piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Adam Haba (2024-03-23 12:57:02+00:00): Moją edycję wzorowałem na projektach podanych na stronie MZD, według których na skrzyżowaniu Jaworskiego i Piłsudskiego.

Tak w ogóle dziękuję za to, że nie usuniesz w całości tego projektu, tylko poprawisz go.
bartgron (2024-03-23 13:11:40+00:00): To są raczej drobne poprawki, na podstawie map na FB Urzędu Miasta Kielce oraz tego że byłem w tamtych miejscach i widziałem gdzie ruch jest przeniesiony z jednej jezdni na drugą itp. Poprawiam zarówno tą okolicę jak i okolice Klonowej gdzie będzie druga przebudowa
Adam Haba (2024-03-23 13:14:48+00:00): Ok. Super
Frans S (2024-03-23 17:47:52+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)

Your mappings are rather accurate, however, buildings are not squared.

Connected node of a building to a road.

Used wrong tag on roads (track instead of unclassified or path.)

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149031498
Frans S (2024-03-23 17:47:54+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)

Your mappings are rather accurate, however, buildings are not squared.

Connected node of a building to a road.

Used wrong tag on roads (track instead of unclassified or path.)

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149031498
Frans S (2024-03-23 17:49:21+00:00): Sorry for the duplication of previous message.

During my validation reviews I noticed that traces of highways are regulary wrong tagged.

How to decide when a trace is a path or an unclassified highway (main choices in rural areas)
First, look what they connect.  Houses, settlements, villages. Then measure the width of that trace.

In iDeditor 

Shortcut : Ctrl+⇧ Shift+M – toggle  opens measurement panel
Draw a line between the shoulders of a trace (zoom in very far) and read the distance.
If a trace is max 2 meters wide, tag it as a path.
Wider and connect hamlets, houses and villages should be tagged as unclassified.
Tag residential in urban areas (villages, towns)

In JOSM, use the measure tab or, draw a circle (round building, shortcut Alt-Z when the building plugin is installed)) between the shoulders of a trace and read the distance on the lower toolbar. (don't map that bulding)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations

Quote: Tracks are roads of agricultural purpose. They usually connect fields to farms. The surface sometimes makes them inaccessible for regular cars, or at least limits the speeds to a very slow pace. Tracks should always be avoided for through-going traffic or within urban areas.

Best regards
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-22 21:40:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/442668115

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
infeeeee (2024-03-24 15:52:54+00:00): Szia! 

Ez a tábla a templom falán van? Ha igen, akkor a templom poligonjába be szoktuk foglalni. Ha nem a falon van akkor minden rendben.

Ha kérdésed merülne fel, a magyar szerkesztő közösség elérhetőségeit megtalálod ezen az oldalon: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Közösség

További jó térképezést!
eggie (2024-03-23 07:11:30+00:00): Dag Jarno,

Mappen in OSM is best lastig in het begin. Het zit vol addertjes. 
Je hebt hier een fietspad op een highway=residential geplakt. Dat werkt niet.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=149031821
We noemen dat duplicated ways.
Ik heb het fietspad verwijderd en vanaf de paaltjes de Kosterstraat gesplitst en deels omgetagd naar highway=path surface=paving_stones foot=yes en bicycle=yes
Iets is pad een fietspad als er een bord fietspad staat.
Het zal niet meer voor motorvoertuigen routeren. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-03-23 07:23:15+00:00): Wanneer er nu een bord fietspad staat G13, 12a en/of G11 dan tag ik het wel om naar fietspad.
Verkeersborden bestand overheid.. https://smoothefiets.ddns.net/html/verkeersbordenkaart/index.php?lat=52.852621663&lng=6.314622760&z=18
Gr eggie
tekim (2024-03-23 16:29:04+00:00): Hello again, Google Maps cannot be used when editing OSM
silversurfer83 (2024-03-23 16:36:00+00:00): Moin :)

wenn die Wege alle noch Baustelle sind, stehen die Mühlen dann schon?

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149032091
bielebog (2024-03-24 14:22:45+00:00): Ja, die stehen schon. Voll beflügelt.
silversurfer83 (2024-03-24 14:30:34+00:00): Top

Danke für die Rückmeldung
tekim (2024-03-23 16:27:00+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap (OSM).  Thanks for the edits to the map.  Unfortunately, we are not allowed to use Google Maps when editing OSM due to Google's terms of use.
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2024-10-08 23:11:17+00:00): gens du voyage areas are tagged as
residential=halting_site

not tourist=caravan_site.

I have fixed it.
jcarlson (2024-03-25 14:25:28+00:00): Hey there! Are you a local to this area? I noticed that part of that stream is actually a bike path. I'm working off the county's imagery from last fall, so I can't totally tell where all the culverts are going, but I don't think it's following that route, looks more like it's crossing west under Devoe.
N219JK (2024-03-25 15:53:38+00:00): Howdy! Yes, I live in Prescott Mill, just north of this neighborhood. I'm just trying to fill in some of the blanks. Admittedly, some are just best guesses until we get better imagery or I go look in person again. I first input that as a bike path, that was my first instinct, but it looked like it ran from and to a culvert on the satellite image. I could be totally wrong, I'll have to swing by and take a look sometime soon. Feel free to change it if you're confident about it!
jcarlson (2024-03-26 19:55:46+00:00): Nice! Always good to see another local updating the map. I'm over in Plano, but I work for the County GIS department. We have some high quality aerials, so I am pretty sure that's a bike path. Our aerials are due to be updated in the next month or so, and I'll go back over this area once we get them in.
MikiDi (2024-04-03 15:24:45+00:00): Hi,
Would you mind adding a lifecycle or access restriction tag to the no longer usable road instead of entirely removing it next time? This avoids it getting re-mapped by remote mappers without the local knowledge, while routers will still avoid it.
Relevant wiki pages:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
Thanks!
plush (2024-07-07 10:42:00+00:00): Thanks for the suggestion. I don't do armchair mapping, so I never even thought about people remapping a nonexistent road just by looking at satellite images.
DD1GJ (2024-03-22 23:27:51+00:00): Die Bushaltestelle nebenan heißt "Alte Schule" Ist Die Schule überhaupt noch in Betrieb?
DD1GJ (2024-03-23 00:24:39+00:00): Revert, schon lange keine Schule mehr
silversurfer83 (2024-03-23 16:31:24+00:00): user reagiert leider nicht auf Ansprache. Hab auch schonmal eine DM geschickt.

Hab ihn in der Watchlist. So lange es bei den wenigen Änderungen bleibt, halte ich es für ausreichend, das manuell wegzuräumen. Wenn es mehr wird, müssen wir bei der DWG mal um nen freundlichen "hallo wach"-Block bitten
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149032806
francians (2024-03-23 07:16:55+00:00): Ciao Andrea,

questa sta diventando una edit war tra te e Palex63. È inutile continuare a mettere e togliere il name. Purtroppo tra un mese saremo di nuovo punto e a capo. Direi di scrivere nuovamente all'utente e segnalarlo se continua, anziché continuare a correre.
Grazie
Francesco
francians (2024-03-23 07:23:29+00:00): Ho scritto di nuovo qui: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148985829
george1201 (2024-03-22 23:35:54+00:00): Darf man das? Geschäfte auf disused setzen, obwohl sie noch geöffnet haben? :-)
Na gut, es handelt sich nur um einen Tag. Heute ist das Tagging falsch, ab morgen dann richtig.
Nakaner (2024-03-23 18:11:04+00:00): Hallo,

ich habe den Artikel so gelesen, dass er schon heute (Samstag) geschlossen ist. Aber na gut, viel gab es in dem Laden eh nicht mehr zu holen … :-)

Viele Grüße

Michael
george1201 (2024-03-23 20:42:43+00:00): Egal. Jetzt stimmt es ja.
Nakaner (2024-03-24 11:32:49+00:00): Und in der BNN steht jetzt, dass der Real doch schon am Samstag geschlossen war. https://bnn.de/karlsruhe/karlsruhe-stadt/beiertheim-bulach/real-in-karlsruhe-bulach-kunden-gehen-am-letzten-tag-leer-aus
george1201 (2024-03-24 18:16:55+00:00): Respekt! Das hast du gut vorhergesehen.Das zeigt, dass man sich nicht auf Ankündigung auf  Websites oder Printartikeln verlassen sollte, sondern besser eine Prüfung vor Ort durchführt. Da hätten sich mal die real-Kunden vor ihrem Besuch auf OSM informieren sollen, dann hätten sie gesehen, dass der Markt schon als geschlossen markiert war.

Danke für das nette Gespräch
und schönen Gruß 
(Georg) Helmut
jpennycook (2024-03-23 10:20:46+00:00): Hi!

The name of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/245481602 was changed from "Wade Road" to "∑∑" - was this intentional?

Jon
jpennycook (2024-03-23 10:21:57+00:00): Apologies - I see you fixed it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149034089
mapboy63 (2024-03-23 10:28:34+00:00): Yep, not sure how that happened but it's fixed. Thanks for checking.
dvdhoven (2024-03-24 10:57:26+00:00): Een living_street moet aangegeven zijn met Woonerf borden. Als dat niet geval is, is het een residential.
Ook de combinatie maxspeed 30 met living_street kan niet. Een living_street is een woonerf en heeft altijd maxspeed 15
Aangezien er hier geen woonerf borden staan, heb ik de living_street weer terug gezet naar residential.

Zie ook de wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=living_street

In het verleden zijn er meer mappers geweest die deze vergissing maken.



Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
Wauteurz (2024-03-24 15:33:40+00:00): Hoi Dick, dankjewel voor de feedback. Ik houd het in de gaten voor volgende edits!

Wat ik me in deze context wel afvraag, is wat de aanpak zou zijn voor de woonwijk ten zuiden van deze wijzigingenset: Het betreft een duidelijke bloemkoolwijk bestaande uit hoofdwegen (Vulkaanstraat, Beekstraat en Gieterijstraat) en aansluitende vertakkingen. Normaliter zijn de vertakkingen woonerven, maar in dit geval zijn deze straten wél als dusdanig ingericht, maar niet allemaal voorzien van de verkeersborden voor een woonerf. De Vormerijstraat is een voorbeeld hiervan. Zou dit ook gewoon als residential getagd moeten worden omdat de borden ontbreken?
dvdhoven (2024-03-24 18:54:50+00:00): Hallo Wauteurz,

Een bloemkoolwijk hoeft niet per definitie een woonerf te zijn.
Ik woon nu bijna 42 jaar - zeer tevreden - in een bloemkoolwijk en die is altijd zone 30 geweest van het begin af aan.
Als ik met de verkeersbordenkaart https://smoothefiets.ddns.net/html/verkeersbordenkaart/index.php?lat=51.927596458&lng=6.343207061&z=19 kijk, dan zie ik bij de Vormerijstraat, Beitserijstraat, Stamperijstraat en Smelterijstraat geen woonerf borden. Die zijn dus residential met zone 30
Bij de Kapelaan Heggestraat en de Pastoor Rölingstraat staan wel woonerfborden, dus die zijn living_street. 
Echter de noordelijke poot van de Pastoor Rölingstraat lijkt geen living_streeet, er staat bij de splitsing een einde woonerf bord.

Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
Wauteurz (2024-03-24 19:36:43+00:00): Helemaal duidelijk, dankjewel!
Ik zal de benodigde wijzigingen later vanavond doorvoeren.
syntex (2024-03-27 01:05:51+00:00): Ta zmiana jest błędna. Nie rozdzielamy ścieżek pieszo-rowerowych jeśli nie ma fizycznej separacji chodnika i drogi rowerowej
Xvtn (2024-03-25 15:46:59+00:00): Regarding your changes in this area, everything looks great! Man, the geometry of the roads around here is particularly bad, huh. Many of these were imported from a government database called TIGER a long time ago. Much of it, such as around here, hasn't been reviewed or cleaned up.

Anyway, no problems with your additions here, so thanks. :)
Xvtn (2024-03-25 15:45:10+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over this and your other recent changesets. In this case, you can see that the bounding box (rectangle that encloses all the things you changed) spans the country. Huge bboxes make it really hard for others to review your work, so we should generally save changes made in one local area before moving on elsewhere. Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!
Filip009 (2024-06-22 08:48:59+00:00): Zdravím, máš tu neotagované čiary https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=tagging&lon=18.90540&lat=48.43711&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=nodes_with_empty_k%2Cways_with_empty_k%2Cnodes_with_empty_v%2Cways_with_empty_v%2Cnode_tags_with_whitespace%2Cway_tags_with_whitespace%2Cnode_with_unusual_char%2Cway_with_unusual_char%2Cnode_with_short_or_long_key%2Cway_with_short_or_long_key%2Cways_without_tags pozri sa na to prosím.
macdale (2024-06-22 09:40:33+00:00): Opravene, dakujem za check.
Xvtn (2024-03-25 15:32:36+00:00): Howdy! Since you requested a review, I looked over your change here. Looks great to me overall! One minor improvement I see is that instead of leisure=park, we can be more specific by putting leisure=pitch and sport=skateboard. I went ahead and switched that over.
Let me know if you have any questions or objections, and thanks for your contributions! Local knowledge is a super valuable resource.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-27 06:01:31+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/84735111/history has access:psv that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
Would using psv access tag (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:psv ) be fitting at least equally well?
pitscheplatsch (2024-03-23 15:14:30+00:00): Hi rain69, welcome to OSM.

May we know the source of your mapping actitvies? Thanks.
angys (2024-07-04 20:18:51+00:00): Haven't open yet
InsertUser (2025-01-02 01:19:44+00:00): There are lots of maps using OpenStreetMap data. Rendering differs from map to map.
iandees (2024-03-23 02:14:01+00:00): Reverting fake+spam edits

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149036334
czebureks (2024-03-24 02:25:36+00:00): Hello!
Thank you for helping us to map a new recreational area in Gdańsk in incredible detail! Today I visited this place and it turned out that only about 1/3 of the planned park has been built so far. The remaining part is probably planned for construction along with subsequent editions of the participatory budget. I have added the "proposed:" prefix to all the objects you created in the area that will be developed in the future.
iandees (2024-03-23 02:14:02+00:00): Reverting fake+spam edits

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149036334
JeSe-MX (2024-03-23 04:15:03+00:00): A este "parque" ¿es posible entrar a cualquier hora y cualquier persona?
iandees (2024-03-23 02:08:51+00:00): Reverting fake+spam edits

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149036251
iandees (2024-03-23 02:11:06+00:00): Reverting fake+spam edits

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149036296
iandees (2024-03-23 02:16:09+00:00): Please don't map fake places on OpenStreetMap. The data is meant to represent the real world. Please reply here if you have any questions about how OpenStreetMap works.
Taya_S (2024-03-23 07:24:20+00:00): @iandees I have reported them. They're a pretty obvious alt of these 2 accounts: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/CoolGuy2004 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/CoolJoe2022
marczoutendijk (2024-03-23 08:49:56+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15861

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
emersonveenstra (2024-03-24 20:57:08+00:00): Hi there,

Thanks for the additions! For https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1265391612, "unclassified" roads need to be part of the public road network. This should be either a residential or service road. Could you please change it to whichever is more correct? Thanks!
literan (2024-03-23 12:21:07+00:00): вы опять продолжаете рисовать тяп-ляп, нарисовали здание поверх дороги
tastrax (2024-03-23 04:02:55+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-06 05:25:27+00:00): Hello!

Note that you do not need to add description of feature type as a name.
For example when mapping tree it is enough to specify that it is a tree, no need for putting that name of this specific tree is "Tree".

So for buildings it is not needed to put house as their name.

Or do you maybe know that this specific object mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1265399812 is specifically named with such name?

And if it was mistake - can you edit map to remove this name?
    
Do not worry too much about this issue - I made way worse mistakes when I was starting. Maybe some tool or explanation is confusing? Why you added this name? Note that I am asking as maybe something can be fixed to be less confusing.
Enock4seth (2024-03-23 21:51:02+00:00): Hi, did you really review machine generated data from RapiD before replacing geometry and uploading to OSM? This residential area could have been better mapped if manually traced considering such a small area.
randomnumber (2024-03-25 17:40:43+00:00): RapiD doesn't generate land use areas. I mapped it manually trough tracing in the RapiD editor, hence the tag as RapidID. My edits mapped the area better than it was when I found it.
b0ssi (2024-03-23 04:04:56+00:00): "and South", sorry
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-03-24 00:25:10+00:00): Hi Quân, edit này chuẩn á. Mà thêm oneway:bicycle, oneway:mofa; oneway:moped đều = no nha. Để đồng bộ. cho các loại phương tiện.
HubMiner (2024-03-24 18:30:09+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415443677

"these ramps are closed from jan to june" - are the closed every year or just for 2024?
jake01756 (2024-03-24 19:10:14+00:00): just 2024
Xvtn (2024-03-25 15:29:55+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything seems great to me! Thanks for your contributions.
Frans S (2024-03-23 10:41:57+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Building not squared.
Building incorrect tagged. Default tag  is buiding=yes



Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149038058
Frans S (2024-03-23 10:42:55+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
During my validation reviews I noticed that traces of highways are regulary wrong tagged.

How to decide when a trace is a path or an unclassified highway (main choices in rural areas)
First, look what they connect.  Houses, settlements, villages. Then measure the width of that trace.

In iDeditor 

Shortcut : Ctrl+⇧ Shift+M – toggle  opens measurement panel
Draw a line between the shoulders of a trace (zoom in very far) and read the distance.
If a trace is max 2 meters wide, tag it as a path.
Wider and connect hamlets, houses and villages should be tagged as unclassified.
Tag residential in urban areas (villages, towns)

In JOSM, use the measure tab or, draw a circle (round building, shortcut Alt-Z when the building plugin is installed)) between the shoulders of a trace and read the distance on the lower toolbar. (don't map that bulding)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations

Quote: Tracks are roads of agricultural purpose. They usually connect fields to farms. The surface sometimes makes them inaccessible for regular cars, or at least limits the speeds to a very slow pace. Tracks should always be avoided for through-going traffic or within urban areas.

Best regards
BCNorwich (2024-03-24 12:09:23+00:00): Hi, These are very strangly shaped buildings, not at all like the imagery. You can easily square building up. Left-click the outline, click the square icon, third one down. The shape must be fairly square to start with.

Regards Bernard.
HiddeWie (2025-07-17 19:25:58+00:00): Hi, can you comment on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dmilestone or https://github.com/hiddewie/OpenRailwayMap-vector/issues/392 how to interpret the railway milestones prefixed by `pkm:`? I would like to display these correctly on the OpenRailwayMap. Thank you!
AgusQui (2025-07-17 20:37:52+00:00): Ready!
https://github.com/hiddewie/OpenRailwayMap-vector/issues/392#issuecomment-3085400459
BCNorwich (2024-03-24 08:37:44+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Review, you've placed these four footpaths on top of existing highways (roads). It's not correct to have highways on top of each other it disrupts routing. If a way needs correcting it's OSM practice to amend/correct the existing way, thus keeping history of way changes. In the case of these duplications I assume you wanted to state that pedestrian use was allowed on these roads. It is usually implied that pedestrians in the absence of a restriction can use a residential or unclassified highway. If it were not so you could merely add the tag foot=yes to the road, no need for a footpath.

Thus I've removed the four footpaths, you can add foot=yes to the roads if you think it is necessary.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2024-03-24 08:42:25+00:00): Hi, Duplicated highways were removed as per the previous review. Please amend the existing highway if it is needed.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2024-03-24 13:14:43+00:00): The duplicated highway was removed.