piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Adam Edwards (2025-03-19 12:22:02+00:00): I don't remember where I got the info the most likely would be something like that for Bristol as I would have searched for something I hoped was definitive.  I was trying to find surfaced routes to get me through the city as I recall a lot of cycleways missing any surface info (and that then makes Ride with GPS which I use for planning reject the route).  My logic for making things foot and cycleway is that's what I see in most parts of OCM and reflects the signing usually with a blue circle showing pedestrians and cycles. When you add cycle and foot path it prompts you to say if segregated or not, so clear if it's shared use or not.  see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=cycleway.   This doesn't suggest the use of "pavement".  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway=sidewalk (which is the information for Pavement) doesn't make this any clearer other than to say "Generally any walkway running parallel to the road, which provides an alternative method of travel along the road for pedestrians is considered a sidewalk." which is to me not primarily about cycling.  I guess both can be used and it may not matter greatly?  Happy to be corrected.
mstrbrid (2025-03-19 20:35:29+00:00): Sorry, I wasn't very clear there in my last point! I meant why did you choose to change it from a highway=footway to a *=cycleway? I didn't mean to question adding either foot=* or bicycle=* (as appropriate), just the primary highway=* tag.
I'm finding a lot of preference for using highway=cycleway on shared pavements, but legally the cyclist has to give way to pedestrians so makes a lot more sense in my mind to keep them as highway=footway, footway=sidewalk,bicycle=yes/designated,segregated=no. It more accurately represents both de facto and de jure statuses, and helps to promote cycle infrastructure (no evidence here!) by not overstating the density of cycleways.
On this example specifically, there aren't any signs that this portion is a shared pavement, and indeed the open data just says it's a quiet road recommended for cyclists, so probably worth reverting it unless you know something else? I'm happy to do it bundled in with other junction modifications if you're not bothered about it?
Adam Edwards (2025-03-19 21:14:48+00:00): I'm very happy for you to use your local knowledge to change this.
Udarian (2024-01-09 05:29:21+00:00): What is the source for the new name for “State Road 821 Access Road”?
Udarian (2024-01-09 14:13:54+00:00): Also, shouldn’t the through lanes have hov=designated on them?
snake21 (2024-01-10 01:42:39+00:00): There is signage at the intersections with Bethune and Dunbar. I believe the service roads extend north beyond 117th Ave because of the fact that they display white "speed limit X" signs as opposed to yellow "ramp X mph" signs. 

Regarding the hov designation on the Thru Lanes, my understanding is that there's no High Occupancy Vehicle restriction, you just can't drive a truck and you have to have a toll tag (Sunpass) as opposed to toll by plate.
Udarian (2024-01-10 12:34:45+00:00): Then wouldn’t something like toll:sunpass=yes or toll:sunpass=designated be more appropriate?
skyper (2024-04-20 14:29:30+00:00): Hallo dktue,
warum hast Du denn die Barrieren gelöscht. Die waren doch korrekt mit `access=yes`eingetragen und sind auch noch vorhanden?
Grüße skyper
eggie (2024-01-09 09:11:37+00:00): Dag Niels,

Je vraagt feedback   Lijkt mij helemaal correct zo.

MVG
eggie
canfe (2024-01-07 18:47:52+00:00): Via Goito, messa così in mezzo a tante case non sarà residential?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145996749
kapazao (2024-02-23 16:45:30+00:00): Hola, por favor cuando añadas rutas de lo que sea, en este caso ciclista, indica alguna referencia para que los demás usuarios podamos comprobarlas.
No podemos saber de donde viene esta información, si es errónea o inventada.
Un saludo
gurglypipe (2024-01-07 16:28:59+00:00): It exists on the aerial imagery, so perhaps it would be better to retag the track rather than deleting it. Otherwise a well-meaning mapper (who has not surveyed on the ground) may re-add it from aerial imagery in future.

I suggest tagging as access=private or disused:highway=track depending on whether the track completely doesn’t exist on the ground (even if you had a key for the gates, say).
Tooslow (2024-01-07 16:48:42+00:00): I did think about that but I wonder how old the aerial imagery is. There is nothing on the ground not even any signs that there was once a track so I went for a full on delete. I am an inexpert and occasional editor so if you would like to change as you suggest I won't be in the least offended. I risk doing more damage :-)
gurglypipe (2024-01-07 17:52:07+00:00): I trust your on-the-ground survey, and value that you’ve taken the time to explain fully why you’re deleting the track, I think that makes sense. My point is that it because it’s still shown in the imagery (regardless of how old that imagery is), an armchair mapper may re-add the track, and all the context of your survey would not be re-added.

I’ll undo your edit and tag the track as abandoned (which is stronger than disused; see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix#Stages_of_decay). It then won’t show up on the map, but will show up in the editor.

Thanks for your work to improve the map :D
gurglypipe (2024-01-07 17:56:11+00:00): Done in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146000715
NeisBot (2024-01-08 00:18:08+00:00): Hello Klub_Sapsan, thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
Baloo Uriza (2024-03-02 18:21:59+00:00): What?  It's literally signed with G shields.  Tisdale Parkway's got LL shields on it...  This is in my part of town...
ArgyleZombie (2024-07-07 10:46:27+00:00): I have driven on those roads again since I made this edit.  You are correct, they are signed with G and LL shields.  They didn't used to be.  Some of my information comes from how I remember things years ago, and they didn't used to be signed with shields at all.  They are now, so should be labeled that way on the map.

However, I still think that it's incorrect to call them "CR." The ref should be just "G" and "LL" without the CR in front.

I believe I saw "CR" being used in Washington County recently, but other than that, I don't recall CR being used anywhere I've been in Oklahoma, and you've put it all over the place.  I have a lot of notes from the last year about rural areas between Eufaula and Tulsa, but I haven't made most of those changes because I don't want to undo all of your work without checking with the wider openstreetmap community.  At some point I'm going to bring this up on the forum and get community consensus before changing a lot of your edits, but one of the things I think is wrong is the use of "CR" all over rural Oklahoma.  I really don't think "CR" belongs in area where nobody uses it to describe a road.  It's much more common in other states, but not used much in Oklahoma.
eggie (2024-01-07 17:33:10+00:00): Dag Audi   Wanneer iets is afgesloten kun je het beter op access=private met delivery=yes

Nu het je de weg verwijderd.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-01-07 17:33:34+00:00): Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=145997957
eggie (2024-01-07 17:36:22+00:00): Ik heb je edits teruggedraaid. Het zal niet routeren voor regulier verkeer. 
MVG
eggie
Audi_gekkie (2024-01-07 17:48:37+00:00): Hoi Eggie,
Oké weer wat geleerd.
mavl (2024-01-14 16:24:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146251017 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: deleting wihout reason].
literan (2024-01-08 11:44:50+00:00): сдается мне, что вы эти названия выдумали. Гугл о таких не знает.

Пока их уберу, дайте, пожалуйста, источники на эти названия.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground
citrula (2024-01-11 05:30:31+00:00): I removed some of the railroads you added because they are clearly not present from aerial imagery. You can review my changes here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146127118

Like I said, if you are interested in mapping where railroads used to go I encourage you to check out OHM, since they are working on a new railway layer at the moment !
mavl (2024-01-14 16:24:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146251017 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: deleting wihout reason].
Dimitar155 (2024-05-27 20:42:16+00:00): Привет Боби,

Знаеш ли дали https://www.osm.org/way/579626413 наистина не същестува (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1M75)? Бил е използван за свързване на нископланинската обиколна пътека (https://www.osm.org/relation/13799163) и има две бележки, с оплаквания че релацията е "прекъсната".

Поздрави,
Митко
mavl (2024-01-14 16:24:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146251017 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: deleting wihout reason].
mavl (2024-01-14 16:24:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146251017 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: deleting wihout reason].
mavl (2024-01-14 16:24:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146251017 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: deleting wihout reason].
mavl (2024-01-14 16:24:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146251017 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: deleting wihout reason].
Filip009 (2024-01-09 12:19:25+00:00): Dobrý deň, chápem, že ste odstránil cyklochodník, ktorý sa tam nenachádza, ale fakt sa tam nenachádza ani lesná cesta alebo lesný chodníček? Potom stačilo zmeniť cyklochodník na chodníček a nebolo potrebné ho vymazať.
dulky (2024-01-09 14:02:05+00:00): Dobre, tak to len zmením
Filip009 (2024-01-09 14:22:26+00:00): Chodník som teda vrátil späť.
woodpeck_repair (2024-06-15 22:29:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 152740214, 152740288, 152740274, 152740234, 152740192, 152740169, 152740167, 152740249, 152740178 where the changeset comment is: revert contributions by Hamilton 44/Delta Evas ALL, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16207
mavl (2024-01-14 16:24:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146251017 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: deleting wihout reason].
ndm (2024-01-08 12:26:56+00:00): Does cross checking with other maps have any copyright implications?
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-01-09 02:47:40+00:00): Hi anh, bên Be có upload ảnh trực tiếp lên Mapillary, anh có thể feel free to use ở phần maps data - Photo overlay nhé
LocalMapGuru (2024-01-21 06:59:49+00:00): Hey there!

Thanks for the edits here.  Just be mindful that voltages should be listed from highest to lowest when there are multiple voltages on a particular line segment.  I've fixed this one already for you (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146501975).

Thanks!
eggie (2024-01-07 17:29:04+00:00): Dag Stef   Je vraagt feedback.

De paden zijn nog zichtbaar op luchtfoto en in de BGT.
Je hebt dus kans dat een medemapper ze gewoon weer gaat intekenen.
Daarom is het verstandiger om de verdwijnende paden te taggen met
disused:highway=path

Je kun dan ook een note=...  toevoegen met uitleg.
Evt. kan ik je changeset reverten dat je alsnog de dichtgegroeide paden intekent met disused:highway=path.
Het voorkomt opnieuw intekenen.
Zeg het maar.
Je edit.. https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=145999316

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-01-07 17:31:10+00:00): Hier de discussie op het forum hoe om te gaan met verdwijnende en ongewenste paden.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/hoe-kan-natuurmonumenten-het-beste-omgaan-met-ongewenste-paden/93583?page=2
WezepscheStef (2024-01-07 17:50:57+00:00): De paden zijn in de fysieke wereld in 90% van de gevallen fysiek onherkenbaar gemaakt. Er staat geen bordje, het pad is gewoon niet meer zichtbaar als pad: men heeft er heidepollen geplaatst. De paden zijn op satelliet nog wel zichtbaar, maar op het moment dat er nieuwe foto's komen zijn de paden ook daar niet meer zichtbaar. Een mapper hanteert lijkt mij meer dan alleen de satelliet om zijn kaart te maken. Op de website van NM staat een kaart waar de nog beschikbare paden op staan. Deze kaart hangt ook op diverse plekken in het gebied zelf: https://res.cloudinary.com/natuurmonumenten/image/upload/ar_400:240,c_fill,dpr_1.0,f_auto,g_xy_center,q_auto,w_800,x_1662,y_1080/v1/2023-08/Hulshorsterzand%20A3_alles-open_web_0
eggie (2024-01-07 18:11:40+00:00): Up to you...

disused:highway=path is bedoeld voor dit soort verdwijnende paden. Je zult ze niet meer op de kaart zien renderen.
Het is een tussenstap.
Wanneer er niets meer te zien is van de paden kunnen ze uiteraard weg.
disused is een pragmatische oplossing op opnieuw intekenen te voorkomen.
Helaas lopen de foto's in de webeditor van OSM (iD)  vaak achter. 

MVG
eggie
arjunaraoc (2024-01-14 01:35:49+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).

I have observed that you are mappingr residential landuse areas which do not reflect the source that you are citing i.e Bing satellite/aerial image.    Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1182410201  During this process you are also vandalising the actual place tags.  Please baseless mapping immediately and revert your baseless changes over the past month.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145999525
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-01 11:07:18+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2052260472/history has barrier=g that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
what this tag means? Is it maybe supposed to be barrier=gate? Or is maybe some other barrier?
LosHawlos (2024-02-01 11:24:13+00:00): Hi,
thank you!
That is correct, it should be a gate. Probably I missed to select the correct value from the dropdown in the editor.
It is corrected now.
empty_child (2024-01-08 12:01:07+00:00): Hello vicvolar,
Thank you for contributions
Some moments: 
1) please, try not to use is_in:* tags, they were marked as obsolete, because client products evaluate location themselves.
2) if it is possible, follow the next logic: in name and name:ab use current Abkhazian names, in name:* correct transliteration of the Abkhazian name, in name:ka - official Georgian name (they usually differ from current Abkhazian). If you are ready for cleaning up all this region, I can send you the official toponyms dictionary of the Republic of Abkhazia
luxluxluxlux (2024-02-18 12:31:52+00:00): Ich denke die Adresse hier ist falsch, der Bienenkorb ist hier: 
Altmummen 18a
87544 Blaichach

https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?whereami=1&query=47.54984%2C10.24052#map=19/47.54984/10.24052
lberges (2024-02-18 23:25:44+00:00): ok, erledigt
gscholz (2024-01-08 07:51:07+00:00): Hi dp7,
your recent changeset have left behind a broken forest relation:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16997527/history#map=10/42.1144/23.5316&layers=C

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=12.27240&lat=43.65036&zoom=14&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

Which is overlapping with this large relation here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3200528/

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Tooslow (2024-01-07 18:02:23+00:00): "It then won’t show up on the map,". I didn't know that, that's perfect, thanks.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-07 18:10:25+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/way/1034480692

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
ashkanyousefi (2024-01-14 22:24:37+00:00): Msgo, Phase 1, Sadra city, Shiraz Central District, Shiraz County, Fars Province, 71994-67975, Iran
املاک اشکان یوسفی
gscholz (2024-01-08 06:47:45+00:00): Hi TheWorldTraveller,
your recent edits have left behind several errors regarding self intersecting ways and invalid footway area relation:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=29.23767&lat=40.96632&zoom=17&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://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=29.23767&lat=40.96632&zoom=17&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=146001372

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Fraxi (2024-01-07 18:29:22+00:00): Used Bing Streetside for corraboration, too.
flohoff (2024-01-07 19:33:31+00:00): Hi,
als feedback zu der änderung mit dem maxspeed 30. Routing hat geschwenkt. Vorher war es schneller durch Kamen zu fahren. Jetzt scheint das auf A2/A1 drumherum zu gehen.

Rot Alt - Grün Neu.

https://osm.zz.de/routeqa/?rid=667354,677607

Flo
Frans S (2024-01-08 15:14:16+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
FYI  the default tagging for buildings is building=yes
Best regards
Mister Kanister (2024-01-09 12:43:58+00:00): Hi ialex, thanks for cleaning this mess of railway relations. I noticed that now there are three relations for Biel/Bienne–La Chaux-de-Fonds: a) https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2468645 route=train – incomplete / b) https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2315633 route=railway and c) the new https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16997380 route=train which is identical to b) 2315633 but has a different ref. Is 225 the correct ref (as in c) 16997380) or is it 281 (as in b) 2315633)?

Then it looks like b) 2315633 should be deleted/merged with c) 16997380 and a) 2468645 should be mapped according to the PTNv2 scheme, correct?
ialex (2024-01-10 18:57:11+00:00): I think the three relation are valid, as they each describe something else. a) is the commercial routes, b) is the number of the route description for train drivers (although I cannot check because I do not have access to it), and c) is the infrastructure itself (taken from https://data.sbb.ch/explore/dataset/linie, which I also added to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Switzerland:Public_Transport/Railways#Liniennetz).

So I believe that c) is the relevant number for the "ref" attribute, as I did here. And I suppose that a) could indeed be corrected.
Baloo Uriza (2024-01-07 19:27:26+00:00): Not bad, but should be "South Jackson Avenue", with no abbreviations.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146002475
Tommybara (2024-01-12 06:16:10+00:00): You are changing things back to the old road layout. The city of Da Lat has done several construction on several intersection to cope with the increasing traffic. The Bing Aerial imagery that you used has not been updated to reflect the current road layout.
Filip009 (2024-01-09 12:11:38+00:00): Dobrý deň, aký je zdroj tohto chráneného areálu?
dulky (2024-01-09 14:01:21+00:00): Na základe žiadosti Urbárskej obce Dubnica nad Váhom bol 16. marca 2021 Vyhláškou Okresného úradu Trenčín  č. 1/2021, zverejnenou v čiastke č. 50 Vestnika Vlády SR pod číslom 125/2021, s účinnosťou od 15. apríla 2021 vyhlásený súkromný Chránený areál Langáčske skaly v Strážovských vrchoch. Informáciu zaslal portálu Lesmedium.sk predseda ÚNIE regionálnych združení vlastníkov neštátnych lesov Slovenska Ing. Milan Ovseník.
bobeeeze (2024-01-09 09:17:29+00:00): Buenos días jpsa2023, primero quiero agradecerte por tu trabajo de añadir caminos y barrancos en zonas poco mapeadas. Y luego solo te quería hacer un par de comentarios:
- los barrancos tienen que estar conectados a la linea del río principal, en este caso el Xúquer, y no al area representando la superficie de agua
- para las pistas es muy conveniente añadir la etiqueta tracktype [1] con su valor correspondiente porque hay mucha diferencia entre un grade1 (asfaltado), un grade 2 (suelo compactado transitable por los coches) un grade 3 (suelo de tierra y roca para todo terreno, motos y btt)...
Saludos y buen mapeo!
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:tracktype?uselang=es
jpsa2023 (2024-01-09 15:59:06+00:00): Muchas gracias por tus comentarios. Es de agradecer que alguien con experiencia me avise de los errores que pueda cometer. Tendré en cuenta tus recomendaciones a partir de ahora. 
Saludos.
citrula (2024-01-07 21:46:07+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Thanks for your contribution. A couple things - addr:street should only include the full, unabbreviated name of the street. The housenumber goes in addr:housenumber only. Also, service_times uses a special format which is described here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service_times . You can use this helpful tool to generate the values: https://projets.pavie.info/yohours/ --- Happy mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146002764
ma-rt-in (2024-02-04 10:57:55+00:00): Hallo,

ich habe deine Änderungen gesehen und leider sind viele davon sehr merkwürdig. Warum ist zBsp: die Anschussstück von der B73 zu neben Staraßen immer als Bundesstraße getaggt?

vg
maps4junkies (2024-10-25 15:31:48+00:00): Moin ich überarbeite noch eventuelle Fehler, musste mich da erstmal reinarbeiten.

VG
woodpeck (2024-01-07 19:36:02+00:00): Dear Muhammad Zeeshan Khan,

hello and welcome to OSM!

In OSM, we use small letters and capital letters - not capital letters only. A house would be "House" but not "HOUSE". But moreover, we only use the name field for actual names like "Sunshine House" or "Mermaid Hotel", not for numbering like "HOUSE60". House numbers belong on the addr:housenumber field or alternatively some "ref" tag but not in the name.

The same is true for grassland areas; they would not normally be called "PLOTxx". Use the grassland tag only for actual grassland, not for building plots. Building plots are not generally recorded in OSM at all.
emersonveenstra (2024-01-08 14:51:15+00:00): Hi there,

Did you mean to mark https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1237850501 as a crossing?
jwgreenlighting (2024-01-09 00:32:06+00:00): That was unintentional. I've changed it to sidewalk
emersonveenstra (2024-01-14 17:21:45+00:00): Great, thanks!
NeisBot (2024-01-14 13:15:32+00:00): Hello MUHAMMAD ZEESHAN KHAN, thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar