piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ChillyDL (2023-05-16 07:24:52+00:00): Hello MichaelCollinson, I see you mapped four historic=archaeological_site as site_type=fort. "fort" is not really in use for archaeological sites, so I changed the value to "fortification".
Also, you may want to switch to archaeological_site= instead of site_type=; site_type= having been deprecated for archaelogical sites.
Best regards!
rhtb0 (2023-05-15 13:53:58+00:00): 기차역 태그는 사용하지 않고 대신 기차역 건물을 사용합니다 경주역 기입도 금지입니다
AndersAndersson (2023-05-15 17:44:03+00:00): Hello
You need to be more carefull with your editing.
In this changeset you changed a hiking trail and two rivers to buildings.
Gud_Slam (2023-05-17 10:27:24+00:00): Hi AndersAndersson,

Thank you for the feedback. I have rolled the data back to its previous state. Henceforth, I’ll be more careful while editing.
opendcc (2025-05-28 05:15:00+00:00): Hallo, die Bäume am Marienplatz - gibt es die oder war das nur Planung? Oder sind die schon wieder weg? Es gibt eine Fehlernotiz, dass dort nichts steht.
zorae (2025-06-18 09:52:49+00:00): Ein paar der Pflanzkübel wurden für Bauarbeiten entfernt: Diese habe ich jetzt aus OSM gelöscht. Die Übrigen sollten noch größtenteils richtig sein.
Aleks-Berlin (2023-05-15 09:26:49+00:00): todo: islet is not prefered.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:natural#Possible_tagging_mistakes
SomeoneElse (2023-05-15 10:51:16+00:00): Thanks
mariotomo (2023-05-15 16:02:14+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136040657
habi (2023-05-15 17:50:31+00:00): Thanks @mariotomo for linking to the original changeset, which I forgot.
user_5359 (2023-06-02 18:48:51+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please take a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1173015242. What is the mean of the tag highway = Автомобильная дорога от кладбища пос.Ясная Поляна вдоль полей до пос.Скородумовка? Please on same well defined value are shown on the map.
JochenOSM (2024-09-10 14:58:20+00:00): Dieser Knoten wird inzwischen sowohl bei OsmAnd als auch MagicEarth als aktive ÖPNV-Haltestelle angezeigt und in der Umkreissuche gefunden. Ich vermute das liegt am "public_transport=station". Kann das Tag entfernt werden? Hier hält ja schon ewig nichts mehr, und die tatsächlich vorhandenen Bushaltestellen sind korrekt neben der Straße erfasst.
915 (2024-09-11 07:18:29+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis. Habe ich entfernt.
Jakka (2023-05-15 15:52:11+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173017753 not farmyard are building. that looks more of farmyard https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/901186562
PatrickKnopf (2023-05-26 20:53:26+00:00): Finalized in josm
Diacritic (2023-05-15 10:58:17+00:00): Hi MapMeister,

Where has this name come from? I can't find any reference to "Janine's Lookout" in any official source (or, indeed, any source at all)
NorthCrab_upload (2023-05-15 10:50:16+00:00): 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/8650353469
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173028168

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
silversurfer83 (2023-05-15 19:18:38+00:00): Moin Tobias,
du hast darum gebeten, dass sich jemand die Änderung ansieht. Ich guck mal drauf...

... OK. Sieht auf den ersten Blick gut aus. Die wichtigen Informationen sind da.
Was fehlt: Details :)
Guck mal in folgenden Artikeln und überleg, ob du noch Informationen wie Oberflächenbeschaffenheit, Steigung (hoch/runter) und weiteres einpflegen kannst.

Grüße
silversufer83

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dsteps
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dpath
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136120452
Gregory Peony (2023-05-15 18:03:38+00:00): The highway here is NOT residential: it connects settlements. Residential roads are only typically found in urban environments/larger settlements. It should therefore be mapped as an unclassified road or a path depending on its ability to accomodate two tracked vehicles. 

Some of the round buildings are mapped with their shadow included. Use shadows as references to help you map (building footprints should be adjacent to shadows); do NOT include them in building footprints as this will result in mapped buildings being larger than in reality and in a more dence environment could obstruct other features.
Kicking Leaves (2023-05-16 08:11:45+00:00): Thank you for taking the time to check my validation work and taking further time to comment. I shall bear this information in mind in future. 
May I check which task within this project you are referring to so that I can revisit it?
Thanks and best wishes, KL
Gregory Peony (2023-05-17 01:40:41+00:00): Task 470. It looks like you've changed the highway to an unclassified road.
SekeRob (2023-05-15 20:26:06+00:00): Hi

See you enjoy visiting the Abruzzi. You're leaving though a long trail of incorrect object taggings and roles, so please, verify the tagging is correct and current, not from a 10 year old book or something

Enjoy your stay.
euromapz (2023-05-17 07:22:35+00:00): Hi, which objects do you mean, exactly? As the edit says, the information is taken from local knowledge. In particular, the housenumbers are those written on the buildings right now. No book or something was involved.
SekeRob (2023-05-17 08:05:35+00:00): Hi,

Guess you and readyboy are one and the same?
All corrections I've made are based on QA program flagged issues. I.e. An entrance tag can't be on an address unless the entrance is affixed to a building or indoor mapped wall. 
ciao
euromapz (2023-05-17 09:09:12+00:00): Hi, I was logged in on my friend's account accidentally, thus the different names. Yes I think it's good that the QA program finds these flaws. In this case, some of the building entrances are on the second floor and do not coincide with the buildings' outer perimeter. So it's not actually a mistake.
pitfire (2023-05-16 12:57:10+00:00): Hallo Jens_L,

bist Du sicher, dass der Weg offiziell für das Befahren mit dem Rad freigegeben ist. In der Vergangenheit ist das bereits ab der Dr.-Ringens-Straße (traffic_sign=DE:239) Ohne Zusatzzeichen sind diese Wege nicht für Fahrradfahrer zugelassen.
Hat sich die Beschilderung geändert?
(Fahrrad möglich und Fahrrad zugelassen sind zwei paar Schuhe)

Gruß pitfire
crodthauser (2023-05-19 09:15:58+00:00): Hallo zusammen,

es gibt auf der Brücke nicht viel Platz. Vermutlich ist (bzw. war) dies daher ein reiner Fußweg. Ich würde mich wundern, wenn das Fahrradfahren hier erlaubt wurde.

Viele Grüße 
crodthauser
crodthauser (2023-05-20 21:14:10+00:00): Hallo zusammen,

ich war heute zufällig genau an dieser Stelle. Es sind rundherum weiterhin alles Fußwege (DE:239), also der Weg zur Brücke, die Brücke selbst und der Weg entlang der Agger.

Viele Grüße
crodthauser
gurglypipe (2023-05-15 11:54:00+00:00): This basically re-applies the changes to the path from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135904623 after reverting it (in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136122957) to restore the position of the trig point.

The trig point (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7685964297) had a note saying its position had been calibrated for calculating imagery offsets, so moving it is probably going to break things.
Emilius123 (2023-05-15 12:41:31+00:00): Hallo,

Du hast diesem Hydranten hier als Name "Jakob-Böshenz-Straße 44" hinzugefügt. Ist dies wirklich der offizielle Name, doch eher eine Referenz (wie es bei Briefkästen auch ist), oder gar echt nur die Adresse?
elsy1 (2023-05-15 14:48:33+00:00): درود شما کل ناحیه دانشگاه را به ساختمان ویرایش کردید و موجب خرابکاری شده برگشت داده شد
pitfire (2023-05-17 05:52:13+00:00): Hallo Jens_L,
du hast auch hier einen, Weg auf "bicycle 	yes" gesetzt. Das kann nicht sein. Der weitere Verlauf ist ein Holzsteeg mit definitiv Radfahrverbot. Die gesamte Strecke ist ab dem Sportplatz "traffic_sign=DE:239".
Du kommst leider nach StVO mit dem Rad aus dem Auel nicht Richtung Lohmar/Siegburg.
pitfire (2023-05-17 06:03:51+00:00): Der "Holzweg (133022581, v15)"  ist auch nicht für Rad freigegeben!
silversurfer83 (2023-05-15 19:27:06+00:00): Moin Benjamin,

Herzlich willkommen bei OSM :)

Mutig, direkt an Flughäfen einzusteigen ;) 
Dazu direkt auch eine Anmerkung: Du hast hier und in der Änderung davor einen Weg mit "aeroway=taxiway" getaggt. 
Das Problem: Die Wege hatten schon einen tag. Der weist darauf hin, dass die taxiways außer Betrieb sind. Daher meine Frage: Bist du dir ganz sicher, dass die Taxiways hier und und FRA genutzt werden? Falls ja, woher stammen die Informationen?

Dass die taxiways als "disused:aeroway=taxiway" getaggt sind, hast du vermutlich nicht gesehen, da der von dir genutzte editor diese tags eher Stiefmütterlich ganz am Ende der Spalte rechts unter "eigenschaften" versteckt.

Ich lasse dir noch ein paar hilfreiche Links für Einsteiger da und erwarte deine Antwort :)

happy mapping
silversurfer83

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Beginners%27_guide
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contact_channels#Chats.2Fmessengers
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments

zwar nicht unbedingt für Anfänger aber passend zu meinem Kommentar: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lifecycle_prefix
pitfire (2023-05-19 11:25:08+00:00): Hallo Jens_L,
die Brücke ist eindeutig nicht fürs radeln freigegeben. Ist wegen Schäden nur eingeschränkt nutzbar.
https://www.ksta.de/region/rhein-sieg-bonn/lohmar/fuenf-fussgaenger-duerfen-lohmarer-bruecke-gleichzeitig-betreten-244040
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-07 09:41:27+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1058823704/history - czyli to już nie Lotos?

Jak tak to 

brand:wikidata 	Q1256909
brand:wikipedia 	pl:Grupa Lotos

można zdjąć chyba?
micholek (2023-08-07 14:44:04+00:00): Oni chyba biorą paliwo od Lotosu, jeśli to nie ma znaczenia w kontekście tagu brand to można usunąć.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-08 07:29:40+00:00): Przy brand ma znaczenie to co na szyldzie jest

A z Lotosu już nie biorą bo Lotos nie istnieje

Wyedytowałem
rodolfovargas (2023-05-16 01:18:01+00:00): Hola :)

Esto se puede mapear con el TAG: entrance=main, mapeado SOBRE la vía peatonal, como NODO.

El punto se borrara.

Saludos.
HellMap (2023-05-15 20:03:43+00:00): Hello again,

Building additions like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173048317 or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173048172 or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173047928 etc. are all misaligned. As I mentioned before, Bing is not a good source in Latvia for aerial tracing with no reference points in the middle of nowhere.

Speaking in general, I guess it's better than nothing. But it really feels like the time could be spent more efficiently than using low-resolution offset imagery to add singular buildings.

Thanks
richlv (2023-05-15 21:22:46+00:00): Hi Aleksandar1994, as this problem does not seem to be an exception, please pause any additions in Latvia for now.
Before resuming, please discuss with the local community (preferably at https://osmlatvija.zulipchat.com) how to best fix these recurring issues.
Aleksandar1994 (2023-05-18 09:40:27+00:00): Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
 
We apologize for any misunderstandings or oversights and are committed to making sure our processes adhere to local guidelines. As we strive to validate map edits worldwide, we sometimes use Bing aerial imagery when local imagery is not available or is of poor quality.
 
However, we understand the importance of using high-quality local imagery, and we are working to improve our logic to use correct imagery depending on the region.
 
If you notice any further discrepancies or have additional feedback, please don't hesitate to let us know.
 
Thank you again for your attention to this matter.
 
Aleksandar
richlv (2023-05-25 12:41:01+00:00): Hi Aleksandar, thank you for your reply.
It seems to be rather generic, though. As this same problem has happened multiple times, could you please detail the exact steps taken to fix this - especially regarding the manual aspect (as per the changeset message, "Manually checked")?

Such repeated problems show Microsoft and Bing in a less positive light, and create unnecessary tensions with local communities, which eventually can lead to arbitration by DWG, account blocks etc. That's something we all would like to avoid.

Latvian OSM community is the most active in this Zulip chat currently: https://osmlatvija.zulipchat.com .
It would be greatly appreciated if you had a chance to join and discuss this topic with the community - we have representatives from other companies doing that with great success.

Additionally, in June 8-9 the State of the Map Baltics conference takes place in Riga - we'd be happy to welcome you to Latvia and work together in person for a better map in the future :)
https://2023.sotm-baltics.org/
Aleksandar1994 (2023-05-26 14:19:20+00:00): Hi richlv,
 
Thank you for the invitation to the conference and the local community! I will ask about the possibility to attend the conference and we will explore how we can work closely with the local community (in Latvia and in general).
 
We improved our validation software so that our editorial team now has the country being shown when judging changesets, so we can catch this early. We will also try to adjust the offset as needed for Latvia. I also acknowledge that we might not be 100% successful as there are a lot of changes to check, but if it happens again, I want to you know that those could only be honest mistakes. Please let us know if you notice anything else (or this thing again), so we can improve!
As a long-term solution, we will ping a satellite team to give a better offset for Latvia. 

Best regards
Aleksandar
audtr (2023-07-30 20:31:40+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3800200
rskedgell (2023-05-15 14:11:34+00:00): Thanks for adding this - the separate sidewalks added in this area seem to have been more decorative than functional, so are currently of limited use for pedestrian routing.

In order for routing engines to include a new edge in the routing graph, the added way generally needs to have a highway=* tag, in this case highway=footway.

I have added this, together with information about the crossing (type, accessibility, etc.) in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136128749
GEO ECLA (2023-05-15 13:28:33+00:00): Sûr pour la surface ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136125500
Julien39 (2023-05-15 13:47:37+00:00): Ouhla non, à Chilly il y a erreur, en effet.
Je ne trouve pas de source attestant du revêtement.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136125500
Fizzie-DWG (2023-05-18 03:51:49+00:00): Hi Alkalln. Sorry, but somethings seems to have wrong here, as the wood involved appears to have disappeared off the map?
Fizzie-DWG (2023-05-18 03:52:31+00:00): Sorry, should have added that that refers to Relation: 11570433
AlkalIn (2023-10-18 13:24:38+00:00): Hi Fizzie41,
Indeed the multipolygon was not complete. I corrected that.
Dodko (2023-05-16 06:25:44+00:00): Do názvu sa píše len skutočný názov objektu a táto odbočka nie je pomenovaná.
https://www.freemap.sk/#map=18/49.118567/20.615153&layers=XI
Aleks-Berlin (2023-05-16 08:21:59+00:00): Hi Tajtrdlik, please write "wikipedia=de:Abcd" not "=http..."
see here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia
Thanks, Alex
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2023-11-28 15:46:41+00:00): Der er vist gået noget galt med ensretning her:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35770445
osmviborg (2023-11-28 16:00:13+00:00): 🤭
Andrea Musuruane (2023-05-15 15:33:35+00:00): Ciao. Perdonami, ma non trovo notizie su questo import. Come detto, devi seguire queste regole: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines Grazie, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136126739
NieWnen (2023-05-15 14:45:47+00:00): https://www.pruszkow.pl/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Linia-2-od-01.04.2023.pdf
jeslop (2023-05-15 14:22:08+00:00): El nombre de esta carretera según su operador es Autovía dce las Rías Baixas y así es como debe aparecer. El nombre en castellano ya va en su correspondiente etiqueta. Lo cambio.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
Autopistero20502020 (2023-06-30 09:44:12+00:00): Hola, Jesús:

Según en la ley de Carreteras 2015, oficialmente esta en castellano como Autovía de las Rías Bajas. En la provincia de Zamora, aparece un cartel que esta en castellano y en la provincia de Pontevedra aparece un cartel que esta en gallego y en ningún lado, no existe la oficialidad "Autovía de las Rías Baixas" para evitar el conflicto lingüístico. Creo que sería mejor dejar así "Autovía das Rías Baixas / Autovías de las Rías Bajas", pero tu decidirás si estas de acuerdo o no.

Un saludo.
jeslop (2023-06-30 10:21:21+00:00): Hola Autopistero. Según el último Catálogo Oficial de Carreteras, de fecha 31/12/2021, el nombre es Autovía de las Rías Baixas, lo que le da toda la oficialidad. Puedes consultarlo aquí: https://www.mitma.gob.es/carreteras/catalogo-y-evolucion-de-la-red-de-carreteras, apartado Catálogo de la RCE. Por tanto la que ya no existe es esa denominación en castellano. Los carteles en estos casos no suelen ser indicativos, pues pueden pasar años hasta que son cambiados. En este caso no es una cuestión de estar o no de acuerdo, es que el Ministerio la denomina así.

Saludos.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
Autopistero20502020 (2023-06-30 10:40:58+00:00): Hola de nuevo:

Ah, eso se refería el catalogo y no la ley Carreteras 2015. Ya lo veo, gracias.

Un saludo.
literan (2023-05-15 20:08:08+00:00): откачу ваш тест, тем более, что навандалили с кофейней на Красном Октябре, и многие теги кривь-вкось
Голубев С С (2023-05-16 12:18:07+00:00): Добрый день, Literan!
Спасибо за поддержку, как для новичка.
Информация принята  и более не будет выкладываться некорректно.
Есть вопрос один и важный, можете подсказать пожалуйста , в целом не имея практики , а только основываясь на советах и предположениях коллег. можно ли в OSM, сделать построение объектов и меток. касаемые только лично для себя, с последующей передачи данных внутренним пользователям. Как бы использовать пллатформу OSM? а работать в собственном слое. Нас обсолютно не интересуют объекты массового пользования а тольк тех. объекты и привязки к ним. Пытаемся настроить интерактивную систему , определяющие комплексный узел с комментариями и пояснениями под своим порядковым номером.
literan (2023-05-16 12:36:48+00:00): Я не программист ,и вряд ли дам вам ценный совет. 

Возможно, тут будет полезная информация https://switch2osm.org/

Попробуйте спросить на форуме https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/ru/63

либо в телеграм-канале https://t.me/ruosm
literan (2023-05-16 15:17:15+00:00): http://use.openstreetmap.ru/
user_5359 (2023-05-15 18:08:33+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Don't delete existing ways! You can add the tag access=private to the way (done).
2feet (2023-05-15 20:21:31+00:00): It's not a private path. It is private property. Suggesting there is a path here
is encouraging people to trespass and therefore needs to be deleted.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-16 03:36:04+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1223998671
mnitrmnitr (2023-05-15 18:34:43+00:00): Kurz interessehalber die Motivation für die Verschiebung?
firefoxinspace (2023-05-16 13:29:33+00:00): dass die Anzeige über dem Ortskern erscheint
Gregory Peony (2023-05-15 17:35:49+00:00): Please do not add map data that is not requested in the instructions of a project as it can make a task more difficult to validate and requires more time to map. I believe the tree rows you added are inaccurate as nearby trees have a much greater diamiter/width.

The round building you added is not a building as it does not cast a shadow. Other nearby buildings cast a clear significant shadow in this imagery. 

Look (but do not map) beyond your task area for features you can definitely identify and use them as a reference when mapping.
jeslop (2023-05-15 14:21:26+00:00): Hola autopistero.

El nombre de esta carretera según su operador es Autovía Lugo-Ourense y así es como debe aparecer. El nombre en castellano ya va en su correspondiente etiqueta. Lo cambio.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
Autopistero20502020 (2023-06-30 09:48:05+00:00): Hola, Jesús:

Aunque esta dentro de Galicia, no hay problema que se queda con el nombre en gallego como titulo principal.

Gracias por la modificación y un saludo.
lipuma (2023-05-17 13:20:26+00:00): Hi marek, I found a spot with a lot of tagless lines and overlapping ways and incorrect tags on buildings.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173065859#map=19/27.69693/85.31513

Was this done by accident? Did you do an import?
gurglypipe (2023-05-15 14:57:38+00:00): Did you see the latest discussion from the National Trust and the OSM’s Data Working Group (DWG) on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135290950?

The National Trust (via AWMapper) have said that path restoration has taken place for this path, and that they are looking into signage.

That does not stop you from walking along this path if you really want to, but it does make it pretty clear that the path should not be on a public map. Putting it on a public map effectively encourages people to use it.

Do you have any response to their points or the discussion as a whole?
user_16720371 (2023-05-15 15:08:50+00:00): Nope, it's all noddy talk.
SomeoneElse (2023-05-15 15:30:07+00:00): Oh dear.  See See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7131 . .
Jakka (2023-05-15 15:42:47+00:00): nr 63 se trouve ici ?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40347913
mike140 (2023-05-15 14:19:01+00:00): З тегом addr:street потрібно вказувати повну назву вулиці, в даному випадку вулиця Романа Гралюка, інакше не буде коректно працювати адресний пошук. І додати сюди ж номер будинку непотрібно - для нього є окремий тег
Getpin_Com (2024-03-11 19:34:09+00:00): Дякую за інформацію. Виправлю
eggie (2023-05-15 14:47:16+00:00): Beste Quartz  Je kunt helaas net editor iD geen routerelaties bewerken. Dat kan alleen met editor JOSM
 
editor josm stap voor stap 

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/editor-josm-stap-voor-stap/75047 

 MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-05-15 14:53:12+00:00): Je wijzigingen heb ik doorgestuurd naar een van de OV route experts.
MVG
eggie
Leo Slager (2023-05-15 15:36:59+00:00): Inderdaad zijn de routes van lijn 37 en 637 gebroken.
De editor iD plakt de nieuwe wegen en haltes achteraan de route. Dan staan ze dus niet in de juiste volgorde en is de route gebroken.
Ook de role van de halte moet nog ingevuld worden, role=platform.
Met de editor JOSM kun je de wegen en haltes makkelijk op de juiste plaats in de route invoegen.
Leo Slager (2023-05-15 15:37:23+00:00): De routes zijn weer gerepareerd.
eggie (2023-05-15 16:34:54+00:00): Leo.. bedankt..
Groet..
eggie
Quartz1 (2023-05-17 12:04:09+00:00): Hoi Eggie en Leo,

Mijn excuses voor het verbreken van deze route. In het vervolg zal ik me beter inlezen voordat ik een edit maak en ik ga zeker kijken naar de JOSM-editor. Daarnaast bedankt voor het repareren van de lijn.

mvg
Quartz
Leo Slager (2023-05-17 15:19:21+00:00): Dag Quartz,

We nemen je ook niets kwalijk.
Ga rustig verder met mappen.
Al doende leert men het vak !

mvg
Leo
zstadler (2025-03-27 14:04:28+00:00): Hi,

The use of access=restricted is unclear and [considered a mistake](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access?uselang=en#Possible_tagging_mistakes)  by the wiki

What is the actual restriction for
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173069168
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173069171
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1173069172
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1151952295
rodolfovargas (2023-05-16 01:10:05+00:00): Hola :)

Muy bien mapeado.
Solo colocar en name: "Refugio Oso Jucumari", ya que son refugios para los animales.