The footway is indeed separated by a physical obstacle, the kerb, as can be verified here for instance: https://bex.uzuverse.com/

Many of these are actally needle leaves.

Merci, c'est possible. la définition de living_street diffère un peu selon les personnes et les pays, de sortes qu'il n'y a pas forcément besoin de panneau, mais votre changement est probablement pertinent. Merci en tous cas de participer à ce beau projet et bonne cartographie! :-)

OK. Thanks. Sorry for this mistake and thank you for the cleanup.

Sure. In general, I try to avoid overlapping areas as it makes editing more difficult.

Kein Problem. Bonne année! :-)

Hi. Why did you delete all the rood details? They were accurately mapped.

Ich sehe, dass es schon korrigiert wurde. Danke ! Und sorry fur das Fehler.

Lieber Habi. Das is Fehler von mir. Sorry. Ich werde es korrigieren.

There is a physical kerbed island, I know this because I walked there many times, and the ways can therefeore be separated as per "A dual carriageway (known as a divided highway in American English) is a road with two carriageways (roads in each direction) that are physically divided by a non-road barrier, median, or other obstacle. This is done to separate high speed traffic, allow usage of the middle of the road, or accommodate new lanes."

Why did you delete acually existing ways? I have lived in this village and the two access ways exist as they were drawn. please reaore them.

Thanks a lot. I mostly use the same tool to detect area error but I will also check the routing from time to time.

I think I made the error because of a conflict (I validated an other contributor modification without checking as I uploaded mine).

Thank you very much. I don't know how I could do this mistake. I think I corrected it in osm.org/changeset/156747221 . Please may I know which tool you used to detect the mapping mistake? I could help me detecting it myself.

Sorry, the source is aSwiss Image 2024 + GWR from https://qa.poole.ch/addresses/ch/missing/5406.geojson

Well done! I had been preparing that for days! Thanks.

Whenever I stumble on older overnodded ways, I remap them.

No issue and I am sorry it didn't work better as these simplifications are truly welcome from my side. I dot it myself as here for instce https://osmcha.org/changesets/154923883?filters=%7B%22ids%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22154923883%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22154923883%22%7D%5D%2C%22date__gte%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%222024-06-30%22%2C%22value%22%3A%222024-06-30%22%7D%5D%7D

See here as an example osm.org/edit?changeset=155151118#map=19/46.33697/6.87180

Thanks for a pretty successful and non destructive simplification! it has however left a lot of empty nodes. Do you know how to select and delete them?

Fictional spaces were indeed indroduced between meadows and fores, between vinyanrd and residential areas, and even between vinyard and vinyard. The relations were not broken, not according to JOSM, not according to OSMinspector.

Stating something simply doesn't make it right. I have nothing pesonal against you but you deleted real features which existed in the world, left random untagged ways and created strange spaces including between vinyard and vinyard. Please refrain from doing this sort of edit.