Adding and changing data in OSM that is accurate and correct is great. Incorrectly changing OSM data to work around the limitations of another program is absolutely not. Not even temporarily.

If you want to use OSM data with some other program and doing so would require making incorrect changes to OSM you have two options:

1) fix the program to work with the correct data
2) download the osm data and make your changes offline

Diskussion hier fortgeführt: changeset/132920258

Habe ursprünglich hier kommentiert aber werde das jetzt hier weiterführen

changeset/132919460

Die Einstufung im digitalen Atlas Steiermark ist für die Straßenkategorie in OSM hier irrelevant. Der `highway`=* tag wird durch die Relevanz der Straßen für den Verkehr bestimmt.

Hallo, du hast hier die Straßenkategorie von einigen wichtigen Straßen in Graz heruntergesetzt. War das mit der lokalen Community abgesprochen bzw. was ist der Grund für diese Änderungen?

lg, Woazboat

If you want these roads to show up as cart paths in your golf game, poke the maintainer of your import tool to take a look at https://github.com/chadrockey/TGC-Designer-Tools/issues/94 and merge the changes in https://github.com/chadrockey/TGC-Designer-Tools/pull/119 instead of incorrectly modifying OSM data

Finding, reporting and fixing vandalism IS the responsibility of all OSM contributors and that includes @emersonveenstra.

If your changes violate the established mapping practice, they shouldn't be in OSM. That includes 'temporary' changes(/vandalism) to the shared global map just so you can import the data for some game. If you want to do that, make your changes to a local file and import that.

I don't see the problem with changing the unconventional mast:type to the accepted tower:type, but tags definitely shouldn't simply be removed.

Hi, you are changing a lot of place names across the US but you didn't provide a source for these changes.
What's the basis for these edits?

Regards, Woazboat

Hi, please don't attach residential landuse (or any landuse really) to roads. It makes things much harder to edit.
lg, Woazboat

Hi,

du hast hier in diesem Changeset einige Wege und Überquerungen hinzugefügt die (teilweise) bereits vorhandene Wege/Überquerungen duplizieren. Bitte achte darauf ob es schon bestehende Objekte gibt die man wiederverwenden kann/sollte.

Parallel laufende Rad- und Fußwege sollten nur getrennt gezeichnet werden wenn sie durch eine physische Barriere getrennt sind

lg, Woazboat

s/operator/brand/ , wobei hier beides gleich ist

> (...) dass Kunden in erster Linie nach "nextbike" suchen und nicht nach dem Standort.

Das ist aber immer noch kein Grund "nextbike" als Namen zu setzen. Das wäre falsches Tagging. Apps/Suchmaschinen können genauso gut nach `amenity=bicycle_rental` + `operator=<xyz>` suchen. Auf z.B. Bankomaten wird die betreibende Bank auch als `operator`=* getaggt und nicht als `name`=*.

Der Anbieter (e.g. "nextbike") gehört in den `operator`=* Tag und nicht in den Namen. Wenn kein expliziter Name für eine bestimmte Station angegeben ist dann gehört einfach keiner gesetzt (bzw. `noname=yes`)

Your interpretation of "there are no banned tags" is incorrect. It does not mean that you are free to add whatever nonsensial tags you like. What it means that you can add any information that is (among other things but most importantly):

1) Verifiable
2) Useful (i.e. actually provide meaningful information)
3) Accepted by the community
(This does not mean that absolutely everyone has to agree or even pre-approve, but it should at least follow local conventions. It also doesn't mean that you always have to ask first before inventing new tags, but if you don't you need to be prepared for pushback and disapproval like in this case)

> seek community consensus for this. Then you may make the change again.

Adding my 2 cents here to support the removal of `service=driveway2`. It does not provide any value whatsoever and does not convey any additional information. All service ways that can be considered drveways should be tagged with the already existing and widely accepted tag `service=driveway` and those that are not should NOT be tagged simply for the reason of having a `service`=* tag. The notion that "every `highway=service` absolutely needs to have a `service`=* tag" is plainly wrong. If there is some additional or extended classification of service roads that allows for more fine grained distinction and **actually means anything**, then sure, go ahead and tag that (after consultation with the community). `driveway2` does not fall into that category. (What is the 2 even supposed to mean?)

Um das Renderingproblem hier aufzuklären: `shop=supermarket` war gar nicht eingetragen. Ich hab's jetzt ergänzt.

Hmmm, I can't see anything on the aerial images that looks like a farm or farmland but I could be wrong.

In other places there's nothing left ( e.g.node/9839367684) which is why I retagged it to place=locality.
abandoned:place=farm would probably be better if there really was farm there at some point, but I didn't think of that at the time. place=farm is supposed to be for farms that are still in use, so I don't think it's the correct tagging for cases like this.

node/2399403377 should simply be merged with relation/7828912

node/2399403377 this also isn't really a `natural=bay`

Hi, I think your import has a few problems. A ton of locations are tagged as `place=farm`, which is clearly incorrect and sometimes duplicates already present information (e.g. node/9839367685)

Hi, amenity=ferry_terminal ist hier wohl etwas fehl am Platz. Für einen Fährhafen ist die Mur doch etwas zu klein. (Und SUPs als Fähren zu bezeichnen wäre etwas gewagt)

way/977911227

lg, Woazboat