Järjekorra numbri lisamine pole probleem, aga ega mina ka ei tea mis kujul see olla võiks. Vb midagi sellist:

"Lugu " + järjekorra number + ": " + aasta + " – " + pealkirja tekst

ehk #1 board:title oleks "Lugu 1: 1938 – Peraküla saetööstuse kõrgaeg, import Inglismaale"?

Samas selline pikk pealkiri võib kohmakaks jääda.

Ühtlustasin silte: changeset/134471348

Pikse, nende infotahvlite kohta on 5 erinevat infokillukest. Lugu #1 näide:

üldnimetus: 100 lugu matkateelt
järjekorra number: 1
aasta: 1938
pealkirja tekst: Peraküla saetööstuse kõrgaeg, import Inglismaale
url: https://rmk100.ee/100-lugu/1938-perakula-saetoostuse-korgaeg-import-inglismaale

Ning kõik sildid on hetkel sellised:
name=üldnimetus
board:title=aasta + " – " + pealkirja tekst
website=url

Kui leiad, et see sildistus ei sobi, siis vajadusel saab neid korraga väga lihtsalt ükskõik mis viisil muuta. Ma ise leian, et üldnimetuse kasutamine name's on vägagi sobilik.

No, I would use full url in website tag and then delete it from the source tag. If anybody needs to check the source, then it is already included in your changeset details. Let me know if you want to change anything, I can do bulk update very easily.

I personally don't see an issue using the name tag for classifying these information boards. But I do have a really minor suggestion - maybe it is better not to keep the same url in both source and website tags? To me it's just redundant. I'm not suggesting that you should manually change it now, but if you like I help by aligning it and make sure the url is only in a single tag.

It's just a matter of principle - OSM is not a suitable place for storing or sharing your personal favorite routes. There are so many better platforms for that.

PS: Maa-ameti maps are not always very accurate, especially when it comes to small paths and trails in the woods. In some cases OSM data can be better.

Yes, there are "Tasuja pst" signs between Mustakivi tee and Saaremaa pst sections.

If you want assess the reliability of Tallinna veebikaart then you can download GIS files with additional metadata:
https://www.tallinn.ee/et/geoportaal/ruumiandmed

FYI - from the website it looks like they have moved to new location: Asume uuel aadressil:Nuia 16-1

Tasuja pst - I have surveyed it and I can confirm there are street signs on the non-motor traffic sections of the "highway".

It is also listed in kohanimeregister:
https://xgis.maaamet.ee/knravalik/knr?obj_id=100262799

Not sure why it's not properly listed in Teeregister.

gis.tallinn.ee/veebikaart - this is completely separate source. In some instances it can have more detailed and more accurate information than Maa-amet. But the license is currently not compatible with OSM, since it requires attribution: https://www.tallinn.ee/et/geoportaal/geoportaali-litsentsileping

If you don't believe me go ahead and survey the sign :) There is an additional 891b tahvel in there - Liiklusmärkide ja teemärgiste tähendused ning nõuded fooridele §21p29
https://www.riigiteataja.ee/aktilisa/1231/2202/0002/Lisa_8.pdf

qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq, thanks! The service road 1155605661 solves the routing issue.

Cycling through the Vabaduse väljak is definitely not prohibited!

The sign probably refers to wide rickshaw types bikes and not regular bikes:
https://news.err.ee/840310/tallinn-city-council-to-introduce-new-bicycle-rickshaw-regulations-in-july

I try to use common sense - when there is a bike parking infrastructure then it also must be routable by bike:
node/9998188475

Please use amenity=pharmacy and healthcare=pharmacy tags for only pharmacies. Shops like "Looduse Abi", that sell cosmetics, nutritional supplements and other health products, are not pharmacies and should be tagged with something else like shop=nutrition_supplements or shop=chemist

Another issue I noticed - cycleway 1155390144 is not routable from one end.

qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq, maybe you can answer, what is the best way to connect node/10744861718 to the rest of the road network:

a) connect the end directly to Pärnu mnt
b) connect it to the footway network and make sure the section that crosses the Pärnu mnt until way/987191893 is routable/has bicycle=yes tag?

Please don't use production environment of testing. There are dev servers for that: https://apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/

Please make sure not add duplicate pharmacies! For example "Tartu Sõbra Apteek" was already in OSM as a way: 278982491

Currently I deleted the node/7755823575 for this pharmacy.

I am no expert on OSM tagging and I have only visited Voormäe couple of times, so I can't comment on what would be the best way to map it in OSM. All I can say is:

1) "Vooremäe" is a name of a popular area and this name is commonly used.

2) I personally don't see any issues with current tagging

When it comes to semantics, what does the name "Vooremäe" actually represent? Could it be, that this is not just an elevated area? Maybe it's a combination of landform, forest, infrastructure and all the recreational activities it is suitable for? If so, I don't see a tagging issue since this forest is part of Vooremäe and it can be used represent "Vooremäe" on a map.

Here are 2 minor usability issues I see when name tag from forest is removed:

1) When I search for "Vooremäe", I expect to see an area of Vooremäe, not a single node.

2) When browsing the map, carto currently displays "Vooremäe" from zoom level 12. In other maps it is also rendered adequately. Comparing this to for example Suur Munamägi, which is natural=peak, it is severely underrepresented by most renderers at the same zoom level. I know perfectly that "tagging for the renderer" is a bad practice but when it comes to usability, renderers shouldn't be ignored completely.

PS: Sorry for mixing up wikipedia links

In my opinion there are 3 distinct features around this area:

1) Tiny hilltop, that can be mapped as a node in OSM. This is also the highest peak in "Kastre vald" at 125,6m:
https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voorem%C3%A4gi#/media/Fail:Vooremagi.JPG

2) Elevated area, rough approximation:
https://xgis.maaamet.ee/xgis2/page/link/bmktUwWR

3) Forest area, as defined in relation/1458796

If you ask me how to name these distinct features, then peak should be named "Vooremägi" and the whole elevated area is commonly called "Vooremäe" or "Voorekas". I suspect the forest area doesn't need a name but since it overlaps nicely with elevated area it doesn't make sense to have 2 similar polygons for both "Vooremäe" and "Vooremäe mets".

There is a tiny hilltop called Vooremägi but the area around it, which happens to perfectly match relation/1458796, is commonly known as Vooremäe. These are distinct features.

Pikse, even if the forest itself doesn't have an official name, the whole area is collectively know as Vooremäe or Vooremägi. So I wouldn't change it.