Both Vespucci and JOSM now use highway=path tagging. I was motivated to retag these in Tartu because I personally experienced problems with foot routing that the modern =path tagging will ameliorate.

This edit:

1) Removed a border_control tag on a building (per OSM wiki, it should appear only on a way).

2) Removed barrier=gates before border_control tags, which arguably duplicated border_control tags and generate Osmose errors due to lack of access tagging.

3) Added surface= tags from publicly available images of this border crossing.

4) Added building=public to US government buildings at the crossing.

At this bridge on a tertiary highway, cyclists join the main road. There is no separate bridge and no cycleway lane markings. The separate cycleway bridge mapped previously was fictional, apparently created for the sake of bicycle routing on the Eurovelo 4 route. However, bicycle routing is more accurately specified by the tagging in the present changeset, which uses bicycle=designated tags to reflect the tertiary highway’s designation as an official Czech bicycle route.

Please do not add wild-camping spots to Openstreetmap. OSM only documents campsites that are in some way official. If you want to share wild-camping places, there are other places for that (e.g. the app iOverlander).

What is your source for all the tourism=camp_site nodes added around Lake Metsovo-Chrysovitsa-Grevenitso? (For example, 39.8320909, 21.1189556). I find it hard to believe that there are so many recognized campsites there.

I see that you edited this road:

osm.org/way/683595579

Is this cross-boarder road actually open to traffic? (And is it open to traffic from third-country citizens?) If not, the part of the road crossing over the board needs an access=private or access=permit tag.

Hi, I see that you have tagged a number of solar farms in Greece. However, you used the power=generator tag etc. According to the OSM wiki:

osm.wiki/Tag:plant:source%3Dsolar#Enclosed_solar_power_plant

that tagging is only appropriate when adding each individual panel inside the area. When you have drawn the entire area, the correct tagging is power=plant and plant:method/source tags.

I have fixed some of these, but only the ones I have seen with my own eyes.

Is the intersection at 52.1126777, 23.1504025 correct? It looks very different in the Geoportal imagery.

Is there actually a sidewalk along the road at coordinates 51.9074006, 22.366938? Geoportal imagery does not show any sidewalk there.

You added surface=cobblestone to some combined footway/cycleway in Belchatów. Cobblestone is probably not the correct surface; such sidewalks in Poland are generally surface=paving_stones. Please check these ways.

This is important for bicycle routing – routers may refuse to send cyclists down cobblestone ways because they are considered too rough and bumpy.

Could you please move the stop_position node at 51.5922990, 18.9605983 off the intersection of the one-way entrance/exit ways? Geoportal imagery clearly shows that the stop position is a few meters more to the east.

I could do this myself, but I don't want to damage all of the bus-route relations in this town.

Yeah, very_bad is more of a tag used on roads which even normal cars would find risky or impassable.

That road looks perfectly manageable for bikes with robust wheels (the definition of smoothness=bad on the wiki).

You added smoothness=very_bad to some asphalt roads. This is almost never appropriate and it will break routing for trekking bikes.

Please do not add access=no tags to cycleways. This can completely break bicycle routing.

If you wanted to specify that no motor vehicles are allowed, then the correct tag is motor_vehicle=no. However, that tag is generally regarded as redundant for highway=footway, highway=cycleway and highway=path.

The title of this changeset is wrong (carried over from a different changeset), sorry. The title should have been "Sidewalk-related tags and way tags from imagery"

You added tracktype=grade1 to various highway=track ways that you saw while cycling. As documented on the OSM Wiki, grade1 is only to be used for tracks that have a hard covering like asphalt. If the surface is ground or gravel, then the tracktype can only be tracktype=grade2 or below. Please correct this in cases where you remember the surface or it is visible from Mapillary.

You set Bydgoska street at 53.13721, 17.60213 to oneway=yes. Is this really accurate? Both Mapillary and aerial imagery show that traffic on this part of the road flows in both directions.

Previously, the parking ways under Wiadukt Solidarności were tagged as layer=-1, tunnel=yes. This is incorrect, as the Wiadukt Solidarności’s ways are already tagged layer=1, i.e. the parking and its service ways are actually layer=0.

This changeset involved changing the tag surface=concrete:blocks on a road to surface=paving_stones. surface=concrete:blocks is not documented on the OSM wiki. However, the wiki for paving_stones:

osm.wiki/Tag:surface%3Dpaving_stones

shows that this is the appropriate tag for the surface that is visible on Mapillary.