The node was such close to the footway that OSMI (osm.wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing) detected an error. Now I set "noexit=yes" with "fixme=check".

Can you please check these two ways of the changeset?

way/512397892
way/512397914

Both these ways do not look plausible.

Thanks for the correction. I didn't notice the note, it was not visible in the data and also not from bing images.

See the changeset, it is very small. One node was overlapping, duplicated and not connected to "Kotkampplein".The best method I know to look at the details is to try to revert the change in JOSM. You can use the validator and the problem will show up.

Thank you -> Fixed.

Hi. Thank you. Fixed.

Revert done. Thanks for the response.

BR,

ratrun

This changeset creates a couple of duplicated prallel overlapping ways. It looks as you didn't check previously existing ways. Therefore I would like to revert this change. Do you mind?

Yes, it looks like a roundabout. I changed it now.

Please repair the highway type of way/235058406 and the other segements of St. Jobsstraat, you changed it to the name. Thanks.

Thank you. Anyhow it was not me who added the crossing tag. All these sidewalks are mapped badly as they are missing the shared crossing points with the roads on the crossing. It means that they are mostly useless for foot routing. From my perspective it would be bettter to add sidewalk tags to the highway=residential without separating them.

Sorry, I do not understand your language. Please write in German or English.

Please see osm.wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing. There everything should be explained.

Bei OSMI handelt es sich um den OSM Inspector osm.wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing. In der Routing View werden nicht verbundene nahe nebeinanderliegende "highway" Knoten angemeckert. Für diese Knoten ändere ich unter Berücksichtung von Bing und versuche zu erraten was der Mapper vorhatte. Meist sind Knoten nicht verbunden.

There was an unconnected node.

See osm.wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing for an explaination of OSMI routing view.

Genau das hatte ich mit meinen Antworten gemeint. Die "note" könntes Du auch weglassen nach meinem Geschmack.

Das ganze hat eine Historie. Die dazu Disukussion wurde hier geführt. Siehe osm.wiki/WikiProject_Austria/Schnellstraßen, dort ist "festgelegt", dass in Österreich "trunk" für eine Autostrasse mit baulicher Trennung verwendet wird. Ich habe das nicht erfunden. Meine halbautomatische Änderung hat nur das was dort beschrieben ist konsequent durchgezogen. In dem speziellen Fall ist "highway=trunk" zuvor schon flasch gewesen, weil das nur eine normale zweigeteilte Bundesstrasse zu sein scheint und keine Autostrasse.

Bitte lies dir die Diskussion unter changeset/22299654 dazu durch.

Please check this changeset. The new way way/444073760 does not look correct.