piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Wanderer2000 (2024-10-29 09:51:16+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53394122/history
Kijk even mee. Twee andere gebruikers hebben eerder al het veldnummer naar ref=* verplaatst, maar elke keer voeg jij stug die name=* weer toe.

Ik heb je ook al eerder gevraagd waarom je dit doet, omdat het mij niet nuttig lijkt om elkaar tegen te werken.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151696617
Daar heb ik je gevraagd om samen tot een oplossing te komen.
Wat ik niet begrijp is dat jij het nodig vindt je mening door te drukken, terwijl er duidelijk mensen zijn die het er niet mee eens zijn.
Mammi71 (2024-10-28 22:57:44+00:00): für jeden motorisierten Verkehr gesperrt, oder ist Forstwirtschaft frei?
Naundorfer (2024-10-31 13:56:19+00:00): Land- und Forstwirtschaftlicher Verkehr frei.
Mammi71 (2024-11-03 18:07:33+00:00): Dann wäre das korrekete Tagging;
motor_vehicle=agricultural;forestry
Filip009 (2024-10-26 08:02:34+00:00): Zdravím, nachádzajú sa tam reálne používané koľaje? Pokiaľ nie, tak je potrebné zmeniť ich označenie na nepoužívané/neexistujúce koľajnice.
Gorger (2025-02-19 03:46:31+00:00): "Hello Geofreund1
 Thank you for mapping!
 Kindly check the connectivity. You have correctly connected way 893303100 (highway=service) to way 57728009 (highway=path), but there is still missing connectivity to way 240766259 (highway=tertiary).
 Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
 Happy Mapping!"
frosm (2025-12-04 06:05:52+00:00): Bonjour,
peux-tu vérifier ta source pour le nom https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1327860424/history/1 ?
un autre contributeur dit que cela se nome autrement https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4821786#map=19/44.680872/4.267400
pb07 (2025-12-04 08:30:43+00:00): Bonjour
Ce n'est pas moi qui ai modifié le nom. J'ai simplement coupé ce way pour mettre la partie basse en escalier. Il faudrait peut être corriger aussi pour la partie haute : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/555281892#map=19/44.680741/4.266807
à voir sur place
frosm (2025-12-04 15:31:40+00:00): ha ? je venais justement de changer en escalier parce que c'était en allée :)

merci pour l'info, je préviens le contributeur initial car je suis trop loin que pour voir sur place
pb07 (2025-12-04 16:11:33+00:00): Oui, je me suis trompé, c'était pas pour l'escalier que j'avais coupé, c'était pour construire la relation Meyras - Château d'Hautsegur du réseau de randonnée.
balint36 (2024-10-27 09:38:28+00:00): Szia!
A vasúti vonalszakaszok nem vesznek fel ilyen módon "nevet", ezért eltávolítottam.
A magyar címkézésekről itt olvashatsz: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Vas%C3%BAt
Dodko (2024-10-24 15:20:33+00:00): Pridal som
second_hand=only
shop=car
inak by z toho nebol autobazár
CurlingMan13 (2024-10-24 14:10:56+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM.

Changeset reviewed.  Parking roads should not be named.  A name is only the official name that is signed, not the businesses it might server.  Also, roads needs to be connected to other roads, otherwise people can't reach it.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158296924
citrula (2024-10-25 04:37:49+00:00): This is an organized editing account for a group that has been blocked before - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16608 

There are several other accounts as well.
bwbuz (2024-11-14 13:23:15+00:00): Moin ‎lollipop, bitte nutze den veralteten Schlüssel ‎operational_status nicht mehr, denn das lässt den Imbiss nach wie vor in unseren Karten als vorhanden sichtbar zurück. Besser ist in derartigen Fällen: disused:amenity
Siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operational_status
sheldonelectric (2024-12-29 11:21:51+00:00): Καλημέρα, προσπαθω να καταλάβω το fixme αλλά δεν βρίσκω τα ωράρια στη σελιδα,
Ανοιγει κάθε 2η δεύτερα του μήνα; Ή ανοίγει 1 στις 2 δευτερες;
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2024-11-02 08:38:01+00:00): شكرا على مساهمتك لكن أحب أن أنبه إلى أن الصور الفضائية من Bing غير حديثه
وأرجوا أن تستخدم مصورات Esri
bxl-forever (2024-10-24 14:28:08+00:00): Hello,

Pardon my curiosity but this changeset is really intriguing.

Your change keeps https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31658095 as a two-way road, but creates two turn restriction relations that make it impossible to enter it from the east.  Has it become a one-way road?  In that case, wouldn’t oneway=yes (with possible exemption for cyclists, if any) be more appropriate than relations, which some engines do not support?  I could not find recent images on Panoramax or Mapillary; is there a public source of data to help here?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18205739
Maksim Sazanovich (2024-10-25 13:56:33+00:00): Hello, bxl-forever. Thank you for your feedback. Unfortunately, from the available public sources we can confirm the application of the oneway only to the nearest intersection in the residential area. Do you think such mapping will be more correct than the application of restriction?
Frans S (2024-10-24 15:04:45+00:00): Hello, Thanks for mapping
A few issues here.
Never connect nodes of a highway to other features like buildings , landuse areas and so on.
You mapped traces as access to farmland as unclassified highways.
Focus on thoroughgoing highways.
Best regards
Frans S (2024-10-24 15:11:00+00:00): And, do not map land use features. 
This is a highway and building project.
You connect nodes of these land use features to highways which are errors which has to be solved.
traces within agricultural field (access to ) are never unclassified highways. 
Best regards
Frans S (2024-10-25 09:33:19+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please realize that this is a building and road mapping only.
Focus on highways which connects settlements, buildings and villages.
Don't waste energy on mapping traces in between agricultural plots and rural areas, ending somewhere in the middle of nowhere.
Best regards and keep mapping.
aceman444 (2024-11-01 11:27:03+00:00): What triangle is not valid? Why do you write that into every changeset?

Also please do not add duplicate restaurants, even with lower quality data than the existing one.
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:40:32+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared.

G: Included the shadow of the building.

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/158298614
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:41:54+00:00): You also clustered buildings on other changesets
I am going to delete your mappings due to the poor quality
Sorry about that.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158298614
Ryccardo (2024-10-24 14:48:53+00:00): Source: survey 2024-10-13
jbcharron (2024-10-24 15:49:09+00:00): branch au lieu banch ? :)
Hopla57 (2024-10-24 18:53:36+00:00): Oups… Merci de l'avoir remarqué, j'ai saisi à la main c'est pour ça 😅
D'ailleurs, si tu as une idée de meilleur tag que `leisure=escape_game`, je ne savais pas trop quoi y mettre.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-24 14:21:41+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/1327872723

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-24 14:21:40+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/6364920600
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/224161399

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:39:09+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared.

G: Included the shadow of the building.

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/158299090
eggie (2024-10-24 19:06:44+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
bxl-forever (2024-10-24 15:48:57+00:00): Hello,

The turn restriction you added prevents motor vehicles from using this street from north to south, forcing a left turn into the tiny street here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/916587513

The changeset claims to use Mapillary.  The latest Mapillary picture, taken during the summer, does not show any sign of a restriction on the main road.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=474309668537116

Would you please be so kind as to provide some documentation about why such a restriction blocking traffic on a major road is necessary?

In general, it is always a good idea to copy a direct link to the Mapillary picture in the source field of the changeset, that will help local mappers to understand what you are doing.

Thanks in advance.
bxl-forever (2024-10-24 15:53:31+00:00): Hello again,

Sorry, I see that the restriction is a "only_straight_on" type, not a real turn restriction.  This would match the situation on Mapillary, indeed.  In that case, it does not prevent traffic from using the road normally.

However, I feel that such a relation is not needed, because oneway=* tags on the side road make the situation unambiguous.

Have a nice day.
Maksim Sazanovich (2024-10-25 14:09:16+00:00): Hello, bxl-forever. Thank you for your feedback which helped me to find out changes in the direction of oneway living street. I agree with you that fixing oneway here would be more correct than restriction (correction changeset - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158339588). Best regards.
Tjuro (2024-10-24 17:58:47+00:00): Hallo map4e123,

Waarom verander je
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1290729986
Naar highway=pedestrian?

Nu heb je parallel hieraan nog een fietspad liggen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1327875895

Dat is niet correct, het is of een fietspad/voetpad combinatie of een voetgangers weg.

Hier dient of het fietspad verwijderd te worden of de highway=pedestrian is een highway=footway.
map4e123 (2024-10-24 18:47:32+00:00): Het gaat om een fietspad dat ter plekke ook zo bebord is, en ook zo in gebruik is, langs de rand van een plein, waar er vroeger een duidelijke stoep was.

De highway=pedestrian parallell ligt er voor de routering en is onderdeel van het nieuwe plein (area:highway=pedestrian). Dat de Carto-stijl hier er een aparte weg van maakt, en de area niet rendert, is iets waar we niet zoveel aan kunnen doen. De bedoeling is in ieder geval om aan de zijkant oostelijk van het fietspad te lopen, over het plein, maar er geen voetpad van te maken (het is een plein met fiets- en sporadisch gemotoriseerd verkeer).
Het is volgens de wegbeheerder in ieder geval niet de bedoeling dat voetgangers door het fietspad gaan lopen, zie ook de afscherming van het naastgelegen parkeerterrein.

De praktijk ter plaatse is hiermee voldoende tot zijn recht gebracht op de kaart. Het gaat niet om dezelfde weg, het gaat functioneel om een fietspad naast een plein, waarbij er vrij kan worden op- en afgereden, waar de highway=pedestrian ligt, voor de routering.

Een footway is het niet, al was het maar omdat het om een route gaat over een plein, en er hier feitelijk heel veel fietsers zullen rijden.
Tjuro (2024-10-24 19:17:34+00:00): Hallo map4e123, 

Ik had:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17696107
Nog niet gezien, als ik het goed begrijp heb je hier het vlak zelf ingetekend als area:highway=pedestrian en de routes daarover heen als highway=pedestrian.

Ik kan nu beter begrijpen waarom je dat gedaan hebt, persoonlijk heb ik een andere style voor het intekenen van pleinen, hier een aantal voorbeelden van pleinen/voetgangers gebieden die ik heb ingetekend:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.256828/6.161125
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.506079/6.090994
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.358750/4.883796
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.235534/5.946575

Zelf gebruik ik lineaire highway=pedestrian alleen voor lineaire voetganges wegen zoals winkelstraten. En niet op pleinen.

Maar hoe jij dat in wilt teken is natuurlijk aan jou de keuze.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Tjuro
map4e123 (2024-10-24 19:27:08+00:00): Dit wordt meer een discussie voor het OpenStreetMap Community Forum. Ik stel voor het zo te houden zolang er verschillende tekenwijzen mogelijk zijn. De footways zijn natuurlijk ook mogelijk, maar dat kruist natuurlijk met het idee van highway=pedestrian. Hier is de routering ook echt voor af en toe een werkbus of voertuig van de hogeschool bedoeld over hetzelfde traject. Het blijft toch zoeken naar een middenweg. 

Bedankt om dit te delen.
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:36:25+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------

Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared.

G: Included the shadow of the building.

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/158299391
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:36:28+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------

Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared.

G: Included the shadow of the building.

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/158299391
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:36:34+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------

Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared.

G: Included the shadow of the building.

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/158299391
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:36:42+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------

Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared.

G: Included the shadow of the building.

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/158299391
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:37:37+00:00): Sorry for the duplication. Something went wrong with this page so it was send multiple times.
Best regards
Frans S (2024-10-24 14:33:16+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.

B: Overlapping buildings.

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/158299445
Frans S (2024-10-24 15:25:12+00:00): Hello, Thanks for mapping.
Please focus on through going highways rather than access traces to farmland. (this one here should be tagged as a track.)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158299624
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-04 07:31:54+00:00): Hello!

You used
colour=weiß
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12285529422/history

Have you maybe meant
colour=white
?

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?
EnricoMittwoch (2025-05-21 16:39:03+00:00): Hey, 
thank you for pointing out the issue with the color. I set the value in a free text form via every door. In german. My bad, "white" is correct, I fixed the data. I'll learn from this in favor of future edits.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-21 17:56:39+00:00): Thanks for the fix!
mjeeloo (2024-10-24 14:40:31+00:00): Heb ik de lantaarnpalen met verkeersborden erop gemonteerd goed getagd? (bijvoorbeeld de op één na meest rechtse)
eggie (2024-10-24 19:53:56+00:00): Het ziet er heel netjes uit, maar of het werkt..
one feature is one element is het motto... even geen idee. 
De validator van editor JOSM vindt het prima. 
lit=yes wordt meestal getagd op de wegen zelf. 

Anders een vraagje voor het forum.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-10-24 19:09:32+00:00): Dag RvE   Je snackbar staat buiten het gebouw. Op welke adresnode hoort deze?
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-10-24 19:10:46+00:00): Info samengevoegd met adresnode
Groet
eggie
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-12-03 08:49:10+00:00): Ê Phonenix, mày là thằng vandalism rồi khi mày không đi check changeset, để có thằng nó  đưa
1327881748 way này lên thành trunk trong khi nó là chuỗi thẳng của Nguyễn Lương Bằng secondary.

Đây tao tự chửi tao luôn vì tao ko có đủ thời gian kiểm tra nổi changset của mày thì phải.
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-12-03 08:50:51+00:00): https://imgur.com/a/7WLUNRJ
JanerNaKole (2024-10-24 14:56:19+00:00): Z wewnętrznych źródeł został uruchomiony odcinkowy pomiar prędkości. Pasy dla pieszych zostały po prostu zamalowane i zmieniona prędkość na 70.
Frans S (2024-10-24 15:21:20+00:00): Hello, Thanks for mapping,
Please stick to the requirements of the project.
Whenever you map highways which continue over the edge of a task, map the road a bit over the edge. A mapper on the adjacent task can continue mapping. (otherwise, the road is not visible for him)
StC (2024-10-25 19:54:06+00:00): Bonjour,

je viens de détecter une discontinuité au Trou des Américains sur cette relation : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17017340. Est-ce possible que ce soit une conséquence de ce changeset ?
Benoit84 (2024-10-27 08:08:52+00:00): Je pense que oui et j'en suis désolé.
Je n'avais pas vu cette relation en faisant ces modifications, mais elle est composée de relations plus locales dont une que j'ai oublié d'ajuster quand j'ai déplacé le point.
Merci de me l'avoir signalé, je viens de le corriger. Est-ce que tout est bien rentré dans l'ordre maintenant ?
StC (2024-10-27 10:28:52+00:00): Tout semble revenu en ordre (voir https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/monitor/groups/fr-nwn). Ca ne semble pas passer exactement là où d'autres sources situent le passage (plus proche du Trou des Américains) mais je ne connais pas la région.

D'ailleurs j'en profite : du côté du groupe Plein Air nous recherchons dès que nous pouvons des données sur la position des poteaux indiquant les carrefours de randonnée, et nous n'avons pas encore trouvé de source pour le Vaucluse. Toute contribution (sur le terrain ou auprès des services locaux) sera la bienvenue !

Merci,
St.