Thanks for the explanation! It is close to my home country setup (Finland) as basically the signs are the same (EU standards I believe), but I just took the instructions from the local(s) a bit too literally without really thinking about the sign legality.

So the cycling routes are meant to use the car lanes for biking on those sections where the sidewalks are meant for walking only. Good work! I must be more careful about those in the future.

Ok, this might be my mistake by misunderstanding something about the cycling and walking infrastructure in Latvia. I did bike here about one full day and if I remember correctly, asked from some local where I can bike and marked a couple of them down and assumed a few others to be the same as they were "identical" in my view. But you may be right of course that they are not official ones and I was mistaken by some local individual who might have not been aware of how it works (officially).

We could reverse those changes if there are no easy way to revert cycleways from the changeset. I am coming to town to bike again next summer (this summer will be exception as I don't have a chance to stop by in Riga area). I can come and check them again.

Thanks for checking them and sorry for the mistakes.. this is the way to improve them properly.

Ne päivittyy aika monen päivän viiveellä tähän yleiseen OSM karttaan johtuen cache muistista. Eli jos ensi viikolla jossain kohti tulet katsomaan niin sitten ne saaret saattaa ollakin jo, malttia vaan.

Thanks for taking the effort. I hope there is some way to do this.

Z route is marked only with VR
relation/7435585

T route is marked with HSL network
relation/358140

D stops in Riihimäki also, though according to VR map it should continue to Hämeenlinna as well, also part of HSL network
relation/358112

so if we figure out what to do with these, we should probably fix all of them the same way.

Totally correct.. the R route was already drawn all the way to Hämeenlinna earlier, so the check failed already then. I noticed the validator failure, but I thought that it was failing earlier too so no change there. Would removing HSL from the route tags work? Then of course the R line service which is part of HSL would not be visible in OSM related applications..

How about two routes, one restricted to HSL area stopping in Jokela and another without HSL tag and going all the way to Tampere?

Hyvä huomio. Olin itse siinä uskossa että paikannimien (mihin korttelinimet/kadunnimet kuuluvat) ei voi asettaa tekijänoikeuksien alle. Toki viittaus olisi asiallinen:
https://www.turku.fi/sites/default/files/atoms/files/vanhat_korttelinimet_1_12500.pdf

Nimet tuli tuolta, jotka on puolestaan kirjasta Turun nimistö 2. Toki, jos olen väärässä, niin voisin pistää viestiä kirjan tekijälle ja kysyä. Luulisin että lupa tulisi.

Oh, this is good to know! I can change to use Esri or Maxar also. Thanks for the note.