Hi! I've noticed that you added some highway=disused like this one recently.
The tag is not often used for this, better use e..g. disused:highway=service because this also tells us what the closed road was used for. See also osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
I wonder if you really mapped the closed road because I don't see any road in BDOrtho IGN?

Hi and welcome to OSM!
I've noticed this changeset because of the unusual tag highway=crossing. Was this tag suggested by Go Map ?
If I got that right the sat images show a bridge and steps or ramps connecting this bridge with the primary roads. The bridge itself is not connected to the sidewalks next to primary roads, so it should be tagged
highway=footway + bridge=yes + layer=1
Next, draw the to ways which connect it to the road network.
Maybe add sidewalk=left or sidewalk=right to the primary roads where this is feasable.

Hi Andy,
well, so this will be one of many unanswered cs comments unless sabiyana is still active for OSM...

oops, meant footway, not path

what do you mean? I see that you added the note but it was and still is a abandoned:highway=path

I agree that it should be kept in this case. Maybe add a note that points to this discussion?

Some of the new residential roads added by
you looked strange. Parts are paved, parts are barely visble. I have no idea if the latter are really usable. At least they seem not to be used often and they have different surfaces. Without local knowledge I would not map them with only IBGE as a source.

Hi, I am also an armchair mapper, sitting in Germany. I prefer to map nothing in cases where sat images are poor. All normal image sources provided by JOSM seem to show two rails on an embankment, so I think cars cannot pass the rails there.

two things:
1) The name tag on the nodes like
osm.org/node/5515708425
should be removed.
2) The ways like
osm.org/way/571731548
I think they are not needed at all, as they duplicate the information of the nodes.

I hope the polski wiki also says that you should add the tag to a node on the highway?

I suppose that was not intentional. Can I help restore the data?

Hi! I've noticed that you removed a river here:
osm.org/way/247827893
What was the reason?
You also removed some route relations. Was that intended?

Hi! I wonder what this highway=underground means:
osm.org/way/561758293
Maybe the building is just a roof and the part of the below it a highway=path + covered=yes ?

Hi! I've changed the unusual highway=abandoned:footway to the common
abandoned:highway=footway.
After doing that I wondered if abandoned: is the right prefix for a way that is not visible as
the wiki
osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix for abandoned: starts with "still visible". Maybe you find a better prefix there?

Thanks for the quick response :-)

OK, danke für die Rückmeldung.

OK, I fixed various errors here:
osm.org/changeset/63533472
I think you probably forgot to download existing data before adding new. This resulted in duplicated or overlapping ways. Hope I did not introduce new errors with my changes...

Hmm, are you sure that normal traffic like cars can use this way? In ESRI I see some marks which indicate that pedestrian use this way but I see no normal infrastructure to cross a rail. Besides that the connecting nodes should be either railway=crossing or level_crossing, depending on the road type.

Thanks and happy mapping!

Moin! Mir sind hier ein paar building:demolished=residential aufgefallen. Normalerweise verwendet man z.B. razed:building=residential
Der "Lifecycle Prefix" ist halt ein Prefix, kein Suffix ;-)
osm.wiki/DE:Lifecycle_prefix
Bei den Straßen ist highway=demolished auch unklar, könnte auch sowas wie "voller Schlaglöcher" bedeuten.