piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
user_5173844 (2025-07-09 08:41:22+00:00): I would say this is a router issue. I am not even sure if it uses sidewalk= tags at all, it seems to fallback to any roads that don't explicitly ban pedestrians. At the same time it indeed over-prioritises footways.

The solution is to keep mapping and keep improving routers. Not to dumb down data to mask router deficiencies. Fixes to the routers may happen overnight, map data - not so much.

The main advantage of Google is algorithms they use for merging disjoint pieces of information (maps, search, timetables etc), not the quality of their map data. And yes, we could learn from them.
Milhouse (2025-07-09 08:45:20+00:00): The. Data. Is. Wrong!
Wynndale (2025-07-12 09:10:10+00:00): These pavements are buttjoined onto the road traversably. We don’t map lanes of roads separately, how are these any different? Also one participant to this conversation has been making unhelpful edits.
SomeoneElse (2025-07-12 13:00:59+00:00): For info, the DWG got a nudge which mentioned this changeset discussion (not, I hasten to add, a complaint about it directly).  I think a forum thread might make more sense (it'd be a bit more visible and allow easier linking) so I've created that at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/separate-sidewalks-or-not-near-ealing/132613 .
kauevestena (2025-10-21 03:00:13+00:00): Sidewalks are pathways themselves, walkers have the right of having their paths mapped as well as car users! In my opinion, when you use tags like sidewalk=yes/left/right you are just mapping sidewalk evidence, not the sidewalk itself, that is a path, that have it's own geometry and its own properties, and deserves to have it's own history - as it has in the real world.
Milhouse (2025-10-21 03:27:23+00:00): Please visit the Community link above where this is discussed in great detail. Believe me, I strongly believe in the important role of OSM to be the best pedestrian (and other) router and expended a lot of effort to ensure that the tagging reflected the situation on the ground, and also reflected the availability of accessibility features. The only dispute is whether inconsistently adding little lines on the map alongside every road improves or worsens the ability to compute pedestrian routes.
user_5173844 (2025-10-21 08:25:45+00:00): There is no consensus on that and many (myself included) prefer mapping the pavements explicitly.
kauevestena (2025-10-21 17:23:59+00:00): Millhouse, it shall improve: pedestrians don't walk on the top of streets, therefore you'll would be always underestimating the length in that way. Pedestrians cross using the well-named crosswalks, not road intersections. In many places (like here in my city, Curitiba, Brazil) isn't the same to walk in the left or right side of the street. If the current routing engines are flaky, they should adapt then, it shouldn't the other way around. Also it's officially deemed as a good practice that one shouldn't map for the renderer, nor for the router.
NeisBot (2025-07-03 04:54:41+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 #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-05 19:38:37+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/168536713
somehundred (2025-07-03 07:15:24+00:00): The two shops that you deleted in Riga are real, actual places. I have walked past Oshii asian mart a few times. The node added by this user was off by few meters so I had moved it to right location. You can Google both of these places and you will find lots of proof that they exist, there's plenty of Mapillary footage around as well.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-07-03 23:33:34+00:00): I have no doubt that they are, but the person who mapped them has used an unknown source, & also done things like make ~150 edits on one cafe in Taiwan, but without actually changing anything? Please feel free to add any details that you are personally aware of!
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-02-01 21:59:03+00:00): Hello!

You used
athletics=running;
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49749974/history

Have you maybe meant
athletics=running
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
nurdafur (2026-02-02 05:26:42+00:00): Solved
Snusmumriken (2025-07-03 12:34:23+00:00): Could you explain in more detail the reason behind this revert?

For example, this node 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1255318511/
you removed the cuisine tag, that was easily deduced from the name tag. 

Here  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12881012501
you deleted a store that exists at least according to their own website. Also in the wake of the deletion you left a broken provides_feature relation
somehundred (2025-07-03 16:50:52+00:00): The two shops, Lotte's papery and Stag, that you deleted in Riga exist in real life and they can be seen in Mapillary. Lotte's papery even had their website linked in tags. These reverts did damage to correct and valid data.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-07-03 23:35:24+00:00): I have no doubt that they are, but the person who mapped them has used an unknown source, & also done things like make ~150 edits on one cafe in Taiwan, but without actually changing anything? Please feel free to add any details that you are personally aware of!
krmatthews (2025-12-13 00:42:23+00:00): I looked through the linked translink website and couldn't find maps/data for the named bike routes you added. I'm curious in particular where you found the data for Midtown (it doesn't continue into New Westminster as far as I know), and Wales/Kerr (Wales is part of the Wales Duchess route, isn't linked with Kerr in any designated/formal way that I'm aware).
danindenver (2025-07-03 05:41:29+00:00): I think I may have been wrong in second-guessing the original intent of this service road. I am regretting my change, but I don't know how to revert my change.
nevw (2025-07-03 23:51:03+00:00): Hi, looks like you may have accidentally deleted parts of the natures reserve boundaries.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=116.13040&lat=-31.93987&zoom=19
nevw (2025-07-03 23:55:29+00:00): You can see the deleted bits in red by zooming in on this https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=168427074
user_5359 (2025-07-03 09:56:50+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You use the keys to import data with unclear license
geocoded_coordinate (not needed!)
google_cover_photo_url 
google_place_id
You use wrongs keys
logo_url instead of logo
payment_options = with a list of values
Use wrong notation 
opening_hours = monday-thursday 07:30-12:00,13:00-17:30; friday 07:30-12:00,13:00-17:00; saturday-sunday off
Please stop the import, delete the unwanted data and correct the wrong keys!
Metzor (2025-07-07 22:03:02+00:00): I sent an eMail to the support of the company behind those changesets to stick to community guidelines and answer in the discussions. 
Let's see if they'll reply. Otherwise dwg...
Supaplex (2025-07-03 13:22:50+00:00): Hi

Is there any change of control here? If not, the OpenStreetMap project follows the de facto status: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories

Please be aware the nature of the OpenStreetMap project, recording stuff according to the on the ground truth, not by certain countries' claim.

Xin chào

Có bất kỳ thay đổi nào về quyền kiểm soát ở đây không? Nếu không, dự án OpenStreetMap sẽ tuân theo trạng thái de facto: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories

Vui lòng lưu ý bản chất của dự án OpenStreetMap, ghi lại thông tin thực tế, không phải theo tuyên bố của một số quốc gia.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168444367
JeroenHoek (2025-07-03 06:36:06+00:00): Als je een track wijzigt in iets anders moet je tracktype ook verwijderen en vervangen. In dit geval door surface=unpaved.
NeisBot (2025-07-03 06:24:44+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
pitscheplatsch (2025-07-03 08:40:47+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168432224
Warin61 (2025-12-27 00:39:11+00:00): HI
Why seperate roundabouts into separate segments? If it is bacuse you thing a route should only include the individual segments ... well that is not necessary ... and can work against certain routes. Routing engines accept that a roundabout as a single osm entry will probably only use some segment of the roundabout. By separating the roundabout there is data bloat and I don't think it really help the routing engines at all.
BCNorwich (2025-07-03 08:42:43+00:00): Hi, The website link diesn't work, I've removed it.
grzegorz75jan (2025-08-19 22:37:53+00:00): Błędne, opisowe name.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168430358
Syl (2025-07-04 06:52:37+00:00): Bonjour, je vois que vous continuez à faire cette même modification. Plutôt que de continuer cette guerre d'édition je vais voir pour rédiger un signalement au DWG prochainement.
votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale (2025-07-04 07:04:37+00:00): Bonjour, Je tiens à vous présenter nos excuses. La modification apportée hier faisait suite à votre signalement concernant la présence de trackers Google. Malheureusement, cette correction a entraîné une erreur involontaire : la suppression du chemin du store locator sur ce poi.
Nous avons identifié le problème hier après-midi et sommes actuellement en train de le corriger. Le chemin complet sera bien évidemment rétabli rapidement.
Merci de votre compréhension. PS
Nous sommes en train de corriger d'autres liens afin qu'ils respectent le wiki que vous nous avez fait parvenir sur les sites web. Bonne journée. Alain
Syl (2025-07-04 07:14:22+00:00): D'accord je vais attendre vos corrections.
Comme j'ai déjà eu la situation par le passé où vous disiez corriger un problème pour finalement ne rien faire je pensais que c'était à nouveau le cas.
Bonne journée.
votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale (2025-07-04 07:20:47+00:00): Bonjour, merci de votre patience, Nous sommes en train de vérifier et de corriger. Bonne journée. Alain
HellMap (2025-07-03 12:42:36+00:00): Hello,

Please do not delete roads that exist. If there is restricted access here, such as private property, then this needs to be marked with appropriate access restrictions, such as `access=private`.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

I have restored the way and set it to private instead, and also adjusted it to fit with the local layout.
Rolzs (2025-07-04 07:31:26+00:00): Hi, Thank you. As I didn't understand from the manual how to restrict access to road and owner was not happy about uninvited visitors, I have decided to remove road. Now I see what did you changed and it is clear how to do it next time.
richlv (2025-07-06 12:49:52+00:00): For the record, you are welcome in the Latvian OSM community chat, where this and any other OSM-related question are very on-topic:
https://osmlatvija.zulipchat.com .
TheNightRider (2025-07-04 02:03:11+00:00): All that around the Otonomous Hotel is not "add residential area". I know it's extra work, but PLEASE update in smaller increments so that your changeset comments match what happened. :)
TheNightRider (2025-07-04 02:04:59+00:00): BTW, since I added the service roads around the new Otonomous Hotel, wanna add the parking lots?
VLD549 (2025-07-12 09:43:03+00:00): Hi, I was asked to verify name changes. Could you provide a link of some sort that shows it to be Olien Street? 
I can't find it.

Thank you in advance!
VLD549 (2025-07-12 09:44:05+00:00): Also, I think there is a typo. STreet --> Street.
Patchi (2025-07-04 05:46:41+00:00): Bonjour,

Y'a t'il une raison particulière pourquoi la relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1054005 (TER PACA 11) se retrouve avec ce groupe de modifications sur le réseau TER Occitanie ? En regardant de plus près l'historique de cette relation sur les 239 versions précédentes il s'agissait bien d'une ligne de la région PACA. J'ai de très gros doutes que cette ligne passe sur le réseau TER Occitanie tout d'un coup alors qu'elle est restée près de 15 ans sur le réseau TER PACA auparavant. De plus le tag "network:wikipedia" est resté sur "fr:TER Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur" donc il y a maintenant une incohérence flagrante.

Bonne continuation,

Patchi.
fs_LT (2025-07-03 13:28:49+00:00): setting the key 'motorroad' to 'no' or deleting it is fine; however, if your satnav guides you along a road with 'highway'='construction' and 'construction'='trunk', the problem is more likely to be with the satnav than with the data in osm;
Rewinteer (2025-07-31 08:53:33+00:00): Здравствуйте! Подскажите, пожалуйста, почему https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411771684 отмечен как covered=yes, но само здание, через которое дорога проходит, не нанесено? 
Спрашиваю чисто для интереса - covered есть, а здания нет :) Они не интересны для WB?
Rewinteer (2025-07-31 10:05:25+00:00): P.S. здание я сам добавил, в вашем пакете правок его не было
Maryna Konan (2025-07-31 12:05:30+00:00): Здравствуйте! 
Спасибо, что обратили внимание на эту ошибку. В дальнейшей работе мы будем избегать таких нелогичных правок.
Еще раз спасибо.
martinst (2025-07-23 19:36:08+00:00): Wege mit deutlichen verbleibenden Spuren im Gelände sollte nicht gelöscht werden, sondern mit einem lifecylce-Prefix versehen werden.
Revertiert in Changeset 169363510, lifecylce-Prefix ergänzt in Changeset 169363564.
gukguk (2025-07-24 07:57:31+00:00): Vollkommen richtig. Aber diese Wegverbindung ist trotz intensiven Suchens nicht (mehr) auffindbar. Ich empfehle, ihn nicht wieder einzufügen.
martinst (2025-07-24 08:39:56+00:00): Mag sein dass er an den Kreuzungen nicht mehr auffindbar ist, im Geländerelief (BayernAtlas) ist er noch deutlich sichtbar, deshalb habe ich ihn zu abandoned:highway=path geändert.
gukguk (2025-07-24 08:53:22+00:00): Nur zum Hintergrund: Ich bin ein Liebhaber von vergessenen Pfaden und bin viel unterwegs, um aufgelassene und verfallene Wege zu erkunden. Ich bin von beiden Seiten ca. 50m in den Wald gegangen, er ist nicht mehr erkennbar. Wenn überhaupt, wäre es zu empfehlen, dass er zumindest an den beiden Enden nicht mehr als durchgängig eingezeichnet wird, damit er bei Planung wie z.b. komoot nicht mehr berücksichtigt wird.
martinst (2025-07-24 09:14:43+00:00): Router verwenden abandoned- und disused-Wege überlicherweise nicht. 
Die Darstellung auf einer Karte hängt von der Anwendung ab, Komoot zeigt nichts mehr an, OsmAnd zeigt sie ganz schwach an.
aharvey (2025-07-04 05:14:23+00:00): Per prior comments, I've updated these to proposed roads.
Supaplex (2025-07-03 13:43:58+00:00): Hi

Is there any change of control here? If not, the OpenStreetMap project follows the de facto status: osm.wiki/Disputed_territories

Please be aware the nature of the OpenStreetMap project, recording stuff according to the on the ground truth, not by certain countries' claim.

Xin chào

Có bất kỳ thay đổi nào về quyền kiểm soát ở đây không? Nếu không, dự án OpenStreetMap sẽ tuân theo trạng thái de facto: osm.wiki/Disputed_territories

Vui lòng lưu ý bản chất của dự án OpenStreetMap, ghi lại thông tin thực tế, không phải theo tuyên bố của một số quốc gia.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168445245
aharvey (2025-07-04 05:10:36+00:00): It appears you're basing these edits soley on the DCS NSW Base Map and I assume other DCS datasets (as the road name does not appear on the base map, but does appear in addressing data)?

These datasets will include roads and lots that haven't started construction yet, as such unless you're basing your changes on other information and can confirm the status is otherwise, they should be marked as proposed roads.

I've made edits to update this.
eggie (2025-07-03 11:33:19+00:00): Dag Roland.. Je info heb ik samengevoegd met adresnode Sint Martinusstraat 3
In het verleden heeft iemand het adres Hoekstraat veranderd in Sint Martinusstraat.
Tja.. dan gaat het mis.



MVG
eggie
Yog Sot (2025-07-03 11:22:14+00:00): dzieki za czujność. Ja akurat bardzo doceniam kolor drogi, który odwzorowuje lokalizację znaku
Dawid2849 (2025-07-03 11:38:46+00:00): Nawet był note, że to nie jest droga ekspresowa, ale kto by się tym przejmował...
rempshaener (2025-07-03 15:32:58+00:00): Hallo,
das sieht gut aus.
Viele Grüße
Kachelkaiser (2025-07-03 19:21:43+00:00): Danke sehr. Dann lassen wir das so 😁
andilocke (2025-08-03 10:10:46+00:00): Hallo ostge-002, warum hast Du die Treppe 460942123 entfernt? Sie ist in real doch vorhanden. Sie ist deutlich erkennbar.
andilocke (2025-10-04 13:21:36+00:00): Treppe 460942123 wiederhergestellt in Änderungssatz 172829989.
Syl (2025-07-04 14:11:20+00:00): Bonjour, vous avez supprimé le bâtiment, il a été détruit ou c'est seulement le garage qui a fermé ?
TeamDELKO (2025-07-07 15:11:26+00:00): Les infos : 

DLZ	
165 AVENUE DES FUSILLES	
SAINT LAMBERT DES LEVEES	
49400 SAUMUR			
02 41 40 54 00

Merci
Syl (2025-07-07 17:22:00+00:00): J'ai annulé la suppression du bâtiment mais je n'ai pas remis les infos du garage, il a l'air d'être en liquidation judiciaire : https://annuaire-entreprises.data.gouv.fr/annonces/912300589
TeamDELKO (2025-07-08 07:27:49+00:00): Ok ça marche, merci.
Syl (2025-07-04 14:08:19+00:00): Bonjour, vous avez supprimé le bâtiment, il a été détruit ou c'est seulement le garage qui a fermé ?
TeamDELKO (2025-07-07 15:06:59+00:00): Bonjour,

Désolé, voici les infos du nouveau garage : 

F.D.AUTOS	
315 RUE L'ENTREPRISE		
69380 LOZANNE
04 37 50 35 62
Syl (2025-07-07 17:04:51+00:00): Merci pour ces infos, j'ai annulé la suppression du bâtiment et j'ai mis à jour le garage.
TeamDELKO (2025-07-08 07:27:18+00:00): Merci Syl !
user_5359 (2025-07-07 08:24:42+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/959105744. What is the mean of the tags
آژانس هواپیمایی فرشتگان = آژانس هواپیمایی
فرشتگان نیشابور = آژانس هواپیمایی
Please see also the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours for the value of opening_hours!
Ondřej Lopatka (2026-06-17 09:06:22+00:00): Ahoj, tady jsi někomu nakreslil obytnou ulici na jeho dvorek way1411778359 není uveden zdroj úprav
Hlav (2026-06-17 10:13:19+00:00): Asi je to tak, zřejmě omylem. Díky za opravení
aixbrick (2025-07-03 13:59:56+00:00): Hallo,
"oneway:emergency=no" bedeutet, dass Einsatzfahrzeuge entgegen der Fahrtrichtung fahren dürfen, auch wenn sie sich nicht im Einsatz befinden. Das muss aber durch ein Zusatzzeichen kenntlich gemacht werden (VZ 1026-33). Die mir vorliegenden Mapillary-Aufnahmen zeigen kein solches Zeichen, daher wäre das Tag hier falsch. Oder gibt es hier mittlerweile eine solche Beschilderung?
Nebenbei bemerkt: Rettungsfahrzeuge im Einsatz dürfen, falls nötig, immer entgegen der Einbahnstraße fahren (so in der StVO festgelegt). Das muss nicht getaggt werden.
Gruß
ayxis (2025-07-07 14:14:05+00:00): Hi!
Danke, habs entfernt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168607926

Viele Grüße
ayxis
aixbrick (2025-07-07 15:40:50+00:00): Danke
limes11 (2025-07-03 10:44:48+00:00): Hallo, 

das ist ein reiner Fußweg, ohne Freigabe für Radfahrer. 

Kann GoMap auch fixme's setzen ? Als "description" geht dieser Beitrag unter. Oder einen Hinweis setzen, dann kann jemand die Treppe entsprechend erfassen.

VG
Guppy (2025-07-03 10:53:54+00:00): Hallo limes11,
Danke für den Kommentar! (Habe noch keine nennenswerte Erfahrung mit OSM.) Der Fußweg ist von der Stadt zumindest auf der Straßenseite mit einem Schild Fußgänger + Radfahrer ausgewiesen, es gibt aber bei Haus 17c und d zweimal Stufen, die natürlich nicht Fahrrad-geeignet sind. Ich werde die Stadt wg des Schildes kontaktieren. Aber wie die Relation unterteilt werden müsste, um die beiden Stufen einzutragen, weiß ich (noch) nicht. Habe deshalb auf die Schnelle nen Punkt gesetzt.
NeisBot (2025-07-03 09:12:44+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
NeisReview (2025-07-05 19:49:36+00:00): ok
NeisBot (2025-07-03 09:16:39+00:00): Hi Andres78sss, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Added local diet information to an existing way."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish #AIgenerated
mueschel (2025-07-04 09:54:04+00:00): Hi,
something went very wrong here. All these tiny buildings are drawn with more than 400 node and a strange "Preparation = Phase" tag. Could you check that?
Erick tamba (2025-07-04 21:11:40+00:00): Sure corrected, the tag it was supposed to be building under construction!
evgenykatyshev (2025-07-03 09:48:53+00:00): Вы снова сдвинули дома по плохому спутинковому снимку, отменил вашу правку. Пожалуйста, не используйте стандартную подложку Bing Maps Aerial, а переключайтесь в меню справа на подложку Esri World Imagery.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168436247
Hufkratzer (2025-07-03 21:38:49+00:00): Hi,
I think, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411789966 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411789967 should not be tagged with leisure=horse_riding = horse riding centre / jazdecky areal; they should be tagged with leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian for riding arena / jazdecka arena; see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian) and example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/89202355#map=18/49.031406/21.201894&layers=P

Automatický preklad:

Ahoj,
Myslím, že https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411789966 a https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411789967 by nemali byť označené s leisure=horse_riding = horse riding centre / jazdecký areál; mali by byť označené s leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian pre riding arena / jazdeckú arénu; pozri https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian) a príklad: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/89202355#map=18/49.031406/21.201894&layers=P

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
NeisRevert (2025-07-03 13:17:27+00:00): #DeletionsCheck

Hi, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed many of your changes in this set involve deletions.

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

Looking forward to your response.
birdlawyer (2025-07-03 22:57:21+00:00): Reverted in changeset 168462688
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168435458
archie (2025-07-03 14:09:42+00:00): Vill du vänligen notera att vi inte "klistrar ihop" landuse och highway med gemensamma noder, tack!
Axel Flordal (2025-07-03 14:20:27+00:00): Oj, det hade jag inte insett att man inte ska göra men känns väldigt rimligt. Ska komma ihåg det till framtiden. Tack för infon!