piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-01-09 02:27:22+00:00): 我知道，您这时候一定想说“请不要创建边界太大的编辑，因为这会让其他用户难以查询本地历史”，对吧？

很巧，我也经常对别人这样说

那么为什么我还要一次性上传这整个编辑呢？因为这里面的成员大多数是关系，而且是横穿中国东西或者南北的关系，即使分别上传，也会造成相当大的边界盒子，因此如果要减少对其他编辑者的打扰，反而不如一次性上传

感谢您看完这个解释

I know, at this point you must be saying "please don't create edits with large boundaries as this will make it difficult for other users to query local history", right?

It just so happens that I often say this to others too

So why do I upload this entire edit in one go? Because most of the members here are related, and they are related across China's east-west or north-south. Even if they are uploaded separately, it will create quite a large boundary box. Therefore, if you want to reduce the disturbance to other editors, it is better to upload them all at once.

Thank you for reading this explanation
Frans S (2024-01-09 12:39:47+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 
Just a remark. Please do not connect nodes of highways to other features than highways, like areas.
Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146049079
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-01-09 05:39:06+00:00): 回退后重画的可见 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146052017
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-01-09 02:58:55+00:00): This is because I noticed that ["network"="TR-railways"] is used only 8 times, while ["network"="TR-railway"] is used more than 177 times, so the former looks like the latter incorrect spelling of later

If you feel something is inappropriate, please comment me directly here! Thanks!
AlexBlasio (2024-01-10 02:12:54+00:00): La información era correcta, antes de eliminar se debió corregir, el tiempo no es gratis.
Quixlian (2024-01-12 00:02:37+00:00): Entiendo que pueda haber alguna confusión sobre la eliminación de la supuesta ruta ciclista en el bosque y sus senderos, así que me gustaría explicar un poco más detalladamente el razonamiento detrás de esta decisión.

Actualmente, no existe una ruta formal para bicicletas en este bosque y sus senderos, al menos no según los criterios estándar para ser considerada como tal. Según la documentación oficial del proyecto, es fundamental que cada ruta mapeada cumpla con ciertos requisitos específicos para ser incluida.

Un elemento clave para considerar una ruta como formal es que tenga un nombre o referencia claramente definidos. Sin esto, es difícil identificar y seguir la ruta de manera coherente. Además, una señalización adecuada a lo largo de la ruta es esencial para garantizar la seguridad y la facilidad de uso, algo que esta ruta no tiene.

Otro criterio importante es que la ruta sea operada o gestionada por una entidad privada o gubernamental. Este tipo de supervisión garantiza que la ruta se mantenga en buen estado y cumpla con ciertos estándares de calidad. A esto se añade la necesidad de tener una longitud específica con puntos de inicio y final verificables, para que los usuarios de la ruta tengan claro su recorrido.

Además, es esencial que la ruta tenga una direccionalidad establecida, lo que implica que las vías se añadan a la relación en un sentido único. Esto contribuye a evitar confusiones y posibles accidentes.

Finalmente, las características distintivas como sitios web oficiales, colores únicos de ruta, y mapas detallados que marquen puntos de interés son elementos que ayudan a los usuarios a identificar y seguir la ruta.

Como ves, esta ruta no cumple con esos requisitos, así que creo que lo mejor es eliminarla y evitar confusiones o problemas. Espero que esta explicación aclare cualquier duda y agradezco tu comprensión.
i2004 (2024-01-09 13:46:46+00:00): porque permanente
PlaneMad (2024-01-11 07:50:23+00:00): Thanks for your edits adding residential outline.
Looks like the entire Nallamala Hills was also mistakenly tagged as residential. Will correct it.
tastrax (2024-01-09 07:39:10+00:00): Welcome back to OSM. You will probably notice a few improvements from 3 years ago.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-10 10:20:56+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/314937555/history has tracktype = 1 that was added in this edit
Maybe it was supposed to be tracktype=grade1 ? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Atracktype
Natfoot (2025-12-10 22:27:48+00:00): That looks to be so. Go ahead and change it or I will get to it later.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-18 18:54:09+00:00): getting back to it - tracktype=grade1 conflicts with surface=dirt

which one of them is accurate?
Natfoot (2026-01-08 10:03:40+00:00): I am confused: surface=* refers to surface material and sometimes to material structure. It may suggest a track type sometimes, but because the same surface material/structure can exhibit various degrees of firmness, it is still advisable to add tracktype=*.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype
Natfoot (2026-01-08 10:04:31+00:00): this seams to suggest to add both.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-01-08 18:41:13+00:00): tracktype= is not so useful when surface= is present already but it is nice to have both
Natfoot (2026-01-08 19:57:44+00:00): I changed the surface and grade tags so they should match.
Udarian (2024-01-09 05:15:03+00:00): Wrong comment, it was supposed to be:

Updated alignment of highway link such that the turn lane tagging is better represented as it is
mappyburdy (2024-01-09 05:33:30+00:00): This is my first contribution trying to add a public bookcase. I’m not sure if it is supposed to be attached to the path? 

I can’t figure out how to separate it from the path or delete it and start over.  I’m currently on an iPhone but will check from a laptop tomorrow.
Minh Nguyen (2024-02-24 22:38:28+00:00): Oh nice, I was worried I’d have to start a whole discussion about doing this, but you took care of it already.

Are you sure boundary=political is the best tag for the counties? As I understand it, that tag is for things like congressional districts and electoral wards, which so far we’ve refrained from mapping. As far as I can tell, Connecticut’s vestigial counties don’t have any electoral purpose either. Rather, they remind me of England’s ceremonial counties, which appear to be tagged as boundary=ceremonial. But I think there’s more momentum behind boundary=historic for this sort of thing.

For the new planning region boundaries, the names of the COGs should be in operator=*, not official_name=*, and I think border_type=planning_region would be less confusing. The planning region is the service area of the COG, not the COG itself. By analogy, we don’t tag Australia as official_name=Government of Australia.
stevea (2024-02-25 01:56:16+00:00): I am not sure boundary=political is best, it is a dart on the board, and not on the bullseye.  It may be boundary=historic works, this is all very liquid.  I think this needs a wider discussion medium than the narrow bandwidth of a changeset comment.  I welcome a new topic in the USA section of our Discourse forum.

This all seems do-able, but it always benefits more from a wider, deeper audience.  So, while you might choose to "worry," tossing it to a wider discussion is prudent.  I wouldn't say I "took care of it," I "hit the dartboard but not the bullseye."

If you think border_type=planning_region can stick (and now that you mention it, I can see this sticking widely across many states), it's beginning to roll down the track of getting nailed together.  We lay down some track here and continue with wider discussion.
Minh Nguyen (2024-02-27 07:17:42+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagging-counties-and-planning-regions-in-connecticut/109799
CurlingMan13 (2024-01-09 07:05:40+00:00): Do not map things for test purposes on the live OSM map.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146052623
CurlingMan13 (2024-01-09 07:05:36+00:00): Do not map things for test purposes on the live OSM map.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146052670
Frans S (2024-01-09 12:47:33+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks has been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers  high quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Buildings ought to be tagged as building=yes.
Inaccurate mapped.
Buildings not squared.
Connected nodes of buildings to highways


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146053399
maro21 (2024-01-13 13:16:03+00:00): Tag junction=yes stosuje się tylko jako wierzchołek na linii, a nie jako osobny punkt. Proszę zwracać uwagę na ostrzeżenia edytora.
Tego tagu nie stosuje się do nazywania trawników. Obszar wewnątrz ronda nie ma nazwy, nazwę ma tylko droga.
Proszę zapoznać się z
https://osm.wiki/Tag:junction=yes
https://osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
Aim311_ (2024-01-13 15:17:38+00:00): Od zeszłego roku ten tag jako obszar z nazwą jest wspierany m.in. przez Organic Maps i jak widać również w stylu domyślnym, więc coś jest na rzeczy.

Alternatywą dla junction=yes z nazwą jest m.in. place=square https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:place%3Dsquare pomimo braku dojścia. Moim zdaniem dla tego typu obszarów wewnątrz rond lepiej pasuje  junction=yes + nazwa, niż place=square + nazwa, pomijam wyjątki w przypadku bardzo dużych rond.
kamilbogacki (2024-01-13 16:19:23+00:00): Dodając nazwy z bazą junction=yes + name, bazowałem na tym co jest tak tagowane np. w Warszawie przez m.in. syntexa. Każde rondo jest tak otagowane i raczej nikt tego nie rusza.
arjunaraoc (2024-01-13 05:35:05+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146054807
Tomas Straupis (2024-01-12 07:52:25+00:00): Labas. Šventežerio mokyklos nebėra? (nuimta amenity=school žyma)
Bravo_two_zer0 (2024-01-12 09:35:04+00:00): Sveikas. My bad, mokykla egzistuoja, tikriausiai redagavimo metu atsitiktinai žyma buvo panaikinta (amenity=school žyma palikti). Dėkui už budrumą.
Tomas Straupis (2024-01-12 09:50:12+00:00): Aš turiu įtarimą, kad čia iD kažką pricrappina, nes ne pirmą kartą matau, kad kai building=yes keičiasi į building=school|kindergarden|hospital|..., tada ir amenity hop ir dingsta.
Frans S (2024-01-09 11:42:22+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks has been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
Please pay attention to next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Collected multiple buildings, mapped as 1 building
buildings not squared.

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146055483
Henny Vianelde (2024-02-27 12:56:30+00:00): Thank you for the information
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-09 08:20:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4739883923

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-01-09 08:21:02+00:00): Contain:

# nannnnnnnnnyn

141287136
141157266
141145987
141139673
141100269
141096181
141095514
141088949
141088842
141088810
140991455
140979250
140934893
traveleditor (2024-01-17 07:55:30+00:00): great work, it's always satisfying seeing your edits
user_14538650 (2024-01-17 13:06:10+00:00): Thank you! I'm busy with school atm so I couldn't edit as much as I've used to be
DD1GJ (2024-01-09 10:20:39+00:00): Wann wurde die Brücke gebaut? Aufgrund der Nähe zu der Überbaung ist der Standort recht seltsam. Auf Luftbildern ist nichts zu sehen.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-09 08:40:30+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11502622271

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Hufkratzer (2024-01-09 13:50:09+00:00): JFYI: There is a guy in the US who is apparently currently trying to figure out how to tag something like this (riding for the disabled), see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:healthcare:speciality=animal-assisted
DD1GJ (2024-01-09 10:16:52+00:00): Ein Park mitten auf einem landwirtschaftlich genutzten Feld?
Fizzie-DWG (2025-03-14 03:02:05+00:00): Reverted by DWG - undiscussed OEG Import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163594729
Frans S (2024-01-09 15:17:50+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. however, many buildings were not squared.

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146057067
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-09 08:50:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5767574815

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
BikePC (2024-02-13 20:28:06+00:00): Beste ov_079, ik heb de tag maxspeed=30 verwijderd van de inner natural=water multipolygon waarvan het brede deel ligt op de gemeentegrens Zoetermeer / Leidschendam-Voorburg. Duidelijk een 'slip of the pen' lijkt me.
ov_079 (2024-02-13 21:22:30+00:00): Dankjewel voor de oplettendheid. Heb ik nog even de vmax (maxspeed) naar wél de juiste way gezet
DD1GJ (2024-01-09 10:35:03+00:00): Wirklich da oder nur ausgedacht?
GeorgeKaplan (2024-04-27 04:21:49+00:00): Bonjour, attention rue du Crozier : vous avez mis votre pseudo en réf.
DD1GJ (2024-01-09 10:29:36+00:00): Seit wann gibt es dieses Gebäude?
NeisBot (2024-01-10 00:21:58+00:00): Hello Yiyi (itwikipedia), thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
DD1GJ (2024-01-09 10:15:47+00:00): Hallo angieeebkmm, willkommen bei OSM. Du hast da einige Dinge bei OSM eingetragen, an deren Existenz erheblicher Zweifel besteht. OSM ist keine Spielwiese sondern bildet die reale Welt ab.  Könntest Du auch bei anderen angesprochen Änderungssätzen dazu bitte zeitnah Stellung nehmen.

Welche besondere Bedeutung hat die Kantwiese? Ein lokaler Eigenname gehört wird mit loc_name eingetragen.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf
DD1GJ (2024-01-10 08:02:23+00:00): Da keine Rückmeldung erfolgte, wurden alle bisherigen Änderungen wegen Vandalismus zurückgesetzt.

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=146093200
Frans S (2024-01-09 16:02:47+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks has been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 

Please pay attention to next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Buildings often not squared.
Clustered buildings.

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146058725
Frans S (2024-01-09 14:02:22+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks has been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 

Please pay attention to next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate (sloppy) mapped buildings
buildings not squared.
Nodes of buildings connected to eachother

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146058731
Jrachi (2024-01-10 09:06:46+00:00): Ciao.
Quel tratto di sentiero fa parte di una percorso a catasto regionale.
Giro la tua segnalazione alla sezione CAI competente.
Capisco che sia la tua prima modifica, ma la prossima volta invece di cancellare puoi aggiungere i tag obstacle o contattare l'user che ha creato la way.

Non ti spaventare, molti sbagliano alla prima esperienza.
Anzi, benvenuto!
Sei autodidatta o hai seguito qualche corso o mapping party?
Ti invito ad unirti a qualche gruppo locale di mappatori.
Alla pagina https://osmit.it/#chisiamo puoi trovare il gruppo più vicino a te e altre informazioni sull'uso di OSM.

Altra cosuccia.
Nella piccola modifica da te fatta hai rotto due relazioni e iD (l'editor che hai usato) ti ha sicuramente dato diversi avvisi.
E: per semplificare la vita ai mappatori locali cerca di scrivere i commenti in italiano. Grazie

Ivo, Jrachi
lag_fra (2024-01-10 10:53:37+00:00): Ciao Ivo, Jrachi, 

grazie del feedback. Non mi aspettavo sicuramente di riuscire ad effettuare una modifica corretta al primo tentativo. Probabilmente la segnalazione al CAI Cumiana fara` si che il sentiero venga ripulito. 

Daro` un'occhiata al gruppo di mappatori in zona Torino, grazie mille!

Io sono autodidatta, da anni uso OSM tramite varie interfacce (OsmAnd+, cycle.travel, questo sito direttamente). Mi piacerebbe molto imparare un po' meglio, vado spesso a piedi e in bici e non e` la prima volta che mi capitano sentieri in stato non corrispondente a quanto tracciato.
Jrachi (2024-01-10 12:17:50+00:00): Grazie a te della risposta veloce.
La maggior parte dei sentieri sono taggati con il minimo, cioè niente,  e spesso le informazioni sono lacunose.
La valutazione della percorribilità, purtroppo, è molto difficile da fare, anche perché dipende dalle capacità del mappatore/escursionista e, come sai, dal periodo in cui si percorre.
So per esperienza che un sentiero che io percorro senza difficoltà particolari,  un altro potrebbe essere perdersi.
Se vuoi fare domande io sono sempre disponibile. Oppure chiedi in una chat, ci sono molti mappatori che sono felici di aiutare i neofiti.

Ivo
lag_fra (2024-01-10 14:52:32+00:00): Avrei dovuto fare delle foto perche` in questo caso il sentiero era davvero indicato male (con vecchi segnavia CAI rosso/bianco sbiaditi) e talmente sommerso da rovi e giunchi nel tratto vicino al fiume che era impossibile mantenere la traccia. Di sicuro si puo` ripristinare con una pulizia adeguata ma non sembrava percorso da almeno una stagione. 

Detto cio`, grazie per l'aiuto. Quali sono i canali di comunicazione piu` utilizzati dai mappatori? O puoi darmi un link a una chat per neofiti? 

Grazie mille, Francesco
Jrachi (2024-01-10 15:51:40+00:00): I canali sono molti.
Io seguo poco il forum, che è adatto a discussioni specifiche a largo respiro.
Uso e seguo molto di più i canali Telegram.
OpenStreetMapItalia
 Ha 650 iscritti, a volte ci sono anche troppe discussioni in contemporanea e più o meno ci sono una 50 di messaggi al giorno. Ha il vantaggio che trovi gente molto esperta su molti argomenti.
OSMers BI-VC-CVL
 è il gruppo di cui faccio parte, e organizziamo incontri mensili di persona o online. La media delle (poche) discussione è di solito ad alto livello, ma rispondiamo anche ai neofiti.
#OsmTO | OSM Prov. di Torino
link: https://t.me/OSM_TO
forse è quello che ti è più vicino.
Nato da poco, raramente vedo molto traffico.
Vedi tu. 

Ivo
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-09 10:00:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/579733013
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1117781067

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Famlam (2024-01-15 20:32:42+00:00): Hoi, ook hier geldt: als de gebouwen met deuren binnenlangs te bereiken zijn, is het nog steeds 1 gebouw, bestaande uit meerdere building:parts.

Pas je deze (en degene die ik eerder doorgaf) nog even aan?
maraf24 (2024-01-13 23:28:11+00:00): Kiedy usunięto tablice z ulic z numerem?
pavvv (2024-01-14 08:41:24+00:00): tablice nie zawsze są poprawne, np. tabliczki z dk98 nadal stoją przy Kochanowskiego
maraf24 (2024-01-16 20:53:31+00:00): To akurat nie ma nic do rzeczy, bo w ref ma być oznakowanie z terenu.
To nie z terenu dajemy w unsigned_ref lub official_ref.
Btw. miasto wykosztowało się na te numery 2 lata temu.
pavvv (2024-01-17 08:48:18+00:00): to wtedy rzeczywiście były one poprawne, bo usunięcie numeru nastąpiło dopiero niedawno, po kwietniu 2023 (https://web.archive.org/web/20230405090143/https://dsdik.wroc.pl/infrastruktura/wykaz-drog-wojewodzkich-na-dolnym-slasku.html)
maraf24 (2024-01-18 21:53:10+00:00): Numery zawsze są poprawne, gdy są umieszczone wzdłuż drogi.
pavvv (2024-01-21 14:31:02+00:00): w takim razie proponuję przywrócenie dk98
https://maps.app.goo.gl/boUDJYTKFDd3Q3Xk6
https://maps.app.goo.gl/XAt2a3yZ9xvFMHyYA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/vLU4i1pEdWnv3dFV6
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ekXKckLm3WZ2SFhf8
pavvv (2024-01-21 14:33:54+00:00): myślę że nie usunięto tabliczek przy DW372, bo numer tej drogi raczej zostanie przywrócony, kiedy zostanie ukończona WOW