piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SHB2000 (2024-07-11 00:25:16+00:00): Ah, that makes sense – I guess that's the best we have for now (I'm sure there'll be better sources closer to the opening date).
rskedgell (2024-06-11 21:48:22+00:00): Reverted. If you don't understand the tagging, please don't change it.

The camera "catches" people who make a deliberate choice to break the law by deliberately ignoring a traffic sign.

Reverted.
BCNorwich (2024-06-11 13:00:41+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The kissing gate would not be in the middle of Dunstable Road, it would be difficult for vehicles to get through.

I've moved it just off the main road to control access to the footpath only. Please check that this is OK.

Regards Bernard.
martien-176 (2024-06-12 17:40:52+00:00): Hi,  thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT.

The buildings you mapped are well done as to their location. But pay attention to the squareness of the corners. Always draw buildings as square and precise as you can. Then add the Building feature type. And last, right click it and click the square icon. 

Please watch these 2 short video for more info: 
-Buildings--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o
-Roads--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBLwb2nisJQ 

Thanks so much for your contribution, Martien, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152538591
rskedgell (2024-06-11 21:45:37+00:00): Not being able to use this as a short-cut is access=permissive (as previously tagged) or access=destination. If your routing software sent you this way, you should file a bug report with the software provider.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-11 11:30:24+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.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/573548813

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Adam_Piszczek (2024-06-19 08:00:05+00:00): Nazw ulic nie ma w tej miejscowości .Adres podany jest prawidłowy.
BCNorwich (2024-06-12 05:42:07+00:00): Hi, the platform as an area feature does not extend to or join to the center line of Alexandra Road. Mapping thus makes for a duplicated section of highway at the join of platform and road. I've unjoined it again.

A service road can be mapped through the platform area joining to Alexandra Road at both ends. But as this is a bus stop area with no parking it should only be for bus access.

Regards Bernard.
literan (2024-06-12 11:45:04+00:00): вы опять рисуете многоэтажки поверх многоэтажек. Это неприемлимо.
literan (2024-06-12 11:48:01+00:00): правка будет откачена
Vaultek (2024-06-15 11:03:15+00:00): Окей, я понял. что это неправильно, только вот это является местной особенностью, помогающие в ориентировании на местности, но раз так нельзя, то нельзя
literan (2024-06-15 11:08:43+00:00): что "является местной особенностью" - что наверху многоэтажек строят еще по одной многоэтажке? мне кажется, вы придумываете. Нет там такого, хотя бы на панорамах посмотрите
Hufkratzer (2024-06-11 20:26:30+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1291282337 ist anscheinend ein Reitplatz. Reitplätze werden in OSM normalerweise mit leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian getaggt, siehe z.B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/831875174. Das leisure?horse_riding (Reitanlage) kannst du evtl. an https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/608901530 (Stoneranch) bugsieren.
dankarran (2024-06-11 13:55:02+00:00): If permissive doesn't quite fit here, access=private is probably better than access=no
rskedgell (2024-06-11 21:38:55+00:00): I'd just revert. I knew what I was doing and why I was doing it when I tagged this as permissive.
dankarran (2024-06-11 21:52:39+00:00): Fair enough. I've only ever been through on foot without paying attention to the gate rules.
rskedgell (2024-06-11 21:58:34+00:00): There may be a reasonable case for making it access=destination, but this user's edit to the Browning Road bridge in #152538450 suggests that they're trying to fix a bug in routing software by editing OSM
literan (2024-06-12 17:06:12+00:00): это не город, нужен тег addr:place
opendcc (2024-06-12 04:04:36+00:00): Hallo, weist Du, ob der Defi auch mit umgezogen wurde oder ob der noch am alten FW-Haus hängt?
Gerald Able (2024-06-12 07:37:34+00:00): Der Defibrillator ist noch am alten Feuerwehrhaus und soll dort wegen der zentraleren Lage im Ort auch bleiben.
literan (2024-06-12 12:38:09+00:00): кривой формат адрески 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%90%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%B0#%D0%9D%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2
cyton (2024-06-13 12:16:12+00:00): ich mag das benutzen von landuse=residential bis zum bordstein auch nicht, aber bitte mach das dann blockweise ganz oder gar nicht, wenn du das änderst, die halb-fertigen kann man sonst hinterher schwer wieder finden. 

am besten wäre, wenn du ein fixme=* dran tust an die noch zu großen teile, oder schon das barrier=kerb dran kommt, die kann man dann finden.

meiner auffassung nach sollte an landuse=residential kein anderer tag vorkommen, das kann man so suchen mit overpass-turbo. mir ist jedenfalls bisher kein szenario eingefallen, wo das sinn macht, bzw. wenn doch hab ich keine alternativlösung.

diese maproiulette challenge hab ich deshalb gebastelt;
https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/37968
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152539603
AndersAndersson (2024-06-11 22:10:59+00:00): Hej!
Kul att du gör bra tillägg till Openstreetmap!
Du får dock gärna använda en något mer utförlig beskrivning än "Edit".
Filip009 (2024-06-11 14:48:17+00:00): Ahoj, zasa mizne les kvôli tejto lúke https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1291294808, dávaj si na to prosím pozor, už to nie je prvýkrát. Nevyskakujú ti pri uploade žiadne upozornenia?
Filip009 (2024-06-11 14:52:16+00:00): Prosím uvádzaj zdroj (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1291294814), tak ako je vyžadovaný od ÚGKK https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Slovakia/Sources#Ortofotomozaika_SR_(orthophoto_by_GK%C3%9A_and_NLC) Ja to mám nastavené na klávesovej skratke.
macdale (2024-06-11 15:05:29+00:00): Cauko, dik za upozornenie aj opravu. Pred uploadom si preverujem chyby cez Validation results a ked mi vyskoci cervene hlasenie, hned opravujem. To iste plati v zaverecnej faze pri uploade. Viem ze sa to uz stalo a aj som si daval odvtedy na to pozor, ale niekedy ma to neviem preco neupozorni. Niekedy si vsimnem ze nie je nieco v poriadku  po uploade a hned to opravim. Toto sa vsak tvarilo ok aj po tejto kontrole.
Filip009 (2024-06-11 15:20:03+00:00): Ono to je jedno zo žltých upozornení, pokiaľ nemáš stiahnutý celý multipolygón. Lebo keď ho nemáš stiahnutý celý, tak to nevie skontrolovať, preto ti dá warning ⚠ "Incomplete multipolygon has been modified" Alebo niečo v tom zmysle. Takže keď ho nestiahneš, error mať nebudeš.
macdale (2024-06-11 15:23:25+00:00): Ok, to som nevedel. Dik za info!
Filip009 (2024-06-11 15:28:50+00:00): S tým zdrojom čo?
macdale (2024-06-11 15:38:27+00:00): No vsak ok. Opravim potom aj tie. Ja som totiz pouzival aj inde popis zdroja, ktory som si myslel, ze je ok. Hlavne pri zdroji o ortofoto som chcel dat info, z akeho roku ta ortofoto, z ktorej to bolo obkresloavne, je. To iste plati aj pri dmr. Som niekde pocul, ze sa skenuje uz siesta generacia.
Filip009 (2024-06-11 15:51:15+00:00): Áno bude potom zdroj ÚGKK DMR 6.0, ale teraz je max ÚGKK DMR 5.0 a pre Otofotomozaiku sa používa Ortofotomozaika SR, a pri pozretí histórie objektu sa dá prísť na to, z ktorého roku Ortofotomozaiku daný používateľ použil (aj keď zatiaľ sú len 2)

Nechcel som to napísať tak útočne, len som chcel vedieť, že prečo to používaš v takom štýle.
macdale (2024-06-11 16:55:10+00:00): Sedi vec, ...a pri kresleni hranic pozemkov, katastralnych uzemi, domov kapor 2. 

Inak co je podla teba vhodnejsie pri zakreslovani rezidencnych zon. Vykreslovat podla hranice katastra obce alebo ist podla toho ako koncia zahrady domov? Niekde som si vsimol, ze raz sa to kresli tak, inde zase inak.
Filip009 (2024-06-11 17:01:18+00:00): Práveže kapor2 je tiež už zastaralý. Používa sa ZBGIS, ako zdroj, keď obkresluješ z katastra.

Je to asi na preferenciách konkrétneho autora. Ja idem od oka. Čiže tam, kde vidím ploty, resp. že to niekto obhospodaruje, tak dávam rezidenčnú zónu. Tam, kde sú viac stromy ako domy, dávam les. A niekedy tam vložím aj lúky. Môžeš pozrieť tu https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/48.3327/20.3072 pred pár dňami som tu robil nejaký ten landuse.
eggie (2024-06-11 12:34:26+00:00): Dag apoxini  Het lijkt me niet correct.  De fietsstrook was al opgenomen in de hoofdrijbaan.
Sinds wanneer is hier een gescheiden fietspad gekomen?
Waarom zitten de lanetags dan nog in de hoofdrijbaan.
Graag reactie
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-06-11 13:07:36+00:00): reverted by changeset #152542672

No separate cycleway here.
The tagging is already in de mainhighway wit cycleway=lane
https://www.satellietdataportaal.nl/?base=openstreetmap&res=0.3%2C0.5&datemin=11-06-2023&loc=52.36448%2C4.918407%2C19z&overlay=mos-0&marker=loc&acqdate=2024-05-21&acqid=20240521_103452_PNEO-03_1_1&sensor=Pleiades-NEO

Greetz,
eggie
apoxino (2024-06-12 08:13:41+00:00): Hi Eggie, 
indeed, thank you for the correction, I was assuming it could be considered as a separate cycleway but it would not be consistent with the guidelines and the other streets in Amsterdam. 

Thank you for the correction
apoxino
eggie (2024-06-12 08:27:08+00:00): No problem   :)
BCNorwich (2024-06-12 06:51:12+00:00): Hi, Those blocks seem to be very strangely placed, not in the way usually placed to stop vehicles. Also not placed as per the image you tagged. That image is 7 years old. Are you sure those blocks are still there?

I've removed the duplicate highway, track on top of the road.

Regards Bernard.
AndyBlackett (2024-06-12 07:15:45+00:00): Hi Bernard - thanks for looking at this.  I'm still learning about how all this works.  I made a mistake in copying an image of a single block which was placed in the area which had the associated image - I didn't look at the image and realise it does not reflect the current position of the blocks.  The blocks on the north of the track have been moved from where they were in the image to prevent access to the track which runs NW from their position, they are in a crescent shape which is rather strange.  The two sets of blocks on teh south of the road are placed to prevent vehicles going off the track at that point (I think there is a gate to stop vehicles going south and the blocks prevents vehicles going round the gate but i can't recall).  I was there on Monday, not to do mapping as such but I noted the blocks were not mapped so have added them in.  

In short - yes they are right, but the image is wrong so I've removed it.

Andy
NeisBot (2024-06-11 12:30:24+00:00): Hi Maeva0705, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1291300297

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-15 13:36:14+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152721958
DaveF (2024-06-13 10:02:36+00:00): Hi
You've left a duplicate undeleted. it has relations attached which will require transferring.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/140777120
VLD549 (2024-06-25 10:58:49+00:00): Hi, could you indicate why the name change from Sint-Pieters-Leeuw Floralux to Floralux for the bus stop?
DeLijn shows it to be Sint-Pieters-Leeuw Floralux.

Thank you in advance!
Mizuna (2024-06-25 13:01:13+00:00): It is Floralux.
When a name fills half of my screen there must be something wrong…
I checked on delijn.be and there’s no other Floralux busstop.

https://www.delijn.be/nl/haltes/310333/?showImportantAnnouncement=true
The principle is : map what you see:
https://imgur.com/nakCTLC
https://imgur.com/Dq01Qng

For me it’s a mystery why they add S-P-L on the site, everybody knows it’s in Sint-Pieter-Leeuw.
So, just Kafka in action.

https://www.google.be/search?q=langste+gemeentenaam+vlaanderen
VLD549 (2024-07-17 11:06:05+00:00): Ok, thank you.
surveyor54 (2024-06-12 06:42:33+00:00): Frage, kennst du die Örtlichkeit?
Es ist Selfservice, aber die Sitzgelegenheit befindet sich in einem separatem Raum und im Außenbereich.
309_308_307 (2024-06-12 07:20:40+00:00): Hallo,

die Thematik Bäckerei/Café ist wohl der Dauerbrenner, gerade bei Supermarktbäckereien. Es gibt leider viele Menschen, die Café mit Kaffee gleichsetzen (hört sich ja irgendwie gleich an) und dann meinen, jeder Ort, wo man einen Kaffee bekommt, ist ein Café. Was auch noch befeuert wird von Bäckereien, die sich tatsächlich nur noch Café nennen, die also den Verkauf von Heißgetränken als Hauptgeschäft betreiben und der Verkauf von Backwaren nur noch in den Hintergrund rückt.
Ich tendiere in jüngster Zeit dazu, nur noch Einrichtungen, wo man auch tatsächlich am Tisch bedient wird, als Café zu bezeichnen, und alle anderen Einrichtungen, wo man am Tresen seinen Kaffee abholen muss, als Bäckerei.

Aber wie man es dreht oder wendet, das falscheste was man in der Situation machen kann, ist zwei Punkte zu setzen. Denn egal ob die Bäckerei jetzt Brot oder Kaffee verkauft, es ist und bleibt nur ein Unternehmen, ein konkretes Objekt, und nicht zwei getrennte Unternehmen. Daran ändert das Sortiment nichts. Der Dorfladen, der neben Lebensmitteln auch Backwaren verkauft, möglicherweise sogar eine eigene Backstube betreibt, aber eben zur Sicherstellung der Nahversorgung gerade wenn der nächste Supermarkt weit weg ist, neben Brötchen auch Nudeln verkauft, bekommt allein deshalb nicht zwei Punkte als Supermarkt und als Bäckerei.

Dass der Aufenthaltsraum baulich getrennt ist, kann hier kein Kriterium sein. Das gibt es bei Supermarktbäckereien, die auch am Sonntag öffnen (wenn der Supermarkt selbst geschlossen ist) recht häufig, weil man so die Bäckerei recht gut vom Supermarkt trennen kann. Aber auch bei alleinstehenden Bäckereien und Cafés hab ich das schon gesehen, denn ein so abgetrennter Sitzbereich gilt nach deutschem Recht als Raucherraum und man darf dort drin rauchen. Einige Lokalitäten machen davon Gebrauch.
surveyor54 (2024-06-12 07:39:59+00:00): Da es hier verschiedene Meinungen gibt, sollte man auch diese respektieren.
Wenn du es nun schon abänderst, solltest du auch das Tagging aktualisieren, breakfast, snack ..

Ich bin mittlerweile fast 15 Jahre dabei und habe mir abgewöhnt hier auf meine Meinung zu beharren.

Weiterhin frohes Mappen
desertivy (2024-06-11 17:58:00+00:00): Vandalism?, excuse me?. what I did is map based on the most recent imagery that's available, I saw no road so i removed it, I don't have the fancy "Maxar SecureWatch Imagery" that you got, so I work on what's available, please don't say such big words without looking well  into it.
Regards.
LockOnGuy (2024-06-12 00:46:30+00:00): Thank you @Eman Ghareeb, for your phenomenal and excellent work. You and your team are making extraordinary efforts to improve and fix the roads in Iraq, and it shows! Please continue the great work.      
      
And for @desertivy, days ago I asked you to use good changeset comments to explain your edits so it is easier for us mappers to understand without digging into it.      
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152435410      
      
Unfortunately, you did not respond to my request and continued to add changeset comments that don't explain what you did. For example, you used "improvements" in the changeset comment when you deleted an existing road, which was thankfully restored here in this changeset. I see you still have changesets with only "improvements" as the comment, as your last one was 4 hours ago, but you did not specify what you improved. Was it the shape and alignment of ways? Did you improve the naming? Delete something? Improve the nodes or shops?      
      
Here are some examples of unclear changeset comments and how to fix them:      
      
For the changeset when you deleted the road, you should have said, "deleted the road as it's not existing in the Esri satellite imagery."      
You stated "construction areas"; you should have said, "adding construction area landuse," for example.      
You stated "خزان ماء الحبيبية," translated to "Habybyah water tank." What about it? You should have said something like, "improved the tagging and deleted 2 duplicate nodes."      
In another changeset, you stated "changed road classification." What road and why? You should have stated the reason, like "changed xxx road classification to a more suitable one per my survey" or "changed xxx highway value from x to y per my local knowledge."      
Another changeset comment was "minor fix," but you did not specify the actual fix. It should have said, "removed building tag from the land and added a building inside of it."      
      
For more info, you can read the wiki or ask for help, and we will be glad to assist you.      
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments      
      
Now let's get back to this changeset. Not only would those who have recent satellite imagery think this might be vandalism, but also the locals or those who have seen it on the ground. Seeing you delete an existing road from the OSM database is concerning. Just this year, we had tens of new bridges and ways in Baghdad, and many of these are still not available in the satellite imagery on OSM. That is not an excuse to remove them. You should have checked the road's history to see when it was added or edited, and you would have seen the source for that before removing it entirely without local knowledge.      
      
I really hope these points are clear and help you map better.      
      
Best regards.
Eman Ghareeb (2024-06-12 07:02:51+00:00): Hello LockOnGuy,
Thank you so much for your comment I appreciate it.
Hi desertivy,
As you mentioned you removed a road that you didn't see, but in this case, you should take a look at the source that we used in our changeset set, In addition, we occasionally use Maxar’s most recent nonpublic imagery for updates in OpenStreetMap. We always prioritize the use of public imagery, but at some locations where new changes are not seen in public imagery options, we will use Maxar’s nonpublic imagery to ensure the map is up to date.
As we mention in our main page in Wiki OSM :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DigitalEgypt
Here is a wiki page that might be helpful for you:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset
Regards
Eman Ghareeb
desertivy (2024-06-12 11:25:16+00:00): Hi 
@Eman Ghareeb
I believe that lebeling a mistake as "vandalism" is an exaggeration and potentially harmful to the community. If we can agree on this, then there's no further discussion needed. I appreciate your efforts and encourage you to continue your great work.

@LockOnGuy 
Alright, buddy.

Regards.
Eman Ghareeb (2024-06-12 12:59:58+00:00): Hi desertivy;
I agree with your point, and next time please read the source in the changeset for any mapper, to save the edits and efforts they made to make OpenStreetMap more accurate.
Happy Mapping!
Regards
Eman Ghareeb
eggie (2024-06-11 13:18:42+00:00): Foutmeldingen warnings:crossing_ways:highway-highway
  	5
Wegen kruisen elkaar ergens zonder verbindingsnode.
Die paden in het winkelcentrum zouden eigenlijk covered=yes moeten krijgen of desnoods tunnel=building_passage Nu liggen ze op het dak.
Let ook op plakken van je paden aan de vlakken. Dat is niet de bedoeling.
MVG
eggie
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-11 13:00:29+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11739657063

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eggie (2024-06-11 13:14:04+00:00): Dag Ytrog.
Wanneer de vlag de lading dekt is het oke. 
De naam rendert nu in ieder geval.
MVG
eggie
Ytrog (2024-06-12 06:20:36+00:00): Dank je. Raar dat er geen kantoor in de culturele sector bestaat hier 🤔

MVG,
Ytrog
woodpeck_repair (2024-06-11 13:09:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152542810 where the changeset comment is: revert attempt to reinstate unwanted Gaza data by a new account trying to mask as someone else
eggie (2024-06-11 13:12:37+00:00): Dag Nivkys.. Die overkappingen komen niet mee met de BAGimport. Die kun je beter apart intekenen met building=roof layer=1
Bij periodieke updates ben je je wijzigingen weer kwijt.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-06-11 13:10:43+00:00): Dag Frankie Is dit wel een track  Dus een veldweg geschikt voor motorvoertuigen. Het zal nu routeren voor autoverkeer?

MVG
eggie
FrankieV (2024-06-11 13:32:45+00:00): Bovenste gedeelte aangepast naar 'informeel pad', smal pad waar je kan wandelen, maar verder ook niet. Onderste gedeelte is wel een zandweg, waar een auto/landbouwvoertuig wel terecht kan. Het onderste toegevoegde deel is wat smaller dan de straat waar het op aansluit 'Nieuwkerk', lijkt qua pad een beetje op 'Swarthoolsepad', een stukje oostelijker, loopt vanaf 'Nieuwkerk' richting zuiden.
eggie (2024-06-11 14:38:20+00:00): Oke... Top!
literan (2024-06-12 13:11:50+00:00): слово "деревня" лишнее
jaale (2024-06-22 09:05:16+00:00): Danke für die Korrektur! Ich hatte den Key aus dem Wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:tower:type%3Dcommunication) übernommen. Habe es im Wiki nun korrigiert.
MatchaHatesGoogle (2024-06-11 18:22:06+00:00): l have - the worst - habit of doing that, thank you!
Tomas_J (2025-06-25 17:01:56+00:00): Cus, na tomto priechode (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11972108415#map=19/48.572160/19.111323) a inych nie je ostrovcek. Opravil som crossing:island na no.
Marian Mika (2025-06-25 17:09:44+00:00): v pohode, je super, že aj takéto detaily niekto zaktualizuje. nikdy nevieme, komu s tým niekedy pomôžeme.
Tomas_J (2025-06-25 17:16:35+00:00): Mapujem pre nevidiacich a pre nich je to dolezita informacia pred priechodom (ci maju cakat v strede ostrovcek alebo nie).
Marian Mika (2025-06-25 17:25:03+00:00): Práve preto som aj ja dávnejšie skúsil zamapovať vo Zvolene čo najpresnejšie čo najviac obrubníkov na prechodoch. Pár rokov dozadu dokonca Zvolen nemal zakreslené skoro žiadne chodníky. Trochu to trvalo, ale stálo to za to. Aj tá navigácia funguje lepšie keď už existujú v mape informácie o chodníkoch, priechodoch, schodoch a pod.
Tomas_J (2025-06-25 17:32:04+00:00): Ano, obrubníky sú co ZV nakreslené super.  A tiez je super že priechod footway=crossing nenapajas priamo na priliehajuci kolmy chodník do tvaru T ale za priechodom nakreslis ako jeho pokračovanie ešte kúsok chodníka. Je to hrozny mikromaping ale pre navigácie pre vozičkárov a nevidiacich je to kľúčové aby sa dala presne vyznačiť poloha obrubníka.
Marian Mika (2025-06-25 17:41:42+00:00): Kiež by som mal viac času na ďalšie editácie, nejak ho mám čoraz menej. Ale keď to ide, tak si vždy nájdem nejakú drobnosť na zaktualizovanie. V súčasnosti sa zameriavam na obchodné centrá, novú výstavbu, rôzne balíkoboxy v celom okrese, aktualzáciu adries za okres.
Tomas_J (2025-06-25 17:48:21+00:00): Editorov je, žiaľ, velmi málo a zmien a nezmapovaneho veľa.  Dobre, že robiš veci, kde sa pohybuje veľa ľudí - to má v mape imho najväčšiu cenu. Tie balikoboxy by sa možno dali získať od Pakety, pošty, DHL a ďalších aj oficiálne a importovať. Česi robili nejaké importy aj pre Slovensko ale nedopadlo to úplne na jednotku...
Marian Mika (2025-06-25 17:57:16+00:00): Veľakrát tie ich zdroje ani nie sú presné. keďže sa "starám" iba o okres, tak to všetko radšej kontrolujem podľa ich webov, upravuje pozície podľa odsledovaného alebo fotiek na weboch. Posledne, keď som pridával defibrilátory, tak bola pekná kôpka zle zamapovaných už v zdrojovom súbore. Možno súradnice brali mobilom, a tam to veľmi presné nebýva. Dokonca také AED na OC Klokan sa zobrazuje niekde na námestí SNP. Úplne mimo.