Also, communicate to me with your usual account, with ﴿﴾‎ you have zéro edits... Very weird!

Done what? Please be specific.

@tux67 you mean their tours. Let's not confuse with the highway=track. ;)

@Wulf4096 access=private on any kind of highway means any kind of mobility is forbidden because it is a private propriety without any exception. Such tag should not be used in conjunction with other specific means of mobility with value "yes", that would conflict. I see this mistake too often and i know that recently someone in OSM's Wiki added such exception but it's wrong. The simple fact that OSM's Carto layer renders it grey, no matter what extra tag, is proof (and logical). Originally, it was meant without exception.

Also, it's a path, so 4 wheeled vehicles shouldn't be able physically to use such way.

About Düren, they should inform themselves on how something works before launching a dispute against a company such as Komoot, who actually is not responsible of the map.

Indeed, please provide the proof as it is becoming more and more common of people ineligibly shutting access with fake "Private property" signs or wanting edits in OSM somehow. Information should be available in government's land registry.

I'm asking because maybe that entrance under cliff rock i had found is not really the cave you recorded.

Hello! Two years ago, you recorded the Völkerhöhle cave and you had placed it here: osm.org/changeset/67590113/
When i passed by with my mountain bike last year, a bit before your position i had found an entrance rather like a shelter under cliff, not really a deep cave but nothing further on your position. So i decided to move it 150m more to South. Lately in OSM, I've enhanced the surrounding area with cliffs and maybe it can help you place it more accurately if you can recall the position?

He confused with another, this hasn't been rebuilt, stayed the same. Thanks for the answer.

And what i meant about the grade5, is that obviously it is used very rarely, hence the uncompacted terrain. To make it clear.

By "erase", i rather ment "deactivate" it by editing the key highway

Hi! If you could find a way like this one osm.org/way/499660348, do not erase. If it's blocked by a feature, there are tags to inform users it is so. Also if it's in the lowest tracktype grade it's because there is a reason: uncompacted soft dirt, grasses and other loose material. Please be accurate! Even if these aren't useful for someone, it may be useful for others and help in matters of orientation and completeing what can be found on terrain.

+ merged equal railways and grass

Hi David!
Why did you restore this way whereas i had added a note saying that it doesn't exist anymore in v3?
osm.org/way/191319880/history

+ positions enhanced on water and buildings

new highways, not new streams

Thank you for clearing the situation out!

Hi! good that you added that stream, i wanted to the other day when we talked about the hiking route relation and track but I forgot.

Tip: if we want to know where the flow of a waterway goes, we can check the elevations on Geoportail.lu Topo map and we can also still cross reference with its streams to verify, even if it's not always correct.

Hi! You added the tag destroyed=yes on this bridge osm.org/way/684177362 whereas i used it the 21st of August. Can you explain?

Hi m sator! You added this relation a year ago osm.org/relation/10983310 What's your source for having included ways osm.org/way/476112566 and osm.org/way/368313920
The problem is that this last track is restricted to cyclists, see note osm.org/note/2447715

Hi G! You added this way 4 years ago osm.org/note/2447715 I know it's a long shot but i'd like to know what's your source to have it made also designated for cyclists? Then user m sator added also a local cycle route relation. The problem is that this way osm.org/way/368313920 is restricted to cyclists, see note osm.org/note/2447715