Hello,
node/931633008/history is now wheelchair=yes;no . Do you have any idea which should it be?

Hello,
A merge somewhere has made way/132716669/history "wheelchair=yes;no". I'm guessing it should be one or the other?

If you download the relation as it was in Josm between changes you can see one of the problems:

[out:xml][timeout:90][date:"2025-12-26T23:00:00Z"];
(
relation(6270840);
);
(._;>;);
out meta;

There's a gap corresponding to the section under the N69. I've no idea why Josm would do this - it is very odd.

I added the two new missing ways a few days later:
https://osm.mapki.com/history/relation/6270840

I've reverted this in changeset/176713986

Merci!

Hello,
Thanks for adding these to OpenStreetMap! A quick question about "Together for nepal office" node/6698508587 - what sort of office is it? Normally an office would have an "office=<something>" tag and value, where <something> is from the list at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/office#values . Perhaps "office=ngo" would work here ("ngo" stands for "non-governmental organisation")?
Best Regards,
Andy

Bonjour,

Merci d'avoir ajouté ces informations à OpenStreetMap ! J'ai une petite question concernant « INSO » (way/192688218) : de quel type de bureau s'agit-il ? Normalement, un bureau possède une balise et une valeur de type « office=<quelque chose> », où <quelque chose> correspond à la liste disponible sur https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/office#values. Peut-être que « office=ngo » conviendrait ici (« ngo » signifiant « organisation non gouvernementale ») ?

Cordialement,

Andy

Hello,
Thanks for adding these to OpenStreetMap! A quick question about "The All Island Jamaica Cane Farmers' Association" - if you look at node/11049752768 you can see that it is between two buildings. I'm guessing that it is in the one to the northeast or the one to the northwest - do you happen to know which one it is?
Also, what sort of office is it? Normally an office would have an "office=<something>" tag and value, where <something> is from the list at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/office#values . Perhaps "office=ngo" would work here ("ngo" stands for "non-governmental organisation")?
Best Regards,
Andy

(re them not been broken now) I re-added them this morning - see e.g. changeset/176625259 .

> I don't know why a new river relation should affect any boundary relations

It was creating the "tunnels" under the bridges like way/1461940070/history that introduced the gaps. I'd have expected to add the new bit to the relations that of the old way it was split from, too.

Please see osm.org/user_blocks/19237 . Someone has already reverted these changes.

Yes - please do raise this specific issue in the forum.
Also, if you find yourself in a situation like https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/15921137 please NEVER continue the revert war. At best, you'll find yourself blocked for a period of time. You're actually very lucky that I did not do this this time.

Hello - not sure why way/1461940077/history is a tunnel? Also the new bits of river weren't added to the civil parishes and townlands, resulting in gaps. I'm surprised that the Josm validator didn't flag that up?

Thanks!

Witaj,
Spierasz się o to, czy https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/15921137 powinien być mapą drugorzędną, czy trzeciorzędną. Wyjaśnij, dlaczego uważasz, że powinien być mapą drugorzędną (lub trzeciorzędną) i (co ważne), dlaczego uważasz, że Twój pogląd cieszy się poparciem społeczności w Polsce. Podaj link do odpowiedniej sekcji polskiego forum lub wiki, aby uzasadnić swoje stanowisko.
Z poważaniem,
Andy Townsend, w imieniu Grupy Roboczej ds. Danych OSM

Witaj,
Spierasz się o to, czy https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/15921137 powinien być mapą drugorzędną, czy trzeciorzędną. Wyjaśnij, dlaczego uważasz, że powinien być mapą drugorzędną (lub trzeciorzędną) i (co ważne), dlaczego uważasz, że Twój pogląd cieszy się poparciem społeczności w Polsce. Podaj link do odpowiedniej sekcji polskiego forum lub wiki, aby uzasadnić swoje stanowisko.
Z poważaniem,
Andy Townsend, w imieniu Grupy Roboczej ds. Danych OSM

Hello,
You are arguing about whether https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/15921137 should be secondary or tertiary. Please explain why you think it should be secondary (or tertiary), and (importantly) why you think that your view has the backing of the community in Poland. Please link to the relevant section of the Polish forum or wiki to support your case.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello,
You are arguing about whether https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/15921137 should be secondary or tertiary. Please explain why you think it should be secondary (or tertiary), and (importantly) why you think that your view has the backing of the community in Poland. Please link to the relevant section of the Polish forum or wiki to support your case.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Also a bit of the River Foss up to Towthorpe

Great - thanks!

Pozdravljeni,
Andy iz delovne skupine za podatke. Ste preverili klasifikacijo s ponastavitvijo spletne skupnosti OSM? Prej smo prejeli pritožbe glede klasifikacije te ceste, zato predlagamo, da o tem razpravljamo na forumu ali podobnem forumu. Zgodovino enega dela ceste si lahko ogledate na https://osm.mapki.com/history/way/498784752.
Različne skupnosti OSM imajo različna pravila za to, "kaj naj bi bilo primarno" itd. Včasih temelji na uradni kategoriji, včasih na mnenju kartografov, včasih pa je to mešanica.
Lep pozdrav,
Andy