piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2026-02-28 21:15:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 35 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1484137913 v1 | 14 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1484137914 v2 | 12 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1484145903 v1 | 7 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/13608282784 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=179187508
NeisReview (2026-03-09 05:33:04+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/179195747
Yunan973 (2026-03-01 23:20:10+00:00): Bonjour,

il semblerait que tu sois l'auteur de toutes les erreurs visibles ici : https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=6.51503&lat=45.22161&zoom=15&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

Pourrais tu les corriger ? As tu besoin d'aide ?
Genépél (2026-03-02 06:25:20+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci pour ton message, en effet je vais m'en occuper aujourd'hui 

Bien amicalement, 

M a
streckenkundler (2026-03-01 14:53:57+00:00): Hei,
also am Donnerstag gegen 18:30 Uhr war die neue Verlängerung des Tunnels und auch der Aufzug alles Baustelle und abgesperrt... Dazu war jetzt auch ein Artikel hier in der Lausitzer.... Ich vermute, man wird noch ein "paar" Tage brauchen... Das Gleis ist auch noch nicht wieder komplett... Ich schaue morgen früh wieder... Ich bin da Werktags eigendlich immer früh und abend da.

Grüße von vor Ort,
Sven
Elefant aus Wuppertal (2026-03-06 14:41:02+00:00): Hei,

super :)

Vielleicht hätte ich lieber construction:highway=elevator nehmen sollen?

Hatte ihn bewusst noch an kein Wegenetz angeschlossen.

LG
Lukas
streckenkundler (2026-03-06 17:37:05+00:00): Hei,

...lassen wir es so... Wir müssen hier nicht unnötig Versionen produzieren... Ich denke, es dauert eh nicht mehr lange... Es fehlt nur noch die Überdachung der Treppe... Das Gleis dürfte spätestens in 2 Wochen auch wieder liegen... Ich beobachte das, ich gehe da ja mindestens 4x pro Woche dran vorbei... 

Sven
Elefant aus Wuppertal (2026-03-06 21:09:24+00:00): Super, danke dir
streckenkundler (2026-03-06 21:18:43+00:00): aktueller Stand:
https://www.lr-online.de/lausitz/luebben/bahnhof-in-luebben-fussgaengertunnel-zur-majoransheide-aktueller-stand-und-ausblick-78671196.html
...Der Artikel selbst ist zwar hinter der Bezahlschranke, aber Bilder sagen hier mehr als Worte...

tiefenentspannte Grüße,
Sven
streckenkundler (2026-05-04 19:58:09+00:00): So... neuer Stand... Heute früh ist  Krantrans (https://www.krantrans.de/) angerückt und mit anderen Gewerken zu Werke... Das Dach/ Häuschen über der Treppe wird gebaut... Gleis 4 (ehemals Gleis 5) liegt auch wieder, auch wenn noch mit Sh2-Signalen gesichert...

Sven
streckenkundler (2026-07-09 19:42:17+00:00): Hei Lukas,

...zur Info... wenn du mal wieder hier bist... Tunnel, Fahrstuhl und alles andere wurde gestern eröffnet... Das Dach ist größer, als ich erwartet hatte... Luftbildsichtbar ist noch nichts... Erfassungen nur geschätzt... informative Grüße,

Sven
streckenkundler (2026-07-15 19:41:28+00:00): Hei Lukas,

nächster Nachtrag... Heute fand ich die Zeit, auf dem Weg zum Garten da vorbei zuschauen... Noch einige Anpassungen sind erfolgt:  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185795922 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185805944. Ich rechne damit, daß recht bald die vorläufige Version der diesjährigen Luftbildbefliegung freigegeben werden. Womit ich nicht klar komme, daß ist die Erfassung dieser Fahrradparkdinger, wo du die Räder übereinander parken kannst... Da hab ich ein fixme hinterlassen.

Grüße,

Sven
Elefant aus Wuppertal (2026-07-20 13:13:02+00:00): Alles klar, ich danke dir!
:-)
rempshaener (2026-03-01 20:18:32+00:00): Hallo,
Hydranten haben keine Namen. Eventuell kann man sie nach description verschieben, noch besser wäre aber, sie ersatzlos zu löschen.
Viele Grüße
IvaKraljić (2026-03-10 14:56:21+00:00): The wrong tag and split have since been fixed in the changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179643785#map=17/41.729172/-71.498259. #OptimoRoute
jb54osm (2026-02-28 22:47:51+00:00): Dag A67-A67,

Over ONLY & SONS: Liguster 202 is het managementkantoor van de Mall. Ook vaak gebruikt als contactadres voor toekomstige / kleine / tijdelijke winkels.
In het echt zit Only and Sons op Jasmijn 20. Ik heb jouw extra gegevens overgebracht naar Jasmijn en de 202 verwijderd.

Jan
A67-A67 (2026-03-03 00:12:31+00:00): Bedankt voor de verbetering
Sakari_N (2026-04-28 17:03:09+00:00): Hi,

If you add swedish names to objects in finland, please follow this: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names#Finland

"Some cities/places/streets have names in Finnish and Swedish. Use name key for the commonly used language (mostly Finnish, use Swedish version if municipality is mainly Swedish) and name:fi and name:sv for the specific language version. "

So you should also add name:fi=Mustalahti to this object, and keep name=Mustalahti as default name.
gurglypipe (2026-03-04 09:35:40+00:00): Looks great! I’ve tweaked the roof type for the main part of the building in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179340172, let me know what you think :)
Till_btn (2026-03-16 16:26:48+00:00): geschätzte Stufenanzahl bringt nichts, sondern verhindert, dass jemand mit vor-Ort-Kenntnis die SC-Quest gestellt bekommt
NGL-engel (2026-03-17 20:15:19+00:00): Danke fürs korrigieren
IvaKraljić (2026-03-10 13:47:19+00:00): The unnecessary split, additional section and the unnecessary tag have since all been fixed in the changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179637786. #OptimoRoute
surveyor54 (2026-03-01 10:18:25+00:00): Hi,
Postfilialen werden nach dem Schema "Postfiliale im Einzelhandel" eingetragen.
Siehe hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dpost_office#%22Postfiliale%22_im_Einzelhandel

Weiterhin frohes Mappen u Gruß
surveyor54
s:s (2026-03-22 11:34:02+00:00): Hallo,
danke für den Hinweis. Ich habe die Änderung analog zu einer anderen Postfiliale übernommen. Im Zweifel nochmal gegenprüfen, ob jetzt alles passt.
VG
IvaKraljić (2026-03-10 13:50:52+00:00): The unnecessary split and additional restriction have all since been fixed in the changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179640469. #OptimoRoute
b-holdet (2026-03-09 19:33:51+00:00): What is the source of this way:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1484163006
b-holdet (2026-03-09 19:40:28+00:00): And this one too
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1484163005
vojtechzaboril (2026-03-09 20:16:58+00:00): Hi, I found it there https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%A6rum_Line#
and also checked the visible ‘line’ in terrain.
b-holdet (2026-03-09 20:24:11+00:00): I have lived there for several years and I can say it is not clear in the terrain. You have clearly not been there in person.
You have also made the line through houses etc. without any notice.
The old line should be put into Open History Map as it is from 1919-1953 and has been razed and clearly removed.
vojtechzaboril (2026-03-09 20:37:31+00:00): The first mentioned way is marked as razed (no remain). I know there is an disscusion on using it, but I have no strong opinion on it.
For the second way, the buildings are clearly aligned along the way, but it can be caused by something else than the railway.
So if you thing the ways can’t be there, I have no problem with removing them.
vojtechzaboril (2026-03-09 20:38:06+00:00): I can remove them on my own, or you can do it if you want
b-holdet (2026-03-09 20:41:36+00:00): Pls. remove them.
NeisBot (2026-02-28 23:36:44+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/1484166983 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Telephone booth"
---
Por exemplo, uma versão mais neutra e factual do seu texto poderia ser: "Cabine de telefone"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-09 05:33:03+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/179561751
(No visible changes after review)
supsup (2026-02-28 23:40:47+00:00): Sorry for the completely nonsensical comment on teh changeset - I hit enter in JOSM by mistake and a previous changeset comment from the other side of the world applied. I had a reminder to revisit this area, because when I was there two years ago the satellite imagery with then newly constructed tracks was not yet online. Now it is, so I am adding new tracks.
rskedgell (2026-03-03 07:46:07+00:00): Was there any particular reason to change correctly tagged highway=cycleway ways to highway=path ? (Already reverted in most cases by another user)
felipeeugenio (2026-03-03 21:24:21+00:00): Hola. Borraste un local comercial por completo para reemplazarlo por otro igual, pero con mas datos. Por favor no incurrir en esa práctica y modificar lo que hay si hace falta. Gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179192017
felipeeugenio (2026-03-03 21:25:06+00:00): El tag building es para estructuras, no para el recinto completo. Yo lo reparo. Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179192017
MacLondon (2026-03-02 21:08:39+00:00): Hi. Any reason why you reintroduced the section of C22 that will be closed for the next 3 years back into the relation for the open route?
NeisBot (2026-03-01 00:57:48+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/7794607900 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Law office"
---
Örneğin metnin daha tarafsız ve gerçek bir versiyonu şöyle olabilir: "Hukuk bürosu"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisAgent (2026-03-03 10:19:15+00:00): 🕵 The mentioned node appears to be part of a highway=* way.

Businesses are usually mapped as standalone nodes (or within building polygons), rather than as part of a road geometry.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-22 14:45:26+00:00): Fixed remaining invalid and highly ambiguous check_date=* and start_date=* format in changeset 184435671

https://osm.org/changeset/184435671
MappingMore (2026-03-02 12:33:54+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:179252486
Wildsharky (2026-03-03 12:07:36+00:00): For partially reverted:  Partially reverted in changeset id:179283453
MappingMore (2026-03-02 15:21:12+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179259928
MappingMore (2026-03-03 03:49:36+00:00): Revert of 179191544
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-03-03 05:31:17+00:00): Why did you upgrade this portion of Nimitz Boulevard to trunk? It doesn't connect to any other trunk roads south of I-8.
Yushclay (2026-03-03 18:24:57+00:00): I'm pretty sure it can be used to connect to road classifications above trunk as well. This case being connecting two motorways for one block. I did want to trunk classify Sunset Cliffs Blvd west of Mission Bay Dr initially, but open to concede that.
Higashimado (2026-03-01 03:16:09+00:00): In this changeset I removed many alt_name tags that weren’t being used as true alternate names:

1. For Chinese alt_name values, these tags should represent names written in different characters, not simply the same name without generic names. I haven’t seen this kind of usage in Japan or other regions that use Chinese characters.

2. For transliterations other than pinyin, they aren’t commonly used in this region, and according to the OSM guidelines (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#When_to_avoid_transliteration) they should generally be avoided. If such transliterations are really needed, a new tag like name:en-<xx> or name:zh-<xx> may be more appropriate.
Wildsharky (2026-03-05 06:24:30+00:00):  Reverted in changeset id:179284551
mueschel (2026-03-08 13:48:44+00:00): Hi,
what does "diet:muslim_friendly" mean? Did you mean 'diet:halal'?
MappingMore (2026-03-03 04:10:49+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179282414
literan (2026-03-01 10:57:16+00:00): только зачем название шоссе латиницей? исправлю
Nevolin Dmitriy (2026-03-01 17:37:15+00:00): Приветствую! Логика была направлена на ПО и сервисы, которые лучше едят латиницу. Могу ошибаться в целом и общем, но не нарочно. Может вы подскажете, как добавить эту локацию (школу танцев) в Instagram Places? Или она сама появится в скором времени? А то я так и не могу понять (в условиях вечного цейтнота не получается глубоко погрузиться в вопрос).
literan (2026-03-02 19:10:00+00:00): про Instagram совсем ничего не знаю :(( Попробуйте спросить в телеграм-канале https://t.me/ruosm
StreetSurveyor (2026-03-02 18:57:34+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM!

I noticed you’ve tagged North First Street with foot=no. Could you share the rationale for that change? I’ve personally surveyed this road and did not observe any signage or legal restrictions prohibiting pedestrian access.
StreetSurveyor (2026-03-02 19:13:59+00:00): As a general practice in OSM, access restrictions like foot=no or bike=no should only be added when there is clear on-the-ground signage or a verifiable legal basis. Without that, we risk incorrectly restricting access in the map data.
notkavi (2026-03-02 19:15:40+00:00): Hi StreetSurveyor, I marked these as not walkable because they are the road centerline, and the sidewalk and bike lanes are marked separately.
StreetSurveyor (2026-03-02 19:19:31+00:00): hanks for the clarification — I appreciate the explanation.

In OSM, sidewalks and bike lanes are often mapped separately, but that does not make the roadway centerline foot=no unless pedestrians are legally prohibited from using the roadway itself. In most cases, the presence of a separately mapped sidewalk does not imply a pedestrian access restriction on the road.

Tagging the road foot=no would indicate a legal prohibition (e.g., a limited-access highway), which affects routing and pedestrian networks. If pedestrians are legally allowed to be on the roadway (even if a sidewalk exists), the road should generally not be tagged foot=no.
notkavi (2026-07-15 03:11:37+00:00): Sorry I totally forgot to follow up with this, in future I will tag foot=use_sidepath in these situations
StreetSurveyor (2026-07-15 08:45:48+00:00): Thanks for following up—I appreciate it.

Just one note: foot=use_sidepath should only be used where pedestrians are legally required to use the adjacent sidewalk or path (for example, where walking on the roadway is prohibited by law or posted signage). The presence of a sidewalk alone isn’t enough to justify that tag.

If pedestrians are simply allowed to use either the sidewalk or the roadway, it’s generally best to leave the road without a foot=* tag. Thanks again for taking the time to discuss it.
MappingMore (2026-03-01 03:55:32+00:00): Revert of 179098308
Wildsharky (2026-03-03 12:06:05+00:00): For partially reverted:  Partially reverted in changeset id:179282458
Sammyhawkrad (2026-03-01 08:52:16+00:00): Hi Kingenious, welcome to OSM. Please use Title Case for names instead of BLOCK LETTERS.
felipeeugenio (2026-03-03 21:18:56+00:00): Hola. Hice unas pequeñas correcciones a esta edición.Agregué algunas restrucciones de giro que me parecen obvias y eliminé ese cruce con San Andrés y lo dibujé correctamente.
Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179194414
FajrAl (2026-03-02 02:01:45+00:00): Welcome
HAALAND_ (2026-03-02 23:17:27+00:00): 您好，想问一下，为何“材料科学与工程学院”的name标签里有英文?
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2026-03-03 11:07:00+00:00): 啊那显然不是我干的，看了一下历史这个是在 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/319291927/history/1 这个11年前最初的版本就有双语了，那时候OSM对使用和尊重本地语言尚未形成完全共识，很多编辑者建立在英语是世界语言的认识上都加了英语辅助名字（当然对OSM mapper来说英语确实是很重要就是）

其次这个确实是不符合中国大陆命名习惯的，name就是保持使用本地法定语言，在非少数民族语言地区就是简体中文，和name:zh一样，英文的应该放在name:en里面

我对我目力所及的稍微修正了一下，如果在哈尔滨遇到其他中英混合的大抵是可以直接这么搞的。俄语就name:ru里面。

感谢您的批评和监督。

更多的可以在telegram直接搜 @laoshubaby 找到我聊或者发站内信给我（不过就是我清邮件的时候才能回复了）
HAALAND_ (2026-03-03 13:00:07+00:00): 好的好的，我其实应该发“为何您不在修改时把name标签中的英文删去”当时脑子短路了，不过能修改过来就行，我也发现了那个错误的name标签是十一年前的。
（说个题外话:你之前应该见过我🤫）
MappingMore (2026-03-03 06:19:13+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179284972
shinylman (2026-03-01 10:25:24+00:00): Thanks for adding these roads. FYI, the road suffixes on OpenStreetMap are not abbreviated and those roads should be residential roads, not living streets. I have corrected this. Also, you can press Q while you have a building selected to make the corners square, it makes it look better.
sbt_01 (2026-03-01 12:58:14+00:00): Appreciate your comment. I will follow. Thank you!
NeisBot (2026-03-01 06:00:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13608766182 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Funeral home"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-03-09 17:33:03+00:00): 🚫 Text removed by https://osm.org/changeset/179202498
Kovoschiz (2026-03-01 09:05:14+00:00): There's no `=peak` if it has become flattened with the surroundings entirely. Only `place=locality` , and it should be on OpenHistoricalMap instead.
Kovoschiz (2026-03-01 09:06:39+00:00): Please don't undisussed bulk change from `old_name=` to other `*name=` , and accuse others of vandalisms. You are only accusing yourself together. Use OpenHistoricalMap.
biker-2 (2026-07-05 16:22:13+00:00): Hi Meskalin, 
Weg: 1484201257 hast du gemappt incl Pfad über Autobahnbrücke, diesen Weg gibt es in der Realität nicht, Komoot routet darüber, das ist gefährlich und irreführend, ich lösche den Weg Weg: 1484201257
Meskalin (2026-07-08 08:22:28+00:00): hi biker,
das ist okay für mich. Ist ja wirklich nur für Instandsetzungspersonal. Wer will kann ja immer noch die Möglichkeit zur Überquerung sehen, so die Tore noch offen sind...  ;)
Schöne Grüße!
Mevess (2026-03-01 10:40:30+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue sur OpenStreetMap !
Merci d'avoir repositionné le point d'adresse, qui doit effectivement se situer entre la propriété et le domaine public.
J'ai corrigé le bâtiment dont la surface était un peu déformé..
Bonne carto !
muralito (2026-03-01 18:05:53+00:00): Hi Neethu. Please keep the changesets within smaller bboxes. Edit a street in Mexico and save the changes. Then edit a street in Sydney. It helps a lot people who are "taking care or bboxes". Thanks.
Neethu P G (2026-03-03 04:29:26+00:00): Thank you for the valuable feedback. Please feel free to point out similar suggestions in future as well. Regards, Neethu P G
apgosm (2026-03-03 09:47:17+00:00): Apologies for the mistake I committed. Thank you for the valuable feedback. I look forward to your suggestion/feedback in the future as well.
Regards, 
Arya PG
FajrAl (2026-03-01 08:52:27+00:00): jika saluran irigasi, gunakan tag waterway=drain
Shougissime (2026-03-04 19:47:19+00:00): Bonjour, la piste cyclable commence bien au bord de la route avec un panneau C115. 
voir documentation https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:bicycle=designated
Nzau (2026-03-04 19:53:38+00:00): Bonjour Shougissime,

Il s'agit de quelle route exactement ? J'en ai modifié plusieurs en simultané. 
C115 = voie verte

Normalement mon édition modifie uniquement les routes hors voie verte, il doit donc manquer d'autres tags.

L'idéal serait d'avoir le lien de la route, ex : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38775142

Au plaisir d'en discuter,
Enzo
Shougissime (2026-03-04 21:15:17+00:00): C'est ce chemin : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1455562794

Le début de ce chemin, connecté au chemin vieux d'Ibos est inclut dans la voie verte et devrait garder le tag bicycle=designated.
Nzau (2026-03-04 21:38:49+00:00): Merci de m'avoir pointé le chemin.
Apparemment, j'ai aussi supprimé un tag bien plus important : highway=*...

Je viens de les remettre sur les différents chemins impactés.


Sinon pour le chemin way/1455562794 : 
- changement de highway (track / unclassified plus cohérent dans le contexte).
- ajout du panneau FR:C115 directement sur le way (pour préciser la voie verte sur chemin agricole)
- ajout du tag motor_vehicule (destination = riverains + agricole)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Voie_verte

Je reste disponible si besoin,
Bonne cartographie
Wildsharky (2026-03-05 06:23:28+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179284176
Axelos (2026-03-01 13:39:31+00:00): Bonjour,

Ce qui est implicite sur ces voies est yes et non designated (cf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#France).

Supprimer en masse ces informations me semble non pertinent car retire une information qui peut être potentiellement représenté d’une autre manière (histoire de marquage vélo par exemple).

Axel.
Nzau (2026-03-01 13:58:21+00:00): Bonjour Axel,
Merci pour la précision et le lien vers le wiki.

Le texte indique d’ailleurs dès le début :
« Lorsqu'un accès légal existe mais pas d'accès pratique, il est possible de résoudre ce problème en ajoutant des balises de surface, de pente et de régularité. Ceci permet d'indiquer aux utilisateurs de fauteuils roulants, de vélos de course, etc., et aux algorithmes de routage d'éviter les chemins en mauvais état, non pavés, meubles ou escarpés. »

Si une voie n’a pas de tag access=*, je ne vois pas vraiment dans quel cas on ajouterait bicycle=designated ? 
Le tag access=* (et ses déclinaisons foot=*, bicycle=*, etc.) sert à décrire les restrictions légales.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:access

Le tag bicycle=designated a été ajouté massivement par certains contributeurs (not. Geovelo) sur des sections de routes jalonnées (véloroutes), mais il correspond à une désignation légale explicite — pas simplement à un jalonnement ou à la présence de marquages vélos.

En France, on utilise bicycle=designated quasi exclusivement pour décrire les voies vertes (panneau de police C115), ou chemin mixte piéton vélo.

Si tu veux, je peux extraire la liste des routes qui étaient concernées par bicycle=designated, pour vérifier s’il y avait un marquage ou autre ?
De mon côté, je préfère retirer bicycle=designated afin d’éviter que des contributeurs novices se basent dessus à tort, plutôt que de chercher à représenter les pictos vélos, bandes cyclables ou véloroutes avec cette balise.

Au plaisir d’en discuter,
Enzo
Axelos (2026-03-01 17:06:50+00:00): OK pour l’extraction. À publier aussi sur le forum en parallèle, car je veux bien m’y coller uniquement sur les environs de mon territoire.