Feel free to leave a note here. However, in my experience, almost all "question notes" remain unresolved forever.

I personally therefore adopted the approach documented in the wiki, which is using notes only to *provide* information, not to *seek* information.

Hi,
Thanks for your edit!

Is "Muzej na prostem Mrzli vrh" really the *name* of this museum or merely a description?

node/11818755987

Hi, can you help with this note?

note/4433084

Hi,
Do you think this is restored now?
way/1303421854

Hi,

You've added the undocumented tag `expected_lcn_route_relations=2` onto node/772756601

What does this tag mean? And what did you want to achieve with this changeset?

Hi, in case you aren't aware: For Ljubljana, there is an orthophoto with higher resolution available in JOSM.

Happy mapping!

Hi,
Thanks for your edit. You left the tracktype tag on way/193609802 which I believe is redundant on highway=service + surface=asphalt

Happy mapping!

I'm pretty sure there is no point in having two OSM cycleways in the same place which both refer to the same unique real-world object.

I think if routing was broken, then we should repair tagging and connectivity of the previously existing cycle path instead of painting a new one above it.

Ok, let's remove
way/1314338186
way/1314338187
way/1198338337

as they are clearly historical features which don't exist anymore then, if you agree..?

Hi,

Seems you've created a duplicate of this already existing cycleway: way/754031495

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. :-)