piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mavl (2023-04-25 09:05:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
Something B (2023-03-31 08:41:25+00:00): Hi, Dracololix123! 
Did you enter the addresses as gas stations? If so, then I'll fix them to address points.
Regards, 
Something B.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134330291
DD1GJ (2023-03-31 08:21:16+00:00): Hallo alinamedialog, welches Problem liegt Deiner Änderung zugrunde? Wohnstraßen sind grundsätzlich für Fahrzeuge aller Art befahrbar und alles war bereits korrekt eingetragen. Arbeitest Du im Auftrag einer Firma und/oder für ein bestimmtes Projekt?
alinamedialog (2023-03-31 08:24:08+00:00): Ich arbeite für meine Firma für unser Gangfolgeprojekt.
DD1GJ (2023-03-31 08:34:50+00:00): Danke für die schnelle Antwort. Beachte bitte https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Organised_Editing_Guidelines

Nach Stichproben sind Deine Bearbeitungen unsinnig bzw. falsch. Da sollte eher der Router angepasst werden, anstatt die OSM-Daten zu verschlimmbessern.

Was ist ein Gangfolgeprojekt? Arbeiten da mehrere Personen dran? In den vergangenen Tagen gab es mehrere komische Bearbeitungen neuer Benutzer nach einem ähnlichen Schema.
alinamedialog (2023-03-31 08:39:58+00:00): Es geht darum, dass Postfahrzeuge nach einer Reihenfolge arbeiten. Bei vielen Straßen wird bei uns aber kein Fahrtweg angezeigt, weswegen wir die Straßen für Fahrzeuge erlauben wollen, weil dort wirklich Fahrzeuge lang fahren. In unserem Tool wird die Straße einfach nicht angezeigt. Ja, meine Kollegen.
DD1GJ (2023-03-31 08:49:23+00:00): Dann stellt bitte sofort eure Arbeit ein, bis die Vorgaben der oben erwähnten Policy erfüllt sind und euer Tool richtig funktioniert!

Die OSM-Daten mögen in einigen Fällen nicht ganz stimmen, sollten dann aber *** fachgerecht *** anhand nachvollziebarer Kriterien korrigiert werden.
DD1GJ (2023-03-31 08:56:38+00:00): PS: Ordentlich gekennzeichne Benutzeraccounts für organisierte Projektarbeit sehen z.B. so aus: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/soemisch
alinamedialog (2023-03-31 08:59:40+00:00): Gut, dann bearbeite ich mein Profil so.
alinamedialog (2023-03-31 09:01:50+00:00): Was ist mit dem Wiki-Beitrag? Können wir einfach so einen machen?
DD1GJ (2023-03-31 09:17:59+00:00): Nicht nur Deine Benutzerseite, da wäre mindestens noch https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=17485261

OSM ist ein offenes Projekt. Jeder kann eine Wiki-Seite anlegen.

Aber nochmal das eigentliche Problem hier: Diese Wohnstraße war gekennzeichnet mit einer Gewichtsbeschränkung von 2,8 Tonnen ausgenommen Anlieger. Wenn euer Tool das nicht versteht, dann liegt der Fehler nicht bei OSM.
alinamedialog (2023-03-31 09:23:44+00:00): Gut, weiß ich für zukünftige Arbeiten. Danke!
A67-A67 (2023-03-31 08:45:13+00:00): Dit transferium was verwijderd bij de vernieuwing van de afrit en de aanleg van de Rijnlandroute. Is het daadwerkelijk opnieuw gebouwd? De locatie is nu namelijk lastig te bereiken.
JanV (2023-03-31 19:09:53+00:00): Thanks. Okee, Ik heb dit niet met eigen ogen gezien. Ik wilde vandaag naar Leiden en zag dat het transferium niet op OSM stond, maar uiteindelijk heb ik ergens anders geparkeerd. Zal ik het weghalen?
A67-A67 (2023-04-01 09:49:00+00:00): Het lijkt dan dat het voormalige transferium inderdaad niet is teruggekomen en dat het beter weggehaald kan worden.
JanV (2023-04-01 09:58:20+00:00): Verwijderd. Dank je voor de feedback.
DD1GJ (2023-03-31 08:39:36+00:00): Da sollte eher der Feldweg zu einem highway=service gemacht werden. Dann ist auch gleich auf der Karte optisch erkennbar, wie das Gehöft am Ende der Strecke erreicht wird. "Anlieger frei" wäre motor_vehicle=destination

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf
YomanNH (2023-04-01 14:27:49+00:00): Cześć, czy są tam jakiekolwiek znaki, z których wynikałoby, że jest to "highway=cycleway", albo że ruch pieszy jest "designated"? Jeśli nie, to lepiej byłoby to oznaczyć jako "highway=path" i ewentualnie dodać "foot=yes" i "bicycle=yes".
ZuidWestDrenthe (2023-04-03 08:00:09+00:00): Hallo Monica, ik ben even nieuwsgierig. Wat bedoelt de eigenaar met Prive? 

Tot vorig jaar was dit pad toegangelijk voor wandelaars. Er stond jarenlang een bordje met pijl. Nu is dat niet meer het geval?
Monica Vorstenbosch (2023-04-03 08:07:14+00:00): Beste,

Ik heb dit van de eigenaar ontvangen via de e-mail;
Ellen Koudenburg
hallo@ellenkoudenburg.nl

Zij geeft zelf aan dat dit prive terrein is.
eggie (2023-04-03 08:51:23+00:00): Wellicht foot=permissive?
Een eigen terrein wil niet zeggen Verboden Toegang.
Graag even checken hoe het met de toegang zit.
Mvg..
eggie
Monica Vorstenbosch (2023-04-03 09:16:24+00:00): Hallo Eggie,

Ik heb gelijk even de eigenaresse gesproken, dit pad is volgens haar niet openbaar en geen toegang voor wandelaars.

Mvg,
Monica
eggie (2023-04-03 09:50:45+00:00): Oke.. da 's duidelijk.. Bedankt voor je reactie.
Mvg..
eggie
user_5359 (2023-04-03 09:49:55+00:00): Hello! Please check my correction https://www.osm.org/changeset/134446649
Heinz_V (2023-04-04 07:55:49+00:00): OK, danke für die Korrektur
user_5359 (2023-04-01 07:02:53+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I revert your SEO SPAM (mostly foreign keys).
trial (2023-04-03 21:12:48+00:00): Un peu limite Osmose sur le coup. Car c'est quand même un giratoire et surtout si on enlève cette information il faut ajouter oneway=yes et les priorités.
bazgal (2023-04-04 21:03:03+00:00): Tu as raison pour les oneway=yes, ça manque maintenant (je les ajoute), en revanche, c'est un "drôle" de giratoire quand même... on peut aller tout droit !
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-31 07:50:21+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/1069067055

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
4004 (2023-04-02 00:03:48+00:00): улица уже отмечена, возможно данные в органике у вас старые, можете попробоватъ османд
Devdatta (2023-04-03 04:43:58+00:00): Hi!
Please keep your changesets limited to a small area, so that they can be reviewed: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
eggie (2023-03-31 08:48:05+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback...Alle begin is moeilijk, maar verschillende vlakken met aparte eiegenschappen over elkaar heen gaat niet werken.
Dan zie je alle door elkaar.
Voor gekapt bos is overigens een aparte tag. 


https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=134332834
MVG,

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2023-03-31 08:54:59+00:00): De stukken scrub heb ik ingebed in het bos. Ze zijn nu net als de rest van de scrub de 'inners' in de grote outer multipolygoon bos.
Hier wat leesvoer voor later zorg:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Multipolygon_Examples

MVG
eggie
aceman444 (2023-06-02 21:48:14+00:00): Zase ziadne zdroje. Nazov kaplnky z Ortofoto, tak to by som aj ja chcel mat take oci.
aceman444 (2023-06-02 21:53:19+00:00): Uz mi veru nesluzia, vidim, ze ste nazov prebrali z existujuceho bodu :) Ale teda tu jej adresu ste si vymyslat nemuseli.
user_5359 (2023-03-31 12:20:42+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building.
Kovoschiz (2023-04-01 09:34:15+00:00): It's not supported by signs to add `foot=no` when it is not signposted. `sidewalk=no` is sufficient at first. 
There are many roads where it is not realistic to walk or bike, but have no signposted bans.
Kovoschiz (2023-04-01 09:35:11+00:00): Also that's a `crossing=traffic_signals`, not `crossing=uncontrolled`.
vectorial8192 (2023-04-15 16:15:43+00:00): It took me a while to discover this discussion feature, but to add to your point, I sometimes see "sidewalk=left" and then a separate "footway=sidewalk". Shouldn't it be "sidewalk:left=separate" instead?
Kovoschiz (2023-04-16 03:05:40+00:00): Usually `sidewalk=left` is added first. Then the `footway=sidewalk` is drawn later. So yes, but you should ensure all  `=footway` in the vicinity have been connected properly for the separate network to work around the segment. Otherwise it's meaningless and misleading.
Nzau (2023-06-25 19:18:38+00:00): Bonjour Boutiflet,

Je me permets de corriger quelqu'unes de tes erreurs de carto, en effet certaines voies cyclables que tu as cartographiés font doublons et surout elles croisent des aménagements sans avoir de noeuds en commun ce qui n'est pas possible sauf s'il y a plusieurs hauteurs de voiries...

La cartographie de la voirie cyclable est un sujet complet et complexe, n'hésite pas à regarder la page du wiki suivante : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle

Et si tu as des questions tu peux m'écrire sur OSM ici : https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nzau

Bonne carto !
Nzau.
scai (2023-04-20 09:49:12+00:00): highway=service + vehicle=agricultural in Kombination klingt falsch. Welches Schild steht hier vor Ort? Wenn vehicle=agricultural ausgeschildert ist, dann ist highway=track korrekt.
mueschel (2023-04-02 12:23:00+00:00): Please check your edits for spelling mistakes. There's no "lane:markings" in OSM. The correct tag is "lane_markings".
rat_lorand_grab (2023-04-03 05:12:02+00:00): Hello.
Thank you very much for attracting my attention.
I have corrected the spelling mistakes.
Have a nice day!
Josef73 (2023-05-27 19:36:22+00:00): Hello, can you the values of the tag opening_hours. Please check the wiki-site at: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours for the right syntax. Thanks.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-31 09:00:22+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/284436203

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
scai (2023-04-20 09:47:47+00:00): highway=service + motor_vehicle=yes? Welche konkrete Beschilderung vor Ort führt denn zu dieser Kombination?
rik_ (2023-04-06 10:31:42+00:00): Hallo Chris,

bitte beim Zeichnen auch auf Zugangsbeschränkungen aufpassen, die Ways [1] und [2] sind eingezäunt auf Privatgrund.

Die Klassifizierung in `path` und `track` sind noch mal ein anderes Thema, letzterer ist in diesem Fall vermutlich eher `service`, der eingezeichnete `path` ist dagegen auf aktuellen Bildern schon gar nicht mehr zu sehen …

Danke und viele Grüße

rik

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/604456902
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26799629
rik_ (2023-04-06 11:53:37+00:00): Den Pfad habe ich soeben nach Prüfung vor Ort entfernt.
chris66 (2023-04-06 12:42:52+00:00): Danke, der war auch gar nicht von mir, ich hatte nur von track auf path geändert. Grüße aus NRW :-)
rik_ (2023-04-06 12:49:11+00:00): Sorry, dann mein Fehler –  da habe ich das CS falsch gelesen. Entschuldige bitte die Umstände.
kakiremora (2023-04-01 22:45:22+00:00): Witam,
dlaczego usunięto tymczasowe rondo? ZDMiKP nie wydał żadnych informacji o jakichkolwiek zmianach. Ponadto linia
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/342064399
nadal ma notkę o rondzie. Ponadto chyba nie jest oficjalnie znana planowana data zakończenia? Czy w takim wypadku nie byłoby poprawniejsze po prostu usunięcie daty?

Pozdrawiam
eggie (2023-03-31 11:29:09+00:00): Dag Frank....  
Lijkt me oke. 
Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode.
Format phone aangepast.. Geen tussennul in OSM.
MVG
eggie
travaudat (2023-04-08 01:09:15+00:00): Hi @TheSwavu, Thanks for your update in this area. I undeleted this node and updated the details. It's now a pastry shop.

Instead of deleting a node for a closed venue, I usually add "disused:" to relevant tags (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:*). This preserves the address of the node, the history and makes it easier for others to update.

Thanks, travaudat
nona mostafa (2023-04-12 11:28:51+00:00): Hello LuisAmaral;
I see you replaced the value in "name" with "old_ref" and according to the Rules in OpenStreetMap "ref" is Used for reference numbers or codes. Common for roads, highway exits, and routes.
could you check it and fixed, please?
Examples of streets:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/734619531
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/704677293
Regards
nona mostafa
Hellight (2023-03-31 09:16:48+00:00): I am sorry for the large changeset. The correct revert source changesets is as follows:
134303458, 134303142, 134302940, 134302724, 134302598, 134302357, 134302169, 134301909, 134278121, 134277787, 134277734, 134277501, 134277446, 134277351, 134276722, 134276535, 134276414, 134276189, 134276142, 134275677, 134275566, 134269902, 134269854, 134269670, 134269002, 134268774, 134268591, 134268181, 134266501, 134266243, 134265730, 134265576, 134265465, 134263294, 134262812, 134261865, 134242709, 134242694, 134242615, 134242575, 134242421, 134241605
eggie (2023-03-31 09:41:55+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback  De adresnodes heb ik ook verwijderd en een landuse greenfield toegevoegd als vlak. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
AndersAndersson (2023-07-14 23:21:29+00:00): Hello
Why did you add that this road is flood_prone? Do you know that it is that?

Or did you "fix" one fault by adding another? Do you think that this way of working really improves the map?
borovac (2023-07-15 07:04:12+00:00): Hi Anders,
that tag (please read wiki page of that tag) is in use to say that the road may be flooded, as you can see from the imagery here this road can be flooded. There is not a single mistake on my part here, now whether you like it or not this way of tagging, that can be discussed.
All best borovac
AndersAndersson (2023-07-15 07:23:58+00:00): I visited that road yesterday. It does not vertically lie any closer to the water surface than any of the surounding roads.
I doubt that it, during the latest 100 years, has been flooded even once.

Your problem was that the roads crossed the water area. Exactlty what problems do that cause?
This faulty tag you added causes the problem that it's a lie.
borovac (2023-07-15 07:31:44+00:00): If you passed by and determined that the road could not flood, adjust according to the condition. When you look at the imagey, you only come to the conclusion that the road can flood. In that case, if it is as you say, they are two separate water surfaces and they should be done that way, and the road then goes where it goes and does not need the flood_prone tag.
AndersAndersson (2023-07-15 22:36:25+00:00): The problem is not if this particular road can flood or not. The problem is that you have made almost 46 000 changesets and you keep, in a large scale, "fix" problems that isn't a problem and replacing them with lies. You are making the map worse, and I assume you are paid by Microsoft to do so. More vandalism to the map means more money for you, I assume.

If we shall discuss this particular road I wonder how skilled you are that can see, from a perpendicular aerial view, if the road is 0.1 or 10 m above the water surface and if that water surface varies a lot or not in height during the year.

Please also answer the question I asked previously. Exactlty what problems do that cause? [when the road crosses the water]
borovac (2023-07-17 06:46:50+00:00): Hi Anders,

I have used flood_prone(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:flood_prone) because based on imagery it looked like due to a high-water level of the lake this part gets flooded and, in that case, having flood_prone tag can give you a very valuable information. However, you are right, after reviewing this road it looks to be at the same level as rest of the ground, and lake is a bit lower, so I have removed the tag. 

I have applied the tag that looked most appropriate from what can be seen on the imagery. I tend to use Mapillary and KaartaView whenever it is possible, also topographic maps and other available resource, but in this case, it was very limited. I should have put on a MapNote so someone doing a survey could fix the issue properly. Sorry, I will do this more often in the future. 

As for the issue itself, I have been working on Keepright issues(https://keepright.at/report_map.php?zoom=14&lat=48.20808&lon=16.37221) this is why I refer to this as an issue, it is not an issue like broken administrative boundaries, or unconnected highways, etc. However, it points out that there is some intersection between road and water on the same level, so either there is missing bridge, layer tag, missing culvert, ford, flood_prone, or geometry itself needs to be adjusted. By fixing these “issues“ map tend to be more accurate, right, and I do agree in this case I have made an unintentional mistake but feel free to check my edits, I do not edit just to fix the “issue“ but to have most accurate state on the ground. 

Thank you for pointing this out to me so I can pay more attention, sorry once again for causing inconvenience, but I can assure you that in these almost 46.000 changesets it will be hard to find more issues (I do not say it is impossible, but hard 😊). I really try not to make mistakes and I really appreciate interaction with the community.
Furdrien (2023-04-26 11:20:23+00:00): Bonjour Christ Mapola,

OpenStreetMap est une base de données mondiale qui n'a pas vocation a accueillir des contributions de ce type,

Je t'invite a utilisé :
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/ pour réaliser tes cartes personnels

Bien à toi, 
Furdrien
bxl-forever (2023-03-31 11:22:16+00:00): Bonjour,
Nous avons corrigé en mettant un point avec les bons tags plutôt que de juste nommer la maison, sinon ça ne sert à rien et le médecin ne sera pas visible sur la carte.  C'est corrigé ici.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10775417217
mavl (2023-04-25 09:01:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
eggie (2023-03-31 11:01:48+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
AndersAndersson (2023-04-28 21:41:57+00:00): Why did you remove the track, the bridge and the path? 

I added them 3 years ago after a survey. They ways also had a source=survey added to them. Yet you removed them stating you "fixed" something. I walked on that bridge yesterday and noticed today that you had removed it. So what did you actually fix?
AndersAndersson (2023-04-28 21:49:19+00:00): I have reverted this changeset in 135485512.

You have 43 000 edits. That makes me really scared how much else surveyed information you have destroyed.
borovac (2023-04-29 07:13:48+00:00): Thanks for bringing it to my attention and for correcting an unintentional mistake.
mavl (2023-04-25 09:09:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
zvenzzon (2023-03-31 11:25:06+00:00): Hej! Vänligen använd bättre changeset comments. "småändringar i mitt område" säger inte så mycket alls om intentionerna. Se https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

mvh
eggie (2023-03-31 11:04:58+00:00): Dag Joep.. De adresnode 4 heb ik weer teruggezet op het gebouw.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=134337187
MVG
eggie
GerdP (2024-04-28 12:42:53+00:00): Moin aus Wildeshausen!
Falls Du noch in der Gegend aktiv bist, schau bitte noch mal diese drei Gebäude nach, haben alle angeblich die Adresse Spechtstraße 2:
https://www.osm.org/way/703522344
https://www.osm.org/way/703522336
https://www.osm.org/way/703522335
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-31 11:40:22+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10774805921
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10572700187

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o miejscowości.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158667914

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Something B (2023-03-31 11:51:56+00:00): Hi, North Crab! 
These changes were mostly fixes for the maps.me user
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/134330291
Therefore, errors are possible.
Regards, 
Something B.
NorthCrab (2023-03-31 12:45:59+00:00): Sure no problem! Thank you for fixing nonetheless
user_5359 (2023-04-03 09:44:39+00:00): Hello! Please what is the meaning of the tqgs
hospital:level:DE = 3
rd_do:kh = K 1
?
farm_and_field (2023-04-03 10:11:04+00:00): Hey! The second tag comes from this changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/4237458 which seems to have something to do with emergency service levels. The first one is a tag proposal I've put together here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hospital:level:DE, would love to know what you think!
eggie (2023-03-31 11:09:08+00:00): Geheel correct..
gr eggie
bxl-forever (2023-03-31 11:12:44+00:00): Hello,

I counted about 100 occurrences of retaining wall structures created by you in the last months.

I understand there may be a few… but those are normally very large structures supporting a cliff.  I don’t think this tag is appropriate for any wall, especially a few bricks with ground to host a bit of green.

I think "barrier=wall" is a more appropriate tag in most cases.
JhowieNitnek (2023-03-31 11:16:32+00:00): Okay thank you, I will take that into consideration in the future I will change it in this changeset
bxl-forever (2023-03-31 11:24:46+00:00): For very low walls (a few centimeters), you may consider "barrier=kerb" too. ;-)
harahu (2023-04-14 18:30:14+00:00): Why did you delete parts of this road? The road exists, even if submerged.
aleksaJov (2023-04-18 14:01:52+00:00): Hello harahu,

I just resolve issue resulted from Keep Rigt QA tool where road and water surface intersect each other. According to Maxar Premium Imagery, Bing aerial imagery and Esri World Imagery and Your dataset import for water surface, the flooded road segment is not usable for any type of vehicle. 

If you have some tagging suggestion for this case, be free to add.


Regards,
Aleksandar
harahu (2023-04-18 15:52:43+00:00): I am realizing the question of whether the road is submerged or not is irrelevant. Because the road isn't submerged. At least not the part of the road you removed. This can be seen if you use the recommended image layer for Norway, called "Norway Orthophoto". This image layer is dated to 2019, but by having a look at sentinel images from 2022 I can confirm that the road is still not submerged.

I suggest you revert this change and rather update the lake boundaries instead if you want to fix this issue.

You should never ever default to using Maxar Premium Imagery, Bing aerial imagery or Esri World Imagery when editing in Norway. Always, and I mean always, check first whether you can use "Norway Orthophoto" first. This layer will have significantly less offset than the layers you mention, and will usually be more up to date and higher res.

I totally get that this was an honest mistake, but the point above is incredibly important. If you do use the sources you mention you risk decreasing the quality of the data in Norway.

If you have other edits in Norway relying on Maxar, it would probably be a good idea to re-visit them using the imagery source I mention.