siehe z.B. note/3315917

lässt sich noch rekonstruieren, welche Wege mit diesem changeset gelöscht wurden? es sind einige Wege zwischen Grabendorf und Zankwarn abgängig, wo isoliert Objekte wie Zauntore oder Hochstände herumstehen - ich habe mal ein bisschen etwas begonnen (wieder?)herzustellen

da gibt es nun knapp nebeneinander zwei Höfe "Knauder" - halte ich für ziemlich unrealistisch? In der ÖK50 und im Franziszeischen Kataster heißt nur der westliche Knauder, der östliche heißt "Zarfl" (bzw. sein nördliches Nachbarhaus "Hintertheißenegg Nr.17")

Ich gestehe, dass ich grad erst im wiki zu "alpine_hut" nachgelesen habe, dort wird definiert, dass es eine Übernachtungsmöglichkeit braucht. Das ist hier offenbar nicht der Fall.
Mir ist diese konkrete Hütte im Vergleich zu anderen Hütten in der Umgebung aufgefallen, die als alpine_hut getaggt sind - möglicherweise gibt es hier großräumig noch ganz schön viel nachzuarbeiten, wenn man es genau nehmen will.

warum ist das Franz-Ferdinand-Schutzhaus keine "alpine_hut"?

merci

Der Königsschusssattel kommt mir mit 1854m wesentlich zu hoch vor - 1654m ließe ich mir einreden, bitte prüfen.

FvGordon restored the contact between the different ways around Punta Cassana.

Perfect, thank you very much!

Ah, this could explain a lot! And certainly the abbreviations are not easy too ("P." vs. "P.ta", we have these problems in German language, too). After all, the alpine pastures in the west are called "Chaschauna", this name could have been moving on either of the peaks (or both, which is not so frequent, but it can happen, as it's the case with Corno di Dosdè and Pizzo di Dosdè opposite Val Viola Bormina - but it could have happened there by mistake, too).
As for "Cassana" vs. "Casana", both would be fine for me - the Swiss map, wikidata, WP-DE and WikiCommons all use "Casana" (adding that also "Cassana" is common), but if "Cassana" is better from the linguistic view, that's also fine.
Don't bother about any "mess", I bow in respect to everybody who started getting this wonderful OSM project going, and the start (with an empty map) is always hardest, isn't it? When I started contributing in 2020, most of the map (at least Europe) was ready and I'm only doing minor additions or corrections.

I just amended the WP-DE article and added wikidata talks on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Talk:Q7199830 and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Talk:Q31659903 Usually, there is very little traffic on wikidata talk pages - just in case somebody asks.

Okay, thank you very much for the changes! What I forgot to ask before: Are you sure it's "Cassana" and not just "Casana"?
I used "name:de" and "name:rm" with "Piz Chaschauna", since it's not really German, but I'd like to point out the original language. I'm not too familiar with the Swiss German OSM custom, but as far as I understand, name:gsw should only be used for the Swiss dialect version of genuine German names (not names from other languages).
Technically, I'm rather an OSM beginner (I came over from wikipedia) and still work "manually" with iD, so I don't have any clue about how to import other data or work with JOSM, sorry. But I'm aware of the copyright issues. I often refer to (>100 years) old maps in individual cases (no mass editing) and enter the source to the object.
As concerns the "loose" paths around Punta Casana, I think that this was done by
node/9190916705. The (Europa-widely extremely active) user FvGordon argued that he was repairing self-intersecting ways (most of his edits have been like that during the past weeks). I'm going to ask him. I don't know the places, too (I'm based in Vienna, Austria), I was just doing WikiCommons work (mountain puzzles), which mostly means the necessity for OSM maintenance as well - and the hours fly... ;-)

I'm aware that you have been doing a lot of correcting self intersecting ways recently, but there seems to be a problem around node/9190916705, where the contact between way/557613942 and both way/557613939 and way/686458282 has been lost during you edit. I'm a OSM beginner (just working with iD) and cannot reconstruct what the way was like before - do you have any hint?

Thank you very much again. Seems this is going to be a Ph.D.'s effort... Maybe we should leave it 90% perfect, not trying to get 100% (which is probably not possible for several reasons, anyway).
I was aware that the "mountainbike" name component would be somewhat unorthodox, but I'm bothered about three or more nodes having the same name... the "mountain_pass" tag for the 2431m instance would be generally fine with me, but as far as I read from the Swiss Topo 25 map (https://map.geo.admin.ch/, with an Italian user interface available at the top right corner), it IS also a natural saddle; and if I'm wrong, I'm just asking myself where the lowermost "natural=saddle" is going to be if we ever wish to have it there (I need not have it, it's complicated enough).
And as concerns the "dialect", I'm pretty sure that "Pass da..." is the official Lombard (lmo) version, which is officially used in many cases in this area both on OSM and the Wikis (e.g. "Corn da Camp", "Scima da Saoseo").

Thank you very much for checking and for the explanations of mountain terms. Note that we are not talking about "cime", but "punte" vs. "pizzi".
Meanwhile, I found an interesting note on https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piz_Chaschauna: "Für Verwirrung sorgt, dass auf der Karte des Militärgeographischen Instituts Florenz der italienische Name des Berges (Pizzo Cassana) fälschlicherweise dem Gipfelpunkt der benachbarten Punta Casana (3007 m s.l.m.) zugeordnet ist. „Punta Cassana“ ist stattdessen am Gipfelpunkt dieses Berges vermerkt, die Bezeichnungen sind also vertauscht." In English, this means:
What is confusing is that on the map of the Istituto geografico militare Firenze, the Italian name of the mountain (Pizzo Cassana) is mistaken for the summit of nearby Punta Casana (3007 m s.l.m.), whereas „Punta Cassana“ is set on the summit of this peak [Piz Chaschauna], so that the names are swapped."
As a source, the wikipedia article refers to Renato Armelloni: Alpi Retiche. Guida dei monti d’Italia. Vol. 32, Club Alpino Italiano, Milano 1997, ISBN 88-365-0974-6, pp. 234. And the wikipedia article also mentions that the "Firenze style" is being used on OSM, too ;-)

Thank you very much for your efforts! I moved the easternmost (old) pass object to the west (2431m) and left a note with it. I also added a note on the south-western pass and added the word "mountainbike" to the northern pass, which is in fact a bit higher than the "Passo Confine" (which is also displayed in the Swiss Topo Map), so I left also this one. Do you agree?

Is it possible that Pizzo Cassana and Punta Cassana should be named the other way round? The one in the north-west should be Piz Cassana (with elevation 3070m, by the way) and the one in the south-east should be Punta Cassana, according to the Swiss Topo Map 25 and wikidata. May I ask you to check in the CTR10000 data base?

and here is a fourth pass: node/5207981175

Sorry for writing in English, hope you can understand what I write. There is some confusion about the exact location of Passo di Val Viola. The node node/565086738 should have an elevation of 2426m (according to the Swiss Topo Map 25), not 2475m, but there is no path there. The lowest pass with a path (2431m-2432m according to the Swiss Topo Map 25 and https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passo_di_Val_Viola) is near node node/9836007611 and it is used by https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q15124465. The pass with the better path (at least on the Italian side) is node node/6781381781 (elevation 2470m according to the Swiss Topo Map 25), it has been mapped 3 years ago (with elevation 2460m) by a user who comments that the signs on the pass say this is the "proper" pass. I'd prefer to delete the name from node/565086738 (as there is no path there) and change its altitude as written above. What do you think?

Cliffs should be mapped at their top edge (with their "teeth" pointing downhill), not at their bottom edge. I deleted a number of those which were obviously wrong. In most cases, the "natural=bare_rock" feature has been doing a good job before and is sufficient, in my opinion.