Niestety transport publiczny nie jest łatwy. Poprawiłem relacje.
Kilka szczegółów na, które warto zwrócić uwagę:
1. type=route to pojedyncza trasa, type=route_master łączy kilka tras o wspólnym numerze, w prostym przypadku dwie trasy w obu kierunkach.
2. Kolejność elementów w relacji ma znaczenie. Najpierw przystanki po kolei, potem odcinki drogi, po której jeździ autobus w kolejności
3. type=disused_route to trasa nieaktywna, której ktoś nie chciał usuwać. Raczej nie warto dodawać do niej dodatkowych przystanków
4. Uważaj na kierunek dodawany
5. Ciężko edytuje się relacje w iD

Dzięki za poprawę. Stronę widziałem, postaram się przejrzeć kolejne przypadki

You might be right on this particular change but many names were removed here which weren't duplicates

Why would you think using area:highway=footway is trivial? Most routing algorithms use modified Dijkstra/A* with ways as graph edges. I see no easy way to add support for area:highway with good performance.

You can see which projects use this tag at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/area%3Ahighway#projects

I never stated there is no such app, I only said I am not aware of one. I am software developer and I have read in high detail few routing implementations. I try to be up-to-date with what popular apps use.

According to
osm.wiki/Key:area:highway#Differentiation_area:highway_vs._area=yes_on_a_highway
> as of 2019, OpenTripPlanner is the only OSM-based router that supports routing over areas. It does so by computing a visibility graph over the area
See more details at https://scribe.nixnet.services/@giscience/routing-through-open-spaces-a-performance-comparison-of-algorithms-b49b6ec43d6a

I have been there but I don't recall all details, I checked aerial imagery. I will check the place tomorrow as I will be nearby.

Previous tagging didn't imply zebra crossing, there is separate tag for that.
You tend to use tags which don't convey clear meaning and your change caused the feature to inconstent set of tags.
It might make sense to remove way here if crossing here is illegal and I don't think it's the case. Leaving it with lit=yes + motor_vehicle=yes + surface=asphalt makes no sense to me.

Usually feature has one main tag such as highway, amenity, leisure, shop... See osm.wiki/Map_features

Some tags are used by many features, some are limited to one or a few. Example: footway tag is used with highway=footway, parking tag is used with amenity=parking, bicycle_parking is used with amenity=bicycle_parking.

Footpaths might seem reduntant. They are not. Routing applications use highway=footway ways, I am not aware of any using area:highway=footway.

It is ok to keep area:highway=footway, although from experience it causes more issue than it's worth, but please keep highway=footway ways.

You should know that it's forbidden to use Google Maps data. See osm.wiki/Google

I am using aerial imagery: Geoportal.

Your tagging was simply incorrect, and you made another change which made this feature incorrect, again.

Please read the wiki first.

It is legal to cross here, there is no need for zebra crossing and footway=crossing doesn't mean that.

> Yes, no police officer is going to stop you for biking on the sidewalk in Warsaw
You might be surprised.

bicycle=yes means that it is legal use bicycle here. It is not. See osm.wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Dyes

I am not a native English speaker, for me it is close to a street and parallel to it, so I used sidewalk. Not really relevant.

I reverted this change. With this tagging such area is not useful, it shouldn't be glued with ways and makes editing more complicated.

Could you make better changeset comments? It's unclear what you wanted to do.
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

It seems that you wanted mark crossing as unmarked. I think previous was correct. footway=crossing does not imply that it is marked.
crossing key is used on a node where footway crosses highway (street). See osm.wiki/Key:crossing

I changed tagging in osm.org/changeset/129209529
motor_vehicle=no and foot=designated are reduntant for highway=footway. I think bicycle=yes is a mistake.

Is bicycle allowed on osm.org/way/1115816181?
Looks like a normal sidewalk

Zmiana wycofana w osm.org/changeset/129194780
Jakie jest źródło budowy takiej linii kolejowej oraz proponowanej ekspresówki?

Czy butik zajmuje cały budynek? Raczej powinien być dodany jako punkt

Nie ma problemu, zmiana jest dosyć prosta (przynajmniej w JOSM), tylko warto o tym pamiętać :)

Jak zmieniasz przystanek z punktu na linię proszę popraw relacje autobusowe, aby linia reprezentująca przystanek się w nich znalazła

Jeżeli ddr przecina się z ulicą/chodnikiem to powinny mieć wspólny punkt na przecięciu.
Chyba, że są na innych poziomach np. kładka/wiadukt i wtedy należy dodać layer.
Dodałem, dzięki za dodanie ddr :)

You added duplicate of running track. I removed it in osm.org/changeset/128410875

Dzięki za pierwszą edycję! Zamknę notki, bo już usunąłeś

Zmiana została wycofana w osm.org/changeset/127842443

Aleje Jerozolimskie zostały przesunięte na budynki. Ta mapa to nie zabawka.
Proszę o dawanie poprawnych opisów zmian.