Perhaps there has been a misunderstanding.
I was suggesting that _you_, as the person who is changing the tags, would as part of the processs where you ask yourself "is this a sensible change and should any other tags be changed" also ask yourself "which applications consume these tag/value combinations and who do I need to notify".

Hello,
As noted at osm.wiki/Tag%3Aaccess%3Ddesignated doesn't actually mean anything. If something is foot=designated, then it is a way that has been specifically designated for foot access. access=designated doesn't actually specify a mode, so makes no sense.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I've removed the name that you added to some access land on Bannau Brycheiniog. It is not called that; that is the name of the national park (of which it forms part).
Are you sure that the other heathland areas here are really called what you have named them here?
Best Regards,
Andy

That PR was a format change only: https://github.com/osm-search/Nominatim/pull/3375/files - I'm not sure what that has to do with the suggestion that you, as the person changing OSM data, should look and see how tags are used before making changes.
The actual software used to display "who uses what" is irrelevant to that.

I'm not sure what a pull request to nominatim has to do with anything?

Great, thanks!

If a tag disappears and I'm not expecting it to I still need to see why it's gone.

Both ts0740b and ts0752b

There is a feed of changeset comments (and other comments); ChangesetMD can read that.
It might be easier just to process mails as they come in to though - assuming you can receive it on a machine you control?

The value here previously was "multi;q". That obviously means that the user meant "sport=multi" but also that they meant to square the rectangle. Did you manually square these rectangles?

Please "engage brain" when making these changes.
You've changed "craft=joinery" to "craft=joiner" on node/2659961527 but have left the tag "joinery=doors". This is exactly the sort of issue that I raised with you on changeset/139677537 just two months ago. I would have hoped that errors that you acknowledged then would have been avoided in future changes.

This is another example where it would have been nice to know that it was happening. I've commented at osm.wiki/Talk:Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/fix_many_obvious_typos in case that route works; many comments at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=3199858 don't seem to be acknowledged; perhaps you're not reading mails from that account?

Given that you're only replacing one value here It'd be much better if instead of just "fixing unusual departures_board values with a clear replacement" you actually said what you were changing.
It saves people having to hunt through the actual previous values you changed.
Failing to do this is making life harder for consumers of OSM data.

Sigh. Would it really be _that_ difficult to contact consumers of tags that you're replacing, here https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=guns#projects ?
No one's going to object that the replacement here is similar but without a message that a consumed tag is going to go away I have to hunt down why it has gone.

(oops - sorry for commenting from wrong userid)

Thanks for tidying these up.

This changeset introduces an "extra bit" of the Dales High Way by the Leeds Liverpool Canal at relation/7152429#map=18/53.84068/-1.80121 . The "extra bit" is signed, so it's the section to the east that's likely wrong (or there's contradictory signposting, which wouldn't be unheard of).

More widely it's about trying to test Garmin foot routing on trunk roads, but before doing that some values needed correcting (on this bridge, sidewalk=both)

¡Hola José Condo y bienvenido a OpenStreetMap!
Parece que se construyen way/1259493116 s mapeados directamente sobre way/1259475526 que fueron mapeados dos minutos antes por https://www.openstreetmap .org/user/Doris_cev. ¿Están trabajando juntos en la misma área?
Atentamente,
andy

Hello José Condo and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
It looks like building way/1259493116 s mapped directly on top of way/1259475526 that was mapped two minutes earlier by @Doris_cev . Are you working together in the same area?
Best Regards,
Andy