piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
supsup (2024-07-25 14:17:18+00:00): I see. As for starting point, it is not documented https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:via_ferrata%3Dstart . Does it work by description value matching the names of the via ferrata relation? I think I changed that to a name, which made more sense to me.

Is it common practice to map all via ferratas in a given spot as one relation when they are more theme-park like instead of mainly serving to securely get from A to B? The wiki says route=via_ferrata is still a proposal and "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Via_ferrata#Tagging_as_route=via_ferrata_relation" does not specify this (it says all ways should be added to it, but I think that referes to OSM-way's, not real life ways) . To me in this particular case, there are three via ferratas of different difficulty that can be climbed independently (so red, blue and purple - they also have different names  [by colour], and different difficulty). Hence there should be three relations?

I can change it accordingly, I am just not sure what the best practice is.
cehceh (2024-07-25 21:14:44+00:00): Hi supsup,

Yes, I know, the tagging of via ferratas is a long-discussed but never conclusively clarified topic.
At least the mentioned proposal has been accepted in many cases.
I'm looking at and tagging via ferratas in eastern Germany, France and also the Czech Republic for many years and I am in discussion with other via ferrata mappers (e.g. Arminus, sannorra).

We use the following approach for routes and relations:
- Dividing route sections into a relation as soon as different difficulties, elements or variants occur
- Naming of variants in all sections of this variant 
- always "highway=via_ferrata", if only accessible with equipment
- always "via_ferrata_scale" at each individual element (variants, emergency exits, bridges, ...) and for the relation (we have mostly considered the more difficult variant, but not bypassable short extreme variants); this tag is evaluated in XCTrails and displayed in color
- "route=via_ferrata" + "climbing=route" + "type=route" for relations
- "name=..." for relations and, if known, for the individual sections and variants (also displayed individually in XCTrails)
- optional "fee=...", "access=..." and "access:conditional=..." for fee obligation, blocking or access only as a customer, seasonal blocking (the latter is displayed in XCTrails with a cross through it depending on the time).

No standards or best practices are officially available for the starting points. Starting points are also only displayed on maps that actually evaluate this tag.
The approach is as follows:
- Only one starting point for the entire relation (i.e. the point at which you decide on one of the variants). This is the point that can then be displayed on overview maps, e.g. as "Via Ferrata Vodní Brána" with a symbol (in such a view, several start symbols very close to each other make no sense)
- After many tests, I now use the following tags for the starting point, which are not criticized by the quality assurance (Osmose, OSMI, ...) only in this combination:
description=Via Ferrata... (name) 
via_ferrata=start
natural=cliff
sport=via_ferrata
- in XCTrails the tag "via_ferrata=start" is used as a marker where the symbol goes (otherwise the route direction or altitude).

In this case I would suggest
- a single relation with named sections and different difficulties (via_ferrata_scale)
- Names and also colors (but as far as I know no one displays these on a map) for each section.

Hope this helps!
Matthias
supsup (2024-07-26 16:50:54+00:00): Hm, so if I get it right, when you use "variant", you mean "way" in OSM. "Section" does not map to any concept in OSM - all the ways in a section need to have name (and colour) applied to each of them. I was trying to break down the sections into individual segments according to their difficulty as the in-place map suggests (i only properly did the purple one, note that the map is no all up to date to reality)the : https://imgur.com/a/STGasQY

I think the current way is a bit of mapping for a renderer (xtrails) and the way I used subrelation makes sense as it maps better to real world than the usage you suggest.

I have a suspicion the breakage might be due to me moving what is in description to name, I am correcting that now and let's see what it does on xtrails. If it does not help, I can go back to one relation.

Also, I think all this should be documented in the wiki even if it is still a proposal.
supsup (2024-07-26 16:54:39+00:00): So the starting point is changed back: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154452452#map=19/50.61555/15.30877

does that help (not sure how fast xtrails updates)?
cehceh (2024-07-29 19:11:58+00:00): XCTrails is updated every 2-3 days; at time I don't see any change.
Ragardless of XCTrails I see a big problem in that the main relation is no longer shown completely if I call https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10588521 (only one sub-relation is now shown). But such links I and others use for reference to the complete via ferrata  which is no longer possible in the case of so called "super relation".
As far as I know, these are actually only used for very long and complex routes (traffic connections, long-distance cycle paths, ...).
As far as I can see, your enhancement mainly concerns the color coding of the routes. Why not define the color as a property of the individual segments?
In this respect, I would very much welcome a return to a simple relationship :-)
supsup (2024-08-01 14:47:36+00:00): Ok, I put the individual ways into the parent relations and kept the subrelations for the three individual sections.

frankly, I still think this is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

and xctrails (and also openstreetmap.org) should be fixed to support superrelations. There is a segment that the purple and red section share, so colour cannot be applied correctly to that way. The main change was actually breaking the purple way into its constituents accroding to the schematic map on-site (picture is linked above) plus aligning everything in the area to a more proper spot.
supsup (2024-08-02 13:23:40+00:00): Ok, I documented https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:via_ferrata%3Dstart
supsup (2024-08-02 15:41:26+00:00): And also the relation: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dvia_ferrata

feel free to edit both. But as there seems to be some form of consensus, it should be in the wiki in my opinion.
cehceh (2024-08-04 15:05:06+00:00): Thank you very much!
I'll check it out when we get back from the Alps in a couple of weeks :-)
Frans S (2024-07-25 10:02:41+00:00): 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. 
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/154274398
Frans S (2024-07-25 10:09:01+00:00): I found also quite a number of buildings where you included the shadow into a mapping.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154274398
ntzm (2024-08-02 10:23:19+00:00): Is it oneway for bikes too?
Pink Duck (2024-08-02 10:25:29+00:00): Yes, but they all illegally cycle either way regardless.
Pink Duck (2024-08-02 10:26:11+00:00): (Well, opposite the one-way is what I meant)
Udarian (2024-07-23 20:59:59+00:00): The names of the stations shouldn’t use the shortenings, aka sw for southwest and st for street they should be using the longer names, that just convention in the community.
notd3nny (2024-07-26 10:43:35+00:00): I just took the names of the stations straight from this government map: https://www.miamidade.gov/transit/library/smart-plan-map.pdf. The bus stops also have their names lettered on them, but they're difficult to see because they're still under construction/on the busway. Some of the names on the stations may differ from the map, but I'll check that when the construction finishes.
Udarian (2024-07-27 10:00:39+00:00): The tiger road names are the same (or at least when they were imported) and had to be expanded afterwards. That’s why I say it’s convention to have to full name (street instead of st for example). I understand what happened I just left the comment as a note for future reference.

Happy mapping,
Udar
notd3nny (2024-07-28 01:50:57+00:00): I'v gone ahead and changed the names of all the stations again to what they actually say on their physical signage, per my last changeset. If you would like to alter them to make sure they are conventionally correct, feel free to.
seewäldler (2024-07-22 19:41:29+00:00): Hallo vacanziere!

Das, was da in der Stockerholzstrasse zwischen Auto-Fahrbahn und Fussweg hinter den Grüninseln mit den Bäumen versteckt ist, ist kein Fahrradweg. Das sieht zwar so aus als ob es einer wäre und viele Autofahrer würden sich wünschen es wäre so und die Radler wären von der Auto-Fahrbahn weg, das trügt aber. 

Das cycleway:right=track sollte deswegen wieder weg.
VLD549 (2024-09-24 17:58:46+00:00): Hi, I was asked to verify the name change. BAG doesn't show only Meierij though.. Could you indicate where this update is visible? I can't find it. 
Thank you!
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-22 18:50:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Tąpadła":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12068628441
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12068659070
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12068659071
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12068659080
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12068659081
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303138283

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Elizen (2024-07-30 10:27:08+00:00): Здравствуйте. Пожалуйста, заносите перевод наименования населённого пункта на другие языки в соответствующие теги (name:ce, name:en и т.д.), а не в name.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
cerla (2024-07-30 18:37:01+00:00): Доброго времени суток. Ответил Вам на почту.
empty_child (2024-07-30 12:57:49+00:00): All your activities were reverted. A claim was sent to DWG

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154605287
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-22 19:10:36+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Tomkowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1019679434
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1019688529
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1201665691
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303140707
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303140711
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303140712
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303140713

"Bolesławice":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1244039369
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303140715

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2024-07-22 19:10:35+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Podana kombinacja addr:city + addr:place jest nieprawidłowa.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1201439542

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
gszkr (2024-09-14 15:45:25+00:00): Jaki jest cel robienia obrysów malutkich skrzyżowań? Zgodnie z dokumentacją oznaczeni junction powinno w praktyce być stosowane dla skrzyżowań mających swoje nazwy - typu Węzeł Łagiewnicki, Węzeł Sośnica itp. Poza tym nawet jeżeli już, to te obszary są niezgodne z zasadami ich tworzenia - fruwają w powietrzu do niczego nie podpięte.
eggie (2024-07-22 20:40:11+00:00): Bikeshop samengevoegd met bestaande adresnode.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-07-22 20:39:04+00:00): Dag Riscky  Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode.

MVG
eggie
galen8183 (2024-12-31 06:57:43+00:00): Hello,
Please square corners when appropriate, as with most of the building geometries you've added.
In iD, selecting a area or node and pressing `q` will square all square-ish corners or the selected corner, respectively.
Thanks!
Robert Whittaker (2024-08-02 09:12:54+00:00): Hi phodgkin,

In this changeset you updated https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9122654096 from a Sainsbury's to a Tesco. Do you happen to know if it's a "Tesco" or a "Tesco Express" store?
phodgkin (2024-08-02 21:03:24+00:00): Sorry, didn't think to check. Almost certainly a Tesco Express based on size, but will check next time I'm passing.
seewäldler (2024-07-23 10:23:09+00:00): Prima, so sieht es richtig aus!
Baloo Uriza (2024-07-23 14:20:00+00:00): Is this really named?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154279690
VillageofWolves (2024-07-23 14:37:56+00:00): There is a sign designating trail for resident use "Baptist Village Footpath..."
I-76 (2024-10-17 16:05:18+00:00): Just a heads-up - don't name things what they are, that's what the feature type is for. I changed these for you.
Frans S (2024-07-23 12:01:01+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. 
Rather accurate mapped. However, you did not square most buildings.
Best regards
JayTurnr (2024-07-22 20:36:45+00:00): With the new Garvey Glade construction site, these are about to be very connected, so I deemed it sensible to merge them
Allison P (2024-07-22 20:56:16+00:00): It is a violation of Google ToS to use Google Maps for contributing to OpenStreetMap! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google
tjhorner (2024-08-04 02:36:48+00:00): This changeset adds `not:network:wikidata=Q6411393` but `network=KCM`, which seems contradictory. The other edited node doesn't have `not:network:wikidata=Q6411393`.

I looked up the stop number on King County Metro's trip planner and it appears to be owned and operated by KCM. I will update the tags accordingly but wanted to comment here in case this change was indeed intentional.
Anas masuris (2024-11-15 14:17:52+00:00): Rampy ładunkowe oznacza się jako railway=loading_ramp a nie railway=platform. Jeśli chcesz edytować obiekty na kolei, to zachęcam zapoznać się ze schematem tagowania:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_Poland
MaciekMma (2024-11-16 06:57:08+00:00): Cześć, dzieki za info. Nie mialem pojecia ze na osm jest "wiki w wiki" o_0 Bo na glownym wiki nie blyo info o loading_ramp.
Anas masuris (2024-11-16 11:02:22+00:00): Nie wiem, czy są też inne rozbudowane, ale w przypadku kolejowych rzeczy, to ze względu na dużą specyfikę i stopień skomplikowania tego działu, to takie coś musiało powstać xd Jest też bardziej ogólny schemat tagowania OpenRailwayMap, a każdy kraj potem sobie ją dostosowuje np. Niemcy, Austria, Czechy itp.
Layft Greater (2024-08-08 10:01:21+00:00): Could you please share the source of the "Tasou Mitsopoulou" street name? E.g. a photo of a street sign

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4677512#map=18/34.90794/33.63775
igor_such (2024-08-15 16:22:05+00:00): If you live in Larnaca, you can find the double name for the Piale Pasha street as Tasou Mitsopoulou avenue. 
I lived on that street and you can find it on the houses along. There is no possibility to attach photos hereor I could not find an option.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-29 05:29:56+00:00): Hello!

You used
emergency=fire_hydrant80
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/318420488/history

Have you maybe meant
emergency=fire_hydrant
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
FFWHol_Norimaki (2025-05-03 10:34:28+00:00): emergency=fire_hydrant
fire_hydrant:diameter=80
lines scrambeled  in a bad way thank you
Frans S (2024-07-23 10:59:53+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please map highways in accordance with this wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India/Tags/Highway
Check the description of tracks.
Best regards
Frans S (2024-07-23 11:01:15+00:00): And improve your mapping skills. 
Buildings hardly squared and not always correct mapped.
Best regards
philippec (2024-07-23 06:15:39+00:00): Ik denk dat er 1 te veel is.
Ik raad ID en mapillary aan.
Jakka (2024-07-23 15:38:59+00:00): Heb er één vanaf gehaald ;)
philippec (2024-07-24 19:56:22+00:00): In orde, met foto.
KiloThree (2024-07-23 15:16:22+00:00): I'm a bit confused by some of what you've changed from footway to pedestrian, e.g. Thoreau Path and Bowdoin. My understanding was `highway=pedestrian` was a pedestrian street, e.g. Washington St, while `highway=footway` was a path, with the distinction being width and amenities?
StreetSurveyor (2024-07-23 21:43:57+00:00): Kilo, my changes were based on the survey that I conducted. 

Thoreau Path was a giant pedestrian street, could probably even be designated as a service road since there was a service vehicle on one side and another vehicle could easily get by on the other side.  Here's a link that even shows some of it: https://urbnparks.com/boston/thoreau-path/

As far as Bowdoin Sq, there was a street sign and those were small pedestrian streets with another sign inside of it for 'Norman Herr Way'.
KiloThree (2024-07-23 22:07:50+00:00): Oh, I guess I had gotten confused about the distinction, and had conceptualized pedestrian street as something commercial lined, or similar, but looking again at the wiki it just seems very ambiguous. Seems like a less clearly distinguished set of tiers than the highway=primary/trunk/tertiary
b-jazz (2025-07-15 22:15:36+00:00): Please don't draw cart paths as areas. Thanks.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2024-10-22 13:30:53+00:00): Hi muralito, 
I think there is a potential mistake with some river names in this changeset. You have added name:es=Arroyo de la Invernada  to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116896246 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303176906 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303176905 which seems not to be correct both per IGM, IGBE and Brazilian Army Topographic Maps. Can you explain your change? Also https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116895878/ has the similar issue. I think that these mentioned rivers are creating Arroio Invernada but should not have that name
muralito (2024-10-22 18:07:05+00:00): Hi Aleksandar,

the interpretation of which waterway is Arroyo de la Invernada is the problem by which the limits between Brazil and Uruguay are disputed since XIX century.

So, name:es in https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116896246 is ok, because its what is called in spanish (IGM link below). Obviously the IGBE and Brazilian Topographic Maps will display other names as they are official organizations in their country. The IGM sheet shows which waterway is called Arroyo de la Invernada for us. https://igm.gub.uy/geoportal/datos/cartas/J/J7.tif

So, I tagged name:es=Arroyo de la Invernada the waterways that are part of "Arroyo de la Invernada" according to Uruguay position.

This way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116895878/ is what Brazil says it is "Arroio Invernada", but for Uruguay is "Arroyo Maneco", so one name in name:pt, the other in name:es, and both in name, as there are tagged all waterways in the BR/UY border.
Hugues Ross (2024-07-23 00:58:11+00:00): This building should not have been split. Don't touch it anymore, I'll fix it myself
Hugues Ross (2024-07-23 01:01:54+00:00): Looking at this again, it has also been incorrectly offset...are you doing that to everything you touch?

Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Montr%C3%A9al#Bing_Maps_Offset
it also applies to Longueuil. When using the Bing imagery, you need to set the offset to 0.6,-1.54 or your data will be offset incorrectly
Hugues Ross (2024-07-23 01:02:34+00:00): I appreciate the enthusiasm and desire to improve the map--but please take your time to make sure your work doesn't have to be fixed later
silversurfer83 (2024-07-23 05:18:57+00:00): Moin :)

langsam wird der Weg realistischer :)

Welche Ausnahmen sind denn unter dem 250er noch mit dem weißen Zusatzzeichen aufgelistet? 

Grüße
silversurfer83
LockOnGuy (2024-07-23 04:18:49+00:00): Please stop this vandalism! stop adding your own name to the map! Your username is "M7MDSADQ" the 7 means the letter H so the username is "Mhmd Sadq" which is the name you added to this street as "the street of the leader mohmd sadq al-gazi"    .     
Please stop this vandalism.    
This changeset and vandal edit will be reverted again.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-10 01:57:05+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164747836
AngocA (2024-07-24 21:47:11+00:00): Hola JLOSM.

Te quería comentar que creaste un loop en un río: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303184547/history
Mira esta página y verás el problema: https://waterwaymap.org/loops#map=14.99/6.81458/-74.58474
Si puedes validar el problema, que el río debería ser en el otro sentido.

Andres G
JLOSM (2024-08-04 06:55:56+00:00): Hola Andrés G,
Direccionamiento del flujo de agua arreglado.

Gracias por avisarme.
Geogast (2024-10-17 20:07:03+00:00): Gracias por el revert!
AgusQui (2024-10-17 23:27:41+00:00): Gracias por el reconocimiento! Fue laborioso.
Marek-M (2024-07-23 08:52:48+00:00): Cześć, dzięki za pierwszą edycję! Mam pewne uwagi do Twojej nowej drogi https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1303186625:

1. Dróg nie łączymy z obszarami - Twoja ścieżka  została połączona z obwiednią lasu w punkcie https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12069067735 (zaraz to naprawię)

2. Czy na tej ścieżce jest zakaz ruchu rowerem - czy stoi tam stosowny znak drogowy? Brak znaku zakaz ruchu rowerem powoduje, że droga nie powinna otrzymać znacznika `bicycle=no`

3. Ścieżki `highway=path` domyślnie umożliwiają poruszanie się nimi dla rowerzystów, pieszych oraz konno, więc tag `horse=yes` jest tam zbędny.

4. Czy ta nazwa ścieżki jest widoczna na jakimś znaku? Ewentualnie nadawanie nazw można usprawiedliwić powszechnym stosowaniem tej nazwy przez np. mieszkańców okolicy. Jeżeli ta nazwa używana jest tylko w wąskim gronie znajomych, to nie powinna ona trafiać na mapę OpenStreetMap.
Frans S (2024-07-23 09:59:12+00:00): Hello. I commented your mappings on changeset 15286624.
Here you clustered also a number of buildings. 
Don't oversize your mappings as well.
You even mapped an big emty terrain with a small building as 1 building. Check if an object shows a shadow.
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154286154
CharliePlett (2024-07-24 02:37:23+00:00): I looked up the latest node in the OSM database for fun, and I see someone having fun mapping parking spaces. Great job, looks nice. Keep up the great work.
Frans S (2024-07-23 07:55:40+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.

B: Overlapping buildings.

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

.

E: Buildings not squared.

F: Buildings partly hidden under trees.

G: Included the shadow of the building .

H: Included a yard of clearing.

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/154286515