piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
vectorial8192 (2025-01-03 12:02:16+00:00): Re

{1}
The government doesn't understand what is a permalink, but see this FB post: https://www.facebook.com/gakeicom/posts/2936533403285783/?locale=zh_HK
The new layout (while lacking details) can be seen as significantly different from any of the old/interim layouts. This warrants a cleanup since those old paths are no longer there irl. It seems likely the new terminus will be a sawtooth one (as per planning preference), but whatever, by the time it needs to happen, someone will draw them.

{2}
I can add back the 485-487 number, but I really don't think the new building(s) will have exactly 485-487 (think: the old bus terminus is probably 483, right?)

{3}
While OSM aims to capture "the essence", at least I think OSM should also capture "the form", especially when it comes to multi-phase constructions. You notice I actually drew 2 construction yards; presumably, you can move them around to suit the updated irl situation, such that one of them will be for the High Block, another for the Low Block. People will be confused when the map says they have to enter a construction yard when in fact the yard is separated by a road. Again, it do be like that irl, and all maps should at minimum capture the irl factor to be called a proper map.
vectorial8192 (2025-01-03 12:07:38+00:00): To add onto {2}, usually when there is a "plot merger" such as in this case, the addr:house_number will remain null and unknown until the construction is "almost finished (TM)" and the relevant whatever gov-dept announces "thy number is XXX", and then we will write that into the data. Right now since there is not even a foundation laid irl, there is nothing for us mappers to do.
TuAmigoElEditor (2025-01-03 02:31:27+00:00): Sorry about that. Glad you corrected it. :)
pitscheplatsch (2025-01-05 15:27:04+00:00): Just a test?
DorneyLake123 (2025-01-22 13:58:57+00:00): reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161639344
demon_box (2025-01-02 11:28:26+00:00): Ciao, hai cambiato questa highway da track (sterrata) a path (sentiero) ma hai lasciato invariato gli altri tags che ora sono in contraddizione:
access=agricultural
tracktype=grade1
surface=concrete
Ti chiedo gentilmente: è un sentiero oppure una sterrata??
Attendo info, grazie!
demon_box (2025-01-02 11:28:57+00:00): intendo questa highway:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300669954
MunoCamuno (2025-01-02 11:48:10+00:00): Ciao demon_box,

grazie infinite di avermi informato!

Sono ancora relativamente inesperto nel modificare la mappa e credevo che, cambiando il tipo di elemento (da sterrata a sentiero), venissero automaticamente eliminati i tags precedenti.

Provvedo a correggere.

Grazie ancora!
demon_box (2025-01-02 12:00:30+00:00): ok, quindi in definitiva è un sentiero NON più uno sterrato?
MunoCamuno (2025-01-02 12:09:22+00:00): Esatto 👍🏻
demon_box (2025-01-02 12:17:17+00:00): Grazie ancora e BuonMapping!
Mohamed_Taha (2025-01-02 15:02:50+00:00): Hello Brendar with an 'R',
your recent changesets have created errors in the OSM database regarding adding untagged roads
For Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160901823
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160882505
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160879521
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160866019
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160848167
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160840766
Kindly review the following link to learn how to classify roads correctly:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_tagging_samples
Can you please fix this?
Regards
Mohamed_Taha
Brendar with an 'R' (2025-01-02 21:59:19+00:00): Hello, I am still working on this task. It is a large task where I have to save my work even though it is incomplete, and then pick up where I have left off. But by the time I am done with the task, everything will surely be tagged. Thank you so much.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160901823
MarcoR (2025-01-03 08:25:57+00:00): Se le bacheche non sono modificabili dalle persone (come nel caso delle bacheche in cui i messaggi diretti alla cittadinanza sono inseriti solamente dal Comune) forse sarebbe più adatto tourism=information + information=board + board_type=notice ; vedi la pagina wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:board_type

Buon mapping,
Marco
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160901914
josmougn (2025-02-16 23:18:22+00:00): tu es allé vérifier tous ces passages piétons sur place ?
Le nombre de passages en "uncontrolled" alors qu'ils ont des feux, ce serait une correction qui me paraitrait plus pertinente.
Il me semble que les corrections en masse sont déconseillées dans osm mais je n'en suis pas sûr.
Nzau (2025-02-17 08:28:37+00:00): Bonjour josmougn,
Il s'agit bien d'une édition en masse, que j'ai signalé ici : https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/penser-les-passages-pietons-cyclistes-de-maniere-coherente/20437/19

Sauf erreur de manipulation de ma part, j'ai uniquement remplacé le tag "crossing_rer=zebra" par le tag "crossing:markings=zebra"

Je n'ai donc pas touché à la partir "uncontrolled/traffic_signal", si tu vois des incohérences sur le terrain, n'hésite pas à faire les changements nécessaires ^^
Langlaeufer (2025-01-13 08:26:16+00:00): Zum Kakelberg ist meines Erachtens eine 30er Zone. Bitte prüfe nochmal falls ich mich irre-  ich hab es allerdings bereits zurück geändert.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160902155
NieWnen (2025-01-02 13:15:09+00:00): Ten nr identyfikacyjny warto wrzucić w ref :)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker#Powi%C4%85zane_tagi
NXN (2025-01-02 14:51:18+00:00): Cześć, 
dzięki za uwagi. Zrobione.
vogelfreier (2025-01-12 17:12:21+00:00): Warum einfach Gebäude löschen? Laß sie so wie sie sind und belaß die Hausnr mit dem Gebäude wie vorher waren https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/90524799/history https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/395972007/history ...
koepikai (2025-01-12 17:49:14+00:00): 1. Habe ich das Dach wohl aus Versehen gelöscht.
2. Möchte ich die Gebäude im 3-D Format haben und das geht in plumpen Flächen nicht.
3. Bitte erbete ich mir einen anderen, konstrutiven Anschreibstil hier. OSM ist nicht DEINE Plattform.
Lg
Jan
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 04:49:46+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164660065
Necessarycoot72 (2025-01-05 14:33:21+00:00): Hi, that Wikimedia link you provided 404s
5R-MFT (2025-01-05 15:21:21+00:00): Ups, now updated.
Hugoren Martinako (2025-01-03 11:18:55+00:00): Buenas, ¿por qué eliminas el nodo https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1482407231?
Seraq (2025-01-03 13:53:02+00:00): Hola Hugoren, según la cartografía del IGN “«La Grajera» se encuentra en las siguientes coordenadas: La Grajera
Ubicación: geo:40.47720,-3.90527?z=17
https://osmand.net/map?pin=40.477203,-3.905266#17/40.4772/-3.9053

Para evitar duplicidades.

Muchas gracias. Quedo pendiente de tus comentarios…

Seraq
Hugoren Martinako (2025-01-03 14:16:57+00:00): En tal caso se deben unir ambos elementos en uno solo por donde han incluido el place=locality.

Las entidades de población catalogadas por el INE están referenciadas (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:ref:ine). Al tratarse de un elemento diseminado (dicha referencia acaba en 99), implica que su población se encuentra en torno a un área indeterminada (a diferencia de los núcleos, que se encuentra concentrada).

Por tanto es preferible indicarlo como isolated_dwelling antes que locality, ya que tiene más "peso" que un mero lugar.

Me encargo de unir ambos nodos.
Un saludo
Seraq (2025-01-03 14:32:26+00:00): Muchas gracias Hugoren.

Saludos,

Seraq
Seraq (2025-01-05 16:06:49+00:00):  Hola Hugoren,
Me preguntaba si La Grajera no es una población de Segovia.

Saludos,

Seraq
Hugoren Martinako (2025-01-07 11:29:25+00:00): Sí, también. Son elementos distintos: el de Segovia es un municipio, el de Majadahonda una entidad singular.

Puedes consultar "Grajera" en https://www.ine.es/nomen2/index.do para más información.
StC (2025-01-02 21:43:22+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
StC (2025-01-02 21:48:59+00:00): J'ai parlé trop vite, et je ne sais pas faire la réparation car :

 - ce n'est pas un, mais trois itinéraires pédestres qui sont concernés : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11894631, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11537975 et https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4471277.

- la carte de chaleur Strava est presque muette sur le tracé du chemin https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/870796038, qui est celui que j'aurais spontanément utilisé pour faire passer les itinéraires.

Avez-vous des éléments de terrain à utiliser pour faire les corrections ?
Rivellon (2025-01-02 22:40:25+00:00): J'y étais encore hier

Le chemin : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/870796038#map=19/49.118656/6.727981
Il existe, mais c'est pas chemin a privilégié selon moi

Le chemin naturel c'est
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/870796037#map=17/49.116992/6.731411

Ceci dit, c'est pas ca que j'ai modifié, moi j'ai surtout supprimé un chemin qui n'existe pas : la continuité vers l'Ouest de celui la : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1019513638#map=18/49.119039/6.729485
StC (2025-01-03 09:21:18+00:00): Bonjour,

voici des copies d'écran qui montrent à la fois les chemins dans OSM, la carte de chaleur de Strava, et l'état des itinéraires depuis ce changeset. Ca donne une idée des questions qui se posent : https://imgur.com/a/BvWiKi2
Dimitar155 (2026-07-29 07:19:09+00:00): Здравейте,

Благодаря ви за редакцията! Друг картограф е изтрил офиса на инспектора на ул. Плиска. Може ли да потвърдите дали все още съществува там? Гледайки сайта на МВР (https://www.mvr.bg/sdvr/дирекцията/за-одмвр/структура/06-ру-сдвр), кварталните инспектори за Хиподрума и Лагера са на един и същ адрес (бул. Цар Борис III №22А).

Поздрави,
Митко
Fraxi (2026-07-29 10:03:43+00:00): Btw, къде трябва да се намира бул. Цар Борис III №22А? Най-малкия четен номер(може би), който имаме в OSM, съм го добавил аз по данни на Софияплан - №32.
node/12144965932
Но май не е верен.
След 56(и 54-съда), са предимно номера на блокове - в СИ посока.
По кадастър(от kais.cadastre.bg) се вижда №12 за имот 68134.201.100.1.86, oзначен от нас като бл. 59. Такъв рязък скок от №32 на 22 е нереален. Между другото, като цъкнеш на едно място в кадастъра за бл. 50, излиза №22.
Fraxi (2026-07-29 10:04:11+00:00): До него има вече отбелязана приемна...
Fraxi (2026-07-29 10:09:39+00:00): Отворих бележка https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5424165
Alberto1964 (2025-01-03 09:05:34+00:00): ciao, cercherò di spiegarti come funziona il modo di dare i nomi alle strutture, almeno per quanto riguarda alcune regioni e forse, anche nello specifico, nelle provincie.  Le strutture che fanno parte per l'accoglienza degli escursionisti, si dividono in queste tipologie: RIFUGIO che può essere situato a qualsiasi altitudine, costruito in modo massiccio con pietre locali (come in molti casi tagliandole sul posto) oppure in cemento armato e poi rivestito in pietra o legno o ancora in solo legno.  Queste strutture possono essere sia gestite (chi arriva trova chi gli prepara il cibo) oppure in autogestione (chi arriva deve sapere autogestirsi).  Poi viene data la definizione di CAPANNA a quelle strutture che sono identiche alle caratteristiche sopra citate.  segue la definizione di BIVACCO dove la struttura la si intende come una di quelle semi botti in lamiera dove vi sono delle brande (6 o 9 posti letto) e coperte, oppure s'intende quel modo ancora più spartano dove uno si trova un giaciglio per la notte (come quelli che bivaccano in parete) ma, viene dato questo nome anche a strutture in muratura, piccole con annesso cucina a legna, o camino o a gas o addirittura tutte le 3 possibilità per cucinarsi qualcosa e riscaldarsi.  Un'altra nome è BAITA che viene dato localmente ed è una struttura che ha le stesse caratteristiche dei RIFUGI ma, solitamente quelle messe a disposizione degli escursionisti sono in autogestione come la BAITA NOVA che per motivi vari, in questo caso, han deciso come società (polisportiva di Albosaggia) di non darla più.  Su openstreetmaps, la parola chiave BAITA l'ho cercata per inserirla, poi nella spiegazione avrei messo rifugio ma non c'è, quindi a mio avviso è meglio descriverla come RIFUGIO che semplicemente STRUTTURA che è più una cosa troppo generica, spero di essermi spiegato, ciao
gmar5 (2025-01-03 10:27:20+00:00): Grazie. 

A riguardo, ci sono tre aspetti principali che possono essere descritti nei tag di OpenStreetMap:
1. Il tipo di edificio fisico, ad esempio building=hut, building=cabin, building=house.
2. Il tipo di servizio offerto, per esempio tourism=alpine_hut (per un rifugio gestito da personale), tourism=wilderness_hut (per un rifugio/bivacco senza personale), tourism=chalet (per un bed & breakfast che si può affittare su prenotazione).
3. A chi è accessibile, quindi access=yes o access=private.
(Poi tag aggiuntivi possono descrivere altre caratteristiche o servizi offerti).

Questa Baita Nòva quindi funziona ancora come "wilderness_hut" (rifugio senza personale), ma ad uso esclusivo privato e non aperta al più ampio pubblico (quindi access=private). 
Altri rifugi descritti con access=private sono disponibili al pubblico, ma bisogna chiedere le chiavi.
Si può dire che la differenza fra una "wilderness_hut" ad uso privato, e una baita completamente privata (ad esempio in un alpeggio, o una seconda casa in montagna) può essere sottile. Comunque ora sembra descritta accuratamente nei tag.

Ciao.
mavl (2025-02-05 14:02:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 162167075 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted. Reason: wrong values for name:en - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161608012].
mottiger (2025-01-20 16:32:47+00:00): Höi Wikilux

Mit deiner angegebenen Quelle swisstopo kann ich den way Farbmatte (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1347970595) nicht rekonstruieren. Ist da ein Fehler passiert?

Liebe Grüsse
motti
Wikilux (2025-01-20 18:43:44+00:00): Hallo motti
Die Farbmatte findet man auf swisstopo bzw. GWR mit folgendem Link:
https://map.geo.admin.ch/#/map?lang=de&center=2639708.86,1228256.98&z=11.708&topic=ech&layers=ch.bfs.gebaeude_wohnungs_register@features=433698_2;ch.swisstopo.amtliches-strassenverzeichnis@features=10140575&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pixelkarte-farbe&featureInfo=default&catalogNodes=ech,457,491
Gruss Wikilux
Wikilux (2025-01-20 18:51:52+00:00): Hallo motti
Mit dem Link oben stimmt was nicht, ich versuche es nochmals:
https://map.geo.admin.ch/#/map?lang=de&center=2639677.14,1228351.19&z=11.908&topic=ech&layers=ch.bfs.gebaeude_wohnungs_register;ch.swisstopo.amtliches-strassenverzeichnis@features=10063420&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pixelkarte-farbe&featureInfo=default&catalogNodes=ech,457,491
Gruss Wikilux
Reinhard12 (2025-01-02 21:30:05+00:00): Hallo Florian,
mit dieser Änderung hast du (vermutlich aus Versehen) aus der Mittelstraße ein Kabel gemacht. Ich habe die Änderung rückgängig gemacht, da es mir unlogisch erschien. 
Gruß aus Dorsten
Reinhard
flohoff (2025-01-04 16:32:03+00:00): Ist auch in der routingüberwachung aufgefallen ;)

https://osm.zz.de/routeqa/?rid=942499,952890#51.69121,6.86768,16z
eggie (2025-01-02 14:28:08+00:00): Hoi... Gebruikelijk is dan om access=private te taggen ipv access=no

Mvg
eggie
Tomas Straupis (2025-01-02 13:13:50+00:00): There is nothing there on the ground now and hasn't been for a very long time. Such information should go to OHM, not into OSM.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-01-02 13:00:56+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/996624543

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Pikse (2025-01-06 18:02:25+00:00): You have readded leisure=nature_reserve here for the second time now. I think it shouldn't be added. See my previous comment: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/87432601
gscholz (2025-01-03 07:16:12+00:00): Hi Aldo Bochicchio,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=15.48598&lat=40.66941&zoom=17&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160906509

As you may know, this kind of error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps. Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2025-01-09 07:50:19+00:00): Hi Aldo Bochicchio, 
this error still exits, can I get your feedback here?
Guido
Aldo Bochicchio (2025-01-09 11:21:59+00:00): Ciao Guido, non ho capito se ho commesso errori nel modificare la mappa, ma non so come rimediare, puoi guidarmi?
gscholz (2025-01-10 07:53:44+00:00): Hi Aldo Bochicchio, 
thanks for your feedback, I have just fixed this messy situation.
Guido
Aldo Bochicchio (2025-01-10 08:39:50+00:00): Ciao Guido, grazie per il tuo intervento risolutore
1993matias (2025-01-08 07:42:50+00:00): Hello, do you have a source of the ETCS you have edited? Because according to the official line diagrams that are available to train drivers (and publicly available*) the ETCS sections do *not* extend as far as you have done them. 

*Link to TIB-S: https://bane.dk/Jernbanevirksomhed/Sikkerhed/Trafikale-regler/SR/TIB_S
davide84 (2025-01-08 09:06:26+00:00): Hello, you are right, I made a mistake while selecting in JOSM. I realized that after a few minutes and I already fixed it with another changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160907172
davide84 (2025-01-08 09:08:22+00:00): I try to link an official and publicly available source everytime I can; in this case the source is an official map from bane.dk - of course it does not match because of my mistake :) I read the instructions on how to revert a changeset and I found it simpler to just make another one correcting my error; please let me know if this is not appropriate!
1993matias (2025-01-08 09:19:03+00:00): Thanks, no worries about it. The map does indeed not show the stations as having ETCS, but it does not show *where* the system change is. 
Thanks for showing interest in improving the Danish railway data!
Kris545545 (2025-01-19 20:33:27+00:00): Hello. Despite the updated changeset, it seems the signalling rules information is still not correct at the system changeover points at Aarhus, Skanderborg, Vejle. Please reference the link that 1993matias sent, for information on where the changeover point is.
davide84 (2025-01-26 12:55:58+00:00): Hello. The linked document is 328 pages of stations whose layout I am not familiar with, excluding the language issue. My strategy here - copied from what I see happening - is to do my best and leave the details to the locals, there is no way I can precisely handle every single track/platform. And I think it's better to have a wrong changeover point than a whole line wrongly classified. So what I'm doing now is removing ERTMS from stations (Aarhus, Skanderborg, Vejle) to avoid the issue; as long as the result matches the official Banedanmark map that I linked as source we won't be too far from reality.
1993matias (2025-01-27 08:13:14+00:00): Hello Davide84, 
Thanks for your interest in Danish railways. I had cleaned up the tagging before you made this changeset. If the only changes made were ETCS tagging, then simply revert the changeset instead of doing more changes. That is the easiest option. 
-Matias
davide84 (2025-01-27 09:02:36+00:00): Learned to revert with JOSM plugins, reverted changeset 161779179 :-) Davide
NorthCrab_upload (2025-01-02 13:41:05+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/9517916399
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1347978909

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
flohoff (2025-01-04 18:44:58+00:00): Moin,
hat sich hier die Beschilderung geändert? Und wenn ja wann? Denn bisher stand an der Auffahrt Weseler Straße direkt ein Zeichen 330.1 also Beginn der Autobahn.

Hier kann man das rechts sehen:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=999975737320194

Flo
Brummelwuff (2025-01-05 10:58:41+00:00): Ja ist jeztzt keine Autobahn mehr bis zum bzw. ab dem km 0. 
Die Schatten der neuen schilder sind auf den Luftbildern schon zu sehen muss also vor dem Aufnahmedatum passiert sein. Das Bild bei Mapillary ist nicht mehr aktuell.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1034499075360886
flohoff (2025-01-04 18:34:42+00:00): Moin,
so als heads up - Du scheinst hier - vermutlich aus versehen - 2 nodes hundert meter verschoben zu haben. 

Betroffen war die östliche Haltestelle "Hochschule"  und ein Building node.

Ist dann im routing aufgefallen weil das mit einem mal ein paar spitze winkel mehr waren.

Ich habe das mal repariert.
 
https://osmcha.org/changesets/160907280
M!dgard (2025-01-02 13:37:08+00:00): This CS also removes a stray operator:wikipedia=Q524255 (Wikidata in Wikipedia tag) on Oud-Heverlee.
M!dgard (2025-01-02 13:43:28+00:00): See also https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154014899
jengelh (2026-01-22 10:53:28+00:00): auf den blauen Schildern steht kein "A7", da steht nur "Göttingen"
kpv8 (2025-01-11 20:12:02+00:00): Ale uwage mogłeś zamknąć nie?
charl3s (2025-01-11 20:20:35+00:00): Nie, bo nawet nie widziałem jej. 
Wylooozuj ;)
rempshaener (2025-01-26 11:14:12+00:00): Hallo,
ich schaue regelmäßig über emergency=suction_point, da diese doch eher exotisch sind.
Auf Grund deiner Beschreibung und dem Stichwort „Notstromeinspeisung“ tippe ich auf einen Tiefbrunnen mit Elektropumpe, das wird dann z. B. wie folgt erfasst:

emergency=fire_hydrant
fire_hydrant:type=pipe
fire_hydrant:pressure=yes
water_source=groundwater
couplings=1
couplings:diameters=A
flow_rate=XXX l/min

Viele Grüße
Yog Sot (2025-01-02 21:03:54+00:00): autobus przestał kursować, czy przystanki wraz z oznakowaniem poziomym i infrastrukturą zostały zdemontowane?
Yog Sot (2025-01-02 21:04:11+00:00): autobus przestał kursować, czy przystanki wraz z oznakowaniem poziomym i infrastrukturą zostały zdemontowane?
PeachyOne (2025-01-06 12:07:52+00:00): Καλησπέρα! Ενημερωτικά, είναι προτιμότερο να παραμένουν ως έχουν τα προηγούμενα πολύγωνα και να διορθώνονται, παρά να διαγράφονται και να χαρτογραφούνται από την αρχή, εκτός αν έχουν κατεδαφιστεί ή αλλάξει τελείως τα κτήρια. Επίσης, όταν γίνεται χρήση των Footprints της Microsoft, καλό είναι να ισιώνονται είτε με το χέρι, είτε αυτοματοποιημένα (στο Rapid πατώντας Q) καθώς συχνά δεν είναι σωστά ευθυγραμμισμένα παραλληλόγραμμα.
Metzor (2025-01-03 11:57:55+00:00): Hallo NxPFoto,

Frohes Neues Jahr und viele Grüße aus Metzingen!

Toll mit wir viel Details du die Daten in Grafenberg verbessert und erweitert hast 😄

Leider ist das deutsche Wiki zu barrier=gate nicht so aktuell wie das englische. Das englische empfiehlt beim Zeichnen eines Gatter/Tors als Linie, dass man einen gemeinsamen Punkt mit der Straße/dem Weg setzt und diesen ebenfalls als Gatter/Tor tagt. Ansonsten haben Router (insbesondere ohne gemeinsamen Punkt) wenig Chance zu verstehen, dass dort ein Hindernis ist.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dgate
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:barrier=gate?uselang=de

Magst du auf deine Gatter nochmal drauf schauen? Z.B. das hier: 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1347997849

Dann noch ein Nice-to-have: Wenn ein Gebäude abgerissen und neu gebaut wird, wäre es schön, um die Historie des Objektes zu erhalten, also nicht alles zu löschen und neu zu zeichnen, sondern die Konten zu verschieben. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1347997822
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/322925134

Viele Grüße 
Metzor