Hi!
I've reverted mixed types highway=living_street;residential
on way/222401635 to highway=living_street, see changeset/53866881.
It seems that GoMap! produces these wrong tags, so please be careful and maybe contact the programmer to fix this problem.

Hi and welcome to OSM!
You changed the tag highway=primary to
highway="Jalan Desa Ranaka" here.
I guess that Jalan Desa Ranaka is the name of the road, so I changed it to
highway=primary + name=Jalan Desa Ranaka.
See also highway=*

Well,
I am not checking you but the list of highway=* values from taginfo. Whenever I see a new way with an unusual value and I think it is not just a typo I try to connect the mapper.

Hi!
Please review misplaced tag highway=traffic_signals
on way/149469091
and way/199548218

Hi and welcome to OSM!
I changed the unusual highway=service_road to service here changeset/53832667
See also highway=*

Hi!
I've changed highway=residential_link to secondary_link + oneway=yes, see changeset/53832589
Please use only those _link values listed in the wiki:
highway=*#Link_roads
See also http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/highway-residential-link-td5859566.html

Hi!
Please review highway="residential;unclassified" on way/191201005
It seems that the app GoMap! creates such wrong data ?

Hi!
I just stumbled over what looks like totally misaligned roads and found this changeset.
See e.g. node/1039759640
or the track starting at node/2524448338
Maybe the sat images changed since your changes? Current layer from Strava seem to say that DigitalGlobe sat images are good, but maybe out-aged.

Hi!
Please review typo highway=hi on way/540588776

I am not sure what you mean. I refered to nodes with e.g. addr:housenumber=ks or KS,
shop=123 or maybe addr:place=a.
This area is full of this data and it is nearly impossible to fix it without local knowledge.

OK, seems that the two alternatives are both accepted. So I've learned something new ;-)

The wiki highway=traffic_signals#Traffic_signals_for_pedestrians says "Add the following tags in addition to highway=traffic_signals for pedestrian crossings if the entire crossing is represented by a single node, or to each highway=crossing nodes if the pedestrian crossings are tagged on their own (strongly recommended). "

This crossing is not represented by a single node.

Hi!
What is meant with highway=погорелова ?
way/101311183

Hi!
Please check highway="carrer de València"
on way/22725910
I assume you wanted to change the name
instead of the highway tag?

One more link:
osm.wiki/Waterways#Man-made_structures

Hi!
I've noticed that you used highway=bridge for a few ways crossing waterways. The usual way is to give the bridge the tag bridge=yes.
Typically you have either a highway=* + bridge=yes + layer=1
or waterway=* + tunnel=culvert + layer=-1
in this situation.
See also bridge=*
and tunnel=*

Hi! Please review typo highway=44 on way/540424568
I assume you meant height=44?

OK, I don't know about the nodes shared with the rails, but the other two are obviously nodes shared by a footway=crossing and a major road, so highway=crossing is the right tag. The tag highway=traffic_signals is only used for simple crossroads of two major roads.

My understanding is that you have a highway=crossing as described in
crossing=*

I think you should have highway=crossing + crossing=traffic_signals instead of
highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals