Why did you add fictional lines inside the power station at Three Gorges Dam?

Nice maping, but please don't attach land use/cover to roads and buildings. They are not related and cause a maintenance nightmare later on.

Trur du har misforstått gang og sykkelveg som er segregert.

Kopling til Flyplassvege ved Meyerskiftet busstopp er neppe rett. Dei som skal bort til til nummer 32 og 36 må faktisk køyre via Grimseidvegen og så inn på Siljustølsvegen. Så via gang og sykkelvegen vidare bort.

A tip, there are another two 132k lines just north of that spot which would show typical H tower size for this voltage level.

I use multiple sources/layers available to keep lines up to date. Imagery, Karverket DOM, Aviation obstacle and NVE data. Unfortunately the DOM and DTM layers don't work in iD as they haven't updated the wms links.

If you have any questions just ask. I've been mapping lines above the 22kV distribution gird over the past few years, and trying to keep it as up to date as possible.

Norway Orthophoto imagery should not be blurry. But they can be a few years old in some cases. The low res images are 0.25m refreshed every 5 years. Higher res is 0.1m or better and is more random. Current image for this area is from 2018, and the line was completed in 2019/20 I believe.

You can actually check age by going to norgeibilder.no There is a small globe icon top right which can change UI to English.

Sorry if I came on a bit direct. Had to deal with random people breaking the power grid over the years. To be honest if you think connecting a 132kV line to a 22kV tower/pole sounds reasonable, then you don't know what you're doing ;) There is a big difference in size on towers/poles between those voltage levels.

Please do not mess with the power lines if you don't know what you're doing. This 132kV line is new and have no connection to the 22kV distribution network below it. The towers are placed based on new Aviation obstacle data available as a layer in editor.

People tag for the renderer by using the banket tags. Its only access= values that show up on the map. So you end up with a bunch of overrides making the tag list unnecessary long.
Norwegian sign 306.1 should be tagged a motor_vehicle=no

If i left some tags stating use sidepath, then that is an oversight by me.

For Bergen light rail you can look at the strong criteria for light rail over tram on the wiki page you linked.

And please do not mess with access tags if you do not know how they work in Norway. Agnes Mowinckels gate has a sign forbidding general motor vehicles except buses. the access=no tag is not used here unless its forbidden for all traffic modes. You effectively blocked walking and biking on the road.

Please revert the Bergen light rail back to its original tag. It is not a tram as it is fully signaled and on dedicated track for most of the line.

The N50 data is made up of areas. Someone destroyed the wood relation south of it so it looks weird. I'll fix that.

Why did you add fictitious power lines at the dam? Please don't do that.

Added the foot and bicycle restrictions on fv510 as well now so it should be all good.

Road class in OSM is set based on what kind of road it is. You can look at the wiki for this: osm.wiki/Norway/Highways
There is also a page for the default access restrictions for each highway class. osm.wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Norway
Those can be overridden by specific access tags. access=*

Fixed it now. Use access tags, not highway class in the future.

Please don't use areas for highway tags it confuses routers that end up using the edge of the area at times.
There are other tags for outlining highway areas.
You also made a duplicate at the helipad by adding an area over the node.
You can draw the outline of the helipad and use that tag, but don't tag it as a highway. Just remmeber to remove the helipad tag on the node.

The ways around the school should probably be highway=footway or cycleway.
The pedestrian value is used for "gågate" or a square in towns/cities.

osm.wiki/Norway/Highways

Tertiary is not really set in stone for Norway so some put it on a lot of roads.
Use of tertiary might encourage more through traffic on roads depending on the router used for the app or website.
I believe some routers actually ignore tertiary due to the variation in use cases.
I've become more cautious using this class as my experience with OSM has increased.

Did the Borgavegen get a separate foot- and cycleway or just a sidewalk?

Wouldn't be wrong setting that part to tertiary I guess. Just don't see the point. Unclassified is between residential and tertiary anyway.

You changed them all from communication_tower to tower. Those two are not the same. The wiki is kind of confusing on this unfortunately.
man_made=communications_tower

Please explain the reason for this change. They were tagged as communication_tower for a reason.