piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
pitscheplatsch (2025-12-07 11:48:12+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175604706#c1522210
Sara1000 (2025-12-09 00:31:10+00:00): Ich habe das bereits gesehen und versucht, alle Beiträge von der Karte zu löschen, da sie bereits verschoben wurden. Jedes Mal, wenn ich einen Beitrag ändern oder löschen möchte, funktioniert es nicht. Ich war vorher neu in der Welt der Karten, aber mein Verständnis ihrer Verwendung hat sich inzwischen deutlich verbessert. Ich bitte Sie daher um Ihre Hilfe. Ich bin mit diesen Beiträgen noch nicht vertraut und wünsche mir Ihre Unterstützung, um den bestmöglichen Service zu bieten.
Sara1000 (2025-12-09 00:38:22+00:00): In beiden Fällen existiert dieser Standort nicht mehr.

Er wurde an einen anderen Standort verschoben.

Es gibt keine weitere Erklärung zu den Beiträgen, die in den beiden Knotenpunkten vorhanden waren.

Sie bitten um eine ausführlichere Erläuterung.

Die Erläuterung lautet:

Diese Beiträge waren vorhanden und wurden tatsächlich an einen anderen Standort verschoben. Daher existieren sie nicht mehr.
Wir müssen die Karte an diesem Standort bereinigen, um die zu entfernenden Daten zu löschen.

Dies dient der Übersichtlichkeit und Genauigkeit der Daten, die die Nutzer erreichen.

Vielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit bezüglich dieser beiden Knotenpunkte und der darin enthaltenen und verschobenen Beiträge
Fizzie-DWG (2025-12-06 23:01:57+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19121
danieldegroot2 (2025-12-06 23:02:31+00:00): *[..., Mapbox]
(not sure what imagery it is)
literan (2025-12-07 11:06:17+00:00): дубли поставили
mavl (2025-12-13 12:29:02+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок добавляет непрямоугольное здание.
Ozon OSM9 (2025-12-13 19:28:26+00:00): Здравствуйте. Спасибо за уточнение. Здание перерисовала. Посмотрите, пожалуйста, верно ли я поняла, что эту выступающую часть здания (которая похожа на крыльцо) не стоит включать в геометрию? При отрисовке смотрела на крышу и на белую часть здания похожую на фундамент, поэтому в предыдущей правке отрисовала таким образом.
mavl (2025-12-14 04:25:41+00:00): Ситуация такая.  
1. Вы добавили здание, но у него кривые углы.  
2. Я выполнил команду "Сделать углы прямыми". Здание стало нормальным.  
3. Вы удалили это здание. И добавили на его место другое. Так не делают.  
4. Я отменил ваше последнее действие.  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%A5%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8C  
  
Выступающие части здания обычно  включают в линию здания.  
  
В редакторе iD (которым вы пользуетесь) есть команда "Сделать углы прямыми". Она может решить большинство проблем.  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175895758
Ozon OSM9 (2025-12-14 07:35:02+00:00): Поняла, спасибо большое
MxxCon (2025-12-07 04:37:29+00:00): Hello.
You changed a playground into a dog park, but the surface is left as rubber. Is that accurate?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175601167
BCNorwich (2025-12-07 06:47:24+00:00): Hi, 
From the website:- https://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/bellevue-south-park/facilities/dogareas, it looks like leashed dogs are allowed in the park but not in play areas. Imagery suggests the playground area is still a playground.
Frans S (2025-12-18 15:23:50+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
PLease do not map simple buildings as a multipolygon . These tags are to be used where a building has a courtyard inside it.
And, square each building with the Q key while selected.
Best regards
tof99 (2026-01-31 16:59:18+00:00): Laut Webseite(n) der Betreiber verläuft die Tour von Havelberg nach Wittstock - vielleicht sollte man die Reihenfolge der Relation umdrehen. Das würde auch der geplanten Weiterführung nach Röbel nützen. Endpunkt 11 km nördlich von Havelberg könnte Abstecher sein (dann als Rolle) eintragen).
streckenkundler (2026-01-31 17:40:32+00:00): Hei, Aha! Danke... Ich hatte in Zusammenarbeit mit Landkreis Prignitz erstmal primär nur für die Knotenpunktrouten Unterstützung geleistet...

Nach https://dieprignitz.de/?cid=1519310972&name=Bischofstour soll sie aber in Wittstock beim Knotenpunkt 1 beginnen und knapp südlich Glöwen am Knotenpunkt 49 enden... Hm... Was nun?
tof99 (2026-01-31 21:55:53+00:00): Da hast Du recht - allerdings auf der bischofstour.de-Seite (https://dieprignitz.de/?cid=1519310972) ist die Tour mehrfach von Havelberg nach Wittstock beschrieben. Also am besten die Knotenpunktreihe umdrehen, Relation ebenfalls, fertig.
tof99 (2026-01-31 21:56:48+00:00): Eigentlich ist das natürlich Sache der Betreiber...
tof99 (2026-01-31 22:00:27+00:00): Der gpx-Track beider Quellen verläuft leider auch entgegen der Beschreibung.
streckenkundler (2026-01-31 22:27:08+00:00): Ich frag mal beim Landkreis nach und schaue mir div. Bildquellen an... außerdem scheint in Wittstock die Tour länger erfasst zu sein, als sie es sein sollte... Da kann ich diese Korrektur gleich mit erledigen. 
Da es z.Z. eh keine Fahrradsaison ist, haben wir etwas Zeit das zu lösen...
dzamper (2025-12-09 19:36:09+00:00): Skądś się jeszcze w tym changesecie na dwóch wayach `maxspeed:hgv:conditional = 80 @ (weight>3.5)` pojawił z niebytu
dzamper (2025-12-09 19:37:21+00:00): A na trzecim wayu jeszcze "bezwarunkowy conditional" pod postacią `maxspeed:hgv:conditional=70`…
Yunkers (2025-12-09 21:07:23+00:00): A bo się nieco źle skopiowało. Poprawie przy następnej sesji mapowania.
TrickyFoxy (2025-12-06 21:36:23+00:00): 👋 В правом меню редактора есть кнопка «Настройки фонового изображения». Выберите там спутниковые снимки ESRI — они свежее и там появилось.

А в гугл смотреть нельзя)
rempshaener (2025-12-06 22:12:26+00:00): Hallo,
danke dir, das sieht gut aus.
Viele Grüße
aharvey (2025-12-09 00:01:08+00:00): grumble grumble... in my view this is excessive to split such small sections due to a small barrier in the middle and how they were mapped before was much simpler.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-12-06 21:41:15+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/911467867
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1456531559

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
JasiahMaps1010 (2025-12-08 04:24:38+00:00): How do you have time for this whole massive area???
aharvey (2025-12-08 23:58:39+00:00): I don't think your changes to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/962492250 are correct, there's no marked lanes, if anything either turn shares the same space, so it's a bit like lanes=1, but I'm not sure it should be tagged.

turn:lanes, theres no marked turn lanes on this part, and you've got none:right coming for Forest Way to Russell Avenue?
green_leek (2025-12-09 09:12:13+00:00): Thanks for pointing it out, turn lane fixed and placement tag added.
aharvey (2025-12-10 02:42:40+00:00): there are no marked turn lanes on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/962492250 so I don't think it should have a turn:lanes=* tag at all. Even if it did, the turn lanes would stop at the northbound carriageway, not continue through to the southbound one.

Same for the lane count, I'm not sure if we should have a lane count here since there are no markings, but even if it did it would be lanes=1 since the forward and back share the same space.
aharvey (2025-12-10 02:53:16+00:00): only one lane from Russel Av can turn right into Forest Way.
Warin61 (2026-02-28 22:44:09+00:00): Deleted relation 19927055 - 2 members both inners.
JakovBušić (2025-12-08 12:37:43+00:00): Wrong hgv restriction that was made, was deleted in changeset 175665310.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175665310
Langlaeufer (2025-12-07 11:50:20+00:00): Wirklich concrete:plate?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:surface%3Dconcrete:plates
Elefant aus Wuppertal (2025-12-07 13:52:17+00:00): Halo Langlauefer,

sorry, dass hab' ich als surface-Wert von zwei dort bereits bestehenden Ways übernommen, wurde ursprünglich mit SC hinzugefügt. Es handelt sich natürlich um paving_stones. Ich korrigiere das.
Langlaeufer (2025-12-07 14:09:35+00:00): 🙂👍
NorthCrab_upload (2025-12-06 22:01:07+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13358223372

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Sylabowy Kot (2025-12-07 11:32:12+00:00): Dodawaj źródło zmian, jeśli dotyczą one rzeczy niepochodzących z dostępnej domyślnie ortofotomapy. Zwykła "wizja lokalna" lub "survey" wystarczy, jeśli zauważyłeś to naocznie w ostatnim czasie. Wiedz tylko, że często dodajemy informacje z danych urzędowych, które są mocno aktualne, więc dodawanie rzeczy ze zdjęć satelitarnych/lotniczych może powodować problemy ze zgodnością informacji, gdyż te są kilkuletnie, czyli nie tak świeże. I zwracam uwagę, że znowu połączyłeś punkt granicy parafii z danymi naziemnymi - nie rób tego. Czytaj, co piszemy.
VictorIE (2026-07-29 23:11:21+00:00): Mediocre imagery now available: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1456568786/
b-unicycling (2026-07-31 23:31:34+00:00): added
Sammyhawkrad (2025-12-10 08:47:46+00:00): Hello Tracy08, you have edited the building to cover the entire compound, but that is incorrect. The previous version was alright.
NeisRevert (2025-12-07 08:24:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/175612942
where the comment is: "Remove vandalism"
zbh0170 (2025-12-06 23:20:11+00:00): Erratum : à lire Griottier et non Grottier
JakovBušić (2025-12-08 12:10:34+00:00): Hgv restricitions were made by a mistake and deleted in changeset 175664110.
eggie (2025-12-07 06:56:17+00:00): Jouw tagging is niet echt fout.
De wiki zegt:
Tagging bij een c12bord

motor_vehicle=no
moped=yes 
mofa=yes 
traffic_sign=NL:C12

Omdat moped en mofa in osm worden gezien als motorvoertuigen.
Volgens de wegenverkeerswet niet.. maar in osm internationaal wel.
Als er een onderbord staat uitgezonderd landbouwverkeer kun je ook motor_vehicle=agricultural taggen ipv no.

..agricultural=yes is eigenlijk bedoeld voor bv N wegen waar je normaal niet met een trekker mag rijden. 
Maar als uitzondering werkt het toch.
De voorgaande mapper had  nog uitgesplitst in motorcar en motorcycle..zou ook moeten werken.. maar in de wiki staat gewoon motor_vehicle no. Zie wiki bordenbestand.
In jouw navia-app werkt die uitsplitsing niet en is toch moped en mofa yes kennelijk nodig.
Ik vermoed door motorcycle=no
Groet..
eggie
eggie (2025-12-07 06:58:47+00:00): Zou het voorlopig zo laten en kijken wat de navigatie er mee doet.
De updates van je routingapp kunnen even duren. Geen idee hoe lang.
zbh0170 (2025-12-06 23:23:19+00:00): Erratum : à lire Griottier et non Grottier
mona_mohsen (2025-12-08 14:45:20+00:00): Hello, aliapo;
Thank you very much for your help in updating the OSM maps in Iraq. I noticed that you removed the highway tag from this street (way 755376687), which is incorrect. This is based on JOSM validation, as explained on the OSM wiki page (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator#:~:text=NONE-,Untagged%20ways,-Checks%20for%20untagged). The best solution here is to delete this street entirely if it no longer exists in reality. This way, we accurately represent the reality while maintaining OSM policy.
Regards
mona_mohsen
Matija Nalis (2025-12-29 22:37:52+00:00): Hi, few weeks ago you've marked this railway crossing https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1064868217 as `double_half`.
Do you recall what was your source / are you sure it's not regular `crossing:barrier=half` ? Thanks!
NGL-engel (2026-01-01 23:55:36+00:00): Hi Matija Nalis, I'm not entirely sure, but I think I got this information from www.mapillary.com. If it's incorrect, I'd appreciate it if you could correct me. Thank you very much. Angela
Matija Nalis (2026-01-02 19:02:36+00:00): Hi Angela, thanks for the answer! I'm however not finding that area covered at Mapillary (nor Panoramax), so you're probably found it somewhere else.

But I don't think there exist any crossing:barrier=double_half in Croatia (railway technical documentation here does not even seem to mention it as an option for ŽCP). So I would guess it was probably regular crossing:barrier=half (i.e. only one half-length lifting pole on each side of the railway, instead of 4 of them altogether). 

So no worries, I'll update that node; I just wanted to doublecheck with you first.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing:barrier#Examples for example pictures how each tagging looks in practice.

Cheers,
Matija
NGL-engel (2026-01-07 12:05:34+00:00): Hi Matija,
Unfortunately, I can't remember exactly where I found it. It must have been on some kind of Street View-like website; perhaps the images there were already outdated. I definitely wasn't there in person. I might have simply made a typo. Therefore, I assume your information is correct. It would be nice if you could change it.

I've also added a few more things there. You're welcome to change those as well, even without contacting me again.

As mentioned above, I wasn't there myself; I gathered all the information solely from aerial photos and street-level images.

Thank you for checking my information again.

Angela
pitscheplatsch (2025-12-07 07:46:38+00:00): Hallo, vielen Dank für den Beitrag. 

Hier in diesem Kartenbereich gibt es jetzt mehrere Einträge für Firmen. Sind dies alles Test-Einträge?

Deine Änderungen und Eintragungen sehen (weiterhin) irgendwie seltsam aus.

Grüße, Pascal
Sara1000 (2025-12-07 11:30:23+00:00): سأقوم بطلب حذف هذا المكان
لان بالفعل تم نقله إلى مكان آخر
pitscheplatsch (2025-12-07 11:46:31+00:00): Danke für Ihre Antwort.

Die Objekte wurden doch von Ihnen erstellt. Wieso haben Sie sie dann wieder gelöscht? Oder weswegen haben Sie sich vorher überhaupt eingetragen?

Aktuell sind die Objekte noch vorhanden ...

Mit einem Hinweis (Note) wird das von Ihnen erstellte Objekt nicht wieder gelöscht. Für mich sieht es danach aus, das hier weiterhin nicht klar ist, wie beim OSM Projekt beigetragen wird, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19042
Sara1000 (2025-12-07 12:02:58+00:00): قمت بطلب حذف اي مساهمات في هذان العقدتين او النقطتين من الخريطه بالفعل
لان تم نقلهم بالفعل إلى مكان آخر
وهم الان غير موجودين بهذا المكان
pitscheplatsch (2025-12-07 14:25:07+00:00): Hallo,
ich schreibe es gerne noch einmal: Die Knoten bzw. die Einträge hier, wurde von dir erstellt. Du kannst sie auch löschen. Bitte unterlasse doch das Eintragen von POIs und das anschließende Erstellen von OSM Notes mit Hinweisen, dass die Einträge wieder gelöscht werden sollen.

Danke und viele Grüße,
Pascal
Sara1000 (2025-12-07 15:52:59+00:00): They have been moved to another location. Therefore, they should be removed from the map data
13358419301
13358419401
13358419501
pitscheplatsch (2025-12-07 17:18:24+00:00): Could you clarify why these features were originally created at that location, given that you now mention they have been moved elsewhere?

Since you were the one who added them at that spot, it would be helpful to understand what changed so we can handle the objects appropriately.
Sara1000 (2025-12-07 17:36:22+00:00): لأن تم نقلهم إلى مكان آخر
Sara1000 (2025-12-07 18:50:34+00:00): The reason for the changes is that all these places have been moved to another location.
wolfy1339 (2025-12-07 19:46:27+00:00): Please don't blindly accept the recommendations from the editor to change the names of features.

The proper name, as in the one that goes in the `name=*` tag, should be in french in Quebec, regardless of what the editor tries to suggest
Famlam (2026-01-02 19:00:45+00:00): Hi Javl, you've added two unclosed grass ways with source=3dshapes.

This is strange in two ways:
- Grass should always be an area, not an (unclosed) way
- source=3dshapes is unlikely to be your actual source I think? (It's not listed in your commit message at least)
fortera_au (2025-12-07 23:54:20+00:00): Hi, this looks pretty good, the only thing I would add is that it would be best to split the way where the tunnels are, and remove the tunnel=yes tag from any parts that aren't tunnels.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175604975
Hb- (2026-03-14 11:54:25+00:00): Because of "Tags of the Schlossplatz-Multipolygon do not have to be duplicated on the outer ring, and …" the tags highway=pedestrian and name=Schlossplatz were removed from way/173043798. 

This caused an address routing error, see https://streetcomplete.app/p/331762.jpg. The same error affects the Platz am Ritterbrunnen since June 2024, changeset/152767584.

See note/5203359 (de) for more discussion on this tagging. The OSM Inspector would not have found this error if https://github.com/geofabrik/osmi_simple_views/issues/43 had been approved.
tomhukins (2025-12-07 14:07:24+00:00): I notice you have added "bicycle=no" to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1453364281 - can you point me at the discussion that concludes this is the best way to map pavements beside roads?  It's important to reach a community conscensus on the best way to map together.
Pete Owens (2025-12-07 19:10:10+00:00): The best way to map pavements is as to use sidewalk tags on the highway - In the real world pedestrians can cross the road anywhere the like rather than just at the fictional "crossings" that mappers have to include to make the pavement reachable at all.
Pete Owens (2025-12-07 19:17:15+00:00): Of course once you have mapped a separate pavement then cycle access is totally uncontroversial from the perspective of law abiding citizens.

THE LAW - Highway Code Rule 64
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.

OSM - cycling=no
Indicates that riding bicycle is not allowed.
tomhukins (2025-12-08 08:51:38+00:00): You have cited the law several times in this and other discussions, but you haven't answered my question.

Your recent blocks at https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19112 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19125 have suggested you use the UK forum to discuss this.  Can you point me at that discussion?

What consideration have you given to Richard's suggestion at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175410402 that bicycle=dismount makes more sense in these situations than bicycle=no?

Please don't keep forcefully stating your case without listening to the other side, refusing to change your habits.  Engage with the community and build consensus to improve the consistency of our shared map.
Pete Owens (2025-12-08 16:05:05+00:00): The law is the only relevant issue in determining whether cycling is permitted here.
Cycling is prohibited so cycling=no is correct.
tomhukins (2025-12-08 16:21:23+00:00): I feel like we're talking past each other.  I do not disagree with the law or your interpretation of it.

However, I disagree with your insistence that any approach to tagging the map other than yours has no validity.

The tags that mappers use are a matter of consensus and consistency as I have already stated.  You repeatedly ignore this and fail to answer my questions.

If you are so sure that your approach makes sense, why do you refuse to discuss it with other mappers and why do you refuse to acknowledge the advice given in the two blocks you have received over the past week?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-18 18:54:44+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13358471501/history has fixme = yes that was added in this edit
What requires fixing here? fixme=yes is not particularly clear, and maybe problem got fixed since then?
Jrachi (2025-12-08 10:45:34+00:00): Ciao. 
I REI deve essere a 8 caratteri.
Forse manca uno zero finale?
rskedgell (2025-12-07 07:33:29+00:00): (Review requested)

That looks fine, thanks for updating it.
MassCartog (2025-12-07 15:18:36+00:00): Hi welcome to OpenStreetMap! Please don't remove the outlines of the building unless they have been demolished, just remove the tags that specify what the building is if that has changed.
MxxCon (2025-12-07 04:40:44+00:00): Hello.
Color values in OSM should in lower case.
In general in OSM other than proper names and a few other exceptions, all tag values should be lower case.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175606245
BCNorwich (2025-12-08 06:27:49+00:00): A single tree is not a wood.
the_third_man (2025-12-08 07:05:07+00:00): Hoi, what kind of hydrant is this?
Xvtn (2025-12-14 18:57:53+00:00): Good info!
Sanniu (2026-04-12 14:34:51+00:00): Hi, there is no `Bar Garden Lane` street nearby. Can you name appropriate street?
AGIOVANN (2026-04-12 15:18:35+00:00): Hi, there are no streets inside Ein Shemer, it's a Kibbutz, so the lane to the park is called Bar Garden Lane.
Sanniu (2026-04-13 06:36:46+00:00): So, I suppose the best way to do it is either name lane to the park or replace addr:city with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:place and drop addr:street.
Now it jumps out in OSM validation tools as error...
Xvtn (2025-12-14 18:56:16+00:00): Hi, I've been reviewing some of your edits, and everything looks awesome! Thanks for your contributions!
jaredjared (2025-12-18 04:33:31+00:00): Thanks!
NeisBot (2025-12-07 02:09:37+00:00): Hi Ternerebelde, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 98% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 1 highway(s)

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

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=175607262
Ternerebelde (2025-12-07 02:12:45+00:00): Yes, i could delete one point from the highway by mistake, mi objective is only focused on delete trails or paths.
trigpoint (2025-12-07 11:00:39+00:00): This changeset has been fully reverted by the DWG in changeset https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/175617370
trigpoint (2025-12-07 11:01:54+00:00): DWG Revert under Ticket#2025120710000033
trigpoint (2025-12-07 11:10:09+00:00): Hello Ternerebelde
Phil from the Data Working Group here.
Please note in OpenStreetMap we do not delete paths fron private land if they exist.
If necessary they can be tagged as private but removing tem from the map is not acceptable.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property
felipeeugenio (2025-12-07 12:37:51+00:00): @Ternerebelde. En OSM mapeamos lo que está en terreno, si el sendero existe, se mapea. Incluso si nos ponemos todos de acuerdo en borrarlo por X motivo, alguien de cualquier parte del mundo puede agregarlo sin tener nosotros mucho espacio para reclamar.

Lo que si podemos hacer es señalar qué porciones de los caminos son privados (access=private), dónde hay portones (barrier=gate + access=private) y qué caminos no son formales (informal=yes).
Si necesitas ayuda por favor entrar al chat de la comunidad en Telegram en el link en mi perfil.
Si te resulta demasiado agobiante el mapeo, puedes dejar notas en el mapa (click derecho + agregar una nota) y con gusto agregamos las barreras y tags de acceso por ti.
Aquí van los links a los tags a los que me refiero, si no hablas inglés puedes traducirlos al castellano en la página misma.
Tag:informal=yes - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Key:access - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Key:barrier - OpenStreetMap Wiki

Saludos
Baloo Uriza (2025-12-08 15:04:52+00:00): What's this camera mounted on?  Looks like the node was inadvertently placed in the middle of a parking aisle.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175607290
osmcrsdrv (2025-12-12 16:19:56+00:00): The satellite map and the transit map are not overlayed properly, The map that I used was the transit map.