piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
jndche (2024-07-29 18:35:59+00:00): I see you've added some access tags. Most of them look like they're technically correct, however I want to mention that in Finland, when there's a dedicated bicycle or footway next to a road, you should tag the road with use_sidepath instead.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154111060
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:49:44+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
E: buildings not squared.
Please restrict yourself to required objects. Buildings and highways ! No need to map landuse features. Due to lack on experience you introduce quite a number of issues which need to be solved.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154111073
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:42:10+00:00): Revert of https://osm.org/changeset/154099781
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:50:08+00:00): See my comment on the other changeset.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154111468
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:38:01+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
You duplicated already mapped highways. 
I think you did not zoom in far enough to see the aready mapped objects.
Check the bottom line . When It shows that there are hidden objects, you have to zoom in rather far.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154111699
flohoff (2024-07-18 18:10:08+00:00): Moin,
nur weil ich es gerade sehe - Sicher das in den conditionals die Wochentage ausgeschrieben werden ? 
Ich kenne das nur in Shortform so wie im Wiki Artikel:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions

Hier so ein Beispiel:

motor_vehicle:conditional=delivery @ (Mo-Fr 06:00-11:00,17:00-19:00; Sa 03:30-19:00)

Flo
donnernuss04 (2024-07-19 05:58:22+00:00): Hallo Flo,
Nein, ich war mir nicht sicher. Vielen Dank fürs darauf aufmerksam machen und für das Beispiel. 
Ich habe das soeben korrigiert. 

LG 
Donatus
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:42:14+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------

C: Collecting adjacent buildings and mapped is as 1 building.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154112018
NeisReview (2025-03-17 06:44:27+00:00): Hallo,

woher stammt der Name vom folgenden Weg: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/234269754/history/5

Danke.
NeisRevert (2025-03-21 20:42:33+00:00): Partly Reverted
streckenkundler (2025-03-21 21:03:09+00:00): was wurde denn hier noch Reverted???  Das mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/234269754/history/5 ist doch mitlerweile ein alter Hut... war vor zweit Tagen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163810871

...und ich hätte in der Gegend und vom Namen her auf einen unvollständig erfassten Imbiss geschlossen...

:( Bitte nicht User unnötig verwirren... :(

streckenkundler
NeisReview (2025-03-28 20:20:50+00:00): Hier am Changeset hat der Hinweis gefehlt, das es reverted wurde.
SomeoneElse (2026-03-26 09:57:48+00:00): Hello,
What is the source of the name for this?  It doesn't look like it is signed at the war memorial end when I walked past a couple of days ago, and I've never seen signage at the other end.
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2026-03-26 10:06:55+00:00): Where "this" is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/139814060 ("Loverose Street").  I can see references on Geograph https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Loverose_Street,_York but suspect that that name has just been copied from Google.
Was the name here actually surveyed?
limes11 (2024-07-27 12:40:18+00:00): Hi,

sicher, dass hier nichts mehr zu sehen ist ? Der gelöschte Weg ist der, welcher nach Wegeplan genutzt werden sollte. 

Derzeit sind sehr viele Wege zugewachsen, die die letzten Jahre teilweise problemlos genutzt werden konnten. Daher würde ich empfehlen, keine Wege zu löschen, sondern ggf. mit abandoned:highway auszustatten.

Viele Grüße
Jule_Beuel (2024-07-27 13:09:25+00:00): Hi,
Das ist mir auch schon aufgefallen. Aber dieser Weg ist so nicht da. Da ist wirklich nichts erkennbar, war mehrfach da und hab von beiden Seiten geguckt. Selbst der Parallelweg ist zwar da, aber nicht wie eingezeichnet. Der eingezeichnete verliert sich in dichtem Gebüsch und kommt dann in eine unschöne Hanglage.
LG Jule
limes11 (2024-07-27 14:54:48+00:00): Okay, danke ! Ich war da seit Jahren nicht. Muss man dann mal im Winter schauen, welche Pfade es wirklich gibt und wo sie verlaufen. 

Viele Grüße
emersonveenstra (2024-07-19 11:29:28+00:00): Hi there,

I've gone ahead and fixed these already, but for future reference, the tag is "motor_vehicle", not "motorvehicle".
InsertUser (2024-07-25 00:21:45+00:00): Why have you appended "bus" to the tag for a different category of vehicle? This is not a documented value for an access tag and bus access was already correctly indicated by `psv=yes`. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
Nathan_A_RF (2024-07-30 09:09:44+00:00): Indeed, the tags here were already correct. I am reverting this.
Enock4seth (2024-07-28 11:57:17+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for mapping. Kindly zoom in enough to see existing features before adding new ones to avoid duplicates and overlaps.

Please do not change tags if you are not sure about what you are doing. eg. changing a "landuse=residential" to "building=yes"

If you need further info and help getting started see https://welcome.openstreetmap.org/ 

Happy mapping!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:06+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:20:00+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
CurlingMan13 (2024-07-18 20:51:44+00:00): You requested a review of this changeset.  I have reviewed your changeset and found it to be good.  Keep up the great edits!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154113823
CurlingMan13 (2024-07-18 20:51:19+00:00): You requested a review of this changeset.  I have reviewed your changeset and found it to be good.  Keep up the great edits!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154113846
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:15+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:19:50+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
aweech (2025-05-19 16:09:35+00:00): Hi! I'm having a hard time finding info on the project that added these protected bike lanes on 400 North. Do you know what it was called?
syntex (2024-07-22 22:04:09+00:00): No właśnie, ktoś błędnie skasował i nie odpowiedział na mój komentarz. Dzięki za przywrócenie.
lonvia (2024-11-13 19:26:10+00:00): Diese Gleise gehören nicht nach OpenStreetMap, da es davon keinerlei Spuren mehr zu sehen gibt. Bitte verschiebe die Daten nach https://www.openhistoricalmap.org/
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:24+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:19:40+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:32+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:19:31+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:39+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:19:22+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
Taksine (2024-07-20 01:46:03+00:00): 您好，快速路只能用于干线道路，不能用于高速公路，您的修正是错误的，请改正
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:44+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:19:12+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
Vas111 (2024-07-25 20:06:02+00:00): Thank you for this, there was a spree of mapping linear footways as pedestrian areas in Aberdeen, I'm still trying to fix that.
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:52+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:18:59+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:05:58+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:18:50+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
rskedgell (2025-07-16 09:58:24+00:00): Access tags in OSM reflect real and verifiable legal restrictions, not subjective opinions. Already reverted by another user.
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:06:04+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:18:40+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:06:10+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:18:29+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-18 19:10:28+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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/12061756656

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
kem0rg (2024-07-18 19:20:28+00:00): Poprawione, nazwa usunięta
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-18 19:06:16+00:00): Should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 04:18:15+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/154119832
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 05:23:16+00:00): Hi bkerch55, welcome to OSM.

Please have a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks!
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-29 14:49:43+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/282415131/history has surface:note = Trampelpfad that was added in this edit
surface:note=Trampelpfad ? Is it simply surface=dirt? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:surface%3Ddirt

Would surface=dirt replace it fully?
LockOnGuy (2024-07-18 20:55:36+00:00): Hello Ahmed, thank you for your edit, but please next time use good changeset comment that explain what did you edit and why so other fellow mappers would understand the edit wtithout wasting time trying to understand what did you edit.     
Thanks again and I hope you do consider adding good changeset comment in the future my friend.     
Regards.     
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Quimby5 (2024-07-18 19:21:39+00:00): Correction: That was from 082F15
redrace (2024-07-21 15:50:06+00:00): HUHU
Du kannst nicht einfach einen Hausnummer an ein Gebäude packen welche schon vergeben ist. Wenn das gebäude zu einer Hausnummer gehört muss das sauber aufgetrennt und wieder verbunden werden. ansonst hat es einfach keinen Hausnummer. Streetcomplete kann sowas nicht, aber da kannst Du "keinen Hausnummer" vergeben!
gregorjoef (2024-07-21 16:00:17+00:00): Hallo,
Danke für den Hinweis. Mir war schon immer aufgefallen,  dass dieses Gebäude als zwei Teile dargestellt wurde. Mit dem Hinweis, dass diese beiden Teile eine Hausnummer haben, wollte ich das Verbinden eventuell anstoßen.
redrace (2024-07-21 16:05:10+00:00): HUHU
wenn Du dir sicher bist das der Gebäudeteil zu einer bestehenden Adresse gehört, dann setzte einen Hinweis. Wenn ich den sehe kontrolliere ich das über Alkis und verbinde ich die Gebäudeteile! :-)
gregorjoef (2024-07-21 16:08:40+00:00): Hallo, ja ich bin mir sicher ;-). Ich wohne dort. :-)
redrace (2024-07-21 16:56:50+00:00): Ich hab's ja auch geändert. Nur für die Zukunft! 🙂
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:33:38+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------

E: Buildings not squared.
G: Included the shadow of the building .

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154115818
CurlingMan13 (2024-07-18 20:50:20+00:00): You requested a review of this changeset.  I have reviewed your changeset and found it to be good.  Keep up the great edits!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154115898
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:34:52+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154116105
adiatmad (2024-07-24 06:11:21+00:00): This is detected as "Mapbox: Fictional mapping" by OSMCha and I agree after checking it in JOSM, that some of buildings need to be double-checked before deleting it, what is your suggestion Frans?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154116105
Frans S (2024-07-25 12:57:11+00:00): @adiatmad
I removed the mappings. I overlooked these mappings. 
best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154116105
RobinNiemann (2024-07-19 09:58:30+00:00): Deletion of Node 6320685998 (Herrmann / Liwell) was a mistake, the store is still existing (verified by phone call)
aceman444 (2025-01-02 22:05:50+00:00): Hi, why did you remove the kindergarten name? It seems to still exist: https://msholicska30.edupage.org/
gscscnd (2024-07-19 10:01:28+00:00): Dla dróg dla pieszych i rowerów i powiązanych tworów używamy highway=path, nie highway=cycleway.
oli_szew (2024-07-19 10:59:20+00:00): highway=path proponuje dawać w niezurbanizowanych miejscach; highway=path jest bardzo ogólne. 
Proponuje mapować highway=cycleway w tej zminaie ponieważ to jest droga rowerowa zaprojektowana jako CPR, nie jest to szutrowa dróżka przez las dla pieszych i rowerów
gscscnd (2024-07-19 11:13:54+00:00): Wartość tagu może takie użycie sugerować, w praktyce wypracowały się inne konwencje (i nie jest to jedyny taki przypadek). Dla początkujących jest to mylące, ale wszystko mamy udokumentowane na Wiki i w wielu dyskusjach na Forum. Ogólne zasady z dobrymi przykładami znajdziesz tutaj:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath
W niektórych krajach są inne konwencje, w Polsce trzymamy się stosowania highway=path do dróg dla pieszych i rowerów (wiem, to uproszczone określenie) narysowanych jedną nitką.
Proszę żebyś ewentualne propozycje przedyskutował na forum, a tę modyfikację na razie wycofał. Mamy cieszącą się wysoką akceptacją konwencję, trzymajmy się jej.
oli_szew (2024-07-19 15:03:30+00:00): skoro tak to cofamy
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-19 05:04:31+00:00): Hallo ps915, willkommen bei OSM!

Kurze Rückfrage: Wieso sollen die gemappten Rettungs-Sammelstellen keinen Mehrwert bringen?

Danke & Viele Grüße
ps915 (2024-07-19 06:34:07+00:00): Hi pitscheplatsch,

leider werden sie Sammelstellen nicht auf der Karte gerendert. Daher war ich mir nicht sicher, ob es sinnvoll ist auf einem Privatgelände die Sammelstellen zu mappen. 

Gerne kann ich sie aber wieder hinzufügen, wenn diese auch ohne auf der Karte zu erscheinen einen Zweck haben. 

Gruß,
Philipp
DD1GJ (2024-07-20 07:10:53+00:00): Hallo Philipp,

auf den "normalen" Karten werden die Sammelstellen war nicht angezeit, aber es gibt auch Spezialkarten und Apps für Rettungsdienste, wo Notfalleinrichtungen angezeigt werden, z.B. https://wambachers-osm.website/emergency Allerdings funktioniert diese Seite wohl gerade nicht richtig.

Es würde auch genügen, die Sammelplätze als Punkt einzutragen.

Viele Grüße, Joachim
ps915 (2024-07-20 08:30:31+00:00): Danke für die Info. Ich werde die Sammelstellen wieder hinzufügen!
ps915 (2024-07-20 08:33:30+00:00): Ich habe noch eine Frage:
Kann ich mit dem Online Editor iD, meine entfernten Sammelstellen einfach wieder hinzufügen bzw das entfernen rückgängig machen?
ps915 (2024-07-20 14:28:04+00:00): Hab es geschafft! 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154181993
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-20 14:31:19+00:00): 👍
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:29:08+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A: Inaccurate mapping.
E: Buildings not squared.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154116392
literan (2024-07-22 19:10:43+00:00): это вообще непонятно что. Внутри полигона commercial вставили еще один полигон commercial. Зачем?
sandworm (2024-07-22 19:35:57+00:00): внешний бы полигон переделать, да я хз, во что. там был завод, да закончился, а теперь территория делится на фрагменты.
sandworm (2024-07-22 19:37:04+00:00): официально, на уровне дги.
literan (2024-07-22 19:59:13+00:00): ну, если бывший завод разделился на отдельные бизнес-центры, и вы знаете границы, то можно и разделить. 

а если нет - то зачем? просто, территория используется под офисы, и норм
sandworm (2024-07-22 20:07:07+00:00): Да я даже не в курсе, под что используется большая часть территории. То, что я нарисовал - о том в курсе. И уж тем более как проходят границы за пределами моего участка
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:01:43+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 
Please upload multiple  buildings  (within the same task square)
Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154116684
Frans S (2024-07-19 11:04:35+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
B: Overlapping buildings.

C: Collecting adjacent buildings and mapped is as 1 building.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154116773
Frans S (2024-07-19 10:57:04+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------

A: Inaccurate mapping.
E: Buildings not squared.
Buildings need to be tagged as building=yes.
Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154116951
eggie (2024-07-18 20:45:34+00:00): details omg Tubbergen ?

Maar wat heb je nu uiteindelijk aangepast of toegevoegd.
MVG
eggie
SomeoneElse (2024-07-19 10:32:46+00:00): Thanks for mapping the wall and fence here!