piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
brainwad (2024-12-21 17:10:00+00:00): According to the wiki, (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway=shared%20lane?uselang=en) cycleway=shared_lane is exactly for this type of legally-not-binding paint-on-road "infrastructure" that just reminds car divers bikes might exist. In the US it's used for "sharrows" which is where they just paint some bicycles on the right hand side of the road without any demarcation. Since the yellow stripes on these two roads _are_ supposed to be for bicycles AFAIK, but are clearly not bike lanes (neither legally not practically since they are too narrow), I thought this tagging was appropriate - it's a marking telling cyclists to share the main car lane.

> every Swiss street is allowed for bicycles by default anyway

Yes but not every Swiss street has a Tiefbauamt-painted indicator. This tag is for the indicator, not the access (that would be bicycle=yes, which nobody tags on roads because as you said it's the default).

> Tagging it as such would make it look "cycle friendly", which it's definitely not.

It exists on the ground, so there must be some way of tagging it. We shouldn't not tag things that exist in reality because we don't like those things...

I don't feel that strongly about, though, it if you think it should be reverted.
Lezurex (2024-12-21 17:41:19+00:00): Sharrows have a bicycle pictogram which clearly shows it wants to tell something about bicycles. These markings do not. It's simply a stripe that could mean anything. As I said, it's just to make the street look narrower. Besides, they're not yellow, they are some sandy-like colour, but not the typical yellow used for cycling paint in Switzerland.

We also have sharrow-like markings in Switzerland, similar to Bärengasse you also edited yesterday. They have a pictogram on them making it clear to everybody, that this is about cycling.

I don't know if we have a tagging scheme for these stripes. I think something similar was done on the VVRs, where we have the green stripes on it, but can't find it right now.

As these FGSO have no legal meaning, they have practically no rules. Thus, they could be everything. See a few examples from this document: https://www.bvd.be.ch/content/dam/bvd/dokumente/de/tba/strassen/sm-signalisation-markierung/sm-ah-farbliche-gestaltung.strassenoberflaechen-fgso.pdf
Creating some scheme for this could be difficult. Probably something in the direction of surface:colour.

Maybe add a note or description for the time being...
brainwad (2024-12-21 18:17:02+00:00): These particular sand-coloured FGSOs really were intended by the city as bike "infrastructure", specifically where they couldn't fit real bike lanes because the street was too narrow and it was a bus route so they couldn't make it one-way. See e.g. the article here: https://www.provelozuerich.ch/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/vj_regio_16_5_ZH.pdf (page 3).

That said, I see the point that this intent isn't very verifiable as FGSOs are used so randomly by communes.
Michaall99 (2024-12-20 19:23:28+00:00): thanks
mavl (2025-05-13 15:07:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
eggie (2024-12-20 12:47:29+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback  Alle begin is moeilijk. Dit soort lijnen met als doel een kerststalroute in te voeren hoort niet in OSM thuis. Ik zal je edit moeten terugzetten.
Het zal in OSM ook niets doen.
Wees even voorzichtig met het aanbrengen van nieuwe edits. 
Mocht je op deze manier doorgaan zal er overwogen worden een (tijdelijke) stop op je account te plaatsen. 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-12-20 12:52:26+00:00): reverted by changeset #160432071
probably vandalism.
Taya_S (2024-12-20 12:29:34+00:00): Hi,
Why did you remove all of these paths? Most of them are plainly visible from the air. If a path is still visible, it should not be removed, whether this path is 'official' or not, as removing it removes valid data. 

Sincerely,
Taya
MyOSMaccount (2024-12-20 13:43:56+00:00): Hi Tanya,
Firstly and mainly because they are not paths. Not every trodden bit of nature is a path. If you look carefully at satellite images, or around you if you're local like me, you could discover hundred of 'paths' that are not footpaths.
Secondly because these ways mapped as footpaths cross protected nature, where you are not allowed to walk so wildlife can have their own space.
Thirdly, connected to the previous, because footpaths in Openstreetmap are used by navigation software and could send hikers inadvertently into vulnerable nature. Removing the footpaths helps protect our nature and prevents disappointment with hikers planning for a great hike with software.
Does that answer your question?
Regards, David
Marc_ch (2024-12-20 15:20:46+00:00): Hello,
There's nothing mandatory :) but an unconnected terminal node like https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12435743682 avoid this route from being used for routing.
if you wish, I advise you to connect them to a piece of sidewwalk that joins the pedestrian crossing or the road on either side.
Regards,
Marc
flohoff (2024-12-20 17:36:52+00:00): Routing hat wieder geschwenkt - Geht also.

Danke

https://osm.zz.de/routeqa/?rid=763084,943823
mavl (2025-05-13 15:09:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
SzymonH (2024-12-20 15:54:28+00:00): Ja bym proponował oznaczyć teren jako landuse=brownfield bo to nie jest całkowicie pusta przestrzeń.
domi_nick (2024-12-21 09:26:39+00:00): Zgodnie z sugestią https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160462673
HellMap (2024-12-20 12:57:13+00:00): Čau,

Gribēju tikai pieminēt, ka neaizmirsti par Binga sistemātisko nobīdi. Citādi te viss jaunais sanāk ar kādu metra nobīdi.
somehundred (2024-12-20 13:26:07+00:00): Man likās, ka jaunais Bing Rīgas teritorijā ir bez nobīdes, bet izrādās, ka nē. Paldies par info.
richlv (2024-12-22 16:04:21+00:00): Ja vēl nav sanācis, droši vien vērts pievienoties Latvijas OSM kopienas čatam - https://osmlatvija.zulipchat.com :)
HellMap (2024-12-22 16:19:01+00:00): Jā, tā gadās, kad niku nomaina ;)
somehundred (2024-12-22 21:25:49+00:00): Jau esmu, nesen nomainīju niku.
HellMap (2024-12-20 16:07:22+00:00): Lūdzu nemaini apkaimju klasifikāciju bez iepriekšējās apspriedes, ja tas nav balstīts uz OSM principiem. Iecavā (cik zinu) nav oficiālu apkaimju klasifikācijas, tāpēc tās visas ir `neighbourhood`. Ja būtu oficiālas, tad būtu `suburb`. Bet `quarter` būtu tikai, ja ir `suburb` smalkāk sadalīts. Latvijā vispār nekur nav `quarter`s.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dneighbourhood#Hierarchy_of_places
czubi (2024-12-22 10:44:49+00:00): Hallo, 
wozu wird das area:highway=motorway zusätzlich zu den highway=motorway benötigt. Dann ist alles doppelt!?
czubi (2024-12-22 10:48:55+00:00): hat sich erledigt, soll doppelt lt. wiki
mavl (2025-05-13 15:03:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
Jordi MF (2024-12-21 14:14:20+00:00): Hola JPRATS2222,

Gracias por mejorar los datos de OSM, pero en este caso, el tramo de la CV-35 des el enlace con la A-7 hasta València, pierde la condición de autovía. Existe una señal que así lo indica. Lo tenemos comprobado, pero a continuación tienes una muestra https://maps.app.goo.gl/oVgerD1m37EpTEXv5.

Según las directrices de etiquetado de OSM España, habrá que dejarla como "trunk" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Directrices_de_etiquetado_espa%C3%B1olas#Comunitat_Valenciana)

Saludos.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-29 12:19:13+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12435869884/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
Marek-M (2024-12-20 18:51:13+00:00): Cześć, co Ty żeś tutaj wykombinował z tymi przejazdami rowerowymi przy Słowackiego? Przed edycją było o niebo lepiej to zrobione. Przejazdy rowerowe nie są tam przecież oddzielone fizycznie od przejścia dla pieszych i jedna linia to idealnie pokazywała. Teraz utworzyłeś jakieś nieistniejące drogi, przy których nawet najlepsze nawigacje zgłupieją. Przywrócisz te zmiany? Dzięki.
Yog Sot (2024-12-20 19:00:33+00:00):  przejazdy mają inne oznakowanie poziome niż przejścia (crossing:markings = `dots` i `zebra` ). Poza tym przejścia mogą mieć `tactile_paving=yes` a przejazdy nie. Czasami też przejazd, a czasami przejście jest od strony skrzyzowania i ich umiejscowienie ma znaczenie podczas krzyżowania się kierunków ruchu. jbc zapraszam do pogawędki na discordzie ;D
Dawid2849 (2024-12-21 00:02:26+00:00): Są znaczniki cycleway:crossing:markings oraz footway:crossing:markings
Yog Sot (2024-12-21 00:40:57+00:00): tak, już to udało się ustalić, tylko iD nie zwraca linku do dokumentacji, bo nie ma dedykowanej strony. 
Pozostała kwestia lokalizacji przejscie/przejazd które jest po prawej/lewej
highflyer74 (2024-12-24 07:28:28+00:00): Moin!

Ich hatte mitbekommen, dass die neue Brücke jetzt freigegeben ist, und schaue mir gerade die Änderungen in OSM dazu an. Die letzten User, welche hier editiert haben sind roho27283 und bison166, deshalb kommentiere ich beide Änderungen zusammen, damit ich nicht zweimal schreiben muss ;-)

Mir fiel auf, dass die alte Brücke bereits aus OSM verschwunden ist. Ist die denn schon abgerissen worden? Die sollte man eigentlich erst entfernen, wenn sie nicht mehr auf Luftbildern zu sehen ist, um ein Neueinzeichnen durch andere User zu vermeiden. Um eine solche Situation darzustellen, gibt es das https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lebenszyklus-Pr%C3%A4fix.

Dann fiel noch auf, dass so, wie es aktuell gemappt ist, keine Fußgänger und keine Radfahrer die Aller überqueren können. Ist das tatsächlich so? Auch hängen an der Straße und den im Bau befindlichen Rad-/Fusswegen eine Menge an Tags, die technisch nicht notwendig sind und die Sache unübersichtlich machen.

Ich würde euch gern helfen, die Lage zu verbessern. Vielleicht könntet ihr einmal beschreiben, wie es aktuell vor Ort aussieht. Viele Grüße!
Nathan_A_RF (2025-01-24 14:52:35+00:00): The ramp at Dowlais heading on the A465 towards Y Fenni is two way traffic for a short length - why have you reverted this?
kitsee (2025-01-24 15:24:01+00:00): Hi,
The south west bound lane is never used for travel at it originates from no where and in practice is only used for lorries to park facing NE-bound or as a short cut for cars turning right out of the fuel station (which they shouldn't really do). This is just a remnant of the old heads when it was a 3 lane single carriageway that just never got demolished.  

Kind regards,
Kits
Nathan_A_RF (2025-01-24 15:33:21+00:00): Just because barely anyone uses it in the other direction, it doesn't make it not oneway for a certain length. This situation occurs in many places, e.g. A74(M) J22, A303 West Amesbury, A34 East Ilsley, A55 J31 to name a few. Here it seems it was twoway to access a gate that has become abandoned over time. The twoway has not been revoked.
kitsee (2025-01-24 15:48:30+00:00): That's a fair argument however I would recommend holding off on changing this for now as the area in question along with the entire hill to the east of the fuel station is undergoing large scale land alterations and this slip road may change. To emphasize this, the gate you referenced no longest exists nor does the fence or even the land it sat on.
Nathan_A_RF (2025-01-24 15:52:01+00:00): I believed this area was unchanged due to the flyover, but as you wish
kitsee (2025-01-24 15:55:13+00:00): They only started changing the hill after the flyover's completion, its been ongoing for a few weeks. i'm not sure what their goal is but they've had around 10 or 15 bulldozers and excavators just moving earth around up there.
kitsee (2025-02-13 11:51:19+00:00): I've updated the junction, they only changed the road markings slightly, the west-bound lane now starts at the entrance to the fuel station. the rest has been hatched out.
syntex (2024-12-20 18:05:18+00:00): Czy możesz zaprzestać kasowania poprawnych nazw geograficznych?
kontrybutor_wg (2024-12-21 08:08:46+00:00): W bazie TERYT nie figuruje taka kolonia czy przysiółek. To jakieś archaiczne oznaczenie.
syntex (2024-12-21 20:57:35+00:00): ale w PRNG istnieje
AndyB_66 (2024-12-20 19:06:24+00:00): O co chodzi? Mógłbyś, proszę, stosować się do zasad: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
eggie (2024-12-20 14:10:51+00:00): Dag casssis Beter geen adresnodes gaan aanpassen. Dan heb je twee identieke en één verdwenen adresnode  en waarom zou outdoor_seating =no (horecatag-geen terras) gaan taggen op een willekeurige adresnode? 

MVG
eggie
jaap de vries (2024-12-20 14:12:22+00:00): Dit zag ik ook al, vreemd om dit hier te doen.
eggie (2024-12-20 14:14:40+00:00): Kreeg conflict bij revert Jaap. Heb jij het al kunnen herstellen?

Groet
eggie
jaap de vries (2024-12-20 14:20:20+00:00): Ik heb het herstel, er stond 2x  hsnr4141 terwijl appartement hsnrs 4137-4143 hier aanwezig zijn.
dktue (2024-12-20 14:11:20+00:00): 👍
eggie (2024-12-20 14:18:18+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback. Tja .. Soms veranderd er wel eens iets. Lijkt me prima zo. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-12-20 14:23:23+00:00): Wellicht heb je hier iets aan.
https://viewer.satellietdataportaal.nl/@52.19342,5.420738,20/?datastrip=20241112_PNEO-04
JungleJim007 (2024-12-20 15:25:23+00:00): dank je, de satellietdata laat idd de nieuwe situatie zien. er is niet echt een heel duidelijk pad afgebakend maar lijkt me prima hoe het nu in OSM staat
Anas masuris (2024-12-21 17:15:57+00:00): Muszę zwrócić uwagę, że nie wszystkie nowe punkty są stacjami - część z nich jest przystankami. Trzeba to poprawić
RafaBoski (2024-12-22 18:51:20+00:00): Już poprawione :)
michel60 (2025-11-30 17:13:50+00:00): Bonjour,

Je n'arrive pas à trouver ce qui est incorrect mais GEOFABRIK OSM Inspector signale une erreur au niveau de certaines plateform.
Voici le lien qui visualise ces erreurs:
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=2.35554&lat=48.88280&zoom=17&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.93&overlays=ptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes
Savez-vous ce qu'il ne va pas ?
Cordialement Michel
Carto'Cité (2025-12-01 13:39:49+00:00): Réponse sur le commentaire https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158984617#c1519300
eggie (2024-12-20 14:29:11+00:00): Dag Zilvervisje.....

Goed om die parkeerterreinen uptodate te maken. Parkeerterreinen hebben echter geen adres.
Haal je de adressen weer weg? 
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160435717

MVG
eggie
ilias_ (2024-12-20 17:59:24+00:00): Il y a donc une micronation avec un poste de frontières, une maire, une route nationale et une autoroute, tout ça au sein de la foret d'Essaouira?? On en apprend tous les jours avec OpenStreetMap.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-12-22 01:39:09+00:00): reverted. Please don't add fake features

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160488416
NorthCrab_upload (2024-12-20 14:40:54+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/338041440

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
WieKo68 (2024-12-27 14:03:14+00:00): Plac Przemysława występuje w adresie innych budynków. Uwaga bezzasadna
SomeoneElse (2024-12-20 14:35:39+00:00): Hello,
Under what licence is data from data.humdata.org made available?
Best Regards,
Andy
alain2003 (2024-12-20 16:21:01+00:00): https://data.humdata.org/faqs/licenses
SomeoneElse (2024-12-20 16:45:06+00:00): That's just a list.

Under what licence(s) is the data from data.humdata.org that you actually used made available?
alain2003 (2024-12-20 19:27:30+00:00): https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1-0/
alain2003 (2024-12-20 19:29:07+00:00): 
Open Database License (ODC-ODbL)

Under the ODC-ODbL license, you are free:

    To Share: To copy, distribute and use the database.
    To Create: To produce works from the database.
    To Adapt: To modify, transform and build upon the database.

As long as you:

    Attribute: You must attribute any public use of the database, or works produced from the database, in the manner specified in the ODbL. For any use or redistribution of the database, or works produced from it, you must make clear to others the license of the database and keep intact any notices on the original database.
    Share-Alike: If you publicly use any adapted version of this database, or works produced from an adapted database, you must also offer that adapted database under the ODbL.
    Keep open: If you redistribute the database, or an adapted version of it, then you may use technological measures that restrict the work (such as DRM) as long as you also redistribute a version without such measures.
SomeoneElse (2024-12-20 19:54:18+00:00): That page says "You can share your data on HDX under one of the following Creative Commons licenses. ".

Where is the page that says that the data that you are using from there is ODBL?

Also, what is the source?  Someone must have uploaded it to this site - where from?
alain2003 (2024-12-20 21:21:34+00:00): ooh,you mean the dataset files?
these are shapefiles
https://data.humdata.org/dataset/cod-ab-mar
alain2003 (2024-12-20 23:24:43+00:00): Can we use this dataset or not?
SomeoneElse (2024-12-20 23:55:45+00:00): I think that we'd need to get a waiver, unless one has already been obtained.

On
https://data.humdata.org/dataset/cod-ab-mar
it says "License Creative Commons Attribution for Intergovernmental Organisations".  That links to the licences page where it says "Creative Commons Attribution for Intergovernmental Organisations (CC BY-IGO)".  That's not a licence that I've heard of before, but it does look similar to a normal "attribution" licence which may be problematic - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility for other examples.  You have a couple of options:

1) Ask for a waiver from whoever provided the data
2) Ask on the forum c.osm.org to see if anyone has asked for a waiver
3) Ask the LWG whether this licence is actually compatible.
alain2003 (2024-12-21 01:23:14+00:00): Hi
I'ts best to revert all the changes i made 
on boundaries.
This license is very vage .cannot be used in osm
i do not even know how to revert these changes.
SomeoneElse (2024-12-21 02:13:38+00:00): I'd suggest that you at least ask about a waiver before reverting everything!
Perhaps ask in the forum c.osm.org ?
alain2003 (2024-12-21 02:34:08+00:00): Hi
Since the new forum,have no acces to it.
connot register nor login.
/auth/failure?message=csrf_detected
SomeoneElse (2024-12-21 04:02:30+00:00): I'm sure it'll be fixed soon.  See https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/there-seems-to-be-a-problem-with-authorisation-currently/123139/9 .
ilias_ (2024-12-21 09:36:32+00:00): Let’s not jump to conclusions too fast, the edits alain2003 made (apart from the fact they took hours and hours of work) are extremely valuable to the country, as administrative boundaries were inaccurate. I have sent an email to the United Nations OCHA (creators of the dataset) asking them for permission to use the datasets on OpenStreetMap. If they do not answer, I’ll create a topic on the forum to see if anyone succeeds in contacting them.
SomeoneElse (2024-12-21 15:15:01+00:00): Thanks!
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-01-24 15:22:23+00:00): Please, please, please stop reverting the changesets, you are making mess on the map, now all neighboring countries relations are also broken. Lets discuss this with OCHA to see if they give a vaiwer in the next week and with DWG about doing proper reverts.
SomeoneElse (2025-01-24 18:11:45+00:00): I did (earlier today or yesterday) privately suggest to wait a bit longer for a reply. Unfortunately, that did not happen.
I suspect that it will be a lot of work to undo the mess now, going either forward or backward.
ilias_ (2025-01-24 18:18:43+00:00): Alain2003 started reverting the changes not because we did not get a reply, but because we actually got one, from the government organization from which the data is sourced. As you can see on https://data.humdata.org/dataset/cod-ab-mar, it says "Sourced from Le Haut Commissariat au Plan". We did contact Le Haut Commissariat au Plan and we did in fact get an answer. The answer was "We cannot legally let you use this data". There was no "haste" and no "underestimation of the time it takes bureaucracies to reply" as you're calling it. What else do you want us to wait for? Even if the OCHA replied (they did not and it's been a month...), they would say that the data is sourced from Le Haut Commissariat au Plan and we would have to ask them directly, which we did and got a negative answer. I am not talking about the way these reverts were made, I am simply talking about your comments on "waiting a bit longer".
SomeoneElse (2025-01-24 19:08:25+00:00): Thanks - I was unaware that we'd had an explicit "no" from the data source.
ilias_ (2025-01-24 19:24:57+00:00): Sure - for the anecdote, I even asked a “director of statistics and cartography”, how come if they cannot legally provide us with this data, that it can be found on many websites, and his answer was “Honestly, I have no idea”. How can we contribute with people like this? Anyway, there’s nothing we can do about it for now.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-01-25 11:38:52+00:00): Sorry if I have upset you, but we were lacking the info that you already got a hard no as an answer. Can you just reply here when all the reverts are done, so we can jump in a and fix broken things. If you want you can also use https://salmon-grass-0d758fe03.4.azurestaticapps.net/ to find broken boundaries.

Thanks for being so agile about obtaining the data.
Happy mapping!
Glassman (2024-12-22 20:21:13+00:00): According to the county, there are a bunch of different names of these streets. See https://scopi.snoco.org/Html5Viewer/Index.html?configBase=https://scopi.snoco.org/Geocortex/Essentials/REST/sites/SCOPI/viewers/SCOPI/virtualdirectory/Resources/Config/Default

I went ahead and updated the street names.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160436375
eggie (2024-12-20 15:41:45+00:00): Oke, maar een note =  heeft geen invloed op de navigatie van LiveNav.
Het zal gewoon moeten routeren. 
Wat is het probleem? 
MVG
eggie
Martijn-VR-Gooi en Vechtstreek (2024-12-20 21:38:26+00:00): Hoi Eggie,
m.b.t. de note, klopt.
Het gaat mij om het feit dat je in het begin een busafrit opgestuurd wordt. Nu is deze oprit dus alleen bedoeld voor de hulpdiensten die dit weten, maar ik wil niet hebben dat een gewone burger zo word gestuurd. oftewel ik wil er zeker van zijn dat het met de gegeven/toegevoegde tags ook gegarandeerd geen burger deze oprit neemt. vandaar de vraag/check of nu zo goed staat?
Martijn-VR-Gooi en Vechtstreek (2024-12-20 21:39:16+00:00): met vriendelijke groet,
Martijn
eggie (2024-12-20 22:07:40+00:00): Dag Martijn..
Het is een busbaan en die staan per default op slot voor regulier verkeer. Ook staat nog eens access=no op.
Dat laatste hoeft volgens mij dus niet.
Zie wiki busway
Groet..
eggie
eggie (2024-12-20 22:09:43+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:busway
eggie (2024-12-20 22:16:27+00:00): Nou.. deze dus https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:highway%3Dbusway

Access no en emergency no zijn zelfs al ingebakken.
Groet..
eggie