Sorry to barge in here, but I think you're talking past each other on the topic of mapping driveways as (continuous) crossings and I can help clarify.

What Andy is saying is that if you are drawing the sidewalk separately, then you should also draw the driveways, this is so that pedestrian routers know about dropped kerbs and can make use of the little segment of driveway between the sidewalk and road.

What that Wiki page says is that if you are drawing the driveway, then you should not tag the node shared by the driveway and sidewalk as a highway=crossing: the point where the sidewalk crosses over the driveway doesn't qualify as a crosswalk.

So the Wiki page and Andy don't contradict each other. In short: draw the driveways, make sure they share a node with the sidewalks, but don't tag that node as a crossing, just leave it untagged. If the imagery isn't of a quality that you can map the dropped kerbs, then don't map the sidewalks separately.

(I'm the author of the Wiki page on continuous crossings)

Hi could you have a look at this note please?
note/4284377
When I was visiting Dumbo I was surprised the street wasn't mapped as hw=pedestrian, so I left the note. I didn't notice the conditional. What do you think about flipping the conditional and making it highway=pedestrian, motor_vehicle:conditional = yes @ … ?

Hi, looks like this actually is bicycle parking - just a very well disguised one!
See the note at note/4726264 - a StreetComplete user uploaded a picture with a bike parked on it :-)

Hi, this location was flagged up by Sustrans (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/differences-between-osm-and-sustrans-mapping-of-the-uk-national-cycle-network/134337) as a place where the data in the Sustrans GIS on where they think NCN1 runs doesn't match what's in OSM. So I cycled there and had a look. And indeed, according to signage, for some reason NCN1 goes via Wester Coates Road and Wester Coates Avenue, instead of the new cycleway and Wester Coates Terrace. The signs look new so I don't think it's just that no one has got round to updating the signage yet. Please let me know in case you have any thoughts on this at note/4924330 I guess we could change the relation back to how it's signed on the ground, but also flag to Sustrans that there's a new cycleway here and it might make more sense to route the NCN1 over it? (Though I can hardly imagine that they have just overlooked this)

Hi. Thanks for updating the map! A node for this shop already existed (node/3402048919), so we have updated it with the data about the new occupier

Hi, unfortunately in your edit you removed the highway= tag from Stora Nygatan (way/166392236/history/14). Could you please fix this and do you think this was just a typo / wrong click or is there anything else in your change set that needs fixing?

Not sure: I added it 11 months ago when I was visiting, I am not local to the area so can't check now.

Their Instagram page doesn't exist any more, so maybe the shop doesn't exist any more. I've left a note.

This changeset also changed highway=alpine_tour to highway=path. I assume that alpine_tour was not a mistake, but that it was quite deliberately chosen as a tag value, because there isn't a path to the top of this mountain in the ordinary sense of the word. There's a lot of discussion in the community forum about how we should tag mountaineering routes, and most mappers seem to agree that highway=path is not the correct tag for this (see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/introduce-pathless-alpine-path-off-path/120971/150). Therefore I'm changing it back to the original value now. If you disagree, I would invite you to join the discussion in the community forum.

Hi and welcome to OSM. I noticed your change which added bus=yes to Shandwick Place. Just thought I'd let you know that this tag isn't needed, because the road already has the psv=designated tag. In OSM that's short for bus=designated, taxi=designated. :-)

Hi, since you originally created the Cobbler Trail, could you please have a look at this note?
note/4505393

Thanks!

Hi, thanks for adding sac_scale ratings here, could you please have a look at the note note/4502255?

Thanks!

Left a note at note/4491592

Thank you! Dave Brovy's description of his trek doesn't exactly inspire confidence that it still existed in this form even in 2020. I'll leave a note, hoping that the next time a mapper is around there they can confirm and add some detail.

Hi, could you please have a look at the following changeset comment?

changeset/141560133

Do you remember anything about the difficulty or visibility of the path, that you could add using a tag like sac_scale or trail_visibility?

Hang on, I've just realised I didn't look at the way history properly: you didn't add the path but you were the last person to touch it. Do you know any more about it?

Hi, thanks for adding to OSM. May I ask what exactly the source was for way/501186954, which you added, and how sure are you that there is actually a path there?

I have been in touch with another mapper who received a GPX file from Dave Brovy who went there 5 years ago. Brovy writes “I would be rather worried putting the section around Molun Pokhari (leg 22 in my trail notes) on OSM without a good warning… Me and also separately a friend of mine both got stuck in that area and needed helicopter rescues… definitely need some disclaimers and a bit of understanding of the risks before following that route!” You can read more on Leg 22 here: https://www.wildernessprime.com/expeditions/great-himalaya-trail/trail-notes/

Brovy’s GPX track looks a lot like the path you added.

Hi, thanks for your edits.

I was at Edinburgh Park yesterday and noticed for the Gordon's Way bus stop there wasn't anything on the ground. There also is no bus route going through it. So I assume it's been removed? I've updated the highway=bus_stop to removed:highway=bus_stop. But please let me know if you know any more about this!

node/5777679044
node/5777679045

I also noticed for Lochside Avenue you used both highway=bus_stop and disused:highway=bus_stop so I've corrected that to use only disused:highway :-)

Hi, I just stumbled across this changeset, out of curiosity, why would you remove sac_scale?

Hi, I've just discovered some wrong FHRS IDs that were added in this changeset e.g. node/3402048918 and node/2396871201

I wonder what's happened here - were they connect when you added them and the business changed its FHRS ID since? Or something else?

I also looked into whether there's open data for the coastline or the low water mark, the way there is for the UK, but that doesn't seem to exist for Jersey