Thanks for the reply. Further more, if you ever walked that track, isn't it connected to this path osm.org/way/39666540 , since it goes to the same direction?

OK thank you! Yeah indeed there is a gate at the Via Aurelia a building along that path which makes me think it's private but i don't know if there is also a gat at the top of the hill.

Hi! You created this inaccessible path osm.org/way/485193584/history Is it really not accessible even by foot? Can you give a description, please?

Hi! You edited this path some minutes ago osm.org/way/258506249/history Is its access still restricted?

Merci de votre comprehension! Je suis en train de corriger. Bien à vous,

Bonjour, Je cherche toujours à améliorer la positions des différents élements sur OSM car il ya parfois un manque flagrant de précision. Or, ici sur ce carrefour osm.org/node/2420202298 , j'ai remarqué votre "contournement" qui ne suis pas les images sat. du track. Vous dites en commentaire que vous avez aligné selon le heatmap de Strava, mais ce heatmap ne retranscrit qu'une moyenne de multiples traces GPS selon le parcours des utilisateurs. Donc il ne reflète pas la réalité. Faites attention à cette grossière erreur!

i changed the unclassified road.

A "highway=path" will always be impossible to be driven by cars since it's a type of way which is too much narrow for any 4 wheeled vehicle. So you don't need to add any dedicated access tag unless particular situation. If by "path" you meant a way in general, then you just need to add the dedicated access tag "motor_vehicle=no" to restrict it to this type of mobility. I have to say also that way we were talking about (this one: osm.org/way/323565259 ) is not an unclassified or service road since it's quite unmaintained, (dirty because of agricultural traktors, many tree leaves, a bit uneven and easily prone to erosion on the its sides), so it is rather a "highway=track" with the tag type "tracktype=grade1" because it has a hard surface (grass or sand is "tracktype=grade5").

For the "Rue de la Gare", if it's only allowed for people living there, then we add the dedicated access tag "motor_vehicle destination". It's already tagged that way. Thank you for your comprehension and efforts. :)

Hi, what is the point of creating ways without connecting them? I'm astonished since you are registered in OSM for quite a long time. There are third party routing services that use the processes of ways to establish direction...

You are not taking into consideration what i wrote you! A few minutes ago you tagged the first way as "access=no" (access restrictions for all mobility means) whereas it has also "foot= yes" and "bicycle=yes".

Sorry, i forgot to link you the ways i was talking about...
The lane detail: osm.org/way/323565259
The type of way: osm.org/way/539218700

Hello! I see that you are new to OSM. Please, make sure that you follow OSM's wiki consensus / rules so that a mximum of people are not mislead by an element. For example:
- lanes=0 is illogical there is always at least 1 lane
- respect the type of way you are plotting by considering its type (see OSM, access, etc...) like this of a way you had made as residential but in fact it's an unmaintained track (dirty, leaves, etc), it can be dangerous if a car takes this way, it's even at the border of a hill.
- be precise as possible, respect the position compared to other elements, the North end of the previous way was connected after a private driveway whereas it finished in front, if not possible like in forests, try to make an average from a source.
Thank you for your comprehension.

Hello! You edited this way some time ago: osm.org/way/512385981/history It would be better to avoid the tag "highway=road" since it's totally unspecific. There are far enough of all kinds of ways in OSM to find the most appropriate. I'm correcting at the moment all those tags in all Luxembourg.
Here is the OSM's Wiki page for all kinds of highways:
osm.wiki/Key:highway

Hi, you were the last person to edit this way (image printscreen): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzU9J1u6HDyCWndOSVdqSnRDenM/view?usp=sharing As you see, you have totally misplaced the position of a node. I've shared an image because i'm going to correct it now, so that third party services get updated fast. I see that you are new but please be careful in the future. Also i see that you use Potlatch 2. I do not recommend it, it's outdated and prone to bugs, i even suspect the node was displaced because of a bug. Finally, do not use lightly the tag "highway=road", it's very unspecific, not very useful. If it's a very small way that can be used for all kinds of vehicles, rather use "highway=unclassified", if the way is unmaintained which means having big chunks of dirt/stones, degraded or with a natural surface (gravel, stones, grass...) but still usable for 4 wheeled vehicles, rather use "highway=track" and preferably specify "tracktype=grade1, 2, 3, 4 or 5" depending of its level of hardness (not smoothness which is another kind of attribute for highways). As you can see it can get very complex, so in doubt always read carefully the page of the according element in OSM's Wiki. Here is the page for all highways: osm.wiki/Key:highway
Track page:
osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack
Track and tracktype grades:
osm.wiki/Key:tracktype

You don't give a damn... right... I'll keep that in mind.

Hello! Yep, i ment service. Thanks you! This area is filled with elements having an offset, wrong tags, etc. I wanted to correct as much as possible before leaving for an appointment. ;)

Hello! This is very unlikely a way only being a cycleway. What about the access to the farm on the East side of that way... certainly not ONLY by bicycle! Logic! :) Allowed access for a certain type of mobility does not make the way necessarily that type of way. There are many access signs on the road CR103 with access restricted to vehicles except bicyles but that doesn't make all of them cycleways. The way you edited is mainly an unmaintained but solid small road (track grade1) for agricultural purposes. On the West side the signs even designate it as allowed to agricultural vehicles and rollerskaters. Before doing any edit you should make sure how the different elements have to be tagged according OSM's general agreement via the Wiki.

Yeah people tend to imitate what they see often, even unknowingly errors assuming it is correct.
I've changed the tags i had edited in this area with crossing=traffic_signals or uncontrolled
crossing_ref=zebra
footway=crossing
highway=footway

Hello! This is quite misleading! The page you shared is the one i had seen recently and what i have done actually for this changeset. I had already used the combination highway=footway + footway=crossing though but i don't use very often urban elements, so i had to check again, was confused and I thought i even had integrated both versions. Now, I found the later Wiki's page and can see that it has the approved stamp. Notice there are even these tags crossing=zebra and crossing_ref=zebra! Duplicate for the same purpose? This project really needs way more thorough yet simplified Wiki pages! Thanks for the report, will correct when i'll have some time.

Hi Dan! You say in your changeset comment that the access is unrestricted (free) from north but some parts are still restricted as private. I think it's because the way was split in several parts and you only changed the one near the fence put aside. I've tried by logic deduction to correct this. Can you second check if my changes reflect reality, please? Also near the area with the fences/gates. If access is granted we should even put access=yes on the gates to confirm access is unrestricted. Thanks!