piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Karel973 (2025-09-08 06:45:25+00:00): Zal ik deze dan maar verwijderen?
eggie (2025-09-08 06:52:26+00:00): Up to you...  Hier kan het weinig kwaad in de routering. Je kunt alleen maar visaversa.
Ik denk dat ik deze al eens eerder had verwijderd.
Wanneer er een groenstrook zit tussen de paden tekenen we wel apart in.
...  en apart intekenen is niet fout... het geeft wel problemen als je te weinig verbindingen maakt.
gr eggie
eggie (2025-09-08 06:12:50+00:00): Dag Karel.. Hier is een prullembak op de loop gegaan.
Meestal komt dat door schuiven met de kaart in editmodus.
Je edits
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=171608031

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-08 06:10:52+00:00): Dag Karel .. Ik heb dat parkeerterrein aangepast naar een parkeerstrook.
gr eggie
AndersAndersson (2025-09-09 22:11:34+00:00): Hej och välkommen till OpenStreetMap!
Hela byggnaden är inte 38C. I så fall får adressen sättas på individuella ingångar.
Jag lägger in det som jag tror det är.
MassCartog (2025-09-08 15:02:04+00:00): Hello Welcome to OSM. Replacing the building tags with a node is fine. But removing the building completely in incorrect. If the building still exists on the ground (has not been demolished) then you should just remove the tags and keep the building outline.
Goappr Studios (2025-09-08 16:29:58+00:00): I have re installed the building
MassCartog (2025-09-08 15:02:19+00:00): Hello Welcome to OSM. Replacing the building tags with a node is fine. But removing the building completely in incorrect. If the building still exists on the ground (has not been demolished) then you should just remove the tags and keep the building outline.
Goappr Studios (2025-09-08 16:26:26+00:00): I have re installed the building
MassCartog (2025-09-08 15:03:01+00:00): Hello Welcome to OSM. Replacing the building tags with a node is fine. But removing the building completely in incorrect. If the building still exists on the ground (has not been demolished) then you should just remove the tags and keep the building outline.

Could you go back through your changes and correct this? replace or restore building outlines.
Goappr Studios (2025-09-08 16:19:39+00:00): I have re installed the 2 building
MassCartog (2025-09-08 15:03:07+00:00): Hello Welcome to OSM. Replacing the building tags with a node is fine. But removing the building completely in incorrect. If the building still exists on the ground (has not been demolished) then you should just remove the tags and keep the building outline.

Could you go back through your changes and correct this? replace or restore building outlines.
Goappr Studios (2025-09-08 16:23:46+00:00): I have re installed the building
MassCartog (2025-09-08 15:03:14+00:00): Hello Welcome to OSM. Replacing the building tags with a node is fine. But removing the building completely in incorrect. If the building still exists on the ground (has not been demolished) then you should just remove the tags and keep the building outline.

Could you go back through your changes and correct this? replace or restore building outlines.
Goappr Studios (2025-09-08 16:11:05+00:00): I have re added the building
MassCartog (2025-09-08 17:14:47+00:00): Thanks! Nice work improving all these features!
ilias_ (2025-09-08 06:59:06+00:00): goddayum what a bbox
NeisBot (2025-09-08 00:55:35+00:00): Hi smithfarms, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 98% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 1 highway(s)
- 2 natural(s)
- 18 landuse(')

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=171609673
smithfarms (2025-09-08 00:58:40+00:00): Hello, yes, there were intentional. I am working on correcting some issues I previously made.
Facalderonm (2025-09-12 18:35:32+00:00): Hola, según la guía de mapeo de Colombia (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Colombia/Gu%C3%ADa_para_mapear), en el país NO se usa el tag "highway=motorway", siendo la más alta "highway=trunk". Así que por favor revertir estos cambios, ya que aunque las avenidas se denominen "Autopista", técnicamente este tipo de vías no existen en el país. Saludos.
Glassman (2025-09-09 21:24:51+00:00): #TIP: Street names are spelled out in OSM. The reason is that software has a hard time with abrevations
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171610180
NeisBot (2025-09-08 01:39:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains 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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
pitscheplatsch (2025-09-14 08:06:38+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/171615826
Glassman (2025-09-09 21:26:47+00:00): #TIP: check out the ESRI World Imagery. Select the background icon then select ESRI World Imagery for more current views.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171610235
nevw (2025-09-08 04:42:07+00:00): Hi, both your business additions to the osm have been reverted and the map restored. The method you have used to add the businesses is considered vandalism. 
You should instead add a node to the location your business operates from and add the business tags to that.
❤️‍🔥 (2025-11-07 07:34:27+00:00): Hi, this section can't be a motorway since it has traffic lights. so I think the previous tag was correct? 

https://osm.wiki/Key:expressway has a confusing name but that tag is designed for exactly this situation
Robert Ancell (2025-11-11 20:58:52+00:00): Thanks for noticing! I've changed it back to highway=trunk and added a note on the sections and commit message for future mappers to notice. I struggled to find formal confirmation that this is the case and ended up using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunedin_Southern_Motorway to determine which section is not a motorway.
hesperus86 (2025-09-08 02:06:47+00:00): flock*
bigbug21 (2025-10-07 19:08:49+00:00): Hallo adjuva,
vielen Dank für die vielen Verbesserungen! Bei der Einarbeitung einer Quelle in den Wikipedia-Artikel zum Betriebsbahnhof Burgsinn stach mir ein Widerspruch zu den offenen Bahn-Geodaten ins Auge. Laut der in Wikipedia verarbeiteten Quelle von 1987 soll der Streckenwechsel 5214 <=> 5215 (siehe Punkt 1196928900) etwas weiter nördlich, auf Höhe des Empfangsgebäudes liegen. Ist das ein Widerspruch zu den von dir verarbeiteten Geodaten?
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-11 02:10:03+00:00): I went ahead and tagged the stairs as bridge=yes where it overlaps with the section below it. Layer tags on overlapping ways don't really do much without a bridge=* or tunnel=* tag.
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-11 02:10:23+00:00): wrong changeset
nevw (2025-09-08 04:46:04+00:00): You appear to have added the bubbler to a boundary instead of a new node and shifted a bench and a flagpole incorrectly.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=171610985
I have reverted your changeset.
nevw (2025-09-11 08:40:56+00:00): I re-added the water bubbler
user_5359 (2025-09-08 06:23:23+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please move your business to the right building!
CAM-Gerlach (2026-05-24 23:13:20+00:00): Removed remaining SEO spam tags in changeset 183130280

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183130280
DD1GJ (2025-09-08 06:40:34+00:00): Revert

Hallo GeoCachingKoblenz, willkommen bei OSM. Du arbeitest hier direkt in den Rohdaten, aus denen die Karte erstellt wird. Ich habe daher Deine privaten Wegpunkte entfernt. Merh Informationen zu OSM findest Du z.B. unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf
felipeeugenio (2025-09-08 11:22:54+00:00): Hola. Pasa lo mismo en varias calles en el país. Se pone como name= la más usada y el resto como alt_name=.

Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171611390
Westbrooke117 (2025-09-08 03:11:02+00:00): Wiki says layer 0 should generally not be used, which I must've missed. I'm going to revert the changes as they didn't resolve the issue regardless.
catgirlseraid (2025-09-12 03:26:17+00:00): can you please explain why you did this?
catgirlseraid (2025-09-12 03:58:08+00:00): If there's a routing issue im happy to fix it but removing the highway tag doesn't seem like the proper solution
ratrun (2025-09-12 04:05:00+00:00): In a tag combination

area:highway=service
area=yes
highway=service

the "area" tag and the "highway=service" are superfluous. I forgot to delete the redundant area tag in my changeset. The "highway=service" is already explicitly mapped as additional way in between of this area, therefore the OSMI routing validator detects unconnected nodes.

As I see that you reverted my change again, I ask you to revert back to my version and additionally remove the area tag as otherwise the error will appear again in about 12 hours on https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-99.48934&lat=38.77357&zoom=8&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=unconnected_open_ends_1
catgirlseraid (2025-09-12 04:24:06+00:00): For highway areas it is accepted and common practice to map them as both areas and ways despite the general OSM guidence of one feature one object. There's no approved singular tagging at the moment which is why i've used both of the most popular formats, so one can eventually be removed when a consensus is reached. It's important to not just map for the validator.
ratrun (2025-09-12 04:38:54+00:00): Please show me how this is common practice and accepted. This is not the case. If you still  insist on your view I suggest to open a discussion on the forum and I'm sure that the result is that this not widely accepted.
catgirlseraid (2025-09-12 04:43:47+00:00): I'm not sure why this particular one seems to be causing an issue compared to all the others so i'll go through it in JOSM and try see what is causing it, as for discussion around it refer to this similar fourm post https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/clarification-of-footway-area-mapping/130974/16 and this discussion on this changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166883890#map=18/40.691542/-74.015139
catgirlseraid (2025-09-12 04:44:34+00:00): but yes I do agree there's probably something wrong with this particular one if its the only one appearing as an error so i'll go through and see if i can figure out what's wrong, maybe it needs splitting up?
catgirlseraid (2025-09-12 04:45:22+00:00): are you able to give more information about what exactly causes the "unconnected_open_ends_1" if known?
catgirlseraid (2025-09-12 04:50:00+00:00): I've gone through the problematic area and added no exit tags to dead ends and split up the area, if the warning reappears can you please comment on this post. I hope it resolves it.
ratrun (2025-09-12 05:24:31+00:00): Thank you for pointing me on your proposal on the forum on that matter.
I think that I understood most of it, but probably not well enough to explain how the combination of the tags area:highway / (area+highway) make sense according to your definition in this case here. Either most people follow the addition way or they stroll around in a probably larger area. 

As discussions here are  tedious, and this is relevant for a broader audience, I will add a post in the community forum in the afternoon pointing to this case here and ask you to answer my question there.

I think that you fixed the unconnected_open_ends issues OSMI detected by adding of the noexit=yes tags, but in order to be sure we need to wait for a new run with the actualized data.
Ferrocarriles de México (2025-10-03 20:40:06+00:00): Revertí este cambio porque añade enlaces de autopista (`highway=motorway_link`) inexistentes. No sé de dónde sacaste esa información, pero está grosamente equivocada.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172808710
Glassman (2025-09-09 21:28:39+00:00): #TIP: Leave the address node when removing the business. Hopefully a new business will take over the same address making it easier for the next mapper.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171612198
i2004 (2025-09-08 12:50:01+00:00): gracias te hice tambiwen martin garcia
i2004 (2025-09-08 12:50:26+00:00): noveades para la 46 https://x.com/CiudadDeBondis/status/1964120568090792396
Glassman (2025-09-22 20:43:19+00:00): DWG here I noticed people adding nodes with name=Pohon. Typically there should be a tag with what type of node this is. Can you do that?
AndyB_66 (2025-09-11 08:23:22+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
mavl (2025-09-09 13:36:39+00:00): Здравствуйте. Указывайте, пожалуйста, названия улиц как принято в OSM. Вас уже просили раньше об этом. Не "улица Новая", а "Новая улица".  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1427873575  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%8F/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BE%D0%B1_%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B3
NeisBot (2025-09-08 04:47:08+00:00): Hi あもすとかりなあまかは, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Added restaurant building with attributes"
PengualaHeadphones (2025-09-08 13:50:54+00:00): The poles may still be present even after the old power line cables are cut.
zstadler (2025-09-17 16:59:19+00:00): Reverted in changeset 172075586.
A series of edits by aziz2424 is incorrect.
user_5359 (2025-09-08 13:53:19+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2bft. What is the mean of the tag autorickshaw = no?
uknown-gryphus (2025-09-08 13:58:14+00:00): Hi, I seem to have made a typo, it is meant to be auto_rickshaw=no wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:auto_rickshaw . I will fix it
user_5359 (2025-09-08 14:05:54+00:00): Thanks for pointing that out! It has already been corrected.
AndyB_66 (2025-09-11 08:23:59+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
öreg (2025-09-11 13:34:51+00:00): Ich gehe davon aus, dass in Deutschland sind in überwiegender Mehrheit christlich.
user_21736114 (2025-09-08 06:06:58+00:00): також село Крутоярка
Yog Sot (2025-09-08 13:16:22+00:00): walczysz o te rowery? ;d
Ale tym razem faktycznie oznakowanie już jest? xD
sjdunbar (2025-12-24 22:23:12+00:00): Hi there, 
I don't think this use of cycleway:right:shoulder is correct, given that you specify bicycle:no. This is causing inaccurate rendering on CyclOSM.
DD1GJ (2025-09-08 06:58:55+00:00): Firmeneintrag in einzelnen Knoten ausgelagert, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13127402833
Yog Sot (2025-09-08 13:15:28+00:00): ale skoro plac budowy, to nie farmland ;]
AndyB_66 (2025-09-23 19:20:50+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
NeisBot (2025-09-08 07:07:13+00:00): Hi Nilde75, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Updated attributes from grassland to meadow"
Frans S (2025-10-20 10:07:42+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please pay more attention to mapping of buildings.  Be more accurate, square them and do not connect nodes to each other.
Best regards and keep mapping
Supaplex (2025-09-08 09:15:03+00:00): Hi,

May you split your edit into at least two changesets? It will make reviewing the changesets much easier.

Supaplex
Data Working Group
gabro00 (2026-04-21 19:16:30+00:00): Kedves Róbert!

Ez a Szondi György utca már létező vagy tervezett útszakasz?
Tandari Róbert (2026-04-22 05:26:17+00:00): Ez egy létező útszakasz, új építési telkek kialakítása kezdődött ezen a területen.
NeisBot (2025-09-08 07:00:40+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains 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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
pitscheplatsch (2025-09-14 08:06:03+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/171620072
4004 (2025-09-13 22:50:12+00:00): dont forget there is also mapillary https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=210170211639069&focus=photo
eggie (2025-09-08 08:22:41+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
silversurfer83 (2025-09-08 14:51:50+00:00): Hi there :)

you might want to be a little more careful when editing the database. You added two nodes with "highway=track" + "tracktype=grade1" across Europe. These looked way out of place so I removed them.

If that was intentional, please make sure to add correct data.

happy mapping
silversurfer83
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171619454
2giraffe (2025-09-08 17:32:18+00:00): Hello silversurfer,
 I have absolutly no idea how this has happened-i just moved the bus station. Hope this wont happen again.
Thank you for correcting it. Kind regards, 2giraffe
Andrea Musuruane (2025-09-10 10:09:39+00:00): Ciao. Qual e' la fonte dei nomi delle strade? Come e' possibile classificare una pedestrian senza essere fisicamente sul posto? Grazie, Andrea
Max1234-ITA (2025-09-10 16:27:13+00:00): Ciao Andrea, per i nomi ho considerato i toponimi riportati da ANNCSU; Per quanto riguarda la pedestrian forse ho peccato di presunzione, deducendolo dal fatto che gli edifici sono molto ravvicinati e un' auto non potrebbe passare (in effetti non ho considerato il fatto che potrebbero passare moto e biciclette, errore mio)
Andrea Musuruane (2025-09-11 07:50:35+00:00): Ciao. ANNCSU non e' una fonte dati utilizzabile perché la licenza non e' compatibile con OSM. Le modifiche fatte sono da revertare. Ciao, Andrea
Max1234-ITA (2025-09-11 07:57:22+00:00): Cavolo, non ci pensavo... :-(

Bisogna per forza revertare tutto il changeset o posso semplicemente ri-editare i nomi ripristinando quello che c'era prima? Non sono tantissime strade lo potrei fare anche a mano.
Andrea Musuruane (2025-09-11 10:42:18+00:00): Puoi revertare solo i nomi delle strade.
Max1234-ITA (2025-09-12 06:12:54+00:00): Ciao, ho eseguito il revert dei toponimi da me inseriti. 
Buon proseguimento!
Max
ManuelB701 (2025-09-10 11:18:09+00:00): Habe deine Änderung rückgängig gemacht, weil einerseits hatte dieser keinen Mehrwert (Weg wurde schon längst als gesperrt eingegeben und Barrieren wurden an den Enden ebenfalls eingetragen) und andererseits hatten diese auch mehrere Objekte zerstört (z.B. Löschung von highway=track am gesperrten Feldweg, barrier=gate ersetzte natural=scrub)
user_5359 (2025-09-08 13:22:52+00:00): Hello! Please have alook on https://www.osm.org/way/76167662. What is the mean of the tag yes = unclassified?
Константин Гам (2025-09-09 13:02:27+00:00): Thank you, I fix it
Vinber-Pro (2025-09-08 09:45:32+00:00): salut,
ce n'est pas téléphone la clé, c'est phone :)

à toi
Dinamik (2025-10-02 15:42:17+00:00): Здравствуйте! Не удаляйте, пожалуйста, данные из базы.
Константин Гам (2025-10-03 09:20:43+00:00): Здравствуйте!
Очень интересно. Я не имею права удалять то, что не существует на местности? Может отметить двух-полосный дунайский проспект из 2004 года, который тут был? :)

Ответил в другом пакете.
Dinamik (2025-10-03 15:44:07+00:00): Вы не имеете права удалять то, что на местности есть. После Ваших правок в пределах парка не остаëтся вообще ничего, что очевидно не соответствуют действительности, т. к. имеется растительность и дорожки.

Я не думаю, что тегирование двухполосного  Дунайского проспекта это хорошая идея.
lumixen (2025-09-08 08:51:17+00:00): This one is very popular and was intentionally vandalized some time ago - see also this Strava heatmap snapshot as of 2025: https://drive.proton.me/urls/AMJSCV8M4C#IcwULzDpkeL1
eggie (2025-09-08 09:50:04+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
Sakari_N (2025-09-10 18:43:24+00:00): Onko tässä kävelyn kieltävät liikennemerkit? 

Huomasin samalla että koko hervanan valtaväylä on foot=no, vaikka tietääkseni kävelyä kieltäviä liikennemerkkejä ei ole kuin rantatunnelissa ja onko siitä lähteen päin. Näiden korjaaminen toki vaatii vähän selvittelyä.
Sakari_N (2025-10-17 19:07:37+00:00): Kumottu perusteettomana. No-access edellyttäisi että kävely on laitonta, ts liikennemerkkejä. Ja liikennemerkkejä ei tietääkseni ole (ja Tampere_joli ei vaivautunut vastaamaan)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173424892
Tampere_joli (2025-11-03 14:16:00+00:00): Hei, pahoittelut että kommenttiisi ei ole reagoitu. Muutoskokoelman kommentista ei taida tulla mitään ilmoitusta eikä tilin seuranta muutenkaan ole jatkuvaa. Mutta kommentti itse asiaan. Kävelykieltoa ei tässä näyttäisi olevan, mutta pidän itse oleellisempana sitä onko kävely tuossa kohdassa oikeasti realistinen vaihtoehto tätä karttapalvelua käyttävälle. Mielestäni ei ole. Pidän tärkeänä sitä, että karttapalvelun aineistoa pystyy käyttämään laaja joukko ihmisiä ja siihen pystyy luottamaan. Nyt siis kävelyreititys on ok tuon liittymän kautta ja siitähän ei realistisesti lähtisi kovinkaan moni oikeasti yli loikkimaan, kuten ei liikennejärjestelmäsuunnittelun näkökulmasta ole tarkoitettukaan.
Sakari_N (2025-11-03 16:16:20+00:00): Muutoskokoelman kommenteista tulee automaattinen sähköposti-ilmoitus siihen sähköpostiin millä OSM-tili on luotu. Niitä kannattaa seurata :) Tai voit lukea niitä esim: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8269922

Olet oikeassa, että OSM-dataa käyttää laaja joukko, ja siksi tietojen oikeellisuus on tärkeää... ja juuri siksi poistin tämän foot=no tagin, koska se on selvästi virheellinen. 

Tagien käyttötarkoitukset on kuvattu wikissä, ja access-tagin sivulla aika selkeästi kerrotaan: "Access tags pre-eminently describe legal permissions/restrictions and should follow ground truth, such as signage combined with legal regulation, rather than guesswork. They do not describe common or typical use, even if the signage is generally ignored."

Käytännössä foot=no vaatii siis kävelyn kieltävän liikennemerkin (tai tieliikennelain pykälän) tai fyysisen esteen, kuten aidan.

Tällaiset ongelmat menevät enemmän sinne reititysalgoritmien puolelle, datan tulkintaan.
Rainero (2025-12-16 21:53:15+00:00): Hallo Golffahrer2000,

du hast hier Gehsteige (z.B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1425798972 ) separat eingezeichnet, die schon mit Attributen an der Straße kartiert waren. Somit existierten sie doppelt.
Wenn du sowas machst, schau dir bitte die Straße an, ändere dort auf sidewalk=separate und übertrag die Attribute wie surface, smoothness, width u.s.w. auf den separat eingezeichneten Gehsteig.
Mehr zu dem Thema findest du im Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Gehsteig
Die Triftstraße habe ich gerade korrigiert.

Servus,
Rainer