Hallo!
Mir ist das
maxspeed=1
beim Freidhof aufgefallen. Ich bin ja eher unempfindlich, aber die Ränder von Grabstätten
als landwirtschaftlich genutzte Strassen
zu mappen ist dann doch etwas seltsam, oder? Ich habe die mal gelöscht und
nur die Hauptwege belassen.
changeset/35680869

Hi there!
I found the attribute
maxspeed=1
I guess this was a typo. What was meant?
way/31376795

Please review my change:
changeset/35680412

Hi there!
You have changed a
type=route relation to
type=multipolygon
Was that intended?

Thanks for the hint. I am pretty sure now that the change was not intended.
I think I first wanted to change that road to oneway=no, was not sure and selected the next way with an unusual oneway tag without removing the changed way from JOSM.
Is there a way that JOSM warns when producing changesets with large bboxes?

Hi there!
Please try to correct the invalid attribute
oneway="no; yes"
for Rue Geoffroy de Montbray:
way/39326398

Hi there!
I've changed highway=parking_aisle to
highway=service
service=parking_aisle
See also
highway=service

Hi there!
Please check these two roads with
highway="GSImaps/ort" :
way/383609609
way/383609613

OK, danke für die schnelle Reaktion :-)

Hallo!
Ich habe gerade maxspeed=2 von der B22
entfernt. Was war gemeint?
way/122528751
way/52518352

Hallo!
Habe maxspeed=2 entfernt.
Was war gemeint?
way/31478504

Hallo!
Bitte prüfen, offensichtlich ein Tippfehler:
maxspeed=2
Bing zeigt lanes:forward=1, aber Du hast
lanes=backward=1 erfasst.
Wahrscheinlich wolltest Du das auf 2 ändern und hast versehentlich maxspeed erwischt?
way/26553488

Hi there!
I found this bridge with maxspeed=1 .
I guess it is a typo?
way/318127118

OK, thanks for the feedback :-)

Hi there!
Please check :
maxspeed=302 on residential roads.
What was meant?
way/315833452
way/315833453
way/315834066
way/315834067

Hi there!
Please review the invalid valies:
maxspeed:sign=95; 85
maxspeed=120; 110
on these ways:
way/383096172,way 175514380,way 383096171

You are right, I also wonder why I've changed more than one way, that wasn't intended. I'll revert the change because I'm
not sure what I did here.

Es geht um diese Wege:
way/22766778,way 22766956,way 22766643,way 35973448,way 228945704

Thanks for the nice feedback :-)

Well, splitting it again also seemed not plausible regarding oneway. It would probably be better to remove the tag?