I can see that such heavy discussions are exhausting. But I don't really see a way around it. I'd like bicycle routers to work well in Tallinn. It's also nice to read on facebook how someone praises how well komoot works in Tallinn.

The only way we can really avoid such discussions is by improving tools/documentation/proposals which is exhausting in a different way :c

Cutting corners is not the way.

1)
>I've removed cycleway=track, so routing should be better now.

Maybe you misunderstood me. These "sidewalks" seem to be designated as suitable road for a bicycle. At least the southern "sidewalk", can't say for northern without a survey. The infrastructure is bad, but it does allow you to bike through this street by the sidewalk.
Right now you've made this street unpreferable for bicycle routers with "safety" profile.

I know using highway=path may look ridiculous at first. Unfortunately, OSM tagging for pedestrians and bicycles is not ideal
osm.wiki/Path_controversy

Using highway=path is a common pattern for bicycle-pedestrian paths. See here bicycle=designated
under examples.

I've heard that vespucci's default template uses path. iD editor's template doesn't use a footway too (though it uses a cycleway which is a controversal tagging scheme and CyclOSM opposes it).

Most bicycle and combined bicycle-pedestrian paths are along a "car" road, so they can also be considered sidewalks. As ridiculous as it sounds, we can use paths on these "sidewalks". I'm not sure about the northen way, but the southern is definitely a path for me, not sure about sidewalk. Here there is no mention of sidewalk osm.wiki/Sidewalks#Cycleway_and_footway_on_sidewalk (also notice, again, that highway=path is used). Estonian law also doesn't allow bicycles on the sidewalk, but I don't think it matters.

Yes, that's a lot of tags, but that's the minimum for pedestrian and bicycle routers to fully understand what's going because of the reasons listed in "Path controversy"

So, in conclusion, my suggestion is to apply these tags on the southern "sidewalk". path=sidewalk can be ommited if it's deemed too custom.

3) I stand corrected, good example.
Though I wonder if sidewalk:both=separate would be a better alternative? Not sure it will be picked up by graphhopper. foot=no can be used too - on streets with max speed >20km pedestrians are required to use the sidewalk if its present by the law.

It's just that I haven't seen use_sidepath anywhere and maybe it's because other tags already cover it's purpose.
https://overpass-turbo.eu/map.html?Q=%5Bout%3Ajson%5D%5Btimeout%3A25%5D%3B%0A(%0A%20%20way%5B%22foot%22%3D%22use_sidepath%22%5D(59.348770639630885%2C24.582252502441406%2C59.49460615309517%2C24.929351806640625)%3B%0A%0A)%3B%0Aout%20body%3B%0A%0A%3E%3B%0Aout%20skel%20qt%3B%0A%0A%0A%0A%0A%7B%7Bstyle%3A%20%0A%0A%0A%20%7D%7D
not many of them in Tallinn. Having a rarely used tag adds to confusion. bicycle=use_sidepath was used in countries where you are required to use a bicycle road if it's present, but if there's no way to make a turn somewhere, you can go on the road bicycle=use_sidepath. What's the use case for pedestrian? You are either allowed on the road or not, so maybe foot=no is better? (BTW bicycle thing doesn't apply to Estonia, you are free to bike on the road regardless of the bicycle paths)

Hello, a lot of changes here without a comment ;)

1)
On Valdeku there is a bicycle path tagged as cycleway=track. Now on bicycle maps it looks as if there are separate bicycle and pedestrian ways which is false.

I'd advise to remove cycleway from the street, and for the sidewalk use

path=sidewalk
highway=path
bicycle=designated
foot=designated
surface=asphalt

There aren't really enough signs which say that bicycles are allowed here, but there is one from Vabaduse pst direction.

2)
On the junction with Lootuse you forgot to connect the sidewalks through crossing.

3) Not sure these use_sidepath amount to anything. There is nothing wrong with adding them but I don't think there really are any routers which will route pedestrians by these roads when the sidewalks are available.

I think it's better to use access=private for private areas.

https://fotoladu.maaamet.ee/etak.php?B=59.36171507729915&L=24.613512420413095&fotoladu

Are you sure? It looks like this. There is no information about this community garden being abandoned. Maybe at this time of year it doesn't look like one.

They even have a photo of it from 5 days ago. I'm restoring it.
https://www.facebook.com/MoldreTeeSelts/

https://www.tallinn.ee/et/keskkond/kogukonnaaiad

Hi, please don't add names like "basketball court" and "Ping Pong Table"

Name tag is not for classification of objects, but for adding distinct names. It's ok to keep it empty.

Why was it removed?

Hi jemm!
There is a Keila algkoolimaja mapped as a separate amenity=school node. It should be removed as it's not a separate school, but do you know if this can be put as a building name instead? Since you've changed the school here, maybe you know what's in the buildings. Having two Keila schools without any additional info looks a bit confusing on the map.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=59.43931613014&lng=24.84471821018&z=17&pKey=245140930775705&x=0.48511907492081197&y=0.5940202549096453&zoom=0&focus=photo

Here's an image from an allowed source.

We cannot use Google as a source. And the signs I'm talking about were on the bridge.

About Saarepiiga bridge - I see you've added bicycle=designated, but I vaguely remember it having a pedestrian way sign. Has this been changed?

@Tobias1996 how exactly did you obtain these street names?

Here are ways named by this user which match with Google Maps, but you wouldn't have any idea of how to name them on the ground and there is no such data on maa-amet.

way/49953815#map=17/59.43680/24.82379
way/628927061
way/639165721

Here are other changesets which are very similar to the current one
changeset/123204834
changeset/123097908
(here Google doesn't have street names)

And there are many more which name small connecting parts of the road. way/28812875

Google maps loves to name adjacent roads by the street name. I sure hope Tobias1996 doesn't use it as a source.

Is this really classified as a pedestrian street? "autoliiklus on lubatud ainult üksikutel tundidel päevas" There are no cars allowed there at all. Only cars I've seen there are maintenance cars with flashing lights.

This tagging confuses cyclemap and cyclosm. Not sure it's a good idea. These roads do not feel like a street to a pedestrian. I think this tag is more for a street which looks like somewhere where the cars could move, but they are forbidden.

Hi, please don't forget to add addr:city

This is definitely a surface parking, not a street-side

What's Pepe?

I meant that paths are often managed and choosing between a footway and a path should not be done based on it. Footways should only be chosen if cycling is not allowed there. Paths are versatile and allow to map all kinds of non-car roads by combination with other tags.

Just wanted to add that this "managed" argument is IMO should not be taken into account. It's common to tag combined bicycle/pedestrian paths as a highway=path with foot and bicycle=designated and actually more preferred to highway=cycleway by some data consumers. These ways are managed, but are still highway=paths.