Hello.

I see you've changed way/858219141 back to highway=cycleway. There is a sign forbidding cycling on this section - see https://www.mapillary.com/app/index/jpennycook?lat=51.309868995200006&lng=-0.6997728123&z=17&tab=uploads&focus=photo&pKey=nFujlBUSvctL5OppzncoIW (the sign is on the wooden bollard on the right hand side of the image). The other side of the bollard is here: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/KsXjrnnRWeKKf0K6OBxBd8 (showing that cycling is allowed west of the bollard).

Jon

Hello.

Can I ask why you've changed the cycle paths/shared use paths from highway=cycleway to highway=footway? Normally these would be tagged as highway=cycleway or highway=path (see highway=cycleway).

Jon

Note that I have reverted the changes to the routes of Stillman Row, Ridges Rise, and Connolly Close following discussions with Rigi03 - see changeset/92437630 and changeset/92437818

Thanks - that's much better!

Jon

Hi!

If the new part of Invincible Road is not yet complete, would highway=construction be more appropriate for the part that isn't open yet (highway=*?uselang=en-GB#Lifecycle)? Otherwise, journey planners will try to use it before it's ready.
In addition, you might want to look at osm.wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts which compares using highway=construction against start_date

Hello!
I assume it came from England Cycle Data - osm.wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project and https://www.cyclestreets.org/news/2011/10/24/osm-merging-tool/

The data wasn't always accurate - it was based on what councils told the DfT I believe. One thing I learned from cycle campaigning is that councils don't actually know where the cycling infrastructure and cycle routes are! Alternatively, it could just be a glitch caused by three different bodies (CycleStreets, DfT, councils) processing each other's data.

Jon

Hello again.

Looking back, it seems that I sent you a message about this subject in 2018: changeset/58006720

Jon

Hi.

You've merged a shared use path with a trunk road at Basingstoke Road, marking it as cycleway=track/opposite_track. This is not what you should do - if you look at https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/73255/cyclewaytrack-versus-separately-mapping you'll see that the cycleway should remain separately mapped in this case. I will revert your changes, but please don't merge shared use paths with roads again.

Jon

Hi!

References for rights of way should be added as "prow_ref=" rather than "name=" or "ref=" - as per prow_ref=*

Jon

Hi!

References for rights of way should be added as "prow_ref=" rather than "name=" - as per prow_ref=*

Jon

Hi!

References for rights of way should be added as "prow_ref=" rather than "name=" - as per prow_ref=*

Jon

Hi.

I see you created a cycleway on the east side of Church Road. If it is now signposted, could you remove the note on way/691236469 please? (It says "note=no signs permit cycling on this path")

Jon

Also added Shipwright's Way MTB route based on the walking route. I have ridden/walked over or past the sections I marked at some point in the past - some of the southerly parts a long time ago.

Hi.

Thanks for fixing this. The section of way/351262644 between Batts Corner and way/351262643 is a public bridleway where horses and bicycles are allowed - I will fix it later.

Jon

Hi.

You've changed way/351262644 from a track to a footway, but it's used for access to houses, and part of it is a public bridleway (see http://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/?lat=51.160349584934316&lon=-0.8305943539291805&zoom=4&mode=0).
Just because a way is a "Public Footpath" doesn't mean that it should be a highway=footway/path. See also osm.wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom#First_map_the_feature "Note: Rather than being influenced by the name of the access provision, tag the feature according to what you observe on the ground. For example a 'Public Footpath' that runs along the route of a farmer's track should be tagged as highway=track rather than highway=footway."

Jon

No problem - some of the wiki pages can be hard to find, and some of them can be hard to make sense of!

Jon

Here we go - the signs on the service roads linking Eastrop Lane/Eastrop Way to Festival Way is sign 619 here: osm.wiki/Road_signs_in_the_United_Kingdom#Vehicular_type_restrictions

Jon

Apologies - ignore the last - it has bicycle=yes. However, the whole road is open to everything except motor_vehicles, so access=no is not appropriate.

Also the same for way/190849154 - this is an access route to the cycleways nearby (i.e. between way/225283666 and Eastrop Lane/Eastrop Way), so access=no will prevent journey planners used by cyclists (e.g. basingstoke.cyclestreets.net/area) from being able to use this road.

Jon

Hi.

You've set "access=no" on way/651956404/history - according to the sign, only motor vehicles (with exceptions for buses and taxis) are forbidden, so this would not be appropriate. Other access is still allowed by the sign, e.g. non-motorised vehicles, horses, pedestrians...

Jon