It doesn’t matter here because all footways have been mapped separately.
More worrying: another user deleted the barrier node after your comment. This lets motor vehicles pass through. I don’t know whether this was intended, I guess that barrier was there for a reason. @Thierry1030 certainly has local knowledge about the situation.

Hello,

A question about a gate, here: node/8715690278

access=private?
Or is it open for anyone?

Hello,
I am afraid your Lambiek-Geuzeroute contains multiple gaps and does not validate properly
In addition, your changes broke 4 relations for bus route 154. Perhaps it would be advisable to check a little more before uploading data to OSM. Breaking things take a few seconds but repairing damage like this will take much longer. :-(

Hello,
Good work.
Being animal-shaped, I think it classifies as "sculpture", not "statue". ;-)

Hello,
Thanks for spotting this.
Having a maxspeed:conditional instruction without a condition is buggy. Perhaps filling the note tag on the ways will be more appropriate.
maxspeed:conditional=*

Right, so you’re saying you really surveyed the place and saw F5 signs. I will inform the other mapper he must have made a mistake, then.

Hello,
This road had been changed from motorway to trunk.
This is explained here: changeset/70087607
Why did you revert this? Is there something new here?

I kept your idea of drawing the cycle track as a separate way. I had to redraw it to match the real outline and connect proper connectors across the intersections.
The map tiles have probably updated by now, you can see how it looks.

Thanks.

Hello,

(I am writing this in English, I hope you don’t mind.)

Thanks for your edits in Brussels, I am reviewing recent changes in my area and came across your latest changes.

May I suggest you use more descriptive summaries for your changes. Because titles such as "Correção de edições anteriores" or "novos dados" do not provide any information about what you changed or why you added or moved something.
Maybe this will help: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Happy mapping! :-)

Hello,
Thanks for this.
You might be interested to learn about this: If a shop closes, only remove what relates to the shop itself—name, opening hours, website and so on—but leave the node on the map, do not delete it. This is because we need to preserve the rest of the information (building number, relations) and above all the history of the node.

OK, thanks again.
I trust you, I changed it to 50.

Hello,
Thanks for spotting this.
My source of information was this: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/QnWf-MhHnR9zHXJT7S6hHQ
Befond the F3b sign (end of city) we enter a rural zone. Unless there is a new speed signs, default speeds apply.
But this picture was taken in 2018, maybe the situation changed more recently, perhaps there are new C43 speed signs when entering Flanders. If you believe the situation has changed, I can revert the changeset.

Hello,

It seems you have changed data on the map in two different parts of the world and uploaded all the changes at once. :-(
One part in Belgium, one part in Indonesia.

I reverted your changes for Belgium, because those changes broke the geometry of several footways and of a tram line. I wish you better luck with your next edits.

Hello,

I think creating orphan footway crossings (or with noexit nodes) brings no benefit to the map.
(way/917067448)

Is there a reason why you have to add those to the map? In Brussels we have started drawing the sidewalks to create a fully-routable network for pedestrians. But one does not go without the other, as unconnected ways trigger lots of validation issues in your area.

Have a nice day.

Hello,

We have to revert this, sorry.

"bicycle=use_sidepath" should only be used when a separate cycle track has been drawn on the map. Alternatively, adding "cycleway=track" to the road does the same job: no need to draw the cycle lane, and apps advising cyclists will tell to use the track on the side. Either solution should only be used if there is *really* some legally reserved space for cyclists, with D7, D9 or D10 signs.

Warning cyclists of a potential danger is usually a good idea but OSM is not the appropriate tool to put such information if it is a short-lived road closure or disruption—unless you have information that the situation will stay for several months.

Hello,

This "no comment" changeset spanning several countries is very puzzling.

I spotted two obvious mistakes:

1) The untagged triangle across a pub in Cumbria should be deleted
way/934968455

2) There are two open polygons within a multipolygon relation, they should be merged into one single area.
way/19990086

Hello,
I get your point but in that case, you’d better use old_name instead of name.
The source you are using says it explicitely: "De plaats ligt bij wat vroeger de Flotsenberg werd genoemd."

Hello,
Next time you create a landuse area, please draw it in such a way it is independent from other objects on the ground. You added an extra node on a railway platform, inadvertently changing its shape, which is incorrect.
I fixed it.

Hello (again),
I fixed this too. It looks more appropriate to draw an area around the school—containing the buildings, car-park and schoolyard—and put all the "school" tags on it. Otherwise, it looks fine.
Perhaps you can have a look and improve the outline of the school area, I hope I took everything.
I guess you have local knowledge of this school; I would suggest to add a node on the main entrance and tag it with "entrance=main". I suppose it’s at the bottom of the stairs, north of the main building.