piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
matheusgomesms (2025-08-14 11:08:33+00:00): Hey dcskobuffs,

Thank you for your message!

I didn't know the existence of that tag, but you're right, it fits much better, since those ways are not Public Transport alike.

Here's the changeset:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170430902

Feel free to improve/change if you think you have to!

Best,
Matheus
dcskobuffs (2025-08-14 20:42:44+00:00): Thank you for making those updates, they look great!

Best, dcskobuffs
eggie (2024-01-28 14:49:14+00:00): Juseit  Je vraagt feedback Lijkt me oke zo.
MVG
eggie
juseit (2024-01-28 14:53:56+00:00): Mooi, begin het te leren... :-)....
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-23 16:23:25+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11557898479/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
PaoloLombardi (2024-01-29 15:00:52+00:00): C'è un motivo particolare per cui hai tolto le service private che ho disegnato a Montaldo?
Le sto riaddando tutte.
Saluti.
Claudio Fogliato (2024-01-29 15:12:07+00:00): Ciao, ho lasciato quelle effettivamente percorribili a Roapiana (inizio e fine della borgata), quelle rimosse sono cortili, interpoderali o vialetti chiusi, ce ne sarebbero anche altre non corrette ma forse non le ho tolte tutte.
PaoloLombardi (2024-01-29 17:36:46+00:00): Buondì
Le service che ho ridisegnato sono in realtà accessi privati alle abitazioni (da qualche parte nelle abitazioni si deve entrare) sia che siano stradine, vialetti o cortili.
Oltre a visionare direttamente sul campo si può fare uso di GStreetView.
Pertanto rimane così come le ho disegnate.
Grazie.
Claudio Fogliato (2024-01-29 19:05:22+00:00): I miei appunti derivano dal fatto che ci vivo. Hai disegnato (anche) strade che non esistono dentro a giardini o spiazzi senza alcuna strada. Anche una strada in casa mia, che ti garantisco che non c’è ;). A cosa servono se sono sbagliati o inaccessibili? Andrebbero allora aggiunti tutti i cortili, vialetti, scalette ecc., che ovviamente non ci sono. Chiedo per capire la logica. Buona serata
PaoloLombardi (2024-01-29 19:47:47+00:00): Buondì
Premesso che stiamo discutendo su una piattaforma dove mancano ancora troppi dati sotto forma di Highways.
Tornando a quelle da me aggiunte lungo la strada chiamata "Via Roapiana" di seguito puoi vedere l'elenco con la spiegazione logica:

1244097948 > Ingresso privato in un cortile con accesso per i veicoli
1243482295 > Strada di accesso ad una serie di abitazioni
1244097949 > Accesso privato ad un cortile sterrato che funge anche da parcheggio privato
1244097950 > Strada per me pubblica quindi "residential"
1244097951 > Ingresso privato in un cortile con accesso per i veicoli
1244097953 > Ingresso privato in un cortile sterrato con accesso per i veicoli
1244097952 > Ingresso privato in un cortile sterrato con accesso per i veicoli
1244097954 > Ingresso privato in un cortile con accesso per i veicoli
1244097956 > Accesso privato su sterrato
1243482305 > Ingresso privato con accesso per i veicoli
1243482301 > Ingresso privato in un cortile con accesso per i veicoli
1244097955 > Ingresso privato in un cortile con accesso per i veicoli
1244097942 > Ingresso privato
1244097943 > Ingresso privato in un cortile con accesso per i veicoli

In realtà mancano delle service perché ci sarebbero altri ingressi privati lungo Via Roapiana che necessitano ancora di questo tipo di highway ma mi sono limitato per questione di tempo.
Come puoi indicare un percorso pedonale che collega una qualsiasi highway all’ingresso di un edificio puoi anche usare una service indicando addirittura la direzione che si dirama dalla direttrice ma soprattutto in tal modo si può “localizzare” l’esatta posizione dell’ingresso in un edificio.
Per fare un esempio logico se un veicolo di emergenza deve raggiungere un particolare edificio in tal modo hai un’idea di dov’è ubicata la via di accesso all’ingresso.

Ora esattamente quale di queste sarebbe “il cortile di casa tua”?
Così lo possiamo sistemare insieme.
Grazie.
Claudio Fogliato (2024-01-30 15:20:47+00:00): Premetto che, a scanso di equivoci, non è mia intenzione polemizzare (non avrebbe senso su un sistema di UGC, anzi!), ma ho scritto solo per capire la logica delle tue aggiunte oltre a voler dare informazioni dirette. Proprio dalla tua spiegazione capisco l’intento, ma allo stesso tempo ritengo che l’inserire strade che non sono tali (che sono violetti, giardini, disimpegni, ecc.) o accessi in realtà "inaccessibili" possa essere un problema, in più con la medesima logica dovresti appunto aggiungerne centinaia solo nelle borgate montaldesi principali, se si volesse fare un lavoro completo e coerente. Questo al netto di alcune che hai inserito correttamente (strade interpoderali che non c’erano), sia chiaro. 
Credo che per questo tipo di lavoro, indubbiamente certosino, sia necessario conoscere direttamente i luoghi. Alcune delle tue aggiunte sono in punti non visibili da GSV e infatti non corrette; ora non riesco a verificare i codici delle modifiche e spiegartelo punto per punto, ad esempio attorno a casa mia sono indicate due “strade” che non sono tali e peraltro non portano neanche all’accesso all’abitazione. 
Sono in generale borgate strette e contorte dove gli accessi anche dei veicoli di servizio o emergenza non si spingono mai oltre la strada principale, e dare indicazioni sbagliate potrebbe essere controproducente.
Se si può fare e se vuoi, proverò a commentare le varie aggiunte in zona montaldo per darti indicazioni “di prima mano”, considerando comunque che per il lavoro che intendi fare tu probabilmente ci vorranno anni ;)
Buona serata
eggie (2024-01-28 07:13:35+00:00): Beste user. Geef concreet aan wat je hebt gedaan. 
Bv adressen goed gezet.. of gebouwen opnieuw uitgelijnd.
Tip:  Je kunt geen gebouwen uitlijnen op grond van een schuingenomen luchtfoto.
Alle gebouwen zijn import vanuit de BAG en liggen in de regel heel precies.Nu dus niet meer.
Overkappingen staan niet in de BAG. Het gaat dan niet om de daken, maar om de plek waar het geboyw echt op maaiveldhoogte staat.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-01-28 07:21:37+00:00): Gebouwen enigzins hersteld mbv de BGT,
eggie (2024-01-28 07:38:48+00:00): Gebouwen die niet meer kloppen kun je doorgeven aan de BAG Dan komt het bij herimport vanzelf goed in OSM
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/?searchQuery=Gedempte+Spui&objectId=0584100001272681&theme=BRT+Achtergrond&geometry.x=87714.56807587753&geometry.y=427068.758442341&zoomlevel=14.525034037539243&bijbehorendeAdressen=Pand
chris66 (2024-07-01 09:46:00+00:00): Hi,
ist eventuell maxheight gemeint statt height?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/445311539
jmsbert (2024-07-01 20:05:57+00:00): Die height=4.95 stellen die vor Ort gemessene Durchfahrshöhe dar - vergleichbar mit width=* für gemessene Breiten von z.B. Fahrbahnen. Ein Schild für die max. zulässige Durchfahrtshöhe fehlt (daher hier maxheight=default gesetzt).
Ich habe nun entsprechend des OSM-Wiki das Zusatztag "source:height=survey" auf dem Segment gesetzt.
chris66 (2024-07-02 08:53:07+00:00): Höhe ist Höhe und nicht Durchfahrtshöhe. Ich denke das müsste maxheight:physical sein.
jmsbert (2024-07-02 20:20:20+00:00): OK - ich habe nun das tag maxheight:physical nun gesetzt - auch wenn ich an dieser Stelle das OSM Wiki noch verbesserungswürdig halte. Überzeugt hat mich letztendlich der Text der unter "siehe auch" zum maxheight:physical steht: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:maxheight#Siehe_auch
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-18 15:06:24+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146760714
yasslay (2024-01-28 20:47:42+00:00): + this seems permanent/indefinite
Barroszt (2024-03-14 09:52:38+00:00): Gdzie są podzielone zabudowy mieszkaniowe w Toruniu? Mapy Torunia wyglądają teraz gorzej, a nie lepiej.
eggie (2024-01-28 14:45:40+00:00): Dag Sven
Je vraagt feedback 
Ik heb atm=yes verwijderd
Dat hoeft niet bij amenity=atm

name=Geldmaat hoeft ook niet operator=Geldmaat is voldoende.

MVG
eggie
ChillyDL (2024-01-29 20:36:50+00:00): Hello Michael Collinson,
I see you used site_type=industrial and =building on a number of edits of yours recently. site_type is deprecated, which makes its use a bit unfortunate, your dozen of edits being the only objects worldwide carrying this key-value combination.

I know there is more to it and I am sure you have reason to not put those object under historic=archaeological_site to begin with. But would you agree to use the archaeological_site=industrial or =building, repectively, which have come to replace site_type= and are widely in use?
MichaelCollinson (2024-02-04 05:17:54+00:00): Yes, I am fine with site_type -> archaeological_site and if you see any more please feel free to change. (IMHO change is a bit silly and retrograde but consensus and conformability are more important).

More generally, I trying to find a way to find to succinctly classify historic POIs. The historic tag itself gives a sense of "how interesting is this?" which I think is good archealogical_site (may be nothing visible or just a grass knoll) vs. (possibly more exciting) ruins for example. Then there is the historic category itself, which is sometimes covered by the "historic" tag itself and sometimes not. Still experimenting and have not found the perfect answer.
baprischka (2024-12-06 19:18:21+00:00): Perché hai cambiato tutti questi addr:* in contact:*?
ivanbranco (2024-12-06 19:51:37+00:00): Per evitare la duplicazione dell'indirizzo, che in Italia identifica l'ingresso, questo ad esempio era già mappato qua: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4736077731

Questa metodologia di tagging è conosciuta come Bremen Schema, per quanto mi riguarda la modifica di megaloman è corretta.
baprischka (2024-12-06 21:02:03+00:00): Capito grazie, infatti mi chiedevo come fare per non duplicare l'indirizzo in questi casi.
vasony (2024-01-27 23:27:55+00:00): Illyés Gyula park
pantufla (2024-03-19 10:14:14+00:00): Hola. Gracias por colaborar. Para números de casas/quintas que no tengan nombre, lo correcto sería usar addr:housenumber=1, etc. 

Si no tiene nombre no lo ponemos. Y si lo tuviera, más correcto sería addr:housename="Quinta Ejemplo".
ivanbranco (2026-03-08 18:49:31+00:00): Hi PcMouse1,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11558309736

what's the meaning of "circumference"="canadian amateur radio basic qualification study guide"?
tastrax (2024-01-28 03:43:49+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
citrula (2024-01-28 06:41:30+00:00): For the sidewalks, you should mark the portion of the way that is crossing the street as highway=footway + footway=crossing. See the wiki for some helpful diagrams: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dcrossing . iD editor will have a tagging preset for this as well, but I don't remember what it's called. Let me know if you have any questions !
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146763922
yawfle (2024-01-28 20:37:55+00:00): Hi! I've reverted this edit, it was correct before your change. Please be careful, odd street relationships like that one are not uncommon in this area. Cheers!
a_random_lemurian (2024-01-29 14:45:06+00:00): reverted by #146823960
blackboxlogic (2024-01-31 16:37:02+00:00): Instead of using the name tag, consider: "trailblazed=yes" and "colour=blue". Mentioning it in case you do a lot of trail mapping.
This could get a map program to show a colored line for the trail.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146764151
AngocA (2024-05-16 17:09:46+00:00): Hola Natalia. Este río ya estaba mapeado, y creaste otro objeto en sentido contrario (aguas arriba) que entraba en conflicto con el existente.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/325040599/history
flohoff (2024-01-28 11:09:28+00:00): 
Moin,
cool das du mit mappst. Ich habe den changeset zufällig gesehen.

Du hast hier einen langen Text in den "name" gepackt. Das gehört nicht in den name. 

In den name gehört nichts beschreibendes oder so sondern lediglich Eigennamen. 

D.h. sowas "Karl-August-Weg" oder "Winni Poo Haus" 

Beschreibendes gehört eher in "description" und das was du hier hast würde eher in "note" gehören.

Dazu hat das Gebäude kein "building=" tag - deshalb wird das auch nicht gerendert in der Karte.

Dazu der namenswechsel auf der 4 - Ich nehme an das ist ein POI - Da ist ein Geschäft? Dann müsste da der Geschäftsname oder typ mit dran - Im moment ist da eine Addresse mit dem name getagged aber nicht WAS das wirklich ist.

Und das es die Bernhardistraße 46 nicht gibt oder gegeben hat bezweifle ich. Selbst das Bundesamt für Kartographie (Die ja über Komune und Land die Daten bekommen) kennt die Hausnummer.

Ach ja - Es gibt für OWL eine kleine Mailingliste auf der du deine Fragen loswerden kannst:

https://gt.owl.de/mailman/listinfo/osm

Flo
flohoff (2024-01-28 11:11:12+00:00): Hi,
hier ist auch wieder der name UND description überladen. Das ist unnötig.

Wenn du eine Straßenbreite mappen möchtest dann muss das als "width" auf den weg. Am besten den dann auftrennen um die Engstelle und nur die mit der Width taggen.

Wenn du da 1.8m taggst werden allerdings ALLE router das meiden. Bei 1.8 passt ja nichtmal ein Golf 3 da durch. Unter 2m wird im Routing/Navigation die Straße für nicht benutzbar für 2 Spurige Fahrzeuge erachtet.

Flo
silversurfer83 (2024-01-28 20:09:09+00:00): Moin :)

ich mische mich mal etwas off topic ein: Nutzer Doncarlos54 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Doncarlos54) hat hier in der Gegend vor 5 Jahren schon ein paar Änderungen gemacht und nicht auf Kommentare geantwortet / reagiert. Nun taucht hier der nächste doncarlos auf.
Lieber don, ich fände es schön, wenn du a) auf Kommentare reagierst und b) die dir angetragenen Informationen nutzt und bei Fragen bitte fragst. Mindestens einen Nutzer kennst du ja schon.

Eine Frage dann noch: Die 1,80m, hast du die gemessen?

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146764446
citrula (2024-01-28 06:32:27+00:00): If it's a preserve, consider changing it to a leisure=nature_reserve. See the wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dnature_reserve
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146764485
M141 (2024-01-28 16:44:32+00:00): So it's an interestingly named park, the city parks and rec website calls it a park but the park's name is a preserve. https://www.copperascovetx.gov/parks/
And one article from the local news exclusively calls it a park but mentions the community desire to preserve it. https://kdhnews.com/news/communities/as-ogletree-gap-undergoes-gradual-change-the-park-continues-to-represent-the-longstanding-beauty-of/article_528e8dcd-e55b-5375-830c-86a08113d866.html
So I'm not sure if this is actually a preserve with any added protections.
citrula (2024-01-28 17:33:52+00:00): leisure=park has a pretty narrow definition, which differs from what we call "parks" in the US. It implies manicured public space. Many "parks" in the US are better tagged as nature reserves on OSM. 
From the wiki page on leisure=park: 
"This tag is intended for (usually urban) parks with managed greenery, located within settlements and nearly always open to general public [...] They are largely a human-sculpted landscape."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark
M141 (2024-01-28 18:13:21+00:00): I'm not sure which is going to be better. About a quarter of the park's greenery is managed by the city and there are no designated trails and it is entirely open to the general public. I think the only reason more of it hasn't been managed is because the local community is against it but there doesn't seem to be any actual legal protections to prevent it.
Anyways, thanks for the info; if you think it needs to be changed still, go ahead. I just wanted to get some of these local parks on the map.
citrula (2024-01-30 17:15:32+00:00): Definitely appreciate adding the parks! The tagging schema is kind of lacking for that sort of partially developed public spaces like this. Happy mapping!
citrula (2024-01-28 06:14:46+00:00): Welcome to OSM, thanks for your contribution
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146764557
citrula (2024-01-28 06:34:59+00:00): When elements can be mapped as a node or an area (like parks) you should only have one. I combined the old node onto your new park boundary in this changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146767636
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146764599
Glassman (2024-01-31 19:30:09+00:00): I squared the building to better align with their roof. To square a building, select the outline, then just type a "q". Also the imagery appears offset. You can change the offset in the editor by using the background icon on the right side. The offset adjustment is located near the bottom.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146764796
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-03-07 11:04:58+00:00): Are you planning to finish conflation so there's less duplication?
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-03-07 11:07:25+00:00): thanks for doing this btw
watmildon (2024-03-07 18:33:29+00:00): The intent was for there to be no duplication but it's totally possible I botched it somehow. Was there some place in particular that needs some more attention from me? Happy to take a look at it.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-03-07 23:35:02+00:00): The downtown area has several businesses and apartment buildings that already have the addresses that were added in this changeset. 100 Corrina, 110 Corrina, 100 East Main for example.
watmildon (2024-03-08 18:54:23+00:00): Gotcha, I will check it out. Thanks for the heads up.
watmildon (2024-03-08 19:06:38+00:00): Curiously the JOSM validator does not flag them as duplicates. I am asking around if that's expected and will make sure I get this cleaned up once I get that sorted out. Hopefully only a few days.
watmildon (2024-03-11 21:36:20+00:00): So it seems JOSM will not flag things with name= as it presume they are a separate entity with (potentially correct) duplicate tagging. There's a setting that will be available in JOSM in the next release that will make this check a bit better so I'll have to roll through in a month or so and clean up. Thanks again for letting me know!
Allison P (2024-03-11 22:22:06+00:00): In the meantime, one technique is to remove all the extra tags, then perform the dupe check. You can then purge the existing objects before uploading.
watmildon (2024-03-11 23:22:31+00:00): Oh that's a lovely workaround! Very clever.

On it.
watmildon (2024-03-11 23:50:33+00:00): This method is very slow but works. I should have this all cleaned up in a bit. Thanks all!
AgusQui (2024-04-08 03:19:26+00:00): ¿porque le cambiaste el nombre a AU Peron?
gnicomorel (2024-04-08 03:28:46+00:00): El nombre correcto es Autopista Camino del Buen Ayre (fuente: https://acortar.link/NSqwJM). Saludos.
AgusQui (2024-04-12 03:12:08+00:00): El Wikipedia usan ambos nombres, en OSM usamos como referencia principal la cartelería oficial, la cual indica AU Peron, el otro nombre se puede dejar como alt_name
gnicomorel (2024-04-12 03:47:15+00:00): Visto desde la conexión norte-sur la cartelería dice "AU Cno. del Buen Ayre", ¿cómo se procede?
AgusQui (2024-04-12 13:04:23+00:00): Tenés foto? No entiendo a qué conexión te referís
MxxCon (2024-02-04 05:38:21+00:00): All of these photos are rotated 90' and are pretty low resolution. 🫤
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146765075
IraGersh (2024-02-04 14:54:28+00:00): I normally take photos at very low res because I take so many and they aren't art shots.  Sometimes OSM rotates them based on info in the photo and sometimes it doesn't.  I think I tried rotating them first in Windows and then uploading to wikimedia and it made no difference.
IraGersh (2024-02-04 17:26:59+00:00): These photos are loaded into Imgur by MapComplete and Imgur doesn't read metadata which means that if I take a photo with my phone in portrait mode, Imgur will show it in Landscape. I think that Wikimedia reads metadata.  I have to remember that Imgur is stupid and I have take photos in landscape mode all the time.
MxxCon (2024-02-04 05:39:12+00:00): Why did you delete incline tags from steps in this edit?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146765279
IraGersh (2024-02-04 14:57:16+00:00): Some steps had them and some didn't.   No one puts in steps if there isn't an incline and and the tag seems to imply one direction only which is never the case in this park.  The steps are used for going up and down.
MxxCon (2024-02-04 15:31:15+00:00): This tag is used to indicate which end of the steps is up and which is down.
IraGersh (2024-02-04 15:51:54+00:00): Huh?  Which end?  This implies two separate one way ways. Seems totally redundant if there is only one way.
alester (2024-02-02 03:28:38+00:00): This needs some re-working. Some of these are marking ridges, so they probably shouldn't be tagged as peaks at all, let alone a single fixed elevation value. One is a blatant mis-tagging of a tree near Port Alberni.
DENelson83 (2024-02-02 03:33:33+00:00): That would be a good idea.  I do not know why ridges were tagged as peaks in the first place.
BCNorwich (2024-01-31 08:05:13+00:00): Hi, Just to let you know that OSM best practice is not to use the tag area:highway=footway. Instead use the tag highway=footway and area=yes. 

The proposals area:highway= has been abandoned, please see here:- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Area:highway

I've amended the tags in this area.

Regards Bernard.
dktue (2024-03-04 21:31:42+00:00): Woher hast Du die Information bezüglich dieses VOR?
geozeisig (2024-03-05 06:37:06+00:00): Man sieht es auf Esri Luftbild das es eine DVOR ist. Man sieht die 49 Antennen im Kreis und eine in der Mitte. Das Gitter ist das sogenannte Gegengewicht, was zum Abstrahlen ebenso wichtig ist.
Warin61 (2024-01-29 01:22:33+00:00): Relation 3423235 - 546 bus route is once again broken. The only mapper making the changes that broke the route is you. 

Will you please fix it so you can learn how not to brake these Public Transport version 2 routes??? 

See 
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=151.02734&lat=-33.77448&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=ptv2_routes_valid%2Cptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes%2Cptv2_routes_valid%2Cptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Warin61/diary/45106
Warin61 (2024-01-29 01:24:01+00:00): The same comment applies to bus route 3423234 bus route 549...
Lockstar (2024-01-29 09:12:06+00:00): I thought I'd fixed this but apparently not.  Checked and uploaded repairs - should be good now.  Thanks.
skquinn (2024-01-28 06:55:34+00:00): Old comment submitted by mistake. Should be: Added bar, pool hall. Sources should be: Bing; survey
mavl (2024-02-23 18:52:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 147818131, 147828921 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
mavl (2024-02-23 18:51:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 147818131, 147828921 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].