piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
JunosL (2025-11-27 15:11:51+00:00): Hi Badojo,
This is a comment on turn restriction in [relation 16286020](https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16286020). I do not think this is correct.

While the road markings do suggest the most common turn here is to the [way 24960661](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24960661), I can see no indication that the turn to the [way 151952109](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/151952109) would be forbidden. 

On the contrary, judging by the "keep left" sign (or [prometni otok](https://pomocnik.meblosignalizacija.si/produkt/3313-b/prometni-otok) in Slovenian) at the beginning of way 151952109, this is actually a perfectly legal turn. Namely, the sign is rotated towards North East, that is towards the vehicles coming from the ring road, so I think it can be assumed that these vehicles can, in fact, turn left here.

I would therefore suggest to remove the restriction in relation 16286020 ("no right turn" is implied with the one-way road), just as there is no such restriction at the [node 8397664629](https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8397664629).
Badojo (2025-11-27 15:55:22+00:00): Hi,

as you said the turn appears unconventional but it is legal as it is also needed for u-turns.

I don't really know why I would've added that restriction but that was 2 years ago so I don't really remeber.

I'll fix the turns.
JunosL (2025-11-28 11:43:16+00:00): Great, thank you very much for looking into this!
lyctkel (2023-12-04 21:22:06+00:00): Hi clementader,
at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11169975940 you wrote 
...
recycling:glass_bottles=bollard
...
I suppose it's a copy/paste error and you meant
...
recycling:glass_bottles=yes
...
Is that right?
Regards
lyctkel
user_5359 (2023-09-06 05:49:02+00:00): Hello! Please use the standard keys! See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=whatsapp#keys
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=linkedin#keys
What ist the source and license of the import?
Sammyhawkrad (2023-09-06 12:54:16+00:00): Keys without the contact prefix are equally valid.
This is more of an update than an import. The name of the company has changed so I updated the names and added information gathered from their website. Each of item has a source tag
user_5359 (2023-09-06 13:20:11+00:00): Please reconsider your way of thinking with regard to the mentioned keys. Just because one spelling looks the same to people, the evaluation for linkedin must now be adapted. In my opinion, you are welcome to stick to the spelling without contact for your phone, email and facebook.
mbaye babacar dione (2023-09-12 19:10:20+00:00): merci
literan (2023-09-05 17:07:14+00:00): не надо рисовать поверх существующих дорог другие дороги. Под откат.
ElliottPlack (2024-12-06 14:49:33+00:00): Hi Matt, welcome to OpenStreetMap. It looks like you are here based on Strava or one of the various completionist apps that use OSM data. We welcome your edits but please be aware that mapping a path as bicycle=no when you don't think it is bicycle accessible is not how that tagged is supposed to be used. access=no or private or only for *legal* prohibitions. Please only add access/bicycle=no if there is a sign prohibiting access or if there is a gate (anything gated is fine as private). Please correct any issue in your edits where this is the case. Thank you!

Elliott Plack  
Data Working Group  
OSM Foundation
Matt Post (2024-12-06 14:55:58+00:00): Thanks for the information, Elliott. Sorry for the mistake. I'll set aside some time to go through and make these corrections.
Matt Post (2024-12-06 14:58:31+00:00): These are unpaved hiking paths through woods that aren't really suitable for riding. Is it appropriate to change the Feature Type from "Path" to "Foot Path"?
ElliottPlack (2024-12-06 15:33:47+00:00): highway=footway are not typically mapped in the woods. You could add the informal=yes tag to designate that they are not formal trails.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Bicycle_restrictions

Are you using Wandrer? footways show up there if they are inside of a park, so this would not help there. The best way to map difficult to ride paths in OSM is adding the smoothness and visibility tags. Then if I were you, I'd lobby whomever manages the apps you are using to not show paths that are 'impassible' or very bad smootness. Check out this link for more:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mountain_biking
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140859551
Allison P (2024-06-11 06:24:20+00:00): addr:* tags shouldn't be used on streets, only features with an actual address
Luzandro (2023-09-06 11:05:49+00:00): Hallo,

ich habe schon ein paar mal Umrisse von dir ohne jegliche tags korrigiert. Achte bitte etwas mehr darauf, ob auch ein Objekttyp angegeben ist - eigentlich sollte der Editor schon vor solchen Fehlern warnen, also vllt. kann man auch die Entwickler von Go Map!! darauf hinweisen
Falsernet (2023-09-05 16:59:34+00:00): In this changeset I also reverted the motorway extent back to merge/diverge with tagging and signage to reflect true motorway status change
Rainero (2023-09-07 21:14:01+00:00): Hallo redhoff,

was ist die Quelle für die eBike-Ladesäulen, die du seit einiger Zeit einträgst? 
Ich frage deshalb, weil bei OSM genau darauf geachtet wird lizenzrechtlich einwandfreie Quellen zu verwenden.
Auf diesen Änderungssatz bin ich gestoßen, weil die Ladesäule doppelt eingetragen ist. Da die für Editoren üblichen Angaben fehlen, verwendest du ein Skript zum Hochladen der Daten?

Und noch zu den Tags: name ist in OSM nur für Eigennamen. Ladesäulen haben in aller Regel keinen Namen. "[BCS] FF Haus Niederaichbach" ist eine Beschreibung der Örtlichkeit und BCS das Modell des Herstellers. Dafür könntest du das Tag description verwenden.
Das verlinkte Bild ist bei deinen Eintragungen immer dasselbe. Wenn man ein Bild hinzufügt, sollte es das konkrete Objekt vor Ort abbilden, nicht ein Musterbild des Herstellers.

Viele Grüße,
Rainer
redhoff (2023-09-13 08:02:45+00:00): Guten Tag,

wir sind der Hersteller der BCS Ladestation und tragen diese bei Wunsch unsere Kunden automatisch in OSM ein, damit diese über diverse Drittanbieter-Apps wie z.B Komoot gefunden werden können. Die Daten werden automatisch von unserem Backend über die REST API in OSM hochgeladen.

Der Kunde ist i.d.R. nicht in der Lage ein eigenes Bild für seine Installation hochzuladen.
Der Name der Ladestation bezieht sich auf den Namen der angemeldeten Organisation des Kunden und wird dementsprechend angelegt.

Viele Grüße
Roland
Rainero (2023-09-15 19:46:40+00:00): Hallo Roland,

vielen Dank für die ausführliche Antwort.
Beim verwenden der REST API wäre es gut mit "created_by" das Tool anzugeben, mit dem der Änderungssatz hochgeladen wird  und mit "source" die Quelle der Daten. Die OSM-Editoren machen das.
Für diese Ladestationen würde es sich anbieten ein Wikidata-Objekt anzulegen und das dann immer mit "wikidata=<wikidatanummer>" zu verlinken. Das hat den Vorteil, dass man die Daten, z.B. das Bild,  dort nur einmal pflegen muss. Mehr dazu im Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:wikidata
Ein Beispiel: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8250678695

Das, was hier in "name" steht ist aber kein Name, allenfalls eine Beschreibung. Daher würde ich das in "description" verschieben. Bei OSM wird "name" nur für Eigennamen verwendet, nicht für beschreibende Angaben.

Das Duplikat hier in Niederaichbach entferne ich jedenfalls, das war sicher versehentlich doppelt hochgeladen.

Viele Grüße,
Rainer
redhoff (2023-09-22 10:32:18+00:00): Vielen Dank für die Hinweise und Informationen für die Verbesserung der Datenintegration.

Ich werde die Feedbackpunkte aufnehmen und in unsere Entwicklung mit einfließen lassen. Wenn wir ein bisschen Luft haben, werde ich die Umsetzung angehen.

Gruß
Roland
mp747474 (2023-09-05 18:29:22+00:00): could have deleted all the subtags of is_in:* as well as is_in itself. they're all deprecated.
aweech (2023-09-18 22:30:26+00:00): Hi,
Thank you for your edits! I see that you tagged the trails here with highway=track and motor_vehicle=no. Why did you choose to change it to this away from highway=path?
Ken Gallager (2023-09-19 10:44:54+00:00): Hi aweech,
The trail is a gated access road which runs from Second Street in the north to Clarke Street in the south. The trail follows a sewer line, so I presume it is used by maintenance vehicles from time to time. Crushed gravel in the south, two-track older gravel in the north. We walked the trail a couple weeks ago.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-24 04:52:39+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141666791
vng_me (2023-09-07 12:24:59+00:00): Is it really necessary to draw separate sidewalks along the roads? Especially in BA (as far as I can see) all highways have a separate sidewalk, so maybe adding sidewalk:both=separate is enough here?
citrula (2023-09-10 12:47:47+00:00): Please don't use abbreviated street names. The name of the street should include the entire expanded version.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140860814
umapjpnic793 (2023-09-06 02:26:23+00:00): こんにちは、情報提供ありがとうございます、よく頑張った!
助言ですが、東京都ではneighbourhood=自由が丘二丁目とすることで住所検索できます。
他に何か分からないことがあったらいつでもコメントしてね。
Allison P (2023-10-30 05:00:36+00:00): Why have you changed the denomination to an obviously wrong value?
augil (2023-09-05 17:53:55+00:00): neden gelmediğini açıklayabilir misin
augil (2023-09-05 17:58:45+00:00): bu yolları ikincil yol yapacak bir özellik yok. tek bağladığı yol 3190. cadde ve onun uzantısı olarak geçmeli.
VanishedUser (2023-09-05 18:07:45+00:00): Mehmet Rifat Börekçi yolunda şerit değiştirmek amaçlı da kullanılabilir. Bu yüzden ikincil yol demek daha mantıklı. Ayrıca bazı şerit değiştirme yolları başka yollarla bağlantılı olmayabiliyor.
augil (2023-09-05 18:22:05+00:00): dediğiniz mantıklı ama kimse bunun gibi yolları sizin yaptığınız şekilde yapmadığı için demiştim. başka yollarla bağlantılı olmayan şeritler zaten arasında olduğu yollarla aynı etikete sahip olmalıdır.
micccey (2023-09-06 07:46:03+00:00): Hallo Dangerfreak,
bitte halte deine Zusage aus der Diskussion zum Änderungssatz 140784511 ein und ändere die Tags wieder korrekt auf den vorherigen Zustand zurück. Hier scheint dabei etwas schief gelaufen zu sein, da der Klettersteig immer noch mit highway=path getagged ist. Außerdem ist "higway" kein valider key. Bitte vergebe highway=via_ferrata und lösche den "higway"-Key.

Bitte arbeite hier gewissenhaft, denn falsches Tagging kann Leben kosten!
andriu44 (2023-09-09 03:37:42+00:00): This should be reverted to the previous version - the 2021 imagery is no longer correct as the intersection of Hampshire and Cambridge Streets was redone to become 2 separate but interoperating intersections.
woodpeck (2024-04-29 23:08:13+00:00): Hello eerib, did you have an on-the-ground source for marking the "permissive" access on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1205278435/ ? because the land owner complained to DWG claiming this was fully private...
eerib (2024-04-30 02:16:12+00:00): Hello Woodpeck,

I have no on-the-ground source for marking permissive, just local knowledge that access has been permissive. It may be the case that the owner is ok with locals having permissive access but others not. Or they have changed their mind completely. In either case, it would make sense to change the access to private. I see you have already made that change. Thank you!
mrunner (2023-09-05 20:37:16+00:00): I think we should discuss how to prevent vandalism, but at same time allow naming of places that people are now building and living on. Many people want to add fictitious locations on that map that doesn't exist in the nature. But at same time there are buildings being built there as I'm writing this and if places exists in real life then I think OSM should also reflect that. But I guess it depends who will be reviewing this area. Someone who is against what's currently happening there will most likely delete all. And someone who is overenthusiastic will add points all over the area that well don't really exist. Same problem is with this area on Google maps. I don't know, but this area will most likely face many changes in the future, so I don't know how OSM will handle this dilemma.
getsnoopy (2023-09-05 20:46:59+00:00): Well OSM should reflect the ground reality, not be subject to the political opinions of some editors. Given that even Croatia—the country that has the most problem with Liberland—is referring to the land (in some legal citation documents) as "Liberland" (let alone being recognized by multiple other countries) should indicate that there is something called "Liberland", and it is this land.

You have a valid point that there could be vandalism in terms of the individual buildings and such that are actively being built there, but this change was about the entire area itself, which is not going to be subject to such rapid change, which is why I think it's fine to have this.
Matija Nalis (2023-11-02 11:01:24+00:00): ref.: people should probably discuss Liberland issue on talk page of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Liberland and update it based on consensus, so it can be easily linked on further edits
impiaaa (2023-09-06 16:44:26+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap! I see you've mapped the neighborhood association as a house, which is a type of building, which isn't correct. I don't know if we have a way to tag neighborhood associations, since OSM focuses on physical objects rather than things like coverage areas. If there are signs on the ground delineating this neighborhood, then it could either be made a residential landuse or a neighbordhood boundary.
bennn (2023-09-06 23:20:03+00:00): Thank you. Obviously this is the first time I made an edit. I'd like to delete what I added; I don't see how to delete it or undo it.
impiaaa (2023-09-06 23:36:12+00:00): You can follow some similar steps. Move the map to the area you want to edit, and click the edit button at the top of the page. In the editor, you should be able to click on the object you want to delete, and either press the "delete" key on your keyboard, or press "control" and "backspace," or right-click the object and select "delete."
bennn (2023-09-07 04:54:33+00:00): "should be able to click on the object" unfortunately I cannot, maybe because the borders coincide with 4 primary roads. Can I delete it by Changeset number? Or by some other method where it appears in a list, instead of graphically? Thank you /Ben
bennn (2023-09-07 04:55:43+00:00): I may not have saved it, so maybe this is moot?
bennn (2023-09-07 04:57:26+00:00): Nevermind; I searched for it, found it, it was then highlighted on the map, hit Delete, and I think I deleted it. Thank you!
bennn (2023-09-07 05:04:28+00:00): No, it appears not to have been deleted. Now I'm confused. I deleted it, then Saved.
impiaaa (2023-09-07 05:14:09+00:00): You've deleted it. The map on the website just takes a bit to update.
bennn (2023-09-07 05:20:00+00:00): Thanks!
jaap de vries (2023-11-23 12:08:09+00:00): Je toegangsweg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1205279996  is in werkelijkheid een trottoir voor de huizen. Als Nijmegenaar en bekend hier zal ik e.e.a. nalopen en aanpassen.
AmyCupcake (2023-10-07 06:14:30+00:00): What is your source for saying this area isn’t “bilingual” and I’d especially like your source for why this road isn’t a trunk road.
impiaaa (2023-09-06 16:39:43+00:00): entrance=yes is meant for the door of a building, but it looks like they're connected to roads here, so if they are for underground parking, amenity=parking_entrance might be more appropriate
Black_Diamond (2023-09-07 00:22:37+00:00): That’s a fair point. I’ll try to resolve that this evening. Thanks.
PerpetualHiker (2023-09-05 18:54:24+00:00): Correction: Source used was Maxar SecureWatch Imagery 2023-07-25.
Kovoschiz (2023-09-06 05:29:35+00:00): `destination:ref=` is only used when the outgoing road is immediately that `ref=` . Otherwise the routing towards that is `destination:ref:to=` .
andriu44 (2023-09-09 03:38:06+00:00): This should be reverted to the previous version - the 2021 imagery is no longer correct as the intersection of Hampshire and Cambridge Streets was redone to become 2 separate but interoperating intersections.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-09-05 19:00:28+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/10065909828
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1118982225

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
user_12523467 (2023-09-08 06:47:14+00:00): Why did you change the route of the road near Aoun? What source do you have to make this change? Note that the "Esri World Imagery" you used is outdated in this region.
You can see the updated images here: https://ibb.co/sVs7S8Y
Please revert your change.
LockOnGuy (2023-09-08 17:45:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by changeset 140997204 and the changeset comment is: Revert changeset 140864684 restore the correct shape of the road.
felipeeugenio (2023-09-05 19:49:09+00:00): Hola. A qué te refieres con las "tablillas" del MOP?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140864702
Siminost (2023-09-05 20:02:50+00:00): Al letrero indicador del limite maximo de velocidad instalado al costado de la carretera.
https://www.google.com/maps/@-37.5627377,-72.1820589,3a,75y,310.01h,79.79t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sV2SwCmYzkv37QgKxjON5ug!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i38?entry=ttu
felipeeugenio (2023-09-05 19:50:19+00:00): Hola Danae. un CFP es un collge en OSM. Además lo pusiste solo en el edificio, hay claramente un recinto completo.
saludos
felipeeugenio (2023-09-05 19:57:35+00:00): school?
Danae, por favor dedicarle un poco de tiempo a darle vueltas a las ediciones.
micccey (2023-09-06 07:48:50+00:00): Hallo Dangerfreak,
bitte halte deine Zusage aus der Diskussion zum Änderungssatz 140784511 ein und ändere auch hier die Tags wieder korrekt auf den vorherigen Zustand zurück. Ein Klettersteig ist kein highway=path! Bitte vergebe wieder korrekterweise highway=via_ferrata.

Bitte arbeite hier gewissenhaft, denn falsches Tagging - gerade im hochalpinen Gelände - kann Leben kosten!
Langlaeufer (2023-09-06 05:35:23+00:00): Hallo jack90

Dieser "Rad"weg ist weder ausschließlich für Radfahrer noch ein reiner Fußweg für und damit  im Sinne von OSM ein Mehrzweckweg (path) und kein Radweg oder Fußweg.
Langlaeufer (2023-09-06 07:02:55+00:00): Als Einstieg schau mal hier: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren
Wobei das in Gronau hier schon etwas schwieriger ist, weil die Wege ja teilweis nur mit "Radverkehr frei" oder in beide Richtungen unterschiedlich beschildert sind.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140865380
NorthCrab_upload (2023-09-05 19:30:25+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Dębowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170253409
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170253417
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170253431
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170274259
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170274268
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170274309

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
MxxCon (2023-09-09 06:37:44+00:00): Hello.
Is this garage underground?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140865519
dpawlyk (2023-09-09 11:35:13+00:00): Garage is built on a hill. (It has one underground level.)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140865519
MxxCon (2023-09-09 16:09:31+00:00): The correct way to tag this feature would be
building=parking+amenity=parking+parking=multi-storey+access=private
You can read more about these tags at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dparking
I updated these tags for you.
Langlaeufer (2023-09-06 08:23:08+00:00): Rohr übersteigen: dann ist es wohl informal=yes
Supaplex030 (2023-09-06 18:57:50+00:00): Hallo aquin94, du hast hier zahlreiche Einfahrten gelöscht. Diese Änderung habe ich wieder zurücksetzen müssen, denn diese Einfahrten sind vorhanden und damit eine sinnvolle Information.

Dass diese in einigen Kartendarstellungen "hässlich" aussehen, ist kein Kriterium, nach dem wir in OSM Daten erfassen.

Liebe Grüße
Alex
Wilmer Osario (2023-09-11 13:20:44+00:00): ¡Hola y bienvenido a OpenStreetMap!

Le agradecemos grandemente su ayuda para agregar datos de esta zona al mapa 😄.

¿Es usted habitante de la zona?
empty_child (2023-09-06 08:28:57+00:00): Hello Guigoo,
Are you sure that there is a camp site in the center of Batumi?
felipeeugenio (2023-09-05 19:54:25+00:00): Hola Danae. Concepción es con tilde
felipeeugenio (2023-09-05 19:53:37+00:00): Hola Danae. El nombre ya está en el recinto. No agregarlo al edificio por favor, es duplicar información.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-09-05 19:50:40+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Szafranowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363440
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363460

"Wrzosowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363443
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363457
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363466
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363478
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363488

"Spokojna":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363451
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363475
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363481

"Chabrowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363465

"Radosna":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11170363484

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
chris66 (2025-02-24 13:44:38+00:00): Hi, wie ist die Beschilderung beim Hof "Liekfor"?

Dein Eintrag "privat" ist angeblich nicht korrekt :)
ChrissW-R1 (2025-02-25 23:05:40+00:00): Das ist mittlerweile ein Jahr her.
Als ich aber damals dort war, war es eindeutig beschildert, dass Zufahrt nur für berechtigte Personen gestattet ist.
Bin wegen einer fehlerhaften Navigation erst darauf gestoßen.

Falls es sich mittlerweile geändert hat, kann es gerne angepasst werden.
chris66 (2025-02-26 06:06:16+00:00): Danke, dann sollte es lokal nochmal geprüft werden und bis dahin könnte man noch foot=yes ergänzen.
gscholz (2023-09-08 06:11:56+00:00): Hi Victor,
this changeset has created several errors regarding self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-48.28257&lat=-1.72106&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=140867013

This kind o error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
MitchCrompton (2023-09-05 20:08:54+00:00): there are a few overlapping buildings but i am fixing those now its just i hit a limit of what was backed up so submitted what i had already done
G_P_J (2024-01-12 09:53:09+00:00): Cześć, bardzo ładne i precyzyjne edycje. Gratuluję. :) Mam tylko jedną małą sugestię. Gdybyś wejścia do bloków oznaczył zakresami mieszkań w danej kletce schodowej zamiast numerem bloku, to byłaby to bardzo przydatna informacja. Przykład bloku z ponumerowanymi zakresami mieszkań: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/292224893
Przykład użycia tagu addr:flats
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10559222059
Pozdrawiam
G_P_J
WTGZ_ (2024-01-12 19:41:04+00:00): Cześć, bardzo dobra sugestia. Będę musiał pousuwać te numery adresowe, już od dłuższego czasu się za to zabieram, ale coś mi nie idzie :) Będę zamieniał od tej pory na zakres mieszkań.
Pozdrawiam
WTGZ