As these are normal cyle & footways, where only on one day some people cycled around with special bikes, I would not have the parts as tracks. You could theoretically make a relation and put the normal bike path parts into them, and then use trail or route tags on the relation, but tracing it over like that is not useful. I think this should be reverted 100%. Also, unless this event gets much bigger, regular and more official, this data should not at all be in OSM.

Nur das jetzt einige Stop positions als rolle platform_entry_only haben, während die platform rollen unverändert sind. Bitte entweder den stop positionen "stop_entry_only_ ubd den platform "platform_entry_only geben, oder diese Änderungen revertieren. Es ist an-sich implizit logisch, dass erste Hst entry only, und letzt exit only sind

Die Plattform (area) und die Stop-Position (mit dem bus_stop legacy tag) sind korrekt gemappt. Bitte keine zusätzliche Platform-node erstellen. Das ist unnötig. Danke

Danke für den Hinweis.
Den Place hab ich wieder hinzugefügt (das der beim mergen verloren ging fiel mir damals nicht auf).
Da diese Nummern sich in der Realität am selben Haus befinden und sich darauf beziehen, ist die Abbildung in der DB nur so richtig. Und wenn die Adresssuche (wie so oft) suboptimal ist, sollte es (zumindest jetzt wo ich den Place-Tag wieder hinzugefügt habe) kein Datenproblem sein. Hoffe das passt jetzt.

So you may have to ask rfuegen what it is supposed to mean. But as it is the only marker with that tag, I guess it could be moved to a note or something like that

Now I remember, the tag was already on the node, I just moved it to the building. Original Changeset/node: osm.org/changeset/24820548 / osm.org/node/3023473668/history

Danke für den Hinweis, war ein Versehen. Ist nun auch gelöscht.

Danke für den Hinweis, habe die Stop-Position auch verschoben

The definitions seem to have changed a few times : osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Tag:public_transport%3Dplatform&oldid=1249860 And yes, the Flughafen is a special case, theoretically, that relation should be changed into multiple as the bus stops are named different from the rail station. But on other stops it is not that problematic. Well done on finding the one where it is just slightly more messy. The name on platform nodes used to be optional, now it is important according to the wiki. So with changing requirements, what is true, what is useful. Idon't see anyone really being willing to say. (local_)ref does not get rendered on all maps and is not used by all systems, then again, some maps use the stop_area relations to group stations, that is a mess anyway. I may split the relations at the airport into rail and bus with the respective names. But having the full name on every node and the ref by which people will find it in a mostly hidden value only does not sit right with me. Also do not confuse the platforms and stop_positions here...

Regarding the changeset comments. I changed some aspects regarding the bus line and its stops. I don't see any point in writing that in any other way than Line-number and maybe a direction. And splitting all of that up into 100 changesets with more precise purpose and prosa is more work than it is worth for me.

I once learned from the wiki, that if a Platform has a ref, that should go in the name, but local_ref is used on highway=bus_stop so it also renders on some maps and is usable. The stop-name only goes on the Platform if no other (important) ref exists. That is how I map it, and I personally believe this to be a pretty consistent way. And having less redundancy than having the stop name on the platform if that is already on a stop_area relation and the stop_positions.

Die Straße heißt aber schon 11. Haidequerstraße.

Hi, that is sime sort of reference number on the Pipeline/marker if i recall correctly. As I know nothing about mapping pipelines I do not know what key that would go in. But as it may be relevant information for someone, I included it. It could be moved to a note/fixme I guess, but that would make it even less findable in my view.

Bilde mir ein diese Note damals aus einer Node am Gebäude übernommen zu haben, da aber das Kloster offenbar eben nicht ehem. ist, hab ich diese Note nun entfernt.

That was not the Bus-Stop, but the U2/U5 platform. The bus stop is correctly mapped (with alt name) next to the road. I fixed this nonsense.

Statt genauere Gehwege zu löschen wäre eher das entfernen der Tags auf der Straße und das verbinden der Gehwege & Straße mit uncontrolled crossing sinnvoll. Es ungenauer zu machen ist eher subobtimal.

Naja, das Business Modell von Parktiger ist, dass sie zumeist das was wir hier als brownfield taggen bis zur erneuten Verbauung als Parkplatz nutzen. Mit Ausnahme des Standortes Perfektastraße sind eigentlich alles Brownfields (oder Gstettn um es lokal zu sagen), auf denen halt auch Autos stehen können. Und da es auf OSM so mapbar ist finde ich es stimmt so.

I will ask again, what is this for?
Useless lines doubling up parts of tram lines?

Same thing here, what are those lines for. That is not a "fix". Testing things should not be done on production

What are these temporary lines for?
If you want to test something, use the test/dev server of osm.