Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You've inadvertently duplicated some sections of highways by placing The Leitrim Way ontop of existing highways. Please see here:-https://tinyurl.com/en5uxz6b If a way needs correcting or amending this should be done to the existing way. Not placing a new way on top of the existing way.

A better way to create a national waymarked trail is by creating a route relation. Then the existing ways can be cut into sections, amended to account for the new info (walking route), and added to the relation. There's a lot to learn before making a router relation, an introduction is here:-https://learnosm.org/en/josm/josm-relations/

Could you please remedy these duplicated highways? If you need help (I'm willing), please just ask in the comments here.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, It looks to me like the lanes are marked, there's a white line between the cycleway lane and the single oneway carriage lane.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, The area doesn't extend to the centerline of the highway. Mapping this way is incorrect (not ground-truth) and makes it very difficult to amend features in years to come.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've moved the area from the highway center lines.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've squared up the buildings, they look good now.

In iD editor to do this press shift+Ctrl click on (highlight/select) all items to be squared up, then right-click and click the square icon.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I don't think Vespucci gives reasons or alternative tags when it says something is deprecated. So the problem here is inadvertent.

If a particular tag is deprecated that is not reasonable cause to delete it. It can be left to assist other mappers or amended if there is a better tag. The tag direction=up does impart knowledge to other users so for that reason ought not to be deleted.

In this case, the tag key direction was also used for purposes other than steps. It was deprecated to tag key incline. So for steps, the tag direction=up should have been amended to incline=up.

Deleting the tag removed information from the database. Leaving or amending the tag would not have lost information.

Thus I've added incline=up to the two sets of steps. Please see :- highway=steps .

Regards Bernard

Hi, Thanks for understanding. The deleted items are reinstated and the grass repaired to its former state in Changeset: 100226740

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I deleted the pedestrian crossing from the underground line.

The cafe is not the whole building so should not be tagged to the whole building outline. I've reverted the building tags and added a POI for the cafe. Placed your tags on the cafe POI and also added the website.

Looks good now, hope that's all OK.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Thanks for your response. With respect may I point out that the highway areas are features that can be mapped to OSM, please see here:- area:highway=*. The only problem is that they should be tagged as area:highway=* as opposed to area=yes and highway=*

It's not a very widely mapped feature but there are over 171,000 uses. It's not always rendered on OSM maps but it can be done, OsmAnd renders it. It is usually seen on detailed OS maps and is used by planners and councils.

These areas have been in the OSM database since 2014 and I think they should be reinstated. Even if to some folk they seem to serve no obvious purpose. They are genuine verifiable features the same as railway landuse is mapped.

I can reinstate them with no alteration to other features you've added. This will also correct the grass area.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Yes they're all connected properly now. Well done. If you need help please just ask.

Regards Bernard

Hi, I did tag the section of highway into The Croft grounds as highway=service and service=driveway as you yourself seemed to point this out.

I've now tagged the north section as highway=service. For the record, the field originally had a footpath going across it so there may well be a right of public access.

It would still be wise to map the gates, I can help if you wish.

Regards Bernard.

Hello Joseph,
Sorry I don't use Go Map, I use JOSM which is by far the best most versatile editor for OSM mapping. There is a Go Map guide here:- https://learnosm.org/en/mobile-mapping/gomap/ but it's very basic.

You did manage to join up one path junction. I'll have a look at your edits later on and see if I can fix the anomalies.

Regards Bernard.

Hello, I've again reinstated the highway that you've twice deleted. I've sectioned the way splitting it at the residential boundary area. I've tagged the residential section as highway=service and service=driveway. I again separated the two areas abutting the track, this can clearly be seen on imagery and is shown as such on the county council map. This track as well as being verifiable by the public is also shown on Ordnance Survey maps and on the official Essex Highways map. Please do not cause vandalism to this map by deleting the track.

If there are gates on the track they can be added and tagged as to the traffic access. I am personally reluctant to tag things as private because as I said, virtually everything in the UK is private. Being private does not mean that no access exists. You could tag the track section as private if you wish. I wouldn't object to that.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The fact that the track is private is not a valid reason to delete it from OSM. Almost all land in the UK is owned and therefore private, even land where there is a right of public access is private. I've thus reinstated the track as it can clearly be seen on imagery and its existence is verifiable.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've noticed that a lot of the paths and cycleways you've added are not joined together to make and extend the highway network. Some double-back on themselves (self-intersecting). Some are joined but cross over other ways.
Thus they are of limited use to the OSM database. May I suggest you go over your recent changes and remedy the problems? If you need help please just ask by commenting here.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Just wanted to let you know that this changeset removed 15 ways covering a large area. It deleted highway areas and some grass areas.

I wonder was this intentional, if so then why? Was it inadvertent, if so the deletions might be reversible? Would you like help reverting the deletions?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You've unjoined the field edge and one of the hedges from the railway. This still leaves the other hedge joined and the stream culvert (layer-1) joined to a field edge, a railway, an admin boundary, a wood edge, and a service road. Could you please have another go at fixing these issues? Thanks.

Hi, I just looked at a few of the sidewalks and I see you have duplicated quite a few of them. In some cases like on West Main Street where the sidewalk is a tag on the street way, the sidewalk is triplicated.

When the sidewalk is marked as a tag (sidewalk=both,left or right) on the carriageway then a separate sidewalk should not be drawn. Sidewalks are usually drawn when there is a separation between the carriageway and footway, where there is a narrow grass verge or parking bays. Please see:-sidewalk=*

It would be good if you could rectify the anomalies.

Regards Bernard

OK, you also have the hedges Way: 895831827 and Way: 895831833 and a field edge Way: 895831834 connected to the railway.
Could you fix these problems as well, please?
Perhaps if you slowed down a bit you wouldn't make so many mistakes. You'd also have time to go back and rectify your very numerous past mistakes.

Regards Bernard.

You've got the stream Way: 906270129 going up an embankment to connect to a railway. Down the other side of the embankment then connecting to a service road. The stream also connects to several area outlines. Could you fix the problems please?
Thanks.