Hi,

foot=yes is implied on highway=pedestrian, so we do not usually add this tag.

Happy mapping!

No, the way goes *across* the river, but it matters, into which direction.

Thanks!

The direction of the way should be inverted.

"Like a natural=cliff the line direction matters: On the left side there is the high side, on the right side is the lower side."
waterway=weir

That means, weirs and dams should always go from the right bank to the left bank (when looking downstream).

Ok, done.

The author sound rather certain it doesn't exist. They report that the path would lead directly towards a rock face.

way/1311723952
note/4348287

Also, on aerial imagery, I can't make out any traces through the scree.

Should we just remove it?

Hi,
Can you help with these notes? They seem to lie on a path that you've recently checked.

note/4348282
note/4348287

Hi,

this seems more like a waterway=weir:
way/1305244419

Also, note the convention that "left side is higher, right side is lower" with this kind of features.

Hi,

Are you sure this is a culvert? (river goes underground in an artificial tunnel)
way/1094692915

Probably best if you reply under this note: note/4339858

Hi,
what does the tag "yes @ wet" on way/626001003
mean?

Probably best if you reply under this note: note/4339858

Ok, sorry to hear that. Is that conversation public?

No, I'm not from Slovenia. It's just the place where i started mapping and since I find the mapping community there quite pleasant, I just kept on. :-)

Thanks, I hadn't noticed this. Is this already being discussed with ChrisM4?

Hi,

Another mapper noticed that you have created a number of empty nodes with this changeset. Looks like an accident.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/117853

Happy mapping!

Hier wird das erläutert: osm.wiki/Area#Multipolygon_area

Ich glaube, dass multipolygons im Wiki in der Regel als "Fläche" verstanden werden, nicht als "Relation". Ich finde das auch verwirrend, weil es technisch ja eben Relationen sind und keine Flächen.

Hi APneunzehn74,

danke für die Korrektur des amenity-Tags der Studentenwohnanlage.

Kannst du erläutern, was du damit meinst, dass es "nicht erwünscht" ist, flächige Features als multipolgygon zu mappen? Gibt es dazu einen Konsens in der Community?

Thanks for the link.

I can't find the name "Bulfon Weg" on that web page.

Hi,
You've added the name "Bulfon Weg" to way/1186561470 which looks suspicious. Are you sure "Bulfon Weg" is the local name of this path?

Hi Bathyscapher, can you help with this note?
note/4340905

Hi,
Thanks for checking this. On the 2023 Ljubljana orthophoto, it also looks like the path has gone for the time being. I've hence just removed most of the path.

I don't know. Best ask the original mapper what they had in mind when they created the relation: @MitjaJez in changeset/93028251

I just found this thing and then over time put a lot of work into its boundaries around Ljubljana using topographic imagery because I found them to be very imprecise.