Merci mais c'est mieux de créer des points pour y indiquer ces infos. Ne pas écrire directement sur le bâtiment, svp.

Refait ici : node/13295210649

The address was already on the map node/12064738244 and is already properly linked to the object.

Please do not duplicate addresses.
We fixed your edit.

Hello,

This edit contradicts the access permission for service vehicles, which had been explicitely set in the previous version.
Can you review the changeset title for version 12 here and confirm that the situation has really changed?
way/24581540/history/12

Also, please be aware that "designated" is meaningless as an access tag in Belgium. This is a problem with the iD editor, but "designated" only makes sense in the UK or Germany, not here. We use foot=yes and bicycle=yes, and not foot=designated or bicycle=designated.

If it is a cycleway, just add "highway=cycleway" and possibly add "foot=yes" if it is shared with pedestrians. Nothing more.

It is recommended to avoid piling access tags like "access=yes" (allow everyone) + motor_vehicle=no (disallow motor_vehicles). This approach always creates unwanted drawbacks for routing (it allows mopeds, horses…)

You may want to have a look at this table, to understand how many default access tags apply as long as you set it as a cycleway, footway or normal road.
osm.wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Belgium

Hello, and welcome to OSM.

Adding new restaurants or businesses to the map is welcome.

However, please make sure not to create addresses on them. The address for nbr 120 in this street was already on the map and you inadvertently created a duplicate.

I reviewed your 3 edits from today, to fix a few tagging issues.

Happy mapping, and don’t hesitate to add more places.

Hello,

Good work for the roads. However, when you split a road in JOSM, make sure you have downloaded its parent relations first, so that they can be updated too.

I noticed that this edit invalided a large number of bus relations because of that. Relations that were not in your JOSM download will still refer to the old sequence of ways and will have gaps.

Hope this helps.

Hello,

More than 536 edits on this account’s first day so far!

This looks like an undiscussed massive import, I couldn’t find any discussion about it.
osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines

Incidently, some values seem to be unlikely.

Thanks for the reply. I made it a polygon, then.
way/1448379611

Isn’t this the same as node/1839362228

Names in upper case, please.

The correct way to write a street name on our map is like this: "Rue Justin Gillet".
Not "rue justin gillet".

Your edit has been redone.
Thanks.

Hello, and welcome to OSM.

Thanks for this… unfortunately we had to redo your edit, which created problems.

Mapping as a simple node without duplicating the address is a much better way to map objects on OSM.
node/13285339950

## REVERTED CHANGESET

School already on the map.
node/10972203050

You added a building inside the existing building. Please do not do this.

Hello,

I do not know what you want to do but I had a look at the various "maproulette" edits which you did in Brussels in the last hours. It looks like a quest about schools but you did not add any school, you merely added extra buildings.

It looks like you are actually drawing buildings on top of the existing buildings. I am afraid that is is not correct. Almost all buildings in Brussels are already properly mapped. Perhaps you wanted to map school polygons but mapped buildings instead.

I will inspect those edits but most of them should be entirely reverted.

If you only remove the name but keep "amenity=pub", then the map shows… a pub with no name.

To clarify, ¿Was your intention here to map: 1) A pub is still there, even if it not Dynastie anymore. or 2) There is currently no pub at all.

Should that be the second option, change the main tag into "disused:amenity=pub". If you do not know how to do it, just reply under this comment and I’ll do it.

Hello,

I am afraid there is a mistake here.

The reason we did not have "name:fr"="Cortenbergh" before is not that we forgot, it is because the official name set by the government is to use "Kortenberg" both in Dutch and in French.

https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/eli/arrete/1988/06/24/1988000115/justel

If you really want to use the alternative form, please consider "alt_name:fr"

## REVERTED CHANGESET

See changeset/174152653 for details.

## REVERTED CHANGESET

Hello,

This street is located on the border between two municipalities, and this is a rare case where the name differs on both sides:

It is called "Rue du Noyer - Notelaarsstraat" on the western side (City of Brussels), notice the double S in the Dutch name.

And it is called "Rue du Noyer - Notelaarstraat" on the eastern side (Schaerbeek), notice the single S in the Dutch name.

Each address belongs only to *one* municipality, therefore we had carefully reviewed all the addresses here so that each address correctly matches.

Your edit incorrectly erased all the addresses on the western side… to copy the compound text which we use for the street name (the street name includes both names, even if we add name:left and name:right on it).

I understand you are new and probably did not realise that your edit would be damaging.

Please do not change the addresses of houses in Brussels, everything is already under control.

Your two edits of today (174152653 and 174153028) have been reverted.

I can understand that but you edited "cycleway:right", which is towards G. Jacques. The way is drawn from north to south here. Right and Left on an OSM way are not synonymous with East and West. Right and Left are always relative to the direction where the street was drawn.

cycleway:left (towards Brussels) was already correctly set as "share_busway".

## REVERTED CHANGESET

Sorry to contradict you, but this change for Avenue de la Couronne/Kroonlaan is wrong.

On the small part from Fritz Toussaint to G. Jacques, cyclists have their own lane away from the bus lane.

Hello,

It looks like you did not really fix any problem.

You simply added layer=-1 to relation/9647700 in order to evade the validator warning… but without solving the underlying problem of crossing ways. It is like sweeping dust under the carpet. :-(

One more suggestion: Please take some time reading this page. It contains useful hints to improve the way you describe your changes in the OSM database.
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Hello,

In the past years, we have been working hard to *remove* all duplicate information from the various POI (schools, shops…) in order to keep the database clean.

It is very annoying to see new users reintroducing the bad tags. You probably did not know and I am sure you genuinely believed it would be helpful to us… unfortunately it isn’t.

Please be kind and do not add addresses on places. All the address points in Brussels are already on the map, they should not be duplicated.

I’ll spend some time cleaning up your latest edits now.

Kind regards.