Shouldn‘t that be addr:unit?

Was für eine Probe?
Außerdem: Testdaten sollte man nicht in der OSM Produktion abladen, sondern dafür eher den Test-API-Server nutzen: osm.wiki/Sandbox_for_editing

Was soll das genau sein? Und sollte das überhaupt gemappt werden, wenn es offenbar keine Tags dazu gibt?

Na gut, dann viel Spaß mit anderen mappern die über diese ungültige Node auch mit ihren Validatorn stolpern und sie dann "reparieren".

Gute frage. Das macht für mich auch wenig Sinn. Vor allem, da ich in dem Changeset sonst eher nur Geometrien oder Tags die bereits existierten korrigiert habe.
Aber, "Felstor", was soll das heißen. Vlt kam daher meine Assoziation zu gate her. Aber was soll diese node eigentlich sein? Hat ja nur eine Note und ein fixme. Ist insofern nicht korrekt gemappt. Soll es als cave getagged sein?

Please only use common value-tags for shop. (Look it up on the osm wiki if unsure which tag to use) Don’t make up your weird own one.

the platform nodes do not need the bus stop tag here, as it is on the stop position. Could I ask you to pleasse revert all these changes on bus-platforms? The id-validator shows this as a warning as it ignores the stop_positions nearby.
Thanks
RobinD. (emergency99)

Please do not add highway=bus_stop tags onto platforms in Vienna/Austria. They are already tagged on the stop_position.

Highway bus stop tags are on the stop position, no need to add them to the platform nodes.

OK, so the problem with the "highway=pedestrian/footway" is, that it might override "highway=platform" which is also valid in most platforms with a line or a polygon.
Also, in Vienna, I mapped the (legacy) bus_stop tag on the (optional) stop positions instead of the stations.
It is just recommended that it is there, but as the public_transport:v2 scheme doesn't even include it, it can be wherever. It needs to be on a node however, which makes stop_position the better contendor, as platform can also be a line, polygon or multi-poiygon.

There has been a discussion on the transport mailing list recently, and the problem is, that not everyone likes the current scheme, so everybody maps it differently in regard to the legacy tags.

Vienna and the east of austria is in that way consistently mapped with the bus stop on the road and platform tags on the sides.
If you want to correctly evaluate, you use "public_transport=platform" anyway. Not old legacy tags. Just my view on the issue.

Also the makers of the validators do not strictly stick to schemes but rather their own ways of doing it.

If we ever get a (better) new p_t sheme that utilises the busstop tag properly, i'd be ready to remap, but for now, I think the way it is here is decent and needs absolutely no corrections...

Kind Regards
RobinD (emergency99)

Hi,

please be careful with the id editor error messages. A few are slightly wrong.

EG: It turns platforms into “footways” and ads the “bus_stop” tag to platform nodes, altough that tag is mapped in vienna on the stop position.

Please abstain from editing platforms with that error tool in vienna and in general...

Thanks

Please stop this nonsense edit! The name:en is not “Deutsch”!

I'd say so many missing names are just a dump. And are the ones where the name is set correct? Most are in russian? I still highly doubt the accuracy. (Re)adding any of this should only be done when the exakt position and name. Take "node/6456392626/history" for example. There is something already mapped,just the user put a "viewpoint" note with name "the best view" there. Pure Nonsense. As long as some of theses entries are of that quality, I see that as harmful spam.

If anything, you should ask on changeset/69997350 how this person knows all of those random places without names in the middle of roads or so on. But don't bother, theses maps.me users do never answer. They don't even know they upload their private nodes to OSM.

These nodes were a maps.me app dump of unnamed nodes, mostly in the middle of streets or some other unrelated places. It is a typical list that users of the app accidently upload to osm. These are all merly some "bookmarks" someone made at places they either visited or wanted to visit then dumped onto osm. No value in them. Look at the original changeset. If you find any useful node, I invite you to remap it.

Hallo, ich bin’s nochmal. Wenn Flixbus echt Zusätzlicher Betreiber drinnen sein soll, dann bitte mit ; trennen also etwa: “Flixbus;Gumdrop”. Wobei die Frage ist, ob die in die Betreiber-Felder reingehören. Fahren ja nix selber...

Wunderbar. Vielen Dank für die Arbeit mit den Fernbussen.

Hi, die Flixbusse werden ja alle von privaten Firmen im Auftrag von Flixbus betrieben. Insofern wäre es eventuell beim Operator tag der Linien die jeweilige Betreiberfirma der Relation einzutragen, sofern bekannt. Weiß nur selber grad keine Seite wo das bekannt gegeben wird...

Will this Spam of that goddamn application ever stop?

Was wird das, wenn es fertig ist?
What is that going to be?