piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
muralito (2024-01-25 15:52:02+00:00): Entre Chacabuco y Junin esta mapeada como motorway y tiene colectoras. OK.

Entre San Andres de Giles y Carmen de 
Areco no veo colectoras, ni ninguna cosa en construccion, ni en Bing. Quizas sea demasiado desactualizada la imagen

La 9 tiene colectoras en el tramo Buenos Aires - Corodoba. Igual que la 5 entre Lujan y Mercedes.  La 8 no la he recorrido en ese tramo asi que no tengo certeza en esa, puede que este mal etiquetada y haya que corregirla pasandola a "highway=trunk"
5R-MFT (2024-02-05 12:26:03+00:00): Hi, are you sure at this place are a camp site as you mapped ?
gabpr05 (2024-02-05 12:28:04+00:00): No, It's not a camp and I was wrong. It's a dog park that I didn't know how to add. Greetings and thanks for attention.
5R-MFT (2024-02-05 12:37:32+00:00): Ok, changed to leisure=dog_park on osm.org.
gabpr05 (2024-02-05 12:42:22+00:00): I'm sorry but I have no idea where exactly this should be done. where is that tag added? I added this with maps.me
5R-MFT (2024-02-05 22:54:26+00:00): I already  change it to leisure=dog park. For quality mapping you better use 
https://osm.org 
you can log in with the same account. This link explain how to map some Point of Interes (POI)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a
if tou need help you can send me a private message from your account.
rskedgell (2024-01-25 05:35:42+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for updating the map.

Are these roads privately owned, but with access for deliveries and visitors and no thoroughfare? If this is the case, the tags you might want are:

access=destination
ownership=private

The iD editor presents access tags for other transport modes as if they were necessary, but you can and should leave them unset if the general access value already describes the situation,

There's limited street side imagery for The Drive and none for Pine Trees Drive, but the Bing Street Side imagery shows a non-standard weight limit sign at the junction with Swakeleys Road, which isn't legal on a public highway.
rskedgell (2024-01-25 05:37:17+00:00): Documentation on the access and ownership keys:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ownership
MTBRider1 (2024-01-25 09:18:34+00:00): As i only joined so i could correct the map I'm not sure how all this works.
I live in Pine Trees Drive. It is a public adopted road.
The Drive is owned privately in that each house owns and is responsible for the road outside.
Despite attempts by the Residents Association of The Drive to prevent it being a thoroughfare the council have made it clear that, because the road has been open and used by all forms of transport for many years without ever being closed, it is a privately owned and maintained public road (not sure if I have the terminology quite correct but I was at a public meeting when that statement was made).
The residents have put up signs decaring it to be private etc. but this is not true. I don't have an issue with that. The issue I have is that the mapping app I use for cycling, Komoot, uses openstreetmap as a source. Someone has very recently edited the roads to be private and I can no longer map rides from my house. Hopefully this will now change back to how it has been for years.
MTBRider1 (2024-01-25 09:35:28+00:00): I can see you have a lot of experience as an editor.
How/when are edits applied to the map?
What happens if the person who edited the map to make the road private edits them back again? How is such a 'dispute' resolved?
Dukes Ride and Georgian Close are most likely privately owned roads but, as they are cul de sacs it is fairly irrelevant in terms of access and there is no access control.
MTBRider1 (2024-01-25 10:31:32+00:00): Further to the above, you will find below an extract from the minutes of the meeting where John Fern, Highways Inspection Manager for the London Borough of Hillingdon, addressed residents to give an accurate description of the status of The Drive (South) with regards to use and restrictions on the road as a privately maintained public highway.

...............If a road has been used by the general public for many years, it becomes a public highway, and almost all public highways within the Borough have been adopted by the public - the Council, who maintained these public highways through funds raised from the Council Tax.   However, there were a small number of privately maintained public highways such as The Drive Ickenham within the Borough, which really have the worst of all worlds, having to maintain their carriageway for use by the public as a public highway.  Uninterrupted access to Uxbridge Golf Course would have been sufficient usage to justify that The Drive Ickenham is a public highway.  The Common Law states, once a public highway, always a public highway.  Therefore, no tolls, barriers, restriction or closure of The Drive can take place whatsoever to impede the use of the road as a public highway.
rskedgell (2024-01-25 10:45:52+00:00): Thanks for your detailed response.

From what you have said, I think the correct tagging on The Drive would be ownership=private + access=yes

Pine Trees Drive should be OK as highway=residential without any ownership or access tags.

Dukes Ride and Georgian Close, if owned privately, would probably be ownership=private + access=destination

For personal use only, you can find out whether a road is publicly or private maintained from findmystreet.co.uk, but the licence for this is incompatible with OSM.

Updates to OSM can take a couple of weeks to propagate to Komoot, but I've noticed some quicker updates recently (it's my preferred site for planning running routes).

It might be worth opening a discussion on this in the OSM community forums, as other mappers more experienced than me may have other suggestions.

In the event of a dispute,the Data Working Group (DWG) can arbitrate as a last resort.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes

I hope that's helpful to you. Good luck and happy cycling.
MTBRider1 (2024-01-25 12:19:07+00:00): I cannot see the ownership and access attributes in the Edit Feature list.
MTBRider1 (2024-01-25 15:37:49+00:00): I have found out how to add a tag so all correct now. Thanks for your help.
eggie (2024-01-25 08:03:10+00:00): Dag Ties 
Bedankt voor je bijdrage. 
Probeer bij te taggen op de bestaande adresnode. Ik heb de info samengevoegd.
mvg
eggie
gabpr05 (2024-01-25 11:28:43+00:00): I was wrong to add a money bank, not a sitting one.
SomeoneElse (2024-01-24 23:24:01+00:00): I'm familiar with the area, but have used the Esri imagery here (less tree cover) to help trace the bed.
tastrax (2024-01-28 03:48:03+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
VictorIE (2024-01-26 04:33:51+00:00): Hi,

Just be careful to not connect power lines to unrelated objects: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11548216128
NeisBot (2024-01-27 01:31:03+00:00): Hello RespToo, thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-01-25 08:52:20+00:00): See also https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/5458

Why your source for vehicle dimensions standards is kartaview?

In fact, how you know that there is no such thing as height limit for vehicles with standard dimension, without special permission ?

Is there width limit on vehicles travelling on public roads, without a  special permission ?
yrtimiD (2024-01-25 14:26:32+00:00): I checked many places with reported as "default" on kartaview and there are clear signs exists (to be mapped later)
AndresDuhour (2025-02-24 12:15:12+00:00): Buen día! Voy a despegar algunas áreas residenciales de la red vial. Se ha conversado en general que conviene mantenerlas si compartir nodos o líneas. Saludos! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Uso_del_suelo
orthocircular (2024-01-25 03:15:47+00:00): Thank you for your contributions! Please remember to write a relevant description in your changeset comments. It helps others review your work and helps you find what you've done if you ever need to refer back to past work.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146652969
emersonveenstra (2024-01-25 12:23:21+00:00): Hi there,

When you went to save this changeset, the editor warned you that the Webber Elementary School building was unclosed. Because you ignored this warning, it is no longer rendering on the map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17077085

Could you please fix this? Thanks!
hhartsoe (2024-01-25 20:45:34+00:00): Sorry i will fix it now
MxxCon (2024-02-04 07:57:14+00:00): What is this?! This looks like a straight up vandalism! Worse yet, it looks like you copied it directly from Google Maps!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146653553
questfinder (2024-02-04 14:58:44+00:00): Thanks for your review; you can check the DC. I'm not reworking anything; I have visited these addresses and used the NJ Bureau of GIS as source if needed. I have already created this location with the appropriate tags as per OSM Wiki. Not to waste my time, go ahead and update all my work. YOU ARE WELCOME.
MxxCon (2024-02-04 15:35:17+00:00): I don't know what "DC" is.
Please provide supporting evidence that this area is named the way you claim it's named.
Nermosh (2024-01-27 19:17:37+00:00): Per the Cadaster and on-house signs, this street has been divided into two streets, one of which is called Kerchi Street.  Why did you put this name as alt_ street name? 

https://maps.gov.ge/map/portal#search/result/ar/mg/getinfo?lbl=ract_g_borders:AAAY6CAAFAAAtdOAAD
Sabinio (2024-01-31 04:46:23+00:00): Thank you for bringing this to my attention! What is the correct extent for the street name?
gscholz (2024-01-26 09:09:27+00:00): Hi Wilmer Osario,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-69.23739&lat=9.38063&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=146653666

Especially way 704281184 is affected here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/704281184#map=11/9.3642/-69.2270

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Wilmer Osario (2024-01-26 12:29:05+00:00): Fixed, thank you for notify me 👍
gscholz (2024-01-26 12:45:40+00:00): Thanks for your quick response.
Guido
Warin61 (2024-01-26 21:36:36+00:00): Hi,

Multipolygon relations outer ways cannot share segments. 
Relation 17077151 has been deleted. What were the outers for this deleted relation have been tagged as buildings as per the deleted relation.
mvexel (2024-03-26 03:48:56+00:00): What's the status of the school of medicine demo / construction? Is demolition / construction already ongoing?
dknelson9876 (2024-03-26 04:10:31+00:00): I can't say for sure what's on the ground, as I haven't been to campus recently, but according to pdc.utah.edu demolition + construction is expected to be from 10/2023 - 08/2025
wireguy (2024-01-25 14:33:10+00:00): Spike, nope.
way 41775908 seems wrong.
and way 41775908 seems to be missing from the relation
way 41775908 also has the tag natural=wood, but does not need it.
MxxCon (2024-01-25 03:26:38+00:00): Hello.
What's the point of bumping check_date that was over 10 years ago?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146654803
Igor Bubelov (2024-01-25 04:35:37+00:00): Hi!

Three main reasons:

1. It helps other users to assess the reliability of such places. This particular place was added 10 years ago, and such places are less reliable than the places added 1 year ago or less.

2. It simplifies re-verification, since starting with the oldest and most out-of-date places gives you more bang for a buck.

3. There is no automated way to figure out the date of the last meaningful edit, it requires manual assessment on a case by case basis (change set author, comments, tags affected, etc.)
CurlingMan13 (2024-02-24 23:28:09+00:00): Was any in-person verification or survey actually performed?
Igor Bubelov (2024-02-25 04:53:24+00:00): In this case, it's the creation date of the place, so I'd ask the person who created it. Please note that the date I set is in the past, which helps local mappers identify outdated elements and re-verify them. There is a near 100% probability that this place no longer exists, so someone needs to check it and either bump check_date to the current day or make amends/delete the record, check_date makes it easier to draw attention to that fact.

I hear many complaints about unreliable/outdated data, most of those complaints are related to places which were added ~10 years ago, so it's pretty important to be able to highlight the unreliable places so users can avoid them and local editors can easily identify the low hanging fruits.

Here is an example of a similar effort, it's a pretty common issue:

https://botsin.space/@restobot
CurlingMan13 (2024-02-28 06:02:51+00:00): Isn't the checkdate just the same as when this business was added?  A query could be use to determine this date based on when the node was created.  Adding a check date just to match the date a node was added is dumb.

By adding a check date from so long ago, are you verifying that you checked it in 2013 and can testify that it existed then?  What if it was added from fantasy mapping or via import but never actually checked?  Are you confirming that you checked it in 2013?
Igor Bubelov (2024-02-28 07:00:34+00:00): Have you tried reading this thread before calling something "dumb"? Of course the creation date idea was considered and it was shortly dismissed because it's not compatible with OSM inner workings.

OSM doesn't have stable entities, someone can add a shop as a node, and someone else can transform it into an area or a relation, which will make it a completely separate entity with a new creation date. It just not reliable enough.

The date of the latest edit is even worse, since it can be an automated edit and there is no reason to assume that all the tags were checked. Which leaves the only sensible option: manual history check in order to determine the most likely check date. It can be creation date, but it can also be any other date, you can't tell without checking full history. A place can be created 10 years ago with a single tag such as street name, with the rest of the tags added a week ago. Of course, we'd like to find an automated and bulletproof way to figure out the check date, but it's clearly impossible.

This timestamping activity was a one-time thing aimed to help local editors highlight the most problematic/outdated places for further re-verification. It's one of the many measures aimed at boosting the data quality and reliability.

I noticed a clear pattern of harassment and erasure of other people's contributions coming from your account. I prefer not to involve the admins since they have better things to do, but I will be forced to report it if this doesn't stop. I'm happy to answer all the questions, as I did many times with many other users, but let's keep it civil.
watmildon (2024-01-26 01:20:32+00:00): Just dropping in to say nice work on the loops and waterway connectivity!
nevw (2024-01-25 06:22:05+00:00): Hi, you have drawn a sliver of a building on the western side of a track here but the only buildings seen in imagery are square and on the other side of the track. The name "Explosives buildings" appears to be more of a description.
In osm the name is only used for things that do have a name as described here
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names
Do you want me to fix or do you prefer to review yourself?
nevw (2024-01-31 22:14:39+00:00): No response. Deleted as unable to resolve remotely.
cs09736 (2024-01-29 18:06:23+00:00): G'day,
Welcome to OSM. Just a quick note about the bike box mapping. Bike boxes are usually mapped as a single node on the stop line for the bikes, rather than as a way along the length of the bike box, even though this seems like a better/more accurate way to map (maybe you could start a proposal to include ways in the cycleway=asl tag). For now though it's best to add the cycleway=asl tag to nodes as this is what data consumers would be looking for.
DannyL112 (2024-01-25 04:15:20+00:00): I'm sorry I didn't realize this would affect the real world map data I thought it was just local
Joseph R P (2024-01-27 21:48:06+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap, DannyL112. Do you know if the park at Rudee Loop is officially completed yet or if construction of it has started?
CurlingMan13 (2024-01-25 05:14:37+00:00): Do not map features that no longer exist on OSM.  I have reverted this changeset in part or full.

This would be a good addition over on OpenHistoricalMaps though.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nonexistent_features#:~:text=Features%20that%20no%20longer%20exist%20should%20be%20deleted
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146655922
DaveTO (2024-02-18 19:55:01+00:00): This changeset added separate cycle tracks around Cherry Street but didn't remove the pre-existing (unprotected) bicycle lanes associated with it. I haven't been in the area recently; would it make more sense to change the cycleway tags in Cherry St. to indicate there are now cycle tracks rather than unprotected lanes? E.g. would it be better to remove the separate bicycle tracks and instead modify Cherry St. to have cycleway=track?
Shrinks99 (2024-02-18 20:20:54+00:00): Hey there!  It's a good question.  I added dedicated pathing instead of cycle tracks on the road way because they are completely grade sperated and IMO not part of the road... I do think having seperated ways would result in more accurate rendering of the infrastructure in place?

Beyond that I'm probably not the most authoritative source on the matter.
DaveTO (2024-02-18 21:00:13+00:00): Pathing them separately is fine. Do we agree that the cycleway=lane tags from the street are now obsolete and need to be removed?
Shrinks99 (2024-02-18 21:49:43+00:00): Ah yeah.  Would be in favour of that, they shouldn't be duped.
DaveTO (2024-02-18 22:23:12+00:00): Great. I have eliminated the redundancy and made some tweaks to the path connectivity so that routing algorithms will see a contiguous cycling network where it is.

See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147627123 for details.
Jarek 🚲 (2024-03-30 01:01:25+00:00): Hi! I was on Cherry Street between the rail bridge and Mill Street today. The bike route on this stretch is not separate from the road - it's paint only, which is pretty canonical cycleway=lane. From a dozen metres away it looked like in the rail underpass it is separated by flex posts, but not really off the road, and I feel that could be fine with cycleway=track. Are you OK with me making those changes to Cherry north of Lake Shore Blvd?
Shrinks99 (2024-03-30 03:08:59+00:00): The underpass is seperated by flex posts from what I remember, but would generally be fine with that.  No strong opinions, thanks for checking! :)

The streetcar loop is posed to be redeveloped in the coming years along with biking and pedestrian infrastructure under the bridge so I imagine this isn't the last time this discussion will happen haha.
Jarek 🚲 (2024-05-22 19:14:39+00:00): Made the change back to lanes in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151693506 after riding it myself
i2004 (2024-01-26 00:44:07+00:00): te agrege paradas del 168
NeisBot (2024-01-26 01:31:04+00:00): Hi Yoshida_plateauimport 👋

your recent changeset has been marked due to a temporary or permanent block from further map edits. 

If you have any questions or if there's anything you'd like to discuss regarding the mapping, feel free to reach out! 

Best regards, 🤖

Details https://osm.org/user_blocks/15612
#ContributorHasBeenBlocked
Luzandro (2024-01-26 05:25:02+00:00): Hallo,

die Tankstellenwege sollten nur als highway=service ohne service=driveway getaggt werden, siehe auch https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/amenity-fuel-highway-service-with-or-without-service-driveway/108051
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146656374
Ich2PunktNull (2024-01-26 10:09:55+00:00): 👍🏼
i2004 (2024-01-25 10:30:50+00:00): lo del 59 es una duda poque supuestamente pusieron un giro tapado en maipu y alberdi
i2004 (2024-01-25 12:43:11+00:00): te agrege una parada en centenario y primera junta para que me ordenes  porfa
AgusQui (2024-01-27 16:57:28+00:00): Si parece que pusieron un giro en Maipú y Alberdi, hay que corroborar si es sólo buses.
Shageldi123 (2024-01-25 04:47:53+00:00): test
rskedgell (2024-01-25 05:55:42+00:00): Which "warning" caused you to delete a tree near Lincoln's Inn Fields in London?
Krafty Kactus (2024-01-25 05:59:33+00:00): My bad, I was showing someone how editing works and how detailed the map was in London. I guess I accidentally deleted a tree while moving around.
Krafty Kactus (2024-01-25 06:04:50+00:00): I'm not sure how to revert the change.
Krafty Kactus (2024-01-25 06:06:14+00:00): Should I just place a new tree in the same spot?
rskedgell (2024-01-25 08:58:09+00:00): Thanks for replying so quickly. Not a problem, I've undeleted it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146663361
Baconcrisp (2024-01-29 22:27:07+00:00): Hello IKYuda! I noticed you've been updating classifications according to this: https://binamarga.pu.go.id/index.php/peraturan/detail/keputusan-menteri-pekerjaan-umum-dan-perumahan-rakyat-nomor-367kptsm2023-tentang-rencana-umum-jaringan-jalan-nasional-2020-2040. I was wondering if you could also update the appropriate links as you upgrade the classifications? Another thing that would be very useful for other editors working here would be to document your project on the Indonesian country wiki page here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indonesia. That way they can see what you're doing and can review your source for themselves. Thank you for your contributions in updating the map!

Baconcrisp
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146656686
fossilised (2024-01-25 06:12:42+00:00): I don't know if this is the right place to discuss some issues but I will anyway.
As a new contributor I find OSM to be frustrating and very US centric with it's tag syntax and I understand the need to make the whole thing useful to those who may translate or use a language other than english.
The available options may be useful to Brits and Americans but make the maps less useful to "locals"
Encouraged by writeups that say edited by the community I ventured forth but have become so frustrated with the user interface that I think I will like many before me leave it to those who have the time to waste fighting the interface. I will go back to Apple maps and to a loesser extent Google to do my navigating.
The current user interface will doom OSM to be only used by a small minority and it will never reach a useable format for the general public unless it addresses the frustration of contributors with an extremely difficult user interface
Having spent too much time already, I think I'll leave it to an insufficient number of experts to struggle to make something useful for the general public
I wish you all good luck.
slice0 (2024-01-25 06:37:25+00:00): mate the interface is steaming dogshit but thats just the tip of the iceberg, i have something going on irl right now but ill write a epic rant here later on. i agree with everything you just said.