No neviem, ziadny material ste tu nepridali. A z Bingu asi dost tazko.

Hi, I hope you also compared with Slovak cadastre map, not just Ortofotomozaika SR. And why the removals of grass in Tatranska Lomnica and Stary Smokovec?

Hi, what are your sources? You cannot see crossing bells, uic_ref codes and similar information on aerial imagery or terrain shading.

The sign can be seen at https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=44.12134499999999&lng=15.250011000000086&z=17&pKey=3833092186788426&focus=photo . Yes it is from 2015, but it is the same at least till 2019. It is true that many sources and articles call it 'od Cezana'. I put back both names on the street until it is cleared up.

Hi, how do you see street names on dgu.hr or Bing imagery?
way/71333594 was correct with '... de Cezana' according to the street sign. Where did you get that it is called '... od Cezana' ?

Hi, Why are you shifting all the buildings here? Your new positions seem wrong even according to the dgu.hr 2020 imagery you claim to use.

Also how can you see the trafic sign from dgu.hr imagery?

Hi, why are these streets like way/1057230178 marked living_street? What is the traffic sign on them?

Hi, many of these 3D buildings you did in Venice are actually technically very wrong with overlapping volumes or not connected building parts which leave a small gap between parts that then assume the hight of the main building creating non-existent spikes and walls. See e.g. https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=45.4376583&lon=12.3251732&zoom=19&camera.theta=55.313&camera.phi=64.25 .
I hope you have learned better since the time of this changeset (4 years) and create higher quality buildings.
See osm.wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings .

Also provide your real sources of the changes. You claim Bing, but you cannot see the building heights so precisely (in metres) on Bing). So you must have other source, which you must quote in your changesets.

Also, (going by your nickname) make sure you do not take anything from Google company (like its maps), as that is illegal and unsuited for OSM.

Jasne, pardon.

way/123386164 how did you see street name from aerial imagery? When I was there personally I have seen the "Bregdetti" name (double t).

Yes, that would be correct, as it is just extension (width marking) of the existing highway=service roads inside it.
It is not possible to drive in any direction as it would be with highway=service+area=yes.
I can add it while I am working there. Thanks.

Hi, without the 'highway' tag (or any other main tag) this area is useless in OSM way/712142536 (it means nothing).

object changes from DGU.hr (2020), Mapillary, ESRI

Yes, they are probably equivalent. I was just keeping the original author's choice of schema :) I did not add it, just changed access:pedestrian to access:foot.
Anyway, it seems foot=yes was added since then.

Hi, why this change? Why "bez komentara". Such a change is really important to comment. Why do some streets have the "Ulica" prefix and some do not? What is the official convention in Croatia maps?

Hi, please provide your sources, as half of the changes here (like, names, addresses, shops) you could not retrieve from dgu.hr imagery.

I am not sure what "Intermod" is, please write proper changeset descriptions. Also the changes at junction of "Biogradska cesta" and "Ulica "84. gardijske bojne HV Termiti" seem to be quite wrong, damaged pedestrian crossings, lanes splitting from the main road when they are not yet physically separated, like way/1052036390 is totally wrong. You even deleted the road that was correct (way/93391082) and with more precise tags.

Hi, you peron (platform) numbers are to be put into local_ref or ref tags, not in the name. I will fix it.

Sadly, it seems most of these changes are quite useless, the buildings and roads are now in worse position than they were (at least according to neighbouring buildings). Please don't randomly shift buildings according to Bing imagery. Always cross-check other imagery. There is a better imagery from Croatian authority dgu.hr available in this area.