Exactly because there are so many socket types defined, and the tag definition is put up in such a way that you can't add a POI unless you know the exact socket type. This goes against the way OSM defines tags in general. I can not get around that without either changing the complete socket tag definition, or adding the generic "domestic" type.

Dat is een typisch voorbeeld van "Tagging for the renderer" osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Ik zie dat je een aantal voetpaden in service wegen veranderd hebt. (Zelfs in het Huis van de Vijf Zintuigen!) Als regel in OpenStreetMap geldt dat dit soort zaken ter plekker verifiseert moeten kunnen worden. Het is waar dat dit voetplein ook voor dienstvoertuigen gebruikt wordt, maar ik zie ter plekke niets wat dit een eigen dienstweg maakt...

I can understand the idea behind this, but emojis do not form a "name". Even if you could call emoji a language (which I doubt), it does not have a concept of names.

It would fit beter with it's own tag ("emoji" maybe?), and then you could go even further and also add things like 🗻 (Mount Fuji) and 🗽 (Statue of Liberty).

But personally, I think it's a bad idea.

Hi, this import overwrote both custom opening hours and website addresses

Hi, why did you remove the oneway on Prinsens gate? There is a sign on the crossing with Dronningens gate that says it's not allowed to drive further north for cars. I agree the situation is very unclear (for example, no indication of this coming from either direction of Dronningens gate), but it is how I interpreted the situation. Maybe I misunderstood?

The guy is called Olav Nygard, not Olav Nygård. :-) https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olav_Nygard

Was de surface tag op osm.org/way/444809961 niet in orde?

We worden in ieder geval bezig gehouden :) Bedankt voor al het werk!

Bedankt voor de wijziging! Sorry, ik zeur een beetje, maar als het een C12 bord is (ziet er ook zo uit op Mapillary) zou het dan niet motor_vehicle:backward=no moeten zijn? En misschien zelfs oneway=yes met bicycle:backward=yes. Sorry, ben niet bekend met de situatie, maar werd er door m'n zus op gewezen... :-)

Hei Steinar! A sidewalk ("pavement") is not a bicycle way. Just the fact that cyclists are allowed to cycle somewhere, does not make it a cycleway. You can add bicycle=yes or even bicycle=designated on sidewalks if you want, but the correct tagging for a sidewalk is highway=footway + footway=sidewalk.

Hi Magnus, thanks for all the details you have put into the map! I have a few comments for you:

- Footway=sidewalk should only be used in combination with highway=footway. It can not be used together with highway=pedestrian. I tend to use highway=pedestrian only for ways that are considerably broader than normal footpaths, for example at least 3m broad.

- When addind sidewalks, make sure you connect them to all road crossings, otherwise routing software can not let pedestrians cross the road there. For example, the sidewalk on the east side of Sverres gate is not connected to the service road on the other side, between Schønninghuset and Kalvskinnet garasje, so routing software can not let pedestrians cross the road there. I tend to draw sidewalks as separate elements only on roads that are so broad or busy that pedestrians should only cross at pedestrian crossings. For smaller roads, I just add the sidewalk=both tag.

- Adding area=yes to road outlines was a really nice idea to show the complete road surface. However, this tag should only be used on real "driveable areas", not lineair roads. The best indication for this is that the higher level roads (primary, secondary) do not support the area=yes tag. Instead, use the area:highway=* tag, which sadly has very little support. (OsmAnd supports it though.)

Yeah, now to find the names of the rest of the statues... :-)

Hoi Eggie,

ik ben het helemaal eens met je redenering. En ik zie op https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=61514 dat het inderdaad problematisch is om de juiste tagging voor Nederland te vinden. (Ik woon tegenwoordig in Noorwegen, en daar hebben we natuurlijk veel "streams".)

Je mag het reverten, of anders doe ik het vanavond. Ik zal ook kijken of ik een betere tag kan vinden voor de kanalen die ik in de Benedentuin en in de Kroondomeinen heb geplaatst.

Hi eggie, I'm sorry but I am reverting way #575452449 back into canal. As a rule of thumb, canals are man-made, straight and with even width, while streams are natural and have constantly changing course and dimensions. As you can see on https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/ZamTQ3N4oCesiKTvmFrtMA, this is clearly man-made. (If you zoom in, you can even see the metal borders to define the edges of the canal.)

Actually, 613868955 isn't a bridge, the stream goes underground here (https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/piqQ6heknRYA7jVwdI5rrg). I'm putting out an updated changeset soon :-)

@observer, is that the common method in the Netherlands? A single address can host several facilities, even if it doesn't currently yet. It has been my understanding that facilities (like a shop) should not be combined with address nodes. (As in, "One Feature One Element".)

> amenity=bench and bin and shelter in the same object is not correct.

It's not -- it's amenity=shelter with bench=yes and bin=no. With several thousand of uses, this seems like perfectly fine tagging to me. Ref https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=shelter#combinations and osm.wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dshelter

Isn't "Les Trois Vallées" (way 297894486) the same feature as "Les 3 Vallées" (way 45117869)?

Can you tell me what bike routing algorithm it is that only takes into account highway=bicycle? Footways and bicycle ways are different things, you should NOT change tagging just because some algorithm or renderer doesn't work as you want it to. Especially in Norway this is unfortunate, since it is allowed to cycle on sidewalks (which by OSM definition are footways). Instead, you should use bike=yes or bike=designated on footpaths where it is common to bicycle. If your bike routing algorithm does not support that, then the algorithm needs to be changed, not the map.