Hello,

I think the convenience shop here should be mapped as a separate node. This will avoid confusion with some tags, e.g. opening hours: 24/7 is presumably only for the fuel station, isn’t it?

What is the difference between the two areas? Shouldn’t it treated as one single object?

Done.

OK, thanks for spotting this. If that is a mistake, I can restore the previous shape, then. In that case, I suggest adding a note tag on the building itself saying the shape was confirmed by surveying and that UrbIS data should not be followed for this building.

(UrbisAdm is the official georeference in Brussels but just like any government source it occasionally contains mistakes and might be outdated when it comes to new or recently deleted buildings; the case for number 120 is fairly obvious, though.)

Out of curiosity, what are those 3D maps you are talking about?

Hello, Mizuna,

The object here is the name of exit #2 of the station.
node/4659808072

On my last survey notes (2022), I have records the signs inside the station mention "Parking Ceria", and this name matches the values we obtained in the official GTFS.

"CERIA - COOVI" is the name of the station itself, of course, but the case here is about the name of the entrance.

Are you sure the entrance really has the same name as the station? Do you know when they changed this?

Hello,

On OSM, phone numbers must be exclusively in international format
+32025346330 is not a valid number. The "0" is a local prefix solely when doing calls within Belgium and without the international prefix.
+3225346330 is the correct form.
(+32 2 534 63 30 is even better).

Also, postal zones and cities are already defined as areas for almost all of Belgium. We should never fill addr:city and addr:postcode manually for every object, it does not make sense (and our experience is also that it’s where we see the largest number of errors in the database). Next time, save time and don’t bother filling those. :-)

Hope this helps.

Hello,

I would like to react to the changeset description here. It is not correct to state that an option does not exist… in OpenStreetMap. It just doesn’t exist in the editing software you are using. Every piece of software provides a list of options but choosing another value is always possible.

surface=bark has 313 occurrences in the OSM database so far. It surely does exist. However, we recommend using surface=woodchips instead, this tag is understood by most apps. Sometimes we have to simplify some choices to reduce tag fragmentation, since OSM is a large ecosystem with plenty of apps using our data.

Have a nice day.

Hello,

I know this place and the two images you associated with those bicycle stands are not here.

Could you please check again and fix the image tag to link to the correct ones, if such photos are available.

Hello and welcome on OSM, I see this is one of your first contributions.

I suppose you are associated with "Hors Catégorie Drohme" for which you added a café tag on the large building in another changeset.

I am afraid the type of object added here is not correct.
A "bicycle repair station" in OSM words is something very small, see an example here: amenity=bicycle%20repair%20station

The name: "Départ Hors Catégorie Cycling Club" is probably meant for something else.

I think we should do it differently: there is a dedicated tag for bicycle repair places which provide different kinds of services to cyclists. If you can give me some more details, e.g. the official name of that place and whether it is part of the same building as the café, I can fix the tags for you.

Have a nice day.

@Jhowie_Nitnek: In version 11 of this object, I had removed the name after finding out through a survey that the name is not shown anywhere and only lives in the mind of the person who authored the first brochure. Yet, you reinstated it in version 12. After that, I called the people in charge at the city administration, who told me they have no indication of a decision about an official name for this passageway. (I admit it was my fault not to erase the name again, it is still stuck in the middle of a long pile of things to do.)

I think we must get to the idea that not everything in OSM has to have a name.

Thanks @RaphaelPasloin for having provided more research here. I didn’t know there was a new version of the brochure. I think we can settle this and remove the name. You can do what I did for version 11, i.e. put the Hilton name as alt_name. That way, it can still be found with the embedded search bar in OSM (which we call "Nominatim").

Thanks for your reply.

Yes, it is a good idea when you see an unusual name or an obvious mistake in the official name. In OSM the "note" tag of an object is made for this, this is to alert other mappers so that they will think twice before "fixing" the mistake. You might want to write something like: "The English name is really spelt Bethlëem on the display."

Just for fun, a selection of nice use of the note tag.
* way/785865648
* way/224879823
* node/4418285657

Hello,

Would you mind having a second look at the information board named "Chêteau-ferme de Bethléem - De Kasteelhoeve van Bethlehem - Das Burggehöft "Bethlehem" - The Bethlëem chateau-farm".

Either the sign itself is misspelt, or the names have not been typed correctly in OSM, because:
* French name: shouldn’t it be Château?
* English name: Bethlehem is the expected spelling.

What do you think?

Hello,

The street name is written in two languages (way/552235079) and the building addresses only in Dutch (way/143399967). This might cause validation issues.

Shouldn’t this be unified to the same naming convention for all of them?

Hello,

Where does the English translation come from? Is it official?

Hello,

If this is just the garden at the back of a house, you should better add access=private + garden:type=residential.

Otherwise, it will be assimilated to a public garden. People sometimes query OsmAnd or other apps to look for the nearest garden for a walk.

Hope this helps.

Bad edit - fixed by changeset/128138155
(street names and addresses in Brussels must be written in both official languages + geometry fixes)

### User LAUBPO ignored changeset comments
### Bad edit flagged for deletion or modification

Bad edit - fixed by changeset/129567525
(incorrect use of addr:unit + user randomly moved buildings by tracing from uncalibrated imagery)

Hello,

Thanks for adding a restaurant.

I think there is a problem in the way you are using Organic Maps.

When you add a point to the map, there is a text box "Name of the place" where you can add the name. Please pay attention to the _language_ indicated here. It looks like you only add the Italian translation. In the list of languages, there is an option named "Native for each country" → this is the field to use for the main name.

Your edit here merely says: "This restaurant has no name (no name to be shown on the map)… but here is a translation into Italian = Mangiavino." This is a bit strange because every time you edit something we’ll have to repair it.

(I agree it’s a shame that Organic Maps does not provide an easy way to avoid this mistake.)

Hope this helps.

Hello,

Thanks for adding charging points, this is useful information to have on the map.

Just one thing: such a point should not have a *name*. Naming the operator and giving the ref code is enough (and "charge.brussels" is not a name). I removed the name on this station and others you added in the last couple of weeks.

Your work is appreciated, it will take a lot of time before we can collect all of them. This is because charge.brussels did not allow us to copy items from its website (for copyright reasons).