I couldn't find the way back immediately because I was looking for a deleted way, but basically the node deletions between version 1 and two of way/192530181/history

It seems like you removed a path in bertembos
between the bosstraat and the junction of way/325260114#map=19/50.88838/4.62618 and way/192530181

which definitely _does_ exist (I've ran there this weekend, and the openstreetmap GPS traces and the strava heatmap agree with my memoy)

Could you please repair the situation?

TIA

Hi,

In this changeset you modified way/75738648 from footway into path (thereby altering the access restrictions). Could you argue what was the motivation for this (as I cannot extract it from your changelog comment)?

I'm pretty sure that nowadays there is _no_ crossing anymore. The crossing that is visible on the imagery is a bicycle crossing place (fietsoversteekplaats), and was only useful before, i.e. as long as the official cycleway was on the other side from the Kromme Dreef on. Now, the whole cycleway is on the side of the Naamsesteenweg (note that is indeed a very recent change)

Almost, there is now some kind of 'cycleway_link' (as in 'motorway_link') to go from the kromme dreef to the cyclepath which turns north. See changeset/48798584#map=16/50.7966/4.7109

For now, I've left the 'highway=construction', but as I mentioned above, I'm not sure if it is the goal to re-build the connection. Actually, as far as I an see, the GR512 is 'broken' right now

Hi,

These corrections are not corresponding to reality. Due to the (very new) cyclepath, there is only a link between the Kromme Dreef and the cyclepath, and _not_ with the road anymore. And given the altitude difference between the road and the cyclepath, it doesn't look like this is a temporary solution. See changeset/48460454#map=18/50.79605/4.71004 where I've mapped the new actual situation.

Thx for figuring out!

Given the above reasoning, I've reverted the part of this changeSet and changed the name back to Kromme Dreef in changeset/48642370

No, I shouldn't... You should never just copy information from external sources

[quote]
If there is existing data in openstreetmap, you should assume that existing data has been mapped by local people on the ground. Sometimes you will be able to tell this by seeing source tags or just by contacting users to ask!
[/quote]

osm.wiki/Armchair_mapping

Hi, In this changeset you renamed the Kromme Dreef into St-Joris-Weert straat. I've never seen any reference to that name on ground. If you would have googled a little bit, you would see that the name "Kromme Dreef" definitely exists (and is indicated using signs) on ground. Hence, could you please re-instate the original name?

Hi, I reverted this changeset, after verifying that the path still exists, see for instance https://www.strava.com/activities/813591634

Ah, ik neem aan dat je met 'anders starten' bedoelt dat de oriëntatie initieel niet nauwkeurig genoeg is bv.? Alle verbeteringen zijn welkom!

Beste Koen, wat was de bedoeling van deze changeset? Op basis van je changelog comment kan ik niet goed uitmaken wat je veranderd hebt. De changeset zelf zorgde er wel voor dat de 2 wegen die je aangepast hebt overlapten, zie changeset/44547825

Hi, I reverted this changeset (too). I'm not sure what you wanted to do in this changeset, but this is not the goal of highway=road. Please contact me via PM, or ask some questions on the belgium openstreetmap mailinglist (talk-be) if you need more information.

Hi, I reverted this Changeset. A (sports) track with the name 'test' seems to be very strange (read: impossible?)... See leisure=track for more information about leisure=track.

I guess it might be a good idea to add smoothness smoothness=* and/or trail_visibility trail_visibility=* tags (or similar) to the newly created paths?

IIRC the shop does have some organic products?

This is what openstreetmap wiki says about organic=yes ( != organic only)

The shop or restaurant usually offers some organic products. For example conventional supermarkets which offer a permanent product line of organic staple food fall under that category.

My mistake, I was having potlatch2 in mind, not iD :-(

Hi, is it possible that way/325315548
should have a 'access=no' tag?
Maybe some of those strava users are just ignoring the forbidden sign :-)

Hi Jo, When pressing save, you can select 'advanced' in the dialog box, and add a source tag over there :-)