Hey Jaap,

Dit lijkt mij een dierenwinkel met post als partner, dus toevoegen aan dierenwinkel -ipv apart- als
post_office=post_partner

osm.wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dpost_office#Shop_as_post_partner

Als je twijfelt kan je dit navragen op het forum.

Groet,

Daniel

Hey Jaap,

Dit lijkt een hobbywinkel met workshops ('training') te zijn, dus
shop=craft + training=yes

osm.wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcraft

Als je twijfelt kan je dit navragen op het forum.

Groet,

Daniel

Beste Xyberion,

Als je zelf al deze foto's hebt genomen, vermeldt het er dan alsjeblieft bij. Al behoudt de eigenaar van de content de rechten op hun content -dus ook voor gebruik in OpenStreetMap-, zonder expliciete vermelding van de bron (de auteur), kunnen andere mappers het idee krijgen dat deze bron (de website) te gebruiken is voor OpenStreetMap. Dit is echter niet zo lijkt mij, voor zover ik dit heb bekeken is content buiten de eigenaar om onderhevig aan auteursrechten (copyright).
Zie de Terms of Use voor Wikiloc
https://www.wikiloc.com/wikiloc/terms_en.html
( wklcdn.com stuurt door naar wikiloc.com )

Anders (als je niet de eigenaar bent, dan wel ter informatie):
We kunnen niet zomaar zonder de juiste licentie of expliciete, geschreven toestemming data -in welke vorm dan ook- gebruiken in OpenStreetMap e.d.
Bekijk de licentie van OpenStreetMap;
osm.wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility
(Zie ook: osm.wiki/Import/Getting_permission )
Als dit het geval is, neem dan contact op met de Data-werkgroep om je edits te laten terugzetten (redacteren)..
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group

Overigens zou het handig zijn als deze foto's geupload zijn op een website die per definitie het gebruik in OpenStreetMap toelaat, zoals Mapillary, KartaView (was: OpenStreetCam) of Wikimedia Commons (hier moet de licentie wel zelf aangegeven worden).

Ik zou daarnaast graag een antwoord krijgen op dit bericht. Dan weten mappers zoals ik dat je het gelezen hebt.

Groet,

Daniel

Hey marek,

Across several changesets, you have introduced numerous redundant and/or unfinished empty ways. This may be considered poor mapping if continued.

Could you fix or remove these empty ways, please? You should also be able to find these in the JOSM validator.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey TheAdventurer64,

Noteably, I am the author of said issue and it's not relevant in discussing this user's edits.

In the case they continue to contribute without replying -in this changeset, not elsewhere-, please report them to the DWG. Thanks.

Hey Jaski Singh,

For discussions regarding sensitive data, please contact the following working groups:

OSM US Trails Working Group
Mainly regarding the trails around such areas.
https://www.openstreetmap.us/2021/12/osmus-trails-working-group

OSMF Data Working Group
Regarding removal -redaction- of data and any disputes.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group

Regards,

Daniel

osm.org/way/1058442952/history

Are you sure this way's width is 25 meters?

Regards,

Daniel

Resolved in
osm.org/changeset/120646414

@mueschel seems like a simple typo to me (user unknowing how to tag multiple values), it's multiple values of traffic_sign. Looking at Wikipedia, these are 'valid'(be it now renamed) values for traffic signs:
- 231 / B5: "Give way." = Yield sign
- 863 / H23 "Two-way cycle path."
And, used in the right place, namely a bicycle crossing (only difference being a traffic island between the two flows of bicycle traffic).

Of course, the yield sign may apply to the cycleway and the traffic signs could be seperated and direction, support tag added to indicate they're facing different ways.

This user had been inactive for more than a year since you asked. You could check if their other edits look ok, but otherwise it may be better to try fixing such an issue yourself where you can.

Regards,

Daniel

Oops, I meant ind_ref => int_ref

Hey moszkva ter,

You have gotten multiple comments regarding good changeset comments, but so far have ignored them.
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=495146

Continuing to use these bad changeset comments may be considered as spam.

Reply to this comment, please. This way other users will know you are reading it.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey APneunzehn74,

You have added a barrier tagged barrier=yes. From your edits, I assume you are surveying. Usually, it should be possible to distinguish the type of barrier when surveying.
osm.wiki/Key:barrier

Regards,

Daniel

Read this wiki page, please.
osm.wiki/What%27s_the_problem_with_mechanical_edits%3F#Large_changesets

See also
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Contact mappers -at least publicly- if they make mistakes where possible (at least if they're still active), please..
I've left a comment here:
osm.org/changeset/92667430

Also, I would not recommend starting editing in OSM by validating others edits.
Everyone makes mistakes.
Start by editing yourself, learn about OSM and mapping, connect with the community and have fun! :-)

Regards,

Daniel

osm.org/node/8019211076/history
"Por lo general, va en bicicleta al trabajo."? Removed in
osm.org/changeset/120475666

Do not add subjective/personal/private information, please.

osm.wiki/Verifiability

osm.wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information

Regards,

Daniel

osm.org/node/3196182587

Second hand books: Yes or Only?
POI is tagged with both
"second_hand"="yes"; and
"books"="secondhand"

Remove redundant tag "books"="secondhand" -and change the "second_hand" tag yourself if needed- if you know this for sure from your survey.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey Joel,

Welkom terug bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Ik zou je eerdere wijzigingensets graag willen reviewen, maar jammergenoeg heb ik hier niet de tijd voor.

Groet,

Daniel

namens de OpenStreetMap-gemeenschap

*protect_class, but they did fix it correctly.

"
Hello Daniel,

I admit I made a mistake, for all protect_class taggs for most of the protected areas I edited.

About the source, I am still consulting a lawyer , so far she told me that if I use openstreetmap data to draw boundaries, OSM should be part of the source.

Best regards,

Paul-Emmanuel
"
The typo in the tag is not a big deal. Don't worry.

As for the source, I am still refering to the source in your changeset.. I mean, you should say what satelite layer you mapped on top of (Bing, Esri, Esri Clarity, Mapbox, Maxar Premium), but you don't need to say you drew on top of the existing OSM data in your OSM changeset. If you also used the "OpenStreetMap (Standard)" layer (what you see on the right hand side), you can choose to say so, but it's not that important.

For using OSM's data outside of OSM, see
osm.org/copyright

If you have questions or want more information on licensing either your data for OSM or the OSM data for elsewhere, it may be best to contact the Licensing Working Group (LWG);
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_Working_Group
(see also for FAQ etc.)

In addition to your or their name, you can write "local knowledge" as your source.

I did find a typo in your tagging, namely "protection_class" should be "protect_class" - only "protection_title" is spelled out fully.
I assume you are refering to
osm.wiki/Key:protect_class
We could fix this on all of your edits if that's indeed the case.

Ok. How did you collect the data? Is this your (or others') local knowledge, or did you survey (go out and look around) every one of these?