piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Michael  S (2026-04-23 07:17:16+00:00): Hallo,
danke für die Ergänzung des "tags" "landuse", hatte ich vergessen für diesen Teil des NSGs
Grüße
Dimitar155 (2026-04-23 10:00:59+00:00): Hello Anna,

Thank you for this change! Are you sure that these tram segments are ballastless? I recall that there is ballast in the inclined version and around the tracks in the loop. This can be confirmed by video footage from there - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9C-ddz9Y2c

The video is not mine, but the author has given consent to the OSM community to use his videos for mapping in OSM.

Happy mapping,
Dimitar
AnnaCatarina (2026-04-26 17:54:12+00:00): Hello Dimitar, thank You for the hint, I was already correcting it to rails with track ballast.
Regards,
Anna Catarina
P. S. Always double check Your info, AnCa! ;-)
mike140 (2026-04-25 23:03:02+00:00): Для вирівнювання будинків використовуйте клавішу Q
mike140 (2026-04-25 23:24:54+00:00): До речі, знімки можно змінити у шарах, наприклад, на Esri або Mapbox - вони більш новіші ніж Bing
lukabułka (2026-04-25 19:24:01+00:00): jak dodajesz prywatne podjazdy do domów dodawaj tag access=private poza tym nie "sklejaj" dróg z landuse bo potem trudno to się edytuje
silversurfer83 (2026-04-24 20:07:31+00:00): Guter Text :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181689230
ion_chi (2026-04-23 15:30:20+00:00): Hi, 
are https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1384177884 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1384177882 supposed to be connected?
cgreggescalante (2026-04-23 18:54:13+00:00): Ah, thanks for catching that. I connected those ways, and rerouted the CJ Ramstad through there, as the previous route now passes through some businesses. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181733339
AndyB_66 (2026-04-23 10:51:06+00:00): Po raz kolejny przyjmij do wiadomości, że decyzja administracyjna (ZnRID) nie oznacza faktycznego rozpoczęcia prac w terenie i nie uprawnia do zmiany statusu drogi na "construction". Zmiana wycofana.
Frans S (2026-04-23 09:34:41+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Not the easiest task to decide what is damaged.
This buildings, you marked it as damaged,
shows an undamaged roof. (rusty corrugated metal sheets, very common here)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1500255284/history

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1500255283/history

Best regards and keep mapping
ika-chan! (2026-04-23 13:32:41+00:00): Hello, the reclassification of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1030745704 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1293444334 to highway=trunk was against what was agreed for Greece: please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Greece/Highways for how we classify roads in Greece.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-30 19:25:50+00:00): czemu w tej edycji min skasowałeś płot?

http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=181690501

mam wrażenie że ty celowo psujesz
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-30 19:26:09+00:00): o https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1489088307/history chodzi
SekeRob repair (2026-04-23 06:15:02+00:00): Hi,

Repaired the forest relation you broke. This edit set needs review as lots more was warned for given the above summary with total of 12 problems flagged by ID editor before uploading to include highways crossing buildings.

Happy mapping
felipeeugenio (2026-04-22 21:24:17+00:00): Hola.
La diferencia entre pedestian y footway, es que por pedestrian pueden, eventualmente, y con autorización, circular vehículos. Por footway no.

un pedestrian son esas calles peatonales del centro, por las cuales igual circulan autos a veces.

para que tengas eso en consideración cuando uses el tag.

saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181691186
randomhacks (2026-04-22 21:29:59+00:00): Hello.  

It's great you are adding buildings.  Have you found the Map overlay called "OSMUK Cadastral Parcels"?  

It on the right hand side menu (the layers button).  The Cadastral Parcels show where one building ends and another starts?  It also helps line up the buildings with the map itself.

If you use this, then your edits will be more accurate.
amacadabra (2026-04-23 08:22:11+00:00): Thank you! That will make (a) life easier and (b) maps more accurate. It really solves my alignment problems.
randomhacks (2026-04-23 12:23:08+00:00): Great.  Happy Mapping!
NaufalFarras (2026-04-22 21:47:02+00:00): Where did you get this info from? I passed this street multiple times a month and it is not private. It is only closed at midnight to morning as indicated by the existing tags.
lampronessa (2026-04-23 17:00:31+00:00): Hello NaufalFarras,

Thank you for reaching out with local knowledge on this street. I added a private tag here based on aerial imagery and the access tags on the gates on each end of the way (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7132561613#map=19/-6.900555/107.613464, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7132566343). What do you think of using access=permissive on the gates and the way?
NaufalFarras (2026-04-23 17:50:58+00:00): Hi,

This is a public street, with multiple businesses along the way. Based on my observation, this street is always open during the day, so I don't think access=permissive is the correct tag.

Since the opening hours of this street is know, I prefer to use conditional tags for this case.
lampronessa (2026-04-24 18:39:59+00:00): Hi NaufalFarras,

Thank you for the further clarification. In that case, what do you think about matching the access of the gates to the way by adding access=yes and a conditional access tag?
NaufalFarras (2026-04-25 06:05:14+00:00): I think that's a good idea
spiregrain (2026-04-23 07:03:00+00:00): Hi and welcome to OSM.   A couple of quick questions on this changeset.  1. Did you check to see whether the motorcycle parking spaces were already present on OSM?  (Is there a risk that your additions have doubled the number of spaces in TH?)   2. What do you know about who can use the spaces?   You've said "fee=no", but are they open to everyone (access=yes) or is there a permit scheme, or are they residents only?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181692301
Parkmoto (2026-04-23 10:50:44+00:00): Hi spiregrain, thanks for the questions.

1. Yes, duplicates were checked. We ran a gap-finder script that cross-references Tower Hamlets Council's official motorcycle bay list (received via FOI) against existing OSM data using the Overpass API. The script matches council bays to OSM bays within a 50m radius. Of 80 council bays, 11 matched existing OSM entries and were excluded. Only the 69 unmatched bays were uploaded.

2. The council's FOI response states: "All (except on Brick Lane) operate at all times and are free to use without a time limit." So access=yes and fee=no is correct for all bays except Brick Lane, which has an 11am-11pm restriction (tagged with opening_hours). There is no permit scheme — they are open to everyone.

Happy to provide more detail on the methodology or make corrections if anything looks off.
spiregrain (2026-04-23 11:13:00+00:00): Good work and thank you for it.  If you paln to do more of this sort of thing,  don't forget about the Import Guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines

It's great to see OGL data being identified and brought into the database.
eastender (2026-04-25 15:28:42+00:00): Welcome to OSM Parkmoto. I have noticed that in some of your changesets you have used addr:postcode=* on motorcycle bays. For UK mapping, addr:postcode=* is normally only used on objects that can receive post, e.g. residential premises, commercial premises, etc. If a postcode needs to be specified for an object that can’t receive post, such as a phone box, a street or a motorcycle bay, then it should normally be mapped using postal_code=*.
Parkmoto (2026-04-25 21:38:53+00:00): Hi eastender, thanks for the tip. That makes sense — motorcycle bays don't receive post, so postal_code is the right tag. I'll use postal_code instead of addr:postcode for any future bay uploads, and I'll correct the existing ones in my next editing session. Appreciate the guidance.
trigpoint (2026-05-30 09:28:08+00:00): Hi Parkmoto
Phil from the Data Working Group with a few questions.
Where was this import discussed with the Openstreetmap community?
You should be following the import guidelines as pointed out by spiregrain.
You use the word we which suggests you are not just an individual working alone.
What explicit licence is this data released under? 
Cheers Phil
Parkmoto (2026-05-30 09:52:13+00:00): Hi Phil,
Thanks for the message, regarding your questions:
1. Actually, you're completely correct here, it was my mistake, it wasn't discussed with the community beforehand. Apologies for that, I've since created some documentation and am finishing up the wiki page draft which I will publish soon. The future imports will all follow the full import/guidelines process which will include community consultations before I upload. 
2. Regarding the guidelines: I should have followed the guidelines from the beginning, and the process from the community consultations before I uploaded anything, apologies. I'll make sure this does't happen again. On the tagging issues, they've been corrected as it was something raised by the community (postal_code, addr:street removal).
3. Regarding the 'we' comment, this was figurative, I am a solo dev, it is a solo project and there is no team. The 'we' portion was used as language for the FOI request template. Parkmoto OSM acount is run by myself. 
4. License -> Open Government Licence v3.0. Camden: explicitily published under OGL v3.0 on their open data portal. Tower Hamlets, Lambeth and RBKC: all three have confirmed OGL v3.0 in writing via email and I have written confirmation from each council. 

Cheers, 
Parkmoto
trigpoint (2026-05-30 10:45:38+00:00): Thank you for your response.
A Reddit thread has been pointed out to me in which you mentioned using Google Maps. 
For the avoidance of doubt use of Google Maps in Openstreetmap is absolutely not allowed and any changes involving it will need to be reverted.
Cheers Phil
Parkmoto (2026-05-30 10:54:48+00:00): Hi Phil, thanks for clarifying, I completely understand and accept the position on the google map verification issue. The verification was only used for and applied to the Camden import (changeset number: 181454614). All other imports from Tower Hamlets, Lambeth and RBKC used Mapillary and personal ground surveys. 
Would you like me to revert the Camden changeset or would re-verifying the Camden bays using Mapillary be sufficient? I am more than happy to follow your guidance on this on whichever you recommend. Based on this information and from the reddit thread, I won't be using google maps for anything to do with OSM for any work going forward. Apologies again for the additional problems this may have caused the OSM community.
trigpoint (2026-05-30 11:49:24+00:00): Hold off at the moment as I am waiting to hear from other DWG members .

Cheers Phil
Parkmoto (2026-05-30 12:07:55+00:00): Hi Phil, thank you  for the update. I'll hold off and wait for the DWG's decision. On a side note, the wiki page has been made, apologies in advance if there are errors. The link for the wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ParkMoto_UK_Motorcycle_Parking
trigpoint (2026-05-30 16:02:36+00:00): I have reverted and redacted the objects added in 181454614.

When you are ready to continue please post to the UK Forum at https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/uk/86

We will need to see any supporting  evidence of licensing, such as the emails received not just your word that someone said something.

Cheers Phil
Parkmoto (2026-05-30 18:19:13+00:00): Hi Phil, 
I completely understand, I'm more than happy to share the OGL confirmation emails as evidence and will post to the UK forum link you've supplied. 
Cheers,
Parkmoto.
Parkmoto (2026-05-30 18:53:18+00:00): Hi Phil, 
Please take a look at the forum link when you get an opportunity: 
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/parkmoto-uk-motorcycle-parking-import-community-consultation-retroactive/144217

Cheers,
Parkmoto
Parkmoto (2026-05-30 19:05:03+00:00): Hi Phil,
Apologies for the additional message, new users on the forum are not able to upload files or add more than 3 links: the license evidence has been uploaded to Github and the links are: 

Tower Hamlets: https://github.com/ABS-Projects-2026/Parkmoto/blob/main/docs/licensing/tower-hamlets-ogl-confirmation.pdf

Lambeth: https://github.com/ABS-Projects-2026/Parkmoto/blob/main/docs/licensing/lambeth-ogl-confirmation.pdf

RBKC: https://github.com/ABS-Projects-2026/Parkmoto/blob/main/docs/licensing/rbkc-ogl-confirmation.pdf
trigpoint (2026-05-30 20:56:44+00:00): That github is private, please can you either make it public or send them to data@openstreetmap.org with the subject [Ticket#2026041510000782]

Cheers Phil
Parkmoto (2026-05-30 21:00:00+00:00): Hi Phil, 
Apologies, I completely forgot it was a private repo, the email has been sent.

Cheers, Parkmoto.
ottwiz (2026-04-22 22:10:26+00:00): + Esri World imagery as source
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-04-22 21:52:28+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 181466550, 181466664, 181466748, 181467481, 181467588, 181467692, 181467781, 181467885, 181468014, 181468209, 181468370, 181468440, 181468503, 181468978, 181469046, 181469343, 181469502, 181469707, 181470197, 181470374, 181470531, 181470702, 181470807, 181471445, 181471527, 181471712, 181472055, 181472430, 181472511, 181472553, 181472596, 181472660, 181472772, 181472834, 181472946, 181473091, 181473302, 181473396, 181473553, 181473648, 181473711, 181473883, 181474103, 181474200, 181474818, 181474938, 181475072, 181476054, 181476239, 181476375, 181476781, 181476903, 181477079, 181477195, 181477240, 181477302, 181477566, 181477758, 181477862, 181477977, 181478071, 181478230, 181478323, 181478479, 181478587, 181478668, 181479097, 181479161, 181479217, 181479409, 181479515, 181479573, 181515198, 181515291, 181515408, 181515496, 181515640, 181515757, 181515876, 181516205, 181516429, 181516831, 181516962, 181517494, 181517600, 181517685, 181517931, 181519063, 181519071, 181534983, 181638677, 181640932, 181674268, 181674293, 181674333, 181674376, 181674399, 181674423, 181674447, 181674478, 181674558, 181674604, 181674631, 181674725, 181674782, 181676187, 181676356, 181676606, 181677913, 181678046, 181678506.
Kai Johnson (2026-06-04 13:47:58+00:00): Similar to the comment on changeset/181646686, please keep the source and datum:* tags on the ways in imported boundary data, such as way/33178232. This information helps us maintain the boundary data over time! Thanks!
BCNorwich (2026-04-23 06:06:45+00:00): Improved building shapes to imagery
karr4s (2026-04-23 11:11:13+00:00): Bonjour,
Pourquoi avoir modifié le niveau de ce bâtiment ? Cette maison serait-elle devenu un garage ? :)
Philippe14000 (2026-04-23 18:41:15+00:00): Salut Kar4s ! Non ce n'est pas un garage c'est une maison construite vers 1920. je suis déjà entré dans cette maison, j'habitais pas loin et je viens de revérifier. Les limites sont plus justes comme ça, mais tu peux remettre comme c'était, c'est pas très important non plus. A bientôt sans doute
karr4s (2026-04-23 18:45:32+00:00): Pas de problèmes pour les limites : ma remarque concerne juste le tag "layer=-1" qui, d'après le Wiki, permet d'indiquer une "relation verticale entre deux élément se croisant". On retrouve donc ce tag pour les ponts, par exemple. D'où ma remarque : c'est peu fréquent de retrouver cette information pour une maison. ^^
Philippe14000 (2026-04-23 18:49:16+00:00): Ah merci, c'est une erreur de ma part alors. Je peux la corriger maintenant. Je ferais gaffe
karr4s (2026-04-23 18:52:02+00:00): Pas de soucis : des erreurs, on en fait tous (et souvent on retourne les corriger nous-mêmes quand on s'en rend compte).
Bonne cartographie et au plaisir de se croiser au groupe local caennais à l'occasion. ;)
Philippe14000 (2026-04-23 18:56:39+00:00): OK c'est corrigé. J'ai pas une grande expérience mais je me forme.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-04-23 03:42:35+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2599477997
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1502676866

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
BCNorwich (2026-04-23 06:00:53+00:00): I can see no evidence of the antenna on any imagery. Can you show it exists please?

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2026-04-23 05:05:01+00:00): Fiction removed.
BCNorwich (2026-04-23 05:15:20+00:00): Shape squared up.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-04-22 22:20:41+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 160375443, 160375526, 160375675, 160375700, 160375739, 160498101, 160498119, 160498236, 160498286, 160498343, 160498428, 160498480, 160498571, 160498597, 160498609, 160498628, 160498646, 160498663, 160498673, 160498693, 160498706, 160498730, 160498736, 160498751, 160498761, 180181412, 180368391, 180601567, 180601687, 180601773, 180601870, 180602008, 180746881, 180792494, 181099703, 181590044, 181590097, 181637606, 181637628, 181637649, 181637691, 181648863, 181649067.
BCNorwich (2026-04-23 05:12:16+00:00): I've reinstated the tag waterway=river. please don't alter obviously correct tagging.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2026-04-23 05:08:37+00:00): The buildings could be squared up, perhaps zoom in, and better refine the shapes to actual outlines.

Regards Bernard.
無限の刃 (2026-04-23 01:21:50+00:00): こんにちは。
unused: ではなく disused: を付与してください。

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Key:disused:*
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:ライフサイクルの接頭辞
LordGarySugar (2026-04-22 23:34:04+00:00): Thanks for updating this development! For your information, you can change the background imagery to Esri World Imagery, this is more up to date than Bing and shows the housing development in a more advanced stage :)
Magick93 (2026-04-26 02:46:09+00:00): Finally! You nailed it! Thank you maxerickson ❤️
LordGarySugar (2026-04-23 16:39:56+00:00): Hi, what is the source for these housenames/numbers, have you surveyed them? You've linked the Essex prow map which has a copyrighted Ordnance Survey basemap, so this can only be used for mapping rights of way and nothing else. Thanks
Aeiouau (2026-04-23 06:05:57+00:00): if you right click on your building shape, you should do the "make square" option to have the angles snap to 90 degrees, like buildings usually are :) also the keybind Q does that when u have smth selected
woodpeck (2026-04-23 17:01:42+00:00): Dear eerib, please do not revert edits made by others without explaining why the revert was done. No action required in this case since I will deal with it, but please keep it in mind for the future. Thank you. (DWG Ticket#2026042310000589)
eerib (2026-04-23 18:34:41+00:00): Hello woodpeck,

Thank you for the reminder and for handling the case.

Cheers, eerib
Wildsharky (2026-04-28 10:47:36+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:181752038
MassCartog (2026-04-23 17:56:38+00:00): Hi welcome to OSM. You have a new account and might not be aware, on OSM, we do not remove features if they exist on the ground. If it exists on the ground, it is valid data regardless of a feature being public or private, designated or informal/illegal/unauthorized. 

The correct way to handle this is to use OSM's tagging system. access=private, or access=no would be appropriate if they are closed to the public. Once this is done, services that do use OSM data will reflect that and specify their access.

So adding the gates and setting the access is the way to go. Thanks

Please read this for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won't_delete_roads_on_private_property
ajmat (2026-04-24 06:12:34+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: 181747646
Alliegaytor (2026-04-23 08:32:08+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap.

When adding buildings and roads take care to check other (more up to date) aerial imagery sources to see if they still exist. Currently Esri World Imagery is the latest and shows that there are no buildings here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1502723163/history#map=19/-37.880220/145.161261

I partially reverted those changes from your changeset:

changeset/181705547
changeset/181705578

Happy mapping!
jcarlson (2026-04-23 12:52:55+00:00): Looks great! Thanks for adding these details!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181697179
vectorial8192 (2026-04-23 17:27:18+00:00): This speed is unexpected, but OK.

An implicit goal of the note is to parallelize the distorted railways, which is later done in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181730371 .
mcliquid (2026-04-23 08:19:42+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!
Stuart_L (2026-04-24 09:47:20+00:00): ooops on the edit in Turkey, wasn't paying enough attention.
b-jazz (2026-04-24 23:59:37+00:00): I don't want to discourage you from mapping golf courses, but please spend a little more time and make the areas more closely map satellite imagery. These outlines look very janky. And you are overlapping things all over the place like the fairway that crosses over the tee box, the green that crosses over the bunker, the fairway that crosses over the rough. If you can't be more careful, it would be better if you'd just wait for someone else to get around to mapping the area.
felipeeugenio (2026-04-23 13:06:13+00:00): Se eliminan duplicados.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181697972
iandees (2026-04-23 12:42:44+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7912190251 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181716609, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
mcliquid (2026-04-23 08:19:58+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!
mcliquid (2026-04-23 08:20:25+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!
FajrAl (2026-04-26 14:16:57+00:00): Hi, please put the name=* with the local language. In this case, it's a Pura....
Kovoschiz (2026-04-23 07:06:19+00:00): The `landuse=construction` is for `landuse=highway`