piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Libya-truth (2026-07-10 14:15:47+00:00): Hi Pascal,

I agree the discussion belongs in one central place and I will join a forum thread immediately. But since you have addressed all parties equally, let me put on record — with reference to the applicable rules — why this is not a symmetric dispute:

1. OSM tagging policy (Wiki: 'Multilingual names', 'Names'). Language-suffixed tags such as name:ber are the standard, non-conflicting mechanism for recording names in other languages. A disagreement about the format of the main name=* tag can never justify deleting name:xx tags. Yet across 7 changesets (185440364, 185440107, 185439978, 185440390, 185442255, 185440975, 185440823), name:ber tags were deleted outright from 19 elements.

2. OSM's definition of vandalism (Wiki: 'Vandalism') includes the deletion of valid data without discussion. In this very changeset, the name tag of Arrabita al Gharbia (node/1565511513) was deleted entirely, leaving the town unnamed — that is data destruction under any reading of the guidelines.

3. Verifiability (Wiki: 'Verifiability'). These names are verifiable: Tamazight is a living language of Libya's indigenous population, and several affected places (Tininai, Eshmekh) are Amazigh-speaking communities. Legally, Libya's Constitutional Declaration of 3 August 2011 (Article 1) guarantees the linguistic and cultural rights of the Amazigh, and Law No. 18 of 2013 recognizes the Amazigh language among the linguistic components of Libyan national identity. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007, adopted with Libya's vote in favour), Article 13, affirms the right of indigenous peoples to designate and retain their own names for places.

4. Process. On every one of the 7 changesets I posted a question asking for the justification for deleting the language tags. Not one has been answered — while I have replied to every comment addressed to me, including all of yours. De-escalation requires the party deleting data to participate; silence plus continued deletion is not a dispute, it is unilateral removal.

I accept your request: no further edits to the disputed tags from my side while a central discussion is open, provided the same standstill applies to further deletions of name:* tags. The current data state simply reflects the situation before the deletions began.

Best regards
jellybeanfish (2026-07-10 16:24:08+00:00): Correction: source used was Mapillary
trial (2026-07-10 12:18:59+00:00): non, un copier coller malencontreux : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29334632/history/12
trial (2026-07-10 12:20:21+00:00): Il a voulu supprimer le sens unique : https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/29334632
HugoC01 (2026-07-10 15:53:31+00:00): D'accord merci
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-13 03:11:10+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20939
Jose Luis Infante (2026-07-23 22:10:18+00:00): Hola Victor, gracias por tu aportación. La verdad es que el Palau y el Màgic se pueden mejorar bastante.
No era necesario etiquetar la cúpula del Màgic como amenity=marketplace, ya que el edificio está etiquetado como shop=mall, lo que corresponde a un centro comercial, pero si que faltaba el detalle de la cúpula.
En cuanto al Palau, queda por hacer. El edificio ya está etiquetado como estadio, y también está como deporte principal el basket, pero el detalle del edificio se puede mejorar bastante. Lo que has añadido, que sería añadir la pista de basket principal no es incorrecto del todo, ya que se podría considerar como una edición indoor, aunque como te digo, hay mucho por hacer con el Olímpic.
Te animo a seguir editando.
Un saludo!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185445743
irrelevantmapper7 (2026-07-10 02:07:20+00:00): sources: survey, aerial imagery
Enock4seth (2026-07-10 03:59:47+00:00): Hi Nsumba Joshua, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thank you for contribution. Unfortunately most of your contributions around this area have added multiple duplicate data on OSM, which is not helpful. 

The Changeset comment is not meant for your name or generic text but a short description of what you have mapped eg. "added buildings" would have been a much more useful comment for yourself and other mappers. 

https://welcome.openstreetmap.org should help you understand what OSM is about and how to better get started.
mueschel (2026-07-16 06:07:33+00:00): Hi,
these ways got a strange 'bcmc' tag - what does it mean?
MVV44 (2026-07-16 16:00:05+00:00): This is potentially a mistake stemming from an A-base recommendation. I had intended to review this, as I am actively working on this data. Here is a longer blurb:

Backcountry Mountain/Multi-use Cycling (BCMC) Classifications

In trail planning and land management (especially in western North America), "BCMC" is sometimes used in planning documents as an acronym for Backcountry Mountain Cycling or Backcountry Multi-use Corridor.

    The Gravel Connection: Unlike singletrack mountain biking, gravel bikes thrive on these backcountry corridors, which typically consist of unpaved forestry service roads, doubletrack, and abandoned rail grades.

    The Purpose: These classifications help park rangers and land managers designate which remote wilderness roads are open to non-motorized, drop-bar gravel bikes and bikepackers without exposing them to high-speed vehicle logging traffic.
MVV44 (2026-07-16 16:02:32+00:00): These are routes suitable for gravel or mountain biking. I either find mountain bike designations that tend to be about technical difficulty, but not gravel touring routes.
mueschel (2026-07-17 18:19:48+00:00): Are you aware of 'class:bicycle'? There's also 
'class:bicycle:mtb', 'class:bicycle:touring' or 'class:bicycle:roadcycling'.
MVV44 (2026-07-17 20:30:09+00:00): I was not, but because of your message I read about them this morning and updated the map. Thanks for catching this and helping me out.
FajrAl (2026-07-10 17:05:33+00:00): Mohon memberi label sesuai dengan kaidahnya osm.wiki/Id:Pedoman_Penandaan_Indonesia
confusedbuffalo (2026-07-12 05:12:23+00:00): Hi, thanks for doing this, I see you added some neat house outlines for terraced houses. However, I think it should be building=house, house=terraced for individual houses and building=terrace for a whole (unsplit) row. I've changed them here
FajrAl (2026-07-10 17:05:25+00:00): Mohon memberi label sesuai dengan kaidahnya osm.wiki/Id:Pedoman_Penandaan_Indonesia
alpacaMaps (2026-07-12 22:38:18+00:00): This changeset adds a surveillance camera in a spot that looks unlikely — the nodes sit well away from any road, which usually means the cameras aren't physically present on the ground.

If these cameras are real, please let us know so the map stays accurate. Otherwise, we'd kindly ask that you avoid adding cameras that aren't actually there, and that you remove any temporary or test nodes once you're done.

If this was simply a mistake, no problem at all — just clean up the nodes that don't correspond to a real-world camera, and leave a quick note here so we can help. If they're placed on that road, please move them forward to be much closer to the road so people are aware of what it can see.

Thanks for helping keep OpenStreetMap accurate.

— alpacaMaps
alpacaMaps (2026-07-19 23:59:13+00:00): This changeset adds one or more surveillance cameras in a spot that looks unlikely. Several of the nodes are stacked near or atop one another. There are also nodes in fields near this neighborhood added by this individual.

If these cameras are real, please let us know so the map stays accurate. Otherwise, we'd kindly ask that you avoid adding cameras that aren't actually there, and that you remove any temporary or test nodes once you're done.

If this was simply a mistake, no problem at all — just clean up the nodes that don't correspond to a real-world camera, and leave a quick note here so we can help.

Thanks for helping keep OpenStreetMap accurate.

— alpacaMaps
FajrAl (2026-07-10 16:53:54+00:00): Mohon memberi label sesuai dengan kaidahnya https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Id:Pedoman_Penandaan_Indonesia
FajrAl (2026-07-10 17:03:56+00:00): Beberapa label ada yang benar, namun juga ada yang salah. Silakan membaca referensi https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Id:Pedoman_Penandaan_Indonesia
FajrAl (2026-07-10 17:03:43+00:00): Beberapa label ada yang benar, namun juga ada yang salah. Silakan membaca referensi https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Id:Pedoman_Penandaan_Indonesia
FajrAl (2026-07-10 17:03:28+00:00): Beberapa label ada yang benar, namun juga ada yang salah. Silakan membaca referensi https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Id:Pedoman_Penandaan_Indonesia
Ejeoxlac (2026-07-10 04:26:10+00:00): #ActualizandoCabimas, me falto poner el hashtag.
Ejeoxlac (2026-07-10 04:25:51+00:00): #ActualizandoCabimas, me falto poner el hashtag.
pwbriggs (2026-07-16 16:49:20+00:00): Thanks for the contributions! Generally this looks good, but I have a few notes:

The outline of the building should generally match the footprint of the building, not the roof. Dormers or other vertical corners on the roof geometry can cause the roof outline to appear angled in aerial imagery because aerial imagery is often a little oblique (appears to be taken from a slight angle, since the plane doesn't fly directly above every building). I think if you were to square the building again to flatten out the garage-door face of the house then it would be more accurate to the building footprint.

I think all the access tags are already implied on the driveway, because "by default" data consumers interpret a highway=service + service=driveway as access=private.

oneway=no is also implied for most road types and shouldn't be added except in very confusing complex intersections and such where you want to clarify to other mappers that it is two-way.

Thanks again for your contributions and welcome to OpenStreetMap! I recommend joining the OSMUS Slack at https://slack.openstreetmap.us/ if you're not on there already: it's a great place to learn about community mapping events and to discuss tagging questions. Happy mapping!
Damian the Map Lover (2026-07-17 22:56:32+00:00): thank you so much for reviewing my post.  should i remove the changes to the building line since it appears that all the houses on the street seem to have the oblique aerial effect?  i didn't consider the aerial photography effect you mentioned before i made the changes.  (is it possible for me to undo a changeset?)
pwbriggs (2026-07-18 06:48:18+00:00): And thanks for engaging! Definitely don't let my feedback push you away from contributing more: I've been participating in OpenStreetMap for about a year and a half, but I still make mistakes all the time and learn how to map something new several times a week! It's got a steep learning curve, but I'm sure you'll enjoy contributing.

One web-based undo tool is https://revert.monicz.dev/ if you ever need it. However, I don't think that tool handles data conflicts very well, so it might struggle in this case because I think your second changeset modified the building's way as well. I'm not sure what would happen. It might be better to simply create a new changeset to align and square up the building again.

Precise alignment of features is unfortunately something that can't ever seem to be quite perfect. Some imagery layers are misaligned, and some public building footprint data published by local governments are also on a different offset than other data in OSM. If you spot egregious examples where buildings are mapped quite far off from how they appear in Bing imagery, then you can adjust them, but I wouldn't worry too much about getting building outlines perfect once they're within a foot or two.

I hope this helps!
iuvi (2026-07-10 16:45:07+00:00): -> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/59.875272/30.446323 по координатам в этом дворе вы стерли линии и детализацию. зачем?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-10 08:40:54+00:00): SEO spam, advertising and mistagging by commercial mappers is strictly prohibited on OpenStreetMap and is subject to immediate removal and possible further consequences for your account. See https://osm.wiki/About_OpenStreetMap_for_SEO_mappers for more information.

Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags, likely sourced from Google Maps, in changeset:

https://osm.org/changeset/185460287
Kovoschiz (2026-07-10 18:44:38+00:00): Why?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-07-15 17:26:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 185798781 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fiction added in error by OSMNAXA.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20923
Samuele Battarra (2026-07-14 07:11:50+00:00): amenity=dog_toilet mi fa pensare ad un wc :)
il negozio di Riccione l'ho taggato come shop=pet_grooming
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:shop%3Dpet_grooming
Aluminum0173 (2026-07-15 05:47:34+00:00): Ops, con ID mi sembrava quello giusto, risolto, grazie!
OSM_RogerWilco (2026-07-13 19:58:13+00:00): Hallo tb_wa und willkommen bei OSM!

Schön, dass wir Unterstützung im Heidekreis bekommen! :-)

Kleiner Hinweis zu dieser Änderung: Bei highway=path ist es unüblich vehicle=no zu taggen. Der KFZ-Verkehr ist standardmäßig bei highway=path ausgeschlossen. Bei einem Zeichen 240 kommt allerdings horse=no noch dazu, was aber auch oft vergessen wird (Pferde/Reiten steht nicht im Fokus vieler).

Siehe hierzu:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Germany
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dpath

Tipp zum Erfassen von Verkehrszeichen:
https://trafficsigns.osm-verkehrswende.org/DE?signs=DE:240

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
user_5359 (2026-07-11 10:06:05+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1537097097. What is the mean of the tags
bfs_nummer = 7005
cat = 629
datum_aend = 2025/11/19 00:00:00.000
datum_erst = 2008/11/24 00:00:00.000
einwohnerz = 6287
erstellu_1 = 1
erstellung = 1997
fid = 6730
gem_flaech = 2692.0
grund_aend = Verbessert
herkunft = swisstopo
herkunft_j = 2026
herkunft_m = 1
icc = LI
id = 629.0
name = Schaan
objektart = Gemeindegebiet
revision_j = 2025
revision_m = 1
revision_q = TGMG_2025_Akt
see_flaech = 0.0
shn = LI7005
uuid = {94F593EC-BCCF-4D23-9823-2709C61B0E8E}
(no other known OSM tags)
?
SimonPoole (2026-07-11 10:47:24+00:00): It is just a left over segment from updating the boundary geometry, given that we have updatend near 8'000 of them, now and then a glitch is to be expected.

See https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/municipality-borders-qa-and-fixes/
rhhs (2026-07-27 16:45:33+00:00): Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for adding information to mosques in Bulgaria! I am wondering if you correctly used the  "service_times" tag for this information. It is normally used for Christian churches to describe the Sunday mass time, i.e. when prayers are held in the church. The Muslim equivalent would be the Salah times, which should be the same for every mosque and variable during the year so it's not very useful to add these to every mosque. Maybe you meant to add the opening hours? For that it's better to use the "opening_hours" tag.
You also added information if the mosque has an imam. I think it is better to add this information using the "description" tag because it is more likely to be displayed by apps that use the data, and to use the Bulgarian language.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-10 06:47:01+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

I think something went wrong with the added name:de=* tag here https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3009689862/history/16
habi (2026-07-10 13:42:17+00:00): Ciao
Wie schon bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185395898 geschrieben, werden Bäume in OpenStreetMap eigentlich *nicht* benannt.
Die Kartendaten werden weltweit von sehr vielen Programmen verwendet, da ist eine Benamsung für ein evtl. eigenes kleines Projekt nicht sinnvoll: https://welcome.openstreetmap.org/about-osm-community/consumers/

Was ist dein Ziel hier?
Gruss,
habi
jbohmdk (2026-07-26 19:57:59+00:00): This looks suspect, how did you survey opening hours of 2 shops very far from each other?  Stating a source as "survey" means you claim to have physically visited both places to collect the information .
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185456256
KennyDap (2026-07-11 04:53:57+00:00): 안녕하세요.
I'd like to offer a little advice. When mapping, it's common to separate the building itself from the POIs within it. So the approach you've taken isn't entirely correct. It's not a critical mistake, but sooner or later someone will have to redo it.
eggie (2026-07-10 09:42:54+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback  oneway=no is default op wegen..  Beter voor die binnenstraten niet het aantal lanes te tagen. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Alshowaiey (2026-07-24 02:36:33+00:00): ادخال خاطئ تم الحذف
Alshowaiey (2026-07-24 02:37:41+00:00): تم التحسين في https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/186269518
Yog Sot (2026-07-10 10:09:47+00:00): czesc dróg ktore oznaczyłes są w obszarze drogi publicznej, więc nie moga byc private. 

Dodatkowo nie skazałeś źródła z argumentem, że wejście jest wyłącznie za zgodą własciciela (private)
Co blokuje wejście? nie zmapowałeś.
Baittar (2026-07-10 10:14:18+00:00): Są to drogi wewnętrzne, parkingowe, odgrodzone szlabanami, które zmapowałem
Yog Sot (2026-07-10 20:12:09+00:00): ale skoro chdonik luźno tuz obok nie ma private, to dlaczego drogi od niego odchodzące mają?
Może zasady wstępu dotycza tylko pojazdów ssamochodowych? Pomyśl o tym.  
Nie ustawia się ogólnego wstępu jeśli restrykcje dotycza tylko aut.
Alshowaiey (2026-07-24 02:38:13+00:00): ادخال خاطئ تم الحذف
Alshowaiey (2026-07-24 02:35:39+00:00): السلام عليكم ورحمة الله و بركاته نشكر لك مساهماتك السابقة لكن حذف الاماكن و اضافة قلاع و اشارات ديار العوازم ضد  سياسات الخريطة المفتوحة و نرجو منك  الإلتزام حيث اي اضافة خاطئة بعد هذا الاشعار سوف تعتبر تعدي
Szymson (2026-07-10 15:17:39+00:00): Od kiedy GLS to poczta?
NieWnen (2026-07-10 15:38:33+00:00): Na ich stronie jest to jako punkt odbioru/nadania, więc można to uznać za amenity=post_office zgodnie z wiki.

Natomiast ten użytkownik leci masowym importem, który nadaje się do cofki za sam brak przedyskutowania pomijając syf w linkach i brak źródeł.
Pajopath (2026-07-10 07:48:52+00:00): jemand ne idee. was genau das ist? aus den SAT Bildern werde ich nicht schlau weil die Verbindung zur Straße scheinbar auch noch mit Umlaufgitter gesperrt ist ... o_O
Marvk (2026-07-10 11:28:30+00:00): Flüchtlingsheim vmtl.

https://www.limburg.de/index.php?ModID=7&FID=3252.26898.1&object=tx%7C3252.26898.1
PizzaTreeIsland (2026-07-10 08:24:21+00:00): Hello, 
Thank you for adding details to this industrial area!
You tagged some streets with access=public. I changed that to access=yes because confusingly, that is the right tag for public places. However, are you sure that these are public? The whole area is private and then there are 6 smaller roads mixed in seemingly randomly that are supposedly public. It seems like that might be a mistake because people couldn't even get there without walking over private roads? 

Thanks and happy mapping!
nicerain (2026-07-20 13:14:00+00:00): 如果「兩側多蕁麻」和「杏樹」加（）可以嗎，如果有人使用行動設備徒步不太方便查看，且京西山上很多路也是使用（）「較險」
hahae (2026-07-21 02:34:53+00:00): 您好，不可以，树的name应该是其专有的，（杏树）并不构成name, 而是species. 举个树带name 的例子， https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/793824902 这个之前是tree, 他的名字是迎客松，现在不知为何改为attraction。 
另外，路名需要是公认的名字，两侧多荨麻显然只是你个人的说法，不足以构成name, 试想某人使用导航时突然说（请右转进入“两侧多荨麻”），会不会觉得很奇怪，无法理解？显然括号内的内容也会读出来。
如果实在想提示自己，可以开note, 或者写fixme=*; note=*, 不能在无关的标签上填写
另外，name=“较险”, 也是不正确用法，如果可以的话，可以更改一下
hahae (2026-07-21 02:41:08+00:00): 顺便说一句，迎客松我又改回了 natural=tree, 这个我是通过 species 标签和搜索确定的，不知为何之前要删除
nicerain (2026-07-23 16:09:59+00:00): 好，謝謝
eggie (2026-07-10 20:14:53+00:00): Hoi,

Lijkt me aardig kloppen.
Die voetpaden die tussen de schuurtje lopen zijn geen sidewalk maar alley.
(brandgang)
Dus highway=footway
footway=alley
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dalley

Een sidewalk kun je intekenen als er een groenstrook tussen rijbaan en trottoir ligt.
Mapse
OutOfBrain2 (2026-07-10 09:01:07+00:00): ist der falsche Abschnitt sehe ich gerade.. über die Kreuzung links abbiegen darf man noch.
Der nächste Abschnitt hinter der Kreuzung (Nord-Ost Richtung) kann auch nicht als Einbahnstr markiert werden weil von Süd-Ost kommend dort ja einbiegen darf - nur Verkehr von Süd-West kommend darf nicht gerade aus. Wie ist das darstellbar? Im Zweifel Reverte ich mein Changeset in kurzer Zeit. Bitte um input
kadiwa (2026-07-10 09:29:25+00:00): Eine passende Abbiegebeschränkung ist bereits eingetragen: relation/20018338
Der einzige Nachteil hiervon ist, dass das Format dieser Relation vielleicht nicht von jeder Routingsoftware unterstützt wird. Grund: Für das "via"-Element wird hier ein Weg benutzt und kein Knoten. Man kann es aber nicht anders lösen, soweit ich weiß. Die in diesem Changeset vorgeschlagene Lösung entspricht ja nicht den hier geltenden Verkehrsregeln.

Ansonsten muss ich kritisieren, dass die Kombination von Tags, so wie du sie hier hinterlassen hast, wenig Sinn ergibt. oneway=yes und lanes:backward=1 gleichzeitig ergibt noch keinen Sinn. Da fehlt dann oneway:bus=no.

Ich kann gerne den Revert machen.
OutOfBrain2 (2026-07-10 10:15:00+00:00): Ich verstehe. Kannte lanes:backward vorher noch nicht und kenne es jetzt und kann mehr auf die anderen Tags achten. no_straight_on relation kannte ich auch nicht und wusste mir nicht zu behelfen. OsmAnd erkennt es leider nicht - wie du schon geschrieben hast. Hast du schon reverted. Danke für die Hilfe und den Input
OutOfBrain2 (2026-07-10 10:35:52+00:00): Abschliessend Issue gefunden: extern importierte gpx track Datei in OsmAnd als routing basis verwendet. OsmAnd routing wurde dann zwar benutzt aber nicht auf Grundlage vom OsmAnd selbst. Das hätte es gekonnt, ist aber dem gpx track gefolgt. Issue ist also in der Routing software außerhalb und nicht bei OsmAnd.
mavl (2026-07-11 09:02:35+00:00): Здравствуйте. Названия в России указывают на обычном русском языке. Использовать только прописные буквы в названиях не нужно.  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Названия
NaufalFarras (2026-07-11 01:01:14+00:00): You have just edited Ngawi to place=city again. What's your justification?
NieWnen (2026-07-10 11:59:58+00:00): Ponownie dodajesz niechciany tracking w linku.
Wszystkie zmiany są niestety do poprawy.

W dodatku zbędnie duplikujesz adres, który już jest dodany na budynku.
bxl-forever (2026-07-10 09:44:06+00:00): Thanks for adding a new place… however this change creates a problem.
Remapping buildings to merge them with amenities or companies is unwanted. And adding an address to the building itself, whereas there are already different address points here, is incorrect and corrupts the database.
The recommended way to map is by creating a *new* point beside existing data; do not add an address to it (we can link to an existing address or use contact:* keys if necessary).
I will fix this edit.
eggie (2026-07-10 10:01:13+00:00): Thijs,
Die adresnodes geven allemaal Westdijk aan. Nu is het verwarrend. Hoe zit het echt?

Graag reactie,
eggie
eggie (2026-07-10 10:06:27+00:00): Nu zit er wel een stukje Westdijk tussen de stukken Veerdijk die naar het Spui lopen.
Klopt dat wel?
https://www.verbeterdekaart.nl/#?geometry.x=78218.74&geometry.y=423752.26&zoomlevel=12.49
trigpoint (2026-07-13 14:08:21+00:00): This changeset has been fully reverted by the DWG in changeset https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/185655322
eggie (2026-07-10 09:48:34+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Niet name=begin normale brug naar eiland... gebruiken om iets te beschrijven.
Wanneer naar die brug geen duidelijke paden lopen niet intekenen als highway=path, maar als man_made=bridge op een vlak net als die brug daar links. Is die er nog? 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2026-07-10 09:50:57+00:00): Je brug heb ik aangepast als bovenstaan en de teksten verwijderd.
Mapse
minusmajorityhh (2026-07-10 18:36:24+00:00): OSM Wiki 里面写了尽量不要使用缩写（https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abbreviations）