Vous avez tagé cet élement comme parc publique, osm.org/way/562891289 C'est faux! C'est très important car il s'agit en réalité de propriétés privées. Il faut laisser cela comme zone résidentielle. privées. Vous devez vérifier le Wiki d'OSM pour apprendre à identifier ce que chaque tag représente dans OSM et s'il peut être intégré à un élément (way, node, area, relation). Ceux ci ont été décide par la communauté par vote.

Aussi, vous avez peut-être remarqué qu'il y a un décalage entre différents éléments, c'est parce que dans l’éditeur ID il arrive souvent que les fonds de carte aient été intégrés sans rectification de décalage (offset). Bing par exemple... Il faut vérifier/corriger un fond de carte avant de l'utiliser pour intégrer/aligner des éléments. Il vous faut trouver une source fiable avant tout et aligner le fond d'écran (SPW recent image à l'air fable). Voici un batiment que je viens d'aligner avec assez de précision, par exemple: osm.org/way/565152668/history#map=19/49.77075/5.62088 Aussi méfiez vous des ombres.

Bonjour, j'ai remarqué que vous connectez des points de batiments à des routes, ce qui engendre des erreurs. Ici par exemple: osm.org/node/5443859345/history
J'en ai corigé quelques un mais je vous laisse libre de réctifier les autres. Veuillez éviter cela à l'avenir, merci pour votre compréhension. :)

massive edit, see the details/history of the according element*

I understand, i've had that same excessive zeal also. ;)

Indeed some photo images have an offset because of steep hills or tilted satellite image shots (check if the walls of a close building are very visible) and need to be corrected. It's an issue i've realized only last years. I was wondering why after having corrected the offset, there are still some areas not aligned correctly. Some people even get fooled of the trees shadows HAHA maybe because their screen's brightness is too dark.

Hi! It's very important to not create too many elements and harmonise the different elements together. For this you should check OSM's Wiki on how to create more simple elements, for example:
- these 2 ways (footway osm.org/way/586960646 & cycleway osm.org/way/586960650 ) can be created within one single way (with these tags: highway=path + foot=designated +bicycle=designated + segregated=yes)
- you created these dedicated sidewalks which are not connected to any other way osm.org/way/586981883 osm.org/way/586982744 osm.org/way/586982744 etc... which makes them totally unusable for routing. Also in my opinion, dedicated sidewalks should only be created when the sidewalk is quite different from the main road, unless special case like the segregated dual way footway+cycleway which obviously are not directly attached to the road, seperated by parkings. Otherwise if it's directly aside the road, better add the tag sidewalk=both or left or right or no. It's way is more simple.
- Also avoid nodes on straight lines, this creates extra data for nothing and makes it hard for portable devices to handle OSM maps.
I know it's quite to consider but it's for the greater good of the map and saves you time for future edits. Thanks for your comprehension :)

another example also this time you lacked actuallu
y in precision because you plotted this neadleleaved forest on the other side of the track but actually the way is its limit, often parcels are limited by ways, waterways or other natural landmarks: osm.org/way/564051076/

example: osm.org/way/568389164/

Hello! Can i suggest you to not create too many nodes on straight lines and also not be too picky about precision like plotting the line around each tree, please? This adds so many nodes that are not really necessary, adding also a lot of data. In my opinion we have to consider this to avoid to overload little portable devices using OSM data. Thanks for your consideration! :)

I know Stereo, but Chachas had put 2 days ago bicycle=no on a way which has the PC1 cycling route here osm.org/way/144874726/history and he commented that "the way is not adapted for road bikes". This suggests that he is misusing the tag bicycle=*, not ME, i just followed his thoughts and tried to explain that he may be forgetting that a MTB is also a bicycle. He actually commented that in all his changesets, even when adding bicycle=yes, that's erratic.

Likewise putting the opposite*

Likesie putting the opposite biycle=yes suggets that all kinds of bicycles can ride on the tracks but obviously road bicycles cannot. :)

Hello! Don't put bicycle=no as this restricts all kinds of bicycle, MTB also but obvisouly MTB can ride on those tracks. This breaks also third party services for planning tours. I'm going to correct your tags.

+new elements, tag corrections

Thank you too! :)

No, i'm saying that you should also pay attention on how precisely you plot your elements (make sure to have your layer well aligned but normally, Geoportail.lu image. sat. are good even if the angle of photo shots are sometimes different) or correct the element's precision with which you interact. This will take a bit more time so maybe indeed you will need to make smaller elements, but not necessarily.

Hi! If you add new elements, can you also enhance the precision of the interconnected elements, please. For example: osm.org/way/86059021/history

Adding big chunks of landuses is somehow nice because we kind of see in general what's in there but afterwards when adding extra details it becomes way more complicated if it's not already placed correctly. The people adding more details will actually have to correct the lack of precision, it's doing twice the job, otherwise those new details get misplaced too. Quit frankly it's not cool for other contributors. Thanks for your comprehension. :)

I guess yeah but as i said, it doesn't exist yet. I explained you. Let's not mislead people using the map. OSM should reflect reality, not agendas of constructions.

Please do not create elements which do not exist, there are no constructions, nothing, even if planned because we don't know for how long it can be in standby. If signs of construction would be present, you should have used the correct tags: landuse=construction + construction=hospital Using the tag amenity=hospital means that the hospital is finished and accessible. Non local people would be mislead. Thanks for your comprehension.

Impossible to have all Sûre riverbank without exceeding OSM data limits which adds difficulties. We should try to shrink the MP so that it only includes the inners. Deleted the data tags relevant to the Sûre since they are already in relation 408622, creates redundancy.