piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
opened by Mapeiro (2017-09-25 06:18:55+00:00): "it went out of business"
The place has gone or never existed. This is an auto-generated note from MAPS.ME application: a user reports a POI that is visible on a map (which can be outdated), but cannot be found on the ground.
POI name: Phuong Hoang
POI types: wheelchair-no amenity-restaurant
OSM data version: 2017-08-17T15:51:02Z
 #mapsme
closed by Peter14 (2017-11-05 13:15:31+00:00): Hier ist nichts mehr eingetragen.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:19:56+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by hintonsb (2019-09-24 16:18:07+00:00): see above
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:20:03+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
commented by  (2019-07-25 00:39:53+00:00): Gate closed. Government boundary gate separating USAF installation and public use lands.
commented by hintonsb (2019-10-29 13:13:49+00:00): surveyed location and updated tag: general access=no access
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:20:12+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by dannmer (2025-12-26 14:13:39+00:00): no gate mapped here
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:20:18+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:21:20+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by dannmer (2025-12-26 14:11:52+00:00): updated access to private to match road to the south
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:21:28+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:21:57+00:00): Es fehlen Treppenstufen in dem Weg
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:22:02+00:00): Es fehlen Treppenstufen in dem Weg
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:22:47+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
commented by freebeer (2018-08-14 01:49:12+00:00): the access tags have not been added
closed by dannmer (2024-02-17 03:27:59+00:00): access tag added
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:22:54+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by DUGA (2021-02-20 20:51:33+00:00): This gate is never open to public. Active DOD ID is required. Should be fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99659676 but awaiting future testing.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:22:59+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by dannmer (2020-04-16 02:06:45+00:00): Looks like it is accessible
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:23:06+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by dannmer (2021-06-07 10:07:01+00:00): fixed
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:23:13+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:23:27+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by dannmer (2020-04-16 11:40:56+00:00): Access is set to all.
commented by boldtrn (2020-04-16 12:03:38+00:00): Currently, they don't have any access tags set? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
closed by dannmer (2020-04-16 12:38:59+00:00): Given that there is a giant parking lot that is only accessible via this gate I would say that vehicles are allowed. Access is set to all, if there are changes that you feel should be made you should edit the map.
commented by boldtrn (2020-04-17 09:00:20+00:00): Given that it's landuse military and the ways are access=private I highly doubt it. For now I set it to access=private as well, same as the ways.

I will leave this note open for a local to double check.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:23:35+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by dannmer (2019-08-29 12:07:39+00:00): it's been changed.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:23:41+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by CurlingMan13 (2022-11-02 03:15:07+00:00): updated
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:23:49+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
commented by CurlingMan13 (2021-08-03 18:23:05+00:00): Accessible by vehicles, but restricted.
closed by CurlingMan13 (2022-11-02 03:14:25+00:00): updated
opened by Сергей Курилович (2017-09-25 06:23:55+00:00): "Сервисный центр ИларАвто"
POI name: Иларавто
POI types: shop-car_repair
OSM data version: 2017-08-17T15:51:02Z
 #mapsme
closed by Something B (2017-10-27 22:10:44+00:00): Есть.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:24:12+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by DawsZed (2021-01-16 04:59:34+00:00): Updated the gate access level to match the access level of Normandy Road - a restricted US Govt. roadway. Fixed in Changeset 97591027.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:26:45+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by Davide_sd (2018-04-05 21:04:27+00:00): The gate was wrongly placed. The error has been correct. I'm closing the note.
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:26:48+00:00): Fablab LCube
Laboratoire de Fabrication Numérique à Limoges
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:26:53+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by [NzN]suriv (2018-01-14 18:51:53+00:00): Eingetragen
commented by fkv (2018-01-15 12:25:39+00:00): Wrong. Permissions should be set on the road, not the gate. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1152142
commented by fkv (2018-01-15 12:37:02+00:00): And why did you map a bypass? This would leave the gate useless, unless the bypass is a oneway.
commented by  (2018-01-15 12:59:06+00:00): Berechtigte die den Schranken öffnen können, können diesen natürlich durchfahren (Kraftwerkzugehörige, Winterdienst, Schulbusse, etc.) alle anderen die breiter als 2.0m sind, also so breit wie der bypass, können die Kraftwerkbrücke nicht benützen.

Sofern ich das jetzt Richtig verstanden habe sollte es accsess=private lauten? Auf dem way mit dem Schranken (higway=service statt tertiary?)

grüße Valentin
commented by [NzN]suriv (2018-01-15 13:02:28+00:00): Der letzte Kommentar stammt von mir
commented by fkv (2018-01-15 13:32:38+00:00): Ich bilde mir ein, dass 2012, als ich dort war, Pkw drüberfahren durften. Es bildete sich nur eine Warteschlange an der Ampel, weil sie immer nur in einer Richtung drüber durften. Auch die Nachrichten (z.B. https://www.meinbezirk.at/perg/lokales/sperre-der-donaukraftwerksbruecke-wallsee-mitterkirchen-d2280981.html) deuten darauf hin, dass die Brücke nur in Ausnahmefällen für Pkw gesperrt ist. Hat sich daran etwas geändert?
commented by [NzN]suriv (2018-01-15 20:57:47+00:00): Es gibt keine Beschilderung, welche bestimmte Fahrzeuge verbietet.
Die einzigen Beschränkungen sind eben diese Engstelle (mit Betonleitschienen erzwungen) von 2m breite. Sowie mir eben noch aufgefallen ist (Mapillary) eine Beschränkung auf 3tonnen und 3.1m höhe. 
Am anderen Donauufer ist das selbe nochmals in Gegenrichtung.
commented by fkv (2018-01-15 22:19:38+00:00): Nach deiner Beschreibung ist alles richtig gemappt (mit Ausnahme vom noch fehlenden maxweight=3 + maxheight=3.1, und statt maxwidth=2.0 gehört anscheinend width=2). Also insofern revidiere ich meinen ersten Kommentar.
Ich kann trotzdem kaum glauben, dass die Straße jetzt für normale Autos gesperrt ist, nachdem sie es so viele Jahre nicht war. Ist die Sperre nur vorübergehend (z.B. Wintersperre)? Sind die Ampeln noch in Betrieb?
commented by boldtrn (2018-01-15 22:21:42+00:00): > Wrong. Permissions should be set on the road, not the gate

This is not true. OSM models the real world. If there is a sign stating private access next to a road, this road has acess=private. If there is a gate, you map the gate and it's access properties. If there is no sign forbidding access, but a closed gate, you map the road as accessible but the gate as not accessible. You would further tag if for examples pedestrians or cyclists can pass the gate, this could lead to motor_vehicle=no and foot=yes and bicycle=yes on a highway=unclassified with no further access restrictions. It is the job of a router to interpret these tags correctly.

> Es gibt keine Beschilderung, welche bestimmte Fahrzeuge verbietet. 
Die einzigen Beschränkungen sind eben diese Engstelle (mit Betonleitschienen erzwungen) von 2m breite. Sowie mir eben noch aufgefallen ist (Mapillary) eine Beschränkung auf 3tonnen und 3.1m höhe. 

Das ist z.B ein gutes Beispiel fkv. Hier hätte die Straße normale access properties mit 3t und 3.1m Höhe. Die Barriere hätte dann eine Beschränkung von 2m Breite.
commented by [NzN]suriv (2018-01-15 23:04:51+00:00): @fkv Welche Anzeichen verleiten dich dazu das die Überquerung der Kraftwerkbrücke für Autos gesperrt ist. Sofern ein Fahrzeug nicht Breiter als 2m, nicht höher als 3.1m und nicht schwerer als 3t ist, ist die querung möglich. Ausgenommen berechtigte die den Schranken öffnen können, für die gelten womöglich mit dem Eigentümer abgesprochene ausnahmen.
Ampelregelung ist ganzjährig in Betrieb (Grünphase alle 10Minuten, eine Minute lang)
commented by fkv (2018-01-15 23:56:18+00:00): Was mich verleitet hat? Wahrscheinlich dass kein modernes Auto (ausgenommen Kleinwagen) durch eine 2m breite Engstelle durchpasst. Meines z.B. ist mit Spiegeln 2,07 m breit, und ohne Spiegel braucht man einen Einweiser und viel Zeit. Wenn auf einer Autobahnbaustelle die linke Spur mit 2m Breite angegeben ist, ist es kein Problem, weil sie in Wahrheit eh etwas breiter ist. Vielleicht ist es auch hier so. Ansonsten wär die Engstelle der blanke Horror, wo jedes zweite Auto stecken bleibt.
commented by [NzN]suriv (2018-01-16 00:07:49+00:00): Ah OK, da hast nicht unrecht.
closed by [NzN]suriv (2018-01-16 11:18:15+00:00): Habe es jetzt überarbeitet. Könnt gerne nochmals drüberschauen und venbessern.
Danke für die Aufschlussreichen hinweise.

grüße, Valentin
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:27:02+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by Bathyscapher (2019-01-18 20:45:40+00:00): Theoretically yes, if you have the key. Resolved.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:27:10+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by Peilscheibe (2017-12-16 22:13:53+00:00): Separated from A13 by a guard rail. Mapped accordingly.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:28:02+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by openpablo3 (2018-01-14 22:19:54+00:00): Cancello posizionato sul bivio con la SS394 anzichè sulla strada privata. corretto
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:28:26+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
commented by frafra (2018-06-13 21:42:13+00:00): It is; do you have any problem with it?
closed by boldtrn (2018-06-14 06:13:55+00:00): It has been removed anyway I think. Will close here, thanks.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:28:34+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by Max1234-ITA (2024-05-10 09:07:23+00:00): Sorry, no gates there...
This is a road in a tunnel (layer=-1), passing under the railway. The fence is on layer=0, it doesn't cross Corso Ventisette Marzo at all.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:28:44+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by IlBano (2019-03-13 20:47:41+00:00): Gates moved to the correct position on the two service highways just north of "Oratorio di S. Colombano"
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:28:55+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by giubar (2019-10-15 13:42:37+00:00): Detail added.
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:29:05+00:00): Canal
closed by 30303020 (2018-05-11 14:14:11+00:00): This is already mapped.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:29:18+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:29:25+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
commented by Bill Ricker (2020-01-02 03:11:28+00:00): Per news reports Dec.2019,  Jefferson Notch Road is seasonal access -- automobile allowed 3 seasons, winter Snowmobile only.
closed by AndrewC_411 (2024-07-22 20:06:44+00:00): Tagging issue was resolved in 2022
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:29:31+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:29:37+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:30:29+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by jmarchon (2022-10-15 23:42:25+00:00): The gate is on a footpath, implying no vehicle access.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:30:35+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by b-jazz (2022-07-27 14:25:35+00:00): Gate no longer exists, but then again, neither does the bridge. I was able to walk right up to the construction however.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:31:01+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by beej71 (2020-02-02 22:01:52+00:00): Tagged,
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:31:24+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
commented by flockfinder (2018-06-07 12:38:09+00:00): I don’t know anything about a gate here. But there are gates at the north and south ends. And yes they are accessible to automobiles and trucks etc.
closed by boldtrn (2018-06-07 13:09:28+00:00): Thanks for the info. I added the access tags.

BTW: you tagged this gate 3 years ago? If there is no gate at this point, maybe we should delete it?
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:31:44+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by dannmer (2025-12-12 03:39:08+00:00): tagged as private, streetside shows road accessible by vehicles
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:32:46+00:00): Is this gate accessible by vehicles? Please add the access tags accordingly.
closed by Constable (2019-05-14 13:49:38+00:00): yes it is. Also, opening hours are something like 8am to 8pm
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:32:58+00:00): rr
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:37:01+00:00): Heidegasthof ist kein Hotel mehr, siehe http://www.maz-online.de/Lokales/Ostprignitz-Ruppin/Zuflucht-in-Klosterheide
closed by ALu68 (2018-12-21 18:11:53+00:00): Erledigt.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:39:27+00:00): Is this gate accessible? Please add the tags accordingly.
closed by fkv (2019-08-28 02:43:28+00:00): not a map error
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:44:12+00:00): 康桥宝邸
opened by  (2017-09-25 06:44:58+00:00): Wanderparkplatz
closed by New Joerg (2017-09-27 06:19:33+00:00): poi
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:48:01+00:00): Is this gate accessible? Please add appropriate access tags.
closed by r00tcz (2026-02-06 17:52:39+00:00): road behind it have access=private so added it to the gate as well
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:48:07+00:00): Is this gate accessible? Please add appropriate access tags.
closed by DrakMrak (2018-03-21 23:39:15+00:00): gate access corrected
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:48:24+00:00): Is this gate accessible? Please add appropriate access tags.
closed by fkv (2018-04-15 14:10:47+00:00): not a mapping error, see note #1152142
commented by boldtrn (2018-04-16 00:36:14+00:00): Please don't randomly close notes, see also my comment in the other note.
closed by fkv (2018-04-16 02:46:50+00:00): Troll.
commented by boldtrn (2018-04-16 03:13:05+00:00): Please stop randomly closing notes.
opened by boldtrn (2017-09-25 06:48:40+00:00): Is this gate accessible? Please add appropriate access tags.
commented by fkv (2017-10-09 20:21:29+00:00): A lift gate is accessible whenever it is open. This is rather a matter of opening_hours than access.
commented by boldtrn (2017-10-09 22:44:32+00:00): In this case you would tag access:conditional, for example access=yes, access:conditional=no@Sun

The default is acccess=no, so this road might not be routable by different services, e.g. GraphHopper.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dlift_gate
commented by fkv (2017-10-10 00:10:12+00:00): That page doesn't say that the default access is no.

access:conditional won't work here, because the closing times are irregular. The lift gate is usually open, except during military training.

In my opinion, access=* (certainly access=permissive) can be considered on the road, but not on the lift gate here. access=* is meant to specify permissions rather than physical restrictions. A closed gate is just a reminder that the road behind is forbidden. Nobody cares whether the gate itself is operated.
commented by boldtrn (2017-10-10 00:25:53+00:00): No, but it doesn't state that the default would be access=yes. A lift gate might be an impassable barrier for vehicles. If it's unspecified you have to assumes access=no. Otherwise created routes are incorrect. Also see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=58238
commented by fkv (2017-10-10 01:11:16+00:00): We map what we see, and when there's no sign regarding legal access restrictions, we don't map legal access restrictions. It's as simple as that.

Your assumptions are obviously rooted in the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Barriers page, which you referred to in the forum thread. That page is not a map feature page, and the line with the access=no default was inserted by a single user without prior discussion. It's just nonsense.
commented by boldtrn (2017-10-10 03:27:58+00:00): If there is no access tagged, then there is no way for a routing engine to estimate if this barrier is accessible or not. The safe way is to assume it is not accessible. Since this gate is tagged on a secondary, I would assume either the road is not a secondary, or the gate is usually accessible. If it might be unaccessible three times per year for a short time, tagging access=yes should be fine IMHO and adding an access:conditional or a note explaining this.
commented by fkv (2017-10-10 07:15:36+00:00): Well, you already concluded the solution: As the road is a secondary, the routing engine can assume that the gate is usually open. This kind of guessing should definitely done by applications, not by mappers. It's not part of the job of a mapper to guess when the gate will be closed. The mapper has to map what's on the ground, and that's a lift gate that may be opened or closed at any time, like a light switch that can be switched on and off at any time.
commented by boldtrn (2017-10-10 08:01:32+00:00): No this is wrong. Most gates, especially on bigger roads follow rules. For example think about the "Wintersperre", there are a lot of these gates on secondary roads. Most of them are either tagged with access conditional or mappers change the tags according to the current situation. Probably this lift gate has it's own rules as well, they should be reflected by the node and not implied by the routing engine. I would be surprised if this gate might change it's state  randomly, but probably there is a sign next to the gate explaining when it's open and when it's closed.
commented by fkv (2017-10-10 08:47:02+00:00): A "Wintersperre" should be tagged on the road, not on the gate, as the Wintersperre is denoted by road signs, and these signs also specify whether the road may be used by foot. Compare that to a lift gate - it can always be crossed by foot and even with a bicycle.

Here, the lift gate does not change its state randomly, but at random times, as there is no periodic schedule for the military trainings.
commented by boldtrn (2017-10-10 09:03:02+00:00): Yes, but the gate is closed and therefore not accessible, so it could be very well tagged with access=no.
commented by  (2017-11-08 06:51:45+00:00): Wether you can access the road (with a car) or not is determined by the lift gate. The lift gate is closed whenever it is not safe to access the street (eg. during live shootings where the safety area crosses the street).
Even you could bypass the lift gate by foot or with a bicycle, it is not recommended because of the live threatening conditions.

There is no fix schedule when the lift gate is open or not, it depends on the army shooting times. The times are sometimes subject of change, can be looked up here: http://www.bundesheer.at/organisation/regional/noe/l75.php
commented by fkv (2018-04-13 09:06:26+00:00): When a gate is permanently open, it can be tagged with opening_hours=24/7. Likewise, when it is permanently closed, it can be tagged with opening_hours="24/7 off". When it is open episodically, no tag can be given. In either case, access tags don't make sense on a lift gate.
commented by boldtrn (2018-04-13 22:23:28+00:00): "Opening hours" of a gate should be tagged with conditional restrictions. See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions

One should not use opening_hours or the hours_on hours_off tag anymore, these are not properly parseable by software and it's often not clear what is effected by these opening_hours.

Access tags for a lift gate make a lot of sense, this might be access=customer, access=private, or access=yes
commented by boldtrn (2018-04-13 22:25:35+00:00): BTW: opening_hours for shops or amenities are perfectly fine, but they don't work for traffic restrictions.

For example there might be a gate that can only be passed by trucks during the day, during the night only cars can pass. This is not possible to model with opening_hours.
commented by fkv (2018-04-13 22:43:33+00:00): When a truck can pass, a car can pass as well because it is smaller. When only cars or trucks are permitted during certain times, the restriction can obviously not be determined by the state of the gate. This is just another example why access tags should go to the road, not the gate.
commented by boldtrn (2018-04-13 22:48:06+00:00): No, assume this is a lift gate and there is an operator. During the night he will only open the gate cars, but not trucks.

Another example are gates that can be used by emergency vehicles, but the roads on both sides are usable by the public.

There are many examples why access tags have to be on gates and why one should not tag opening_hours for traffic related things.
commented by fkv (2018-04-14 06:43:30+00:00): You are talking of "many examples" but couldn't name one. I can assure you that none of those cases exist in Austria. Permissions are always bound to roads or areas, not gates, in Austria.
commented by boldtrn (2018-04-15 07:53:16+00:00): Well I named 4 (or 5?) examples, of which 3 (4) definitely exist in Germany, Australia, and other countries, I am quite certain that these should exist in Austria as well. OSM is a global project. Anyway tagging gates with access values is accepted standard for many years and practiced all over the world, if you think this is wrong, we should probably move this discussion to the mailing list or forum.
closed by fkv (2018-04-15 14:10:01+00:00): You did not name a single example, but who cares. According to key:access definition, "Access values are used to describe the legal access for highways and other transportation networks". This cleary does not apply to this gate. Map notes are for mapping errors or adding information to the map. There is no error here, neither did you provide additional information. Please don't abuse the map notes feature.
commented by boldtrn (2018-04-16 00:35:44+00:00): Please let me know if you struggle with understanding the examples, I can provide them in German if that helps :).

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:barrier#Access_control_on_highways

Useful combinations: access

Also see: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/barrier#combinations

Please don't randomly close notes.
closed by fkv (2018-04-16 02:46:22+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:barrier#Access_control_on_highways is not about the access=* tag, and a tag listed as useful combination does not make its use obligatory.