wycofane

osm.org/changeset/166589485

Thanks for the fix!

I jak to się stało że raz nazwa jedna a potem druga? Skąd się wzięły?

Skąd ta nazy które tu dodano w tej edycji? Z jakiego źródła się biorą?

Skąd ta nazy które tu dodano w tej edycji? Z jakiego źródła się biorą?

Can you take a look at osm.org/note/4766606 ?

You added disused:amenity=pharmacy without removing healthcare=pharmacy

what you wanted to achieve?

> foreigner walking into a Japanese shrine ground and calling it a mere garden

mapping garden of cultural and religious significance as a garden is fine and does not preclude mapping it also as place of worship or historic monument

in the same way using standard place= tagging does not preclude mapping local legal/cultural peculiarities with other tags

> In order to know if something is an apartment you have to know the local customs, the economic and legal rules that define that building's usage

especially legal rules have limited influence
for example, if something is a prison then government declaring it Happy Sunny Reeducation Camp does not preclude us from mapping it as a prison

legal rules defining village of 35 people as a city does not require us to map it as a place=city

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/24xM has some similar cases (shop= with opening_hours=closed)

> You can't make these calls in any meaningful way without understanding the local customs, laws, and terminology.

local customs, laws, and terminology can be tagged somehow, but place=* is not about local laws/customs/terminology

if village of 25 people is called "city" due to some local legal tradition it does not become place=city (but maybe new tag can be invented for this)

I guess I can implement opt-out - can you post list of ways which you want to retag to sidewalk=none in https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/sidewalk-none-to-no-proposed-automated-edit/128842/ thread?

I guess that I can also exclude ways you last edited but in such case when someone else edits way it will be later retagged

In either case this can be still retagged manually

what is your reason for retagging it to sidewalk=none ?

it means the same and it just makes harder to process data

general migration was approved and in https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/sidewalk-none-to-no-proposed-automated-edit/128842/15 you claimed that both values mean the same and that edit is pointless - so I am confused why you are making the same kind of edit that you claimed to be pointless, just in an opposite direction

Hello! osm.org/way/1148103146/history has roof:type = dome that was added in this edit
Maybe roof:shape=dome was intended here?

See osm.wiki/Key:roof:shape

Hello! osm.org/way/640284105/history has roof = crosspitched that was added in this edit
Maybe roof:shape=crosspitched was intended here?

See osm.wiki/Key:roof:shape and osm.wiki/Key:roof

Hello! osm.org/node/12092170017/history has fixme:type = bank that was added in this edit
Would amenity=bank fit here? See osm.wiki/Tag:amenity=bank

Hello! osm.org/node/11799300846/history has fixme:type = park that was added in this edit
Have you tried to map a park here? If yes, then maybe leisure=park would fit?

See osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark

For start, thanks for mapping and have a good mappy happy day!

For this location: I opened note then, see osm.org/note/4766857

And how I found it? I am trying to fix amenity=fixme broken tagging, see https://github.com/Zverik/every_door/issues/880

osm.org/node/3093602337/history#map=19/50.806662/19.117776

ta apteka to nie istnieje? Pytam się bo healthcare=pharmacy zostało

re osm.org/note/4766604

yes, ED has a known bug about pharmacies, I reported it at https://github.com/Zverik/every_door/issues/905

and thanks for checking here!

I asked in osm.org/changeset/150689265

If they do not reply I plan to revert them

Is this building existing now? Are there at least real plans for building it? If there are no serious plans for it - that should be entirely deleted. If construction started then building=construction is a better tag. If construction is upcoming then source for this claim should be tagged on the geometry itself (source tag, note tag) and different tagging should be used - we are mapping proposed features in OpenStreetMap very sparingly, not every promise or business plan should be mapped here.