piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
silversurfer83 (2024-08-08 06:29:20+00:00): Hi :)

Abbiegebeschränkungen sind, soweit ich weiß, Relationen, die aus mehreren Wegen bestehen. Da musst du hier nochmal gucken, da du die Beschränkung auf den driveway gelegt hast, was nicht so gut funktioniert.

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154908240
jhaluska80 (2024-08-06 22:09:39+00:00): name_1 is old and should be replaced with alt_name.  You can add multiple alternative name values by separating them by a semi colon (;).  There's also old_name for when a street is renamed and official_name which I only use for otherwise unnamed ramps.

Tiger tags are also no longer used, although the only one I routinely delete is the reviewed one.

Stuff like this is what makes mapping challenging.  You can use plot addresses and the NJ Arcgis Centerline as tie breakers.
dillard243 (2024-08-06 23:31:17+00:00): Gotcha, thanks for the tips. I have no clue what tiger tags are so I just left them as is. I just deleted the tiger:reviewed tag as you suggested and replaced name_1 with alt_name.
jhaluska80 (2024-08-06 23:42:35+00:00): TIGER stands for Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing system.  Most of the US roads were imported and not hand drawn by OSM mappers.  The extra tags were left over from the import.  People use the reviewed tag to find roads that have not been reviewed.  Adding lane counts, surface and aligning them the aerials is enough to remove the tag.
emersonveenstra (2024-08-07 10:45:39+00:00): Hi there,

I fixed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/996500558 for you since you made it into a highway (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/996500558). Also please note that abandoned railways must be visible on the ground in order to be mapped. Historical railways that no longer exist need to be mapped on OpenHistoricalMap, not here.
totosm (2024-08-06 20:23:41+00:00): Changeset Titel vergessen zu ändern:
Neubau Projekt Schroertal: "Grüne Insel" hinzugefügt.
franzhuchel (2024-08-07 22:57:01+00:00): Hallo eköln,

es freut mich dich als Mapper in der OpenStreetMap begrüßen zu dürfen. Nur ein kleiner Tipp: Die Tage bei den Öffnungszeiten sollten im englischen angegeben werden (Mo -> Mo, Di -> Tu, Mi -> We, etc.), damit auch alle Programme das einheitlich verarbeiten können.

Liebe Grüße
Alex
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154909128
unzow (2024-08-17 07:20:54+00:00): Verstanden, & danke!
nw520 (2024-08-07 16:57:14+00:00): Hallo KartoGrapHiti, ich kann nicht nachvollziehen, weshalb du bei https://osm.org/node/1603472550 die Tags  public_transport=platform
stop_id=24801
wheelchair=no
gelöscht hast. Könntest du mir das bitte erläutern?
KartoGrapHiti (2024-08-07 17:17:25+00:00): Das war ein Fehler. Ich habe ihn korrigiert. Ich hatte versucht, durch Vereinigen von zwei Punkten die Relations-Eigenschaft der südlichen Haltestelle, die es nicht mehr gibt, auf die bestehende nördliche Haltestelle zu übertragen. Dabei sind in JOSM versehentlich Eigenschaften verschwunden.
nw520 (2024-08-07 20:12:05+00:00): Besten Dank fürs Korrigieren!
joost schouppe (2024-10-15 14:39:12+00:00): waarom heb je hier de amenity=hospital gewist? Dit is zeker geen synoniem met building=hospital
mcliquid (2024-08-07 18:55:53+00:00): Review: Good
NorthCrab_upload (2024-08-06 20:50:28+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12095913028

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2024-08-06 20:50:27+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12095951990
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2755177764
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1306028078
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/87504339

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
kubahahaha (2026-05-21 12:23:43+00:00): Możliwe że naprawdę nie ma, czy ktoś mógł przeoczyć szyld?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5302753
mcliquid (2024-08-07 19:03:03+00:00): Review: Good
Coehill (2024-09-11 03:05:57+00:00): Please do not use the bicycle=dismount tag on Edinburgh, since that tag represents that bicycling is not allowed on the road, but pushing is allowed - which is incorrect. As a result, apps may have ignored that part of Edinburgh even when it is the only option to ride on.

You are allowed to bicycle on Edinburgh, even if there is no safe bicycle infrastructure.  Instead, it is recommended to mark the speed limit, surface type, and importantly, whether there are bike lanes (in this case, cycleway:both=no).  Then, apps can use the available info to determine whether it's safe to use as a bicycle route.

I have gone ahead and fixed this to be "bicycle=yes" instead which means that bicycles are legally allowed to ride here.

I hope this explanation helps and thank you for your edits! :)
Coehill (2024-09-11 03:07:46+00:00): Oops! This comment was meant for Changeset: 142370768.  I'll add it there instead.
acarasimon96 (2024-08-06 21:17:00+00:00): USGS has removed man-made structures (in which churches and towers meet the criteria) from the GNIS in 2021 (see https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/does-geographic-names-information-system-gnis-include-manmade-and-administrative-features-such). Searching the GNIS ID of such features in their search tool (https://edits.nationalmap.gov/apps/gaz-domestic/public/search/names) will return no results.
BER319 (2025-05-09 19:10:01+00:00): Hallo

bist du dir wirklich sicher, das der Verlauf des P6 so wie von abgeändert der richtige ist? Meine erkunden vor Ort und auch der Verlauf auf der offiziellen Website sagen etwas anderes.
BER319 (2025-05-11 19:30:35+00:00): Da ich hier von dir keine Antwort bekommen habe, stelle ich den ursprünglichen Zustand wieder her. Als Stammtisch Mitglied sollte dir eigentlich die Etikette von OSM bekannt sein. Ein kleine Antwort ist kein Meisterwerk.

Schönen Abend noch 

BER319
hca (2025-07-01 20:27:10+00:00): Hallo,

Dein CS-Kommentar ist völlig an mir vorbeigegangen, tut mir leid. Irgendwie scheint das mit der Benachrichtigung nicht so optimal zu funktionieren.
Was den P6 betrifft: Du meinst vermutlich das Stück zwischen dem Heldrastein und dem Ort Heldra?
Was das Teilstück betrifft, bin ich mir sicher, daß der Verlauf vor etwa einem Jahr so ausgeschildert war, wie ich es dann eingetragen habe, denn ich war da. Ob das nur eine vorübergehende Änderung war oder dauerhaft gelten sollte, weiß ich nicht sicher, kann aber gut sein, daß das nur temporär war.
BER319 (2025-07-02 06:36:53+00:00): Guten Morgen,
kein Problem wegen der verspäteten Antwort.
Ich meine das Stück im Bereich Ritterholz welches nicht auf dem Kolonnenweg verläuft. Leider habe ich damals keine Bilder gemacht. Aber ich habe an dem Wege einen Routemarker mit eingetragen welcher dort vorhandenen ist.
Vielleicht komme ich dort vorbei, da ich gerade in der Nähe bin. Dann kann ich das noch einmal vor Ort überprüfen.
hca (2025-07-02 15:03:21+00:00): Ja, wird am besten sein.
/hca
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-08-07 22:36:04+00:00): Please use compatible sources.
reverted

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154956111
silversurfer83 (2024-08-08 06:32:45+00:00): Hi there :)

I really appreciate you adding missing information but I'd like to ask you to please give better comments since "attributes added" simply doesn't help very much. Giving a source would be nice, too.

cheers
silversurfer83

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154911398
dsk1 (2024-08-08 20:10:01+00:00): Hello, the source of my changes is just that I am (or have been) at that location. Should I add local knowledge each time? I make the changes on my phone so I avoid to type too much. If you compare the change sets you'll see the attributes I've just added. I change the comment if I change other things. If I make changes with osmand it just adds the comment "supermarket (etc.) changed".
Regards
dsk1
Katrin_H (2024-08-12 08:56:44+00:00): Hallo Thore,
finde es mega gut, dass du alles so detailliert getaggt hast :) Mir ist hier eine Kleinigkeit aufgefallen:
hier bei diesem Weg (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1306038534) brauchst du keinen tracktype angeben, weil es sich nicht um einen Wirtschaftsweg handelt: siehe: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dtrack. Und handelt es sich wirklich um einen baulich getrennten Weg? Wenn nicht, würde ich es eher nach dem Beispiel 8 von den Tagging-Beispielen von Antje taggen.
thorescharnweber (2024-08-12 09:44:52+00:00): Hallo Katrin,
Bei dem Weg wird jetzt keine Historie angezeigt, weil ich den geteilt habe, damit er meinen Abschnitten entspricht. Dadurch kann man die Historie des Weges nur bei dem Abschnitt dahinter einsehen. Der Tag „tracktype“ war für den Weg schon gesetzt und er war auch schon als extra Linie eingezeichnet. Soll ich das dann trotzdem ändern oder ist das dann so in Ordnung?
Katrin_H (2024-08-14 10:57:07+00:00): Dann kannst du ihn einfach so lassen :)
NeisBot (2024-08-06 23:52:38+00:00): Hi tacobravo, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 97% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 6 highway(s)

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=154913265
tacobravo (2024-08-06 23:56:26+00:00): I think I made a mistake. I meant to trace over my gpx route
pitscheplatsch (2024-08-07 06:41:23+00:00): Thanks for your answer.

Can you undo your map changes?
tacobravo (2024-08-07 12:20:57+00:00): I cannot undo my changes but I have made a bunch more edits to complete the trail system.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-08-09 01:34:24+00:00): There shouldn't be landuse inside other landuse
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154913379
eggie (2024-08-10 05:25:27+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
mueschel (2025-01-26 10:26:03+00:00): Hi,
could you check this building? It seems to small for a warehouse, to large for a give_box, and 'cans' is not used anywhere else.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1201806251/history
MichS (2024-08-07 05:10:02+00:00): Hallo, 

willkommen bei OSM und Spaß beim Eintragen.

Bitte nur tatsächliche Eigennamen eintragen.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen#Namen_sind_keine_Beschreibungen

MFGhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen#Namen_sind_keine_Beschreibungen

MFG
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-03-31 15:26:37+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12096282229/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop?
tastrax (2024-08-07 11:10:42+00:00): Its common practice to add spaces in the phone numbers for readability. This is easy to do in GoMap! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features#Phone_Numbers
KiloThree (2024-08-12 14:41:22+00:00): Arguably, it's not necessary to tag `foot=no` on motorways with sidewalks in the state. State law is such that on all motorways with sidewalk, pedestrians are not allowed on the motorway, and so it can be considered the default access. Generally, it's more important to tag the exceptions than the rule

On the other hand, I can understand how data consumers might have trouble with that particular law, so I'm not going to tell you to not keep adding these tags
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154915160
neuhausr (2024-08-08 20:17:08+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding to OpenStreetMap! I noticed in OSM Inspector that your edits created some self-intersections. https://tinyurl.com/bp5kvzx4 If you edit in this area using iD, and click on these ways it should highlight the issues. Could you take a look and try to resolve? Happy mapping!
Flynn Marquardt (2024-08-07 07:06:13+00:00): Hello,
this change broke 4 border relations: 148838,165479,1428125,390867.

It created two holes in the broders: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/390867#map=12/49.0039/-118.0253

Can you please review/fix this?
Ponderosopine (2024-08-08 07:09:36+00:00): Sorry, completely missed your comment until now! Is there something I'm doing specifically that is breaking the boundaries? Or can do to avoid breaking them? I have been disconnecting the forest boundaries from the border because the forest boundaries are not defined by the border. I've been doing so by cutting the forest ways off the border, reconnecting the edges of the forest Boundary, and then removing the national forest from the border as a relation.
Flynn Marquardt (2024-08-08 07:42:04+00:00): Hello,
thank you for answering.

The problem was already fixed by somebody else, no more work from your side is needed. All borders are now intact.
Ponderosopine (2024-08-08 16:12:53+00:00): Okay, still wondering if you have any tips about avoiding breaking the BC border in the future, so lmk if you do!
Flynn Marquardt (2024-08-08 18:05:04+00:00): The only tool of my knowledge, that is usefull for this, is JOSM.

Some of the ways you changed are part of border relations, e.g. way 616417663.

After your work you should load the way (Ctrl+Shift+o) in JOSM with all depending relations und use the verify button/function. It shows you all warnings and errors found by JOSM.
KiloThree (2024-08-12 14:38:31+00:00): Looks like you may have accidentally dragged a point on way 1291328298
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154915537
StreetSurveyor (2025-07-31 01:21:51+00:00): These changes are incorrect. If there are sidewalks, they should definitely be foot=yes.
❤️‍🔥 (2024-08-07 08:55:54+00:00): thanks writing helpful changeset comments :) you may want to check out the RapiD editor, which lets you efficiently add buildings without drawing them yourself: https://rapideditor.org/rapid#map=18/-40.21112/175.60199&datasets=ef9136b079e24bbfb432be9bbdd246ff&poweruser=true
daaanna (2024-08-11 07:24:01+00:00): السلام عليكم . لاحظت انك حذفت  مخارج في تقاطع انس بن مالك و طريق الامير محمد بن سعد ممكن افهم السبب ؟ و تم تعديلها قبلي وهي صحيحه 100%
Archi_Ma (2024-08-13 04:43:42+00:00): Hi daaanna, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.
Archi_Ma (2024-08-14 10:14:45+00:00): Hi daaanna, Thank you for feedback and reverting the changeset. I referred to the OSM wiki guidelines and removed the highway links as there is no solid triangular island near the junction.
aduxas (2025-02-14 21:54:45+00:00): This part of 146 comes after the merger with 146A South.  This is why the 146 Trunk Road used to stop here.  I am not sure your change is correct.  There are traffic lights and intersections from here on.  Also, Bicycles are allowed on 146A South (or at least I cannot find any restrictions anywhere).  Your change gets bicycles in a dead end of which they cannot escape.
Joseph R P (2025-02-14 22:08:51+00:00): Sorry, but I am not quite sure what I've done wrong here or what you're pointing out is incorrect. I had changed this section from motorway to trunk because it is part of Eddie Dowling Highway, which is primary/trunk, not the North Smithfield Expressway, which is tagged as a motorway. Assuming the change affects bicycle routing, you can use the 'bicycle=yes' or 'bicycle=no' tags on roads where applicable to indicate how they can be accessed by bikes, which would likely resolve your issue.
aduxas (2025-02-14 22:24:27+00:00): I believe the hwy type should be the same as 146A, as the continuation of that road.  Trunk road is higher in hierarchy than Primary Road:  going South from 146A, this upgrade seems odd.  There are several businesses along the road from here on as well.  TBH I am very annoyed with the situation, as RIDOT has never replied to my questions concerning this section.  I agree that South of Reservoir road, 146 becomes Motorway again.  And then there is the overpass under construction, which has not yet been mapped.  Brief, I think Trunk is a level too high for this section, as a Trunk Road in general does not have traffic lights.
Joseph R P (2025-02-14 22:43:57+00:00): Trunk roads are for any sort of road, be it an expressway, urban arterial, 2-lane country highway, etc., just as long as they meet a certain criteria of importance. For example, this section of 146 links two freeway sections which in turn forms a major heavily-travelled route between Providence, Woonsocket, and Worcester. See here for info on trunk highway tagging in the US: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance#Trunk

Additionally, here is the trunk road section of the Rhode Island highway classification guidelines, which identifies this route as a top-priority non-motorway corridor which should be tagged as trunk: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rhode_Island/Highway_classification#Trunk_roads
aduxas (2025-02-15 01:03:35+00:00): OK, Thanks.
Joseph R P (2024-08-07 18:22:30+00:00): Hello! Do you know the exact issue were you having with bike lanes not being properly displayed with Route 140 being tagged as a trunk road? Bike lanes added as tags to a road won't render in the standard OSM map regardless of a road's classification, rather only when it is a separate way tagged as a cycleway, which is used for things like standalone bike trails or protected bike lanes. Perhaps you're using another renderer than the OSM standard map layer?
Road–Runner (2024-09-04 13:10:42+00:00): Es wäre besser, die Adressen bitte mit ; (semikolon) zu trennen, weil das die übliche Vorgehensweise ist.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-17 04:45:18+00:00): DWG revert – undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165053304
H4N5-antw (2024-10-10 11:55:44+00:00): Hebben jullie bij het toevoegen van fiets op zijpad overwogen hoe een fietser in oostelijke richting het stukje tussen https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?note=4470522 en het begin van het fietspad overbrugt? Routeerders begrijpen niet  dat zij stukje mogen smokkelen, daarom mijn advies geen use-sidepath meer toe te voegen tenzij over de gehele lengte een fietspad beschikbaar is. 
En westelijk van genoemde node is in 't geheel gaan fietspad ingetekend, zodat dat stuk Herentalsebaan niet gerouteerd wordt.
Gelieve wijzigingen terug te draaien
h0rr0rrdrag0n (2024-08-09 12:49:57+00:00): Thank you for fix! :-)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154918033
Frans S (2024-08-09 12:55:16+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A: Inaccurate mapping.
C: Collecting adjacent buildings and mapped is as 1 building.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.
E: Buildings not squared.
H: Included a yard of clearing.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154918728
NorthCrab_upload (2024-08-07 06:20:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12096505213

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eggie (2024-08-07 06:28:22+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback..  tip.. Beter niet schuiven met de kaart in editmodus. Dat levert vaak schade op.
Een track (of tegenwoordig ook path)  heeft ook een tracktype. Daar maakt de routergebruik van.
Zie wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Key:tracktype
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
DurgeshSinghChouhan (2024-08-10 06:18:39+00:00): Hi j_lee59, 
Thanks for mapping the area! I noticed a couple of issues with your mapped elements/features:
 
1. Many of your mapped buildings are not square enough. To solve this simply press the "Q" key on your keyboard. This will square the selected area. 
2. The outlines of the buildings are not traced accurately.  

This happens when we are new to mapping. With a bit of practice and knowledge, you’ll get better at it.

 If you wish to learn from experts, here is a link to training videos from HOT: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team/Open_Mapping_Hub_-_Asia_Pacific/Open_Mapping_Guru_Project/OM_Guru_Network_Trainings#Training_Schedule_and_Resources 

Thank you :)
Rainero (2025-01-18 19:29:59+00:00): Hallo FlockyonOSM,

erstmal willkommen bei Openstreetmap! Danke, dass du beiträgst die Kartendaten zu verbessern.  
Bei diesem Edit ist das leider nicht so gelungen. Du hast den kombinierten Fuß-/Radweg zu cycleway geändert; path war aber vorher richtig. Mehr zum Kartieren von Radwegen findest du hier: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren  
Leider ist das im iD-Editor (der im Browser) nicht richtig umgesetzt. 
Außerdem gibt es den Parkplatz dort zweimal mit unterschiedlicher Geometrie übereinander. Das ist aber nicht deine Schuld, das war vorher schon so.  
Ich werde nun deine Änderung zurücksetzen, damit der Fuß-/Radweg wieder stimmt und schaue dann, dass ich den doppelten Parkplatz bereinige.

Servus,
Rainer
Frans S (2024-08-09 12:43:36+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A:  sometimes Inaccurate mapped.

E: Buildings not squared.

H: Included a yard of clearing.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154919717