3. No, it can contradict the Categories rule, even for what's in fact 3 corridors with 2 east-west. You should not use `route=` simply for this. It's not a transport planning policy tool. It's for reflecting a signposted, official, or numbered one.

1.1. No, the ground truth principle can't be disproved. As I said, the standard and expectation for `route=` is higher. Even if you want to argue it's commonly used by people, it's unable to be distinguished whether it's proper, or a descriptor as a category.
1.2. So as I said, can you give other examples of such "x of y" for you arguement? You seem to be assuming they are used, but they aren't the norm.
2. Then what's the purpose of creating this? On the contrary, `highway=footway` + `network=` would be more widely and easily visible, supported, and used.

1. This is not my "personal preference". I'm explaining to you on the `route=` , not other `highway=` roads. Wuhu St Underpass is used on traffic notices, and Schedule of Routes, to refer to the road. "Footbridge System" is a specific set of interconnected footbridges, but is at least not a `route=` , and not rigorously a `network=` either.
2. Seems I didn't make it clear both are unacceptable

1. This is a `route=` , which has higher expectations and standards
2. Do you have other examples? Such prepositions are almost never correct.

That's Nominatim's fault. It overwrites the `admin_level=` with the `label` `place=` `address_rank:` counterintuitively. Has already been worked around with `admin_centre` yesterday. Need to wait for it to update or something.

This section is embanked, not bridged continuously. You can see the joint easily on the span across Lin Cheung Rd on the east.

2. The street naming isn't very useful, and it's quite unique to HK. `street:name=` should be enough for gazetted street, and `=motorway_link` can be named by interchanges.

This should not be followed, as it's inconsistent. Eg Rt 3 ends on an Exit in WHC. It may be taken to mean the km measuring only.

1. If there's not a signposted or official extent, it should not be added
2. I don't understand what your "x in/at/on/of y" is referring to

The slip roads are made `=motorway` for the existing status (cf TMCLK, TKOLTT)

Please don't delete `area:highway=`

1. Please discuss this first before changing all of them. They are 25kV_ac KCR sizes, built as mainline national rail, and functions as suburban trains. The existing compromise is to use `route=subway` on the `railway=rail`
2. The `route=` already has `colour=`

2. Would it be any different "Footways in East Anglia" had an article?

2. Again you are ignoring your problems here. "Something" in "Somewhere" is obviously in the same league as them.

1. "I am a bit surprised" you didn't get I'm asking about your reasoning, and lack of elaboration. Do you know what's a project "name"? It's a title, and is a descriptive label. The uppercase is used as title case. It's described as "the footbridge network in the western part of Tsuen Wan town centre". This can also be "footbridge system along Tai Chung Road and Hoi Shing Road", which is obviously not proper. It can be lowercase "Extension of footbridge network in Tsuen Wan". https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr06-07/english/fc/pwsc/papers/pi07-06e.pdf#page=12

1. I don't know how you understanding and reasoning works. `name=` is not a "label" itself. It's for proper names. This is not one. Applications can choose to combine it with other attributes to form labels, and even not use it, or no labels.

1. What's the logic of ""key:name" considers official usage as one of the usual sources of primary names. This gives "Footbridge Network in Tsuen Wan" legitimacy to be inserted as a name. " ? You didn't explain anything.
2. Can you please try harder? It's referring "List of" and "Category:" pages.

This one is debatable, as proper names for hangars would be "Hanger 12" etc. The "Former" on the sign also suggests it's a descriptive label, ie it can be "Old Royal Air Force Hangar" and "舊皇家空軍飛機庫" hypothetically.

Please don't directly delete them . They are already `disused:*=` correctly. They contain addresses, and still represent store spaces. This makes tracking and updating them more difficult, wasting previous effort, and increasing next workload.

It's possible all these existed before. Only now removed to promote recycling, and the botched waste pricing.