You set access=no to way/974769289

This implies no pedestrians are allowed here (even with highway=pedestrian). However you set bicycle=yes, which looks suspiciously like a tagging mistake. Did you perhaps just mean motor_vehicle=no ?

I've fixed it. Thanks for spotting this!

Sorry, no that was by accident!

Congrats on creating nodes 9999999999 and 10000000000 !!

Hi there, it seems you've been mapping a lot of stuff using outdated aerial imagery; thereby destroying edits that I made where I used newer imagery. For example you removed this new building way/186909634 that I had added and instead you re-created buildings that do not exist anymore, like this one: way/1047275934

Ah, no worries!

Try josm! A bit of learning, but after 2 days practice you will not want to switch back anymore.

Hi,
There is no horse=yes tag on way/953824979/history

Did you mean some other bridge?

Sorry, that must have been a copy+paste mistake. I've corrected it.

Thanks for pointing this out!

Thanks for the reply!
And thanks for your research and the links! Since this route is documented, I think we should keep it. Probably good to make adjustment in location where bikes clearly can't be used like here: osm.org/go/0Ik1xz_Pc--?m=

So are you saying that both

- this one way/844378265

- and the one a few hundred metres to the North node/3876340592

exist in reality?

There's a parking mapped a bit further north: node/3876340592

Did you perhaps mean that one?

Hi,

it has been reported that there is no parking space here: note/2714444

Aerial imagery also shows no parking space.

Did you perhaps map this in the wrong location?

You've created a cycle route for PST:relation/11568094
An almost identical hiking route already exist: relation/86438

To my (limited) knowledge, this is only a hiking route, not a cycling route. But I may be wrong. Do you know whether this documented as a cycling route anywhere? (website, legal documents or signage on the ground)

Yep, let's hope for the 2021 orthophoto to go online soon!

Hi,

Thanks for adding the new roundabout. Just FYI you broke the bus relations of line 27 by doing so (you forgot to add them to the roundabout). I'll fix that, this is just to give you a heads up for future similar cases.

Looks like a mapping error, thanks Rainer!

I've corrected it.

See my comment here: changeset/119651803

Then, the correct mapping is a closed way (interpreted as area in this case) with tag building=apartments (on the building outline).

A node tourism=apartment is wrong in this case.

See the wiki entries (admittedly, the example images in both articles are somewhat misleading):
building=apartments
tourism=apartment

Happy mapping!

The bench is already mapped 3 metres away from here.

Hi!

Are you sure these are tourism/holiday apartments? Or are these houses regular houses with apartments?