piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-14 14:26:31+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10940063351/history has guest_house = hotel that was added in this edit
Would it be hotel? ( tourism=hotel - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dhotel )
Guest house? ( tourism=guest_house - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house )

Something else?
AssisFS (2025-05-14 14:53:38+00:00): Olá Mateusz, obrigado pelo contato. Sim, apesar no nome sugestivo para hotel (nome: "Nosso hotel"), não se trata de um hotel, pois o mesmo apresenta uma estrutura com quartos pequenos, além de ser administrado pelo próprio dono e o atendimento  não é 24h/dia indicando portanto, ser tratar de uma pousada(guest_hotel).
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-14 15:05:48+00:00): So tag guest_house=hotel is not needed, right?

name goes into name tag (name=Nosso Hotel) and actual type into tourism=guest_house
AssisFS (2025-05-14 15:29:51+00:00): Sim, concordo contigo! Pronto, corrigido.
eggie (2024-12-02 15:16:46+00:00): Ro  Ik heb het opgelost met een stukje voetpad en een slingerhekje

Aan de highway=service heb ik service=alley toegevoegd

Mapse
eggie
eggie (2024-12-02 15:18:58+00:00): Vanaf het Van der Duyn van Maasdamplantsoen heb ik ook een stukje voetpad toegevoegd naar je highway=service
whb (2024-12-12 16:29:23+00:00): Guten Tag,

ist die Beschilderung der Gartenstraße wie hier auf dem Foto zu sehen wirklich nicht mehr aktuell und KFZ sind jetzt unbeschränkt erlaubt (motor_vehicle=yes)?
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=475589685265940&focus=photo

Wenn nicht, bitte das motor_vehicle=yes wieder entfernen.

Viele Grüße
whb
whb (2024-12-12 16:30:14+00:00): Ebenfalls bei der Luitpoldstraße.
whb (2024-12-12 19:24:51+00:00): Da es sich hier wahrscheinlich um einen Routingtest gehandelt hat, habe ich das "motor_vehicle=yes" wieder entfernt.
whb (2024-12-12 16:38:05+00:00): Hallo,

das motor_vehicle=yes habe ich wieder von der Ludwigstraße entfernt, das ist hier nicht notwendig.

Viele Grüße
whb
м1т (2024-12-02 18:34:15+00:00): https://gorkenesh.kg/ru/the-rulings-of-the-bgk-mob/28-sozyv/5818-129-ob-administrativnoj-granitse-goroda-bishkek.html
codll (2024-12-02 18:58:48+00:00): pourquoi ces changements? les rues de concarneau et dom michel le nobletz sont bien en sens unique, et les rues du centre ville sont bien des rues piétonnes
codll (2024-12-03 13:24:38+00:00): Rue Michel le nobletz https://panoramax.openstreetmap.fr/#focus=pic&pic=a78d66d3-bc73-4d4a-8e96-2674d85061f4
Rue de concarneau https://panoramax.openstreetmap.fr/#focus=pic&pic=6a89c061-8d8a-4e1e-b39d-498ea00be8be
codll (2024-12-03 19:23:32+00:00): j'ai remis les sens unique https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/159893675
codll (2024-12-07 17:53:13+00:00): sans réponse, j'ai également remis les rues piétonnes https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160034923
ce n'est pas parce qu'on peut y entrer en voiture pour faire des livraisons, etc, que ce ne sont pas des rues piétonnes, c'est indiqué par les panneaux carrés bleus avec les piétons, et également par l'aménagement de la chaussée, pavée, sans trottoirs ni voies de circulation indiquées, ce qui montre bien que c'est un espace voué au piétons en premier lieu

j'ai laissé le bd du moulin au duc en highway=service comme tu l'avais changé parce que ça se discute, il y a des trottoirs et une chaussée séparés, bien que je crois que la zone piétonne indiquée par les panneaux ne s'arrête pas là. à vérifier
sefabaris (2024-12-09 10:00:51+00:00): Why you deleted park area? The park area can be seen in Esri Imagery.
sefabaris (2024-12-09 10:08:21+00:00): Why you deleted park area? The demolished item is not the park, but the airport. The park can be seen in Esri Imagery.
魔大农 (2024-12-09 11:45:27+00:00): Because all other aerial/satellite imagery shows an airport, and I assumed it got expanded.
Is there a way to check the date of the imagery?
魔大农 (2024-12-09 11:55:52+00:00): ...including Esri imagery below zoom level 15, btw.
sefabaris (2024-12-13 11:04:50+00:00): Comparing with Google Earth images, maybe.
魔大农 (2024-12-13 11:23:15+00:00): In that case I'll just stick to surveying.
5m4u9 (2024-12-03 02:12:32+00:00): hola bienvenid@!

No es necesario duplicar el área del parque solo porque tenga un nombre local... se puede añadir aparte del nombre oficial el que mencionas en el área completa, ya lo corregí.
bxl-forever (2024-12-02 16:06:16+00:00): Hello,

Can you please point us to a source or a picture to help us confirm this name?  I could not find any reference for this name.

Thanks in advance.
max_bxl (2024-12-04 17:04:31+00:00): It's the place where I live !
bxl-forever (2024-12-04 21:08:48+00:00): Fine, but is the name visible on the front?  Or mentioned in a public document?

Verifiability is a core principle of OpenStreetMap, and that was the question we asked you here.
RedGreenBlue09 (2024-12-02 15:59:29+00:00): I mean, name="Trần Nhật Duật", alt_name="Đường tỉnh 994E" and the same for the others. Thanks.
eggie (2024-12-02 15:52:07+00:00): Dag Woody   Geef concreet aan wat je hebt verbeterd. 
Gebied verbeterd  zegt niemand wat.

MVG
eggie
rempshaener (2024-12-02 19:41:34+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Anpassungen gebeten. Danke für deinen wertvollen Beitrag.

Ich habe nicht viele Anmerkungen.

inscription
Hier sollte der der gesamte Text der Inschrift rein, siehe die Beschreibung auf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Stolpersteine

uploaded_by
Dafür wäre „source“ passender.

Viele Grüße
muralito (2024-12-02 21:23:46+00:00): Hi, unless your sources are up to date, is not a good idea to revert changes of a local user.

I have not seen in person, but there are news that all the internal ways of the park were blocked for cars and now are pedestrian only.
LakeTana (2024-12-04 01:07:13+00:00): Hi muralito,
Thank you for reaching out about this area. I will defer to local knowledge and change these ways back to pedestrian.
eggie (2024-12-02 16:18:54+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback  Het bankje heb ik losgemaakt van het pad.

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Technisien (2024-12-02 16:40:33+00:00): Ah daar moet ik dan even op letten. wist niet dat je objecten kan koppelen aan andere objecten.
eggie (2024-12-02 16:45:24+00:00): Nou... editor iD heeft de vervelende eigenschap alles aan elkaar te plakken. Je voorkomt het door de linker alttoets te gebruiken tijdens bewerken en.. of goed in te zoomen.
eggie (2024-12-02 16:21:28+00:00): Dag Technisien
De weg stond al in twee aparte accesstags op slot voor auto en motorfiets. Maar nu ook voor moped en mofa.
Welk bord staat hier vooraan?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-12-02 16:25:23+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:traffic_sign%3DNL:C12&action=edit&redlink=1
De tagging als volgt aangepast
way 	motor_vehicle=no & moped=yes & mofa=yes & traffic_sign=NL:C12
MVG
eggie
Technisien (2024-12-02 16:29:32+00:00): Aan beide kanten staat verkeersbord C12 gesloten voor alle motorvoertuigen. dat is dus de rode rand met auto en motorfiets.
eggie (2024-12-02 16:34:37+00:00): Oke.. dan klopt met nu conform de wiki.

Bromfietsers en snorfietsen zijn ook motorvoertuigen .. niet volgens de verkeerswet.. maar wel in osm.
Die aparte tags voor auto en motorfiets heb ik verwijderd.

Mapse
jandar22 (2024-12-18 20:32:29+00:00): Welcome to OSM and thanks for adding to the map! A couple notes on this changeset:

* Typically, it is not advised to use landuse=residential to cover a large region as though it were administrative boundaries; use it only for land area predominantly used for residences. i.e. it shouldn't overlap farmland, lakes, etc. See the wiki here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=residential

* This area was added to the relation for the administrative boundary Keeler Township (r10229316), perhaps by mistake? The area does not in reality define any part of the township boundaries.

* While Sister Lake is locally known to be the region around these lakes, it is not an incorporated community with any defined administrative boundaries. Typically in this case a point feature should be used to mark the general location of the place rather than an area boundary. In this case, a populated place marker already exists on the map: node 153496066.

I will work on correcting what needs to be corrected. Hopefully this is helpful feedback to keep in mind going forward. If you have questions or comments feel free to respond in this thread.
Map_HeRo (2025-12-28 13:49:40+00:00): Hi Senhitu, Fortsetzung der Diskussion aus https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/wie-kann-man-feststellen-wer-ein-bestimmtes-wegsegment-in-eine-relation-eingefugt-hat/139773:

Die Wegsegmente, die Du hier als "Alternative" eingefügt hast, führen als Sackgasse vom Hauptweg bei Point Alpha nach Wenigentaft. Sie sind "on the ground" nicht als Jakobsweg markiert und in keiner Wegbeschreibung dieses Teils des Jakobsweges enthalten. Gibt es irgendeine Quelle für die Zugehörigkeit dieses Wegteiles zum Jakobsweg?
Map_HeRo (2025-12-28 17:17:05+00:00): Hat sich schon erledigt, weil Deine Bearbeitung nur eine Änderung war. Den Verursacher habe ich jetzt ausfindig gemacht und werde ihn anschreiben. Gruß Mikke
silversurfer83 (2024-12-02 19:14:36+00:00): Hi there :)

whatever you did here, you did not succeed. You created a couple of multipolygons where simple areas would be enough. I'll try and fix that...

(you can visualize your work using tool like achavi https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=159849823&relations=true or OSMCha https://osmcha.org/changesets/159849823?aoi=21850a5f-7d91-45c0-a0c1-c54409c8407c )
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159849823
silversurfer83 (2024-12-02 19:19:17+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/159856129
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159849823
DankJae (2024-12-02 19:41:50+00:00): It is signposted as only "Capel y Groes" and that name is used in English too. Where a secondary translation is used it is translated as "Chapel Cross". Reverted in 159856682.
VLD286 (2024-12-04 16:22:29+00:00): Hi DankJae, 

Thank you for your feedback, I will keep this in mind going forward.

 Have a great day!
NorthCrab_upload (2024-12-02 16:31:01+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/1009293803

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
rskedgell (2024-12-02 16:39:32+00:00): Has the driveway been removed?

If not, it should be tagged as highway=service + service=driveway (+ access=private if appropriate).
Glassman (2024-12-03 18:58:26+00:00): I noticed that someone before you, tagged Fluid as highway=cycleway. My guess is this trail is for mountain bikes. It that is correct, then it should be tagged as highway=path + bicycle=designated. Since I'm not familiar with this area, can you review the paths tagged as cycleway? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mountain_biking. I'll send you more info on OSM in a message.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159850550
AndersAndersson (2024-12-02 19:46:51+00:00): Har du någon källa på att bäcken går via en kulvert och att det inte är en bro på den gamla järnvägsbanken?  Tittar man på gamla flygbilder ser det ut som en bro.
AndersAndersson (2024-12-04 16:31:43+00:00): Inga kommentarer om denna?

Tydliga bevis på att du valt att ändra något du inte visste något om till något som med 50% chans var fel. Då är det kanske bättre att vara tyst?

Facit fanns två musklick bort genom att byta bakgrundsfoto. Du gör det stora jobbet att ändra, men inte det lilla jobbet att kolla vad du ska ändra till.
AndersAndersson (2024-12-02 19:43:13+00:00): Varför kopplade du ifrån vägarna från T767? Har du varit på plats och vad vill du uppnå?
Msiipola (2024-12-02 21:44:52+00:00): Du menar korsning mellan övergivna järnvägen T767. Vad jag kan se på flygfoto finns inte längre någon synlig övergång mellan den och T767.
VET DU att sådan finns och att den gamla järnvägen syns i terrängen? Historiska järnvägar hör inte hemma i osm. Har DU kollat på plats?
AndersAndersson (2024-12-03 22:12:04+00:00): Du tycker inte att historiska järnvägar hör hemma i OSM. Många andra tycker motsatsen och har lagt mycket jobb på att lägga in det. Du tar dig friheten att förstöra detta. Dessutom kopplar du isär stigar så att navigering inte fungerar. Någon har en gång i tiden valt att lägga in dessa stigar.
Jag har inte varit på plats. Men eftersom jag var tämligen säker på att du hade fel (precis som din andra felaktiga ändring i det här området (som enkelt kunde verifierats om du hade brytt dig om något som inte finns i NVDB)) så kollade jag på Google maps, och mycket riktigt finns där en stig. Kanske inte den mest välanvända, men ändå tydligt mer slitet där än bredvid.
https://www.google.se/maps/@59.7770998,14.7745172,3a,75y,171.07h,68.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTQr9oXB3LjiQvo6mnv7kig!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D21.02208152244667%26panoid%3DTQr9oXB3LjiQvo6mnv7kig%26yaw%3D171.0710191795477!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTExNy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
Msiipola (2024-12-04 07:32:56+00:00): Sakfrågan är om gamla järnvägen även syns på vägbanan. Vilket jag inte vet, men gissar att den inte gör. Flygbilden visar inte heller några sådana spår. Därför kapade jag järnvägslinjen där den passerar vägen. Och därmed har jag inget mer att säga i denna fråga.
AndersAndersson (2024-12-04 16:27:21+00:00): Så om en lerig stig inte fortsätter vara en lerig stig tvärs över en asfaltsväg så kapar du av stigen? Du vet att det inte ska göras på det viset va?
Varför skapar du inte en egen privat databas med NVDB? OSM är ett gemensamt projekt där man inte bara kan förstöra sådant man själv inte bryr sig om. Något du gjort ända sen du började editera.

Så trots fotobevis på att du har gjort fel (förutom det uppenbara att noder ska sitta ihop för navigering) så anser du dig nöjd med ditt agerande och din ändring?
Glassman (2024-12-03 21:47:20+00:00): This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

I'm reverting this changeset as well, you dragged nodes on this changeset as well. I'll send you more info on OSM in a message.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159851528
DaveF (2024-12-02 23:19:31+00:00): Hi
What was the source for 'Quarry Farm'?
pennm (2024-12-02 23:30:29+00:00): I looked at the road sign. Although perhaps it could have been indicating the name of the building at the opposite end of the road...?
DaveF (2024-12-03 21:57:30+00:00): Indeed, it is the area at its end.
OS, National Highway & the local authority all state the private drive doesn't have a name.
martien-176 (2024-12-03 20:04:37+00:00): Hi,  thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT. You requested a review of your mappings. 

The buildings you mapped are well done as to their location. But pay attention to the squareness of the corners. Always draw buildings as square and precise as you can. Then add the Building feature type. And last, right click it and click the square icon. 

Please check out these sources for more info: 
- Buildings--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o
- Roads--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBLwb2nisJQ 
- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit

Thanks so much for your contribution, Martien, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159851818
Glassman (2024-12-03 21:46:16+00:00): This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

It looks like you accidentally dragged nodes. Unfortunately I'm going to have to revert this changeset since I'm not sure how to fix it.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159851828
eggie (2024-12-02 22:14:18+00:00): Dag PowerGeo

landuse=education is ook een correcte tag.. die helaas nog niet rendert. Die tag kun je dus laten staan, want als die veel gebruikt gaat worden zal Carto die gaan renderen.
Zet je de tag terug?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-12-02 22:18:36+00:00): amenity = school kun je overigens wel laten staan....
eggie (2024-12-04 07:07:50+00:00): education teruggezet. De school stond nu 4x vermeld op deze locatie. Nu er twee van gemaakt. West en Oostkaap. 
Je kunt het beste een keuze maken. Bij meer namen de nodes gebruiken of anders één naam op het vlak. 
MVG
eggie
somehundred (2025-02-25 12:48:23+00:00): This edit directly duplicated many buildings and had to reverted to save my and other mappers' time. Please don't duplicate buildings.
whb (2024-12-02 18:23:28+00:00): Guten Tag,

mit "building" wird der Gebäudetyp erfasst, nicht die aktuelle Nutzung.

Viele Grüße
whb
bxl-forever (2024-12-03 09:01:45+00:00): Hello,

There is a problem with this edit.  I want to alert you, to avoid seeing the same problem multiple times.

You added this road.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1339546448

It shoud connect… another road.
It does not because you attached it to a landuse area (which is not routable and should never be attached to roads) and to the tram track (which is not routable either).

Here is how you can fix it: Extend your road to the west to connect Ch. Alsembergstwg and remove node 12391004410.
Dawid2849 (2024-12-02 22:47:15+00:00): Dzięki! Jeszcze na trawniku została nazwa: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1291692086
Dawid2849 (2024-12-02 22:49:27+00:00): Oraz NSZZ to samorządny związek, nie samorządowy
syntex (2024-12-03 00:00:30+00:00): Racja, naprawiłem obie te rzeczy. Samorządowy przekopiowałem z poprzedniej nazwy : P
gscholz (2024-12-04 10:58:29+00:00): Hi queerthoughts,
this changeset has created a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines and duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=4.35994&lat=50.58015&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=159852704

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
queerthoughts (2024-12-04 16:12:29+00:00): Yes, I will. I normally fix these immediately after the import, but haven't had time yet.

The issues aren't even limited to those: also overlapping buildings occur frequently because the MapComplete tool doesn't properly detect what OSM building to replace. I'll mention it to Pieter (the dev) when I see him again, because this isn't the first time this happens.

But I'll fix it ASAP.
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-06 08:06:59+00:00): Hi OSMPrivate, welcome to OSM!

Could you please clarify the reason for changing the highway key from 'track' to 'footway' for several paths in the area?

Thank you!
LKAsahi (2024-12-02 17:46:14+00:00): Reference: 台北市政府簡報
https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzYzL3JlbGZpbGUvNDU1MDUvODIyOTU1Ni81MzFhNDVjYi0zOTVmLTRmMTEtOGU3MS0yYWUzOTc2YjA1NzMucGRm&n=QTA0LnBkZg%3d%3d&icon=..pdf
AkuAnakTimur (2024-12-13 11:36:29+00:00): Hello. It's fantastic to know that you've been able to provide almost every street names in a swath of area between Kolej MARA Kuala Nerang and Hospital Kuala Nerang. May I ask, how did you manage to get all these  names of residential streets?
dieterdreist (2025-09-26 08:55:57+00:00): Ciao, "correggo" non si capisce, in realtà quello che ho trovato qui è un errore: hai rimosso il "building_passage" da questa way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1059326849 ma è così, si passa sotto all'edificio. Ho corretto la situazione :)
tastrax (2024-12-05 06:00:08+00:00): Please take some time to actually adjust the house to the actual imagery when its so good. The Microsoft building outlines were created years ago when the imagery was not as good. Most need some realignment.
rempshaener (2024-12-05 17:15:55+00:00): Hallo,

eine kurze Anmerkung zu https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12391395512 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12391395540: Hydranten sollten nicht mit Straßen, Gebäuden und anderen Linien oder Flächen verbunden werden.
Das ist einfach zu beheben: Punkt in iD markieren, „E“ drücken – fertig.

Viele Grüße
Jusu05 (2024-12-02 18:26:35+00:00): metsää ei lisätty vaan peltoa
فروشگاه آنلاین سوغات دکان سرا (2024-12-02 18:35:07+00:00): آدرس وب سایت
https://dokansara.com
AwFi (2024-12-04 21:17:56+00:00): Ciao, 
ho visto che hai modificato l'edificio della stazione e l'hai ripristinato com'era fino a poco fa, con il tag della stazione ecc. Posso chiedere gentilmente perchè? 
Buona serata.
demon_box (2024-12-05 07:56:38+00:00): Ciao, molto semplicemente perchè non vedo il motivo (e non lo ritengo corretto) per mappare la stazione con un solo nodo all'interno dell'edificio della stazione. A mio avviso è corretto mappare tutti i tags della stazione sull'intero edificio, perchè l'edificio E' la stazione.
AwFi (2024-12-05 08:07:43+00:00): Ciao, 
Io trovo questo riferimento nella wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=station#How_to_map e mi pare indichino di usare un solo nodo, o eventualmente di mappare l'intera area come stazione ma non solo l'edificio. L'edificio secondo la wiki dovrebbe essere building=train_station.
Buona giornata.
demon_box (2024-12-05 08:12:55+00:00): Si è vero il wiki dice di mappare soltanto un nodo per la stazione (non sono d'accordo ma è la mia opinione).
Quello che sono sicuro non va fatto e su questo la community è allineata è mappare i tags dell'indirizzo sull'intero edificio: questo è errato perchè in Italia il civico indica il punto di accesso all'edificio e non l'intero edificio. Dico questo perchè ho trovato mappato i tags dell'indirizzo sull'intero edificio della stazione.
Grazie, BuonMapping!
AwFi (2024-12-05 08:24:01+00:00): Hai perfettamente ragione sull'indirizzo, penso fosse una cosa ereditata da tempo addietro che non ho rimosso quando ho portato la stazione nel nodo. 
Buona giornata!
cytryn (2024-12-02 20:09:31+00:00): Cześć,
Czemu tak? To nie jest nazwa budynku tylko osiedla, którego granice pokrywają się z landuse. Więc imho poprzednia wersja była prawidłowa.
Pzdr.
Rogoyski (2024-12-03 06:58:58+00:00): Uważam, że jeden budynek to z definicji nie jest osiedle. Nie znajduję zresztą na szybko dowodów, że używa się albo deweloper używał pojęcia "Osiedle CasaVerde".
cytryn (2024-12-03 08:06:18+00:00): Osiedla zamknięte bardzo często przecież składają się z jednego budynku, a ich granicę wyznacza zwykle wygrodzony teren, dostępny wyłącznie dla mieszkańców. Deweloper mógł co najwyżej używać tego określenia w odniesieniu do całej inwestycji, a ta - podobnie - obejmowała nie tylko budynek, ale i obszar wokół.