piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NorthCrab_upload (2024-09-19 14:10:59+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10834046068

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
kartler175 (2024-09-21 15:10:39+00:00): reverted falsely orthogonized polygons:  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156916050
tastrax (2024-09-20 11:41:47+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#Phone_Numbers 
To get the + symbol on a mobile device numeric keypad you may need to do a LONG press on the zero.
I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
mueschel (2024-09-22 13:01:46+00:00): Hallo,
die toll:* Tags sind etwas seltsam:
"8 EUR (before 10:00 and after 15:00) / 6 EUR (15:00 onward)"

Die beiden Zeiträume überlappen sich. Was bezahlt man denn zu welchen Zeiten?
wildmaps (2024-09-22 13:45:09+00:00): Hallo, da ist mir ein Fehler unterlaufen.

Bis zum 03.11.2024 kann man die Straße mit dem eigenen PKW vor 10.00 Uhr und ab 15.00 Uhr erreichen. 

Auffahrtsgebühr auf die Plätzwiese:
- Autos bis max. 9 Sitzplätze 10,00 €
- Motorräder 8,00 €
- Personen mit Behindertenausweis 7,00 €

Ab 15:00 Uhr gelten folgende Tarife:
- Autos bis max. 9 Sitzplätze 7,00€
- Motorräder 6,00 €
- Personen mit Behindertenausweis 5,00 €

Kannst du das vielleicht richtigstellen?
wildmaps (2024-09-22 13:45:49+00:00): Ja mit dem Behindertenausweis kannst du jederzeit auf die Plätzwiese fahren. Es genügt den Ausweis am Kontrollpunkt Brückele vorzuweisen. Für PKW`s mit Behindertenausweis gilt eine reduzierte Auffahrsgebühr.
wildmaps (2024-09-22 13:46:19+00:00): Weiter Infos: https://www.prags.bz/de/plaetzwiese
mueschel (2024-09-22 17:05:54+00:00): Ich habe die Tags editiert, ich denke jetzt sollte es passen.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-09-21 01:34:54+00:00): This changeset added motorway tag to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1236738038/history/3
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156823407
bxl-forever (2024-09-28 16:05:48+00:00): Hello,

Are there really 2 places named Mystical next to each other?

There was this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11510928353

And you added this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12186412112
SachaBe (2024-09-30 06:34:03+00:00): Good catch! Removed the duplicate, thanks :)
flohoff (2024-09-19 14:34:49+00:00): Hi,
has this mechanical edit been discussed before?

Can you point me to the discussion? 

As per requirements mechanical edits need to be announced and discussed beforehand.


Flo
Yurii Skvortsov (2024-09-19 15:37:29+00:00): Hello, I apologize for the editing. I did this because after looking at Google maps at all the stops it was considered to be a tram, I apologize for the inconvenience
flohoff (2024-09-20 13:14:39+00:00): Okay - there are multiple issues here which are right now beeing discussed in the German Forum.

Your changesets will be reverted.

Using Google maps/streetview etc itself is also absolutely not okay. Its not allowed to be used because of of licensing issues.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mechanical-edit-level-crossing-vs-tram-level-crossing/118980

Flo
woodpeck_repair (2024-12-02 23:53:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 159862440, 159862427, 159862512, 159862481, 159862457, 159862433 where the changeset comment is: revert roblox_gmx edits, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16954
alesarrett (2024-09-20 07:59:39+00:00): Ciao Flight777, ho visto molti changeset simili a questo in cui aggiungi layer=1 dove è presente un building=roof.
La key layer si usa in caso di elementi che si incrociano o si sovrappongono ("The layer=* tag is one of several methods used to describe vertical relationships between crossing or overlapping features." qui https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer?uselang=en
C'è qualche motivo specifico perché la stai agiungendo? Altrimenti sarebbe da togliere.
Flight777 (2024-09-20 08:22:48+00:00): Ciao  le tettoie per import  dovrebbero se non sbaglio essere 
tettoia 	building=roof + layer=1
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lecce (solo per esempio in italiano)
se vedi sul id problemi  come avvertimenti viene segnalato 
Se sbaglio o hai informazioni contrastati avvertimi.
Flight777 (2024-09-20 08:29:09+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:building%3Droof
alesarrett (2024-09-20 09:38:47+00:00): Grazie per la risposta. Le impostazioni di import di Lecce non so chi le abbia seguite, ma ipotizzo che abbiano aggiunto layer=1 nell'ipotesi che sotto ci passasse qualcosa e per evitare conflitti. Se però l'elemento roof non ha nulla sotto, layer non è assolutamente necessario. Se guardi anche la pagina del wiki che hai linkato, layer è indicato solamente quando roof è sovrapposto a qualcos'altro, per indicare come gli elementi sono sovrapposti verticalmente. Se c'è solo il roof, il layer non ci va.
alesarrett (2024-09-20 09:41:03+00:00): Cmq ho visto che in effetti in iD dà un warning. Secondo me è il warning ad essere errato, ma approfondisco :-) grazie
Flight777 (2024-09-20 09:41:44+00:00): Ok Grazie per la delucidazione
alesarrett (2024-09-20 09:52:57+00:00): Ho aperto una issue qui: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/10470
Vediamo cosa dicono.
osmviborg (2024-09-19 14:57:02+00:00): Checker du nogensinde datoen på de ting du laver om? Se med her: https://dataforsyningen.dk/map/2776
osmviborg (2024-09-19 15:02:54+00:00): Hvis du ikke kan integrere dataforsyningens kort i din editor så vær meget varsom som at bruge billederne som kilde. Det her er noget roderi.
eggie (2024-09-19 16:55:17+00:00): Please use the present addressnode to tag on... Not the building shape. Please no duplicated addresses at the buildingshape.
Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2024-09-19 16:56:48+00:00): I removed the duplicated info from the buildingshap.. De club is also tagged at the sportscentre.
Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2024-09-19 17:01:01+00:00): added pitches...   The sports centre is incl the building.
CTRL F5 for effect.
gr eggie
Cicuta33 (2024-09-20 07:14:22+00:00): Thanks eggie!
Xvtn (2024-09-20 15:32:08+00:00): I was able to hike out to Bob Stewart Peak last summer via the trail (apparently) named Brushy Springs Trail. Were you able to verify it isn't accessible anymore? If not, I'd say an informal path with poor visibility is still appropriate based on my memory of that area.
Oregonian3 (2024-09-20 18:21:22+00:00): Oh weird not sure what happened there; looks like I somehow accidentally deleted some of the path unintentionally!
Oregonian3 (2024-09-20 18:24:23+00:00): Ok, I think I figured out what happened:

The name "Brushy Springs Trail" comes from the official USFS map, but the USFS map itself has the trail descending into the basin east of Box Elder Peak and south of Bob Stewart Peak. However, I was unable to find any trace of the trail on the Strava heatmap or on any aerial imagery, so it doesn't seem to actually exist in most places.

The part that remains on the map is the one part of the official Brushy Springs Trail that appears to actually exist nowadays, between the main ridge and Bob Stewart Peak. The extra bit that I accidentally deleted is not part of the Brushy Spring trail; seems like I probably meant to mark it as informal but instead deleted it entirely accidentally.
Xvtn (2024-09-29 01:33:15+00:00): Gotcha, thanks for investigating! Funny we're talking about this because over on the forum there is a fiery debate and reconciliation regarding what it means to be a path, what counts as a path, and all manner of related topics. Perhaps you were aware already.
Anyway, in this case specifically (and in general) I'm open to tagging methods other than my preferred method. My vote for this segment is what I mentioned earlier: highway=path, informal=yes, visibility=poor or no. Let me know what you think, and thanks for your contributions!
Oregonian3 (2024-09-30 14:11:21+00:00): For sure! I don't really follow the forums because 9/10 times the topics won't be related to the things that I map.

But I'm mostly aligned with you on the tagging method for these types of paths. If it's an informal path that I'm not super familiar with, I'll usually use highway=path, informal=yes, surface=ground. In my view the surface tag is one of the most important tags, as it seems to be one of the most common that external applications (e.g. Gaia GPS, Strava) make heavy use of from OSM data.

Side note, I see people using the incorrect surface=dirt tag in the Wasatch and it bugs me more than it should haha. Pretty much none of our paths save for a few flowy mountain bike trails are actually manicured dirt like the tag is designed for; it's almost always just whatever the natural ground happens to be in the area. I've been over time correcting these surface=dirt tags to surface=ground, but there's a ton of them and I haven't gotten to all of them yet.
Afrandez (2024-09-23 09:33:31+00:00): Would like to note deleted nodes in this changeset are based on the following gps trace:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Afrandez/traces/11467329
Kalepom (2024-09-19 20:27:06+00:00): Salut Dilys, 
Je me permet de te demander la source que tu as utilisé pour ajouter ce panneau de pub
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6276124265
Les dernières images de terrain disponibles ne laissent pas voir de panneau à cet endroit, mais elles datent un peu (2022). 
Je me pose la question car, implanter un billboard à cet endroit ne semble pas respecter le code de l'environnement, et il serait illégal. 
Merci :)
Dilys (2024-09-20 10:53:42+00:00): Salut Kalepom,
Ce panneau de pub a été ajouté il y a 5 ans par l'utilisateur Morgane3112, voir la version #1 [1]. J'ai légèrement "bougé" le bâtiment, donc aussi le nœud avec le panneau de pub [2].
Salutations
Dilys 

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6276124265/history
[2] https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=156826025
Kalepom (2024-09-20 22:31:20+00:00): Bien vu. Désolé je n'avais pas exploré suffisamment l'historique. Il semble avoir bien disparu depuis, je m'occupe de l'enlever. 
Merci pour ta réponse
Nakaner (2024-09-19 15:27:06+00:00): Hi,

despite a comment by flohoff in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156823443, you continue your mechanical edit. Please stop immediately if you don't want to get temporarily banned.

Where was this edit discussed as required by the Automated Edits Code of Conduct? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

Do you receive some kind of instructions (e.g. MapRoulette) or any kind of instructor?

Note: Your changes are subject of a discussion on the German forum. https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mechanical-edit-level-crossing-vs-tram-level-crossing/118980

Best regards

Michael
user_5359 (2024-09-22 05:41:27+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/145635324 (only as example). Did you mean roof:height instead of roof:h?
Nadjita (2024-09-22 05:44:55+00:00): Yes, I did. I thought I catched them all. Thanks for the help!
BCNorwich (2024-09-19 18:43:38+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

That; 's the outline of a building part, the building address tags are already on the building outline.

Regards Bernard.
AlunMW (2024-09-19 19:50:23+00:00): Thanks Bernard, 
I didn't intend to add a building part. It's really quite difficult to find the entity for the whole building, but I have now done so, and have corrected the postcode, which is PE1 1XB. 
It would be helpful if the church name were just "St John's Church" as that is the name the church is generally using, and referring to it as "St John the Baptist" causes people to think it a Baptist  church, when it's actually an Anglican one.
BCNorwich (2024-09-20 06:17:41+00:00): Hi, I've made a few tweaks to address your points and amended some tags to suit OSM practice.

Regards Bernard.
AlunMW (2024-09-20 07:58:57+00:00): Thanks!
Marek-M (2024-09-19 16:16:27+00:00): Cześć, tutaj widzę niedokładną edycję https://www.osm.org/node/12180330795 - dodałeś `ref=1047` oraz `ref:ztm=1046` przy czym `ref:ztm` ma wartość zgodną z https://mapa.ztm.gda.pl/?stop=1046 i jest prawidłowy. Nie warto duplikować wartości pomiędzy różnymi tagami `ref*`, bo to często prowadzi do błędów.

W Gdańsku wystarczy dodawać tylko `ref:ztm`

Ewentualnie można dodawać `local_ref=03` (w przypadku tego przystanku) ale wtedy z nazwy przystanku należy wyrzucić numer przystanku.
stasiu512 (2024-09-19 23:13:56+00:00): dziekuje, poprawione
BCNorwich (2024-09-19 18:33:19+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

That's an agricultural storage pad, even if folk park there it's not a car park.

Regards Bernard.
silversurfer83 (2024-09-19 19:25:57+00:00): Hi :)

ich hätte da mal zwei Tips für dich:

- wenn du Objekte zeichnest (oder die Geometrie veränderst), die rechtwinklig sein sollen, dann kannst du mit der Taste "Q" am Ende alle Winkel sauber auf 90° stellen. Sieht dann wesentlich besser aus.

- unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a findest du viele Dinge und wie wir sie in die Datenbank eintragen. Wenn du etwas nicht findest, so kannst du auch einfach die Suche im Wiki verwenden und dann auf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:healthcare%3Dhospice treffen.

Bei Fragen immer raus damit
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156826969
eggie (2024-09-19 17:01:51+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Andrea Musuruane (2024-10-14 11:08:26+00:00): There's something wrong here. Q109122153 was the id for Mensa Garella.  Q130324179 is a duplicate item without any description.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156827256
archINFORM (2024-10-14 11:41:31+00:00): Hi Andrea,
sorry, we created accidently a duplicate wikidata entry for this building and assigned that to the osm outline. Now I merged the wikidata entries to Q109122153 and reasigned this id to osm.
eggie (2024-09-19 17:07:49+00:00): Dag Keetron,

Wanneer gebouwen in de BAG staan kun je ze ook laten importeren via het forum.
Draadje BAG importverzoeken.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/nl/43
MVG
eggie
FrankOverman (2024-09-20 20:47:53+00:00): Bij deze: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=156886807
eggie (2024-09-20 20:51:59+00:00): 👍
Keetron (2024-10-19 12:43:13+00:00): Ah, dat is cool want op nummer 102 is dus ook iets weg maar inmiddels weer herrezen. Ik zal het forum eens bekijken.
StefanHRT (2024-09-21 11:31:42+00:00): Hi, Ich habe das mal auf paving_stone geändert, da es kein Kofsteinpflaster ist. Bin gespannt, wann die den letzten Rest zur Wilhelm-Busch-Straße fertig haben.
VG
StefanHRT (2024-09-21 11:32:48+00:00): hat sich erledigt
StefanHRT (2024-09-21 11:33:13+00:00): ups (falsche Note mit dem letzten Kommentar)
Caerum (2024-09-21 14:34:25+00:00): Hi, ja danke, ich hatte mich da bei der Steinart vertan. 
Aber ich denke, dass es eigentlich ein "Fußweg" und nicht ein "Pfad" als Objekttyp ist, da es ja ein fester Weg mit Laternen ist.
StefanHRT (2024-09-22 04:04:40+00:00): Moin, Normalerweise würde ich Dir zustimmen wegen dem Fußweg, Da es (noch) keine Beschilderung für Fahrrad frei oder ähnlich gibt, Du aber bicycle=yes gesetzt hattest, finde ich in dem Fall path besser, außer es gibt irgendwo einen Hinweis, dass dies als reiner Fußweg geplant wurde. Bin bis jetzt noch nicht zur Fotoauswertung gekommen, aber ab folgendem Link sind meine gestrigen Fotos https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/stefanhrt?lat=52.5297401&lng=13.79062620000002&z=19.9&menu=true&mapStyle=OpenStreetMap&focus=photo&pKey=1084508516378654
Caerum (2024-09-22 13:25:34+00:00): Hi, ich wusste nicht, dass der Weg noch am Ende unfertig ist. Ich war nur bis zur Mitte und wieder zurück gegangen. Sollten die Bauarbeiten noch markiert werden?
Ja es soll ein Fuß- und Fahrradweg sein (nach dem Bebauungsplan), aber es gibt in OpenStreetMap ja nicht so ein Objekt, daher dachte ich es würde über "Fußweg" mit dem Flag bicycle=yes gehen. Ist Path nicht eigentlich für Waldwege gedacht oder verstehe ich das falsch?
Viele Grüße
StefanHRT (2024-09-22 13:35:47+00:00): Korrekt, am Ende ist noch offiziell Baustelle (siehe Fotos). ggf kommen am Wegesrand noch Sitzbänke und Mülleimer, muss man mal abwarten
Und nein, path ist nicht nur für Waldwege sondern auch für gemeinsame Geh-/Radwege sofern diese nicht Fußwege mit Fahrrad frei sind. Schau Dir mal die Seite https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren an ;) Wichtig ist (mMn) für die Kenntlichmachung der Fahrradfreigabe das Traffic_sign. VG
Caerum (2024-09-22 14:03:50+00:00): Ok danke, ich hab es verstanden .
Ich weiß auf jeden Fall, dass noch Obstbäume gepflanzt werden sollen, aber mal schauen was wirklich kommt :)
StefanHRT (2024-09-22 14:28:40+00:00): Da Du es im Blick hast, wirst Du dann schon alles entsprechend eintragen, dann sehe ich ggf. auch wenn der Weg mal fertig ist. Glaube für Obstbäume gibt es auch ein passendes tagging ;)
EP_Repair (2024-09-19 16:08:33+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 154456104, 155298386, 155299391, 156578598, 156578814.
EP_Repair (2024-09-19 16:10:11+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 154456104, 155298386, 155299391, 156578598, 156578814.
EP_Repair (2024-09-19 16:12:45+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 153250564, 153250841, 153251424, 153251682, 153253225, 153253919, 153254156, 153254442, 153254760, 153255052, 153259407, 153259576, 153267163, 153267434, 153267508, 153267632, 153267736, 153267934, 153268029, 153268100, 153268165, 153268210, 153268323, 153268450, 153268669, 153268978, 153269256, 153269370, 153269434, 153269535, 153269570, 153294076, 153294326, 153294506, 153296806, 153297568, 153299786, 153311657, 153311673, 153311972, 153313121, 153313159, 153313375.
Wise_Turtle (2024-09-21 12:34:12+00:00): Удаляю свой пакет правок из-за удаления в нём точек других участников. Прошу прощения. Перересую.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156910072
tkk (2024-09-20 07:56:40+00:00): Zdravim,koukam, ze uz to prehazujeme delsi dobu. Cedule osm.org/node/9534025583 obsahuje i dalsi informace krome mapy, proto by podle mne mela byt znacena jako informacni cedule. Viz. https://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/fody/?id=33941 . Diky tom.k
Hlav (2024-09-20 08:13:33+00:00): OK, díky za fotku. Omlouvám se za případnou chybu, já tu ceduli osobně neznám, ale iD mi ji nahlásil jako deprecated_tags. Možná by to chtělo přidat nějakou další poznámku, nebo třeba odkaz na tu fotku, aby už to nemohlo nastat, nevím. Nebo z toho udělat dva uzly, jeden pro mapu a jeden pro ty informace?
tkk (2024-09-20 08:27:32+00:00): Je to jeden objekt, informacni cedule na ktere je mimo jine i mapa, takze dva uzly tady zadny smysl nedavaji. Vadilo typ cedule 'map', zrusil jsem, realne by to melo projit, ale zaroven se pouzivalo driv pro tagovani map, takze chapu proc to hlasi. Diky tom.k
literan (2024-09-19 20:43:22+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145625519#map=16/55.85917/37.40618
mcliquid (2024-09-19 21:44:41+00:00): Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
sheldonelectric (2024-09-23 16:01:59+00:00): The wiki says there's no consensus about the size of the area. These are charging stations in my trip from Clausthal-Zellerfeld to Mulhouse which are on the same continent (as the wiki suggests) and less than 600km apart.
mcliquid (2024-09-24 14:13:23+00:00): Okay
muzirian (2024-12-04 12:23:45+00:00): there were lot footways added to the church, please refer to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indoor_Mapping if you want to try indoor mapping
muzirian (2024-12-04 12:27:03+00:00): looks like lot of footways have to be removed here
zhiar590 (2024-09-19 18:54:32+00:00): Hi Renas , I deleted the name "دارستانی پیرەمەگرون" because it didn’t fit the area. If you have a better name in mind, feel free to add it!
Renas Azad (2024-09-19 19:17:02+00:00): welcom zhiar
i know it is not fit, i was puted it temporarily to distingwish the relation that collect the parts of the wood easily from the other relations as i work on it.
i suggest you to think withe me to find a proper name.
thanks.
zhiar590 (2024-09-19 19:24:44+00:00): oh, okay I understand 
for me I can't think of a name right now, but I'll let u know if thought of anything good
JeroenHoek (2024-09-20 11:30:16+00:00): De combinatie van motor_vehicle=destination met bicycle/horse=no is raar. Dat zou betekenen dat bestemmingsverkeer wel met een auto mag, maar niet met een fiets.
JeroenHoek (2024-09-20 11:37:33+00:00): Die motor_vehicle=destination voelt wat raar als deze beelden nog kloppen:

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.409934,6.4717503,3a,39.3y,329.16h,83.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVOH10iq8jVoZcVEUEbbLOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDkxNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4219101,6.4714474,3a,75y,178.55h,82.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Wy7FHOdOz-fQbyRliwTUg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDkxNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4120583,6.4742431,3a,68.9y,298.07h,78.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swEQb6lfK0VP3SkrXYFzetg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDkxNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

Dit lijkt me niet echt een pad waar je met een auto vrij mag komen. Eerder een access=private met foot=permissive.
JeroenHoek (2024-09-22 07:42:42+00:00): ?
Op'tRad (2024-09-22 07:47:05+00:00): OSM is qua wegniveau vaak niet zo eenduidig te taggen. Iets is een track wanneer er twee sporen zichtbaar zijn. Het toegangsbord verderop, bij het schuurtje, staat op een foto die ik er eens maakte: Motorvoertuigen, fiets, paard, hond: nee.  En toch zijn er sporen zichtbaar. Het zijn paden die met trekkers wordt bereden omdat er grotendeels een sloot langs loopt waar altijd wordt gemaaid. Aan de kant van de Oost Dammarke steege staat echter geen bord ... Daar mag je er wel in met je paard ... De vraag is eigenlijk of we schouwpaden op OSM moeten gaan zetten. Er zijn wel meer schouwpaden te belopen die als pad zijn getagd en niet als track. Misschien is het beter om dat maar zo te laten. Groet, Werner
JeroenHoek (2024-09-22 09:43:43+00:00): Of iets een track of path is kun je ter plekke prima onderscheiden. Track past hier wel volgens mij. Maar aan je omschrijving te lezen is dit qua toegangsrechten beter:

access=private
foot=yes
dog=no

Daarmee voorkom je onbedoeld gebruik.
Op'tRad (2024-09-22 20:56:40+00:00): Eigen citaat: 'Er zijn wel meer schouwpaden te belopen die als pad zijn getagd en niet als track. Misschien is het beter om dat maar zo te laten.'
Of helemaal niet zijn gemapt. We krijgen wel werk als we alle schouwpaden gaan mappen en als wandelkaart raakt OSM als het ware  vervuild. Je stoot je neus wel eens op OSM. Wellicht is het beter om ons met schouwpaden te beperken tot als er lange afstandsroutes lopen, of lokale ommetjes die in opkomst zijn. En dan gewoon als highway path