piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
LudovicG (2025-09-10 05:37:41+00:00): Hi,
The shop was mispelled with "Interflora" (the word in big on the front of the shop but not the good name). And yes, it is one of the delivery service available (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interflora).
I don't know how to tag this and I put interflora=yes to keep the information.
So, it is not the brand of the shop.
mueschel (2025-09-10 10:13:22+00:00): I guess we can tag this like delivery services of restaurants, i.e. 
delivery:partner=Interflora.
mueschel (2025-09-08 09:53:28+00:00): Please check the names you added. There are many wrong language codes like

po, ua, jp, sp, tu, in

Also, please add only those names which actually exist in the given language. There's no need for transliterations or plain copies of tags.
spiregrain (2025-09-03 14:49:07+00:00): Thank you for doing this.
custodiankeyy (2025-09-03 19:36:51+00:00): Mağazayı eklerken relation olarak mahalleye eklemeyin lütfen. Ayrıca shop=clothes etiketi olmadan eklemeniz pek bir şey ifade etmiyor.
Carto'Cité (2025-09-11 13:14:45+00:00): Salut Xandrex,
Je trouve qu'on perd en information quand on supprime la séparation piste cyclable / chemin piéton dans des situations comme ici où les deux sont assez nettement séparés, qu'on trouve une signalétique dédiée (B22a). Je ne sais pas vraiment ce qu'on y gagne même si je suis d'accord que dans certain cas cela mérite d'être mutualisé tellement l'aménagement ne constitue qu'un seul objet physique et que le partage piéton/cycliste, même avec une ségrégation sera problématique.
J'avais commencé à les recréer avant de me rendre compte que tu les avais supprimées. Donc je te propose qu'on en discute et qu'on collecte quelques avis. Ça te va ?
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
aceman444 (2026-02-09 21:13:09+00:00): Thanks, but you didn't need to remove the old names of the cafe.
eggie (2025-09-03 14:29:18+00:00): Dag donux. Lijkt me geen probleem als je het zelf in de gaten houdt en op je to-do lijstje zet. 
Gr eggie
donux-nl (2025-09-03 18:45:03+00:00): Ik hoop dat ik dat goed heb gedaan via de openingstijden:
2025 Sep 06 - 2025 Oct 05 Fr-Sa 10:00-17:00; Su 12:00-17:00
eggie (2025-09-03 19:02:51+00:00): Da validator van JOSM vindt het allemaal best.
gr eggie
Valerio_Bozzolan (2026-07-06 06:57:06+00:00): Ciao :) Grazie per i tuoi contributi!
L'altro giorno mi si è fermata la macchina qui e ho notato per caso un possibile problema in questo punto preciso:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13103956140

Sembra un puntino nella strada mappato come  leisure=garden, ma lì sulla strada non mi sembra ci sia questa cosa.

Ho tolto quei 3 tag da quel punto esatto. Se qualcosa non va avvisami pure che ripristino :) Ciaau
BibiOSM (2026-07-08 12:18:23+00:00): Ciao, si probabilmente era un residuo non rimosso di un edit più ampio, concordo con la modifica. Grazie!
Andrea Musuruane (2025-09-04 08:57:35+00:00): Ciao. I nomi vanno con l'iniziale maiuscola in OSM. Ciao, Andrea
Una tantum (2025-09-04 12:01:53+00:00): Corretto, grazie della segnalazione
user_5359 (2025-09-04 06:59:12+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1426837710. what is the mean of the key Tip_RK?
Vladimir_Geroev (2025-09-04 10:21:41+00:00): This tag is not provided by OSM, meaning 'Type of advertising product'. If you say no, I will remove it from here and from other edits.
user_5359 (2025-09-04 12:55:08+00:00): Hello, this is useful information. Do you recognise the website https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Advertising? It seems to me that there are already corresponding keys. Please also note that at least the keys should be in British English.
MarcoR (2025-09-04 06:08:03+00:00): Ciao e benvenuti su OpenStreetMap!

Per mappare un punto panoramico puoi usare tourism=viewpoint + name=<nome proprio> (solo se ha un nome)

Per maggiori informazioni consulta la wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dviewpoint

Buon mapping,
Marco
eggie (2025-09-03 13:59:13+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback.. Het zou natuurlijk zomaar kunnen, maar de toevoerpaden van west naar oost zijn dan niet erg logisch. Bv de noordelijke oversteek bij de rotonde. Die staat op oneway=yes
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-09-03 14:09:52+00:00): 'k Denk dat de wegbeheerder niet erg goed gekeken heeft hoe dat dan in de praktijk zal gaan. 
Jij hebt het formeel correct gemapt.
Het is onduidelijk of de noodelijk oversteek bij de rotonde oneway=yes of no is.
oneway=no lijkt me logischer. Dan routeert het van de Jacob van Campenweg naar 'jouw' fietspad.
Daar gaat niemand die hele rotonde rondfietsen
Up to you
Groet
eggie
ota-iod-98 (2025-09-04 19:03:04+00:00): Hi Eggie,

De noordelijke oversteek wordt inderdaad gebruikt in twee richtingen. Dus dan zal ik voor de noordelijke oversteek deze veranderen in een oneway=no; en de aanpassing toevoegen aan mijn changeset.
ota-iod-98 (2025-09-04 19:04:32+00:00): Groet,
Ray
eggie (2025-09-04 19:16:28+00:00): 👍
AndyB_66 (2025-10-09 19:59:34+00:00): Stosuj się, proszę, do zasad, obowiązujących w społeczności OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
eggie (2025-09-03 14:02:24+00:00): Dag ota   Wanneer er een G7 bord staat is het niet een highway=path maar een highway=footway. Dat routeert ook niet voor fietsers.

Get zal dan dus getagd moeten worden als highway=footway  .. bicycle=no kan dan weg.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-03 19:14:23+00:00): Als bovenstaand aangepast. Bron Obliekfoto's Slagboom&Peeters
default accesstags verwijderd.
Gr eggie
eggie (2025-09-03 14:22:19+00:00): Dag Jan.. Het is beter om de bestaande adresnodes te gebruiken om op bij te taggen. Dat voorkomt dubbele adressen. De format van de postcode is zonder spatie.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-03 14:25:39+00:00): Ik heb wat samengevoegd
FroschForscher (2025-09-03 15:12:33+00:00): Hallo ding_ms,
wie ist die Situation vor Ort beschildert? Ist die Baustelle fertig?

Hintergrund: "bus" ist kein valider Wert für motor_vehicle und access=no (siehe auch note=...) verbietet z.Z. auch Pferde, Fahrräder, Fußgänger.

FroschForscher
ding_ms (2025-09-03 16:31:56+00:00): Hallo FroschForscher, die Baustelle sollte am kommenden Sonntag fertig sein, da der Busbetreiber (SWU) die Andienung der neuen Steige in der Unterweiler Straße bereits dahingehend kommuniziert. Bei der Begehung heute sah das noch sehr nach Arbeit aus. ;-) Für mich stellte sich das vor Ort so dar, dass der MIV von/nach Wiblinger Querspange zukünftig über die abknickende Gögglinger Straße geführt wird. In die Unterweiler Straße auf Höhe der Aussegnungshalle dürfen m.E. nur Busse rein fahren, für Fußgänger (ggf. Radfahrer) sollte der Zugang ebenfalls möglich sein. Wie sollten die Kanten nach dieser Maßgabe korrekt definiert sein?
FroschForscher (2025-09-03 19:43:29+00:00): - note=... kann weg sobald der Grund (Baustelle) nicht mehr exitiert.
- access=no sollte entfernt werden.
- für (motor_)vehicle hängt es von der genaue Beschilderung ab. Hier gibt es einen inkonsistenten Wildwuchs sowohl auf Seiten der Verkehrsbehörden als auch auf Seiten von OSM.
Ich habe gerade festgestellt das das OSM Traffic Sign Tool 2 tatsächlich (motor_)vehicle=bus vorschlägt. Was nicht im Wiki dokumentiert ist. Im Wiki ist dafür das m.M.n. uneindeutig/problematische bus=yes (oder psv=yes, was allerdings auch Taxen mit einschließt) dokumentiert. Kurzum, wie so oft bei OSM access hat man die Wahl zwischen schlecht/falsch und schlecht/falsch.
Bei VZ 250/260 mit ZZ würde ich einfach den Vorschlag vom OSM Traffic Sign Tool 2 übernehmen. Alternative könnte man auch auf eine Verbesserung der Situation hinwirken, was ein langwierig Diskussion im Forum voraussetzt.
rskedgell (2025-09-03 16:52:05+00:00): If it's private, you can just set access=private and delete any other tags which have the same value. Using access=no isn't a synonym for private, it means "not accessible by any transport mode, unless overridden by other access tags".
JassKurn (2025-09-03 17:01:46+00:00): I believe this group of changesets by The Vyne needs reverting. They all imply a lack of understanding of tag defintions and are likely wrong. The original tagging was done by the National Trust team and should be considered authoritive, if their work is changed there needs to be a clear explenation in the changeset comment.
rskedgell (2025-09-03 17:40:53+00:00): @JassKurn Unless someone else gets there first, I'll revert them tomorrow, after @NTTrailsLSE has had a chance to get into the office,read the DM I sent them and see the current state.

The Vyne aren't the only NT property who've had a bad day today.
rskedgell (2025-09-04 14:02:05+00:00): Re-tagged with sensible values in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171454730

As these edits were clearly not made in line with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/National_Trust_Paths and @NTTrailsLSE hasn't replied, I'll escalate this to DWG and National Trust.
rskedgell (2025-09-04 14:06:58+00:00): That's no what your edit did and it was certainly not made in accordance with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/National_Trust_Paths

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171455073
rskedgell (2025-09-03 16:49:51+00:00): This edit doesn't mean that "The Hidden Realm" playground is for paying customers only (you'd add access=customers for that), but that it doesn't exist.
rskedgell (2025-09-04 13:54:56+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171454522

Please read:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
and
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/National_Trust_Paths
The Vyne (2025-09-08 08:15:45+00:00): The Hidden Realm is closed due to safety and not accessible to anyone. It will not be reopening.
rskedgell (2025-09-04 13:49:51+00:00): Your edit deleted the highway=path tag from these paths, effectively removing them from OpenStreetMap for rendering and routing purposes. You were certainly not editing OSM in line with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/National_Trust_Paths

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171454270
rskedgell (2025-09-03 16:40:05+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Unfortunately, deleting the highway=path tags here leaves data consumers with access permissions attached to nothing. You'll notice that they've completely disappeared from the map following your edit(s).

If it's a permissive footpath and isn't used by estate vehicles, I suggest using:

highway=footway 
foot=permissive
designation=permissive_footpath
(no other access tags needed)

If it's used by estate vehicles, you might use:
highway=track
vehicle=private
foot=permissive
designation=permissive_footpath

You could also add the following to indicate who's responsible for the permissive nature of the path:
operator=National Trust
operator:wikidata=Q333515

Please let me know if you need any help reverting or repairing these edits.
rskedgell (2025-09-04 13:46:33+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171454189
The Vyne (2025-09-08 08:21:18+00:00): I was trying to make it clear that the footpaths are permissive, not public, as we've seen an increase in antisocial behaviour and people accessing the area within the pay barrier and private staff areas, without paying (runners and cyclists) as they have been appearing on third party sites and designated as suitable for these activities. This is not the case.
SomeoneElse (2025-09-14 22:34:32+00:00): Hello "The Vyne", and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
I wonder if there's been a bit of a miscommunication about "permissive access" here?  Something that the general public have a legal right to access (e.g. a public footpath) would be "yes" or similar.  "permissive" means that people are allowed to access it, but the land manager might remove that access at any time.  "customers" means paying customers only, and "private" means only the people who own the land or people they explicitly allow (such as someone delivering the post).
If you've got any other questions, you could pop in to the UK forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/uk/86 (login with your OSM login) and ask there.  I'm pretty sure that there are people there with long memories that stretch back to the join OSM / NT training that happened at Clumber many years ago!
Best Regards,
Andy
eggie (2025-09-03 14:13:51+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Eigenlijk zou dat NL:G13 bord in de tagging van met fietspad zelf gezet moeten worden.
Dus op het lijnelement

Met de volgende tags
moped=no, mofa=no, traffic_sign=NL:G13
Zie ook 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway


Het zit nu vast aan de landuse
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-09-03 14:16:37+00:00): Ik heb het losse bord losgemaakt van de landuse.
Je eigen edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=171409334
gr eggie
rskedgell (2025-09-03 16:47:17+00:00): You don't really need access=permissive and =no for everything else in the iD editor's drop down list on a tagged as highway=footway with foot=permissive - everything apart from foot=permissive is redundant. Although it's unlikely, current permissions mean that you can literally drive a cart and horses through it (you haven't set vehicle=no or carriage=no, but please don't).
rskedgell (2025-09-04 13:41:53+00:00): Updated in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171453947

You need to familiarise yourself with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/National_Trust_Paths
rskedgell (2025-09-04 14:27:42+00:00): ... and fully reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171455900
Langlaeufer (2025-09-04 08:31:07+00:00): Dann wäre es private, permissive heißt, jeder kann die Genehmigung ohne größere Probleme erhalten.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171409787
Stephan-4711 (2025-09-04 08:36:09+00:00): Hannes korrigiert,danke
Hunte (2025-09-03 14:38:10+00:00): Moin,

Du hast das ganze Gebäude als Firma/Büro gekennzeichnet.
Am besten du änderst Deine Änderung und machst nur an der richtigen Stelle einen Punkt mit dem Tag Office usw.
Das ganze Gebäude wird wohl nicht die Firma sein.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:office?uselang=de
iandees (2025-09-03 15:14:36+00:00): The segments that you marked as `bicycle=designated` are just regular crossings or sidewalks and probably aren't "designated" for bicycles. Are you trying to map for a routing situation?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171410424
WandrerBike&Run (2025-09-03 15:46:55+00:00): yes many platforms require this for routing and when crossing perpendicular to traffic or when going from path to path... makes sense to have.  Many paths are completely inaccessible to map/route, because there is never a connection to a road or path.  Especially where people are riding bikes on them.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-09-04 16:35:17+00:00): takie zmiany trzeba dyskutowac na forum przed zmianami

https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/pl/40
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-09-04 16:36:27+00:00): bez dyskusji to każdy może wycofać
theDM (2025-09-04 20:37:15+00:00): czy ta droga ma "analogiczny standard i znaczenie" do dróg ekspresowych? jeżeli tak, to wpisuje się w obecną definicję i nie są potrzebne dyskusje, do wycofania jeżeli nie spełnia tego wymogu
user_21741990 (2025-09-05 07:25:03+00:00): Znaczenie na pewno ma, bo to przedłużenie drogi S52 - jednej z docelowo zaledwie trzech(lub czterech, jeśli kiedyś powstanie S8 Kłodzko-Boboszów) dróg klasy A/S prowadzących do granicy polsko-czeskiej i na obecną chwilę drugie najlepsze pod względem standardu technicznego połączenie tych państw. Droga po polskiej stronie, aż do granicy, jest w całości bezkolizyjna, więc nawet bardziej kwalifikuje się do takiego tagowania niż np. DK1 w Zwardoniu czy DK4 w Korczowej, gdzie występują pojedyncze skrzyżowania kolizyjne. Tutaj jedynym punktem kolizyjnym jest rondo Oběšinec położone już na terenie Czech, gdzie tamtejsza społeczność OSM wypracowała trochę inne zasady stosowania tagu "trunk" niż u nas i tagowanie kolizyjnych rond jest w drodze wyjątku dopuszczalne(przykłady: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1252439787 i https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/87592787)
theDM (2025-09-05 07:40:40+00:00): Jeżeli na tym odcinku nie jest dopuszczony ruch pieszy i rowerowy, czyli za rondem po czeskiej stronie i na wjeździe z ul. Pułkownika Gwido Langera po polskiej stronie stoją właściwe znaki, to droga kwalifikuje się jako analogiczny standard i znaczenie do dróg ekspresowych.
user_21741990 (2025-09-07 06:29:34+00:00): Ostatnio byłem w tym miejscu na żywo parę lat temu, ale na szybko przejrzałem wymienione przez Ciebie punkty na Google Street View, i tam raczej żadnego oznakowania nie ma.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-09 10:08:16+00:00): Hello!

You used
tracktype=grade2c
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/371586337/history

Have you maybe meant
tracktype=grade2
?

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

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

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
eggie (2025-09-03 15:46:26+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
Dimitar155 (2025-09-06 06:21:19+00:00): The two escalators here are missing their direction of escalation.
rhhs (2025-09-06 06:30:09+00:00): added
hauke-stieler (2026-02-07 14:07:09+00:00): Hi,

ich möchte dir hier kurz Feedback zu deinen Änderungen hier geben: Du hast den existierenden Riccardo-Zigaretten-Shop mit dem Way der Hermannstraße verbunden und zudem noch ein Duplikat dieses shops angelegt. Dessen Tags hast du an den Node der Tiefgarageneinfahrt gehängt. Ein Feature in der Realität sollte aber möglichst immer ein Feature im digitalen sein. Hier also: Ein Node für die Tiefgarage und ein Node für den Shop. Habe die Daten aufgeräumt und den Shop zurück ins Gebäude der Hausnummer 10 verschoben. Bitte beim nächsten mal etwas aufpassen.

Zudem: Du editierst nur unter der Woche. Editierst du OSM beruflich?

Grüße
Hauke
Emma Js (2026-02-15 18:39:14+00:00): Hallo!
Vielen Dank für Ihr Feedback zu meinen Bearbeitungen. Ich wollte eigentlich nur die Autobahnen korrigieren und habe dabei versehentlich die Punkte verwechselt. Das war keine böse Absicht.

Nein, ich bin kein professioneller Bearbeiter. Ich bin Amateur und bearbeite Texte in meiner Freizeit. Viele Grüße
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171412260
capt_planet (2026-07-19 18:24:25+00:00): hej, wzdłuż Kopalnianej jest odseparowana asfaltowa ścieżka (nawet fajna), ale w terenie nie ma ani jednego znaku pionowego ani poziomego, który wskazywałby, że to DDR
rohieb (2025-09-03 15:46:56+00:00): Zu den Bänken siehe auch https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4932714
rskedgell (2025-09-03 17:00:30+00:00): What you've deleted here is a public right of way, part of Ivinghoe Footpath 27.

If the PRoW tags were applied to the wrong path, it would help if they were applied to the right path. This may help, although I'm sure NT has access to better information about PRoWs which cross its land:
https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/bucks/-/ivinghoe/

If you have a desire line path which is visible on aerial imagery on National Trust land where you are, as the landowner, in a position to forbid access, you'd be better off using:
highway=path
access=no
informal=yes

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
rskedgell (2025-09-04 08:22:55+00:00): I also note that you've deleted a section of the Ridgeway National Trail with this edit.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-09-14 23:14:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 171939901 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits due to misunderstandings about how public rights of way work in England+Wales, and also some that will have entirely the wrong effect.  Please see https://osm.org/changeset/171412889 for more detail.
SomeoneElse (2025-09-14 23:26:30+00:00): Hello NTAshridgeEstatePaths,
As some people have already said, you'd deleted a number of public rights of way.  The one here can be seen at https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#16/51.8328/-0.6079/O/P (the green overlays on that map are created using local authority data - they are where they think the footpaths go).
It might be that the land manager here hasn't been ensuring that the path is maintained, or has arranged with the local authority to move it, in which case please ensure that OSM is updated with the new public rights of way.
Also as noted your edit here created a gap in the Ridgeway national trail.  I'd expect that to be at least moderately well signed here so if the route shown by https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8879#map=17/51.833152/-0.606887 is incorrect please do update it.
If you've got any questions please ask at the forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/uk/86 - you can login with your OSM account.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend,
on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
rskedgell (2025-09-04 08:00:38+00:00): The problem with deleting these instead of using appropriate access tags is that they're visible on aerial imagery and likely to be re-added without any access restrictions or other information.

If you have a desire line path which is visible on aerial imagery on National Trust land where you are, as the landowner, in a position to forbid access, you'd be better off using either access tags, e.g.:

highway=path
access=no
informal=yes
note=*

... or lifecycle tags, e.g.

disused:highway=path
note=*

You can use the note=* tag to include a short description of why NT would like people to stop using it.

osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
SomeoneElse (2025-09-14 23:38:10+00:00): Hello,
You'd deleted the tracks / footpaths here and I've restored them, because your deletion may cause someone to re-add it from imagery (where it is clearly visible), and if they do that they will not add access tags.
I have added foot=private to each since presumably that is what you were actually trying to record.
Filip009 (2025-09-04 15:41:59+00:00): Zdravím, je táto cyklotrasa https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18898204 rozdelená na 2 časti? Netvrdím, že ste ju tak upravil vy, len sa pýtam, či neviete kadiaľ vedie.
Adam Hafera (2025-09-04 18:12:54+00:00): Dobrý večer, cyklotrasa má byť v celku. Vedie popod kopec "Zlámaná hora", v blízkej dobe tam pôjdem, zistím kadiaľ vedie a opravím to :)
Filip009 (2025-09-04 18:21:04+00:00): Pardon, myslel som si, že ste ju prešiel celú. Inak občas sa dá cyklotrasa odhadnúť aj podľa vzdialenosti na smerovníku. V editore JOSM sa dá zmerať dĺžka jednotlivých ciest a na základe toho odhadnúť trasovanie cyklotrasy. Samozrejme najlepšie je prejsť si ju. :)
Mannivu (2025-09-13 13:42:51+00:00): Perché hai modificato l'ordinale in minuscolo? Secondo https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Nomi_delle_strade vanno scritti in maiuscolo
toponomastica_comune_arenzano (2025-09-17 08:59:37+00:00): sistemato
Mannivu (2025-09-17 10:31:11+00:00): Grazie!
kitsee (2025-09-06 07:51:10+00:00): Hi there, what is your source for this speed limit? from memory I believe this lane is only a 30.
AH9999 (2025-09-09 09:02:38+00:00): Hi, I have double checked and think you are correct. I have changed it back to a 30
trigpoint (2025-09-10 22:28:33+00:00): Hello
Phil from the DWG here.
What sources did you use to double check?
ZioDragon (2025-09-07 15:40:05+00:00): Chưa có văn bản nào công nhận đường cao tốc Cam Lộ - La Sơn - Hoà Liên là một phần của đường HCM. Hiện đường HCM vẫn đang đi theo QL.14