piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
silversurfer83 (2024-04-16 14:28:35+00:00): Gude :)

warum entfernst du denn von diesem Gelände https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/225147199 die Eigenschaft "amenity=clinic"? 

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150071900
95927717 (2024-04-16 18:44:20+00:00): Hi,
laut wiki soll amenity=clinic folgendermaßen genutzt werden: amenity=clinic is a medical centre, with more staff than a doctor's office, that does not admit inpatients.
Insofern trifft das nicht ganz auf die Kliniken in Rh zu; die Patienten sind ja während ihres Aufenthaltes dort stationär untergebracht.
Grüße
silversurfer83 (2024-04-16 19:20:47+00:00): Schon richtig. Aber die Leute wohnen da eher und werden nicht 24/7 medizinisch betreut. Gerne auch mal auf der deutschen Seite des Wiki-Artikel gucken. Das trifft es eigentlich ganz gut, glaub ich, oder?
95927717 (2024-04-17 20:37:46+00:00): Stimmt auch wieder, änder ich bei Gelegenheit zurück.
Grüße
StarTrek2 (2024-05-05 03:06:32+00:00): The standard way to map a town name is with a single node. You can not map a town name multiple times as an area. 

/Corrected

Google translate:
วิธีมาตรฐานในการแมปชื่อเมืองคือการใช้โหนดเดียว คุณไม่สามารถแมปชื่อเมืองหลายครั้งเป็นพื้นที่ได้

/แก้ไขแล้ว
Taya_S (2024-04-16 08:53:49+00:00): Hallo David,

Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Groeten,
Taya
Msiipola (2024-04-16 09:47:39+00:00): You have done an incorrect change. The speed limit 70km/h is from NVDB and is correct. 
Your change will be reverted.
DD1GJ (2024-04-27 09:37:27+00:00): Revert nach Kontakt mit dem Mapper. Unzulässige Quelle sowie 20% Fehlerquote durch händische Übernahme
Msiipola (2024-04-16 09:45:31+00:00): You have done an incorrect change. The 70 limit is from NVDB, and is correct.
See:
https://www.google.se/maps/@59.6449503,15.2364258,3a,75y,148.21h,84.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr30-godClV1oT-RXfpEhDQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Your change will be reverted
Msiipola (2024-04-16 09:21:41+00:00): Hi! Why did you change the maxspeed on this road? You changed it from 70 km/h to 30 km/h. I don't think this is correct. The 70 limit is from the NVDB national road db. Have you proof of the change?
Msiipola (2024-04-16 09:28:10+00:00): The speed limit has nothing to do how fast you can travel on the road. Speed signs says what the MAXIMUM speed is.
Msiipola (2024-04-16 09:38:52+00:00): I will now revert and delete your incorrect edit. Please in the future, be sure you add correct updates to OSM. Not what you think is correct.
Msiipola (2024-04-16 09:39:56+00:00): As an reference look at this image, which is taken 2024:
https://www.google.se/maps/@59.6449503,15.2364258,3a,75y,148.21h,84.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr30-godClV1oT-RXfpEhDQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
mikimapbuilder (2024-04-17 06:05:56+00:00): Road was duplicated at one end, probably by mistake
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-16 09:10:13+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/11821433564

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
dypa (2024-04-18 06:36:54+00:00): При указании размеченных не регулируемых пешеходных переходов нельзя использовать тег crossing=zebra, см https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:crossing=zebra

Пожалуйста при внесении следующих правок используйте теги (Размеченный (нерегулируемый) пешеходный переход)
crossing=uncontrolled
crossing:markings=zebra
felipeeugenio (2024-04-16 16:14:54+00:00): Hello.
Thanks for the correction, but it is clear that two separate ramps (not the best example of ramps, I know) exit and enter the highway. Besides, you left the exit lane disconnected to the exit itself. The edition was rolled back to its original and more accurate state.
Peace_Stroke (2024-04-19 14:03:42+00:00): Hi  felipeeugenio, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.
Peace_Stroke (2024-04-23 04:04:40+00:00): Thank you for feedback and fixes felipeeugenio. I’ll be careful further while working here.
felipeeugenio (2024-04-23 13:47:13+00:00): Don´t worry. Happy to help.

regards
fx99 (2024-04-17 04:57:16+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3590773287 gibt es laut Bildern
de:08231:430 nicht (mehr)!
NVBW_Seifert (2024-04-17 06:13:12+00:00): Hallo fx99,
ich habe ihn eben gelöscht, nachdem ich beim VPE nachgesehen habe, das er dort auch nicht mehr existiert.
Danke und Grüße
Dietmar
jogro14 (2024-07-16 12:55:46+00:00): An dieser Stelle sind doch 3 Spuren. 2 für den Kfz-Verkehr und eine für Busse und Fahrräder. Da Busse auch motorisierte Fahrzeuge sind müsste lanes=3 sein.
Đuro Jiří (2024-05-03 06:35:46+00:00): Ciao garageeks,
ho notato che hai aggiunto nello stesso giorno diverse stazioni di ricarica e-bike, però hai scritto "source - survey". Mi sembra strano che alcuni sono a Reggio Calabria e atri nella Lombardia.
Una domanda, questi stazione di ricarica hai aggiunto solo approssivamente secondo alcuni fonti, oppure hai verificato personalmente sul posto presenza della stazione di ricarica?
garageeks (2024-05-09 08:23:13+00:00): Ciao, siamo installatori di stazioni di ricarica. Per facilitare il loro ritrovamento, abbiamo deciso di pubblicare le stazioni già installate su OSM, per questo che nello stesso giorno trovi pubblicate stazioni un po' in tutta Italia. D'ora in avanti pubblicheremo a mano mano che vengono installate nuove stazioni. Abbiamo scelto "Survey" perchè effettivamente eravamo sul posto, e abbiamo coordinate GPS e fotografie. Dato che hai molta più esperienza di noi su OSM, se pensi che vada migliorato qualcosa dei nostri edit scrivici pure.
dankarran (2024-04-16 09:55:52+00:00): I've asked the council for clarification, and told them about the faded signage at the top of the path that I think notes this as a shared cycleway, but is admittedly unclear.

https://ibb.co/WK6SR0z

Have a good day :)
dankarran (2024-04-16 10:25:52+00:00): By the way, the sign at the northern end is the little round sign in this Mapillary image, on a pole that's set in the brickwork for that walkway. It's 90% faded as mentioned in other changeset comments.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.5139713&lng=0.0027414&z=17&pKey=6051898158155110&focus=photo&x=0.3394868821773948&y=0.38727828005875437&zoom=1.6796769851951558
dankarran (2024-04-16 10:56:29+00:00): I'm curious what you think this toucan crossing connects to, once you've crossed Lower Lea Crossing going north on a bike:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.510565755833&lng=0.0019071341666858643&z=18.196574224490558&pKey=528131508603267&focus=photo&x=0.4827265650123412&y=0.549184939015345&zoom=0

It either connects to the pavement (possible) or more likely to the riverside walk, which you've now tagged as requiring a dismount. That doesn't make sense.

My references to Silvocea Way come from the little number plates on each of the lamp posts along the riverside railing by the way (though the council misspelled it IIRC, oops):

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.510565755833&lng=0.0019071341666858643&z=18.196574224490558&pKey=304897057849594&focus=photo&x=0.7912056863308451&y=0.40833030781224705&zoom=3
dankarran (2024-04-16 12:12:59+00:00): This is a closeup of that faded sign at the northern end of the Silvocea Way path / Iron Bridge Wharf / Lea Valley Walk / Leaway / whatever you want to call it:

https://ibb.co/nB8nVQ6
dankarran (2024-04-16 19:02:28+00:00): In case those photos aren't enough, I'm going to invite you to have a look at the map at the entrance to Bow Creek Ecology Park which shows the Lea Valley Walk (Meridian) with a purple line with both pedestrian and bike icons. 

It follows down along this path (which I realised is named as Silvosia *Wharf* not *Way* on those lamp posts, but the name isn't important here).

Annoyingly I can't find a copy of the map online, but you're free to go and have a wander over to our lovely local park to see for yourself. Photos for reference:

https://ibb.co/f0ZdzbY
https://ibb.co/26GJQcf
https://ibb.co/NTq5gY8
https://ibb.co/jH1LV4y
mrgeolikesmaps (2024-04-16 23:03:01+00:00): Hi Dan,

Thanks. I was over there yesterday. It's a nice walk. I appreciate you're trying to make sure the facts and evidence are supported on OSM. 

However, this map is out of date, I've found the same path on TFL website clearly indicated as a "walkway" route under "walk london" See below. No where is there a map that indicates this is a share cycle/walk route. https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/walking/lea-valley.

TFL Route maps
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/cycling/routes-and-maps

Cycle Maps
https://tfl.gov.uk/maps/cycle

This would align with the fact that the council has removed or faded the sign for cyclists going down Lea Valley Walk Way (Which now is sign posted with a "Pedestrian" icon).

It's probably worth letting them know.
mrgeolikesmaps (2024-04-16 23:04:07+00:00): It's faded, because it's not a cycle route anymore. I know councils can be incompetent, but they're normally good at putting signs up.
tastrax (2024-04-16 10:48:02+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
tastrax (2024-04-16 10:50:31+00:00): Apologies - just noticed that you were just correcting Key values not adding the actual number. Cheers
mgerken (2024-04-16 11:53:24+00:00): Moin,

du hast hier eine Relation zu einem einer Tour angelegt die unter https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/34197 schon existiert. Da es sich dabei sicherlich um ein und dasselbe handelt würde ich die neue wieder löschen.

Für den Anfang würde ich empfehlen sich mehr auf Wege und Flächen zu konzentrieren, da das Thema Relationen doch etwas komplexer ist.

Die produktive Karte ist auch nicht der beste Ort um Dinge nur auszutesten (wegen source="Test").

Beste Grüße
rskedgell (2024-04-16 16:21:56+00:00): Yes, that's what the segregated=yes tag means. That's why I added it in October 2018.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:segregated%3Dyes
mrgeolikesmaps (2024-04-17 12:29:06+00:00): It was exclusively a foot path. I've correct to add Cycle & Footpath
rskedgell (2024-04-17 13:38:48+00:00): No, it wasn't. It has been correctly tagged as highway=cycleway since it was first mapped in June 2011. I added the segregated=yes tag in October 2018. A StreetComplete user surveyed it in June 2021 and added the tags for the different surfaces.

https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/116909607

You've added the access tag bicycle=designated and changed foot=yes -> designated. That isn't incorrect, but it doesn't correct any mapping error, real or imagined. The effect of this edit on OSM-based routing software is nil, but it's harmless.
mrgeolikesmaps (2024-04-17 21:10:51+00:00): Looks like your comment has achieved as much as my edit then.
dankarran (2024-04-18 11:25:17+00:00): I think it may have been showing in the iD editor as just a Cycle Path rather than Cycle & Foot Path, even though it had the necessary cycle/foot segregation tagging already.  It's just the iD editor being particular about things though - as rskedgell says, the original tagging had the same effect.

I've just seen a similar case while editing the segregated cycle path on the north side of the A13. There's no harm in 'upgrading' these tags like this so they look right when editing in iD.
mikimapbuilder (2024-04-17 06:08:31+00:00): Police station was added without tag amenity=police
habi (2024-10-17 08:54:39+00:00): Dieser Defi wurde mit `description=Vom Haupteingang, Treppen nehmen, 1 Stock. Bei Reception Fragen [...]` und `level=5. OG (Haupteingang zum Gebaude ist 4.OG)` erfasst.
Diese Angaben sind nicht konsistent.
Was stimmt?
chnuessli (2024-10-21 14:39:40+00:00): Wurde von Geonick bereinigt.
Lorenzo Zucca (2024-04-16 11:42:41+00:00): Eccoti, ti aspettavo. Perchè continui a modificare la zona e a rendere tutto lo spiazzo un parco (cosa che non è)?
Almeno stavolta hai lasciato l'area di parcheggio
Puoi spiegarmi le tue motivazioni?
emersonveenstra (2024-04-17 10:49:08+00:00): Removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150122581, point was not located near a street called Anderson Way
canfe (2024-04-19 10:15:31+00:00): La SP32 non ha come name SP32, quello è il ref.
Spesso le statali e provinciali non hanno nome. Lo prendono, per il pezzo che compete, quando attraversano centri abitati ed un genere son nome "del ventennio" tipo Via Roma, Via Capoluogo o simili.
Ho corretto.
Mannivu (2024-11-30 08:41:37+00:00): Ciao. Ho annullato la modifica perché i nomi delle strade seguono un certo standard che puoi trovare in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Nomi_delle_strade

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/159765955
Jmap (2024-04-16 10:25:31+00:00): School is still under construction.
kubahahaha (2024-04-17 11:04:51+00:00): Zmieniłem jeszcze "http" na "https" w adresie strony
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150077748
mmahmud (2024-04-17 07:16:38+00:00): Hi, it looks like you have tried mapping for the first time. Before starting to map, orient yourself with how OpenStreetMap and feature tagging works. The mapping you did created many issues, so I will suggest learning to map first. You can check out the beginner's guide here: https://learnosm.org/en/
Frans S (2024-04-16 10:52:51+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please do not connect nodes of buildings to each other. Each building should be mapped as an individual building.
Best regards
Dimitar155 (2024-08-27 18:20:39+00:00): Здравей Ричард,

Do you remember why you've deleted the archeological site in front of ЦУМ (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/287104635/history)?

Поздрави,
Митко
rhhs (2024-08-27 18:29:33+00:00): Did I? I remember editing some paths and steps there, but not that I deleted an area. It might have been a mistake...
Dimitar155 (2024-08-27 19:33:15+00:00): No worries. I've just restored it.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155848626
Leo Slager (2024-04-16 12:53:37+00:00): Dag DerkG,

Als de paden nog in aanleg zijn dan is highway=construction correct.
Dan ook taggen:
construction=footway.
En foot=yes hoort er dan bij.

Verander je het zelf ?
DerkG (2024-04-16 16:51:23+00:00): Dank voor de feedback, ik heb het aangevuld
gurglypipe (2024-04-16 20:42:01+00:00): Is the stream/road crossing https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1273039723 a bridge or a culvert (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tunnel%3Dculvert)? It looks quite small, which typically means it’s a culvert rather than a bridge, though it can sometimes be hard to work out the best tagging. I haven’t surveyed it so I defer to you though! :) Looks like you’ve had a busy day surveying today!
amcclements (2024-04-17 08:42:58+00:00): I'll go and have a look. There's a another feature over there I need a closer a look at anyway, so I can do both.
amcclements (2024-04-17 10:37:44+00:00): The feature referred to is a stone structure with walls both sides (partially collapsed to the south) with a small stone arch. I think its better classed as a culvert so made that change along with a few others in: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150121732.
gurglypipe (2024-04-17 13:35:57+00:00): Looks great, thanks a lot for going out and checking it again!
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-03-20 11:38:10+00:00): Hello!

What you meant by fixme:type = APG ?

created in this edit at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11821753443
dzidek23 (2025-03-20 18:05:39+00:00): Cześć Mateusz,

Przepraszam, sam nie wiem czemu takie tagi się dodały. To był chyba pierwszy (i jedyny) raz kiedy użyłem EveryDoor żeby szybko dodać jakieś miejsce. 

Jak będę miał dostęp do pceta to postaram się poprawić.
Pozdrawiam
mmahmud (2024-04-17 07:17:00+00:00): Hi, it looks like you have tried mapping for the first time. Before starting to map, orient yourself with how OpenStreetMap and feature tagging works. The mapping you did created many issues, so I will suggest learning to map first. You can check out the beginner's guide here: https://learnosm.org/en/
emersonveenstra (2024-04-16 12:01:05+00:00): Removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150081693, there is only a post office at this location
syncronic (2024-04-17 07:57:58+00:00): Hallo Rickbernst, danke für deine Mitarbeit. Löschen sollte man Wege erst, wenn da wirklich nichts ist. Ansonsten ist es besser, entsprechende Tags zu setzen oder schlussendlich das highway in abandoned:highway (oder removed:highway) zu ändern, dann fällt der Weg aus fast allen Karten raus. Du hast auch noch https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/734000586 ls Furt eingetragen. Das war wohl ein Versehen.
martinst (2024-04-18 14:36:04+00:00): Revertiert in Changeset 150178526.
Der gelöschte Pfad Way 1090409605 existiert "on the ground".
Es wäre besser hier informal=yes zu setzen und den Zustand der Wege mit sac_scale und trail_visibility etc. abzubilden.
Rickbernst (2024-04-19 09:32:25+00:00): Der Weg ist vielleicht sichtbar, aber aufgrund von Hang-Abrutschen nicht mehr passierbar, und eine Wartung zur Wiederherstellung der Begehbarkeit ist hier schlicht nicht zu erwarten. Mir geht es darum, nicht andere Wanderer auf diesen Weg zu leiten in der Annahme, er sei genau so gut ausgebaut wie der Gratweg zum Drei-Kirchen-Blick etwas südlich davon. Bisher ist in der Wegesignatur kein Unterschied erkennbar. Kannst du den Weg bitte entsprechend markieren. Mit dem Rücksetzen meiner Änderung ist keinem Wanderer geholfen.
martinst (2024-04-20 05:25:35+00:00): Ich habe informal=yes, ford=yes und sac_scale=* in Changeset 150247854 ergänzt bzw. aktualisert.
GBAB (2024-06-25 12:40:54+00:00): Mit jelent az, hogy „a csorgó valódi forrása”?
grozsa11 (2024-06-25 13:02:25+00:00): Elvileg onnan van (csövön vagy árokban?) levezetve, de sajnos ezt még pontosításhoz helyszínelni kellene.
rskedgell (2024-04-16 16:34:46+00:00): Your edit removed the tag boundary=administrative from the administrative boundary of Reading Borough Council	(already reinstated by another user). What were you trying to do here?
NLBRT (2024-04-16 11:47:52+00:00): Hi, please ensure that the buildings you're adding are "squared". You can do it by selecting the building and pressing "Q" on your keyboard. Thanks!
NLBRT (2024-04-16 11:47:41+00:00): Hi, please ensure that the buildings you're adding are "squared". You can do it by selecting the building and pressing "Q" on your keyboard. Thanks!
Bede Mitchell (2024-08-12 10:25:23+00:00): Are you sure the end of Gadsby road (Way: 1271018066) is paved? The aerial imagery is from less than a year ago and shows it unpaved.
Numbergod (2024-08-12 10:38:35+00:00): Whoops.  Sorry.  Yes.  You're correct.
I'm happy if you wish to correct it.
NLBRT (2024-04-16 11:47:26+00:00): Hi, please ensure that the buildings you're adding are "squared". You can do it by selecting the building and pressing "Q" on your keyboard. Thanks!
NLBRT (2024-04-16 11:47:14+00:00): Hi, please ensure that the buildings you're adding are "squared". You can do it by selecting the building and pressing "Q" on your keyboard. Thanks!
Benoît C MdP (2024-04-25 07:01:35+00:00): Bonjour

Pour info, le schéma recommandé pour les bandes cyclables à contresens est cycleway:left=lane & cycleway:left:oneway=-1

Bonne continuation

Benoît
MrMargouillat (2024-04-25 09:40:49+00:00): Bonjour, 
Oui, ce n'est pas ce que j'ai fait ?
Merci !
Benoît C MdP (2024-04-25 10:04:18+00:00): Pas toujours en tout cas. Par exemple ici, c'était correct avant ton passage https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/930352512/history
Du coup, j'ai modifié le cycleway:left=opposite_lane en cycleway:left=lane

Benoît
NLBRT (2024-04-16 11:46:48+00:00): Hi, please ensure that the buildings you're adding are "squared". You can do it by selecting the building and pressing "Q" on your keyboard. Thanks!
limes11 (2025-06-03 17:11:17+00:00): Hello Komoot, 

Please describe the alleged proof. 

Do the sign indicate private property or simply state that the roads are maintained privately ? Are there any clear access restrictions mentioned on the signs ?

Thank you
Access Claims (komoot) (2025-07-24 16:03:09+00:00): Hi limes11,

Thank you for following up.

In this case, the landowner contacted komoot directly and provided photos of signage at the location to support their request. Specifically, there are two signs—one yellow with black letters and one white with black letters—both stating “Privat”.

Since the signs clearly indicate restricted access and the landowner proactively submitted them with a request to reflect this in OpenStreetMap, we acted accordingly by marking the way as private.

Best regards,
NLBRT (2024-04-16 11:46:35+00:00): Hi, please ensure that the buildings you're adding are "squared". You can do it by selecting the building and pressing "Q" on your keyboard. Thanks!
NeisBot (2024-04-16 12:34:02+00:00): Hello ParadoX_ZLWC, 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.Please see https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
fortera_au (2024-04-16 12:24:51+00:00): Hi, you've requested a review, can you please explain what you've changed considering you've only left "gg" as a comment and have made a change across multiple countries?
dadavid (2024-04-22 15:24:54+00:00): Moin Stinktier :) 
Danke dir fürs fleißige mappen! 

Ein kleiner Hinweis, das hier [1] ist ein zusammenhängendes Gebäude mit drei Eingängen und dementsprechend drei Hausnummern. Der einfachste Weg, das abzubilden ist, die Gebäude direkt "aneinanderzukleben", so dass sie an den Ecken jeweils zwei gemeinsame Punkte haben, dann entstehen keine Lücken in der Karte, sieht bissle netter aus und man erkennt, dass es nicht drei separate Gebäude sind :) Nur nen Vorschlag, mach wie du magst :) 

Viele Grüße und weiterhin viel Spass 

David

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1273067882
Noktoborus (2024-05-20 17:35:56+00:00): Константин, здравствуйте.

Не могли бы Вы пояснить, что именно значит "единый сб" и зачем Вы удалили тег highway=crossing?
Merna_mahmoud (2024-04-18 08:28:47+00:00): Correction: Source used was Maxar SecureWatch Imagery 2024-04-12
woodpeck (2024-04-16 12:37:52+00:00): Hallo, bitte verwende für Deine Beiträge einen aussagekräftigen Changeset-Kommentar: Was wurde geändert, warum, und auf Basis welcher Quelle. Der Verweis auf die Wikiseite hilft nicht, diese Fragen zu beantworten. Danke!
flohoff (2024-04-16 15:25:52+00:00): Moin,
cool das ihr mit mapped - Ich hab diesen changeset gesehen. Hat die einrichtung auch einen Namen ? Der fehlt da gerade komplett.

Flo
euroPathfinder (2024-04-17 15:59:38+00:00): Hi mafi74,
Vielen Dank für Deinen Beitrag! Du bearbeitest die Karte mit OsmAnd, was für einen Anfänger einige Fehlerpotenziale bietet. So fehlte bei diesem Laden der Tag shop=florist, damit OSM versteht dass es sich hier um einen Blumenladen handelt.

Mein Tipp: verwende für Edits auf dem Handy vielleicht gerade am Anfang lieber eine App die dich bei den Tags ein wenig unterstützt. Meine Tipps wären StreetComplete oder EveryDoor, da kann man nicht viel falsch machen und es ist auch viel komfortabler Änderungen vorzunehmen.

Viele Grüße und weiterhin viel Spaß beim Kartieren!
euroPathfinder
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150082590