Hi, you are adding changing forest features using imagery which is not very up-to-date. Consider using Maa-amet's ortophoto. Also consider the fact that in a forest used for forestry these things change and maybe you won't be there to update them. Since this place is far from big population centers, other mappers may ignore it too and it will quickly become outdated (as the photos you are basing your mapping on)

Hi, bicycle-pedestrian path was changed to a footway. bicycle=designated and highway=footway is a rare combination. Is this intended?

Very quick reaction :)

If there really is a pipe and you don't have to jump over a ditch, I'd recommend to create a tunnel.

Click on the intersection and in feature type select "Point", this will remove ford. Then select the ditch and it will suggest you to add a tunnel.

Also, it's better to use path instead of a footpath for forest paths.

You can change the type by clicking foot path on top left when it's selected.

As for the ditch, it looks like there is a pipe. If you select the ditch, again with one click you can create a tunnel for it. Then just adjust the nodes (points) of tunnel start and end.

Welcome, very nice edit.
One thing is that paths should connect on intersections, like this path
way/1162803504
If paths are not connected apps won't be able to plot a route. Maybe they are not connected because a bridge is missing? In this case, obviously, they should be.

iD editor will show a message on the left to easily connect it with one click when you select the new path. Also, it shows warnings when you save your changes, don't forget to check them out.

There are times when it doesn't fit as official_name. Like the name in riigiteataja can be different and when an education facility has multiple sites which have their names and the official name looks strange.

I disagree. I like hierarchical structure which goes from country to system to field. And the field name is the same as in the system so that there is less confusion. If there is a usecase to use it as a ref, it could be copied to ref field, but I'm not sure about such a usecase since this id is not a code or a natural key.

EE:EHIS:name is required only when it's different from the name.

I can see this in case EE:kindergarten tag, but not for EE:EHIS:id, EE:EHIS:name and EE:EHIS:type I'm also using.

Paths and rivers do have shared nodes when there is ford=yes because they intersect at the same level.

Same thing is happening here, riverbed and path intersect at the same level.

You are correct that you can walk there, I don't know how to tag it (path with seasonal=yes?), but at least the path from the dry land connects directly to where the river would be and I wanted to show it.

Hello, please keep your changes to one geographical region. You can make multiple changesets if you need to.

I'd like to suggest using square tool which is available on right click, and also just being more careful with your shapes, they don't look good at all. And this house overlaps a road.
way/1159239859

Also, Ukrainian community asked to refrain from mapping Ukraine for the time being osm.wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war

>Where do you see noise?
I don't. Because most of the trails are official, great work BTW!

But if everyone starts to add their personal routes this could get complicated. Right now there are only those 2 which just raise a question, but if we started to add them it will change.

I do think we need some rules.

>Why can't I put here nice route for others to follow?

Because it's an arbitrary personal route. This data is not verifiable and subjective, it's not marked and not publicized as an "official" route. I can make so many IMO nice routes you'll tire of managing relations when editing roads. They'll also create noise on maps like https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/ . There are many nice routers which can help with creating a custom route.

Every mans right doesn't apply to yards which is the case here, that's why I'm curious.

"Luba viibida võõral maatükil, välja arvatud õuemaal, eeldatakse olevat, kui omanik ei ole maatükki piiranud või tähistanud viisil, millest ilmneb tahe piirata võõraste viibimist maatükil, või kui tahe piirata viibimist ei ilmne muudest asjaoludest."
https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/117032023031?leiaKehtiv

The problem I have with it is that it looks like your personal route. If everyone starts to add them we'll drown in them. There are more specialized services for this like Komoot.

>There was no problems passing private properties.

The exact place I'm talking about is here
way/61328529
I'm kinda interested if the owners are ok with it or they just didn't see you / bother with it. It looks like a shortest route between Keila and Saue and is likely to be routed through. Access tags could be set there.

I once hiked abroad on an official route through private property to be greeted by a dog who didn't want to let me through.

Hi, what's the source for these routes?
relation/6535295
relation/6562171
The northern one even goes through private property, I wonder if it's still accessible.

Hi, you probably wanted to use
building=roof

Can confirm that there are signs "on the ground". Added name and source:name=suvery.

The schools look duplicated and I can't see any buildings there. Maybe imagery is outdated.

Nice fix for nonames, was this some automated change?

There are some small strange things like Aru loosing wikidata
way/8016649/history

Not sure that this road should have lost tracktype way/641957435/history
Of course it's a bit confusing since it's not a track anymore, but I think it should be ok to have it since highway tag is about purpose of the road.

Tasuja pst way/30908948/history
1) highway=footway and bicycle=designated are uncommon tag combination which should be avoided, this I've fixed right away
2) Tallinn GIS thinks this street does have a name https://gis.tallinn.ee/veebikaart/ (I'm not sure if anyone has asked permission to use their data, but that can be done). I'll try to check if there are any street signs.

You can also check why the highway type was changed here changeset/130798351

märk 321
«Jalgratta sõidu keeld»
keelab jalgratta, mopeedi ja pisimopeedi liikluse.

Bicycle parking is on the side of the square and can also be accessed by pushing your bike. I'd say using access tags which are about access by law for the whole square is wrong.

I ride bike a lot, but as a pedestrian I don't like sharing infrastructure with bicycles and we shouldn't direct bikes to places where they don't belong. Bolt cyclists often don't care about safety at all. So I'm not sure about Tammsaare park too. I don't want to be too correct with access tags either, but my common sense is a bit different.