Hm. I think not. What I wanted to tell is that you had converted the whole forest (osm.org/relation/155451) into a car park the size of many km². That's simply impossible. :-D

I do not doubt that there is a missing car park somewhere, but if you would like to add it, you have to draw a new area for it using the appropriate area-drawing-tool in the OSM editor.

Hi. Welcome to OSM.

In this changeset, you apparently converted the whole forest into a car park. I guess that wasn't your intention, was it? I have fixed the issue it in the meantime.

--

Hallo! Willkommen bei OSM! In diesem Änderungssatz hast du anscheinend aus Versehen ein großes Waldgebiet in einen Autoparkplatz umgewandelt. Ich habe den Fehler inzwischen behoben.

The bridge has been completed, hasn't it? See https://www.stol.it/Artikel/Chronik-im-Ueberblick/Lokal/Twenty-Bruecke-ueber-den-Eisack-fertiggestellt

Aha ja. Das hatte ich übersehen. Danke für die Infos!

see osm.org/note/387121

Hi. Kannst du vielleicht schnell mal auf folgendes Note schauen: osm.org/note/386012
Danke

Kann es sein, dass hier Bahnsteig 1 vergessen worden ist?

I've reverted this changeset as it added a huge kink to the road network (Sackstraße). See http://imgur.com/ewg6m15 and osm.org/changeset/32179119

I've reverted this changeset. Because it introduced overlapping and invalid landuse geometries.

Wurde die Bushaltestelle tatsächlich auf die andere Seite der Kreuzung verlegt?

erledigt: osm.org/changeset/31917144

Würde für so einen Brunnen nicht besser amenity=drinking_water (anstatt man_made=standpipe) passen? Siehe auch osm.org/node/3586177795

Ah, I found some official maps showing the road connecting at the roundabout, just like I guessed above: http://gis.gvcc.net/WebGis/02/21012/browse.jsp . (I've adjusted the route already.)

And sorry again for reverting your valuable addition so quickly even before asking; that wasn't very nice from me!

Oh, OK. I'm sorry and I will revert this changeset, of course.

But could you please use better changeset comments next time when doing non-obvious changes (e.g. like here: adding a new road which is not yet visible on aerial imagery)? In osm.org/changeset/31348540 you simply stated "ajout divers" which made it hard for me to verify your changes. Thank you!

Btw: Are you sure the new road does connects at osm.org/node/2188350734 to the secondary road and not at the roundabout a few meters to the East of that, which would make more sense from a road construction point of view (at the node where you drew the connection, the secondary is on a underpass)?

discussion continued here: osm.org/changeset/31562171

Hi, is there really a new road along the rail tracks in Branzolo (osm.org/way/244943952)?

Hi. Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap. Und danke für das Eintragen des fehlenden POIs!

Ein kleiner Hinweis: Für die Felder "cuisine" und "opening_hours" gibt es spezielle Formate, in denen die Werte eingetragen sollten, damit sie für Programme auswertbar bleiben. Siehe mehr dazu im OSM-Wiki:
osm.wiki/DE:Key:opening%20hours?uselang=de
osm.wiki/DE:Key:cuisine?uselang=de

I'm still not sure this is a good idea here. The wiki page you linked talks only about using this tagging in addition to one-dimensional streets, not squares and explicitly excludes/special-cases pedestrian areas from the tagging: “Pedestrian areas (for example squares and piazzas) should be formed using a closed-way around the perimeter and be tagged with highway=pedestrian and also area=yes.”

hay. What was wrong with the previous tagging? Those are actual plazas/squares, so highway=* plus area=yes seems like proper tagging to me.

osm.org/node/2354057417