piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Robert Whittaker (2024-10-11 09:47:12+00:00): That's odd with the "Quiet Lane" - do you think the sign was a mistake by the council?

But regardless of that, surely it should be public_footpath, not public_footway in the designations there.
Robert Whittaker (2024-10-11 09:51:15+00:00): I've just found https://knaptonvillage.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Norfolk-County-Council-Quiet-Lanes.pdf . Page 11 suggests the off-road sections should be "links" rather than "Quiet Lanes"...
Pink Duck (2024-10-11 09:58:18+00:00): Ah, missed the typo! Yes, should be public_footpath in designation instead of public_footway. The Quiet Lanes map for North Norfolk used dashed lines for the links, but the marker posts on ground call them Quiet Lanes still.
Mazda05 (2024-08-17 17:17:14+00:00): «ref= should not be used for aerodromes, cfr. wiki » https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref "ref" stands for "reference" and is used for reference numbers or codes. Common for roads, highway exits, routes, entrances to big buildings etc. It is also used for shops and amenities that are numbered officially as part of a retail brand or network respectively.
Jan Olieslagers (2024-08-17 17:44:23+00:00): From https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Daerodrome:

ref=* 	Instead of using this key for an airport code, use more specific keys, such as iata=*, icao=*, faa=*, local_ref=*

A bit hard to understand, perhaps, even after several communications?
Mazda05 (2024-08-17 20:24:31+00:00): There are no restrictions for refs at airfields at wiki. XWPR isn't a local reference (local_ref). It's a national (& international between several countries like Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Qazaqstan etc.) reference. Please, don't change the official refs (by Federal Air Transport Service of Russia at «Руководство по авиационной электросвязи» 01.09.1999 & at «Сборник четырехбуквенных указателей (индексов) местоположения аэродромов, полигонов и посадочных площадок») from "ref" to "local_ref" or ref:aopa:*.
Jan Olieslagers (2024-08-17 20:30:56+00:00): Any reference that is not global or universal is, by definition, local.
Jan Olieslagers (2024-08-17 20:31:58+00:00): And yes, our wiki very explicitly states that ref= should not be used on aerodromes.
Mazda05 (2024-08-17 21:25:57+00:00): XWPR isn't a IATA / ICAO / FAA code. About Local_ref, you added personally to wiki it is not clear for what reason. You probably saw the data already marked up incorrectly or tried to systematize it this way. But local_ref it's about local reference. XWPR & similar official refs isn't a local reference. It's a national/international rank of codes. Yes, I'm having trouble understanding why after several discussions you're marking non-local refs as local (local_refs) when it's national/international. No, Wiki doesn't prohibit the use of ref, but recommends the use of IATA / ICAO / FAA (iata=*, icao=*, faa=*) codes where they mean and not use ref to specify these codes. No, except for the local (local_ref), there are also national (nat_ref), international (int_ref), regional (reg_ref). Since these codes are used both at the national and limited international level, I believe that this is just "ref" tag.
Jan Olieslagers (2024-08-17 22:41:44+00:00): I SAY AGAIN:
Any reference that is not global or universal is, by definition, local.
Jan Olieslagers (2024-08-17 22:44:59+00:00): Then again, you seem to have your own ideas about aerodrome codifiction. Perhaps you could propose a detailed scheme somewhere on the wiki, that we could discuss, and tweak, to come to a consensus? Mind you, it should be universal, not just limited to your own territorium.
Mazda05 (2024-08-18 10:38:26+00:00): «Any reference that is not global or universal is, by definition, local. » Definition by whom? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref int_ref=* - international reference numbers or codes; nat_ref=* - national reference numbers or codes; reg_ref=* - regional reference numbers or codes; loc_ref=* - local reference numbers or codes. XWPR & similar official refs isn't a local reference.
Mazda05 (2024-08-18 11:38:49+00:00): «Perhaps you could propose a detailed scheme somewhere on the wiki, that we could discuss, and tweak, to come to a consensus? Mind you, it should be universal, not just limited to your own territorium.» This can be done. In what form do you propose to do this? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process or in some other? If you are concerned about the general description of ref at wiki and you want to specify the description of this code and you are against the latinized version of this code in "ref" tag, then one of my proposals is to transfer these codes to the another tag: "aftn" or "ref:aftn" (Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunications Network https://en.wikiphedia.org/wiki/aeronautical_fixed_Telecommunication_network because this code is used primarily for this network and for the general identification) and add information about this on wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref + https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Daerodrome. At the moment, I'm observing the only use of "aftn" tag in Croatia near Pula, the use of "ref:aftn" I don't observe. The use of "aftn"/"ref:aftn" tag for latinized version will not be limited to the territories of the former USSR. The use of the AFTN in cyrillic version as "nat_ref" tag value also corresponds to the description on wiki, since this option is used at the national level. I remind you that I am talking exclusively about official identifiers that are appointed state structures of the USSR, the Russian Federation and other states of the former USSR. For amateur identifiers, such as from the site aopa.ru, which aren't included in the official lists and aren't indicated on official airfield schemes, I already proposed using the corresponding tags like ref:aopa:ru & ref:aopa:en (as almost a monopoly source of identifiers amateurs in the Russian Federation). However, if we come to an agreement to use the aftn/ref:aftn tag, then latinized identifiers beginning with U*** but not assigned as an ICAO code should be moved from ref:aopa:en to aftn/ref:aftn, since they are also used in AFTN. It should be noted that the AFTN code, when it contains more than 4 characters, may be used by aerodrome units/departments or aerodrome services
Mazda05 (2024-08-18 13:01:49+00:00): *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeronautical_Fixed_Telecommunication_Network
Mazda05 (2024-08-18 14:05:29+00:00): «Perhaps you could propose a detailed scheme somewhere on the wiki, that we could discuss, and tweak, to come to a consensus? Mind you, it should be universal, not just limited to your own territorium.» https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:aeroway%3Daerodrome#Other_tags,_generic
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2024-08-17 15:23:37+00:00): Hi, you've made a service way near the river access=private. This forbids pedestrian and bicycle routing there which I think was not your intention.
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2024-08-17 15:24:02+00:00): change it to motor_vehicle=private if it's for vehicles only
eggie (2024-08-17 14:24:41+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
aTarom (2024-08-17 14:06:05+00:00): hola amb el tag
"lid"
per exemple a
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264832485/history
entenc que és
"lit"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lit
veritat?
Salutacions
prodrigestivill (2024-08-17 14:55:27+00:00): Si, typo, veig que havía posat alguns amb t i alguns amb d.
Moltes gràcies.
Arreglat al #155374919
eggie (2024-08-17 14:27:12+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback  Het adres heb ik compleet gemaakt. city

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
griffonboi (2024-08-22 13:38:35+00:00): Thanks for updating Ewen, I reckon way 45582523 is SG only though, there's another way 45583161 which is BG only that branches off from the main link
mcliquid (2024-08-17 12:21:19+00:00): Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
aseidel (2024-08-22 10:05:35+00:00): Lieber LukasBr11,
bitte hier noch traffic_sign=none ergänzen.
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
eggie (2024-08-17 14:51:30+00:00): Beste Jurjen..  In Nederland mag je volgens de wegenverkeerswet gewoon wandelen op een fietspad. foot=no is dus incorrect.
Zou je kunnen nagaan waar je dat nog meer hebt gedaan. Ik zal de accesstagg verwijderen.
MVG
eggie
Jurjen de Vries (2024-08-19 15:11:42+00:00): Hoi Eggie,

Bedankt. Zover ik mij herinner is dit de enige, misschien perongeluk bij hooguit nog een ander. Ik ga het nakijken. Ik ben wel op de hoogte dat je ook mag wandelen op een fietspad, bedankt voor de duidelijkheid.

Vriendelijke groet,
Jurjen
baumgrenze (2024-08-17 12:05:15+00:00): path does not exist please delete
muralito (2024-08-18 16:34:17+00:00): Changeset reverted. Please do not delete these elements again.
muralito (2024-08-18 16:04:35+00:00): Please do not delete element you do not understand their usage.

This element is used for integrity checking of the road relations.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-08-18 22:16:57+00:00): How does it help with integrity checking up road relations?
muralito (2024-08-18 16:25:04+00:00): Please don't repeat this deletions. You deleted some months ago, they were restores and now you deleted again. This elements are needed for integrity checking.
muralito (2024-08-18 16:28:32+00:00): Changeset reverted.
muralito (2024-08-18 16:29:44+00:00): This is not unnecesary. It is needed and useful for integrity checking. Please do not delete them again.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-08-19 02:27:00+00:00): You could start by explaining why you need fake features for "integrity checking".
muralito (2024-08-20 12:52:11+00:00): This way is the first member of the relation, and there is another at the other end of the motorway as the last member of the relation.

The identification of these points is needed to be done with special tags, and tags that users do not need to change in normal edits for improving the data.
marczoutendijk (2025-09-23 18:19:26+00:00): building=4
What is the meaning of that?
rab (2024-08-17 14:34:10+00:00): Please consider to mark the task as "completely mapped" when you leave it. You have never done this before and therefore work on the same tasks again and again. This way, your work will never be checked by a validator and you will miss an opportunity to improve.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-08-23 01:01:11+00:00): Please don't add fake roads to OSM
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155369102
mavl (2024-11-13 06:00:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 159076867, 159076813, 159076848 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: incompatible sources - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16857].
Tomas Straupis (2024-08-18 15:43:21+00:00): Na multipoligonai taip nesidaro. Jei viduje yra daug mažiukų SUSILIEČIANČIŲ, tai negalima tiesiog juos visus hop ir sudėti kaip inner, reikia visus juos keisti multipoligonais ir į išorinį sudėti tik išorinių žiedų dalis.
Bravo_two_zer0 (2024-08-18 17:45:08+00:00): Multipoligonai man dar naujas dalykas, dar pažindinuosi. BTW dėkui už info.
Tomas Straupis (2024-08-18 17:48:34+00:00): Aš toje vietoje dabar didžiąją dalį sutvarkiau, tai galima pažiūrėti, kaip turėjo būti.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-08-17 13:20:13+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1269160189

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eggie (2024-08-17 14:21:56+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback Wegen die over priveterrein lopen kunnen gewoon op de kaart blijven.
De hulpdiensten navigeren ook op basis van OSM en deze wegen kunnen van levensbelang zijn. Liever dus niet verwijderen. Wel de juiste accesstags toevoegen. Bv access=private
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
sudface (2024-08-17 14:06:54+00:00): Imported in accordance with https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/sydney-bus-stops/117080
hatul (2024-10-30 09:25:23+00:00): שלום יצחק

לפי מה אני מבין זה פשוט מקטע משביל גזר. אני מציע לאחד את כל המקטעים ליחס אחד, אין סיבה לפצל אותם. כמו שלא נסמן כל מקטע של שביל ישראל בנפרד.
תודה על התרומות.
Yitzchak M (2024-10-30 10:47:10+00:00): זה לא אני. זה מועצה אזורית גזר, הבעלים של השבילים האלה, שמפצל אותם.
https://t-gezer.co.il/
Yitzchak M (2024-10-30 10:53:17+00:00): https://www.gezer-region.muni.il/uploads/n/1716920959.9784.pdf
hatul (2024-10-30 11:09:50+00:00): הפיצול הזה טיפשי, אבל הם לא רצופים אז אין לי רעיון טוב איך לחבר. יכלו לפחות לתת להם שמות שונים.
אולי אפשר ליצור יחס נוסף שיכלול את כל היחסים.
zstadler (2024-10-30 12:11:18+00:00): האחריות על השמות היא של מי שיצר את השבילים. במקרה הזה - המועצה האיזורית.

אולי הפיצול לא כל כך טיפשי אם אין דרך טובה לחבר שבילים שאינם רצופים?

כיוון שכך, לא ברורה לי התועלת ביצירה של יחס נוסף שיכלול את כל השבילים
hatul (2024-10-30 12:17:08+00:00): אפשר לפחות לתת שמות ולא מספרים.
התכוונתי ליחס של היחסים, לא של השבילים.
Yitzchak M (2024-10-30 13:18:41+00:00): בהתחלה של כל מקטע, יש שלט עם שם של המקטע. לדוגמה:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f9/IHM_%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9C_%D7%92%D7%96%D7%A8_2.jpeg/1600px-IHM_%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9C_%D7%92%D7%96%D7%A8_2.jpeg
Yitzchak M (2024-10-30 13:21:41+00:00): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/IHM_Gezer_Trail_3.jpeg/1600px-IHM_Gezer_Trail_3.jpeg
Yitzchak M (2024-10-30 13:26:36+00:00): גם, לכל מקטע יש צבע אחר. כל מקטע עומד בעצמו.
hatul (2024-10-30 13:29:41+00:00): טוב
yelisey90 (2024-08-18 08:55:22+00:00): Hi! Please check carefully if the object you want to add is already there or not. It's the second time you create a duplicate: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12116925622 vs. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11293429531 ; https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12112123615 vs. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1063062536
z-z-z88 (2024-08-18 12:16:36+00:00): about scupture Mother of Georgia I disagree. I am fully aware that sculpture is there already, but when I checked a map I could not find it easily. That is a big tourist attraction and it has to marked as tourist attraction. 
Do you suggest to add additional tourist attraction to the existings sculpture point?

About drapery store I also do not agree with you. I saw some no name shop is marked there,but it was a different type of shop. I went to that shop and that is drapery store,so either I change existing point to drapery store or add another point. Old point is also matches reality, so I decided to add second point. Thing is that I couldn't find drapery store using osm and drapery stores are difficult to find, so it's important to have them on map.

Please offer your solution,before you delete important information from maps.
yelisey90 (2024-08-18 20:06:53+00:00): Yes! That's the correct way of editing information: updating an existing object if you think that it's missing some properties, or changing those properties if they are wrong.
Creating an additional object with those properties only makes an impression that there are two objects in reality, not one. So it's just wrong.
By the way, is this dairy shop also a correction of the already added convenience store, or is it another shop in the same building?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12110140269
z-z-z88 (2024-08-18 23:59:59+00:00): it is a small separate kiosk
Bobbi123 (2024-08-18 20:59:17+00:00): Ok, jetzt ist die Freileitung immerhin endlich wieder korrekt in der Karte zu sehen.

Aber die Frage bleibt: Woher weißt du, dass 20KV Spannung jetzt definitiv stimmt, wo du doch zuerst vor 2 Jahren sicher warst, dass hier 11kV korrekt sind und es so gemappt hast? Ein ganz einfache Frage, auf die ich gerne eine Antwort hätte.
aseidel (2024-08-22 09:57:23+00:00): Lieber LukasBr11,
Sie taggen recht häufig oneway=no an regulären Straßen und Wirtschaftswegen. Da das der Standardfall ist (normale Straßen sind immer in beiden Richtungen nutzbar, wenn nichts anderes ausgeschildert ist, z. B. durch Einbahnstraßenschild), brauchen Sie diesen Tag nicht zu setzen. Er ist zwar inhaltlich nicht falsch (kann also bei den schon so getaggten Objekten stehen bleiben), aber redundant (daher bitte künftig an normalen Straßen nicht mehr taggen).
Außerdem bitte beim hier verlinkten Weg prüfen, ob tracktype=grade2 passt (wenn die Straße durchgehend mit Kopfsteinpflaster befestigt ist, passt eher grade1).
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
alesarrett (2024-08-25 16:45:08+00:00): Ciao Fabio, hai inserito il percorso del futuro tram SIR2 come railway=construction, ma non è ancora in costruzione.
Se proprio la si vuole inserire, dovrebbe essere inserita come railway=proposed (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed).
Modifichi tu o faccio io?
eggie (2024-08-17 14:30:18+00:00): Beste lkhd

Goed om zaken actueel te maken.
We taggen in OSM bij op de bestaande adresnodes.
Je hebt nu allemaal nieuwe incomplete adressen gemaakt.
Zou je je edits nog eens kunnen nalopen.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=155373059

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-08-17 14:32:52+00:00): Hoogeind en Singel heb ik vast voor je gedaan.
eggie (2024-08-17 14:36:20+00:00): Randstad en Tempoteam zitten op hetzelfde adres? Kijk je nog even?
eggie (2024-08-17 14:41:31+00:00): Denk dat ik de meeste wel heb samengevoegd
Groet
eggie
lkhd (2024-08-17 16:09:41+00:00): Hoi Eggie,

Sorry voor de rommel. Ik was op de fiets in Sneek, met OsmAnd, en de UI is nogal verwarrend. Ik heb zoveel mogelijk bestaande POIs aangepast, maar de meesten waren nieuw.
Randstad en Tempoteam zitten inderdaad in hetzelfde pand, met dezelfde voordeur, huisnr 57.
lkhd (2024-08-17 16:13:05+00:00): Sommigen zijn inderdaad incompleet. Ik kreeg niet overal openingstijden, telefoonnummers en websites te pakken.
Nogmaals excuus - ik zal mij in de toekomst meer verdiepen in OsmAnd's UI.

Fijne avond,

lkhd
eggie (2024-08-17 16:13:23+00:00): Yep.. voor onderweg is OsmAnd wel makkelijk.
Maar daarna zou je het dan kunnen bewerken met een reguliere editor als JOSM of iD. Maar misschien was ik te vroeg met screenen en was je dat al van plan.

Het is in inder geval weer actueler hier.
MVG
eggie
lkhd (2024-08-17 16:20:00+00:00): >voor onderweg is OsmAnd wel makkelijk
Offline maps zijn geweldig, en de voornaamste reden dat ik van OSM data gebruik maak.

>JOSM of iD
Hier zal ik me in verdiepen, dankjewel voor de hulp.
emvee (2024-08-17 14:17:21+00:00): Zit ook een kleine update in Beverwijk bij.
Albe_ (2024-08-18 11:07:50+00:00): Kiitos kun huomasit!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155373322
CAI Stabia (2024-08-19 10:00:15+00:00): ciao Domenico, due giorni fa hai modificato la geometria del sentiero che da Torca scende a Crapolla.
Posso chiederti se hai effettuato una survey di persona e a quali strumenti ti sei affidato? 
Tieni presente che il CAI ha segnato il sentiero dopo averlo percorsopiù volte utilizzando esclusivamente strumenti GPS aggiornati e non smartphone.
Poichè le modifiche impattano sulla sicurezza dei tanti escursionisti che visitano la zona, ti invito ad avere la massima cautela nel modificare i sentieri CAI e solo ed esclusivamente sulla base di ricognizioni effettuate con strumenti GPS affidabili (mai con lo smartphone)
DomenicoCacace (2024-08-19 11:56:41+00:00): Ciao,
Ho usato come riferimento le immagini ortorettificate fornite dal PCN e le più recenti immagini satellitari di Bing, allineando le seconde alle prime per avere un riscontro più accurato. Le modifiche al sentiero in questione riguardano l'aggiunta di punti per rendere il tracciato meno "segmentato" (le curve dei gradini erano mappati con 3 punti ciascuno); la differenza tra il vecchio ed il nuovo tracciato è nell'ordine dei centimetri, fatta eccezione per il tratto finale in cui la differenza è di qualche metro (è possibile anche che il segnale GPS in quei punti abbia un'accuratezza minore, essendo quella parte del sentiero abbastanza addentrata nel fiordo). Se ritenete che la modifica non sia adeguata e possa causare problemi posso provvedere a ripristinare la condizione precedente.
A proposito di sicurezza degli escursionisti: ho rimosso parte di un sentiero precedentemente mappato che portava dalla spiaggia di Crapolla alla torre vicereale, in quanto non mi risulta che esista effettivamente (esiste anche una nota di un altro contributor che non è riuscito a trovare il sentiero in questione); a voi risulta che questo sentiero esista?
CAI Stabia (2024-08-22 08:36:08+00:00): Si, la traccia di sentiero da Crapolla alla tore esiste, d'estate è occultata dalla vegetazione. Mi sembra quindi che non sei andato di persona a verificare. Ci raccomandiamo di non modificare o peggio cancellare sentieri senza una ricognizione di persona. Qualcuno può sbagliare, anche noi naturalmente, ma si dialoga con l'autore del changeset (proprio come stiamo facendo noi ora)
DomenicoCacace (2024-08-22 11:38:04+00:00): Vi ringrazio del feedback. Ho provveduto a ripristinare lo stato precedente con il changeset 155600716 e a chiudere la nota 3676777 riguardante il sentiero che porta alla torre.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-17 08:32:43+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12116991230/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 )
Telegram Sam (2025-06-13 00:56:08+00:00): Sorry for the delay. I'm not sure why I created that fix me. I might have just fumbled the controls in the app.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-06-13 13:39:49+00:00): I deleted it then
SekeRob (2024-08-25 17:41:43+00:00): Seems you have broken something as now the country outline lights up in OSM Inspector. https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=13.51358&lat=43.69502&zoom=9&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.50&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Please check
user_177389 (2024-08-25 19:01:11+00:00): Coastline was changed today(!), I fixed it: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/384526298/history

The change to the relations was eight days ago. I can't find any new errors.