Hi the numbers on the public footpaths are actually council reference numbers so the tag is ref=1234 rather than name=1234. I've changed these three.

Regards Bernard.

My thoughts also but I wanted to check first, thanks!

Hi, I see you added address details and moved te POI. Can you say where the info (address and position) came from as I can't see any of this info on their website.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You actually dragged a huge section of riverbank out of alignment. I've reverted this changeset to remedy it.

Regards Bernard

Hi, Sorry but there's another couple of problems. OSM appreciates your trying to correct the mistakes but trying to drag areas back doesn't always work out. There were then different areas out of shape.

Also if I may point out it's always best practice, if a feature needs amending/correcting, to correct the original feature. Thus the complete history of the features mapping history is maintained. In this case you had deleted Way: Cerne Abbas Giant (660725451) and redrew it anew in your rectification. Thus you inadvertently lost the history of the original mapping of the feature. (When you correct/amend a feature without deletion your correction history is added to the database along with the previous history.)

So I've reverted your changesets 96497811 and 96472180, the mishapes are now rectified. All features are back to their original state, alls now well.

I hope you don't mind my helping and I hope I've explained the reasons.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Sorry to say your adjustments have somehow really messed the outline up dragging thigs out of shape. Also deleteing the historic=archaeological_site area completely. I think you were trying to lineup the outline with an image that was not originally used to make the outline. If you look at the Maxar imagery you'll see it corresponds quite well to the original drawn outline.

May I respectfully suggest the changeset be reverted. If you need help please just ask and I can revert it.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Your footpath addition was a duplication. The public footpath is on the service driveway which is tagged as designation=public_footpath
foot=yes. So I've removed the duplicate way.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You placed several sections of these highways ontop of existing highways. If a way needs correcting or amending it's OSM practice to do this to the existing way, thus saving all history and avoiding the nuisance of duplication. I think I've removed the duplications, and tagged the existing ways as foot=yes.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've amended and added to your POI, this to suit OSM practice and enhance your POI information.

Are you sure you've correctly positioned the POI. Please have regard to the traffic calming hump seen on the imagery nearby. Also I've terraced the houses so you can be precise, or if you occupy the whole house you could put the data on the house outline.

Regards Bernard.

I've reverted the changes that dragged features out of shape. I managed to save most of your new features but a few may have been lost if they joined the dragged features.
By the way greens and fairways can be tagged surface=grass, bunkers natural=sand. Please see leisure=golf_course for OSM golf tagging.

Regards Bernard.

PS It would be best not to make further changes/additions to the area till the above problem is resolved.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Sorry to say that this changeset has dragged several features way out of shape. As far as I can see I think you inadvertently aligned the nodes of Way: Adur (23165913) into a circular shape. Unfortunately you made a large number of new additions to the golf course and have since made more additions to the same area. Thus It will be difficult to revert the inadvertent changes and keep all the new mapping. When reverting (changing everything back how it was), there are several conflicts that have to be addressed.

I can revert the changeset and keep as much as I can of the mapping if you wish. This seems the best way to correct the original features. What do you think?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You are repeatedly making self-intersecting ways on your mapping.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

As the footpath has been diverted it is not now a highway (unless it's still unofficially used). The tag highway=no has been used to indicate a removed path. I see from the definitive map that the roughly north to south section of footpath should be on the west side of the hedge and cross the stream at a different point. If this is the case on the ground perhaps you could amend the map to suit. Need any help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Just to let you know for the future that in most cases negative tagging is not neccessary as for example in the case of oneway=no in it's absence it is implied that there is not a direction restriction.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

To map the gate in iD editor, highlight/select the node, tag barrier=gate, then save/upload.

Had you noticed that part of Spencer Walk is mapped going through a building. If this is correct then that part under the building ought be sectioned off and tagged tunnel=building_passage with layer=-1

Need any help please just ask. Regards Bernard.

Hi, You've duplicated a lot of features here, buildings and walls. Could you please have a look and remove the duplicates? Need any help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Just a couple of points that you might be able to amend.

The other cairrageway (northern line of the dual way), I would think this is also now oneway?

There's a bridleway in the middle that crosses the motorway via a bridge. Has this been reinstated where the bridleway crosses the A21?

There are two othe bridges crossing the motorway that look like they may join to or cross the A21, do you have info that could amend these?

Regards Bernard.

OK, I did say I'd revert everything, which I had assumed you had agreed with. Now the reversion is limited to the changeset where there was deletion of the original mapping.

Regards Bernard.

Hi Matt,
All changesets have been reverted to the original state in my changesets numbers #95818983 #95818312 #95818280 #95818253 #95818234 #95818201 #95818175 #95818132 #95818084

You can now make corrections/amendments to the original mapping without deleting features, thus you'll keep all history.

Regards Bernard.