OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
108189363 over 3 years ago

Does way/123888940/ actually have a cycle track on one side or is it just a footway (pavement)?

115164152 over 3 years ago

Hi, could you I suggest you update your method of tagging crossings such as this one? node/9352617209
If you want to add "pelican" then it should be tagged as crossing_ref=pelican instead, with crossing=traffic_signals.

123024888 over 3 years ago

Why have you changed way/428462927 to a path?

122848798 over 3 years ago

Don't think historic=manor is the correct tag for this...

122883777 over 3 years ago

looks like you've added the ref to an admin boundary?

122131194 over 3 years ago

Thanks but I don't think we need to mark it as an attraction.

122220593 over 3 years ago

Thanks for adding the grounds, fixed it so there is only one school object here though.

122720448 over 3 years ago

I've removed the address data from the building as it was already tagged on the address nodes :)

122752640 over 3 years ago

Hi, welcome to OSM. I've extended the wall to block off this section and moved the path back a bit.

122775001 over 3 years ago

thanks but not quite right :)

122176063 over 3 years ago

This was raised with CycleStreets: https://twitter.com/OSMScotland/status/1535219713114005506 - basically your end point was geolocated to the private roads, whereas if the end point was the terminal it wouldn't have used the private roads!

121776666 over 3 years ago

Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the edit. Not cycled this way recently - wonder if you can help as it might be worth adding the "smoothness" value to this path? smoothness=*

122470082 over 3 years ago

Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the edit :)

122195700 over 3 years ago

Please check the co-ordinates and the wikipedia page before adding, as it actually refers to a building on the coast here: osm.org/?mlat=56.0315&mlon=-3.3492&zoom=15#map=18/56.03140/-3.34953

122176063 over 3 years ago

That is surely a problem with CycleStreets rather than the tagging though, as the OSM website routers manage fine: osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=55.9554%2C-3.3419%3B55.9481%2C-3.3603#map=15/55.9424/-3.3435

122176063 over 3 years ago

Any particular reason why you added the bicycle restrictions? As it already has access=private

121845408 over 3 years ago

Thanks for adding this - though I've moved it to the south side of the A96 as per the article photo and linked it to the minor road as per https://www.bearscot.com/a96-lhanbryde-to-fochabers-footway-and-cycleway-project/

118561340 over 3 years ago

Hi, highway=services is not the correct tag for this - node/9583459500

119430686 over 3 years ago

Not sure why you changed this to crossing=toucan but I've fixed it. node/4976104204/history

121778857 over 3 years ago

Thanks for the reply - I just didn't know what had been deleted and couldn't see the history. :)
Agreed there's no point in the duplicate. Doesn't seem like other walking relations have the towns as nodes so it can be deleted.