piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2025-09-18 09:06:25+00:00): De tag social_centre rendert overigens niet, maar is wel vindbaar.
E11497 (2025-09-18 14:23:05+00:00): SHSEL gebruikt huisnummer 167d 
Eigenlijk is dat het algemene nummer van de beheerder van het gebouw.
Ook de huiskaart kan afwijken.
Nummer 167 zonder toevoeging gebruikt de EHBO vereniging.
Ik zal eens opletten, als ik in de buurt ben.
https://www.prismare.nl/plattegrond
E11497 (2025-09-18 14:25:39+00:00): social_centre: Als je een betere tag weet voor een Sociëteit?
eggie (2025-09-18 15:13:37+00:00): Niet alles rendert. Het is was het is.
Sportclubs renderen bv ook niet.
Gregory Peony (2025-09-18 03:20:00+00:00): You improved the accuracy of some footprints here. Generally try to modify features instead of deleting and re mapping. In this case there's not much loss because there was not much history. Did you check it before making the deletions?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172081801
slavan118 (2025-10-25 01:27:39+00:00): старые названия уже имеются в теге old_name=*
bartgron (2025-09-17 20:26:46+00:00): Witaj, dzięki za mapowanie! Czy korty tenisowe na tym terenie również już nie istnieją?
MsBlondyn (2025-09-20 18:49:04+00:00): Korty otwarte istnieją ale nie nadają się  już do grania, parkują na nich auta Lelya
Gregory Peony (2025-09-18 03:25:19+00:00): The pentagonal footprint here is likely square and it just looks like it's not in the imagery becasue it was taken at an angle. I cross referenced mapbox and it looks square there. Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roof_modelling#Typical_errors_in_the_interpretation_of_roof_geometry_from_aerial_images --- It is possible to delete tags from features without deleting the geometry. If tags are consistently applied; it's simple to modify or remove them using JOSM.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172082128
Taya_S (2025-09-18 08:05:32+00:00): Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172099214
Taya_S (2025-09-18 08:05:33+00:00): Reverted destructive edits DWG Ticket#2025091810000091

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172099214
eggie (2025-09-17 19:48:02+00:00): Dag E, 

Hier heb ik een dubbel adres verwijderd.
In dit pand bevindt zich nu nr 6 en 8.

MVG
eggie
OddlyAngled (2025-09-24 18:01:21+00:00): looks like this is already tagged on the building - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1427236740 ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172082933
DoneWorkin (2025-09-24 21:10:51+00:00): Yes you are quite correct - thanks I will remove that!  
FYI - I used CoMaps (the Android app) to add the toilet.  It looks like CoMaps maps can be up to several months old.  The building was added 20 days ago and wasn't showing in the app yet.  I can see that using CoMaps to add things is convenient but not the best.
whb (2025-09-17 22:30:15+00:00): Guten Tag,

was bedeutet information=relation_marker?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2409288528

Viele Grüße
whb
FL0815H (2025-09-18 02:53:04+00:00): Das war natürlich ein ein Fehler. Danke für den Hinweis! Ist korrigiert.
Gregory Peony (2025-09-17 22:00:04+00:00): Good job modifying the existing data instead of deleting it; you improved basically all footprints here. The deletions you made were valid. The long T shaped footprint envelopes 2 buildings. 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/172083770
AdelinoAraujo (2025-09-17 20:28:31+00:00): https://serafimfernandes.pt/
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-17 20:40:56+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12453155673

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Dimitar155 (2025-09-29 12:16:56+00:00): Please make sure to verify whether there is physical separation before spiting roads like that. In this case, there isn't.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172610134
SunnyIsland10 (2025-09-29 21:07:27+00:00): Hello Dimitar155,

This editor is no longer on the team but thank you for changing this back. The modeling looks good to me.

Have a great day!
Enock4seth (2025-09-18 13:56:50+00:00): Hi, 
"Added Buildings" is a more useful changeset comment. Take a look at how and why Good changeset comments https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
eggie (2025-09-18 05:02:58+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback   Het is niet de bedoeling als een weg 's nachts dicht voor een aantal dagen is om dan die weg te verwijderen uit OSM.
Voor een iets langere periode gaat dit overigens op een andere manier met conditionaltagging.
Nu zitten we met een gemankeerde kaart. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-09-18 05:07:48+00:00): reverted by changeset #172093525

Dit waren je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=172085657

Vraag in zo'n geval even hulp via het forum of zet een opmerking op de kaart.

MVG
eggie
AndAcorn (2025-09-18 06:28:52+00:00): Dank je voor de reactie. Dit is een nieuw account onder mijn nieuwe email adres, maar heb al een tijdje niet meer bijgedragen dus ben wat roestig. Ik had de weg aangepast naar een barricade zodat ik de track simpel terug kon zetten , maar als je een betere manier hebt hoor ik dat graag, zag niet dat je de gewenste aanpassing al gedaan had.
Groet,
    Andre
eggie (2025-09-18 06:38:11+00:00): Dag Andre... Dat gaat in ieder geval niet zo. Je bedoeling was uiteraard goed.

Wanneer een weg voor een aantal dagen op slot zit heeft het geen zin om actie te ondernemen, want tegen de tijd dat de updates van de verschillende routers zijn doorgevoerd is de weg al weer open.

Wanneer iets vele weken duurt dan wordt iets als volgt aangepast..
Zomaar een willekeurig voorbeeld.
access:conditional=no @ (2025 Sep 20-2026 Apr 3)

De routering wordt dan in zo'n geval  automatisch weer hervat. 

Daar kan ook bv met tijden.
motor_vehicle:conditional=no @ (Mo – Fr 11.00 - 18.00; Sa 11.00 - 17.00; Su 12.00 - 17.00)
Hier heeft het duidelijk geen zin.

barrier=yes zetten we niet op wegvakken.
de highwaytag halen we niet weg.

Hier hoef je nu geen actie te ondernemen. 
De periode is te kort.

MVG
eggie
AndAcorn (2025-09-19 11:32:26+00:00): Hi eggie,
Het was inderdaad om te zorgen dat Waze en OsmAnd niet zouden routeren. Mijn frustratie dat ik pas bij de Suffolkweg zuid erachter kwam waar de Suffolk weg zuid ligt voerde de boventoon. 
MVG Andre
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-17 21:31:00+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3111819766
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/337581075

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Fizzie-DWG (2025-09-17 22:12:06+00:00): DWG revert - sockpuppet vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172087065
Fizzie-DWG (2025-09-17 22:12:07+00:00): DWG revert - sockpuppet vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172087065
JobeKremmer (2026-01-02 02:42:56+00:00): Cool
Gregory Peony (2025-09-18 03:45:20+00:00): You did very well improving footpritns and deleting likely non-buildings. Some of the footprints you mapped are mapped as well as the imagery allows so I did not modify them during validation. --- On a few occasions you mapped some complex footprints which I think generally envelope multiple adjacent buildings. Try to see if a simple shape accurately represents the feature you want to map and if not then try more complex options. Consider if there is any distortion/illusion making it appear more complex than it really is. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roof_modelling#Typical_errors_in_the_interpretation_of_roof_geometry_from_aerial_images and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roof:shape#Roof_shape --- 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/172086495
Udarian (2025-09-17 22:38:38+00:00): please, next time you add an apartment don't just add the name, please also add the relevant tags to mark it as an apartment, you can just search for apartment in iD and it will pop up.
FlamingoOSM (2025-09-18 01:00:52+00:00): Will do
Gregory Peony (2025-09-18 03:48:44+00:00): Here is a good example of footprints that likely represent multiple buildings. It appears that the way the Eastern two were mapped previously was more accurate. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. 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_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172086850
CRCulver (2025-09-21 11:18:05+00:00): With this changeset, you created an amenity=school way that already had amenity=school buildings inside it. This is an error and will automatically create a bug in the Osmose layer, so you are making more work for your fellow mappers.

The correct way to tag a new school area when the schools are already mapped, is the landuse=education tag. I fixed this in changeset 172240275.
Gnurpsnewoel (2025-09-21 19:08:00+00:00): thanks!
Gnurpsnewoel (2025-09-21 19:11:01+00:00): However, the light yellow area vanished, which was helpful on the map. Therefore I changed it agai, and did it like in https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/542174080
Gnurpsnewoel (2025-09-21 19:16:19+00:00): ok, I didn't, you were totally right. However, I am unhappy that the area turned kind of invisible. Maybe, I am marking the fence around it
CRCulver (2025-09-21 19:27:15+00:00): Do not choose tags based on how the resulting map looks. This is known as “tagging for the renderer” and is a mistake:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

And remember that the map at openstreetmap.org is just a tech demo, not something that many people actual use. These tags may look completely different in phone map apps like CoMaps or OSMAnd.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-09-17 22:19:33+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 170804078, 170829610, 170829768, 171036910, 171043055, 171044710, 171045197, 171088974, 171335910, 171428998, 171429079, 171458106, 171490372, 171510032, 171788110, 171788158, 171826326, 171843710, 171855662, 171910834, 171974599, 171974809, 172012217, 172013096, 172052187.
felipeeugenio (2025-09-20 12:04:30+00:00): are those buildings really there?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172087907
smaptious (2025-09-18 17:36:13+00:00): Correction: Source used was Esri World Imagery; Mapillary
gogorm (2025-09-18 17:46:44+00:00): Thanks for taking the initiative to update the map and also for removing the outdated business information. Just to point out, it looks like the objects containing former business details were also containing the building outline. Building outlines should be kept if the associated building still exists. In other words, it would be better to just delete the "name" / "shop" tags and keep the buidling tag and anything else that is still correct for the affected object.
Otter space (2025-09-19 09:24:08+00:00): Very fair point, I'll keep in mind for future edits, and if I get the time I'll fix this (but no promises unfortunately).
VictorIE (2026-03-22 09:39:20+00:00): Hi,

I've set Otter space as shop=games instead of just a building and marked it as being on the first floor.

In the future, it might be useful to properly capture the building geometry of the whole shopping centre.
Firefishy (2025-09-18 06:24:20+00:00): Site of what?
rhhs (2025-09-18 09:59:34+00:00): Thanks for your revert of the construction status of that motorway: it is under repair, but probably not worth mapping that as it's temporary.
I did revert your edits west of the junction with the ring road, however. There's been a discussion about the motorway status of the section east of the ring road https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/motorway-status-of/122136 but west of it, it's definitely not a motorway
Enock4seth (2025-09-18 14:04:16+00:00): Hi,
"Added Buildings" is a more useful and related changeset comment. Take a look at how and why Good changeset comments https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
mapko (2025-09-19 23:27:13+00:00): Zdravim, mozete uviest na zaklade ich informacii ste realizovali tieto zmeny? Ani jedna zmena nezodpoveda realite.
aceman444 (2025-09-21 15:18:15+00:00): Podla coho je dialnica uz otvorena?
mapko (2025-09-21 20:16:32+00:00): Dialnica bude zatvorena pokial sa nedokonci usek Krivan-Mytna https://scontent-vie1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/547907799_10223770701295083_8129993129822739533_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=aa7b47&_nc_ohc=54DnNVamNoAQ7kNvwHWxqUj&_nc_oc=AdmxWTQkC6U9Ao2_rXdiHcV_sqjkzDdDHq5NTTQrL-ZatpBSBu_4IhAYyrJbDe8giWs&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent-vie1-1.xx&_nc_gid=c7xnk3xVy9OxsKJiCjv1Uw&oh=00_AfYK6TOSWw80HoSXr7xVtSdNI6mSFqmK59d8JWvotoL8zA&oe=68D2D167
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-12 06:58:37+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other tagging for Dogtopia POI in changeset 184001701

https://osm.org/changeset/184001701
Jarek 🚲 (2025-09-18 01:07:59+00:00): The receipt also confirmed that the address is 9 Queens Quay West, as changed previously (in version 6 of the relation)
Erick Araujo (2025-09-25 17:34:58+00:00): Olá, GivorsCanal, por favor, não faça modificações em áreas cujo você não conheça somente com visualização de satélite, por favor, estou revertendo esse conjunto de alterações. Obrigado!
GivorsCanal (2025-09-25 23:23:25+00:00): Olá, Erick Araujo,
Obrigado por nos informar sobre esta edição. Após a análise, concordo com você que ela é melhor como serviço. Peço desculpas por sobrescrever sua classificação. Vejo que você reverteu isso e adiarei suas edições daqui para frente.
Há uma pergunta sobre a qual gostaria de receber seu feedback. Notei que havia relações de rotas que utilizam esta estrada e, no Mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-22.898728200000008&lng=-43.209962099999984&z=19.44740812681181&focus=photo&x=0.38170506750371197&y=0.7881284287112623&zoom=0.4649973971135737&dateFrom=2023-09-01&pKey=1071736937926501), é mostrado que esta estrada possui uma barreira física. Existe alguma correção para redirecionamentos nestas rotas atualmente? Obrigado novamente por ajudar a manter o mapa do Rio de Janeiro atualizado. Serei mais minucioso em minhas investigações no futuro. Abraço.

tradução automática

Hi Erick Araujo,
Thank you for taking informing about this edit. After review I agree with you that it is better as service, apologies for overwriting your classification. I see you reverted this and will defer to your edits going forward. 
There is one question I would like to get your feedback on. I noticed that there were route relations that use this road and in Mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-22.898728200000008&lng=-43.209962099999984&z=19.44740812681181&focus=photo&x=0.38170506750371197&y=0.7881284287112623&zoom=0.4649973971135737&dateFrom=2023-09-01&pKey=1071736937926501) it shows that this road has a phyisical barrier here. Is there a fix for reroutes on these currently? Thanks again for helping keep the map up to date in Rio de Janeiro and I will be more thorough in my investigations in the future. Best.
nevw (2025-09-18 09:26:37+00:00): Hi
is Jack's House the correct name of this building or is personal information?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/306610837
nevw (2025-09-23 07:56:45+00:00): no response, deleted building name
Udarian (2025-09-18 03:05:40+00:00): when you add footway=sidewalk to a footway please make sure that the whole footway is a sidewalk as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/367833252 is not by a simple look at the imagery.
PedestrianMapping_CloakMap (2025-09-18 04:56:37+00:00): Thank you for the feedback. I have made the necessary changes
Udarian (2025-09-18 03:21:47+00:00): next time please be more careful were you place crossings as you placed the crossing way across the wrong road as per Bing streetside.
PedestrianMapping_CartoBypass (2025-09-18 05:14:05+00:00): Thanks for pointing that out.  I’ll be more careful ; appreciate the heads-up!
iandees (2025-09-18 04:10:18+00:00): Hello! Can I ask why you're dividing roads?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172091955
zorglubu (2025-12-02 09:13:40+00:00): Bonjour,
lorsque les opening_hours contiennent des commentaires, il faut veiller à entourer le texte de guillemets afin que cela puisse être exploité par des logiciels comme comaps ou osmand.
Cordialement.
symac (2025-12-03 20:58:40+00:00): Merci @zorglubu, je ne connaissais pas cette consigne, je tacherai de l'appliquer désormais.
nevw (2025-09-18 11:09:12+00:00): Hi
Multipolygon members with outer roles cannot share sides if they are to be a valid mp. I suggest dropping the multipolygon relation and map as a simple poygon around the whole area or if you prefer 3 simple polygons to cover the area.
nevw (2025-09-18 11:10:59+00:00): Osmi displays the error here
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=138.61278&lat=-34.80709&zoom=19
Mawsons Lake (2025-09-18 23:22:09+00:00): Hi
Thanks for your help on this. That was my first time trying a merge, and it didn't work. I have now reconstructed the three areas into a single area.
nevw (2025-09-19 00:32:58+00:00): Thanks for fixing - looks good now.
mavl (2025-09-18 13:31:12+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок добавляет здания прямо поверх существующих зданий. Этот пакет правок отменён.  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9E%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BD_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%8A%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82_%E2%80%94_%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BD_%D1%8D%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%82_OSM
sosquqer (2025-12-17 08:43:37+00:00): 👋 Do you know if those two camp sites are different? If not it's worth deleting one of them
Firefishy (2025-09-18 06:18:21+00:00): I think the complex should be tagged as landuse=residential instead of as a building. ;-)
werries238 (2025-09-18 07:34:58+00:00): Updated thank you :)
sosquqer (2025-12-17 08:42:27+00:00): 👋 You didn't change the name:en here
iandees (2025-09-18 13:11:01+00:00): When a road closes we don't delete it. Instead we mark it as under construction. Will you make that change or should I?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172093121
iandees (2025-09-18 14:03:36+00:00): I modified it to reflect the construction work.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172093121
NeisBot (2025-09-18 05:03:40+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Comment #Description
user_5359 (2025-09-18 07:52:16+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice this is a production database.
Please only draw in existing objects and facts. I have now reverted your changes. see https://www.osm.org/changeset/172098660
Gregory Peony (2025-09-18 17:55:19+00:00): Hi, the footpritns you mapped here represent buildings. You correctly excluded what appear to be (white) tarps from some building footprints.

For my feedback I will focus on https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1430792920 . 

You outlined both the roof and walls of this building resulting in it being oversized: 192 square meters compared to 150 the way I mapped it. Here the North and Eastern walls are visible and shadows are cast NW. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roof_modelling and watch https://youtu.be/JAPiGntG6fs

As I mentioned before in my comment on Changeset: 171090518 you should proceed with caution when using the Japan GSI seamless layer, because the angle it is captured at changes frequently, making it more difficult to know when you're looking at a building's walls. I recommend cross referencing other sources to aid your interpretation. Idealy one taken from a different angle and with shadows cast in a different direction.

I'm assuming we have permission to use Japan GSI standard Map when contributing to OSM. It looks really useful especially for toponomy, but please compare it with the imagery; to me the footprints do not always appear accurate. For example I see no evidence in imagery to map the footprint I've been discussing as anything other than a rectangle.

https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1430792915 is positioned a few meters away from being in alignment with features in its vicinity. Try to improve it. If you choose to do so, then please send me a link to the changeset.

I hope this is helpful. Thank you for your contributions!
あじさか (2025-09-19 00:06:01+00:00): Thank you for the feedback, I’ll take it into account.
5m4u9 (2025-09-19 06:57:06+00:00): Hola, bienvenid@ y gracias por mejorar un poco el mapa.

Resulta que hay muchos "casas" que dibujaste pero en realidad son terrenos, porque dibujaste sobre el perímetro exterior del terreno. Hay una categoría para este caso.

Los edificios deben ser dibujados "cada uno" por separado, si hay dos edificios (que es común en ciudades en bolivia en el área periurbano) hay que dibujar dos áreas :(
Kovoschiz (2025-09-18 08:49:19+00:00): 1. Please don't delete the `=footway`  when you draw `man_made=bridge` and `building=` . This breaks routing. 
2. Please don't add `leisure=park` to each part of parks. This causes duplicates.
Sylabowy Kot (2025-09-18 08:23:32+00:00): Relying on Strava isn't always a good idea. As you're using the browser editor probably you are not aware that JOSM users have a better tools to map park paths.  Here I'm not so sure if the deleted path is no longer walkable. Heatmap is too much hot in this place to rate it good.
Anastasiya_Vakulich (2025-09-18 09:05:30+00:00): clarification: road geometry was fixed based on ITACyL - Castilla y León #mapbox_linters
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172095457
Anastasiya_Vakulich (2025-09-18 09:16:48+00:00): clarification: road geometry was fixed based on PNOA Spain #mapbox_linters
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172095925
limes11 (2025-09-18 19:44:11+00:00): Hallo, 

wieso ist hier 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/98245624

Radfahren verboten ? 

Das ist eine normale Zufahrt, geeignet für zweispurige Fahrzeuge. Liegt nicht im Naturschutzgebiet.

Viele Grüße
limes11 (2025-09-20 08:12:20+00:00): Ok ihr hattet wohl einfach nicht gesehen, dass die Zufahrt bis zum Burgstallweg geht, das service=driveway war auch falsch.

Habe das korrigiert
revulutzer (2025-10-01 05:54:57+00:00): Die Änderung ist falsch. Das war und ist ein Feldweg mit einschränkungen für Kraftfahrzeuge (kein Verbot).