In this changeset you deleted 4 areas of mapped woodland and dragged a surveyed footpath feature out of position. These elements of the changeset have been reverted. Please take care to respect existing mapping, and use meaningful changeset comments so that your edit intentions are understood.

In this changeset you dragged a node and merged it with the edge of trees ~200m away, I've reverted it for you. Please use meaningful changeset comments.

The key word there is 'dedicated'.
But where the road is a public right of way that remains open but has car/lorry access removed, marking access=no says the road is closed (except...) which works ok, but starts from the position that the road has been closed to the general public. OSM is a map for all users, not a car map.
Please identify any router that does not know about motor_vehicle.

The use of access=no, foot=yes, bicycle=yes, bus=yes results in a lot of tags and tends to encourage map rendering with the way appearing to be closed/unavailable. As an alternative motor_vehicle=no, bus=yes is available.

Hi Greg011 and Bernard,
I had a look at this last night and based on the changeset description and the imagery (all including the oldest plus the OS OpenData StreetView have the same), I think nothing has changed, just the total invisibility of the feature on all the map renders was confusing?
It was tagged ok to block cars/lorries, although the tag psv=yes had been set which (I think inappropriately here) allows taxis as well as buses. Also the road was set as tertiary ie main through route which isn't good with this feature in it.
So I've set the road section as residential, changed the gate bit to highway=service, lanes=1, bus=yes and added the bollards which should better reflect the actual position.
Cebderby (Clive)

Can you reverse the false connection at node/5613999532, it was very carefully set as connecting the bridge and elevated ways to the lifts and NOT the platforms.
Also the reason that plat 7 track was set as siding was that no passenger services ever stop there (unless something has changed)
regards Cebderby (Clive)

Hi TheMoneyTour,
Can you please add meaningful changeset comments, something as simple as "added details to golf course" would normally be fine for your edits.
However in this changeset you also deleted a designated public footpath way/23899877 which is Birmingham public right of way ref BY 4104 (and shortened the way/528449331 marking the old roman road line). This is presumably a mistake and the deleted way can/should be recovered (I can do this if you need).
Cebderby (Clive)

Why is it that EVERY SINGLE ONE of your edits needs to be reworked to fix the bad way shape, bad alignment and sometimes bad tagging?
Please use the best available imagery (typically the new sharp Bing imagery in many places), ALIGN IT to existing mapped features, LOOK AT the imagery to see the actual way shape and map more accurately. Kindly rework this edit and review ALL your edits for quality.

Deleted false way. Why set source=maxar and use Esri imagery, when Bing imagery is clearly more recent (this is a building site, marked as such).

Meaningless tag, adding no information, please remove

description has no place in address, please remove

what is your source for this boundary line?

village is not 'in' Doncaster, please remove

again, do not add descriptions as names, please remove

Do not add descriptions as names, please remove

In OSM, places like this are normally mapped as nodes as the boundary is rarely verifiable. Please read
place=*
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/91222606

Hi Simon270,
There's a nice tool:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=91189397
(keep the link and just change the number on the end to see other changesets) where you can see what all the tag values were before and after, so you can put things back as you need to. You can have a gate as a point on a way, but sounds like a fence is right so you can draw a line across the track (including a node shared with the track) and tag that as fence. You can also usefully divide the track and mark the inaccessible part as access=private if you know how much of it is likely blocked off (or just mark a short length of the track as access=private the other side of the fence) then no-one should get routed along it.
Cebderby (Clive)

Hi Weretom,
Welcome to OSM. You managed to get 2 of my least favourite things about iD in one changeset:
1. In the walkthrough they never mention anything about the background imagery, and nothing about imagery alignment. Unluckily, it looks like the Bing imagery isn't well aligned in your location. You saw the existing buildings were out, but if you look at the roads, paths etc you'll see everything is out by the same amount in the same direction. Whenever you see this, you can assume it is the imagery which is out, not all the existing features. To adjust the imagery, in the Backgrounds tab, scroll down and drag in the grey box until you get the best match for a bunch of roads, existing buildings etc. Then add/move your new stuff to match that. Switching over to the OS OpenData StreetView background is also good as a fixed point of reference - if you seen road junctions etc that match well there, try to get the imagery you want to use to line up to those same features.

2. For some reason, the iD guys think that if a building overlaps a road/path, then putting layer=1 / -1 on one of them solves the problem in some useful way. (Presumably you got a warning when you moved the village hall; it was because the adjacent paths then overlapped). Pressing on the proposed 'fix' button put layer=1 on the hall, which isn't really right for a non-bridge / non-elevated building.

I've reset the hall and church where it looks (to me) that they should be, can you try the Background tab to look at different imagery (some are better aligned but comparatively fuzzy and non-vertical) and then try aligning the nice sharp & vertical Bing imagery to the roads/hall/church, then adjust your houses.

The house shapes look good, don't forget there's a right-click/'square' option (shortcut key Q) available to make the angles 90deg when wanted.

Hope this helps and happy mapping,
Cebderby (Clive).

It's pretty hard to review this changeset as you changed both River Lane in Leatherhead and Mallorca in the same changeset so it's about 1300km tall!

It's not at all necessary to add oneway=no to ordinary roads (despite the choice of wording in iD which rather implies otherwise).

However two of the ways:
way/
97554865
and
way/97554879
had previously been tagged as junction=roundabout which looks wrong as they are turning loops at the ends of roads and is very inconsistent with your oneway=no. Here, asserting oneway=no (or yes as appropriate) is useful, but can you remove the junction=roundabout on each of these?
(and try to keep changesets local to one area).
Cebderby (Clive)

Hi Simon270,
The A36 is divided in the right place, at the moment there only seems to be a restriction without a type (so no effect) with 'from' + 'to' on the NW part of the A36, 'via' on the junction node. Probably best to get rid of this first, so click on the that part of the A36 and bin the 'from' and 'to' entries labelled just 'Restriction' (avoid the bus route and the one currently showing as 'to' for a 'No right turn' as that is for the next junction NW for the opposite side entry). Then, select the junction node and delete the 'via' for the same 'Restriction' entry. Now you're back to a clean junction to start from.

The big choice for blocking entry is either to use a short length of oneway, or have two turn restrictions from each direction of the A36. The short oneway is easier, some may regard the two restrictions as more correct.

For the short oneway option, divide Straight Lane eg at the footpath, and set the end bit as oneway out. Or, for two turn restrictions blocking entry, select the junction node. In iD's left panel you should have a diagram of the junction, in this diagram (not the main map) now click one part of the A36 and then click on the representation of Straight Lane until it goes red. Then click away and select the other part of the A36, and click on Str.La again until red. Once you've clicked away you should be able to hover over a 'from' way and see the choices (green=compulsory,red=blocked)

Whichever of the above options you go for,
to add a no-right-turn coming out of Straight Lane, with the junction node still selected on the main map, on the diagram select Straight Lane, then click on the NW part of the A36 until that goes red. Click away and you should have 1 (or 3) turn restrictions.

If can't make it work or get into a mess don't worry, it can be cleared up or fixed, so have a go.
Cebderby (Clive)