Yes, it was discussed at the time in local chat

Whoops, sorry, missed a dot in script.

Corrected.

May I ask why have you added translation of the name and not transliteration? I mean, as far as I can tell, there is no particular reason to do so.

I based my understanding on this wiki page: osm.wiki/Tag:amenity%3Drecycling#Recycling_type:
> `amenity=vending_machine` + `vending=bottle_return` for all machines that accept bottles, cans and crates which return.
and considered ambiguous tagging as undesired.

I see that I might be wrong here. Please consider joining discussion here: https://osmlatvija.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/358602-general/topic/depoz.C4.ABta.20punkti and help us get to a consensus.

Not great. As a novice in tagging, I try to err on side of caution. And when I see warnings, I assume that it's my fault, not editor's (except for obviously ignored by somebody else previously warnings, like happens a lot with crossings).

Thanks for correcting!
I had same exact problem with somewhat similar "air corridor" here: osm.org/way/475617182

I fixed it in a similar way, as you explained.

I still fill a bit confused regarding path underneath. Once I extended building and added building part, path had warnings. I think (but not really sure for now) that warning gone away once I placed points of separation of the path (for `covered=yes`) onto the contour of the building. But I'll figure this out.

Thanks again for you guidance!

It has 523, with "Izņemot ar RTK atļaujām".
After reading what the `access=permit` means I agree.
Thanks for clarification and guidance.