Direi che definitivamente no.

I tag place= si usano soprattutto per comunicare il nome (e forse altri dati) del paese/citta'/qualcos'altro
place=*
I tag place sono usati per lo piu' su punti (node) e meno su aree.

Se si tratta di un'area, ci vuole sempre un tag 'fisico' che, nel caso di un'area abitata, puo' essere o landuse=residential o landuse=farmland

Hi Mateusz,
it was definitely a mistake, sorry. I have removed the tag:
changeset/178054532
Cheers
Gábor

Salve,
si', puoi avere ragione. Il tracciato l'ho preso dal sito ufficiale del cammino comunque puo' essere che non e' puntualissimo da qualche parte.
Allora l'ho corretto:
changeset/177127674
Saluti
Gábor

Caro Guido,
yes you're right. However, it was already so before I made this changeset, so it is not my fault though I could have fix it if I weren't lazy to do that. I am sorry.
I will try to do it…
Happy new year!

Gábor

Kedves Vakulya!
Honnan származik az az információd, hogy ez egy olajkút?
node/13072912094

Üdv

Gábor

Kedves kalu1820!
Honnan ered a Közti-park elnevezés? Az interneten sehol sem találok ilyesmit, és a helyiek sem szokták így emlegetni a Dugonics tér és Kölcsey utca közötti háztömb belsejét.
Kösz!
Gábor

Can you specify more exactly where you can find it on the wiki site? It is a bit long…

Anyway, inside a multipolygon is not needed any additional relation. One or more simple ways are fairly enough.

Look e.g. here:
• relation/1775846 or
• relation/1775847

They consist of two ways and that's it. No additional multipolygon inside the multipolygon.

No, definitely not.

Now, you have a multipolygon with another multipolygon as an inner member. This is absolutely not necessary and just makes things more complicated.

The solution is to have a multipolygon where the inner member are simple ways (areas).

For more information:
osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon

(Or just look some multipolygons on OSM.)

E.g. these are multipolygon relations with one and only member:

relation/19857249

relation/19857252

They can stay alone as simple features (ways) whithout making them relations.

OK, no problem ;-)

Dear Lola Fox,

swimming pools can simply stay alone as polygons; it is absolutely not needed to create relations with only one members e.g. from swimming pools (or from any other feature).

Relations are made to relate two or more features.

Cheers

Gábor

Ezek nekem mindig homályosak, mindenesetre most kikalapáltam.

Actually not, it is not signposted, there is just a website to it that you can see on the relation itself:
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=18528487&type=relation&map=14.0/41.8793/12.4856

Szia!
Igen, átnéztem őket, de egykönnyen lehet, hogy attól még itt-ott figyelmetlen voltam.

A futópályákkal mindig bizonytalan vagyok, s ez most sem változott: mikor area=yes, mikor =no?...

Ugyanígy a footway-ek is; valószínűleg ezért nem is vettem le egyiket sem, mert nem tudom, mi lenne a helyes. (Ha egyáltalán van olyan, hogy „helyes”.)

Az access=yes szerintem általában alapértelmezett, s mint ilyen ritkán érdemes kifejezetten kiírni; inkább a különféle korlátozásokat célszerű kiemelni.

Üdv

Gábor

Hi, I just tried to follow the guidelines of the wiki (i.e..the lowest level route segments do not bear any OSMC symbol);
osm.wiki/ViaAlpina