piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
fkv (2023-07-10 20:51:49+00:00): @SomeoneElse You didn't answer my questions, which were about the meaning of the word "passageway".
You know that forum discussions lead nowhere when there are different opinions. I see only 2 options to clear that up: Either the DWG decides who is right and who is wrong (which you obviously want to avoid), or by voting. The only valid way to initiate voting on globally used tags is via the standard proposal process. I hate to do all that work while those who started the edit war will have a good time on the beach, but that's how life is. If nobody would do the work, there would be no civilization.

@Woazboat: The tunnel=* tag in your example was set by an armchair mapper who had never been there. (Same as here.) The user is also infamous for connecting ways that shouldn't be connected. I think he gets paid for those validator "fixes", no matter whether they are right or wrong.
Woazboat (2023-07-10 21:03:11+00:00): That is literally the tunnel into the Altausee salt mine that thousands of visitors walk through regularly (including me a few years ago). 

https://salzwelten.at/en

You can see a picture here
https://salzwelten.at/Medien/Altaussee/38/image-thumb__38__lightbox/SW_AA_gefalltete_Steinsalzschichten_mit_Stolleneingang.jpg
Negreheb (2023-07-10 21:05:32+00:00): The only thing you read on the wiki-page is the shortdescription that maybe should get reworked? And not all of the rest? I'll give you some examples: "tunnel=* is used for roads, railway line, canals, etc. that run in a tunnel. " or "Where the water from a smaller stream, drain or even cattle crossing passes under a way structure or a building consider using tunnel=culvert in place of the tunnel=yes used for accessible and larger tunnels for roads, railways, etc. " that would apply here. And the next paragraph "When the waterway=* runs underground for a considerable distance, you can use tunnel=flooded especially when the duct isn't designed to be safely accessible in operation or man_made=pipeline for sections built with tube assemblies. " 

and for your initial question for me: Someone asked in chat, i just mentioned that i commented and did a revert but i have to disappoint you, i did absolutely not tell everyone to chime in. 

I'm not the big bad guy you are trying to make me. And i don't think the other guy does get payed for connecting waterways, that sounds like a nice little conspiracy you have there going. But it helps you to just avoid a discussion in the forum. "Everybody else is mean, so i can just ignore them!"
SomeoneElse (2023-07-10 21:38:13+00:00): @fkv Please don't press too hard for the DWG to make an "executive decision" - you might not like the answer!
I don't think that a "vote" would be of much value either - the small numbers involved in OSM wiki votes just make them self-selecting polls; useful to see which way the wind is blowing but very easy to game.
Better would be a community discussion where you can explain why you think you're right and the people who disagree can say why they think you are not.
fkv (2023-07-10 23:31:03+00:00): I already explained (mostly in German, but anyway) why I think I'm right. I would basically just copy&paste it all to the forum, and the others would do the same, and then what?
If an "executive decision" is against me, I'm done with OSM. It's not just about one tag or one object. It's about the appreciation of ground work and expertise. OSM started as a counterpoint to Wikipedia: While "original research" is forbidden in Wikipedia, it was encouraged in OSM. Data derived from GPS was preferred over imported data. That has very much reversed. Surveyed data gets overwritten by imported data or data from arial images, and tags chosen by the original mappers get replaced by tags chosen by validators. As I have already mentioned, some people even get paid for changing the data. We mappers get nothing. I've spent 13 years of my life for OSM and probably tens of thousands of € for fuel and never got anything in return. The only thing that mappers like me can get is the appreciation of our work. I don't see that anymore. This debate tops it all. People edit my object without even knowing what it is, and without asking. They start an edit war and then say I started it (double absurd when I'm the creator). After starting an edit war, they complain to the DWG. This is all unbelievable. The fact that the DWG hasn't already decided in my favor tells how broken OSM is. If the DWG now decides that changing other people's work is more welcome than contributing own work, there is no longer a point in contributing own data whatsoever.
Kevin Kofler (2023-07-10 23:33:53+00:00): @fkv:

> I hate to do all that work while those who started the edit war will have a good time on the beach

LOL. YOU started the edit war. A well-meaning user (who has not even participated in the discussion so far) has added a tunnel=culvert tag. You have reverted the addition (removing valid information). This is the start of the revert war.

And how has it turned into a revert war? The community has discussed your revert on IRC/Matrix and decided that the tag should be readded, and has done so. You have repeatedly reverted the addition. I count 4 consecutive reverts from the same user (you) of edits by 3 different users, all on the exact same issue.

And then you have the nerves to accuse others of having started an edit war? You cannot be serious!

> The tunnel=* tag in your example was set by an armchair mapper who had never been there.

Even disregarding the fact that this accusation is probably not accurate in that case, you need to get rid of your pathological disdain for "armchair mappers". A lot of useful work in OSM is done by armchair mappers, considering all the freely licensed data sources out there nowadays (OGD etc.). I would even guess that MOST useful contributions to OSM come from "armchair mappers" nowadays. It does not scale to go personally to every object whose tagging needs to be completed and/or corrected. All the more if it is not necessary, because the disagreement is about how a feature whose appearance is NOT disputed should be tagged.
Kevin Kofler (2023-07-10 23:42:24+00:00): PS: And objects in OSM are NOT "owned". It is a fundamental part of any community editing project, be it a wiki or a database like OSM, that existing data can be improved, no matter who has originally created it. If you look at the history of pretty much any object in OSM, you are likely to see edits from several users other than the original creator.

In this case, a contributor has added a tag that in that contributor's view was missing, and the community consensus is that we tend to agree with that contributor. The first one to revert the addition, and hence the one who started the revert war, was you.
Kevin Kofler (2023-07-10 23:45:44+00:00): PPS: A well-meaning edit is NOT an edit war. It only becomes a war when people revert each other's edits. Which is why I prefer the term "revert war" to "edit war".
SomeoneElse (2023-07-10 23:59:55+00:00): >  It's about the appreciation of ground work and expertise....

If you think that I'm in favour of "armchair" or "non-local" contributions at the expense of survey you clearly haven't read anything I've written since I started contributing to OSM many years ago :)
This isn't about that - it's about how best to capture the physical reality in OSM tags.  That's why I'm suggesting you explain "what is there" to a wider audience so that that wider audience can comment on how that physical reality tends to be tagged in OSM.
fkv (2023-07-11 01:26:15+00:00): Which "wider audience" are you talking about? My target audience is the data consumers, and the language to tell them is the OSM tags. My target audience is *not* Nehegreb or Kevin Kofler, and they don't even want to know. Otherwise they would have asked me. They never did!

There's no "correct" way of mapping sewers, as they are rarely mapped. As far as I know, I'm the only one who has ever mapped a sewer in Austria. I wasn't even sure which waterway=* tag to choose, because there's zilch documentation on sewer tagging. Where no tagging scheme exists, mappers can make up their own ("use any tag you like"). But either way, it should be up to the mappers and experts to work out tagging schemes. You can't dictate pilots how to tag airports when you have never even seen one.
Negreheb (2023-07-11 13:54:53+00:00): > My target audience is the data consumers, and the language to tell them is the OSM tags.

And when you are using the wrong tags, like you do now, they can't process them properly. The renderer is one such data consumer, just telling you. 

There is a taggin scheme, tunnel=* but simply chose to ignore it because you chose to use the description and ignore the whole text there. The funny thing is - if you do the same with the wrong tag you used, its pretty clear you can't use it. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Ddrain "An artificial free flow waterway used for carrying superfluous water, usually lined with concrete." - "Frei fließend". 

And if you want something additional you have to do what you suggested others - make a proposal for the new tagging scheme for sewers. Maybe even participate in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Culvert_type for example. 

It seems like this should be tagged as culvert.
Luzandro (2023-07-11 18:13:39+00:00): Here is a photo of the tunnel exit we're talking about: https://i.imgur.com/wHSJL5O.jpeg

I have now restored the tunnel and I am confident that fkv will accept it this time and manage to count more than 3 people who disagree with his opinion when recounting and not a single one who shares it
fkv (2023-07-11 18:30:53+00:00): As already said, I can bring in people who confirm this is not a tunnel. It seems the only reason why you are so obsessed with the tunnel tag is to make it render it dashed in Carto. If you want to tag for the renderer, we can talk about it, but first of all you need to admit it!
SomeoneElse (2023-07-11 18:51:00+00:00): > As already said, I can bring in people who confirm this is not a tunnel.
There's no need to "bring in people" - just discuss it with people who are familiar with OSM tagging of similar structures at https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/at/59 or https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/help-and-support/tagging/71 .  By all means ask people with real-world experience of water management (or whatever) to contribute there, but it has to be a discussion with other people who tag things in OSM to achieve anything.

> It seems the only reason why you are so obsessed with the tunnel tag is to make it render it dashed in Carto
I don't see the evidence for that - you are the only person here who has mentioned OSM Carto's rendering.
fkv (2023-07-11 19:01:52+00:00): What else could be the reason why mappers come across a "missing" tunnel tag, if not due to its rendering? And why do you keep referring to a forum on Austria when you know that sewers exist all over the world? Do you want them tagged differently in each country?
SomeoneElse (2023-07-11 19:24:46+00:00): > What else could be the reason why mappers come across a "missing" tunnel tag,
Because people want it mapped "correctly" in OSM, in the sense of "consistently with other examples of similar features"?
> And why do you keep referring to a forum on Austria 
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/help-and-support/tagging/71 is (as the link suggests) a global "tagging" sub-forum below "help-and-support" on the forum.
Luzandro (2023-07-12 04:38:49+00:00): seems like I was a little bit too optimistic that fkv will leave the tag until he discusses it with a wider audience and finds someone who supports his view. Here are a few more pictures from mihai3:

https://imgur.com/a/rZjCRlu

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3775272
Kevin Kofler (2023-07-12 06:54:26+00:00): This is the 5th consecutive revert from fkv. @SomeoneElse: I am afraid I think the only way to stop this revert war is to block fkv from editing.
Kevin Kofler (2023-07-12 06:55:16+00:00): (revert #5 by fkv: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/138391703 )
Luzandro (2023-07-12 07:00:32+00:00): btw. the comment on the note, "there is no need for a picture, because I have been there and mapped the object" is also an interesting contribution to the discussion
SomeoneElse (2023-07-12 08:05:32+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/argument-about-an-underground-drain-in-vienna/101082
Hungerburg (2023-07-13 01:23:24+00:00): Mich würde schon noch der Hintergrund der Expertenmeinung aus dem Höhlenklub interessieren, die da keinen Tunnel sehen will - Muss ein Tunnel im Sprengvortrieb errichtet werden oder von einer Mordsmaschine gebohrt? Sind 40 km Eisenbahn im Unterinntal (Terfnertunnel) nicht Tunnel sondern überdachte Grube?
Hungerburg (2023-07-13 22:09:19+00:00): Behold, the "Neue Unterinntal Strecke" consists - in engineering terms - of tunnels and mostly "Wannen". Just from a quick dict.leo.org search, "Wannen" might translate as "sag". Will that call for a new tag? Something that was built "overground" and later made "underground". I'd propose "tunnel=sag" or perhaps "tunnel=tub" :)
Famlam (2023-07-10 17:28:53+00:00): Dag Noah, vanwaar dat je deze straten hebt hernoemd?
Ik ben even gaan kijken en er staat echt niks anders dan St. Titussingel (sinds eind vorig jaar)
Famlam (2023-07-10 17:54:26+00:00): Heb het inmiddels hersteld
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-09 11:04:03+00:00): Cleaned up SEO spam and applied correct tagging for World of Smoke & Vape POI in changeset 183869322

https://osm.org/changeset/183869322
Langlaeufer (2023-06-14 09:29:21+00:00): vehicle=private: ist es dann nicht eher ein Grundstückszufahrt highway=service, service=driveway?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137317081
adrianojbr (2023-06-15 03:07:28+00:00): Você confundiu o muro com o portão.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137317467
AlbercheRiver (2023-06-16 05:16:55+00:00): Hello Adrianojbr, I re-investigated the area using Mapillary and I agree with you. I see you have already reverted the edits to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1181772055. Thank you and have a nice day.

tradução automática

Olá Adrianojbr, pesquisei novamente a área usando o Mapillary e concordo com você. Vejo que você já reverteu as edições para https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1181772055. Obrigado e tenha um bom dia."
LySioS (2023-06-14 18:35:42+00:00): Bonjour RP Carto et bienvenu dans OSM.

Merci pour tes ajouts, tout à l'air bien fait.

N'hésite pas si tu as des questions, nous sommes quelques-uns dans les PO :

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Pyr%C3%A9n%C3%A9es-Orientales
silversurfer83 (2023-06-15 06:54:49+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OSM :)

Änderungen, die mit dem Editor auf der Seite openstreetmap.org gespeichert werden landen in der Datenbank und sind für jeden sichtbar. Daher möchte ich darum bitten KEINE "tests" in die Datenbank einzutragen. Ich war so frei und habe den Punkt (auch node genannt) wieder entfernt.
Ansonsten immer gerne Informationen aus Quellen, die dafür frei gegeben sind, hinzufügen.

Zum Einstieg empfehle ich das Wiki beziehungsweise die Seite https://learnosm.org/de/beginner/

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Beginners%27_guide
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice

Bei Fragen immer raus damit :)

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137317712
LockOnGuy (2023-06-14 09:36:02+00:00): Hello Ahmad-0772, please do use meaningful changeset comments - “Fixing quest” does not help other mappers understand what you are doing.      
Please read: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments     
Best regards.
Strubbl (2023-09-26 21:33:53+00:00): Hi Rob69420, 

building=house scheint hier nicht korrekt zu sein. Bitte lies die Doku im Wiki zu dem Tag:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:building
aceman444 (2026-05-06 08:55:58+00:00): Hi, why is this road 'tertiary' ?
Pawcio (2026-05-06 10:50:30+00:00): Hi, why not? It connects other tertiary with primary and is used be a few bus lines, so it is much more important than average unclassified. It can't be residential as there are no houses on it.
mcliquid (2023-06-15 06:14:51+00:00): Warum werden diese Objekte erfasst? Warum werden sie nicht gelöscht?

Der Überprüfbarkeitsgrundsatz (auch „On-the-Ground-Regel“ genannt) ist der zentrale Grundsatz des OpenStreetMap-Projekts. Etwas, was in OpenStreetMap erfasst wird, muss vor Ort so beobachtbar sein. Nur äußerst wenige Informationen werden zusätzlich erfasst, obwohl sie oft nur schwer vor Ort beobachtbar sind, z.B. Gemeinde-, Schutzgebiets- und Postleitzahlbezirksgrenzen.

Wenn ein Objekt vor Ort existiert und gesehen wird, kann es erfasst werden. Sollte seine Nutzung durch die Öffentlichkeit beschränkt oder nicht gestattet sein, wird das durch zusätzliche Attribute erfasst. Damit ist das Objekt so erfasst, wie es der Realität entspricht.

Die Erfassung der Daten erfolgt dabei von öffentlich zugänglichem Grund aus oder mittels Luftbildern, sowie in weit geringerem Maß aus lizenzkonformen Übernahmen von Fremddaten. Über allem steht die objektive Überprüfbarkeit, d.h. die Erfassung soll nicht von Spezialwissen des Erfassers abhängen.

Anwendungsbeispiel: Ein Privatweg, der von niemandem außer dem Eigentümer benutzt werden darf, wird als Weg erfasst, der zusätzlich das Attribut `access=private` trägt. Anwendungen, die OpenStreetMap-Daten nutzen, sind dazu angehalten, diese Attribute auszuwerten und keinen Routen über diesen Weg zu berechnen.
Frans S (2023-06-16 12:46:40+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please solve the issues listed on the Issue triangle before you upload your mappings.
About tagging of highways.
How to decide which tag to be used.
How to measure the width of a trace In Ideditor:
Command Ctr+shift+M  shows the  measuring dimensions tab.
After that command, select add line.
Zoom in very far (20 - 25 mtr) so that you have a good view on the shoulders of a road.
Then draw a line between the shoulders.
You can read the value in the measurement tab. (select Metric value)
<2 mtr tag it Path
> 2 mtr tag it unclassified, residential or track depending on the situation. 
 Delete the line after measuring.
See the wiki african highways to decide which tag to be used.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa
Best regards and keep mapping
aseidel (2023-06-14 13:57:06+00:00): Liebe:r Oedemer,
bitte Am Alten Werk (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25453007) nochmal die lit-Angabe überprüfen. Von Süden/K10 bis zur Einmündung zu Knauf-Gips sind Straßenlaternen in regelmäßigen Abständen vorhanden (lit=yes), erst dahinter offenbar nicht mehr. Ggf. also den Weg aufteilen.
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
aseidel (2023-06-14 12:22:30+00:00): Liebe:r LaraBr,
bitte bei der cycle_barrier https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10880771915 ergänzen, ob man sie mit dem Rad durchfahren kann oder absteigen muss (bei 0.9m dürfte das bicycle=dismount sein; falls auch Durchschieben nicht möglich ist, braucht es ein bicycle=no), siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dcycle_barrier#Standard_bicycle_access sowie auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/LGMaps#Tags_an_Punktobjekten_(Standard_und_optional).
Den Mapillary-Tag hatte ich selbst gesetzt. Ihr Foto (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=807090737427333) ist jedoch deutlich geeigneter, also bitte gern tauschen!
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
aseidel (2023-06-14 15:53:32+00:00): Liebe:r Jannik L,
bitte bei allen drei hier geänderten Straßen den Tag oneway=no wieder entfernen, siehe Ausfüllhilfe S. 2 (Hinweis ganz unten). Normale Straßen sind (anders als straßenbegleitende Radwege) im Standardfall immer in beide Richtungen zu nutzen. Nur bei ausgeschilderten Einbahnstraßen taggen Sie oneway=yes.
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
aseidel (2023-06-14 13:47:32+00:00): Liebe:r Florian Kautsch,
bitte beim Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1181977116 nochmal das Tagging prüfen: lt. Mapillary ist das ein Nur-Gehweg, braucht also noch foot=designated und traffic_sign=DE:239; bicycle=no hier bitte nicht taggen, denn das Nutzungsverbot ergibt sich aus dem Verkehrszeichen 239. 
Der Untergrund scheint mir eher surface=ground zu sein (naturbelassen, unbefestigt, teils bewachsen), nicht surface=sand (das wäre purer "Mullersand" wie in der Heide, weich und "grundlos"). Bitte diese Angaben ebenfalls ggf. anpassen.
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
silversurfer83 (2023-06-15 06:45:09+00:00): Hi :)
die infortmation über die Firma ist schon am Gebäude eingetragen und damit ist dieser Eintrag hier überflüssig. Ich war so frei ihn wieder zu entfernen.
In das Feld "Bild" (image=) gehört ein Link zu einem Bild, welches das Objekt zeigt. Eine einfache Webseite ist dort leider nicht hilfreich.

Weitere Infos bietet immer das Wiki und auch die community und wiki.openstreetmap.org und community.openstreetmap.org

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137320267
NieWnen (2023-06-15 20:37:42+00:00): Cześć,
zmiany niestety są niepoprawne i relacje zostały uszkodzone.
Edycja relacji autobusowych nie należy do najprostszych, a w szczególności przez edytor iD – łatwo coś w nim zepsuć i robi się to o wiele ciężej. Zachęcam do spróbowania JOSMa do tego.

Przystanki oraz odcinki dróg muszą być dodane w odpowiedniej kolejności oraz z odpowiednimi rolami.
NieWnen (2023-06-15 22:02:19+00:00): Poprawiłem te 4 linie oraz tagowanie zawieszonych przystanków. 

W przypadku 120 ZTM ma sprzeczne dane oraz na wszystkich jeśli chodzi o przystanek szkoły. Jeśli posiadasz lepsze to śmiało daj znać.
dcapillae (2023-06-14 15:15:53+00:00): Buenas tardes.

Gracias por los cambios. Buen trabajo.

Siempre que le sea posible, evite eliminar elementos existentes (nodos, vías, relaciones) para que no se pierda su historial. Esta es una buena práctica en OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Mantener_el_historial.

Si necesita especificar las características de solo una parte del vial, divida la vía en uno de sus nodos e indique las características de cada parte donde corresponda. Así evitará tener que borrar la vía para trazarla de nuevo. 

Gracias por su colaboración.

Atentamente,

Daniel Capilla
Cisneros1992 (2023-06-14 16:34:40+00:00): Entendido, muchas gracias. Un saludo.
literan (2023-06-14 18:19:04+00:00): вы поставили название здания "РМАНПО". Сомневаюсь, что здание так называется, отменю вашу правку.
ivanbranco (2023-06-15 08:38:38+00:00): Ola Arturo, thanks for these edits!

Just a reminder that wikimedia_commons=* has a syntax to be followed. It should be "File:Avenida del Obispo Quesada.jpg" instead of "Archivo:Avenida_del_Obispo_Quesada.jpg"

thanks again and good mapping!
Arturo Francisco Barbero (2023-06-17 12:01:51+00:00): Hi!
I didn't know that.
Tanks for notify it!
ZeLonewolf (2023-06-20 02:23:23+00:00): Please provide the actual data source.  Where did your "geojson data file" come from and how do we know that it's OdBL compatible?
zluuzki (2023-06-20 05:09:21+00:00): "actual" source? I didn't tag any source at all. geojson described in the other comment.

Nothing from any outside sources was added here.
maplemoths (2023-06-20 04:29:17+00:00): oops, i just noticed now that i accidentally had the wrong changeset comment, this comment was meant for pueblo colorado. i don't know how to change it, apologies!
bxl-forever (2023-06-14 16:19:56+00:00): Hello,
If you want to draw houses and buildings, you might be interested to use another background when editing.
Never trace buildings on aerial imagery.  Switch the background to use "Digitaal Vlaanderen GRB" (or "AIV Flanders GRB" depending on the software version you are using), and there you will have a good reference.
Hope this helps.
kapazao (2023-06-14 16:44:09+00:00): Hello, in Spain what we call "bar" is a "pub" and vice versa :)
I have fixed it as a pub.
Regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137322159