Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Merci

Is the name really "Primary School"?
node/12235942002

fixed to tourism=information

fixed to tourism=information

fixed to tourism=information

Relationen von Relationen können mit Overpass Turbo nicht direkt gefunden werden, das ist eine bekannte Limitierung. Eine Umgehung der Limitierung geht so: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Sn9
Mehr Informationen hier: https://github.com/drolbr/Overpass-API/issues/293

Für diesen Fall benötigst du aber gar kein Overpass, da es nur eine Relation ist.

Änderst du die anderen Sub-Relationen wieder zurück?

Ein paar unverbundene Wege und doppelte Nodes korrigiert.

Hier hast du es ja schon ergänzt: relation/36367

Dann können alle anderen Tags an den Sub-Relationen wieder weg.

Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Wäre es nicht besser den Wert auf die Superrelation zu legen statt auf jeden einzelnen Sub-Part der Route?

Dieser Changeset wurde vollständig zurückgesetzt. Siehe vorheriger Kommentar.

changeset/157632308

Tagging behoben: changeset/157621143

Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!

Sobald eine übergeordnete Straße einen Fußweg kreuzt, wird davon ausgegangen, dass hier ein Fußgängerüberweg vorhanden ist. Spätestens StreetComplete wird dann fragen: Gibt es einen Fußgängerüberweg?

Ich habe die Diskussion nicht vollständig studiert, aber nach meinem Verständnis hat man sich auf highway=crossing + crossing=informal geeinigt.

Ich möchte hier keine Änderung anregen, sondern nur auf einen möglichen, unbeabsichtigten Edit-War hinweisen.