Hello,
Just out of curiosity. The change from highway=footway into highway=pedestrian on many roads. Does this apply for roads that are used by service or cleaning vehicles?
I am asking because this is the only park with some many "roads" in it. If we can find a suitable set of criteria, perhaps we could change the other parks accordingly.

Hello,

Something about railway level crossings.
I see you are using railway=tram_level_crossing instead of the current usage (railway=level_crossing). This is a fairly recent tag, promoted by iD. I suppose you discussed this with the local community first, didn’t you? There are 4,500 such nodes for the Brussels tram network and several thousand others in Belgium; do you plan a mechanical edit to change them all at once?

Also, do you really want the crossing:barrier tag on tram crossings? This tag showed up on some nodes a couple of years ago because of a mistake in StreetComplete (in older versions, the app bugged users into filling it for every crossing; now it has been fixed and it is only for trains). Any thoughts?

Hello,
You must use amenity=kindergarten, and not change the building type.
This is because the building structure is an ordinary house. building=kindergarten is only for a very specific construction type, not the case here.
I fixed this.

Hello,
Thanks for this.
But please do not add addr:* tags on nodes. Those tags are already there, usually within the building area (in Belgium, postcodes/city names are computed automatically based on the area). Otherwise, you make it harder to maintain the data.
In the mean time, I fixed your edits in the Brussels area.
Happy mapping.

I reverted this change. UrbIS imagery confirms this building has no number. That would fix the problem we have with duplicate housenumbers within the same street.

Hello,
We cannot figure out what you wanted to do with this changeset?
For instance, you changed the road type here, to make it impossible to cycle here (way/32763555) but this way is part of a cycle relation.
Has anything changed here recently? New street closures? Banning bicycles across the area?

Hello,
This restaurant replaced the former restaurant located here. In the future, it is advisable you update existing data instead of creating duplicates.
I fixed this one.

Hello,
No longer a two-way road?
In that case, I suppose this way (way/481692444) should be made two-way too, otherwise routing won’t use it.

Hello,
Just one thing: please try to be very careful when working with ways used by buses.
Your changeset broke De Lijn 241 towards Brussels and it created a strange situation, with several ways moved further inside the route relation.
I fixed it.

The street is back to its former situation, I changed the map accordingly.

Beautiful rendering! Truly impressive!

Hello,
Good point to add sidewalks.
You might be interested to know that we have detailed UrbIS imagery for Brussels with proper calibration (never draw on top of AGIV in Brussels, otherwise we’ll have to clean up after you).

Hello,
My mistake, indeed. Nothing will ever beat local knowledge. :-)

Hello,
Thanks a lot for spotting this. Yes, on this one it was pure armchair mapping.
(The tags were wrong too indeed; I created presets to create all the keys at once but inadvertently erased my own work while selecting the preset again.)
That should be fixed now.

Hello,
I think the street was reversed temporarily, that’s why you will see parked cars headed south on 2019 aerial imagery (taken during that period). AFAIK the construction works in this area are complete and the street is back to its former situation. I’ll try to survey this in the next days to see what the current situation is.

Seems fair, indeed.

Hello,
I started doing the same in other neighbourhoods, I will be happy to take advice from other mappers.
Just one thing here: shouldn’t it be a multipolygon instead? With the small buildings as "inner".

Hello,
Over the past 10 days, you have routinely renamed DG DEVCO building into its full name (more precisely a text string containing both English and French names without a separator).
In the past we had lengthy discussions within the Belgian community to set up a standard for such buildings. It is summarized in the wiki, and explained in one of the reverts. (osm.wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/EU_institutions_and_bodies)
Would you please be so kind as to explain why you are so keen to name this building the way you do. Is there anything we should be aware of?
Thanks in advance.

Nice initiative. I can’t think of anything better than amenity=clinic, it was a good choice, then.
Did some minor fixes. I’ll try to re-use this to add the 3 other ones.

OK, good to know. Not a mistake, then.