piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
CYPRESSMTB (2025-03-07 20:52:05+00:00): Thanks for the information. 

There are some good things in there and some surprising things, but it’s your platform to decide. 

In terms of the legal implications, I’m not only talking about from those who use OSM. Im talking about what happens when users sue corporations for what’s happened to them as a result of OSM guiding them to lands they’re not allowed to be on and they get hurt, and then the corporations then sue OSM. BPP the land owner of the land we are talking about is a multibillion organization who’s been proactive about decommissioning these trails in the past. Not only does mapping them result in the demise of these trails - which is probably why eerib seems to have so many complaints (based upon eeribs own commentary), but highlighting the trails just results in more people being at risk. They’re not safe for most people. Which is why the DANGER No Trespassing signs are up in the area. 

Anyways, I’ll ask BPP if they want the trails removed from OSM and you’ll either hear from their Counsel or you won’t. But when/if BPP is sued for many millions - and it could happen - if OSM was involved then you’ll be dragged into it too. That’s why Trailforks has proactively decided not to show these trails on its maps.  

Im just a guy trying to keep people safe in the woods. I’m out of this discussion but I do appreciate the constructive dialogue even though I oppose some of your principals. 

Me last try. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD EERIB PLEASE STOP.
user_18023081 (2025-03-14 01:44:53+00:00): ok
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-05 18:41:00+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/167734153
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/171231268

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
WieKo68 (2025-03-05 18:58:13+00:00): poprawione
Jakka (2025-03-05 19:09:19+00:00): foute naam 	is geen eigennaam van een weg maar een definitie "Jaagpad (fiets/wandel)"
Is het wel een fietspad met verkeersbord D7
Je tekendes een tweede "highway naast een reeds bestaande highway ????
RLR0 (2025-03-05 22:12:25+00:00): Akkoord met de verkeerde naam. 
Er ligt ook effectief een nieuwe weg die evenwijdig loopt met de weg eronder. Op de verhoogde dijk loopt een asfaltweg die verbonden is met andere asfaltwegen/jaagpaden langs de Schelde. De weg onderaan is een grindweg die beneden de dijk loopt. 

Er staat geen verkeersbord D7. Het gaat om een "jaagpad". Dit jaagpad is verbonden met andere jaagpaden langs de Schelderivier, die momenteel gemarkeerd zijn als "Nationale/Regionale fietsroute"
Jakka (2025-03-06 07:22:26+00:00): OK ontdubbeling.
Het is niet omdat er daar fiets routes langst komen dat automatisch een fietspad is.
Hier heeft osm.be de meest voorkomende verkeersborden proberen om te zetten naar code zie onder andere die met jaagpad en des nood combineren met andere onder borden. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Belgium/C_Prohibitory_signs
https://www.vlaamsewaterweg.be/jaagpaden
TheBestIdea (2025-03-05 18:48:27+00:00): Update Henry Hudson Trail
Adam Franco (2025-03-05 20:17:08+00:00): Realized that I had building conflation done incorrectly. Will re-do

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163259826
Szymson (2025-03-05 19:19:53+00:00): Hej to nie jest żadne old_name bo tam nie było wcześniej żadnej oficjalnej nazwy. Samo name=Dębowa wystarczy.
Dawid2849 (2025-03-05 19:28:39+00:00): według Geoportalu była tutaj nazwa
Szymson (2025-03-05 19:32:25+00:00): Ale tylko na tym fragmencie:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car&route=54.611740%2C18.216979%3B54.612175%2C18.218164
Szymson (2025-03-05 19:33:51+00:00): Doooobra, już widzę. Jest ok, nawet podzieliłeś jezdnię w tym miejscu. Nie było tematu :P
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-05 19:10:54+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/731983073

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-29 10:52:04+00:00): reverted edits that added suspect data, it is from a suspect account, as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166617410 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164649036 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163053969 remain not answered

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173922887
Dimitar155 (2025-03-05 21:22:56+00:00): Thank you! I was counting on you to add these details, since I've lost them in my gallery. :)
Adam Franco (2025-03-05 19:17:26+00:00): I realized that some buildings weren't properly conflated with the address points. Will try again.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163257631
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-05 19:10:58+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/942550399

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
empty_child (2025-03-07 09:26:52+00:00): Hello A1ekcy,
Please, return it. You can close access either through access=* tag, or with moving to highway=construction construction=*
empty_child (2025-03-07 09:29:34+00:00): Nah, did it myself, don't worry
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163318809
citrula (2025-03-05 23:41:50+00:00): Looks good to me. Thanks for your contribution, and welcome to OSM!
user_9848150 (2025-03-07 00:39:41+00:00): boa, a de cima é a 4
NittyGrittyInTheCity (2025-03-07 22:09:28+00:00): Olá cblacksheep, obrigado pela informação! Vou adicionar o nome “SHSN Chácara” 115 Rua 4" em https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158689692 como você sugeriu. Tenha um bom dia!”
felipeeugenio (2025-03-05 20:18:03+00:00): Hola.
En addr:street= debe ir el nombre de la calle tal como está escrito en la calle, en este caso "Avenida Fernández Albano"
Si acaso ese nombre está mal, entonces hay que cambiarlo, pero ojo que en OSM usamos los nombres oficiales o bien lo que se puede deducir de la señalética en terreno. No va el nombre completo si no está en ninguna parte.
Para salir de cualquier duda por favor incorporarse al chat de la comunidad en Telegram en el link en mi perfil.
saludos.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163258149
kmpoppe (2025-03-05 19:32:24+00:00): closed:note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4635822 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4635827
NeisReview (2025-03-05 20:08:39+00:00): #NameCheck

Hello and welcome to OSM.

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits, particularly those concerning the names you've added or modified.

Some of these names caught my attention as they are quite unique or a bit unusual. Could you please confirm if these additions were intentional or if they might have been added mistakenly?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
NeisReview (2025-03-05 20:08:34+00:00): #NameCheck

Hello and welcome to OSM.

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits, particularly those concerning the names you've added or modified.

Some of these names caught my attention as they are quite unique or a bit unusual. Could you please confirm if these additions were intentional or if they might have been added mistakenly?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
NeisReview (2025-03-05 20:08:14+00:00): #NameCheck

Hello and welcome to OSM.

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits, particularly those concerning the names you've added or modified.

Some of these names caught my attention as they are quite unique or a bit unusual. Could you please confirm if these additions were intentional or if they might have been added mistakenly?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
eggie (2025-03-05 20:17:31+00:00): Dag Dennis,

Heb je dit nu overlegd met de voorgaande mapper?
Het was toch goed gemapt? 
Ook de vorm was precies conform de BGT. Nu niet meer.
area=yes hoort hier niet getagd te worden. Dat heeft een andere functie.
Verder is de historie hiermee verwijderd. 

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-03-05 20:27:57+00:00): Ik heb de historie hersteld en de ruïne uitgelijnd conform de BGT.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-03-05 20:36:21+00:00): Verder barrier=wall toegevoegd
Die voorgaande vorm klopte ook niet met de BGT...  nu wel.
Groet
eggie
Brecht6 (2025-03-05 20:06:32+00:00): nog foto's:
- https://i.ibb.co/gZgyNK2N/IMG-20250201-135812838-HDR.jpg
- https://i.ibb.co/XZLmg8Gd/IMG-20250201-135826082.jpg
b-jazz (2025-03-09 19:50:45+00:00): As mentioned in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162300773, you shouldn't be reusing the nodes when the fairways extend all the way around the green. Some sort of fringe should be left or the fairway should come up short and butt up against the green instead of surrounding it. 

If you need further clarification, please leave a comment here with any questions and I'll be glad to help out.
Superadlen (2025-03-06 09:04:20+00:00): Saha remedank
Rokolell (2025-03-06 12:33:23+00:00): Mir ist gerade aufgefallen, dass hier railway=power_supply falsch angewandt wurde, weil das Tag für zwei verschiedene Dinge genutzt wird: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Elektrant

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Einspeisung 

Wäre vielleicht sinnvoll das zu konkretisieren.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
SunnyIsland10 (2025-03-06 22:32:33+00:00): Correction: Source used was Mapillary.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
JJIglesias (2025-03-05 23:50:32+00:00): Saludos.Soy hoy hemos revertido 3 changesets que hiciste, por dañar data correcta existente en el Mapa.

Por favor deja de hacer cambios aleatorios a tu parecer, hay Mucho mas que necesita ser INCLUIDO en el mapa que "Mal Arreglado" por ti.

Este mapa NO es un campo de juegos y si el comportamiento de tener que revertir tus cambios continua, puedes ser baneado de la aplicación pues lo que haces se considera Vandalismo del Mapa.

Como te dije, dedicate a agregar antes de a MAL MODIFICAR.

Gracias
NeisReview (2025-03-06 05:55:56+00:00): #NameCheck

Hello and welcome to OSM.

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits, particularly those concerning the names you've added or modified.

Some of these names caught my attention as they are quite unique or a bit unusual. Could you please confirm if these additions were intentional or if they might have been added mistakenly?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
NeisRevert (2025-03-14 07:25:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163598419 where the changeset comment is: 
Remove testdata
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-14 07:26:23+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163303731
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-05 21:11:56+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nieprawidłowa wartość addr:postcode. Kod pocztowy powinien być formatu XX-XXX, gdzie X oznacza cyfrę.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12639448356

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
MxxCon (2025-03-06 21:59:40+00:00): Hello.
are these 2 more separate buildings or are they part of 714 and 716 58th St buildings?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163260967
Gregory Peony (2025-03-26 18:12:31+00:00): Overall a good changeset. You improved the geometry of virtually all of the buildings modified here. You appropriately moved higways to prevent building highway overlapps. All buildings you modified and added are valid. Please press ? in ID to check out the editing shortcuts in ID for scaling and nudging feartues. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163261090
MapSpot (2025-03-07 16:44:23+00:00): Hi yellowf1ag,

Thanks for helping add school mascot tags in Florida. For future edits, please be mindful that mascot tags are treated similarly to name tags. They should be capitalized and pluralized like a title (e.g. "Patriots" instead of "patriot").

More info on nomenclature can be found on the wiki here.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Amascot
DaDapperMapper (2025-03-05 21:01:47+00:00): Correction: Comment is "Added street name, Rua Anita Kuster Rossiman, to segment south of Santa Maria De Jetibá based on Maps feedback #adt"
YomanNH (2025-03-05 21:33:42+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Rowery#Drogi_dla_pieszych_i_rower%C3%B3w
Yog Sot (2025-03-05 22:15:40+00:00): As i have described, pedestrian highways happen to be inside `living_street` as well and a highway can't be both values :)
Gotta pick one.
YomanNH (2025-03-06 09:12:26+00:00): To nie jest żadne "pedestrian highway". W zestawie zmian https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163222332 masz informację, że jest znak C-13/16 z podziałem pionowym, czyli jest to ciąg pieszo-rowerowy. Widać to również na filmiku, który mi przysłałeś.
Yog Sot (2025-03-06 11:20:32+00:00): no właśnie niby jest podział pionowy, że rowery jedna połowa, a piesi druga połowa.... a jednak jest wymalowany dokładny obszar gdzie te rowery niby mają być, co jest sprzeczne ze znakiem drogowym ;D
No i jeszcze te meble, ludzie chodzący, a również jeżdżący dowolnie xD. 
NO zdecydowanie unkcjonuje to bardziej niż obszar pedestrian z możliwością przejechania rowerem przez środek. 
No i nie jest to droga publiczna, więc znaki nie pełnią takiego jednoznacznego znaczenia. Może występie z ciekawości o projekt SOR oraz wskazanie gdzie tam są drogi oraz jakie są ich ewidencyjne granice, bo obszar drogi ma tu kluczowe znaczenie :)
YomanNH (2025-03-06 12:56:24+00:00): > jest wymalowany dokładny obszar gdzie te rowery niby mają być, co jest sprzeczne ze znakiem drogowym

Nie ma znaku, który obrazowałby perfekcyjnie tę sytuację. Segregated=yes sprawdzi się tu bardzo dobrze, bo ruch pieszy i rowerowy jest rozdzielony. Do perfekcyjnego mapowania obszarów można użyć area:highway=*.

> ludzie chodzący, a również jeżdżący dowolnie 

Jeśli po chodniku ktoś jeździłby autem, to zmieniłbyś go z highway=footway na highway=residential, czy cokolwiek podobnego? Jeśli na drodze ludzie nie stosują się do ograniczeń prędkości, to należy zmienić maxspeed na niezgodne ze znakami? Dziwną logikę stosujesz...
Yog Sot (2025-03-06 16:03:46+00:00): przecież jest segregated, a ze sposobem przemieszczania piłem do tego, że niby stoi znak, ale nie odpowiada malowankom, a tak w ogóle nie wiadomo jak jest z tą organizacją ruchu, bo to nie jest droga publiczna i brakuje znaków "strefa ruchu", nie wiadomo jaki jest faktyczny obszar "drogi" która to jest wymagana aby znaki funkcjonowały. Tak w skrócie ;)
szydzio (2025-03-24 18:24:16+00:00): Cześć!
Jeśli znajdziecie chwilę czasu możecie wejść na forum i odnieść się do tej zmiany. Założyłem posta w poznańskim wątku:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/do-poznaniakow-i-okolicy/75596/167
Pozdr!
Minh Nguyen (2025-03-05 21:04:17+00:00): Source was a survey back in November.
Jan Olieslagers (2025-03-06 15:32:51+00:00): It seems unlikely to find an aerodrome right under a high voltage line. 
Is there any reference or information source to confirm?
Hufkratzer (2025-03-06 19:27:41+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1364865247 does not look like a horse riding centre, it looks more like a horse riding arena. In OSM horse riding arenas are usually tagged leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian, like here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1069062624
See also: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=horse_riding
SomeoneElse (2025-03-29 11:03:20+00:00): Hello, 
What was "invalid" that led to the change here?  The comment just says "Fixed an invalid way." which does not really explain anything.
Best Regards,
Andy
OldManCelli (2025-03-29 16:05:09+00:00): It had a self intersection. So I converted it to a relation with two members. One for outer and one for inner.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-03-05 21:21:16+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12639568182

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NeisBot (2025-03-05 21:18:38+00:00): Hi Tsteindl, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
No primary map features!?

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=163261783
Tsteindl (2025-03-05 21:23:35+00:00): Yes this is correct.  The area was used to add data to test, but the data does not exist in reality
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-03-05 21:47:18+00:00): Why was fake data added?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163261783
eggie (2025-03-05 21:35:55+00:00): Dag Dennis..
..leisure=park is een functie.. geen landuse.
Het is een transparant die als een deken over landuse en evt water heen ligt.
Kleine stukjes groen zijn meestal geen parken.
Mvg
eggie
aTarom (2025-03-06 09:09:27+00:00): si us plau reviseu el nom d'aquest element
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12627998602/history
MatiMatix (2025-03-06 00:11:08+00:00): Słowicza*
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-03-06 11:53:15+00:00): Hi! Thanks for your contribution!

However, in Quebec, we prefer having POIs as nodes since it is easier to update and visualize the POIs near their actual entrance instead of on the building centroid. Thanks!
blef (2025-03-07 15:34:52+00:00): Bonjour Éric,
L'AMAP Prévert n'existe plus?
Si c'est le cas, pourquoi garder ces 2 attributs sur le nœud  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8088606737 qui, seuls, ne veulent rien dire?
Piskvor (2025-03-06 09:53:27+00:00): Doesn't exist even as a footway, or an informal footpath? Or exists, or is not accessible by car?
Plawa (2025-03-06 12:57:49+00:00): Sidewalk only,  the two roads are not connected for vehicle traffic.
Piskvor (2025-03-06 14:14:29+00:00): Thanks for the edit, every piece of update helps to keep the map more precise :)

I have edited it a bit more, so that the foot access is still possible (split the path into two, and mark the foot part as highway=footway) - see 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1365004973
Plawa (2025-03-06 15:06:53+00:00): Great, diky.
IvaLedinščak (2025-03-06 14:30:27+00:00): Reverted because of an accidental node edit #OptimoRoute

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163287940
citrula (2025-03-06 20:44:56+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You can press "Q" to square the corners of buildings
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163262194
Luzandro (2025-03-06 11:40:58+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4652888
Yog Sot (2025-03-06 15:27:09+00:00): znów, byłeś tam? ;d
Sprawdziłeś czy jest faktycznie przejście? ;D
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1364871394
Feskil (2025-03-09 01:09:06+00:00): Jutro będę na miejscu
Yog Sot (2025-03-11 00:08:52+00:00): no i jak, jest przejście? xD
czy brama od 10 lat nieotwierana tak zarośnieta? ;)
Grass-snake (2025-03-06 18:14:27+00:00): Пожалуйста, не удаляйте статусную часть (улица, переулок, проезд, …) из названия, она обязательно должна быть.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F#%D0%98%D0%BC%D1%8F_%E2%80%93_%D1%8D%D1%82%D0%BE_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B8_%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BA%D0%BE
dknelson9876 (2025-03-08 19:19:46+00:00): Hi Kuatsystems, are you this is a dog park? On Bing Streetside, it really looks like it's just some grass in the middle of a roundabout
Kuatsystems (2025-03-08 19:31:51+00:00): i was going off of what i saw on google maps. not sure what it is used for
dknelson9876 (2025-03-08 19:43:11+00:00): That is problematic for two reasons. The larger one being that OSM is not allowed to use Google Maps data (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google). The other being please do not put something on the map that you are not sure about. If there's something that you are thinking should go on the map but can't verify, make a note about it instead (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Notes).
Kuatsystems (2025-03-08 21:42:49+00:00): Let me explain a little further, I like to go on walks in my area and look to see how accurate google maps is, I’m not just Willy-nilly copying things from google maps. That grassy area was questionable but I saw people playing with dogs on it and I saw that yes it was labeled as a dog park on google maps. So I felt confident that it was.
dknelson9876 (2025-03-09 00:35:30+00:00): Sorry, but that's not any better. What you've described is using Google Maps as a secondary source, and using Google as a source, even as a secondary source to check something, isn't OK. And seeing people playing with their dogs there one time doesn't make it a dog park. To count it as a dog park, I'd expect there to be some kind of signage, or a fence, or something for the dogs to play on (like on the one you've mapped nearby as Woodgate Dog park). I'm still not convinced that this isn't just a patch of grass
Kuatsystems (2025-03-09 01:02:20+00:00): ok, well, its not a one time thing, and since you are so adamant about it, and are really kinda being a butt about things i will change it. since i guess local knowledge about things is trumped by everything else ok?  so back off, everyone makes mistakes and likes to learn but doesn't like it when individuals try and strong arm people for just trying to do the best they can.
dknelson9876 (2025-03-09 01:16:53+00:00): I sincerely apologize if I came across as rude - that was never my intention. I really appreciate the effort you’ve put into mapping your neighborhood so thoroughly, and I just want to ensure that the information remains as accurate as possible. Whenever I have questions about a change and the original mapper disagrees (as in this case), I make it a point to check with the community on Slack or Discord to ensure I’m not mistaken before proceeding. Several others also felt that this doesn’t quite look like a dog park.
Kuatsystems (2025-03-11 17:38:22+00:00): hey, no worries, it was a rough weekend, didnt mean to be snappy. thanks for the feedback, sorry for not getting back as soon as possible. i promise i will still make (and have made) mistakes
NieWnen (2025-03-17 01:21:33+00:00): Dlaczego dodajesz relację zakazu wjazdu na rondo?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18786557

A oneway=no jest na rondach zbędne tak na marginesie, ale to powyższe totalnie rozwala routing.