I looked a bit closer at the global usage and I think the truth is that usage varies greatly. Here are some stats for all the ways with bridge=yes set:

Global usage:

oneway=alternating + priority=(unset) -> 1944
oneway=alternating + priority=backward/forward -> 380
oneway=(unset) + priority=backward/forward -> 1037

New Zealand usage:

oneway=alternating + priority=(unset) -> 1176
oneway=alternating + priority=backward/forward -> 347
oneway=(unset) + priority=backward/forward -> 26

Given that at least two variations appear in wide-spread use and usage varies regionally, I think now would be a good time think about how we want these tags to be used. I tend to favor priority= without oneway= simply because it is easier to understand (for an English speaker) and would hopefully lead to less mistagging in the future.

I also wonder how a one-lane bridge with a traffic light would be tagged (oneway=alternating + priority=(unset)?).

If you don't mind, I'll try to see if this ambiguity was already discussed anywhere and if not ask the community. Given that I'm traveling, it'll likely take me another two weeks to find time for this. For the time being I'll refrain from changing any existing oneway=alternating tags.

Having thought about it for a while, declaring the road oneway seems wrong. Not based on the wiki necessary but simply based on the meaning of the word oneway. The priority sign simply means one, particular side has to yield if passing isn't possible. The street may be used in both ways if passing is possible. At least this is my understanding. Two bicycles could certainly pass on this bridge.

Still, seems worth a broader discussion.

I was mostly looking at priority=*:

> oneway=alternating - When the narrow section is controlled by traffic signals instead of priority signs

This strongly suggests it should not be used when there is no traffic light.

Looking at oneway=alternating I'm uncertain. Some of the wording seems more geared towards a controlled traffic flow like a traffic light. For example, "This tag is only used for roads that change direction often (usually several times per hour) and regularly." With signs there is usually not much regularity to the traffic flow and mentioning some sort of time interval seems odd. Also, "Routing engines are encouraged to route over this type of oneway independent of direction but use a heavy penalty when calculating the travel time to allow for possible waiting times" seems not fully appropriate for a simple sign. Perhaps, this is something that should be discussed with the community. The wording certainly could be clearer.

When changing the shape of a building, please don't remove it (way/231840557) and recreate it again (way/1264094493). If you just change the shape of the building, the history is preserved, making it easier for other mappers to understand your change.

By recreating the building, you created two distinct histories: way/231840557/history and way/1264094493/history

Thanks.

All the best,

Peter

Please don't map "house numbers" with periods in them. These are some sort of federal building number, as I understand, but certainly not part of an actual address.

Happy mapping,

Peter

FYI, I ended up removing the parking relation again you created. See changeset/149643976.

Please note the following:

a) When using relations, tags should be moved onto the relation, rather than exist on both, the relation and it's members. amenity=parking, for instance, should not exist on the relation and members.
b) In case of amenity=parking, it's not designed for use with relations and you should avoid using them on relations when possible. See "Used on these elements" at amenity=parking.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and happy mapping,

Peter

Reverted by changeset/149633550.

A roundabout was created only temporarily while construction was ongoing. Please be careful when mapping features still under construction. Tip: for major construction work on the main road network, there is usually official information available online.

Reverted by changeset/149633550.

A roundabout was created only temporarily while construction was ongoing. Please be careful when mapping features still under construction. Tip: for major construction work on the main road network, there is usually official information available online.

As you correctly realized, this was supposed to be bridge=yes. Thanks for fixing it.

I wonder if surface=stone:plates is the right choice here. In Switzerland, this value has been used only 21 times, mostly by you, and is not documented in the wiki [1]. Looking at other steps and the wiki, I think surface=paving_stones [2] would be more appropriate. paving_stones value is used ~2,500 times in Switzerland. Also, I believe Osmose would be happier with the new value [3].

Would you be offended if I changed the surface to paving_stones?

[1]: surface=*#Values
[2]: surface=paving_stones
[3]: https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=18&lat=47.468095&lon=8.330109&item=xxxx&level=1%2C2%2C3