piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
smichae (2024-12-02 03:20:06+00:00): Thanks for the parking lot addition. For those lines that have only parking spaces on both sides, you can use the 'Parking Aisle' category. You can also indicate a one-way if traffic is only supposed to move in one direction, which it looks like those parking aisles are one-ways. Thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159826379
Adam850 (2024-12-02 17:56:29+00:00): Thank you, I was struggling to get these relations right.
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:32:46+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159826961
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:34:51+00:00): It would be correct to merge the node with the polygon as a waterway=boatyard.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159827060
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:35:10+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159827101
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:37:21+00:00): This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

The building should match the roof line. Please correct. If they are separate buildings you can create a multipolygon to show them all as part of the church. Can you fix? Let me know if you need help.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159827132
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:39:01+00:00): Is that really a park or just a recreation area for the school?  Also since the school's landuse covers the entire area, the name is kind of redundant.
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:39:26+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159827361
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:39:43+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159827370
user_11609320 (2024-12-02 04:27:15+00:00): it used to be on the west side of east avenue, next to mueller court cul de sac
Langlaeufer (2024-12-02 10:12:15+00:00): Hallo Hb-,
sorry wenn ich das so sage, aber so wie du das "replace geometrie"-Plugin benutzt ist es wirklich nicht hilfreich. Du verwendest alte Objekte für komplett andere Objete wieder. Das macht die Versionshistorie sehr unleserlich und ist auch meiner Auffassungs nach nicht der Sinn des Plug-ins.
hier z.b. primary-road wird zu Gebäude:
https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/331596854
Grüße Langläufer
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159827759
Langlaeufer (2024-12-02 10:20:11+00:00): Bitte verstehe dass nicht falsch. Ich habe nichts gegen deine Bearbeitungen. Ich verstehe nur nicht, warum du die Replace-Geometrie Funktion so verwendest.
Grüße und weiterhin frohes Mappen 
Langläufer
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159827759
chef bama (2025-07-08 00:41:33+00:00): went to a lot of trouble to put those in. perhaps you would like to pay for my time.
watmildon (2025-07-08 01:03:39+00:00): Hello!

There's community consensus that OSM isn't and shouldn't be a map of parcels. I am sorry if this causes you downstream issue but you're free to use the parcel layer directly in whatever downstream use you have for it.

You can see a discussion about this class of issue in a number of places but here's one regarding a parcel import in TX that has also now been removed. https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposal-undo-4-year-old-parcel-import-in-dallas-tx/107965/25

If you think this has been done in error or want to discuss the general rule, I encourage you to open an issue on the community forum and we can work it out as a group.
chef bama (2025-07-08 01:08:25+00:00):  "community consensus". Wish that could have been expressed before I spent the time on it, and before it was part of the map of my neighborhood for years. This is among the reasons why I mostly don't contribute anymore.
watmildon (2025-07-08 01:17:21+00:00): I hear ya. It's totally possible that there wasn't any consensus when these went in or that there was and it changed over time. This happens and it can definitely when effort gets caught in the crossfire. Has happened to me too. One of the dangers of the loose schema and "rules" around here.
ZeLonewolf (2025-07-08 01:24:29+00:00): Unfortunately there is no way to read the minds of users that take it upon themselves to conduct undiscussed imports that are at odds with community consensus. That is the reason for the import guidelines and the Automated Edits Code of Conduct.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines

Unfortunately, discussing things with the OSM community is more work than simply unilaterally uploading data. I totally understand if discussing imports in advance is too much of a burden and this causes you not to conduct future imports. Such is the nature of collaboration.
chef bama (2025-07-08 01:51:42+00:00): Likewise, there is no way to read the minds of the "OSM community" when the docs are fragmented and at times at odds with themselves. 7 years ago I brought in the data a few blocks at a time, hardly a mass import. And only for my own small neighborhood, not the whole city. Every time my contributions get erased, it's because of a dubious "community consensus" that doesn't help add anything to the map. Might get around to commenting on this on numerous other mass deletions. Might not.
gerdotron (2025-09-19 17:25:27+00:00): This ALPR is no longer here as of ~05-01-2025. It was taken down for street widening. The project was completed in 08-2025 so we will see if the ALPR returns.
map per (2025-07-25 17:21:35+00:00): Hi, I rolled back this change based on this note: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4874611

(Wondering why you thought an Arabic street name would make sense on the Faroe Islands...)
MountSuckling (2025-07-29 17:26:58+00:00): Hi map per, 
Thanks for catching that, it was a mistake. Have a nice day and happy mapping!
silversurfer83 (2024-12-02 20:55:56+00:00): Hi :)

solche Inseln an (T)Kreuzungen sind in der Regel eher als Verkehrsleitungen denn als Verkehrsberuhigung zu sehen (bei OSM).
An Stellen wie diesen ist es nicht unüblich die Fahrbahn aufzutrennen und einzelne Spuren zu erfassen, da ja eine bauliche Trennung vorliegt. Was hier ungünstig ist: Es liegt eine ÖPNV-Relation drauf...

Wenn du die Richtungen einzeln erfassen solltest, kannst du die Insel als Umriss mit der Eigenschaft "area:highway=traffic_island" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:area:highway%3Dtraffic_island

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159828640
wies1 (2024-12-03 15:39:37+00:00): Hallo,
du hast recht. Ich hatte die Möglichkeit bei Streetcomplete entdeckt und wollte sie mal ausprobieren - wollte mal sehen, wie das in der Karte angezeigt wird. Es hatte aber nicht den erdachten Effekt. Habs wieder weg gemacht und die Kreuzung mit Einzelfahrspuren umgebaut.
Gruss
wies1
AndyB_66 (2024-12-02 13:22:24+00:00): Po raa kolejny proszę, byś nadawał swoim zestawom zmian sensowne komentarze, zgodnie z obowiązującymi w społeczności OSM zasadami: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian - data dokonania edycji nic nowego nie wnosi - opisz krótko, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś.
julcnx (2024-12-02 07:56:42+00:00): Thanks for your contributions! FYI I have corrected the name tags (Thai should go into name and name:th, english into name:en) and recreated the place=village as node. You can read more about Thailand's tagging guidelines at the link below. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! Happy mapping :) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand
julcnx (2024-12-02 07:57:20+00:00): Thanks for your contributions! FYI I have corrected the name tags (Thai should go into name and name:th, english into name:en) and recreated the place=village as node. You can read more about Thailand's tagging guidelines at the link below. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! Happy mapping :) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159829216
tmgunner6 (2024-12-02 07:20:16+00:00): It was mistakenly marked as 'Government Lower primary school'
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:43:37+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159829461
Glassman (2024-12-02 16:50:03+00:00): The view point is about 160' from the trail. Is there a path to the view point? Also, the view point doesn't seem to be at the highest point. Check out the USGS Elevation background that is found under the editors background icon. Right hand side of the editor.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159829482
ZACK2559 (2024-12-11 03:01:29+00:00): I'm new here, I must have made an error by accident, I will remove now
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159829482
skquinn (2024-12-02 07:06:31+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Please note the following:

1. Changeset pages, including the comments, are nofollow and spamming the changeset comments with ad copy/SEO fodder does nothing.
2. The opening_hours tag is not a free form text tag, it has a specific machine-readable syntax (which I have edited it to conform to).
3. healthcare:speciality is also not for SEO spam. I have removed this.
4. Street names in the address are unabbreviated and should not contain extra junk like "suite" or "unit". I have also fixed this.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-12-02 06:51:01+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/1217024090

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
TheSwavu (2024-12-02 21:55:09+00:00): Hi,

This changeset deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/479837822, which is part of the suburb boundaries.

Please be careful when deleting things in iD, as it may not tell you that you've broken something.

Thanks.
habi (2024-12-10 10:14:37+00:00): Ciao wies1
Hier hast du einige Gebäude von `building=apartements` zu `building=fl` umgewandelt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160122843
Ich nehme an, das hing mit `roof:shape=flat` zusammen und war ein Tippfehler.
Ich habe die betreffenden Gebäude wieder zu `building=apartments` umgewandelt.
Gruss,
habi
wies1 (2024-12-10 13:14:24+00:00): Hallo,
oh ja, das war ein Tippfehler. Danke fürs bereinigen.
Wie hast du diese Fehler gefunden? Zufällig darauf gestoßen?
Gruss
wies1
habi (2024-12-10 17:27:09+00:00): Ich habe den "long tail" von Gebäude-Werten auf https://taginfo.openstreetmap.ch/keys/building#values angeschaut.
Da tauchen einige Schreibfehler auf ;)
wies1 (2024-12-11 15:14:51+00:00): Hallo,
danke für den Hinweis auf Taginfo. Wie kann man da am einfachsten nach Schreibfehlern suchen, um diese zu korrigieren. Gibt es da eine gezielte Möglichkeit? 
Gruss
wies1
habi (2024-12-12 20:45:43+00:00): Auf https://taginfo.openstreetmap.ch/keys/building#values ganz nach hinten klicken,  und dann die Werte, die es nur ein- oder zweimal gibt anschauen :)
Aachsv1 (2024-12-02 07:34:13+00:00): دکتر بسیار با تجربه و مجرب، مهربان و دلسوز
Glassman (2024-12-02 17:03:47+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159831212
Glassman (2024-12-02 17:03:55+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159831263
Hufkratzer (2024-12-02 22:58:46+00:00): Hi,
was ist denn ein "IRL operator"?

Du hast einige Flächen, die auf dem Luftbild wie Gebäude aussehen und auch als Gebäude getaggt waren, umgetaggt. Aus https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86767184 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86767094 hast du in OSM Reitplätze gemacht und aus https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86767160 eine Reitanlage, wobei du jeweils das Tag building=yes entfernt hast. Ich glaube nicht, dass das den gegenwärtigen Zustand wiederspiegelt. Da du neu in OSM bist, denke ich eher, dass du Tags bzw. Presets verwechselt hast.

Jedes Gebäude sollte mit einem building=* Tag versehen sein; sonst wird es auf den Karten nicht als Gebäude dargestellt. Für Pferdeställe gibt es z.B. building=stable und für Reithallen building=riding_hall.

Eine Reitanlage ist kein Gebäude, sondern eine komplette Anlage wie unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=horse_riding beschrieben. Vielleicht kann man in deinem Fall die Fläche https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86767181 zusätzlich mit leisure=horse_riding taggen, so wie z.B. bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29280160 . Ansonsten könnte man einen Knoten (Punkt) ergänzen und mit den Reitanlagen-Tags versehen.
habi (2024-12-02 07:45:21+00:00): Sorry, falscher Changeset-Kommentar.
Ich habe damit Notiz https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4539630 erledigt.
Glassman (2024-12-02 17:04:34+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

Don't forget to square buildings by selecting the outline, then just type a "q"
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159831389
Alliegaytor (2024-12-08 09:47:14+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap :)

Just letting you know that there were quite a few duplicated segments of roundabout in this (and potentially other) chanegset(s). Might be a bug in relatify?

I have (hopefully) fixed those issues. 

Might be worth checking to see if you have accidentally duplicated segments of roundabouts in other changesets!

Fixed in: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160050163 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160050057 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160049989 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160049960

Anyways, have fun mapping!


~Allie
FacelessOkuyama (2025-08-14 15:53:53+00:00): Bonjour,

Il faut une consistance dans les majuscules des noms propres. J'ai corrigé un grand nombre de puys (notés dorénavant "Puy de" plutôt que "puy de" mais je ne peux pas tout changer partout)

Merci
mueschel (2024-12-03 15:03:45+00:00): Hi,
something went wrong here. All these nodes don't have any valid tag.
Could you check this?
_EdOnGIS_ (2024-12-03 15:06:51+00:00): yeah sure.
pavvv (2025-05-14 16:41:44+00:00): No wiesz co, nie jestem pewien, czy taka droga jest dwujezdniowa…
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/193147804
Erelen (2024-12-03 00:30:24+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tunnel%3Dbuilding_passage

"The layer should be the same as the layer of the building, with the exception when several tunnels are passing on different levels. So if the building doesn't have a layer tag, the way should not have one either."

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/817657559
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/817657561
DjaRiver (2024-12-04 03:38:51+00:00): Hello Erelen, thank you for contacting me. The OSM wiki supports your examination, thank you for updating me and for your contribution. Have a nice day.
eggie (2024-12-02 09:04:11+00:00): Beste Stegink,
Probeer het gebied van je edits klein te houden. Dus na elke mutatie uit de editmodus en dan naar en nieuwe locatie.
Editor iD is berucht om het veroorzaken van schade door schuiven met de kaart.
MVG
eggie
Stegink08 (2024-12-02 09:10:15+00:00): Goedemorgen Eggie,

We hebben de werkwijze aangepast. Dit heb ik intern gedeeld met mijn collega's. Bedankt voor de tip!
eggie (2024-12-02 09:13:24+00:00): Top....  Er is overigens geen schade.

MVG
eggie
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-13 01:19:33+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164876683
HellMap (2024-12-04 22:07:28+00:00): Sveiki,

Ēku daļas būtu jāatzīmē ar `building:part=*` nevis `building` citādi sanāk, ka šeit ir trīs atsevišķas ēkas. Es šeit izlaboju.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part
Hopefullycnx (2024-12-02 09:31:26+00:00): Good
Hopefullycnx (2024-12-02 09:31:42+00:00): กาแฟอร่อย
silversurfer83 (2024-12-02 21:09:13+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap :)

danke, dass du hilfst die Datenbank zu verbessern.

Das verlinkte Bild ist anschaulich, beim Namen muss ich jedoch kurz stutzen, da die Burg ja schon benannt ist und der Turm schon als bergfried innerhalb der Burg gekennzeichnet ist.

Zum Thema Namen gibt es eine ausführliche Seite in unserem Wiki (welches grundsätzlich sehr viel rund um OSM dokumentiert):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen

Bei Fragen immer raus damit und bitte viel Spaß an der Karte 

silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159835028
JRbw (2024-12-03 10:33:57+00:00): Hallo und danke für den Hinweis. Da die gesamte Burganlage ja 'Burg Heiligenberg' heißt, wollte ich nur den Bergfried mit einer verständlichen Übersetzung versehen, damit die Besucher wissen, was damit gemeint ist.
silversurfer83 (2024-12-03 10:41:55+00:00): Danke für die Rückmeldung :)

Ich kann deinen  Impuls nachvollziehen. Wenn ich den Artikel, den ich dir verlinkt habe, richtig im Kopf habe, dann sollte es vielleicht so ausgeschildert sein. Wenn die Anwohner alle vom "Turm der Burg..." sprechen, könnte der Name in das Feld "loc_name=*" wandern.
fortera_au (2025-04-23 06:44:00+00:00): Hi there, those guidelines are just recommendations, not hard guidelines. Changing this to tertiary while keeping the northern part as secondary is quite odd as well.

If it definitely meets the critera for a tertiary road more than a secondary road (excluding what WA Mainroads says), that's fine, but I'd recommend also updating the section immediately north of this one.
Syl (2024-12-02 11:16:09+00:00): Bonjour, j'ai repris ces différents ajouts en ajoutant des précisions et notamment la nature de chaque activité.
mavl (2024-12-02 15:00:30+00:00): Здравствуйте. Подскажите, пожалуйста, почему Tyumen'?
Danil Moiseenko (2024-12-02 19:11:15+00:00): Да, ведь на английском Тюмень = Tyumen. Вообще города России, оканчивающиеся на мягкий знак (Ь), в переводе на английском заканчиваются предпоследней буквой. Исправьте пожалуйста
mavl (2024-12-03 14:17:29+00:00): @GPMapper  
Вы ничего не пояснили и ваши изменения были отменены.
mavl (2024-12-06 14:05:05+00:00): Hello. Please, don't add the personal data to the map.
seawolff (2025-01-01 00:21:09+00:00): Das Gebäude ist viel zu groß gezeichnet. Die IBAK hat sicherlich Architektenpläne oder Fluchtwegepläne mit den echten Abmessungen.
eggie (2024-12-02 10:46:01+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback  We zetten geen bicycle=yes op reguliere wegen. Dat is default. Wat is het probleem hier?
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=159836350
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-12-02 10:52:22+00:00): reverted by changeset #159837491
Vicjusma (2024-12-02 11:07:21+00:00): Sorry, I don't speak Dutch, so if we could keep it in English I would appreciate it.
The thing is I had a query with R looking for all the cycling infrastructure and where cyclists can go, but this specific street didn't appear in the query, but I know from the Mobiliteitsprogramma Delft 2024 that this is part of the main cycling infrastructure, seeing as the other's had either a bicycle=yes, or some other tag that indicated cyclists can go there (like cyclestreet=yes, highway=cycleway, oneway:bicycle=yes, etc), I assumed that this one was missing a similar tag.
Best regards,
Vícjusma
eggie (2024-12-02 11:16:08+00:00): Hi..

There is no need to add bicycle=yes to roads. Not even on a cycleway or cyclestreet.
Cyclestreet is a special catagorie.
Oneway:bicycle=yes is to make clear there is no exception for bicycle by oneway=yes..
Oneway:bicycle=no is the exception.

Bicycle yes is default.

Greetz..
eggie
eggie (2024-12-02 11:38:55+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cyclestreet#Netherlands

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:oneway:bicycle%3Dyes

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway:bicycle

and cyclewaytagging in the Netherlands
G11: mofa=yes, moped=no, traffic_sign=NL:G11
G12a: moped=designated, mofa=designated, traffic_sign=NL:G12a
G13: moped=no, mofa=no, traffic_sign=NL:G13

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway

Somethimes we tag bicycle=yes in case of routingproblems.
f.i. in case a route is crossing a road with bicycle=no and you have to traverse 5 m
On that 5m element we will remove the bicycle=no  or add bicycle=yes to make clear to other mappers this is an exception.


If you have questions you are welcome.
eggie
NeisBot (2024-12-02 10:22:39+00:00): Hello Caminhao, welcome to OSM, and thank you for your contributions!

I've taken a look at your recent edits and wanted to discuss a few discrepancies I noticed regarding the surrounding environmental features. Specifically, the locations in your edits don't seem to align with the typical geographical characteristics expected in that area. Here are some (max 10) relevant links to the edits:
https://osm.org/node/12389872385

Could you please take a look?
Looking forward to your response.

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

#Somewhere
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=159836409
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-04 19:38:42+00:00): No response, reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/159931664
Sanniu (2026-07-05 14:44:48+00:00): Why to remove a tag, but leave a name?
Is it not there anymore?
hatul (2026-07-05 19:38:15+00:00): My mistake, I deleted it now
ndg032 (2024-12-02 13:59:08+00:00): Buenos días FranOctubre, me puede decir que se supone que es ''extensión'' ya que causo una gran cantidad de errores en la base de datos osm, por el momento quito el ''building=yes'' ya que es el causante de todos los errores. Pero explique que se supone que es ''Espacio Hacker''.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 04:15:23+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164659495
eggie (2024-12-02 10:58:50+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Helaas heb je nu ook de adresnode verwijderd.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=159837627
Er is vast nog wel een adres. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-12-02 11:03:07+00:00): adres hersteld
pavvv (2024-12-02 11:25:49+00:00): Propozycja dotyczyła tylko tagowania ekspresówek jako motorway. O trunkach dyskusja się toczy. Proszę je wprowadzać nieprzedyskutowanych zmian.
forestus (2024-12-02 11:38:23+00:00): Droga z Biskupca do Sorkwit (którą Pan pozostawił jako trunk i nie podniósł do motorway)  jest dokładnie tym samym  ) co obwodnica Olsztyna między węzłami Zachód i Południe. Realnie to mogłobyby być też motorway bo niczym się nie różnie od drogi pomiędzy Olsztyn Południe, a Olsztyn Jaroty. Moja zmiana jest zatem nieszkodliwa a nawet wskazana. Jeśli toczy się dyskusja o trunk, to prośba o link do niej. Pozdrawiam