That would be great!

Well, OSM data users should get these details from the description tag. I am aware that people tend to put all sort of names to OSM object, however this does not mean that this has to be tolerated. I do not want to be hostile, however some names are really not appropriate like "Pipa pred straniščem ŽP Most na Soči" or "Pipa pod kapelico v Kamnem". I think it would be better to add also that chapel, for example, and in the description of the water tap write "pod kapelico" (so, even without Kamno, because it is clear that it is in Kamno, description just provides the user the info to locate it more easily so that he knows that the tap is not behind of the chapel which can be sometimes not so easy to see with a lot of small features).
This at the same level as some tracks/roads that somebody named around Kočevje, probably for his/their convenience (example of previous version: way/455281810/history/3). Luckily, this is now gone, another user corrected removed the ridiculous names.
I think that for most of the names we are talking about here the description tag would be the most appropriate. Nickname is, as described in wiki (nickname=*), an unofficial name (still, not an alt_name, which is for old/historical name and similar), e.g. The Big Apple for New York. If you are not convinced we can ask on the forum for other opinions.

Well, your names are composed of location description, which is already encoded in the coordinates. Details location info are to be put in the description tag. Water taps do not need to be named at all (only if there is a specific name like Grofov izvir etc.). What you are suggesting is that everyone can just add name tags that will appear rendered for their own convenience, which is utterly wrong. For more info please consult also osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Naming drinking water points/taps using generic names like 'Pitnik ob igrišču v Doljah' is not appropriate. Such generic text that is providing some additional details on location etc. of the object is to be put under the description tag (can be in several languages). Please, consult description=* for details. I would suggest to edit all such occurences that are quite a few in this region... Water fountain only deserves a special name only in specific cases, e.g. with historical names.

OK, reverted.

The discussion with the author brinnnnnn revealed that addition of the cycling node was not intentional and should be reverted.

changeset/171750387

Hello. I have just noticed that you placed a single node corresponding to recreatinal network, however this does not seem OK. Please, re-check.

Hello, adding descriptions to "name" tags is not a valid practice. Please, consult name=* (citing: "The feature is known by a generic term or description such as "toilet" or "basketball court". Use a feature tag to indicate the type in a language-neutral, machine-readable way. You can also use description=* or note=* if other tags do not quite express what distinguishes the feature from others of the same type.").

I have noticed (and commented) on such changes already previously, see changeset/151672422#map=15/45.62339/14.88100

The generic "names" should be either removed or moved to a description tag. Do not use name tag or any other tag to enforce display of something on a map.

At least part of what is now rendered as "Pionirska proga" is not a cycleway. Only a section from osm.org/#map=19/46.048021/14.477009 to osm.org/#map=19/46.062426/14.468444 is a cycleway, the rest is just ex-railway with no cycleway on it. Tagging something as ex-railway is appropriate only when some remains are still visible (or at least a course), however here in the part where the actual cyclepath and ex-railway separate the remaining are not visible and impossible to follow.

Current tagging that was changed with the last changeset is wrong and needs correction.

Use of name tag for a generic description is inappropriate, please see osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions and name=* (section 'When not to use'). This generic name triggered a warning (warnings:suspicious_name:generic_name), however it was obviously ignored.

I think such generic "name" should be either removed or moved to a description tag. Do not use name tag or any other tag to enforce display of something on a map.

Hi, the names like "E6" or "Po sledeh vodomca" should NOT be added directly to path names. For such purposes there are relations, i.e. like the one that I created for the trail "Po sledeh vodomca". Please, remove the names.

In fact the industrial area is not included in the Ljubljana marshes nature park. But, yes, I understand your comment, there is just an "invisible" line between industrial area and a protected area...
Anyway, this can't be changed here, so let's leave it like this.

Thanks a lot, the plan is in fact obsolete. The industrial area of Škofljica is expanding, I have now added some roads there (still need to be improved a bit perhaps), previously this area was crossed by that "highway" and I was reluctant to put it there at that time.

Mistake in changeset description: The D-2 crosses Ljubljana from NW (arriving from Kranj) and continues alongside Sava (the description given initially is for D-1, the course of which was also re-aligned).

Thanks, I'll keep an eye on the road if the sharrows are re-introduced when renewing the asphalt layer.

Hi,
Sorry for late reply, but I went to re-check. In fact there were sharrows drawn in the forward direction, however they are now very very faded and only one seems to be renewed (the one closest to the crossing with Zoisova cesta—here, the asphalt layer is rather new and the arrow was redrawn). I can supply photos if needed.

One of the most recent proposals is depicted here: https://www.delo.si/lokalno/ljubljana-in-okolica/ze-pokopano-skofljisko-obvoznico-bi-obudili-od-mrtvih/

Still, it is just a distant proposal, not a plan, and I believe this is not enough to include it in the OSM.

The section "razvojna os 3A" from "razcep Malence" to at least Škofljica is very outdated. It is an old proposal (in fact merely a concept, not even a plan), however according to the most recent proposal the splitting point will be near highway exit Rudnik with road continuing west of railway completely bypassing Lavrica.

The note to the changeset is wrong; in fact just the English name was added for Koslerjeva gošča.

Thanks to you for the message, I was not aware of such practice because in Slovenia addresses are normally added to the buildings themselves. The address nodes are generally used only if the building is not drawn on the map.