Hello,

Thanks for adding more details here.
Are you planning to put in more work here?  I am asking because your changeset was flagged with a large number of warnings of ways incorrectly crossing each other.  Perhaps this is only a temporary situation, which you were planning to clean up in the next days.

Also, I cannot help but notice illogical situations, like this footway being connected to the outline of the parking area (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12849517905).  Routing won’t work correctly unless it is connected to a road or another footway.
Same for this orphan node (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12849517948) and several others.
When footways cannot be connected to anything, standard mapping practice in OSM is not to map them and stop at the previous junction.

One more thing: you set https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1388080077 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12849517908 as having no markings… whereas the latest available imagery (both UrbIS and Digitaal Vlaanderen) clearly shows proper zebra marks.  In case you use other data sources (e.g. a recent survey) it is better to mention this explicitely in the changeset source field, otherwise people will raise questions about your changes.

Thanks in advance.