piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NieWnen (2024-08-04 13:23:59+00:00): Duplikat świateł + zostało usunięte przejście, które było dość szczegółowo zmapowane i zastąpione chodnikiem tracąc przy okazji historię obiektu...
Benishbalosh (2024-06-08 11:37:15+00:00): "Exciting progress on #hotosm-project-15690 #APHub #TongaMapping #OMGuru as buildings and roads are being added or modified! This collaborative effort is crucial for enhancing mapping accuracy and accessibility. For more insights into AI governance and its implications, check out this informative primer: [AI Governance Primer: NIST RMF for AI](https://www.aiguardianapp.com/post/ai-governance-primer-nist-rmf-for-ai)."
Benishbalosh (2024-06-22 06:52:24+00:00): Great work on #hotosm-project-15690! The contributions to #APHub and #TongaMapping by #OMGuru, with added or modified buildings and roads, are impressive. For related updates and balance checks, visit https://howemirates.com/fab-balance-check/.
Benishbalosh (2024-07-26 06:46:31+00:00): Great work on the #hotosm-project-15690! The updates to buildings and roads are essential for improving map accuracy. Kudos to #APHub, #TongaMapping, and #OMGuru for their contributions to this important project. Your efforts help enhance our understanding of the region and support various applications and services. visit for social media video editing http://capcutproapk.pro/
rempshaener (2024-11-29 19:11:11+00:00): Hallo,
ich habe das "grassland" wieder auf landuse=gras umgestellt. grassland wäre "Eine unkultivierte Landschaft, deren Bewuchs von Gräsern und Kräutern dominiert ist und die weder gemäht noch künstlich gedüngt wird. " - das ist hier nicht der Fall, die Flächen werden zumindest kurz gehalten.
Viele Grüße
Logan346 (2024-04-17 13:27:40+00:00): Thanks. I'm not sure my changes went through
thopf (2024-04-16 09:57:08+00:00): Die Antwort ist: Ja. In diesem Teil ist sie eine Einbahnstraße für den Zulieferverkehr, wie die Mapillary-Bilder zeigen: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=47.059185679998&lng=15.412585160003&z=17&pKey=882925446914601&focus=photo&x=0.5064292656280573&y=0.44374760011651765&zoom=0
Danke woazboat, für die Mapillary-Aufnahmen!
thopf (2024-04-16 10:04:29+00:00): Genau genommen, müsste man das Einbahn-Tagging sogar nach Norden bis zur Kreuzung mit der Kratkystraße fortführen. Dort befindet sich ein Einfahrt-verboten Schild mit der Zusatztafel "ausgenommen Graz-Linien, Straßendienst und Radfahrer".
thopf (2024-04-16 10:22:11+00:00): Ich habe es entsprechend ausgebessert.
fortera_au (2024-04-15 22:28:32+00:00): Hi there, link roads usually don't have a name associated with them, one option is destination:street to tag the road they're leading to.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150053524
BR_pebble (2024-05-21 11:04:01+00:00): Hello
Sternentraeumer
Thank you for mapping!
I have added Missing buildings 41.1341028, 28.8434977
41.1341371, 28.8435839
41.1341542, 28.8436275
41.1337611, 28.8427974
41.1337687, 28.8427847
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
fortera_au (2024-04-15 22:29:18+00:00): Hi, as per my comment on 150053524, link roads generally don't have names.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150054004
VivienVivien (2024-04-16 07:48:29+00:00): Thanks. I have done like you said for the 2 comments
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150054004
BR_pebble (2024-05-22 06:13:34+00:00): Hello charles chilufya
Thank you for mapping!
I have added missing buildings 41.0613303, 28.8903607;
41.0613643, 28.8901323;
41.0613584, 28.8901405;
41.061031, 28.8904008;
41.0610387, 28.8904233;
41.0610279, 28.8904762;
41.0610337, 28.8904917;
41.0611318, 28.890705;
41.0612541, 28.8909759;
41.0612246, 28.8908421;
41.0611501, 28.8906977;
41.0614759, 28.8905619;
41.0615156, 28.8906561;
41.0615218, 28.8906786;
41.0614182, 28.8906958;
41.0613709, 28.8907379;
41.0616274, 28.8908598;
41.0616992, 28.8910688;
41.0616524, 28.8910531;
41.0616465, 28.8910215;
41.0615256, 28.8909557;
41.0608433, 28.8909587;
41.06097, 28.8909631;
41.0610175, 28.8910456;
41.0625747, 28.8897984. I also added the missing elements to several of your tasks.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
tekim (2024-04-15 21:58:31+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap!  We are happy to have you as part of our community.  Thanks for your edit to the map.  Unfortunately, when editing OpenStreetMap we are not allowed to use Google Maps (which is one of the sources you cited) due to Google's Terms of Service.
tekim (2024-04-15 21:58:51+00:00): reverting a changeset that used a source that is not allowed

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150059604
ArmanB (2024-04-16 13:24:11+00:00): Thanks for letting me know! I have been on location and can verify that the addresses are as indicated. I double-checked against Google Maps and thought I would add that as a source in case anyone wanted to double-check. But the original reason for me to submit the changes was because I had been there, hence why I (also) used the "local knowledge" source tag. I would be happy to resubmit my changes based only on my local knowledge.
tekim (2024-04-16 15:17:36+00:00): Thanks for your friendly reply.  You are free to edit the map using sources that have licenses/terms of service that are compatible with OSM. Unless you are sure that a source has a license/terms of service that is compatible with OSM do not use it.
MikeN (2024-04-15 21:41:57+00:00): Hi - why were the parking lots deleted?  They still exist.
Clemson PATS (2024-04-15 22:41:21+00:00): @MikeN we are transitioning to a new parking app and we are labeling the lots already. A lot of the lots have the wrong numbers and are always changing. With the lots gone it is less to manage on the new app.
MikeN (2024-04-16 02:09:14+00:00): Thanks for clarifying.  Do you plan to add the lots back with the new numbers?    Otherwise the next mapper will add the parking lots again when they notice them missing.
AurélienQ (2024-09-21 12:38:39+00:00): Bonjour, 
Les préfectures sont sur OSM depuis des années. Celles que vous avez ajouté, en plus d'être placées très approximativement, sont donc des doublons.
Je vous laisse les supprimer ?

Aurélien
Albe_ (2024-05-21 10:53:20+00:00): Hei, tuliko use_sidepath vahingossa koko Pähkinämäenkadulle vai jäikö pyörätie (jos on) merkitsemättä?
ssundell (2024-05-22 09:49:54+00:00): Kirottua, taisi mennä toisinpäin: merkkasin ensin tuon Pähkinämäenkadun use_sidepathilla, ja sitten selvittelyjen jälkeen päädyin poistamaan sieltä pyörätien (pohjoispuolella ei ole merkkejä lainkaan, eteläpuolella ovat hiukan hatarat, ja kaupungin mielestä molemmin puolin kulkee kuulemma jalkakäytävä).

Poistan tuon use_sidepath -merkinnän, ajellaan ajoradalla.
marczoutendijk (2024-04-16 07:41:37+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15949

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
Leo Slager (2024-04-16 09:41:44+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
Mazda05 (2024-04-15 23:07:43+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian–Ukrainian_war
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-06 17:30:06+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11820115871/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
ivanbranco (2025-05-06 17:46:00+00:00): Mokas and coffee. I will change it to shop=houseware since it's the most used tag for elements with name=Bialetti (28 shop=houseware vs 12 shop=coffee if I remember well). Even though this way the information that the shop sells coffee as well is lost.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-06 17:55:06+00:00): cafe=yes ?

sells:coffee=yes ?
kapazao (2024-06-20 07:12:18+00:00): Hello, could you explain the change in protect_class?
Your comments in changesets does not help and you should know about a it (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments). It is obvious what you edited, but not why and you did not add any reference.
Regards
CartoNex (2024-06-26 13:08:29+00:00): Hello, the Granada Geopark is declared by the UNESCO. According to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Clasificación, the adequate protect_class for Spain is 98. I'll try to add more info to changesets. Regards.
kapazao (2024-07-01 15:28:07+00:00): Thank you for that reference, now I understand it.
Regards
ivanbranco (2025-07-21 18:42:54+00:00): Hi JohannesMeyerFachwartverein,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11820135634

I think that circumference=28,5 is supposed to be centimeters, am I correct (based on aerial imagery and nearby trees values)? In such case it should be circumference=0.285

thanks and good mapping!
aceman444 (2026-06-08 15:57:21+00:00): Zdravim, to zeleznicne priecestie pre auta https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4418059490 avsak na chodniku ako v skutocnosti vyzera? Je tam nejake znacenie o zeleznicnom priecesti? Ak nie, tak je tam zo zakona zakaz prechodu, nie ze tam este pridate oficialne priecestie.
kornad (2024-04-25 07:44:44+00:00): Hej, dlaczego niektóre platformy przystankowe oznaczasz jako linia (www.openstreetmap.org/way/1272900063), a niektóre jako obszar (www.openstreetmap.org/way/1272900061)? Wprowadza to niepotrzebny chaos... Jak już w całym Gdańsku zmieniasz przystanki tramwajowe to rób to chociaż w sposób spójny.
Dodatkowo w tym miejscu (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1272900063) stosując przystanek jako linię przerywasz ciągłość chodnika, co jest niedopuszczalne (np. w przypadku eksportu ciągów pieszych ten odcinek pozostaje przerwany). Proszę popraw to.
kornad (2024-04-29 09:35:03+00:00): Ponawiam pytanie ^
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2024-12-05 04:42:13+00:00): algumas etiquetas natural=wood nas áreas residenciais, quando devem ser mapeadas com árvores individualmente (pontos), não como áreas.
natural=wood é para formações de matas ou florestas.
ex. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1272902427
gurglypipe (2024-04-15 21:52:16+00:00): Oops, wrong changeset number. I meant changeset 150055604
Binnette (2024-10-15 16:29:46+00:00): Merci d'avoir ajouté la boîte à livre 😇👍
Gen_Gavi (2024-10-16 07:51:17+00:00): Bonne journée  :)
marczoutendijk (2024-04-17 14:42:29+00:00): I have asked Paul B Powers to get in contact with you.
Please solve this problem among each other.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149931673
  
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
VictorIE (2026-05-04 21:02:54+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1272904326
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1272904332/

I realise that they are unconventional, but would it be accurate for these be described as leisure=outdoor_seating ?

Are the sports pitches part of the park area?
b-unicycling (2026-05-05 10:38:52+00:00): I think the woodchips are to soften your fall, if you fall out of the hammock, so I wouldn't call that outdoor seating. Or do you mean seating as in lying in a hammock?
VictorIE (2026-05-05 14:41:52+00:00): Seating as in lying in a hammock or one of the 'sun loungers', not on the wood chips. :)

It seems like a very different park compared to others.
b-unicycling (2026-05-08 22:39:21+00:00): Hm, I guess. But where do you draw the line? A lawn can be an outdoor seating area as well, we still don't map it as such.
DressyPear4 (2024-04-17 05:44:14+00:00): Não adicione áreas genéricas
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150059663
woodpeck (2024-04-16 00:47:29+00:00): In this changeset you have deleted about 100 buildings, without explaining why. Have these buildings really all been demolished?
woodpeck (2024-04-18 12:25:49+00:00): I have reverted this edit now.
Mazda05 (2024-04-15 23:07:33+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian–Ukrainian_war
oLexandr123 (2024-04-16 05:26:22+00:00): И зачем?
Mazda05 (2024-04-16 13:43:33+00:00): Перейдіть за посиланням https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian–Ukrainian_war, там угода спільноти
miluethi (2024-04-16 01:21:04+00:00): Ashley,

Please square out your buildings by pressing the "Q" key. The shapes have to match the satellite imagery. If you don't care, please stop contributing to OSM.
akimapbuilder (2024-04-16 06:53:20+00:00): Removed descriptive name.
akimapbuilder (2024-04-16 06:55:52+00:00): Try to match building geometry from satellite imagery.  Thanks!
miluethi (2024-04-16 01:15:36+00:00): Ashley,
Please square out buildings and match the satellite imagery. Otherwise I'm forced to delete your work.
Thank you.
miluethi (2024-04-16 01:13:22+00:00): Ahley,

Please square out buildings by pressing the "Q" key. Also be more careful with building shapes. They should match the satellite imagery, yours don't. 
Thank you.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-16 18:11:04+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1272112409/history - czy w tym momencie jest tu jakakolwiek budowa?
BCNorwich (2024-04-16 05:33:20+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

If you zoom in you can more precisely draw the houses. You can also square them up, select the house, right click mouse, click the square icon.  Lastly if there's more than one house then the building would be tagged as residential.

Regards Bernard.
rskedgell (2024-04-16 10:29:23+00:00): If you're adding residential gardens, they might be better tagged as leisure=garden + garden:type=residential than landuse=grass.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:garden:type%3Dresidential
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-17 15:42:16+00:00): Have you wanted to end with name:ne=Marma odar (name in Nepali, without setting local name tag)?
eric0497 (2024-04-25 06:28:41+00:00): It's the local (Nepali) name for this place. I have changed from name:en to name:ne. Was that the right procedure to do?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-25 11:18:33+00:00): Yes! Though adding it just as name= tag would be also fine

If you want to keep name:ne then adding additionally name tag with the same value will work well (I am assuming that this language is a dominant language here)
user_19382120 (2024-04-23 16:48:27+00:00): May I ask why you removed bicycle access from the foot ways here?  You're also adding curbs that are incorrect, I've pointed this out to you previously.  The paths here meet everything that  is required to have bicycle access. Removing it to 'Not specified' is illogical. It can be N/S, if you don't know, but you didn't add it, I did.  If it doesn't allow access then please change the tag to 'No'.  Did you mean 'No'?  I'm not aware of any restrictions here, or anywhere you've been removing it.
niobium-fronds (2024-04-29 04:27:44+00:00): Hi, there are a few reasons why I removed it.  Firstly, I understand that it is legal to ride on sidewalk/footpaths but they are not designed for bicycle usage, they are designed for slow moving foot traffic (they are narrow with limited sight lines to driveways and corners).  The inclusion of bikes on the allowed access for sidewalks results in poor navigation for cycling specific apps that use OSM data where the apps are directing usings to ride on sidewalks as they take the bike tag to equal a bike path which these sidewalks are not.  Finally, there is inconsistency across Brisbane with most sidewalks not tagged with bikes and only a few have recently tag with bikes. I think it should remain consistent.
user_19382120 (2024-04-29 06:18:36+00:00): You are simplifying how routing apps use data to determine which ways they choose.  Allowing bicycle=yes is not equal to bicycle=designated. bicycles=designated will always be used over bicycle=yes. 'yes' is only used in the routing apps that I test when that is the easiest connection to either a road or designated way, or, if it is faster (not speed but time).
  Mapping to please routing apps is incorrect and is akin to map for the renderer because you are supplying data for a specific outcome.  Routing apps need to change there routing engines if they are placing bicycles upon paths when there are other better options. Which app(s) are you referring to?
 Every app that I am aware of doesn't place cyclists on sidewalks unless it either connects to a designated way or it is quicker (Except one app, which you choose to be on sidewalks, irrespective of allocated access).  I have personally ridden on this path numerous times, there is no problem with the line of sight. The road however is, as vehicles cut the corner onto the shoulder, so perhaps you should remove bicycle access from the Chalk Street corner.  Fraser Street is a straight line and even though there is a physical connection to the designated cycleway you have your feelings about things, rather than attempting to provide data. 
  If safety is your concern the curbs you have paced here are incorrect, (third time I'm pointing this out). The vision impaired will be happy to find a drop in curb height when you've told them to expect none.   But its good you barred those pesky bike riders from travelling on a path that they will still ride on because of some personal agenda based on fallacies.  Inconsistencies don't form an argument,  it is legally allowed, meets requirements and you need a better argument than an unreliable routing app trying to sell subscriptions.
  If someone wants to go down that path on a bike, they are allowed, legally. But you know better? 
  Why not give the data to the map which is factual and allow decision making to adults, which is their right, rather than making it for them.  You're not a mapping vigilante you're just meddling.
niobium-fronds (2024-04-29 06:38:51+00:00): I will continue to update the map as has been traditionally done where sidewalks are not tagged with bikes.  I won't be responding to any of your comments in future
user_21303518 (2024-04-16 18:47:04+00:00): Apenas fiz a correção do endereço, deixar ele mais completo
DressyPear4 (2024-04-17 05:42:57+00:00): Não remova tag da via, adicione uma linha em paralelo separada
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150063086
mueschel (2024-04-17 17:35:08+00:00): Hi,
it seems something went wrong here - you uploaded hundreds of nodes without valid tags. I guess this was a mistake and these nodes should be deleted?
miluethi (2024-04-16 12:33:40+00:00): Hi Kata, I deleted 2 building shapes of you. They did not match the satellite imagery.
Please square out buildings by pressing the "Q" key. 
Thank you.
Kovoschiz (2024-04-16 06:44:57+00:00): This is actually wrong. The absolute position is correct. It's the two relatively positioned on the west that are inaccurate in the first place.
chrisynch (2024-04-16 07:13:13+00:00): This Wellcome is currently located on 62 Bonham Road, on the ground floor of Yee Ga Court building. west of Tai Yip motors and east of Kingsland Court.
chrisynch (2024-04-16 07:15:15+00:00): confusion is coming from missing building footprints in this block.
Herman Lee (2024-05-11 00:40:01+00:00): 您好，在中国大陆地区进行编辑时，请在name及name:zh中使用简体中文作为tag，对应繁体中文应放在name:zh-Hant中，多谢。
akimapbuilder (2024-04-16 07:04:41+00:00): When adding building, try to follow building footprints and match the geometry. Cheers!
nevw (2024-04-16 05:26:14+00:00): There are a couple more sections of Connor Street at the eastern end that need updating too
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/771415108#map=19/-28.65187/151.94024&layers=D
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/566678276#map=19/-28.65147/151.93899&layers=D
rskedgell (2024-04-16 10:23:31+00:00): These were already mapped as highway=footway, which is implicitly bicycle=no. Adding bicycle=dismount will have no effect on OSM-based routers, which weren't likely to be sending bicycles along these paths anyway.

It can be helpful to tag footways as bicycle=no where it is explicitly signed with TSRGD diagram 951 signs (Riding of pedal cycles prohibited). In these cases, the signs can also be added as a node on the way nearest to the sign's physical location, tagged as traffic_sign=GB:951 + bicycle=no

You may find this useful:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#United_Kingdom
rskedgell (2024-04-16 10:50:38+00:00): In OSM in the UK, highway=footway already implies bicycle=no, so adding bicycle=dismount has no effect on routing,

None of the objects edited in this changeset are footways in the legal sense, so Highway Code Rule 64 and s. 72 Highway Act 1835 are entirely irrelevant here.

As far as I know, none of these streets are maintainable at public expense, so the degree and modes of permissive access are at the discretion of the landowner. I would rather see a definitive statement on that access from someone with authority to make it.
dankarran (2024-04-16 19:32:01+00:00): I've had another wander around this evening (I needed the exercise anyway :) and I think the only section that is explicitly "pedestrians only" is the main path through Botanic Square.

https://ibb.co/n8VK0FV
https://ibb.co/mzCHwBf

Other paths either state "no vehicular access" or don't state anything at all (apart from e-scooters being banned at both the northern and southern end of the estate).

https://ibb.co/t8Jy81M
https://ibb.co/sP5wfr2

I'm not proposing to tag any of these as shared cycle paths, but I also don't think they need the bicycle=dismount tag added explicitly.
mrgeolikesmaps (2024-04-16 22:25:47+00:00): Dan, thanks for the pictures.

That's correct, there is a sign there given this is private property and speeding food delivery cyclists were using it as a shortcut. There is a road that goes around the LCI, which cyclists/motor vehicles can use. 

The issue, which is being raised with Ballymoore the property developer is that cyclists and mopeds, don't follow the highway code (presumably, because their unaware it applies), but the cost to educate people is placed on lease holders to pay for signage. 

I've asked, and the walkways aren't shared, and clearly not advertised for cyclists which is what creates ambiguity for people who aren't informed about the law. 

However, as they're clearly labelled with "Pedestrian" walkway, and exclude cycling, the dismount label is there because that's the law! 

Section 3. 3. Walking, cycling or riding in shared spaces

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-changes-you-need-to-know-from-29-january-2022
rskedgell (2024-04-17 07:25:55+00:00): The set of people who don't understand the Highway Code includes those who use Highway Code Rule 64 as a spurious justification for asserting the existence of a prohibition of cycling on anything other than pavements/sidewalks.
Toni100 (2024-04-21 22:39:12+00:00): Moi, ja tervetuloa OpenStreetMapiin! Hienoa kun kävit muokkaamassa, osoite ei kuitenkaan ole oikeassa muodossa. addr:street kohtaan kuuluu vain tuo "Harjattulantie 84", kävin korjaamassa sen.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150066412
Toni100 (2024-04-21 22:36:29+00:00): Moi! Hienoa kun kävit muokkaamassa, katso kuitenkin oikeaoppinen aukioloaikojen formaatti täältä https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150066418
Mazda05 (2024-04-16 13:41:33+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian–Ukrainian_war
Toni100 (2024-04-21 22:26:49+00:00): Moi ja tervetuloa! Lisäisitkö ensi kerralla myös lyhyen selityksen mitä olet muokannut.
Toni100 (2024-04-21 22:43:57+00:00): Moi, ilmeisesti lisäsit Hookin kahteen kertaan? Kävin kumoamassa muokkauksesi.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150066627
ZLima12 (2025-10-17 00:57:53+00:00): Hi,

Why did you remove ref="IL 137" from the ways here?
Mundilfari (2025-10-18 19:27:53+00:00): because the ref sits on the relation (1656989)