Continues here note/5148456

Thanks, I added info so it's clear it belongs to the chain

Yes, and on the west side of the building there are paths at 2 levels too. I can't remember exactly where they are though, need to go there with a laptop to draw them :) бул. "Симеоновско шосе" 1 is the address of Villa Victoria restaurant in Loven Park, so it can't be here.

Hi, thanks for your edits! Is the Minimart of this brand https://mini-mart.bg/ ?

Still wondering. I would guess it's called Slatinska only from where Vartopo flows into it, and definitely Dragalevska where it flows through Dragalevtsi. On all the paper maps of Sofia and Vitosha that I have, it's called Dragalevska until Loven Park

Hi, glad to see you started adding to the map! I hope we have a new mapper?
To save yourself some work, you should know that many "ways' have default values that are assumed so you don't need to add them. A highway=footway is defined as a way only for pedestrians, so no need to add foot=designated, motor_vehicle=no, etc. :)
Keep up the good work!

Hi, thanks for your edits! I think the footways you added are sidewalks (pavements)? Then please also add footway=sidewalk tot he sidewalk and adjust the sidewalk= and sidewalk:*:surface= tags on the street where you added the sidewalk. Yuriy Venelin has sidewalks on both sides, so it would be good to add both, not just one of them.

I added as much detail based on what I can remember (I've only been there 2-3 times in the last years, the last time a month ago) and from streetside images from Svetoslav Minkov. I hope it's now clear for anyone looking at the map that it's hopeless to try to walk from Svetoslav Minkov to Sasho Nikolov-Sladura, and that there is no road suitable for cars at all. If you want, you can correct my mistakes and add more detail.
People not respecting private property is a problem, but I don't think we can solve it by deleting paths from the map. Most of them won't look at a map anyway...

Hi, thanks for your edits. Looks like you deleted a building? It is recommended to show that a building has been recently removed by adding demolished: in from of building= In this way it will still be visible in editors, so other mappers will not be tempted to add it again because it's still visible on aerial images. It would also help other mappers if you describe in a bit more detail what you did (write "deleted a building" instead of "errata", for instance). :)

The paths on the west side of no. 7 are real paths that are publicly accessible (for mail delivery, for instance), but it's not possible for someone without the key of the gate to walk from Sasho Nikolov to Svetoslav Minkov. I think it is accurately mapped.
On the east of no.7 it used to be a road, which is now closed with a gate with lock and used as parking spaces. I can adjust the map so it shows them as parking spaces with a path connecting them through the gate. Would that be a good solution?
Deleting these is not a solution, because someone who doesn't know about this discussion might add them again without the information that it's private access.
By the way, the background map that cadastre is using is very old, so deleting the paths here won't remove them there.

I reverted your edit: see osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

You mean it is planned to build a road there, but it's not there yet and construction hasn't started?

You are right, Mitko! StreetComplete is another nice app that allows you to make many simple edits to the map, while Vespucci is one that is very powerful but a bit more complicated.

Thank you! I replaced the Review clothes shop with the bakery. Did you know that in Organic Maps, you can edit the information of an existing shop, including if a new kind of shop has entered it? That's a better way to improve the map than to add a new shop... ;)

In between deluxe and quartz, there are the Review clothes shop, an Easypay office and an Easybox parcel locker... Which ones do you remember are still there?

Hi, thanks for your edit! Is this a completely new shop, or is it a new occupant in a shop which is already on the map? In that case, which shop is not there any more?

Have a look at smoothness=*/Gallery
Excellent is for almost seamless paving stones; the bricks normally used have noticeable seams so are "good".
The sidewalks are among the worst in Sofia, but if you would drive a car on it, you wouldn't damage the underside (it doesn't stick out more than 14 cm). It's not worse than osm.wiki/File:20230418_142605c.jpg

Hmm, are you sure about these changes? I think the standard smoothness for new paving_stones (bricks) is "good": I usually tag them "excellent" only when (indoor) floor tiles were used. A surface with smoothness=bad has quite deep potholes, and one with smoothness=very_bad is not usable with a normal car and needs a high-clearance car to be passable (very rare for paved surfaces).

If it shows or doesn't show up on apps should never be a consideration when mapping, see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_for_the_renderer

iD gives that warning because in English, it's still descriptive. But I think in Bulgaria you can consider it a name. You could also consider tagging it with noname=yes if you think the sign on the shop is only a description of the kind of shop, and inscription=Мини Маркет to show what's written on the sign