piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mavl (2024-11-13 10:14:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 159083843 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: incompatible sources - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16857].
NorthCrab_upload (2023-07-21 13:50:21+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/641531908

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Piotr Strębski (2023-07-21 17:24:22+00:00): poprawione
ghostrider44 (2023-09-13 09:27:22+00:00): Hallo welzheimerwald,
wie kommst du darauf, dass hier ein "Falsches BiBi" vorhanden war?
Das Gewerbegebiet hatte früher Ortsschilder von Tamm, die aber (evtl. auf Wusch der Fa. Porsche) entfernt wurden. Auch eine andere Straße im Gewerbegebiet, die früher "Porschestraße" hieß, wurde umbenannt und die jetzige Porschestraße im Verlauf geändert, damit sich die Fa. Porsche ansiedeln konnte. Die Adresse ist eindeutig Bietigheim-Bissingen und nicht Tamm (evtl. weil das nicht nur die Post so sieht, sondern auch die Fa. Porsche Wert darauf legt). Siehe z.B. auch:
https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=2081&q=porsche%2C+bietigheim-bissingen&cvid=8da2f72a6701460882ff822828d49625&aqs=edge..69i57j0l3.10027j0j1&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=HCTS 

Auch Kollege Chrysopras hat seine Änderungen im Jahre 2017 deshalb wieder rückgängig gemacht, siehe:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50232283#map=17/48.93901/9.13479&layers=N

"Bietigheim-Bissingen/Tamm: revertiere meinen Änderungssatz 46363901, da die Post für diese zu Tamm gehörigen Gebäude als Anschrift "Bietigheim-Bissingen" wünscht. Danke an ghostrider44 für den Hinweis
Geschlossen vor etwa 6 Jahren von Chrysopras"

Ich bitte dich deshalb, die korrekte Anschrift wieder einzutragen.

Gruß ghostrider44
welzheimerwald (2023-09-15 15:00:10+00:00): Die Flurstücke gehören eindeutig zu Tamm (Die postalische Zuordnung zur PLZ 74321 ist keine politische Zuteilung, sondern Sache der Post). Es gibt im gesamten Straßenkatalog von BiBi keine Steinbeisstraße, wohl aber eine in Tamm (https://www.geoportal-bw.de/#/(sidenav:search-results/steinbeisstra%C3%9Fe%208%20tamm). Auch im GIS des LRA LB kann man Adressen nachschlagen: https://karo.landkreis-ludwigsburg.de/weboffice_buerger/synserver?client=core&project=LRALB_BPL

Auch gehe ich davon aus, dass die Firmen ihre Gewerbesteuer in der Standortgemeinde Tamm entrichten.

Ich werde hier keine Änderungen - wohlwissend, dass sie falsch sind - mehr vornehmen. Mir ist es egal, wenn sich die ortsansässigen Unternehmen fälschlicherweise als "in Bietigheim-Bissingen" labeln. Das gleiche Problem gibt es auch im Gewerbegebiet Aspach/Backnang-Lerchenäcker sowie im Gewerbegebiet Göppingen-Voralb (Eschenbach). Nur weil das Gebiet postalisch aus einem anderen Zustellungsbezirk versorgt wird, findet noch lange keine Umgemeindung statt. Auch die OSM-Community hat ganz klar festgelegt, dass im Schlüssel "addr:city" in Deutschland der Name der politischen Gemeinde zu stehen hat)vgl. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:addr:*). Und dieser wird über das Grenzpolygon (admin_level=8, 6 bei Stadtkreisen wie Stuttgart) definiert. Bei den angesprochenen Gewerbegebieten habe ich übrigens die Finger von den Adressen gelassen. Werde ich in Zukunft auch hier tun.
ghostrider44 (2023-09-16 08:57:51+00:00): Hallo welzheimerwald,
du kennst vermutlich die örtlichen Gegebenheiten nicht. Deshalb zur Kenntnis:
Die Stadt Bietigheim-Bissingen bildet mit der inzwischen auch zur Stadt erhobenen Gemeinde Tamm und der Gemeinde Ingersheim eine Verwaltungsgemeinschaft. Das Gewerbegebiet Laiern ist ein gemeinsames Gewerbegebiet der Städte Bietigheim-Bissingen und Tamm. Deine Aussage:
„Auch gehe ich davon aus, dass die Firmen ihre Gewerbesteuer in der Standortgemeinde Tamm entrichten.“ ist nicht korrekt. Die Stadt Bietigheim-Bissingen erhält sehr wohl umfangreich ebenfalls Steuern von den dortigen Firmen, allen voran von der Fa. Porsche. Der beim Bau der Fa. Porsche maßgebliche Manager der Fa. Porsche wohnte und wohnt evtl. immer noch in Bietigheim-Bissingen und hat größten Wert auf die Anschrift Bietigheim-Bissingen gelegt. Die Gemeinde Tamm war dann auch noch damit einverstanden, dass die Tammer Ortstafeln entfernt wurden, das Gewerbegebiet somit genau genommen außerorts ist.
Meine Meinung, dass Bietigheim-Bissingen hier richtig ist, teilen im Übrigen auch die Kollegen 
Chrysopras ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50232283 )
Dan_Fi ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3885301 )
AndySchulte ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141207968 )
Wie ich nun festgestellt habe, hat der Kollege AndySchulte die Adressen wieder auf Bietigheim-Bissingen gesetzt.
Gruß aus Bietigheim-Bissingen
ghhostrider44
welzheimerwald (2023-09-16 17:28:47+00:00): Hallo ghostrider44,

um mir hier Ortsunkenntnis vorzuwerfen, war ich wohl zu oft beim Stöckle vor dem Außendienst 🙃. Was ich an dieser Diskussion sehr bedauere, ist, dass hier postalische Adressen über die amtlichen Adressen gesetzt werden. "Weil der Porsche-Chef da wohnt und das so will" und "die Gemeinde bzw. Stadt Tamm auf ihre Ortstafeln verzichtet" und "deshalb baut auch der Hofmeister eine höheres Logisthalle als im Bebauungsplan zulässig" usw. usf... Nicht alles, was irgendwo gemacht wird, ist auch korrekt. So haben wir hier eine postalische Adresse, die von der amtlichen Lagebezeichnung abweicht. Das Chaos ist perfekt. Glückwunsch. Die Rettungsdienste der ILS im Lkr. LB arbeiten übrigens mit den amtlichen Lagebezeichnungen aus dem Liegenschaftskataster (Und die orientieren sich an der Gemeindegrenze, ich verweise an dieser Stelle nochmal auf die Adresssuche im GIS des LRA LB: https://karo.landkreis-ludwigsburg.de/weboffice_buerger/synserver?client=core&project=LRALB_BPL ). Ich hoffe mal, dass es da keine Probleme gibt. Wie gesagt, ich werde hier nichts mehr rumwurschteln. Um solche Konflikte (Postadresse vs. amtliche Adresse, hatte ich letztens schon im Stoinächle bei Affalterbach) in Zukunft zu vermeiden, wäre eine Spezifizierung in den Keys gut.

Gruß,
welzheimerwald
CurlingMan13 (2023-07-23 10:30:04+00:00): Just because they are private doesn't necessarily mean they are service roads.  They look almost like living streets, residential or alley.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138814845
jandar22 (2023-07-23 15:05:28+00:00): Fair point - my thought here wasn't just whether they were private or public but also character of the street and priority in the road network. I think to your point Irish Crossings Lane could be considered a residential street due to its look and character. Contrast to Irish Way (17561666), for instance, it essentially functions as a named parking aisle and should not be routed through over Dunn Rd and Willis St.
tux67 (2023-07-21 14:54:55+00:00): Hi oiseau123,
für highway=residential sind bicycle/foot=yes und inclide=0% redundant da es sich um die defaults für diesen Wegtyp handelt. Sollte man also weglassen.
Gruß
tux67
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138814917
HikeAndMap (2023-08-23 03:23:48+00:00): Hi Tim, why did you remove valid tags?
addr:country=PH
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:*
If you know them and they exist.... so there's no reason for me not to add them and for someone just looking up specific heritage buildings (someone doing a worldwide query) it might be very helpful if the tags are there.

addr:quarter=Session Road Area into the non-valid tag addr:barangay?

addr:barangay has no valid meaning worldwide nor in any apps. As such I and with me many, follow the proposal by Eugene for many years now:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Seav/LGUs


Baguio isn't the province of Benguet! On OSM we stick to reality right, - the administrative boundary of Benguet does NOT include Baguio.

So I'm kinda puzzled about why you made these changes?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138814918
Timmy_Tesseract (2023-08-23 13:38:05+00:00): Hey Vince, 

Due to the geographic isolation that comes with being an archipelago addr:country in the Philippines can be derived from boundaries with 100% accuracy. But I haven't considered the use case mentioned by you. I won't remove the tag anymore from now on.

Regarding addr:province, adding this tag seems to be standard practice in independent cities. While Baguio is administered independently isn't it still considered to be geographically located within Benguet? It is very common for official forms to have a mandatory field for province when asking for an address. What do you enter in those cases? 

Moving on to addr:barangay, I'm not sure why this would be non-valid. It has been in local use much longer (since 2014) and has almost double the usage compared to addr:quarter. It is also used by more different mappers and it's more widespread geographically (25% of addr:quarter usage is in Baguio alone). On the data consumer side Nominatim treats both tags as equally valid and most other applications ignore both. Do you know any platform that only processes addr:quarter, but not addr:barangay?

But now to the practical side of things. Postal addresses are a topic entirely independent from OSM place tag assignment. Seav's LGU proposal is exclusively about the latter, he does not mention addresses at all. Just look at how addr:city is globally established for usage with whatever place name goes together with a postal code, regardless if it's mapped as place=city/town/village/suburb in OSM. Another example is how locally in the Philippines we use addr:province despite provinces being mapped as place=state.

Deviating from this practice of using a single tag for a specific address component leads to multiple problems and complications. To start with, only a small part of barangays (small to medium sized urban ones) are place=quarter in OSM. Most are tagged as village, fewer as suburb and some even as neighborhood, hamlet or town. It's also not unusual that mappers change place tags of a barangay without updating all addresses referring to that place. And it then gets even more confusing considering that quarter is also commonly used for large puroks, sitios and other non-administrative places encompassing several smaller neighbourhoods. Because of this a data consumer that wants to know the barangay of an address currently needs to make wild guesses wether it's found in addr:quarter, addr:village, addr:suburb or if it's missing altogether. And for mappers it's a mess too, many seem to just omit the barangay and only add addr:street/city/postcode.

Addr:barangay avoids all these issues by being very clear and unambiguous. An added advantage is that new mappers will immediately understand this tag and are therefore more likely to intuitively start using it.
HikeAndMap (2023-08-24 21:05:14+00:00): I understand all these arguments, Eugenes proposal may be about the places itself and not the address, but if the places are tagged as quarter, and then the address is tagged barangay, it wouldn't know that barangay equals quarter right?

So that's why I figured it's more consistent if on the map the addr points to quarter.. since the places themselves are also tagged quarter as per Eugenes proposal.

as for the usage, I think you'll find if you skip the usage of the time before Eugenes proposal - and focus only on added and newly created places since that proposal, the ratio isn't 1:3 but already over 1:1 in favor of the quarter usage.

I wonder then - if the solution might lay in adding both.

addr:barangay and addr:quarter

This may seem double then - but at least it's clear for everyone 

As for renderers/routers .. OSMAnd and JOSM doesn't know what to do with Barangay.. maybe Nominatim can find any tag/key/value combination, but the apps I'm using certainly don't know what to do with "barangay"

Maybe there's some special rendering plugin one can install I'm not aware about.

but again, I could imagine just adding addr:barangay and addr:quarter both .. since you're also argumenting that adding the same webstring millions of times into the database is the right practice I'm going to assume here you wouldn't oppose the idea of adding addr:barangay and addr:quarter double, as surely that won't go into the millions LOL


I do recon, now I got the boundaries finally - I started the practice to add country/quarter/ because Baguio back then had no boundaries..

but now we do have - today will visit the DENR for more updated data in this regard - we could indeed just omit both country and quarter/boundary completely.. since we now have the administrative boundaries right?

Maybe that's even better to just omit it completely from the addr:?

except at places where there's boundary disputes.. there it may still be wise then to add both addr:barangay addr:quarter to maintain physical reality on the ground vs official boundary how it should be, but isn't on the ground?

thanks for the discussion btw..
user_5359 (2023-07-22 10:15:27+00:00): Hello! Please take a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1191236917. What is the mean of the tag 18 = 46/1?
Nastya Ponizovtseva (2023-07-24 09:30:47+00:00): Hello! Thanks for reporting! I’ve already fixed it.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/138871627
HikeAndMap (2023-08-23 03:32:46+00:00): I'm actually wondering if that is really a name?

When I added it - I may not have been so strict on naming - and if the description is "SM Mini Park" I might just have added that as a name.. although that's strictly speaking false and should be just in the description ...
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138815021
Timmy_Tesseract (2023-08-23 04:12:17+00:00): I was actually wondering the same thing. 

But given that survey was mentioned as the source I thought there'd probably be a sign or at least some local usage of the name.

Would anyone know what you're talking about if you'd suggest to meet up at the SM Mini Park?
HikeAndMap (2023-08-24 06:50:16+00:00): I'll put a fixme on it - any time I'm back at SM I'll walk around to confirm if it's really a name or just a description..
user_5359 (2023-07-22 10:37:29+00:00): Hello! Please take a look on https://www.osm.org/node/11059562417. What is the mean of the tag naturiste = oui ? Did you mean nudism (see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key%3Anudism)
Yves01120 (2023-07-23 10:52:15+00:00): Hello!
Thanks for your help and precision. In French, naturiste and nudiste is a bite different but I make the change. 
Thanks again
Fizzie-DWG (2023-12-19 16:11:39+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145298310
mcliquid (2023-07-21 14:38:46+00:00): wow, that's a huge changeset. Wasn't it possible to reduce the size of the bbox? And is the mechanical edit discussed in the mailing list / forum? If yes, can you link it? Thanks!
wardmuylaert (2023-07-21 14:43:46+00:00): Hello, it was just a few incorrect key values where people had typoed and forgotten an "s".
wardmuylaert (2023-07-21 14:45:27+00:00): Does the bbox size matter?
mcliquid (2023-07-21 15:15:48+00:00): Yes it does: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
wardmuylaert (2023-07-21 16:31:35+00:00): Apologies, I'll be sure to keep that in mind going forward.
eggie (2023-07-21 19:14:32+00:00): Beste Ad... Beter het oude adres intact laten en de info kopieren naar het nieuwe  adres.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-07-21 19:15:57+00:00): Voorgaande adres hersteld
eggie (2023-07-21 15:22:13+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback....  De school staat op het vlak al gemapt. Nu nog als OBS De Duizendpoot  icm amenity=school. Zo worden scholen vaak gemapt.
Wanneer er meer scholen in een gebouw zitten worden de adresnodes gebruikt.
Nu is het verwarrend. Denk dus dat je beter het grote vlak kunt gebruiken en de schoolinfo van het gebouw kunt halen.
In pricipe gebruiken we de adresnodes...., maar scholen zijn vaak de bekende uitzondering op de regel. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
map per (2023-07-22 11:09:34+00:00): Hallo JakobMunichways,

wegen review_requested:
foot=yes, motor_vehicle=yes, etc. am Toor (1) bedeuten, dass jeder auf das Gelände darf. Ich vermute aber mal das dort nur THWler rein dürfen, das wäre dann access=private.

Viele Grüße
map per

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8568410540
eggie (2023-07-21 15:27:50+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
feedback...  
warnings:crossing_ways:building-highway

Dit is een lastige... De BAG ziet alles als één gebouw.
De toegangsweg naar de parkeervallen zal een highway=service 'moeten' zijn.
Die weg loopt niet door het gebouw. Het gebouw is import vanuit de BAG. Dus niet veranderen.
De woongedeeltes kunnen  apart ingetekend worden. 
Zal nog even kijken of er een simpele oplossing is. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2023-07-21 15:45:51+00:00): Voorlopig even wat opgelost met building:part en die torens apart ingetekend. De BAG import van de Einsteinstraat klopt ook niet helemaal.
Het fietspad aan de K Onneslaan bestaat niet meer. 
De PDOK achtergrond die je gebruikt is helaas gedateerd in editor iD. 
Groet
eggie
eggie (2023-07-21 15:49:56+00:00): Die nieuwe bedrijfspanden pas ik wel even aan. Kun je zelf de adresnodes goedleggen?
woodpeck_repair (2023-11-06 23:58:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 143714051, 143714044 where the changeset comment is: revert von edits eines users nach selbstlöschung
surveyor54 (2023-10-21 15:59:35+00:00): Ist die Sperrung schon aufgehoben?
Sollte doch nur bis August bestehen.
boldtrn (2023-10-21 18:07:21+00:00): Die Sperrung ist ja mit conditional angegeben, die Straße sollte also wieder befahrbar sein.
Jrachi (2023-07-22 20:09:47+00:00): Ciao.
Questo 08N è un percorso svizzero o italiano?
Mi sembra strano che con il codice sia mantenuto anche nella parte Italiana così.
Sulla parte italiana segue il percorso a catasto regionale/nazionale chiamato EVBAG200 e ref=G20.
Dovresti far terminare lo  08N al Passo di San Giacomo.

Ivo, Jrachi
ale48 (2023-07-31 16:00:46+00:00): ciao, 
ti spiego, così mi puoi aiutare a meglio mappare OSM: i numeri che ho indicato sono i numeri delle tappe presenti sul sito https://www.viaaltavallemaggia.ch/it. Fammi sapere cosa secondo te devo modificare!

Alessandro
Jrachi (2023-07-31 19:27:52+00:00): Ciao.
La regola di OSM per le relazioni dei percorsi, hiking o altro, è che siano presenti sul terreno delle indicazioni, cartelli e segni, che lo rendano distinguibile da qualunque sentiero esistente.
Sui due percorsi, lo 08N e il 10, non ho visto niente. Sono assato due volte su entrambi nel 2017 e sui cartelli c'erano solo le indicazioni per quelli che sono percorsi escursionistici della rete piemontese (G20 e G24, di quest'ultimo in quell'occasione ne ho fatto il rilievo ufficiale).
Può anche essere che da allora siano stati messi cartelli di questi percorsi  non registrati nel catasto nazionale.
Ma se sono stati messi violano la sovranità nazionale, o meglio la regolamentazione regionale/nazionale.
Se stai utilizzando i gpx presenti in quel sito fai attenzione perché non ho visto una dichiarazione sul riutilizzo dei dati, se non è esplicito violi la necessaria licenza per OSM.
Non ho idea se nel territorio svizzero i regolamenti sui percorsi escursionistici siano ben definiti. Quello che ti chiedo nuovamente è di non inserire percorsi senza segnalazioni sul terreno.
O perlomeno di interromperli al confine.

Ivo, Jrachi
Ferrocarriles de México (2023-07-21 17:25:07+00:00): Do not change the street importance levels at random. You changed “tertiary” to “residential” for the main road of this borough.
aaronq227 (2023-07-21 21:54:08+00:00): Hello Ferrocarriles de México, thanks for reaching out. I changed these ways from tertiary to residential as they filter traffic from a main primary road into a singular neighborhood. Global Policy on the OSM Wiki suggests tertiary be reserved to “link smaller towns and villages” (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway). Look forward to hearing back from you.
Ferrocarriles de México (2023-07-22 17:40:08+00:00): The wiki is very general. In Mexico and in particular in this area, highway=tertiary is used for linking smaller towns, villages and borough.

Again, do not change hierarchy at random, especially in a place where you are unfamiliar with its well-established conventions, per community. Reincidence will result in being reported.
Ferrocarriles de México (2023-07-22 17:58:20+00:00): In OSM, usage of the hierarchy inside urban areas is different from outside areas, that is in most of the world. Just taking a look around the place you edit, in the map, will tell you that.
aaronq227 (2023-07-24 21:24:12+00:00): Hi Ferrocarriles de México,

Thank you for taking the time to explain your use of tertiary here. I will leave those as you have mapped them. Have a good day
aceman444 (2023-08-12 14:31:08+00:00): Zdravim, preco odstranovanie nazvov z bodov public_transport=stop_position? Napr. zeleznicna stanica. To je nespravne. A siet MHD v Trnave sa naozaj vola "mestsky bus"?
A aky "streetlevel imagery" pouzivate? Smie sa pouzivat len Mapillary, alebo vlastne fotky, takze to mozete uviest presne.
John Dumpling (2023-08-12 15:07:09+00:00): Ano, MHD bola premenovana na Mestsky bus od 31. 7. tohto roku. Pri stop position na stanici som sa asi pomylil, mozem to opravit - ak viete o nejakych dalsich miestach, kde som spravil tuto chybu, mozete mi to oznamit. Fotky pouzivam vlastne, hlavne kvoli presnemu zmapovaniu vybavenia zastavok, budem to teda uz spravne zadavat.
aceman444 (2023-08-12 15:16:00+00:00): Super dakujem. Urobil som par oprav v linkach Flixbusu a medzimestkych busov. Zda sa mi, ze na tu siet MHD nemate relaciu typu network, ktora by tie MHD linky zdruzovala, tak tu Vam mozem vytvorit. Pozriem teda ci nie su nejake problemy v znaceni zastavok, ale inak napr. OSM Inspector ziadne chyby v spojitosti liniek neukazuje, takze to mate asi vyborne urobene. Dakujem
Udarian (2023-07-21 15:28:36+00:00): the updates are from Southwest 222nd Street to Southwest 216th Street
Nearby0051 (2023-07-22 13:58:39+00:00): Moin Moin
Ich habe bei den Änderungen mal die Objektart ergänzt.
Ohne die Angabe dessen wird das Objekt nicht auf der Karte angezeigt.
Gern bei Bedarf noch weiter anpassen

LG
Südflora (2023-07-23 15:42:22+00:00): Hallo Jannik,

super, besten Dank, mir war nicht bewusst, dass das als Knoten gesetzt sein muss und auch nicht wie ich das machen würde. Danke also!

Thorsten
DressyPear4 (2023-07-22 14:57:57+00:00): Olá, a geometria deve ter referência a base da edificação e não o topo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138820372
literan (2023-07-21 17:43:37+00:00): атата! нельзя использовать 2гис, яндекс, гуглкарты в качестве источников
Supaplex (2024-01-18 17:23:08+00:00): Hi Thayingrid

It seems you don't fix the building offset. The road and buildings are overlapped with each other. Please keep in mind you have to move the building outline and align with ground baseline.
Supaplex (2024-01-18 17:25:17+00:00): Parece que você não conserta o deslocamento do edifício. A estrada e os edifícios estão sobrepostos uns aos outros. Lembre-se de que você deve mover o contorno do edifício e alinhá-lo com a linha de base do solo.
canfe (2026-06-13 09:32:27+00:00): I benzinai mettili come nodo, così compare l'icona ed è più compatibile coi dati MISE
mcliquid (2023-07-24 07:26:46+00:00): Hi, ist dieser Weg vor Ort mittels Beschilderung so ausgezeichnet? Inklusive (S2)? 
Die Definition von "name" ist in OSM sehr streng: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:name
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138820924