It seem like a non-passenger to me, but unfortunately I was too lazy to look up its history :( But I did it now. The cables are still hanging - so, I think disused:aerialway=yes would be a better. Or do you have better ideas?

way/1448294609

tunnel=building_passage

"The layer should be the same as the layer of the building <...> So if the building doesn't have a layer tag, the way should not have one either."

Did you actually manage to find this trail in the area?
On May 3, 2025, I walked exactly along this line and the trail was practically invisible and difficult to pass.
way/1442570654

JFYI: current ESRI has offset and (!) distortion (so, offset is different in different parts of the city).

osm.wiki/Using_aerial_imagery
"In any case, do not rush to move objects created by others! Make sure your offset is more accurate" ... "Start moving objects on the map if you are completely sure your offset is accurate."

You are completely sure that current ESRI with zero offset (your movement completely matches it) is accurate? Based on what data?

2) This grass exists in real world:
way/222228727
Why you delete it?

>100 fire hydrant in Novi Sad mapped. Achievement unlock! ;)

Building with a way passing through it: tunnel=building_passage

Please, don't solve JOSM warning by adding layer=-1 to tunnel=yes or changing tunnel=yes to covered=yes.

Separate cycleway path was built in early 2023. Please, don't use 5 years old Bing (5.09.2020) as ground truth.

changeset/169881859

Please, take a care about right satellite imagery offset. As I can see, now you use imagery as is (zero offset).

You can use this well-aligned object: way/1300643404

Current Bing imagery (2020-09-05) is 3.20; -4.10

Wiki text: "...but being a single object"
Your text: "separated by one object"
There is little difference :) Ok, this is minor.

But there is several problems with joining. For example:

1) node/12884655403 (originaly tagged by another user about uear ago)
barrier=kerb,kerb=lowered - it's true for footway, but not for cycleway. Your solution (deleting this feature) isn't osm-style (and I know, who really use this tags for navigation). footway:barrier - zero uses in OSM at all: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=footway%3Abarrier

2) node/10672146532

This amenity=waste_disposal is accurate between footway and cycleway. In what side of combined way you want to place it? "Nobody cares" - isn't good solution.

Please, suggest a solution that does not degrade the quality of already mapped data.

Where is "separated by one object" in wiki???

And shape of several objects near crossroads :(
Please, don't start one more revert competition.
I'll read you argumentation more carefully in the near future.

And there is changes in another region. You reverted all in one :(

You use ESRI with zero offset and move existing objects to wrond place.

This is precise measured and positioned red paving stones rectangle, that you can see on any sattelite image. For example: https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=45.255109%7E19.844861&lvl=20.3&style=a

You can align sattelite image using it. Current Bing offset: 3.20; -4.10. In JSOM you can use Imagery Offset Database plugin.

tunnel=building_passage

"The layer should be the same as the layer of the building, with the exception when several tunnels are passing on different levels. So if the building doesn't have a layer tag, the way should not have one either."

way/817657559
way/817657561

Current Bing offset: 3.20; -4.10

Next time you remake it to your great liking, please don't break the routing. :(
Fixed in 153271100

Very, very bad practice: ignoring dialog & arguments (changeset/152730077). Just silent revert & redraw.

It looks like a conscious preference for a war of edits over any other solution :(

There is now new seaprate way here. Just at that moment this street has path status.
Current solution (highway=path + construction=*) is widely used: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Ne9