Zdravim, relacia relation/20079936 s len dvoma clenmi je nefunkcna. Odkial kam sa tu neda zabocit?
Predpokladam, ze sa musi ist z Novackeho na nadamiho dolava (teda na vychod), ked je jednosmerna. Je to tak? Potom je relacia zbytocna, lebo doprava sa nesmie, ked je Adamiho jednosmerna v bode krizovatky.

Ten park way/1544316036 nie je cely pokryty lesom. A ma kde je les uz zakresleny bol. Takze preco prekryvajuce sa lesy? JOSM na to aj upozoril. iD to nerobi?

A trosku zmysluplnejsi popis sady zmien poprosim.

What problems did JOSM have with all the names that you have removed? And how did you find out the various language variants of the Komi republic name from ESRI imagery (which has no names).
This changeset seems absolutely bogus.

Hi, you did not oly add name:en but also many other languages, so your description is misleading. Worse, it is not allowed to copy data from Wikipedia to OSM, see osm.wiki/Collaboration_with_Wikipedia#Geodata_import/exports_with_Wikimedia_projects . So revert all the changesets like this one as soon as possible. Thanks.

Sorry, but you broke the name of the relation relation/13376469 here. See the 'note:name' tag in there. The name was correct, and you chaning it to Spanish now does not match the note. Also, what exactly were you fixing in the name? What was wrong with it? names with / or - are correct, if the represent multiple languages used in the region.

Hi, as far as I know, Wikipedia is not an allowed source for OpenStreetMap.

Hi, you claim to add Korean names, but you also added many other languages. You provide no source. But according to the wrong names you added it is clear you copied them from Wikipedia, which is forbidden (it is not an allowed source).
The changeset will be reverted.

Super, dakujeme, hotovo.

A viete aj preco? Uz opravili most, kvoli ktoremu sa tadialto obchadzalo z jednej casti Serede do druhej?

The dust component is intentional and permanent part of the material, it does not go away with rain. It is actually there to allow rain to be absorbed into the surface and still be walkable (no puddles), similarly to clay on tennis pitches. Lookup that "crusher fines" material (it seems there are different sizes produced too).
So 0-5mm does not fit into 2-8mm range. Also, thanks to the dust, it is not loose surface and is not problematic for bicycles.
It is not as what si displayed nor described on wiki surface=fine_gravel.
It is more closer to surface=compacted (aside from a .
The image at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Two_gravel_roads.jpg is weird, I wouldn't consider the right surface as fine_gravel, it does not look very loose. It is more crusher fines or dirt or compacted. I cannot see the individual stone gravel particles.

No neviem, bezne sa to tak robi.
Preco by to nebolo dobre? Musia to byt len stromy popri ceste?
Ale ak sa niekomu chce zakreslit jednotlive stromy, tak to tiez bude dobre.

Nerozumiem, myslim, ze highway=footway#Areas o plochach jasne pise.
Myslim, ze medzi pesou zonou a kusom vydlazdenej plochy je rozdiel. Problem je, ze tu nie je dopravna znacka pesej zony, takze kazdy asi len moze hadat k comu tato plocha sluzi.

It seems the material I mean is called "crusher fines". There is already some use of it in OSM, but very rare.

Hi,thanks for the updates. But it seems you have shifted all objects according to Ortofotomozaika, while they were all drawn according to the cadastre map (source=kapor2). You should have changed the source on the objects when you used a different source. Second, as all the objects are now shifted relatively to the cadastre map, let's hope the new positions are correct and you haven't introduced a systematic wrong shift. Note the area is raised by a few meter, so there may be a skew in the Ortofotomozaika because it is shot from the side, rarely from a point just above the objects. You can see it on buildings that the roof is at different position than their base. And in OSM we map the object where the base is.
You made this mistake with building way/739643650 which you have shifted to align with its roof, but that is incorrect.
So let's see what happens in a year when a newer Ortofotomozaika is published, whether you will not need to shift the objects back :)

What is worse, you seem to have duplicated the footway at way/1540314591 (there is already way/902159829 ). Also, as far as I know that area, there is n gravel surface on those roads, but a very fine dusty material. I called it surface=clay, but I am going to fix that. Some other ways are marked with surface=fine_gravel, but no gravel.

Zdravim, preco by to malo byt pedestrian namiesto footway?

Zdravim, to pridanie building=yes na relaciu Univerzity Komenskeho nebolo dobre. Vytvorili ste budovu v budove a robi to teraz problemy.
Netvrdim, ze ta relacia je nejako slavne urobena, ale nepomohli ste jej.

Vsetky Vase sady zmien maju popis "Add/update missing info." , co nie je vhodne, pozrite: osm.wiki/Cs:Dobr%C3%A9_koment%C3%A1%C5%99e_sad_zm%C4%9Bn .

Dufam, ze len "neopravujete" klamlive hlasenia editora iD.

I have fixed it for you so you can check: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=186612239

Hallo, bitte erfinden Sie keine Namen. Verwenden Sie ausschließlich den offiziellen Namen, wie er vor Ort im Geschäft/in der Klinik oder in anderen relevanten Quellen angegeben ist. Es ist sehr unwahrscheinlich, dass diese Klinik den von Ihnen genannten deutschen Namen trägt. Auch auf der Website https://excimer.sk/ findet sich kein entsprechender Hinweis. (Die Klinik ist inzwischen umgezogen.)

I mean that is for road surface. For paths with cycleway and footway parts using cycleway:surface and footway:surface is common, but I think it is only useful if the surfaces differ.

I see, thanks. 'surface' should refer to the whole road with. If individual lanes have different surface, 'surface:lanes' can be used too.