Hello! What is the point of creating sidewalks which lead to nothing? Like this one: osm.org/way/831369177/history
Please avoid creating superfluous elements which overwhelm OSM servers for nothing or even very little use. You've certainly noticed lately that the map got very slow and OSM Foundation is searching once again for new servers. There are far more interesting things to plot than what is already obvious. Thanks for your understanding.

Hello! I noticed this weird multipolygon (MP) tagging/structure from you. I think it would be better that you check how MP work really before creating something which would require a lot of correction. Thanks for your understanding! osm.org/way/562583585/history

Hello! Please, do not leave close nodes to eachother disconnected if you need to disconnect elements. Example: osm.org/node/7653180557/history also the nodes from the residential area periphery near the "Chemin de la Corniche". This creates useless data and as you have certainly noticed, the OSM Foundation needs again to find new servers due to the massive data that overwhelms the rendering of the map and editing each time a new change has been done resulting in slowing down everything even the view of the map. I am correcting these Thanks for your comprehension!

Hello! On this way: osm.org/way/123811447/history why did you leave the specific access tags whereas your tagged it as is a private way?

+ tags added

+ tag additions on steps

+ tag additions on steps

+ corrected Dogado from the wrong building

J'avais omis la bande d'urgence. Bien vu! Merci!

centrage*

Bonjour! Sur quelle reférence vous vous êtes basé pour ce cenrtage?

+ new elements

Hi! The fact that you are new to OSM and plotted very imprecisely makes me think that the following is erroneous. You created this track osm.org/way/800749723 and others on a private domain (or it used to be) and you even created a way which from my memories crosses a barrier/fence/hedge, also on the 2019 aerial photos only a rogue trail/path hows up, not a track... If this is still private, you are indirectly encouraging trespassing of a private propriety. Do not include such features in OSM, several times we had problems with landlords. Can you explain your edits, please?

Hello! Please read carefully OSM's Wiki for tags you are not accustomed to. In the history i've found that this way was before a track grade 1 tagged by users i know well and only partially grade 2. So i believe it was already correct and this road is not part of the road network, mostly only for forestry, agriculture and other specific vehicles maybe (cycling, horse...). So please correct back ALL ways you've edited, check your own contribution history via profile. Thanks for the effort!

+ added tags

+ corrected tag

I'm also learning in the process. The question we can ask ourselves is: is it worth to differentiate similar features slightly different with 2 different tags? Example: barrier=gate, barrier=wicket_gate, barrier=sliding_gate, barrier=hampshire_gate, etc if any other. All these physical features perform the same function: restricting access whether the person is by foot, bicycle, car, truck... the final result will be the same. On another hand, barrier=chain also "prevents" access but the final result won't be the same for all kinds of users, people by foot can still cross it if they want and if allowed depending of the reason. The matter that it restricts to a private propriety will be rather defined with the access tag. So it is very relevant to differentiate a barrier=gate from a barrier=chain

Once i talked with another contributor and he made the joke that OSM contributors are quite close to invent new tags for what kind of door handle we have at door entrances... This cracked me up! Indeed we are indeed so close. We don't have all the same kind of sensibility towards "purposes", so the right balance between both must be found is special occasions. It is great to have a very detailed map but it can become very confusing or even unreliable when it is too much crowded with futile elements.

Also, did you noticed how the map background has become very unresponsive lately and that the OSM Foundation is seeking again for new servers? The fact that the OSM data is becoming ever more complex in many ways is one of the causes.

Bonjour! Vous aviez crée des dizaines de relations ayant les mêmes caractéristiques avec un seul élément. Or le but d'une relation est de regrouper plusieurs éléments différents qui font parti d'une entité partageant ses caractéristiques avec eux. Dans le cas du réseau de piste cyclables d'une commune, le réseau regroupe différentes rues.
J'ai du n'en garder qu'une et effacer toutes les autres: osm.org/relation/10928850/history
Vérifiez si je n'ai pas omis d'en inclure, il y en avait tellement...

Je vois que vous en créez d'autres... si vous avez effectué la même procédure, tout est faux. Il faudra corriger s'il vous plait sinon ces relations ne servent à rien.

Bien à vous!

+ new elements

Hi! It was not meant as an insult, nor a rant. It just had a "tired" tone because as soon as i see an element which does not correspond at all to reality, i correct it, i don't skip and there is a lot. And it's more frustrating when these interfere with new contributions i'd like to enter precisely or others I already contributed but got changed to something exotic or which does not correspond to reality.

For the gate i admit, i missed the "t", my mind retained "wicked"... Sorry! There are so many now it is hard to keep track when it is not a common tag. People want to detail so much but then most people won't handle it anyway. In fact it is good that you corrected, myself i was mistaken with "swing gate", it does not correspond. So for this sorry and thank you! "wicket_gate" is not yet recognized, i had searched with a "d" too which explains why i did not find it. Anyway, i've tagged it as "gate" for the reasons i told you here before and on a path or footway, it is very obvious that it is no large gate.