Yes, that would be correct, as it is just extension (width marking) of the existing highway=service roads inside it.
It is not possible to drive in any direction as it would be with highway=service+area=yes.
I can add it while I am working there. Thanks.

Hi, without the 'highway' tag (or any other main tag) this area is useless in OSM way/712142536 (it means nothing).

object changes from DGU.hr (2020), Mapillary, ESRI

Yes, they are probably equivalent. I was just keeping the original author's choice of schema :) I did not add it, just changed access:pedestrian to access:foot.
Anyway, it seems foot=yes was added since then.

Hi, why this change? Why "bez komentara". Such a change is really important to comment. Why do some streets have the "Ulica" prefix and some do not? What is the official convention in Croatia maps?

Hi, please provide your sources, as half of the changes here (like, names, addresses, shops) you could not retrieve from dgu.hr imagery.

I am not sure what "Intermod" is, please write proper changeset descriptions. Also the changes at junction of "Biogradska cesta" and "Ulica "84. gardijske bojne HV Termiti" seem to be quite wrong, damaged pedestrian crossings, lanes splitting from the main road when they are not yet physically separated, like way/1052036390 is totally wrong. You even deleted the road that was correct (way/93391082) and with more precise tags.

Hi, you peron (platform) numbers are to be put into local_ref or ref tags, not in the name. I will fix it.

Sadly, it seems most of these changes are quite useless, the buildings and roads are now in worse position than they were (at least according to neighbouring buildings). Please don't randomly shift buildings according to Bing imagery. Always cross-check other imagery. There is a better imagery from Croatian authority dgu.hr available in this area.

Also please put proper changeset description instead of just unhelpful "Diklo". See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments .

Hi, if you add private swimming pools, either do not add them at all, or tag them access=private so that they do not appear being publicly accessible. Thanks.

Hi, a beach was already mapped here as a polygon. Please do not add needless duplicates of lower quality (just a node). Thanks.

Zdravim, existuje jeste toto hriste? Pred rokem tam nebylo.

Hi, next time please reuse or update the existing objects, instead of adding duplicates. Like you did for apartments and restaurant Marinero. Also there is no building=restaurant. It is was a leisure=outdoor_seating in this case.

Hi, yes, the bus ticket price has changed. But why are you removing the tags public_transport:version=2 ? Those were correct.

Zdravim, preco je na cestach ako way/365196944 strkovy povrch? Predtym tam bol asfalt. Nieco na tych cestach robia?

Zdravim, tato budova mozno ani neexistuje, alebo je to bazen alebo nejaka technicka stavba (podla chabych snimok co mame). Ako ste prisli na to, ze je to samostatny rodinny dom?

How should one know 273 is the bus number? You also touched many other bus lines. And I have no idea what code FR2 is. You now claim it is the direction. It would not be hard to write that. Also what did you fix in the changesets? Why did it need fixing? Changing the 'name' tags in a questionable way would indeed deserve some comment/description on why you are doing it.
You did the same changes in year 2016 (changeset/43074374) and someone has changed it back again (to real names). So it seems not everyone shares your tagging schema.
Also you say there is a stop_area relation. Ok then, but having is a name of 'Flughafen Wien' and then it containing member platforms having different names (like Flughafen Wien Busterminal, or your numeric names) seems wird. Why are then the platforms (and stop_positions) in the same relation if they do not have the same name? Either drop the relation, or then the platforms do not need any name. But be aware applications so far do not take the name from the relation so it will be a mess. It is a mess anyway. You didn't rename the stop_positions even though they are in the same stop_area relation as the platforms.

And please show me the wiki that said any 'ref' (whatever it is) should go into the 'name' tag. There is a bit ambiguity whether platform numbers should go into ref or local_ref, but never into name. See e.g. public_transport=platform and highway=bus_stop .
The traffic map on osm.org (osm.org/#map=18/48.12001/16.56422&layers=T) does show local_ref too, so now it displays duplicate information from local_ref and name. And the real platform name is nowhere.
Notice how that map merges bus stops into a common area (a polygon encompasing them), when they have the same name, see e.g. osm.org/#map=17/48.15519/17.10740&layers=T . Of course, nobody says this rendering is perfect and the only correct, but the data on these platforms at least match the wiki.

Hi, what is the point of having local_ref and name the same, e.g. at node/2216578408 ? The addition of the platform number into local_ref is good. But the 'name' tag should have remained (without the platform number of course).

Also please provide proper changeset descriptions and your sources, see osm.wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments .

Reverted as there is no response from the author and no fix from him.