BCNorwich's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 143366526 | about 2 years ago | Hi, The running track is already mapped and described as an area multipolygon relation. Please see here:- relation/1634345
Don't worry about it there's lots to learn. Regards Bernard. |
| 143316514 | about 2 years ago | Hi, No your contributions are not moderated as such but they are open for anyone to comment on. As a personal thing, I look at the first few edits of all new mappers in eastern England and comment when necessary. Your edits up to the one "straightened path" do all show up occasionally you might have to clear your browser cache or reload an OSM page to force a re-render of the map. Thanks for adding the bridge. Regards Bernard. |
| 143316514 | about 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Could you please map how the new path crosses the water at the NW end? Regards Bernard. |
| 143193751 | about 2 years ago | Hi, Lots of highways corrected. |
| 143193161 | about 2 years ago | Hi, many highway tags corrected. |
| 143199686 | about 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. From the Bing Imagery and other popular imagery, it looks like there is a path along that embankment. Did you mean to say there is no Public Right of Way here? If so that's a different matter. Please be aware that paths other than PRoW's can be mapped to OSM. Indeed I think that is the case here. So unless you know that no path exists here, in any manner, then the path should be reinstated. Regards Bernard. |
| 99620667 | about 2 years ago | Hello ifkmaps, The track is not any form of Public Right of Way, (horse or foot), so I would assume there is no legal public access for walkers. I think the tag horse=yes is incorrect on a private track. If horses are allowed on a private track the tag would be horse=private. Regards Bernard. |
| 76229369 | about 2 years ago | All the others are removed so I've now removed this one. Thanks for the nudge. Regards Bernard. |
| 142931024 | about 2 years ago | Hi, Please don't place a footpath on top of a road, it's a highway duplication that disrupts routing. It's OSM practice in cases like this to section off the existing highway that needs amending. I've now done this for your new path, tagging the service road with designation=public_footpath
Regards Bernard. |
| 142931267 | about 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. I've amended the building shape and the tags to OSM practicw. 48a Westoning Road is not the name. Regards Bernard |
| 142803220 | about 2 years ago | Duplicated highways and fiction removed. |
| 142753044 | about 2 years ago | Hi, Just to let you know you duplicated several highways in you mapping. I've removed all the duplicated sections but please be careful and check before you upload. Regards Bernard. |
| 142832931 | about 2 years ago | Review, tags tweaked. |
| 142753110 | about 2 years ago | Duplicated highways and untagged lines removed. |
| 142743480 | about 2 years ago | Duplication removed |
| 142743585 | about 2 years ago | The duplicated rail line removed. |
| 142744936 | about 2 years ago | Duplicated waterway removed. |
| 142744809 | about 2 years ago | I returned a dragged out of line highway. |
| 142744574 | about 2 years ago | Hi, your new highway Way: 1216397824 duplicates the line of an existing highway, it crosses other highways as indicated in the warning above. I've removed the new highway because it could disrupt routing. Regards Bernard. |
| 142769198 | about 2 years ago | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. I've reviewed and tidied up by removing/ amending the footpaths. There were several instances of duplicated or self-intersecting footpaths. I'm not local to the area so my edit is from imagery logigically making the changes. If there are inaccuracies please amend without duplication or self-intersection. Need any help please ask here below. Regards Bernard. |