Hi 5m4u9,
Thank you for your question.

Members of our team are working on pedestrian connectivity and focused right now on Bolivia. 

For [way 619269358](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/619269358), I added foot=no since the [Mapillary](https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&lat=-16.5117328&lng=-68.153459799972&z=17&pKey=929661531465122&x=0.5111354500390765&y=0.5059285779486546&zoom=0) confirmed that the way had no sidewalk pedestrian feature, and there was already modeled footway geometry to the north. I extended that footway connectivity to the secondary [way 619269362](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/619269362).

For [way 846845617](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/846845617), I added foot=no since there was already modeled footway geometry on the traffic_calming island and then extended the footway crossing geometry per this [Mapillary](https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-16.511605899972&lng=-68.1538031&z=18.528822848307087&x=0.32945511856782106&y=0.5286270790780735&zoom=0&pKey=2233558723700544&focus=photo) image.

For [way 1349250499](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1349250499), I left this without foot=no since [Mapillary](https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-16.511605899972&lng=-68.1538031&z=18.528822848307087&x=0.5472726080104197&y=0.5006069905933833&zoom=1.0777514372745451&pKey=600907198831867&focus=photo) confirms that there is sidewalk adjacent to the road. 

In cases such as this, we are adding foot=no to segments of highway that are not for pedestrian use and we are ensuring that existing footways are modeled and adding footways when missing. 

Let us know if you have any further questions on this.

Happy Mapping! :)