Deleted also many 1 member relations and placed the same tag in the according ring.

Hello! I see that you've cut this way and added fixme way/479762849 I'm wondering if it actually should be in this way position i've inserted now way/566639653. I've plotted mine thanks to Geoportail.lu's im sat 2016, 2017 and Strava's heatmap. Geoportail.lu topo shows your way position though, but it has shown many occasions where its ways are outdated/mispositioned. Since it is part of several routes, i think we should set this asap. What's your insights?

Bonjour, veuillez ne pas placer les panneaux de signalisation sur l'intersection même du carrefour car de cette manière il peut très bien être interprété pour tous les chemins se dirigeant vers ce point. Or ici node/3407796593/history ce n'est pas le cas en réalité. J'ai corrigé les autres que vous avez inséré dans le rond point mais je vous ai laissé celui-ci pour vous en rendre compte et le corriger. BàV

Ceci n'est certainement pas un parc. way/562892782

Bonjour! Veuillez respecter le consensus des tags établi par la communauté des contributeurs que vous pouvez retrouver dans le Wiki d'OSM. Un élément est taggé selon sa représentation la plus proche à la réalité. Par exemple vous avez défini cette zone way/431538355 comme un parc alors qu'il y a des terrains sportifs à l'intérieur. Donc, le plus proche serait de le tagger comme landuse=recreation_ground et s'il n'y avait pas de terrain de jeu pour enfants leisure=sports_centre. Ce ne sont pas des parcs comme le Parc Gaspar ou Parc Léopold. Attention aussi sur la précision. Merci de votre comprehension!

Salut Pierre! Attention aux MP, tu avais effacé la relation pour le périmètre externe de la zone résidentielle d'Arlon. Je viens de la remettre.

Hello! :) Beware of adding isolated highways (not connected to other ways), it's useless because highways serve mostly as a direction to other ways or places (nodes or areas) and adds useless data to OSM. Like this footway: way/490606032/history Just use a crosswalk to represent a pedestrian passage. In case you want to represent parallel sidewalks aside to a road, i suggest you to add to the road the tag sidewalk=left or sidewalk=right (depending of the direction of the road) or sidewalk=both (both sides). Even pedestrians of the map will mostly follow a road because it's more visible.

I used to work at MUDEC a long time ago. It was private at that time. Thank you and you too have a nice weekend! :)

Found my answer: http://www.differdange.lu/visiteurs/parcs/parc-edmond-dune/
I used to work there more than 10 years ago and at that time it was private.

Right now i'm editing them but I've put a stop, please don't edit or will get conflicts. Thanks! :)

Hi HAL! About the parc Edmond Dume and its ways behind the Miami University (MUDEC) in Differdange, isn't all that private?

Hi Dan! Hoooh! At last we know what's been planned there. :D

Hi! We can obviously see it's in Esch. :) Can you be more specific on your changeset description, please? Thank you for your comprehension!

most of them were duplicated elements,

This cycleway : way/349568951
or
starting here : node/3883713018
??

Well these constructions have been goign on for quite some time though and quite a few road constructions take time in Luxembourg... (Stafelter tunnel for example). ;) Not a critic, just an observation, better do things right and slow than waste money.

Yeah i know, there are even restriction turns that are not included in OSM, i don't think it's worth putting them, it's a lot of work and they might change soon. That's why i only changed the element's lanes in the northern side of the roundabout in construction. What about this element: way/84201329 ??
If i recall correctly there are only 2 lanes, the third lane being the incoming motorway_link.

Hi! If you copy/paste elements to create a more detailed ensemble, make sure that the tags are correct for each element. You didn't rectify the lanes for example. Also you didn't update accordingly the route for the PC6 relation. It's done now, i corrected but don't hesitate to have a double check because i'm not aware of all the changes you did.

I checked your changeset because i like this area and contribute in it as much as i can because either there are missings, mistakes or imprecise elements already plotted. So i was curious, had an eye on your changeset and i just had found some ways that were still not precise in position. Nevermind, i already rectified what i could and added other few things. So i don't have anything specific now to tell you. My previous comment was just an invitation if you can have a closer eye on future edits. Thank you anyway for the efforts! Wishing you a nice continuation! :)

Hello! Thanks for your edits and updates! I've checked some of this changeset and i noticed that you edited the way whereas it is still misaligned compared to reality/image sat.. This combined to other services, for example the terrain's altitude, might make a big difference for the practical use. So can i suggest you to try improve also the position when possible, please? Thanks for the considerations. :)