Hi danzhch,
This zigzag of the elevation profile is caused because the segments of the relation are not ordered correctly. Waymarkedtrails also shows this message "Route is potentially unordered or incomplete. Elevation information might be inaccurate." to give you this hint :-).
The route should be in the exact order as you would walk it. You also see this if you move over the elevation profile with your mouse. The respective location is also shown on the map, but suddenly it jumps to a completely different position. This is because the next segment in the list is not geographically connected to the previous.
Does this help you understand what is going on?
I'm not familiar with ordering segments in iD editor, as I always use JOSM editor (where it is pretty easy), so I cannot help you with the exact approach there.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Stretch Longfellow,
Thanks for the quick reply. I think you might need to read a bit on the wiki about the difference between a track [1] and a footway [2]. I was there Sunday and hiked [3], [4] and [5]. All these highways were about 4 m wide and on [3] and [4] there were even cars parked (I assume from the owners of the small pastures/farms along it) and at [5] there is a sign that motorized traffic is not permitted, but that doesn't make it a footway.
Hence also my doubts about the other highways you changed, but which I did not visit Sunday.
Could you explain your rationale for changing these highways?
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
[1] highway=track
[2] highway=footway
[3] way/151190292
[4] way/151190293
[5] way/120925051

Source is incorrectly defined, forgot to change. Actual source is "Survey on location"

Source is incorrectly defined, forgot to change. Actual source is "Survey on location"

Danke für die Erklärung. Ich habe es geändert.
changeset/61192202

Hi Stretch Longfellow,
Thank you for contributing to OpenStreetMap in Switzerland. I notice you changed quite a few tracks to footway and a via ferrata to a path. Could you please share your source for these edits?
Kind regards,
dikkeknodel

Ich glaube hier ist nicht Obwalden aber Graubünden... Hier ist auch kein Campingplatz wenn ich [1] glauben muss.
Camping Chapella war schon 2 Jahre früher eingezeichnet etwa 400 m nördlich [2].
Wenn ich mich jedoch die DigitalGlobe Standard bilder anschaue seht es aus ob es dort auch Zelten gibt und auch im Wald zwisschen die zwei Wiesen steht etwas. Weisst du vieleich ob das alles zu den selben Campingplatz gehört? Wenn ja, dann kann es zusammengefügt werden.
Liebe Grüsse,
dikkeknodel
[1] note/1448152
[2] way/227965797

Hallo mkkz,
Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap.
Diese erste Änderung seht gut aus!
Viel Spass bei der Kartographie.
Liebe Grüsse,
dikkeknodel

Hi Josh,
I noticed the Co-working Space has conflicting naming tags.
The native 'name' tag contains "Pura Worka" while the English 'name:en' tag contains "Co-Working Space". The latter seems more like a description of what it is.
Instead, I would advice the tag amenity=coworking_space.
Kind regards,
dikkeknodel

Hallo Jan,
Ist diese ein persönliches Notiz, oder versuchst du die folgende Firma einzutragen?
http://zellweger-comestibles.ch/

Wenn ich mich die Website anschaue, dann ist das kein Restaurant. Vielleicht würde eine andere Kategorie besser sein.

Liebe Grüsse,
dikkeknodel

Hi WomoMap,
Thanks a lot for clearing up. I am happy to help, because OSM only exists because we work together :-).
Don't worry about making mistakes (also in your future contributions), we all make those. What only matter is how you deal with those mistakes when they are noticed, and you did that perfectly.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Please do so in the following Changesets:
- changeset/60341561
- changeset/60277847
- changeset/60166584
- changeset/60135162
- changeset/60125215
- changeset/60118831
- changeset/60115740

Hi WomoMap,
Happy to help, and good to hear that your entries were surveyed on location. Please be more careful with what you write as the source in the future.
I have already sent an e-mail to the Data Working Group which handles the copyright violations (might have been too early though). I will update them on the discussion and see if they can do anything to correct the source.
What you in the meantime can do it add comments to all these changesets that you have made a mistake in adding the source, and state what is actually your source.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi WomoMap,
It basically means that anything you find on the website is copyrighted, and are thus not allowed to copy to, for example, OpenStreetMap.
You are allowed to use it for your personal hike. And if then during that hike you see that the hike is guideposted, you are allowed to record it's route and then put it on OpenStreetMap. So again, they don't own the reality of the route being signposted, but they do own their representation of that reality (a gpx, a route description, a drawn map).
If you look at the map displayed on their website it says "Reproduziert mit Bewilligung van Swisstopo (BA140107)" so they have a written consent from Swisstopo to put re-distribute the data, but that is only for 'Stiftung Urwaldreservat Bödmeren', not for anybody else to reproduce the data.
So if this indeed means that you used the map from the website or brochure to add in on OpenStreetMap, then it is a copyright violation. A copyright violation means dat redaction is required.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi WomoMap,
No it does not only mean downloading data from Swisstopo. If you check the Swisstopo map and see that something is marked as a mountain hiking route, you are not allowed to USE that information to update OpenStreetMap.
The Swisstopo maps are their 'representation of reality', which is through copyright owned by Swisstopo and not allowed for re-use in OpenStreetMap.
The reality itself is not copyrighted. If you go out into the field and check out how a specific stretch is marked by the guideposts, that is allowed because then you checked the reality.
Do you understand the difference that I try to explain?
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi WomoMap,
Thanks for getting back quickly.
I was concerned your only source was the 'official map'. If that official map has a copyright, you are not allowed to use that as input for OpenStreetMap.
If you see some discrepancy on the official map which you then check locally, or via the allowed imagery (currently DigitalGlobe/Esri/Bing etc.) then it is ok to update. In that case it is clearer if you do not mention any potentially copyrighted info.
Basically you are not allowed to use any other information than the explicitly allowed sources like de imagery by default available in JOSM and mentioned herer [1], and of course the information you gather by going to the location itself. Other information is only allowed if you have written consent, which then should also be publiced at the wiki [1].

So In this specific case there is no problem, since you were there yourself to check it.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
[1] osm.wiki/Switzerland/Datasources

Hi WomoMap,
What does official map mean? This question obviously relates to the other comments I sent in other changesets of yours. Who is the copyright owner of this official map, and do you have explicit written consent to be allowed to use it?
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi WomoMap,
The source you describe here is explicitly not allowed because it violates copyright of Swisstopo [1].
I please stop using illegal sources for your edits, this makes OpenStreetMap liable for copyright infringement.
I will report the specific changesets for redaction to the Data Working Group [2], which will remove any edits that may infringe copyright.

Kind regards,
dikkeknodel
[1] osm.wiki/Switzerland/Datasources#Not-compatible_data_sources
[2] osm.wiki/Data_working_group

Hi WomoMap,
I noticed you added boedmeren.ch as the source for your edit. If I look at the website there is a copyright statement "© 2015 Stiftung Urwaldreservat Bödmeren". Do you have explicit written consent that you are allowed to use this data to enter into OpenStreetMap? If not, this is probably a copyright violation and the data needs to be removed.
Please read the wiki on copyright [1] and which sources are explicitly allowed and not allowed in Switzerland [2].
Cheers,
dikkeknodel
[1] osm.wiki/Copyright
[2] osm.wiki/Switzerland/Datasources#Not-compatible_data_sources

Hallo Lezurex,
Dank für die Antwort. Du hast Recht, ich hab mir die gleiche Bilder angeschaut, aber nicht mit iD editor aber mit JOSM. JOSM hat die Bilder offenbar etwas anders ausgerichtet. Ich hatte erwartet das es für beide gleich war, aber leider nicht...
Liebe Grüsse,
dikkeknodel