Why add direction=clockwise? Is is really reverse direction to default?

Hi Vincent,
It's considered best practice for roundabouts, yes mostly for routing, so that 'taking the first exit' rather than 'turning left' is used. There are nearly no roundabouts where this is not done, even when geometrically awkward - only exception is where a 'bypass' route exists and a no-left-turn turn restriction may be wanted on the route via the roundabout. But the 'bypass' route is only mapped if theres a physical separation of the ways.
regards, Clive

Noticed you've added some underpasses under the A6 in this changeset and in changeset/46813168. At the moment the tagging (railway=subway) implies the track of a underground train running on the surface! Suggest you use the tags of the adjacent pathways and add tunnel=yes for the underpass parts. You can also use the Bing imagery layer as well as any gps data you have to ensure you get the best possible accuracy of locations. regards Clive

I suspect it is over-penalising a route from a secondary to a primary road via a minor way, even though it seems short and obvious. Trying with 'fuel efficient' route option (ie. short route) OsmAnd gets the right turn, it's only the 'fastest' route with the problem. For now, I've removed the no-U-turn, and trying/proposing setting the two cross-ways at the junction (which were minor ways) as secondary link (ie. extensions of Vic.Pk.Rd), so turns don't need to pass over minor ways. Looks reasonable, but would have to wait for next month's update to see any effect, and of course it (may) destroy the test case if it should rather be reported.

Hi, If turning right from the southbound Welford Rd into Knighton Jnct Ln or the pub is ok then this new turn restriction can't remain. The specific routing problem was in (expecting to) turn right from Victoria Park Rd to northbound Welford Rd - OsmAnd app's router gives left turn then U-turn which is silly. Thought I would find a mis-set turn restriction at that junction but there are none, so router must be over-prioritising main road usage. If dual carriageway goes further south that would probably discourage it from the stupid route. Thanks, Clive

A few months ago I saw that Keep right error flag at the Furzefield Chase railway bridge, and wasn't sure from imagery whether the footpath went under the bridge or not, so created a Note, which has been answered today saying that the path crosses the road. But I see you made the opposite fix a few days ago. Are you sure the path goes under the bridge, or should the path connection to the road be reinstated and the bridge (probably) shortened as per the Note response?

For me, it's not (just) an access to a private property or business, and it's certainly not private as driveways often are. It may be a dead end for car drivers, but for walkers its a significant through route connecting to the footpath beyond - in the absence of service=driveway_and_footpath, it needs to be something else, be it a lane or an 'unspecified' service road.