024-11-20 13:30:24+00:00): Kiitos viestistäsi.
aseidel (2024-08-27 15:32:34+00:00): Liebe:r mschoene,
bitte bei straßenbegleitenden Radwegen und freigegebenen Fußwegen immer den oneway-Tag ergänzen.
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
Vinber-Pro (2024-09-17 16:41:14+00:00): Coucou,
vu le nom https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311507088/history ne peut-on mettre access=private ?
syntex (2024-10-23 18:43:27+00:00): Jakiego osiedla?
syntex (2024-10-28 19:12:57+00:00): Zmiany wycofano
InsertUser (2024-08-27 13:47:14+00:00): What is your source on the restricted access swimming area? Land owners can normally only kick people out down to the high water mark.
jpeterson1346 (2024-08-28 11:41:18+00:00): I’m guessing my interpretation of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dswimming_area was wrong. It’s simply a swimming area with a marked floating outer boundary. There is no territorial claim or access restrictions I am aware of.
Filip009 (2024-08-30 05:43:33+00:00): Prečo by to malo byť track a nie service?
Sp1deR (2024-08-30 06:34:10+00:00): Je to neudrziavana cesta, celkom prudka, nevhodna pre auto smerom hore (vyjde iba 4x4). Cestou dole sa da, preto je lepsia pristupova cesta z druhej strany, no neviem ako inak nastavit prioritu cesty zo zapadnej strany od Ubytovania Klinger.
Filip009 (2024-08-30 06:40:23+00:00): Okej, chápem, vďaka za vysvetlenie.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-08-27 13:10:58+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12139893231

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
SomeoneElse (2024-08-28 10:09:46+00:00): Hello,
You've deleted NCN266 here - is that no longer a thing?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2024-08-28 10:10:28+00:00): (and NCN265)
user_9916803 (2024-08-28 10:58:50+00:00): correct - those old NCN routes have been removed from the network and have now been resigned as the South Somerset Cycleway. This mirrors the official public facing NCN routes on Ordnance Survey mapping which show Sustrans' public facing route alignments.
SomeoneElse (2024-08-28 11:02:28+00:00): So should they still be there as "rcn"s, or are those already mapped as something else?
user_9916803 (2024-08-28 11:08:40+00:00): I've changed these sections to 'south somerset cycleway' which is marked as a regional route. I'm not sure if it's best labelled as regional or local, but it isn't part of the NCN at this point. Hope that helps, sorry if I haven't explained well.
Alliegaytor (2024-09-01 07:24:11+00:00): I've fixed the relation order as well as remove the "forward" roles. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156041420 

Does ID add "forward" roles to added ways on ptv2 routes, or did you manually add them?
0235 (2024-08-31 20:38:20+00:00): Why were the tags on the nodes removed? It is common practice to tag the node where the wheel stops, and the way? Many of the ways were the incorrect direction, and adding data to the node made the data clear.
kapazao (2024-09-02 14:14:48+00:00): I think the wiki makes it clear, as I indicated in the source of this changeset. The tagging should not be in the way and the node so it would be duplicated.
If the problem is the direction of the way you are free to fix it, I did not checked that this time.
Regards
0235 (2024-09-02 15:16:16+00:00): Ok thank you. I think the wiki is a bit confusing, especially as the parking position numbers are at the begining of the way and at the point where it ends, but you are right it can make the data a bit cluttered.

I will check that the ways are all facing the correct direction, but from a quick look yesterday they seemed to be correct.

Thank you for the information :)
mga_geo (2024-08-28 05:17:16+00:00): Bonjour,
Vous venez de nouveau de casser plusieurs relations route=bus (pour le réseau STAR  r14703424,r4011266,r4011267,r4021025,r4021026,r4021037,r4021038,r1743067,r1743068,r406378,r1268456,r399697,r1268241).
Pourriez-vous répondre quels sont les objectifs de ces modifications ?
Marc
EUMapper (2024-08-30 11:46:49+00:00): Bonjour,
Excusez-moi, j'ai décidé de ne plus essayer d'améliorer les routes nationales et Autoroutes en France. Désolé si j'ai cassé qch.Merci
eggie (2024-08-27 15:04:54+00:00): Dag io Jeff
Wanneer er een G7 bord staat en/of alleen bedoeld is voor voetgangers dan highway=footway gebruiken. Staat er geen bord en is de status onduidelijk. Dan highway=path gebruiken. Dat laatste routeert ook voor fietsers. 

Het pad dat je hebt ingetekend eindigt bij een fietspad met bruggetje. Ook daar staat geen bord fietspad en kan dan beter als highway=path getagd worden.
Veel doorsteken in een wijk zijn ook bedoeld voor fietsers.. weliswaar wordt dat fietsverkeer dan afgeremd door slingerhekjes.
Up to you om het te beoordelen.

MVG
eggie
ItsOnlyJeff (2024-08-27 15:32:48+00:00): Hi Eggie, bedankt voor de feedback! Ik zal erop letten. Groetjes, Jeffrey
gszkr (2026-06-05 15:18:42+00:00): Kolejne zmiany naniesione z danych z ... no włąśnie, skąd? Nie z Geoportal 2: Ewidencja budynków WMS, bo tam tych wiat nie ma. NIe z ulicy, jak przy przywracaniu przeniesionych firm kiedyś Pan twierdził, bo by Pan widział co to jest.
Frans S (2024-08-27 14:19:02+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
Please do not connect nodes of buildings to each other. Just keep them separate.
Best regards
d3mol3k (2024-08-28 19:51:38+00:00): Co to za droga w budowie? Ulica czy tunel dla pieszych?
Kuba__PL (2024-08-29 02:06:58+00:00): tunel dla pieszych
d3mol3k (2024-08-29 19:24:42+00:00): to proponuję dodać jeden ważny szczegół - construction=footway by inni wiedzieli co tu będzie ;)
tkk (2024-08-28 06:02:34+00:00): Zdravim, opet se vyskytl stejny problem u ruseni informacni tabule. Prosim tedy o zvazeni, zda tabule pripadne rozcestniky ve StreetComplete kontrolovat (resp. oznacovat jako zrusene). Dale prosim o informaci, zda chybi jen ten tato tabule, nebo jich chybi vice ci je naucna stezka uplne zrusena, pokud k tomu nejake info mate. Diky moc.
Vojtěch Fošnár (2024-08-28 06:29:21+00:00): Ahoj, tabuli jako takovou jsem tam nikde neviděl, možná ale došlo ke stejnému problému jako u Silver A, že je to něco v zemi :) Dneska budu mít kolem cestu tak si snad vzpomenu to omrknout
Vojtěch Fošnár (2024-08-29 08:53:13+00:00): Cedule jsou sice v horším stavu, ale stezka tam je, sorry za přehlídnutí.

Založil jsem https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/5851
tkk (2024-08-29 09:03:06+00:00): Diky, jen prosim pro jistotu - cedule cislo 8 je tedy komplet zrusena, zbytek NS je funkcni - tj. smazat uzel pro ceduli 8, zbytek nechat, jak je. Spravne? Diky moc.
Udarian (2024-08-30 01:59:50+00:00): residential landuse should be mapped as on large area like the way you deleted in this commit, this is because the whole area (including the roads) is residential, not just the part with the homes, the whole of it. land use is ultimately mostly decided by the county and the developers, we just map what they decided. OSM is a map of the world as it is, so we must endeavor to map the world as it is, this is why we shouldn't map landuse as individual small areas but as the whole area because what land is used for what is decided by the county in the zoning and use of the various areas and when mapping land use that is what we are mapping and the land that the roads are on is still part of the land that is being used as part of the neighborhood which is the larger area. 

if you have any comments feel free to contact me seperatly. 

happy mapping,
Udar.
kitsee (2024-08-27 18:42:48+00:00): Hi Ade,
Could you please add more descriptive comments to your changesets in future. its hard to tell what you are changing.
ade9 (2024-08-28 06:40:03+00:00): Ah yes of course, sorry
alesarrett (2024-08-28 06:02:17+00:00): Ciao Uragano, ho visto che in questo changeset hai inserito vari edifici con tag building=house, che indica una casa unifamiliare indipendente. A occhio vari di questi edifici sono invece condomini (ad es. questo https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311532850) che dovrebbero essere taggati con building=apartments. Se, come capita spesso, si mappa da immagini aeree e non si è sicuri, meglio lasciare semplicemente il default building=yes.
Zrop (2024-08-28 16:25:42+00:00): Hallo eköln,
für Baustellen ist "landuse=brownfield" die falsche Bezeichnung. Baugebiete werden mit "landuse=construction" + "construction=*" (hier wohl  "construction=residential") getaggt.
Schaust Du Dir das bitte nochmal an und korrigierst es.

Zrop
unzow (2024-08-29 17:07:23+00:00): fixed as advised
onovy (2024-08-27 21:32:31+00:00): Revertnul jsem:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155852265

Plakety na zemi stale jsou, odhadem chyba StreetComplete editoru?
Vojtěch Fošnár (2024-08-28 05:44:50+00:00): ne, to je moje chyba, díky za povšimnutí
onovy (2024-08-28 06:47:40+00:00): malickost, stane se :)
gurglypipe (2024-08-27 15:17:39+00:00): Hiya, thanks for the edit here. Unfortunately changing foot=yes to foot=no here is not correct — the `foot` tag reflects the legal status of foot access, not its routing priority, and hence foot=no means that pedestrians using the carriageway is legally not allowed, which is not the case in Lancaster Uni.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:foot for documentation of the `foot` key.

To solve the routing problem, it would be useful to know what routing software the user was using, and what their source and destination were. Decent routing software should heavily prioritise pedestrian ways (such as footpaths and separately-mapped pavements). It might be the case that something on the route was not mapped correctly (i.e. was tagged as if it were impassable to pedestrians even though it actually is) so the router thought the only possible route was to use one of the vehicle roundabouts.

Hope that makes sense, thanks
gurglypipe (2024-08-27 15:18:24+00:00): I’ve reverted the original changes (as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155837143) because they were not correct, but am happy to work with you to find a better solution, if you can provide the details above :)
Dezza (2024-08-28 07:26:26+00:00): I suspect that the issue is that some pedestrian footways are not connected to the rest of the network.
If you take a look for example at the junction of North Drive and County Avenue, the only route for a pedestrian is around the back of a recycling/ cycle shed. Presumably though the pedestrians can cross straight across the entrance of County Avenue.
Presumably something like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:crossing%3Dunmarked and the associated tags would need to be added across the entrance of this junction, and others
iandees (2024-08-27 16:24:48+00:00): Hi there, driveways are useful and important information to include in OpenStreetMap. Please don't delete them.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155835749
gscholz (2024-08-28 19:09:21+00:00): Hi Esdras24,
your recent changesets have created a lot of errors regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=2.60655&lat=6.57336&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?

May be you like to reflect about how to map a building?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buildings


JOSM internal validator helps to prevent uploading such errors:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator

Kind regards
Guido
kitsee (2024-08-27 14:50:24+00:00): this reverts changeset #155834346
gscholz (2024-08-28 19:09:17+00:00): Hi Esdras24,
your recent changesets have created a lot of errors regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=2.60655&lat=6.57336&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?

May be you like to reflect about how to map a building?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buildings


JOSM internal validator helps to prevent uploading such errors:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator

Kind regards
Guido
demon_box (2024-08-27 19:40:13+00:00): Hi Sebastian, PLEASE, PLEASE, in Italy you don't have to tag the address on the entire building: it's completely wrong! In Italy the addr:housenumber indicate only the point of entrance (the door) to the building and NOT the entire building. So you have to tag the address with a node near the building but detached from it.
Only if you know EXACTLY the position of the entrance you can tag the address on a node at the exact point on the perimeter of the polygon. Ok?
I had already fix your errors. Thanks.
demon_box (2024-08-27 19:45:15+00:00): If is the "Every Door Android 5.1" smartphone app that leads you to make these mistakes (I think so...), PLEASE DON'T USE THIS APP!! It's not an accurate work!! Try Josm pc app: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/
THANKS!
JesseFTW (2024-12-29 17:33:07+00:00): Why did you remove https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/332874228 ? The Bing imagery still seems to show a track there.
NeisBot (2024-08-27 15:34:38+00:00): Hi maxjvjohansson, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 16 highway(s)
- 14 natural(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=155838010
pitscheplatsch (2024-09-09 09:21:39+00:00): #golf #remapping
mikedld (2024-12-21 16:55:55+00:00): Hi. You seem to be using outdated imagery from 2018, the roads have changed since then. Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160476691
NotAvailable (2024-08-28 13:05:54+00:00): سلام چرا خیابان های این مجتمع مسکونی را حذف کردی؟
تو توضیحات هم فقط نوشتی اصلاح...
ali azami (2024-08-28 14:16:05+00:00): خیابان نیستن حیاط بلوک مسکونی قابل ورود برای عموم نیست
NotAvailable (2024-08-28 14:36:46+00:00): یه مجتمع مسکونی اونجاست و همه میتونن وارد بشن.
شما با حذف خیابان محل زندگی/مسکونی باعث میشی ورودی مجتمع و بلوک ها از بین بره.
لطفا دیگه خیابان های مجتمع های مسکونی را حذف نکن.
eggie (2024-08-27 16:06:52+00:00): Dag Braandon

Het zou zo maar kunnen, maar waarom maakt die weg nu een slinger.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=155838503

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-08-27 16:16:20+00:00): Wegdeel gecorrigeerd
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-08-29 00:02:07+00:00): Why are you removing construction tags?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155839309
rab (2024-09-05 17:04:04+00:00): you should not combine ways with different tags
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/191505954
eggie (2024-08-27 16:20:20+00:00): Dag Tom.. Ik heb de poi verplaatst naar adresnode Vlasakker 2a. 
MVG
eggie
Tom van Dijk (2024-08-27 17:35:27+00:00): Hallo eggie, ik begrijp niet echt waarom, omdat het adres Vlasakker 2a hoort bij een huis in de buurt, en niet bij de friettent zelf. Die staat los als een soort-van container naast het woonerf daar. Maar als dit wel juist is, dan bedankt voor de hulp.
eggie (2024-08-27 18:03:23+00:00): Dag Tom...

Dat adres stond al op die container.. maar ik zal straks nog even in de BAG kijken of het nummer correct is.
Groet..
eggie
eggie (2024-08-27 19:21:48+00:00): Volgens het Kadaster is Vlasakker 2a toch echt die container van die friettent.

https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/?searchQuery=vlasakker+2a&objectId=1924200002150521&theme=BRT+Achtergrond&geometry.x=69909.29722609969&geometry.y=419111.7491352212&zoomlevel=15.136

Er is geen woning met nr 2a

MVG
eggie
Tom van Dijk (2024-08-28 15:43:12+00:00): Okee, mijn fout, dank je wel.
eggie (2024-08-28 15:47:00+00:00): No problem 👍
user_20523254 (2024-08-27 16:30:47+00:00): wrong source specified
source: bing
mcliquid (2024-08-28 12:30:30+00:00): Hi, wenn die Verkehrszeichen hier geändert worden sind in den letzten 5 Monaten, müsste man den Wert für "traffic_sign" noch anpassen und "footway=sidewalk" ist dann unstimmig.
Vor einem halben Jahr war noch folgende Beschilderung: https://trafficsigns.osm-verkehrswende.org/?signs=DE%3A239%7CDE%3A1022-10

Siehe: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1266039518
pitscheplatsch (2024-08-27 18:22:53+00:00): Wow, that's a lot of data :-/
pitscheplatsch (2024-08-27 18:25:04+00:00): Wow, that's a lot of data :-/
pitscheplatsch (2024-08-27 18:25:11+00:00): Wow, that's a lot of data :-/
pitscheplatsch (2024-08-27 18:25:20+00:00): Wow, that's a lot of data :-/
pitscheplatsch (2024-08-27 18:26:09+00:00): I am curious, is this a data import or not?
marc__marc (2024-09-01 13:47:17+00:00): Bonjour,
vous avez oublié d'ajouter le way pour certains linéaires qui n'ont que des points, par ex https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12140471693
voulez-vous les reprendre ? si oui voici un moyen facile de les trouver https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Qwt
Cordialement,
Marc
PierZen (2024-09-01 21:02:10+00:00): Merci Marc d'avoir repéré ces noeuds orphelins. Je m'en occupe. Dans JOSM,  mon fichier de travail contient des chemins non encore envoyés, et étrangement lors d'envoi partiel de chemins, des noeuds ont été envoyés sans le chemin.  Cela peut être venu d'un envoi interrompu.
JS Bédard (2024-09-04 18:21:53+00:00): Salut Pierrre-Félix ca va? J'ai vu que tu as remis ce chemin comme une route principale/tertiaire. Ce chemin est abandonné et passement seulement en quad ou motocross, le chemin a à peine 2m de largeur par endroit, et ayant été 2-3 fois dormir à Casey depuis 2022 et discutant avec Naor le propriétaire d'Aero-Venture c'est aussi ce qu'il me confirme que c'est impraticable/impassable en voirture. Je te suggère de remettre le tout en "track", bonne fin de saison et fais-moi signe si tu viens rider dans le coin de QC on ira ensemble! Cheers
Pierre-Felix Breton (2024-09-04 18:34:27+00:00): Tu as entierement raison!  Merci de porter cela a mon attention.  Je corriges a l'instant!
JS Bédard (2024-09-04 18:37:09+00:00): merci!
Pierre-Felix Breton (2024-09-04 18:42:09+00:00): regarde si c'est ok?  J'ai eu une discussion interessante avec d'autre utilisateurs qui ont suggeres d'utiliser le tag abandonned en plus  (voir ici:  https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/forest-roads-corrections-updates-insights-needed/118079/16)

Si j'ai oublie des segments, laisse moi savoir - ou soit a l'aise de les corriger.  Merci encore
OquirrhMountainMan (2025-12-08 07:12:41+00:00): Could someone get it worked out so clicking on the Stansbury Island, UT node would create a boundary similar to what Antelope Island, UT has?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-08 11:48:24+00:00): not sure what you mean - and it seems unrelated to edit made here

you may want to ask on https://community.openstreetmap.org/
DeFra85 (2024-12-18 16:34:43+00:00): Sorry, aber was soll das oneway=yes und oneway:foot=no?
Ist es nicht einfach nur oneway:bicycle=yes
nurdafur (2024-12-18 19:08:21+00:00): Hallo DeFra85
Es gab vor 2, 3 Jahren im Forum eine Diskusion dazu. Ergebnis war, dass für foot das oneway in OSM nicht gilt und es deshalb an dem Weg nur ein oneway=yes braucht. Wer will, der kann aber zusätzlich noch ein oneway:foot=no zufügen. So mache ich es seither.
DeFra85 (2024-12-18 19:23:47+00:00): Aber dein oneway=yes soll ja anscheinend nur für den Fahrradstreifen auf dem Pfad gelten, oder? Wieso dann nicht oneway:bicycle=yes ???
Und im wiki finde ich zu oneway:foot= auch nicht wirklich etwas. Sonst werden Entscheidungen aus dem Forum dort auch immer eingearbeitet
nurdafur (2024-12-18 19:52:27+00:00): Es landet leider nicht alles im Wiki, das diskutiert wird. Ein wunderbares Beispiel dazu ist diese Diskusion: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mini-roundabout/7524
Fast 400 Diskusionsbeiträge vor beinahe 2 Jahren und es gab nie ein proposal, um das Wiki anzupassen.
limes11 (2024-08-27 17:04:25+00:00): Hallo, 

danke für den Eintrag. Bitte darauf achten bei den Wochentagen die englischen Abkürzungen zu verwenden, also Mo/Tu/We/Th/Fr/Sa/Su.

sport=luftsport gibt es in der Form nicht. sport=ultralight_aviation wäre eine Option, die hier aber nicht zutrifft. 

Ich denke, club=aviation passt hier besser, normales Fliegen fällt im osm-Sinne nicht unter Sport.

Viele Grüße
pitfire (2024-08-28 04:49:35+00:00): Hi FL380,

bitte "Key:phone" noch ins  international (ITU-T E.164) format ändern.
Findest Du hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone
VG
mcliquid (2024-08-28 12:32:01+00:00): Grüß dich, da war deine Abfrage wohl nicht auf Deutschland beschränkt:
https://osm.org/way/68959977
https://osm.org/way/67609312
wambacher (2024-08-28 13:05:07+00:00): oops, ja da ist was schief gelaufen.

nun denn. jetzt weiss ich wenigstens wo ich heute noch was zu korrigieren habe ;)

Danke und Gruß
wambacher (2024-08-28 13:12:55+00:00): beide erledigt. Das passiert, wenn man von einem Projekt (PLZ-Grenzen in Frankreich) zu einem anderen Projekt (Wrong Citynames in Deutschland) wechselt und dabei vergisst in JOSM das alte Datenlayer zu löschen.
Also pure Schlamperei. :(
mcliquid (2024-09-04 17:16:42+00:00): War im Urlaub, danke dir! :)
GinaroZ (2024-08-29 10:38:19+00:00): Hi, the buildings with two housenumbers should either be split or two separate nodes added for each number (as 1/2 is not the actual address) and also addr:housename should be used instead for those with names. :)
jSeke (2024-08-30 09:53:22+00:00): Thanks! Ive undone these changes and will be sure to do this in future
jSeke (2024-08-30 14:32:48+00:00): does this also apply to names of courts/flats?
map per (2024-09-01 19:44:40+00:00): Wegen review_requested:
Die Änderung sieht gut aus, danke!
LudovicG (2024-10-17 08:21:03+00:00): Bonjour
Pour le restaurant, vous pouviez peut-être laisser un was:amenity=restaurant et modifier le name en old_name. Cela permet de s'y retrouver pour ceux qui connaissait les lieux d'avant (voire de faire une carte dans le temps avec le tag name:2001-2010 par exemple)
aseidel (2024-08-28 07:07:58+00:00): Liebe:r mschoene,
das Tagging der Radverkehrsinfrastruktur entlang der L234 (Amelinghausen-Oldendorf und weiter) war fehlerhaft. Innerorts in Oldendorf sowie auch in Amelinghausen (hier mit Ausnahme des letzten Abschnitts vor der Lüneburger Straße) existiert nur ein nach Süden freigegebener Fußweg, der als separate Linie gemappt ist; es gibt keine explizite Radinfrastruktur (daher cycleway:both=no). Außerorts gibt es eine benutzungspflichtige, separat gemappte Radinfrastruktur rechts neben der Straßenlinie (cycleway:right=separate, bicycle=use_sidepath). Tags wie cycleway:right=track an der Hauptlinie oder andere track-Angaben passen hier nicht). Ich habe die Tags entsprechend angepasst, bitte aber noch vervollständigen: width=* auf dem Radweg und dem freigegebenen Fußweg; alle #lgmaps-Tags auf der Straße innerorts (da diese mit dem Rad befahren werden darf).
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
eggie (2024-08-27 19:30:02+00:00): Dag IOJeff

Lijkt me oke.
Kom als ondergrond in de wiki wel dit tegen
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:surface=rubber

 ipv rubbercrump
Denk niet dat het highway=path er zo doorheen loopt. 

MVG
eggie