piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2025-05-04 19:47:27+00:00): Restored addressnode... Your edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=165815356
DiogoBaptista98 (2025-10-02 02:27:06+00:00): Dou conta desta tua errada edição sem qualquer fonte, este edifício a construir não será a sede do banco de Portugal como erroneamente denominaste mas sim a sede da fidelidade. A sede do banco de Portugal será num dos edifícios a nascer no terreno da avenida da republica
topolusitania (2025-10-02 11:00:54+00:00): Caro Diogo Baptista, é sempre um prazer ler os teus comentários sobre as minhas edições.
O edifício em questão foi projectado para ser a sede da Fidelidade. Depois disso mudou de mãos, tendo sido comprado pelo Banco de Portugal. Numa primeira fase foi dito que seria a futura sede do banco ( quando a edição foi feita) .
Depois houve uma forte polémica na imprensa sobre as obras de adaptação da actual estrutura, e o Mário Centeno decidiu comprar um terreno na antiga feira popular para "fazer uma sede de raiz" e este edifício alojar serviços auxiliares. Quanto às fontes, basta fazeres uma busca pela NET e verificarás por ti quanto precipitada e errada é a tua observação. Sempre ao dispor para tirar as tuas dúvidas . Cumprimentos. Topolusitania
PS A Fidelidade anda a procura de nova sede, mas como tem novo dono, pode ser que a busca seja suspensa
DiogoBaptista98 (2025-10-02 12:23:17+00:00): É espantoso como consegue escrever com tanta certeza… e ainda assim estar errado. Esse edifício nunca foi dado como sede do Banco de Portugal, será a sede da Fidelidade, em construção desde pelo menos 2021 e já perto da inauguração. O Banco de Portugal terá sede noutro local, no terreno da antiga Feira Popular (Parcela A), onde a primeira pedra só foi lançada agora, em 2025.
Acresce que nenhuma fonte foi por si apresentada e não existe qualquer notícia pública que suporte a afirmação de que esse edifício teria sido comprado pelo Banco de Portugal para serviços auxiliares. Para se poupar a mais lapsos, deixo-lhe a fonte que desmonta o seu discurso: https://eco.sapo.pt/2025/01/27/banco-de-portugal-fecha-acordo-com-fidelidade-para-construir-sede-na-antiga-feira-popular/
DiogoBaptista98 (2025-10-02 13:11:07+00:00): Convém também esclarecer outro ponto: o edifício em causa está de facto a ser promovido como futura sede da Fidelidade, mas não será ocupado integralmente pela companhia. Segundo a própria informação oficial do projeto https://stack.inspacexr.com/projects/fosun-hive-and-fidelidade/fidelidade-hq#, cerca de um terço do edifício será destinado a outras empresas. Ou seja, nem sequer faz sentido apresentá-lo como se fosse um imóvel exclusivamente da Fidelidade, a realidade é mais equilibrada e está bem documentada. Diria que o mais correto será não dar nome ao edifício mas usar nodes para as empresas que ocuparão o edifício como foi feito no EXEO por exemplo.
DiogoBaptista98 (2025-10-02 13:14:23+00:00): Acrescento ainda haver aqui uma contradição sua demasiado evidente para passar despercebida: por um lado editou este edifício como sendo a futura sede do Banco de Portugal, por outro afirma agora que serviria apenas para serviços auxiliares. Nenhuma das versões é correta.
Os factos são claros: este edifício será a sede da Fidelidade (ainda que com parte do espaço ocupado por outras empresas), enquanto a nova sede do Banco de Portugal ficará no terreno da antiga Feira Popular, cuja primeira pedra foi lançada apenas em 2025.
topolusitania (2025-10-02 16:02:03+00:00): Faltou te colocar mais alguma informação, do ECO:
Fidelidade põe à venda futura sede por mais de 200 milhões. Amancio Ortega, dono da Zara, está na corrida
Alberto Teixeira
6 Agosto 2024
Como vês as coisas tem um começo, um meio e veremos como acabam
Citando o poeta: 
Erros meus, má Fortuna, Amor ardente
Em minha perdição se conjuraram;
Os erros e a Fortuna sobejaram,
Que para mim bastava Amor somente.

Tudo passei; mas tenho tão presente
A grande dor das cousas que passaram,
Que as magoadas iras me ensinaram
A não querer já nunca ser contente.

Errei todo o discurso de meus anos;
Dei causa (a) que a Fortuna castigasse
As minhas mal fundadas esperanças.

De amor não vi senão breves enganos.
Oh! Que tanto pudesse que fartasse
Este meu duro Gênio de vinganças!
Cumprimentos 
TL
habi (2025-10-08 08:33:15+00:00): 545 / 5,000
Ciao pps345
You've recorded the center points of individual cantons here.
These center points can actually be calculated from the cantonal outlines (e.g., for Bern https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1686344 or Valais https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1686699).
If the center points are specifically marked, e.g., as in https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7616510930, this stone or plaque can of course be recorded, but I wouldn't add "just" the center point as a separate `tourist=attraction` in OpenStreetMap.
Can you tell us what you're aiming to do here?
Greetings from Bern,
habi
habi (2025-10-14 18:18:39+00:00): Since the center points of the cantons can be calculated from the present data, it is not necessary to add them to OSM.
They were removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173255219
If (and only if) there's a physical feature present at the center point of a canton or municipality, then this can be mapped of course.
I did so in https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7616510930/history/1
Fraxi (2025-05-04 19:39:46+00:00): Тоест operator:wikidata
Marc_ch (2025-10-08 10:44:36+00:00): Bonjour,
est-ce qu'il y a vraiment quelque chose à visiter à cet endroit ou tu as rajouté simplement un point calculé comme étant le centre sans rien sur le terrain ?
Salutations,
Marc
pps345 (2025-10-08 19:54:18+00:00): Bonjour Marc,
oui, c'est un point virtuel et calculé comme dans d'autres cantons.
Il est tout de même mentionné sur les pages suivantes pour faire des randonnées.

https://www.schweizer-wanderwege.ch/fr/randonnee-guidee/2664/Le-centre-du-canton-de-Fribourg
https://www.wandersite.ch/geographischer_mittelpunkt.html

Je n'ai pas les moyens de contrôler si cela est correct.

Salutations,
Peter
Marc_ch (2025-10-09 19:58:44+00:00): Bonsoir Peter,
Merci pour ton retour.
Je ne vois rien sur la première page qui dit qu'il y aurait quelque chose à cet endroit. par conséquent il n'est pas correct de dire qu'il y a une attraction touristique que les gens pourraient aller voir. sinon on pourrait ajouter le centre des districts, des communes, des villages des forets.
Mais tous ces lieux sans présence d'un élément touristique induisent les utilisateurs en erreur tout en pouvant être calculé par qui le souhaite.
Salutations,
Marc
Metzor (2025-05-05 18:16:22+00:00): Hallo Fabian!

So wie du es gemacht hast (highway=construction), tragen viele Baustellen ein. Du kannst es also so lassen, wie du es eingetragen hast.

Ich finde, es gibt eine noch schöner Lösung. Diese sagt auch, ob Fußgänger den Bürgersteig noch nutzen können.

Lies dir doch einfach mal die wiki-Seite durch:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dconstruction

Wenn dir das auch gefällt, kannst du ja die nächste Baustelle so eintragen.

Schöne Grüße und schön, dass du immer noch dabei bist!
Metzor
Fabian007 (2025-05-12 17:36:38+00:00): Hallo Metzor,

Danke, für die Info!

Ich werde es bei der nächsten Baustelle eintragen, den link, wo du mir auch geschickt hast.

Aber danke, für das weiterhelfen, meines Anliegen!

Ich wünsche dir einen schönen Abend noch!

Mit freundlichen Grüßen Fabianbuecheler
Metzor (2025-05-12 21:09:33+00:00): Hallo Fabian!

Immer gerne :-)

Dir auch noch einen schönen Abend!

Viele Grüße
 Metzor
Fabian007 (2025-05-17 10:47:27+00:00): Hallo Metzor,

Danke, dir auch einen schönen Samstag noch!

Mit Freundlichen Grüßen Fabianbuecheler
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-16 07:18:53+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other tagging for POI in changeset 184167395

https://osm.org/changeset/184167395
meongseolin (2025-05-05 04:59:49+00:00): 您好，你可不可以把两者关系的全部边界搞完再加关系啊？（只做一条边界不是负责任的边界编辑；且因为不封闭而无法在layersfr正常渲染）
meongseolin (2025-05-05 05:01:07+00:00): 实在不行的话也可以看看旁边的中心城区的乡级边界是怎么搞的。
Tadasuki (2025-05-05 09:38:31+00:00): 感谢您的指正，昨天太晚我只画了一条就先睡觉了，今天我会对照政区图把边界画完。
meongseolin (2025-05-06 14:55:50+00:00): 主要是湖北已经有两个乡级界关系不规范编辑了（分别在巴东和阳新；没有边界，只有行政村驻点），再多一些就没人愿意维护了。（人手本来就少）
MassCartog (2025-05-05 15:20:26+00:00): Hi welcome to OSM, in this change set looks like you are adding buildings which is great!

But here is some tips on how we do it on OSM. Make sure each building has its own outline, don't group buildings together if they are actually separate in real life. Also when you are done outlining the building, you can right click on it and then push the square Icon, or just press "Q". This will square the edges and fix odd angles!
MassCartog (2025-05-21 15:42:41+00:00): [no user response]
Bison Ranger (2025-05-21 15:56:57+00:00): Thank you MassCartog for the tips and tricks. Being brand new to it there is a lot I am sure I am missing, so I appreciate any constructive feedback provided!!
somehundred (2025-05-05 07:39:41+00:00): Kāpēc Tu noņēmi dažas pieturas un platformas no 14. tramvaja relācijām? Uzvaras parka pietura vispār paduzusi no abām relācijām.
somehundred (2025-05-05 07:59:24+00:00): Es salaboju.
HellMap (2025-05-05 09:21:51+00:00): Es vakar nepabeidzu labot. Jo Relatify dažas pieturas un punktus kaut kāda iemesla pēc izlaiž un es līdz galam nesapratu kāpēc, bet bija jau ļoti vēls. Es dažus salaboju uz to brīdi (piemēram šeit https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165818206 ), bet dažus acīmredzot nepamanīju. Bet pašas kļūdas šeit visticamāk ir pašām platformām un punktos, kurus vajag arī vispirms salabot. Es gribēju šodien saprast, kas nav tā, jo veikt daudz labojumu manuāli bez Relatify ir baigais laiks. Pat ar JOSMu taisīt tādus un sortēt elementus ir čakars. Ja mums ir ilgtermiņā jāuztur pārsimts maršruti, tas ir nereāli (un starp citu ļoti daudzi Rīgas maršruti ir gan salauzti, gan nepareizi).
somehundred (2025-05-05 09:44:14+00:00): Es 14., 8., 5. tramvajus izlaboju līdz galam un ar JOSM sakārtoju.
HellMap (2025-05-05 10:07:12+00:00): Ok, paldies.

Šādas līdzīgas problēmas gan ir gandrīz vai pusei maršrutu Rīgas Satiksmei (par citām pilsētām vai ATD vispār nerunājot). Ar tikai iD/JOSMu būs grūti to pabeigt un uzturēt...
Glassman (2025-05-04 23:18:04+00:00): Question - your changeset comment said this is a private residence yet the edit removed a path. Why did you remove the path? Does it not exist?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165817313
JMRosenfeld (2025-05-05 01:53:13+00:00): Apologies for removing. The path does exist. But it is not on the public right of way.
HirschKauz (2025-05-12 07:39:18+00:00): Hi,
wenn Du einen shop auf disused:shop setzt, dann kann man den Namen auf old_name=* setzten. Die ganzen contact:* payment:* und Co können dann weg. :-)
Grüße
Glassman (2025-05-04 23:20:17+00:00): The path exists on imagery. Why was it removed? Note - even though the property is privately owned, we can document features that exist there. You can add the tag ownership=private as well as access=private if the footway has no trespassing signage.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165817442
JMRosenfeld (2025-05-05 01:54:14+00:00): Yes, the path is there, but it is on private property.
Glassman (2025-05-05 20:39:13+00:00): Check out the wiki page on removing roads on private property.  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property. While the wiki page talks about roads, the same argument can me made for sidewalks and paths. Please add the ways back.
Glassman (2026-02-27 15:40:09+00:00): restored in changeset 179137247#
map per (2025-05-06 12:44:20+00:00): Wegen review_requested:
Hab die Tags der ehemalige Tankstelle noch etwas aufgeräumt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1773914563
Vinber-Pro (2025-05-13 13:23:09+00:00): Bonjour,
merci pour les contributions.

Par contre cela serait bien de préciser un peu mieux les commentaires, quelques précisions ici https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bons_commentaires_de_groupe_de_modifications

à plus
eggie (2025-05-05 06:22:18+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Ferrocarriles de México (2025-09-23 19:33:32+00:00): Esto no es un sendero. Son los remanentes de una antigua vía de ferrocarril. Lo restauro a como estaba.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172361220
eggie (2025-05-05 06:23:39+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:59:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:00:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:55:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:55:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
pavvv (2025-05-05 07:45:45+00:00): Czy aby na pewno? Skoro tak, to dlaczego? Takie drogi jak ta: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24700573 od zawsze miały nazwę na osm. Czy nie lepiej będzie, jeśli te odcinki będą miały nazwę, żeby nawigacje nie pisały, że to drogi bez nazwy?
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:59:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:59:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:59:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:54:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
AgusQui (2025-05-20 03:42:11+00:00): En Openstreetmap se mapea la realidad, no elementos inexistentes, inventados, etc.
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:55:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:00:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:55:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:01:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:57:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:57:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:55:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:57:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:56:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:56:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:00:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:01:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:53:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:01:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:02:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:53:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:53:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:57:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:58:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:55:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:01:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:54:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:01:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 09:01:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
fortera_au (2025-06-26 08:59:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 168128627 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping
Fraxi (2025-05-05 10:45:04+00:00): Здравейте!
Благодаря, че сте минал на живо в околността(вижда се и по другите промени). Но, бих ви помолил специално този сервиз и стъкларницата, да ги проверите по-рано през деня. Защото през деня съм виждал най-малкото сервиза да е отворен.
PuhPuh (2025-05-05 18:06:17+00:00): Cheers! 
I live nearby, so I pass by those building almost daily. The glass shop has been closed for at least a year.
I haven't seen the repair shop open in weeks, if not months. There's opening hours posted on its window (I took a photo today, but I'm not sure how to upload it here), and I've definitely been there when it's supposed to be open, but it hasn't been. I will check again on Wednesday to be sure.
Fraxi (2025-05-05 19:17:23+00:00): Sorry, I thought you are a Bulgarian. Thanks for your reply and engagement.
PuhPuh (2025-05-14 19:22:51+00:00): I went by the shop 4 times during the supposed opening hours over the past week or so and it's been closed every time. I think it's either permanently closed, or on a very long vacation. I pass by often, so I will update the map if anything changes.
Lezurex (2025-05-05 10:14:07+00:00): Hallo xinon,

Bitte keine Emojis verwenden, die sind für Datenkonsumenten tricky. Für Symbole siehe hier: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:direction_north#Further_details

LG Lezurex
xinon (2025-05-05 18:53:39+00:00): Hallo Lezurex,

Danke für den Hinweis - mir wurden die beim erfassen vorgeschlagen, deshalb habe ich die angeklickt. sind nun entfernt. 

Grüsse
Xinon
rempshaener (2025-05-07 17:18:15+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Das sieht sehr gut aus, ich habe keine Anmerkungen.

Bei Fragen bitte melden. Vielen Dank für deinen Beitrag.
Viele Grüße
Lezurex (2025-05-05 06:35:59+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1383640188 etc...
Der Value von area:highway ist immer der Value von highway beim entsprechenden Way. Hier also area:highway=residential. Ausserdem: Wenn ein Highway ein area:highway kreuzt, sollte dort ein geteilter Node platziert werden.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1383640187
Das müsste area:highway statt area sein, oder?

Die Parkplätze südlich Merbag hätte ich als ein einzelner Parkplatz gemappt, ist ja ein einzelner grosser Parkplatz, soweit ich sehe (mit parking=surface).
stillhart (2025-05-05 07:53:24+00:00): hmm, ich wähle in iD einfach Strassenfläche aus, was ziemlich generisch ist?

Zur Kreuzung: Ich wähle in iD einfach Kreuzung aus?

Zum Node: Sollte man das wirklich verkleben? 

Zu Merbag, scheinen verschieden Arten von Parkplatz zu sein, zumindest gemäss Luftbild.
Lezurex (2025-05-05 08:13:25+00:00): area:highway=yes ist nicht per se falsch, aber richtiges Tagging macht es für die Konsumenten einfacher https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway

Ja, Kreuzungen kann man auch mit area=yes mappen (hab ich in der Schweiz aber noch nie gesehen), aber da du rundherum mit dem area:highway-Schema mappst, macht hier area:highway deutlich mehr Sinn.

Ja, das sollte man so verkleben: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Area_highway/mapping_guidelines

Für mich sieht das wie ein grosser privater Abstellplatz aus, müsste man vor Ort abklären, keine Ahnung, aber egal ist ein Detail.
mstrbrid (2025-06-20 08:45:37+00:00): Hi Iwerne, did you mean to change ways https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/516833636 & https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1043781881 to a guideway? The guideway only starts on the bridge as I see it.
Iwerne (2025-06-23 09:42:25+00:00): Good question. Arguably there is an ambiguity in the OSM Wiki defiition of a 'bus_guideway'. The purpose-built route that is for the exclusive use of guided buses starts at the junction with Cumberland Road. The stretch to the bridge is not a conventional bus-lane (see the No-entry signs). How else should we tag it?
mstrbrid (2025-06-24 14:12:20+00:00): I reckon the wiki page is pretty explicit: "Do not use this on normal paved roadways that are designated for buses only."
I think that's applicable here as bicycles are also permitted on this section (but not on the pavement) so it's important to have the bicycle=* access tags on there too. 
So, I'd go with highway=unclassified (it's not adopted), bus=private, and all the other relevant access tags
Iwerne (2025-06-27 11:01:05+00:00): I'd be happy for you to make the appropriate updates, noting that cycles appear to be allowed in a westerly direction only.
mstrbrid (2025-06-28 11:23:49+00:00): Have now done so. Let me know if I've made any mistakes