Marek, could you please share a link to "the local community's decision" which **forbids** me to draw 2 roads with different surface as 2 ways?

Just a note for myself: I see you're okay with reverting someone's huge job osm.wiki/?diff=2821415 without even say "sorry" osm.wiki/User_talk:Mateusz_Konieczny/Archive_2#Why_did_you_remove_my_translation,_which_I_worked_on_for_a_week?

+ one more long thread to read (for me): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mapping-separated-footways-or-cycleways-along-central-street-as-one-tagged-line-versus-mutiple-lines/126766

Hello, Marek!

1. "mogą być rysowane" is not a "must be tagged only this way", right?
2. I see you're actively writing these "rules" osm.wiki/w/?diff=2821515 but is there any Polish OSM community decision behind it? Or is it some personal opinion written into the wiki page?

I remember I've read thread https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagging-of-adjacent-cycleway-footway-sidewalk/108404 and I found there is no strict rule about such tagging.

Sorry, what does "addr:floor=G" mean here node/12085160968 ?

I think that entrance node/12844762288 is placed at level=0. Fixed in changeset/171745578.
Please let me know if you think that level should stay = 1.

In this change you've deleted "smoothness=intermediate" tag for way/153342297. For this one road, I restored the tag: changeset/171582737

Please don't delete any information in OSM :)

It looks like someone mixed up "building:flats" and "building:levels".

Please see a note note/4794040

Yes, the building is Marszałka Józefa Piłsudskiego **28-30**, but the store address is just 28.

Got it, thanks!
I recommend you to read this page ramp=*

And in common, please use the wiki as a source of truth if you're planning to edit OSM a lot. I see you're very active, it is good, we need more active mappers!

Thank you for contributing!

@Myshor, but it has a ramp, right? This one: way/1391379192

@maro21, please write better description of your changes, see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Partially reverted in changeset/166365173

@Poprawiłem, why did you remove tag "smoothness" from way/52026589 ?

@maro21, why did you remove some tags in node/4347953448 ?

crossing* tags — fixed in changeset/165779386

> please don't map check_date:surface … The surface won't change

Probably I'm too old, because for me a surface changes are quite often.

> Only use uncontrolled/traffic_signals as values for the crossing=* tag

I will probably forget this pretty soon, sorry. crossing=zebra is too obvious and human-writible. It would be nice to have your suggestion in JOSM linter, so it will remind me (and not only me).

> - Yes, you should probably use footway=crossing for a footway crossing a cycleway but it's just a form of micromapping and you don't need to split the footway in every place like this.

Got it, thanks!

> In context of some more general path tagging, try to always use the footway=* tag with highway=footway. The values are, as written on the wiki, sidewalk, crossing, traffic_island and path.

Normally I add footway=sidewalk when remember and when it is obvious (in a city, in villages). But here on a parking it is less obvious, so my neural network do not recognize it.

> For another general tip for segregated cycle- and footways I recommend making it so that the cycleway is on the left side of the direction of the way. It will then be rendered correctly by CyclOSM.

Not clear for me: is it about a case when both footway and cycleway are marked with one way in OSM? I'm trying to avoid this, it is too complicated. When it is possible, please let's use 2 separate ways for it.

Thank you for advices!

Pawix99, I don't think it is good idea to remove data which has history, for example this way/579228607/history and draw new roads over deleted roads…

Fixed in changeset/165163102

Ok, I see in highway=footway :

> For ways designated for pedestrians, but which also allows bicycles, use either highway=footway and bicycle=yes or highway=path, foot=designated and bicycle=yes.

I'm terrified of how complicated it is now for newbies to grab just a base minimum knowledge to contribute into OSM… The only hope is for the community, which will guide and help.

I can add bicycle=yes only when I'm 100% sure it is allowed (so there is a sign or marks), so I will use highway=path. But it will be really hard to change a habit to mark all footways as highway=footway…

@maraf24, thank you for notifying me! Sorry it goes slow to figure out and fix…

Yes, there is no bicycle ban there.

Hmm, till today I thought this way:

> "Paths kept mainly by the fact of people walking on them or paths that are only minimally constructed are usually tagged as highway=path. Their surface might be uneven (typically ground)…"

(this is from highway=footway )

Now I see a problem:

> "For urban paths which are intended primarily for pedestrians (potentially with bicycle=yes), some argue it's better to use highway=footway. Others prefer to only use highway=footway for formal footways…"

(this is from highway=path )

Let me read more about it…