piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
EB50 (2025-03-26 13:32:28+00:00): Thank you for the fixes! If other trails have been rerouted like this, how do you fix a dangling way?
tekim (2025-03-26 18:03:31+00:00): It depends on what the on the ground situation is that we are trying to depict.  

I am assuming, based upon your use of access=private, that while the general public is no longer legally allowed to use the trail, there are some people that are, e.g. members of a private country club, a resident of a homeowner’s association, or park rangers. If this is the case, the manner in which the trail is now mapped is correct (with the exception of the bicycle=permission, and foot=permissive tags).   If on the other hand, the trail is closed to everyone but still physically exists, use access=no, leave it connected to the rest of the network, and remove the specific access tags, e.g. bicycle=permissive.  Finally, if the trail no longer physically exists to one degree or another you can use the lifecycle tagging (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix), e.g. disused:highway=path the appropriate access tagging, probably access=no, and leave connected.  In this final case, you could simply delete the trail, but you risk some other mapper adding it back in if it still appears in other sources, such as imagery, the Strava Heatmap, or the USGS 3D Elevation Program data.  There are not many cases where one would disconnect a trail from the larger network of trails and roads.
EB50 (2025-03-28 13:49:02+00:00): Awesome, will keep that in mind moving forward!  Thanks for all the information!!
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-03-18 22:00:55+00:00): Size 5 gün önce yine sormuştum(changeset/163546424). Cevap yazmadınz. int_ref etiketlerine AH-87'yi eklemişsiniz. Fakat bağlantıdaki uluslararası anlaşma metninde ve Asya Karayolu haritasında AH-87 Ankara-İzmir arasındaki yol olarak görünüyor. int_ref etiketine AH-87 etklediğiniz yolların AH-87'ye dahil olduğuna dair kaynağınız nedir?

https://www.unescap.org/resources/intergovernmental-agreement-asian-highway-network#
https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/AH-map.pdf
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163788923
Data 7 (2025-03-20 22:10:19+00:00): Ti ringrazio mascalzone 67. Ho copiato le etichette in un altro nodo che mappa un'altra panchina. Non ero sicuro di quali tag usare
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-03-18 22:15:54+00:00): Ankara-Kırıkkale arasındaki otoyolun inşasına yeni başlandı. Neden hemen D200 yolundaki int_ref(E-88) etiketlerini siliyorsunuz? E-88'i bozuyorsunuz.

Lütfen şu kurala uyunuz: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

Otoyolun daha inşasına bile yeni başlandığını göz önünde bulundurunuz.

---

Construction of the highway between Ankara and Kırıkkale has just started. Why are you immediately deleting the int_ref(E-88) tags in the D200 path? You are breaking E-88.

Please follow this rule: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

Consider that the construction of the highway has only just begun.

---
Size bunu daha önce de yazdım. Cevap vermediniz. / I wrote you the same thing before. You didn't answer.
osm.org/changeset/163702346#c1402721
Carto'Cité (2025-03-30 13:17:37+00:00): Merci pour la description du changeset ! J'ai failli remettre le parking qui a été rasé si je n'avais pas lu ton commentaire.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour Île-de-France Mobilités #CartoVeloIdF
lordmcdrake (2025-03-21 09:09:58+00:00): Ahoj, isto sa tak volá tento útvar?

Mne to podľa tejto mapky nesedí:

https://issuu.com/dankez/docs/slovenskykras_2003/160?fbclid=IwY2xjawJKC1lleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHecsZra8epGbNpk5DVKH5_jNEHkkt9NjjAom4K-gfggMgmKMwIDrDIFGlw_aem_JspM6tIpsbNUA7x8SuSu3g
*Martin* (2025-03-21 09:18:47+00:00): ahoj. mas pravdu, je to chybne. nazov odstranim.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-18 20:02:30+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2619757082

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
JeroenHoek (2025-03-18 20:54:37+00:00): Dat is toch geen supermarkt? Die lat ligt wel iets hoger.
Comino (2025-03-18 21:12:08+00:00): Denk dat als je mensen op straat zou vragen dat 99% zegt dat is een supermarkt. Maar als je denkt dat het meer een minimarkt is dat wat mij betreft ook oke.
JeroenHoek (2025-03-19 07:10:11+00:00): Ben je er wel eens geweest? Dit komt niet in de buurt van een volwaardige supermarket. Als mensen dat een supermarkt noemen (en niet een supermarktje), dan ligt de fout daar.

De wiki hanteert de stelregel dat je pas over een supermarkt spreekt wanneer je ook winkelwagentjes hebt en het aanbod breed genoeg is voor dagelijkse boodschappen:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dconvenience
Comino (2025-03-19 08:43:17+00:00): Zeker, meerdere keren. Zoals ik gisteren al aan je schreef; minimarkt. Ik heb het zojuist aangepast. Bedankt voor je scherpte!
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-18 20:21:39+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/2755183175
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/382746393

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Peter Newman (2025-03-22 17:19:20+00:00): Hi @MapMasterMike you've converted mac to computer:type, but it's currently a car dealership the mac/PC tags were from when it was a computer shop before that.
bxl-forever (2025-03-19 00:24:44+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM.

Nice try, but you unfortunately created some damage on the map here.
Some parts of the gardens grossly overlap buildings, and you also destroyed two buildings on Avenue Armand Huysmans/Armand Huysmanslaan, which you split into multiple parts for no reason.
If you want to use the simple editor on the osm.org website, please stay away from the "scissors" button, this is a dangerous action.
I will try to repair as much as I can here.
juanbautista_delfinal (2025-03-19 08:04:04+00:00): Ok my bad, I'm new to OSM and wanted to try something that "seemed" simple but apparently made some damages. Very sorry for that and thanks a lot for correcting it. I'll be more careful in the future.
NeisBot (2025-03-18 20:21:41+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was flagged because your added description contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2025-03-21 20:07:28+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163922824
YomanNH (2025-03-18 21:35:25+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
SomeoneElse (2025-03-18 22:54:30+00:00): To be honest (and with reference to https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163383605 ) I suspect a bit of discussion would have helped here.
I'm confused by noexit=yes on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8984377004/history .  Presumably this is an unofficial (and hazardous?) pedestrian crossing?
I'd suggest that it needs discussion about how best to tag it.
Best Regards,
Andy
Yog Sot (2025-03-19 00:47:00+00:00): oh wow, so now i'm getting reported everytime? xD
This is a crossing that's there since like 30 years i live there. Not going to elaborate on local laws, coz that's spotty and even dear YNH doesnt follow laws in his city mapping. Tho if someone needs to go crazy with tags there, sure. Last time i went crazy with tagging using specified wiki examples, all was deleted, Best regards.
SomeoneElse (2025-03-19 01:10:36+00:00): Irrespective of local laws, wuld some sort of "hazard" tag make sense?
I think that there was some sort of discussion of "iffy" crossings on https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/do-we-really-need-railway-tram-crossing-resp-tram-level-crossing/118987 , but I might be wrong.
Yog Sot (2025-03-19 02:09:33+00:00): law may disallow crossing a dual carriage way, nontheless if people cross it at that certain route i don't see a reason  to not map it. As for tram crossings, they do hold a big value, because you know that you do cross one on your way, coz you know ahead of time that you gotta yeld for instance. But like i said, aanyone can map any tags. Only some people do delete em i gues.
YomanNH (2025-03-19 10:33:44+00:00): noexit=yes służy do zupełnie czego innego, niż jest użyte w tym przypadku. Używa się tego na końcu drogi/chodnika/ścieżki itp., która nie ma kontynuacji. Jest to opisane w dokumentacji, którą już wiadomo, że lubisz ignorować: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:noexit=yes?uselang=pl

Patrząc na orto, wygląda to na nielegalne przejście przez tory. Po revercie algorytmy wyznaczające trasy będą tędy prowadziły, co jest bardzo złe. Brak ścieżki, tak jak było przed revertem, był o wiele lepszy, niż stan po revercie. Jeśli jednak chcesz dodać ścieżkę, to zgodnie z obowiązującym prawem, powinieneś dodać access=no, co będzie jasnym wskazaniem, że to przejście jest nielegalne i algorytmy nie będą bez sensu prowadziły tędy ludzi.
cyton (2025-03-18 20:39:06+00:00): vielen dank
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-03-18 22:13:40+00:00): Ankara-Kırıkkale arasındaki otoyolun inşasına yeni başlandı. Neden hemen D200 yolundaki int_ref(E-88) etiketlerini siliyorsunuz? E-88'i bozuyorsunuz.

Lütfen şu kurala uyunuz: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

Otoyolun daha inşasına bile yeni başlandığını göz önünde bulundurunuz.

---

Construction of the highway between Ankara and Kırıkkale has just started. Why are you immediately deleting the int_ref(E-88) tags in the D200 path? You are breaking E-88.

Please follow this rule: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

Consider that the construction of the highway has only just begun.

---
Size bunu daha önce de yazdım. Cevap vermediniz. / I wrote you the same thing before. You didn't answer.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163702346#c1402721
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163791656
CurlingMan13 (2025-04-01 03:05:30+00:00): Do you have a source for the new Spur 320?
evdence (2025-04-01 04:15:23+00:00): https://eu.elpasotimes.com/story/money/business/2025/02/12/borderland-expressway-first-phase-opens-in-northeast-el-paso/78429429007/ I think this is accurate to the images
txemt (2025-05-17 20:49:03+00:00): I have a question. I've noticed that you're going around adding HGV to a ton of roads around Texas, but your source isn't correct. The link that you're sourcing is merely who grants the authority for a truck route, or restrict a truck route. https://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/TxDOTOnlineManuals/TxDOTManuals/smk/truck_routes.htm This link gives information about truck routes, and how cities can have truck routes in various parts of their limits. Do you have a better source to cite?

As far as I know, most roads within Texas are hgv, especially those in the rural farm lands as well as those along the Gulf Coast where the oil refineries are. Also, it's understood that trucks are allowed to go on any road that hasn't been signed as "no trucks allowed."
MarkoŠatrak (2025-05-18 07:12:52+00:00): Hi @txemt,

I’m writing as the project lead for our organised editing activity: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/OptimoRoute.

Thank you for taking an interest in our work. We have discussed our U.S. mapping activities on the OSM community forum. A related topic about tagging the U.S. National Truck Network is covered here: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/interstates-in-the-southeast-not-marked-as-truck-national-network/124465. I mention it because even though interstate highways might be “commonly understood” as truck-designated, that is not always the case, and, more importantly, the consensus in that thread was that explicitly tagging such designations in OSM is appropriate.

From our perspective as both mappers and data consumers, information that exists only as “common understanding” but is not tagged in OSM is effectively missing data. The same logic applies in Texas. The TxDOT page we referenced is an official government source that defines truck routes, and our recent hgv=* tagging in Texas reflects those designations in OSM. If you know of a more appropriate official source, please let us know.

I would be happy to continue this discussion with the U.S. community, either in the existing thread about our activity in the United States (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/optimoroute-organised-editing-activity-in-the-united-states/120453) or in a new thread about Texas truck routes, so more contributors can weigh in.
Please also let us know if you notice any tagging that appears incorrect.

Thank you,

Marko
OptimoRoute team
MarkoŠatrak (2025-05-18 07:27:38+00:00): Sorry, I forgot to mention an important point. The “common understanding” of truck routes in Texas is almost unique to that state. The larger number of hgv tags added in Texas during our U.S. activity simply reflects how Texas defines truck routes compared to other states, ensuring all this information is properly tagged in OSM.
txemt (2025-05-18 11:55:20+00:00): The link that is being referenced is for how local governments can set up a truck route through their borders. It is not a specific source that says “this highway is designated as a truck route”.

I’m not doubting the project, I’m nearly doubting the source.
MarkoŠatrak (2025-05-18 12:46:00+00:00): I understand what you’re saying. We interpret that source to mean all numbered highways in Texas are truck routes by default unless a local authority specifies otherwise, so we applied the relevant hgv tags to every Texas-numbered highway on that basis.

If you know of another official source that clarifies these rules, please share it. We will gladly review it and update the source values on the Texas ways we edited.
txemt (2025-05-18 13:15:19+00:00): I did not see anything about numbered highways in the source that has been cited. When I get home tonight, I will do some digging and find a better source than the one that is being provided.

The one being provided for Texas is simply for local governments, not actual designated truck, routes
MarkoŠatrak (2025-05-18 14:26:39+00:00): OK, thank you. To clarify, by “numbered highways,” we mean TxDOT maintained roads signed as I-xx, US-xx, SH/TX-xx, FM, or RM. Before applying bulk tagging, we verified examples of these routes displaying on-the-ground designated truck-route signage.
txemt (2025-05-18 15:32:39+00:00): I knew you were referring to state maintained roads. I wasn’t referring to the residential streets of the city, however, the  the source you are citing is referring to surface streets within city limits
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-18 21:01:30+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12677443553
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/879331226

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
StreetSurveyor (2025-03-24 16:22:01+00:00): These roads should not be foot=no. There are sidewalks all around.
NieWnen (2025-03-19 17:07:08+00:00): Cześć,
drobna uwaga odnośnie mapowania podjazdów.

Część przed płotem (publiczna), nie powinna mieć dodanego `access=private`. Taką linię należy podzielić na min. 2 części i tą przed płotem najlepiej zostawić bez tagu `access`.

Jest to istotne np. gdy podjazdy się przecinają ze ścieżkami rowerowymi/chodnikami i trzeba nim poprowadzić na jezdnię (lub odwrotnie).
mwk3 (2025-03-19 17:58:54+00:00): Dzięki!

Poprawiłem:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163829270
felipeeugenio (2025-03-20 12:44:56+00:00): Hola. Por favor no borrar lo que estaba antes. Si hay que corregirlo, se corrige, pero no borrar y agregar todo otra vez. Se pierde todo el historial. Se pueden básicamente borrar todos los nodos menos uno y empezar a construir a partir de ahí, pero con la vía que existía anteriormente.
saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163793073
eggie (2025-03-18 22:48:00+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Ik heb leisure=sports_centre toegevoegd.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
NeisBot (2025-03-18 21:58:34+00:00): Hi Likita666, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 83% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 2 landuse(')

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=163794042
NeisReview (2025-03-26 09:48:32+00:00): 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♂️ Mapper deleted their own data.
rempshaener (2025-03-24 16:26:03+00:00): Hinweis auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164027609
ndm (2025-03-18 22:32:38+00:00): Reverting this - as it deletes useful housename information.
rskedgell (2025-03-18 22:31:23+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Thanks for spotting the missing access=private tag on the allotment track.

For the foot=no tags added to the A523, I have checked the available Bing Streetside imagery for evidence that there really is a (signed) pedestrian prohibition here. I cannot see any TSRGD diagram 625.1 "pedestrians prohibited" signs on the imagery, so do not believe that a prohibition exists and have partially reverted your edit in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163794968

The wiki states that access tags reflect legal access. Subjective opinions about whether it would be pleasant, a good idea, safe, etc. for a particular transport mode are not relevant to legal access.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:foot
eggie (2025-03-19 07:43:29+00:00): Dag DwarfNebula,

De busroutes zijn nog intact. Je hebt immers niet geknipt in de routes. 

Groet
eggie
eggie (2025-03-18 22:45:41+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback  : Nu staan de kenmerken van  AH en Plus wel door elkaar.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=163794638
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-03-18 22:51:50+00:00): Alle PLUS info heb ik verwijderd.
NeisReview (2025-03-20 07:55:39+00:00): #UnexplainedChanges #Test

Hello, welcome to OSM.

Could you please clarify the purpose behind your map changes? It's not entirely clear from the edited data and your added description. Also, what was used as a source of your activity?

Looking forward to your response. 
Thank you.
NeisReview (2025-03-21 07:37:58+00:00): Hallo clt2025,

vielen Dank für die ausführliche Erklärung und den Kontext zu euren Edits im Rahmen des Chemnitzer Linuxtags. Es freut mich sehr zu sehen, wie ihr OpenStreetMap als praxisorientiertes und pädagogisches Werkzeug nutzt, um die Community und das Verständnis für offene Geodaten zu stärken.

Um mögliche Missverständnisse oder unbeabsichtigte Datenveränderungen zu vermeiden, empfehlt es sich, zukünftige Edits während solcher Demonstrationen mit klar(er)en Changeset-Beschreibungen und der Angabe passender Quellen zu versehen (z. B. "Chemnitzer Linuxtag Demonstrationsedit"). So können andere Mapper leichter nachvollziehen, dass es sich um gezielte Test- oder Vorführungsbeiträge handelt.

Sollten dabei Testdaten eingetragen worden sein, die nicht dauerhaft in OpenStreetMap verbleiben sollen, bitten wir euch, diese nach Abschluss der Demonstration wieder zu entfernen oder entsprechend als Testdaten zu kennzeichnen. Noch besser wäre es allerdings die extra dafür vorgesehene Dev- und Test-Umgebung des OpenStreetMap-Projektes dafür zu verwenden. Dies kennt ihr sicherlich auch aus der Open-Source-Community und Linux-Welt.

Ich freue mich auf weitere Beiträge von euch und wünsche weiterhin viel Erfolg bei euren Aktivitäten!

Viele Grüße
NeisReview (2025-03-21 07:39:01+00:00): PS: Die Antwort wurde ebenfalls mit einer generativen KI erstellt. 🤷‍♂️
dieterdreist (2025-03-21 13:33:26+00:00): KI-generierte Sprachmodelle sollten in Diskussionssystemen, die für menschliche Leser gedacht sind, nicht verwendet werden, da sie oft keine echte Meinungsbildung besitzen und lediglich vorhergesagte Muster replizieren. Dies kann zu Missverständnissen, inhaltlichen Ungenauigkeiten und fehlendem Kontextbewusstsein führen. Zudem kann eine Überflutung mit generierten Texten die Qualität und Authentizität der Diskussion beeinträchtigen, da echte menschliche Perspektiven durch synthetische Inhalte verdrängt werden. In offenen und kollaborativen Plattformen wie OpenStreetMap ist es entscheidend, dass Beiträge von realen Nutzern mit echter Erfahrung und Verantwortung stammen.
dieterdreist (2025-03-21 13:34:22+00:00): (man muss dazusagen, dass es kurz und bündig sein soll)
0000FF berries (2025-03-26 00:44:10+00:00): Hello :) Έχεις αλλάξει το ξενοδοχείο στο https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4924631721 άλλα ξενοδοχείο εκεί δεν υπάρχει. Ή είναι airbnb ή είναι λανθασμένη προσθήκη. Η προσθήκη έγινε πριν 8 χρόνια από χρήστη με 14 changesets. Μήπως να αφαιρεθεί τελείως;
sheldonelectric (2025-04-01 08:26:05+00:00): Έφτιαχνα το λεοφωρείο 227 και ταυτόχρονα διέγραψα κάποια άχρηστα name:xx που πέτυχα, δεν έλεγξα την ύπαρξη του ξενοδοχείου. Αν δεν το βλέπεις, διέγραψέ το...
0000FF berries (2025-04-01 19:06:03+00:00): Έγινε, το διέγραψα :)
bernward1 (2025-11-19 18:44:31+00:00): Heute habe ich alle Lücken im linksrheinischen Jakobsweg korrigiert. Viel mir diese Änderung von dir auf:
Du hast du dieses Stück des Jakobswegs ans Ende bei Bingen angehängt. 
Achte das nächste mal bei solchen Aktionen dass der Weg als durchgehender Weg erhalten bleibt.
(Mit JOSM ist das einfacher als mit dem ID-Editor.)
s777n (2025-04-04 21:09:32+00:00): Здравствуйте. Вы зачем-то проставили одно этажной части здания 9 этажей. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1180135185 Исправлено
flex16 (2025-03-19 12:22:10+00:00): Hallo hca,

dein Changeset ha
flex16 (2025-03-19 12:23:53+00:00): Hallo hca,

dein Changeset hat vermutlich in irgendeinerweise das große forest multypolygon beschädigt. Vermutlich ist irgendwo ne Lücke in der outer line. Sei so gut und fix das wenn möglich.

Viele Grüße
Flex16
hca (2025-03-19 18:22:21+00:00): Moin Flex16,
ich hab's auch gerade gemerkt und korrigiert.
Der Wald sollte in absehbarer Zeit wieder auftauchen.

Viele Grüße
Hartwig
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-02 04:47:56+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164401286
StreetSurveyor (2025-03-30 02:54:09+00:00): Hi, this is still part of Revere St per the city map. It is also accessible to foot traffic.
Tris Wilson (2025-03-30 04:24:30+00:00): Ah! I think I conflated the chained off path with the "no trespassing" signs a few hundred feet later but your new tags seem to match the situation on the ground much better now that I'm looking at them again. Thank you for the note + fix!
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-02 04:47:49+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164401283
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-02 04:47:43+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164401280
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-02 04:47:37+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164401273