Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Has the bicycle parking been removed? If not would you please reinstate it.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Sorry about that I was looking to amend the shed outline as it showed up in OSM Inspector. I couldn't see exactly where the shed should be, I thought I had backed out with no change but I was obviously wrong. I've now reverted my change here so I'll leave it to you.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, this section of the drive is private but foot only is permissive.
Is the drive a permissive path on foot to Scadbury Park Local Nature Reserve?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I removed the path as it duplicates a highway. I added foot=permissive to the gate. the drive and ways off of it should now be route able.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
Your new path has been drawn on top of an existing path, thus making duplication of ways. Amendments should be made to the existing way, this will keep all of the history. If you need help removing the duplication and making amendments please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

No response so I've removed the incorrect data.

Hello and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You have requested a review of your this and two other changesets where you've deleted quite a few tracks. These tracks seem to be genuine on the ground features clearly visible on available imagery, I would think also mostly able to be verified by a survey. Thus it's my opinion that these deletions should be reverted to the previous state. I can't think of any valid reason for the deletions, perhaps you could enlighten me as to your reason.

These tracks can be amended to show agricultural or private status. The gates I can see on imagery can be added as barriers to the tracks. If you need help re-instating the tracks and amending them please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, just add level=-1 on the culvert. This shows the relation between the two objects, (the highway implied as layer=0 with the culvert below tagged level=-1).

Hi, There's a duplicated highway, path on top of Denehurst Park Way. The areas that you've joined to Denehurst Park Way need to be amended to get to the duplication. This is the problem with unnecessarily joining areas to highways.

Please decide what you can do about all those park areas, then I can get to and remedy the highway duplication.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
I'm not sure what you were trying to do with the changes in this upload. It resulted in Albion Street being duplicated/triplicated and dragged out of position by self intersection. Also the access tunnel was moved out of position.

I've reverted this changeset so its all back OK as before your changes.

Regards Bernard.

Hi,
Thanks for responding. I've removed the duplicate building outline and amended the tagging on the garden section to include building:levels=2 building:min_level=1 level=1 which should describe where the garden is.

As for you delivery driver problems I've found that Royal Mail have three postcodes for Leonard Court, SE15 2BP are Leonard Court, Cobden Walk, SE15 2BF are Leonard Court, Meeting House Lane and SE15 2DH are Leonard Court, Queens Road. Could this be where the problem lies? Are there three entrances to Leonard Court? If so it's likely each has a different post code and the full address should be tagged on the entrance. Then a minimal tagging on the block relation without the address. Thus the routeing will be to the particular entrance rather than the building. What do you think?

I'll help if you wish, Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
I think the Whiteknights Campus is part of the University of Reading, therefore the tag amenity=university should be reinstated.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
There's a problem with Leonard Court now, three areas are tagged building=apartments. one outer area and two identical (one atop the other) inner areas. Anyway the address data of a multipolygon area should be placed on the relation.
Is the inner area a courtyard or a roof garden?

Regards Bernard.

Hello Jon,
The tag leisure=park indicates an area of open space for recreational use, please see:- leisure=park. Parks don't usually extend to highway center lines as it would not be safe for folk to walk or play on the highway. It is very simple to zoom in and accurately map park areas. When multiple features are drawn with a single linear demarcation it is very difficult to isolate one feature for amendment. The park areas here are not joined to the highway center lines.

You describe the grass areas by the roads as verges so they are not parks. A correct tagging would be verge=yes surface=grass Unfortunately this tagging is not at present rendered on OSM standard layer but it can be rendered. A tagging that is rendered is verge=yes landuse=grass.
Verges however abut a highway, not extend over it nor to the center line. So the outlines of these areas need amending. The verge areas could be drawn over the highways as roads and paths can are usually rendered on top of areas but as I said multiple features on one line are very difficult to amend. Anyway by zooming in it's very easy to precisely draw areas.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

This building to which you've added an address is not 48 Broadley Terrace
NW1 6LG. I doubt it's name is Broadley House or Broadley Studio.

If you look on your website you'll see where Broadley Terrace is located.

If you need assistance removing the incorrect data and/or adding data in the correct position please just ask in the comments here.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've removed your new path Way: 861127731 as it duplicates an existing footway. If the existing way needs amending please amend it not add a new way atop of the existing.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I broke off to look for a render style that shows what I'm trying to say. Please look here:- https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=16&lat=51.57261&lon=0.0385&layers=B000TT I hope you'll see your golf features rendered nicely as you've tagged them. It's the render style that counts.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, There is nothing wrong with the tagging as it is now and it ought to remain as such. Any alteration would be incorrect tagging for the purposes of a particular visual rendering. Rather the rendering should be altered to give a particular visual effect.

The problem with the rendering you see, that gives the impression of features disappearing, is that greens, tees and fairways are rendered the same colour. Especially the fact that the green is mapped atop the fairway and both are grass, the same colour.

I've made a test on hole two removing the surface tag to see how that renders, please give it a while.

Hi,
There is not usually a gap between a field and a path.

As I said field boundary's are usually joined together at hedge center line, fence or ditch, thus no gaps between the field edges. Field edge paths or tracks are not usually set on the boundary line (or they would be atop a fence, hedge or ditch), they are set on what is termed the field edge. Within the field on it's edge but not over it's edge. Thus the path is adjacent to the field edge boundary.

The problem, is the fact that we mappers don't know where the legal boundary is. We do know that that fields and boundary lines are usually measured/taken from the center of fixed or determined features, i.e. hedges, trees, stones, markers, walls etc. We do know that all land is usually owned. We do know that a paths are on one piece of owned land, not two, (except where there is cross over from one field to another). So we can make a pretty good assumption of where a boundary (field edge) is, and know the path is within that boundary, not outside of it.

Unfortunately most of mapped farmland in OSM doesn't take on board the above criteria. If fact it mostly ignores individual fields, lumping it all as farmland. Often even then drawn very poorly.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, This area tagged leisure=park is not a park or public leisure area. It is for the most part highway and highway verge. You've drawn lots of these some overlapping and some joined to the highway center line. Could you please remedy these anomalies, either remove or redraw and re-tag them.

Regards Bernard.