piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
willkmis (2023-05-14 15:14:20+00:00): Thanks!
DavidKarlas (2023-05-14 06:09:47+00:00): Hi,

what is reason for removing boundary=administrative tag from this relation, it seems perfectly valid tag to have on this relation?

Thank you,
David
Glassman (2023-05-13 18:07:33+00:00): why is Cougar Smith Road tagged as private for motor vehicles?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136056237
Glassman (2023-05-15 18:48:30+00:00): I haven't head back from you so I removed the private tag from motor vehicles. Please let me know if this is incorrect.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136056237
CougarSmith1890 (2023-05-15 23:02:45+00:00): I work for Green Diamond Resource Company. Cougar Smith Road is a private road from the west fork of the Satsop river to Wynoochee Valley road. There are signs posted. It can be closed to motor vehicles at anytime. Having Cougar Smith end up on driving directions causes safety issues for us. We don’t want to actually have to close the road, but we also want to see a reduction in passenger vehicle and RV traffic.
Glassman (2023-05-15 23:57:10+00:00): Thanks for the information. I've changed the road to a service road and marked it as private. Having it tagged as a tertiary wasn't good either - that would make it a higher priority for routers to use.
CougarSmith1890 (2023-05-16 00:53:56+00:00): Thank you!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136056237
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:39:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 137412856 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers
Mammi71 (2025-06-08 20:10:26+00:00): @ticki,
diese "Mautstation" ist doch Tagging für den Renderer:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10893621604
ticki_52 (2025-06-13 07:02:37+00:00): @Mammi71, das war kein "tftr". Das war schiere Verzweiflung, weil ich kein passendes Tag gefunden habe. Und das unpassende Tag habe ich auch noch als Barriere auf den Highway getaggt. Asche auf mein Haupt. Nun habe ich ein Tag gefunden, welches die Situation besser darstellt, nämlich amenity=checkpoint auf dem Gebäude. So ist die Zufahrt nicht blockiert. Was meinst Du dazu? Man sollte halt noch das tag "checkpoint2 spezifizieren. Nicht dass man das Tag nur auf dem Berliner "Checkpoint Charly" begrenzt. Ich habe das Tag auch auf die AWRM-Deponie BK-Steinbach angewandt. Vielleicht könnte die Community meine Idee mal diskutieren und bestätigen oder verwerfen und eine bessere Alternative aufzeigen.
sorcrosc (2023-05-14 01:00:39+00:00): HI. You have removed several campsites but your stated source is only aerial imagery. Have you verified that these no longer exist?
tili3222 (2023-05-14 08:54:03+00:00): I searched for informations about this campground, with google, google streetview, local websites, everything but didn´t find any hint that there could be a campground.
ivanbranco (2023-05-14 21:09:56+00:00): local website are fine, but Google and Google Streetview can NOT be used as sources for edits on OSM.
sorcrosc (2023-05-14 21:33:13+00:00): I don't believe removing features based purely on absence of information on the web is good practice.
Since it was mapped out and with a given name, the campground likely existed and possibly still exists. Tents are visible in older aerial photos.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-05-13 14:40:14+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o miejscowości. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, zastosuj kombinację addr:city + addr:street. Jeśli nie, przekaż nazwę miejscowości w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/237815330

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-10-24 09:00:34+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1004372340/history - is it now only asphalt? Or is it still concrete in one direction and asphalt in the other one?
ChehrehBargi (2023-05-21 13:42:15+00:00): سلام
alt_name برای اسامی استفاده می شود که در هیچ دسته بندی قابل ثبت نیستند.
شما میتوانید از old_name برای نام قدیم، از loc_name برای نامی مردم محلی در حال حاضر استفاده می کنند و نیز از سایر دسته بندی ها که در ویکی، توضیح داده شده استفاده کرده و اگر در هیچ دسته بندی جای نگرفت، نهایتا در alt_name ثبت نمایید.
DaveF (2023-08-18 14:58:15+00:00): There is not requirement to split highways between bus stops. Please refrain form further unnecessary edits.
Langlaeufer (2023-05-13 21:33:58+00:00): Woraus ist ersichtlich, dass nur nur Fußgänger den Pfad nutzen dürfen? Wäre es dann nicht besser ein Fußweg?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136057471
torger (2023-05-22 19:24:47+00:00): Again this changeset destroys the alignment of roads. You can't just trust Bing to be correctly aligned. ESRI imagery is generally much better aligned in these areas, but you can't trust that 100% either. NVDB is pretty safe in moste places, but it's good to double check with Strava layer. Please revert the change completely, or the the changes that alters the roads, and move the houses into more correct positions.
Jonas_C83 (2023-05-22 21:22:40+00:00): Sorry about that. I used an offset on the Bing map to bring it somewhat more aligned. I tried reverting the changeset with the reverter plugin but it keeps crashing my computer. I have had this problem before and I was never able to get it working. Is it possible that you can revert both changeset for me? 

I have the entire road network for Arjeplog in shape-format, acquired with the help of GNSS equipment and with an accuracy at about 5cm.  Someday I´ll export it to GPX and have a look. As I understand it, it is possible to import GPX-tracks into both JOSM and the web editor.
torger (2023-05-23 05:48:12+00:00): No problem, and sorry if I was sounding a bit grumpy. It's great to get mapping help in northern Sweden, not many are doing work in the more sparsely populated areas. I'll look at reverting when I get back from work this evening, I'm not sure I can do it as a different user (never tried). (The OSM database doesn't really have a revert function as such, what happens is that a new change is applied to restore what was before, and I guess that part can be a bit wonky at times.)
Jonas_C83 (2023-05-23 20:03:15+00:00): No worry, didn’t get the impression you where grumpy :) During my lunch break today I made a quick export of some building geometry that been produced with an RTK. After a bit of tweaking I got it into the webtool as an GPX. If I remember correctly the Bing map needen an offset of -0,8;-18,5 to align with “the real world”. With that, most of the buildings and roads in the eastern part of town aligned quite nicely. But depening on the zoom level the offset grew further west. Saw a couple of places where the NVDB data is way off. Gonna have a look at that too. In your opinion, is it better to have the Open Street Map geometry (like buildings), align to the aerial photo or too their correct coordinates?
torger (2023-05-24 06:59:32+00:00): You probably know this already but satellite photos need accurate elevation data to be corrected, so anywhere where the ground isn't flat the correction offset needs changing. Lantmäteriet has accurate high resolution laser data to be able to correct their photos, but Bing probably have a quite low resolution model. ESRI have lower resolution images, but seems to have higher resolution elevation data so I find their imagery to be better corrected than Bing. (It is possible to get Lantmäteriet ortophotos in JOSM but the legality about that is still a bit unclear so I don't do that myself.)

NVDB can indeed have positional errors or small local geometry distortions (quite common where one road connects to another). If you have a Strava account you can enable a Strava heatmap layer in JOSM it's great for checking alignment if unsure. If one only has NVDB and Bing to go on concerning positional information, I'd choose NVDB as reference. If one goes to the data source at Trafikverket I think there is information about positional accuracy embedded in the data, but we don't transfer that into our OSM model for the moment.

There's some more info about NVDB limitations here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/Sweden_highway_import/Import_guidelines#Typiska_fel_i_NVDB-datat

Regarding the question, it's much better to align to the correct coordinates. When I started out with OSM mapping the accuracy of the satellite photos was much worse than it is today. And it will likely improve in the future. The goal should be to map with as high quality as we can with the sources we have, and if you have a better third party source, use that. It's likely that within a couple of years we will actually have Lantmäteriets ortophotos (not only the historic ones) in the web editor and JOSM as an official imagery layer as it's becoming open data too, and then the positional accuracy will increase dramatically. If the buildings are already correctly placed from the beginning a lot of work is saved. Of course there will always be a risk that someone with lesser access to high quality data sources will come in and "correct" the positions, but in my experience it's quite rare. People mostly map new things, correcting old (like we do in the NVDB import project) is quite rare.
limes11 (2023-05-15 20:44:54+00:00): Hi, 

Schugt ist schon hier verzeichnet:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7050294003

Ist da noch ein anderes Geschäft nebendran? Haben die sich ausgebreitet?

VG
limes11 (2023-05-17 16:45:21+00:00): Duplikat entfernt
BCNorwich (2023-05-13 16:44:05+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

If you're going to change stuff you might as well do it right, a lot of these buildings are not houses, they're bungalows, building=bungalow would be the correct tag.

Regards Bernard.
gscholz (2023-05-17 06:21:23+00:00): Hi Luisa Gutierrez,
your recent activities have left behind a significant amount of errors regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-72.93777&lat=5.70436&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, this kind of errors irritate routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
lukie80 (2023-05-14 20:18:30+00:00): Servus,
gibt es einen Grund für die Löschung? 
Grüße
gscholz (2023-05-17 06:21:11+00:00): Hi Stefania Alvarez,
your recent activities have left behind a significant amount of errors regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-72.93777&lat=5.70436&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, this kind of errors irritate routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-05-13 16:11:21+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 136054562, 68734456, 68762492, 68932103, 68955453, 68984366, 69023157, 69062497, 69096523, 69177699, 69373272, 69373489, 69431158, 69499976, 69501941, 69545022, 69556403, 69590547, 69590764, 69590961, 69613960, 69637746, 69649060, 69649654, 69683242, 69694199, 69711149, 69711855, 69754908, 69755022, 69814859, 69902124, 70011722, 70029118, 70143419, 70203237, 70244467, 70438076, 70641001, 70661513, 70723366, 70817004, 71013326, 71037262, 71060991, 71117224, 71226838.
rodolfovargas (2023-05-16 00:58:38+00:00): Hola :)

El TAG addr:housenumber corresponde al NÚMERO DE CASA, y addr:street al NÓMBRE DE CALLE. Creo que hubo un herror de mapeo con ese punto.

El MARIPOSARIO se puede mapear con el TAG: zoo=wildlife_park; tourism=zoo; name=Mariposario. 

El "Area de Resilvestración" creo que se refiere a lo mismo que el MARIPOSARIO.

Lo optimizas por favor.
Saludos.
gscholz (2023-05-17 06:22:39+00:00): Hi Cristian Tibaduiza,
your recent activities have left behind a significant amount of errors regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-72.93777&lat=5.70436&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, this kind of errors irritate routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
BCNorwich (2023-05-13 17:10:23+00:00): Hi, 
Again some of these buildings are bungalows, thus building=bungalow. 
Some of the outlines are drawn covering several dwellings so the tag should be building=residential.
If you are not sure what type of dwelling it is then just leave it as building=yes.

Lastly please limit your changeset uploads to about twenty features. This changeset has well over 2000 objects. It's going to take a long time to check and correct where necessary all that lot.

Regards Bernard.
pyrog (2023-08-26 05:35:27+00:00): Bonjour,
Tu as "cassé" un itinéraire du réseau pédestre : https://knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/route/13406085

Je corrige.

Cordialement,
Yves
pyrog (2023-08-26 05:49:12+00:00): Si tu es dans le secteur, il devrait passer sur le chemin plutôt que sur la route : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/999236799
peux-tu vérifier sur le terrain stp ?

Attention à la carte de chaleur Strava. ça prouve un passage mais ce n'est pas une mesure précise. Même si la BD Topo est souvent peu précise en forêt.
gscholz (2023-05-17 06:19:06+00:00): Hi NADIA MILENA MELO MARTINEZ,
your recent activities have left behind a huge amount of errors regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-72.93777&lat=5.70436&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, this kind of errors irritate routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
wambacher (2023-05-14 10:42:44+00:00): Hi, du hast die PLZ vom DLRG-Ausbildungszentrum von 12555 in 12557 geändert. Warum?

Das Gebäude Oberspreestraße 181 hat laut Post  definitiv die PLZ 12555 und ist auch so in OSM erfasst.
delineatorix (2023-05-14 13:51:28+00:00): Sorry, mein Fehler. Hatte da etwas verwechselt. Danke für den Hinweis.
gscholz (2023-05-17 06:21:50+00:00): Hi Luisa Gutierrez,
your recent activities have left behind a significant amount of errors regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-72.93777&lat=5.70436&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, this kind of errors irritate routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2023-05-17 06:19:02+00:00): Hi NADIA MILENA MELO MARTINEZ,
your recent activities have left behind a huge amount of errors regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-72.93777&lat=5.70436&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, this kind of errors irritate routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
literan (2023-05-14 11:57:18+00:00): это не пеший путь, а маршрут теплохода/речного трамвая
julcnx (2023-05-14 12:32:57+00:00): It appears that your changeset covers areas both in the UK and Australia/NZ, which may have been unintentional given that your MapRoulette campaigns is focused solely on the UK. Just wanted to bring it to your attention.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136061221
Hobgoblin (2023-05-14 15:46:52+00:00): I don't know how that happened, although I did switch to a maproulette challenge to sort sharp angled roads in Australia.  I'm sure I uploaded all my changes after every edit.
TheClaush (2023-05-13 17:35:30+00:00): #yekastreetmga
Benoît C MdP (2023-05-17 13:06:12+00:00): Bonjour Florimont.
Il y avait il y a quelques semaines un couloir bus ouvert aux vélos en direction de la porte de la Chapelle. Est ce que les travaux de pérennisation ont démarré et entrainent la suppression de ce couloir bus ?

Bonne continuation

Benoît
Florimondable (2023-05-17 13:10:14+00:00): Bonjour Benoît.

Le couloir bus est cartographié avec un autre way, voir ici par exemple https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/868171366
Il ne faut donc pas ajouter tag sur la route principale.
Benoît C MdP (2023-05-17 13:12:24+00:00): Non, je parle du couloir bus en direction de la porte de la Chapelle. Pas du couloir bus en direction de gare du nord qui lui existe effectivement sur une voie séparée.

Benoît
Florimondable (2023-05-17 13:16:31+00:00): Ah oui ! Mince, autant pour moi, je me suis complétement trompé.
Le couloir de bus existe toujours.
N’hésitez pas à corrigé, sinon je le ferais.
Merci de l’avoir vu !
Benoît C MdP (2023-05-17 13:18:42+00:00): De rien. Je vais faire un revert de ce pas. Ce sera le plus efficace.

Benoît
Arnaud Champollion (2023-05-14 11:59:31+00:00): C'est pourtant bien une microbibliothèque (étagère de livres en libre service), qui se trouve dans le hall d'entrée de la médiathèque :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/112493944
jmarchon (2023-05-13 18:43:05+00:00): Nice work! Welcome to OSM!
gscholz (2023-05-15 06:29:25+00:00): Hi V1LLORA,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting ways and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-1.95161&lat=37.40323&zoom=18&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

I have fixed those, but are you sure these objects do actually exist in reality?
Guido
silversurfer83 (2023-05-13 20:55:55+00:00): Moin
Den Artikel mit der Erklärung der Zugangsberechtigungen hatte ich dir ja verlinkt.
Hier hast du ganz allgemein den Zugang für ALLE Verkehrsteilnehmer auf "ja" gesetzt (access=yes). Das überschreibt alles andere, was an Berechtigungen vielleicht noch an den Weg getaggt wird. Bei Wegen kommt in fast 100% der Fälle kein "access=dran", da wir implizit erstmal davon ausgehen, dass der Weg genutzt werden kann solange keine Einschränkungen bestehen. Daher schlage ich vor, dass du dir die Beschilderung und die Berechtigungen vielleicht noch einmal ansiehst und diese dann anpasst.
Wenn du Fragen hast kann ich oder jemand anders dir sehr gerne helfen.

Grüße
silversurfer83
Frans S (2023-05-14 07:55:59+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. 
Please pay more attention to mapping extensions and so on. See this webpage with modifications
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=136074933
Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136064941
lipuma (2023-05-17 13:38:44+00:00): Is die barrier=motorcycle_barrier wel juist? Op de OSM wiki bedoelen ze dit met een motorcycle_barrier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dmotorcycle_barrier

Bedoel je niet eerder een barrier=gate of barrier=swing_gate?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dgate
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dswing_gate
Famlam (2023-05-17 15:57:39+00:00): Ik heb er erg lang over zitten twijfelen of ik de tag zou veranderen (deze staat er al sinds 2017 op, zie https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4921772856/history )

Het is geen hek, omdat er permanent een groot gat tussen de delen zit en het dus onmogelijk dicht kan. Het zijn eerder twee halve hekken die nooit aansluiten, zoals bij een cycle_barrier: je moet een slingertje maken om er doorheen te komen. Mijn inziens zou ik dus denken om er bicycle=cycle_barrier van te maken (met bicycle/mofa/moped=yes). Een beetje zoals dit: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Cycle_barrier_openable2.jpg

Omdat het er al op stond, had ik het als motorcycle_barrier laten staan, maar ik verander het graag als je het ermee eens bent?
lipuma (2023-05-17 19:35:38+00:00): Ja klinkt goed! Beter dan de motorcycle_barrier denk ik.
Famlam (2023-05-17 19:56:23+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136226977
NorthCrab_upload (2023-05-13 19:40:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o miejscowości. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, zastosuj kombinację addr:city + addr:street. Jeśli nie, przekaż nazwę miejscowości w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/411239371

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
frasty (2023-05-14 02:41:36+00:00): Hello,
although it seems dangerous cycling on this highway, bicycles and other vehicles have no legal restrictions on these segments of SS1 Via Aurelia.
If you think that it could be better for cyclists to avoid this road, it might be the case to add tags like "class:bicycle" with a negative value (ie: class:bicycle=-1), just to indicate that the road is not very well suitable for cycling.
DressyPear4 (2023-05-16 16:43:40+00:00): Por que você está alterando a classificação de vias e adicionando onde nem existem?
Não crie mapas fictíceos.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136065306
é o que (2024-01-25 22:37:21+00:00): Foi mal.
ArnaudLeCaddie (2025-01-11 15:31:07+00:00): Hello ! I was wondering how you found all those bunkers ? I saw one of them on a hike and it surprised me that they were pined because they are pretty hard to find.
Interteutones (2025-01-11 22:50:28+00:00): Hello colleague,
there are military maps from that time in which the facilities are marked.
ArnaudLeCaddie (2025-01-19 13:42:46+00:00): Ok, thank you for your response! Do you know where I could find those military maps? I work as a forester in this forest (Soultz communal forest), and we are looking to mark these facilities on our maps.
Interteutones (2025-01-21 16:25:27+00:00): Hello,
look here:
https://www.bundesarchiv.de/das-bundesarchiv/standorte/freiburg/
ArnaudLeCaddie (2025-01-24 08:42:13+00:00): Hello, thanks you ! I'll take a look to it.
user_18305684 (2023-05-14 14:17:50+00:00): Hi,

don't forget to add roles on waterway relations, see wiki : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:waterway

I improved relation 15851614

Best regards
puma515 (2023-05-14 14:24:35+00:00): Thanks for pointing this out and adapting this relation. I'll check this right away for all waterways I've worked on and add what's still missing.

Best regards
puma515 (2023-05-14 15:39:47+00:00): I have checked all that I know on site of about 50 waterway relations, 14 of which I have now added.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136090072

Best regards
user_18305684 (2023-05-16 17:22:49+00:00): Great work !
(but the relation 531553 is strange : a river in 4 parts ?)

Best regards
puma515 (2023-05-16 19:51:13+00:00): Yes the relation 531553 is strange.
But Several parts are right here, the Giselau was also separated into several parts by the construction of the Kiel Canal. There is also a larger river Eider, which also consists of 3 parts. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/407956#map=11/54.1206/9.4572

Best regards