ohmanger's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 139949054 | over 2 years ago | Hey, just an FYI the tracing on a lot of the river sections seems to be way off e.g.
|
| 134664950 | over 2 years ago | Quite true! I've surveyed lots of Ride UK paths that go through private land. I'd argue bicycle tags should only be added if permission is explicitly permitted or if the infrastructure suggests it, which isn't the case here. It appears this user has assumed permission by default in a LOT of cases, which is encouraging trespassing and could get users into trouble. They've also pretty much ruined Telford's route mapping for bikes. I've already had to undo a change to a path with a narrow kissing gate. |
| 137006853 | over 2 years ago | I'll add the small bit that I remember but I don't think it followed the path we went. Facepalmed when I realised none of it was mapped as I usually take pictures of the markers. |
| 134664950 | over 2 years ago | Hey there! Just to let you know that I have changed bicycle=yes to bicycle=no on the public footpath at way/1160739489
Cheers |
| 131911141 | over 2 years ago | Hi, I've noticed that you've marked a lot of paths as suitable for bicycles. I'm not sure this is the case in a lot of cases e.g. way/1133424188 which I know has a narrow kissing gate. In other areas I believe they're designated public footpaths so you can't legally cycle on them. Could you please state what source you're using? Thanks |
| 125306942 | over 2 years ago | It is just used to indicate the general direction of the viewpoint in degrees. It could probably be changed here to include a more specific range. |
| 131372143 | almost 3 years ago | Great thanks 👍 |
| 131372143 | almost 3 years ago | Hi, I can see you've marked the Tramway near Pandy as not accessible to horse or cyclists (way/55740719). This seems to conflict with the signed route The Ceiriog Trail managed by Wrexham council. The information on their website mentions it as a permissive bridleway https://www.wrexham.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2022-03/riding-routes-ceiriog-trail.pdf - could you please clarify this change? Last time I was there the access signs were still up. Thanks. |
| 113808789 | about 3 years ago | Hey Phil! No signed turn restriction but I'm pretty sure I put this here because there are physical "keep left" barrier islands (visible on bing maps) making it impractical/impossible to make a right turn from the slip roads without mounting the kerb. I have added implicit=yes tags to the relations. It might be better to account for the keep left islands by splitting the road into individual ways. |
| 129569701 | about 3 years ago | Good spot. https://www.bubbleoncup.com/ works although it currently just redirects to their facebook page. |
| 114888114 | about 3 years ago | Hey DaveF, thanks for the comment. I think this is a quirk with the iD editor and a script I sometimes use to copy tags to blank areas. I'll keep a look out for it in the future. |
| 111927910 | over 3 years ago | I'm fairly sure that way was split from way/23712583 so the designation tag was left over from that (my bad). The tunnel at the south is public so I suspect a historic route that is redirected. I'll do another survey to check. |
| 125817813 | over 3 years ago | This has highlighted one way that is (was?) a PROW but is now redirected (way/223403981). I have removed the designation tag and remarked private. If I get time I'll go down and review the other ways affected. Whilst I think I agree with the sentiment of this changeset persistently doing so in such a heavy handed way is wrong. More time should be put into actually looking at what you're changing. Reading kevjs1982's comment is interesting as it is quite common locally to assume the *=designated tag takes priority over the access one so you end up with tracks tagged as access=private+foot=designated which imo is much more concise but I gather would be an issue for some people. |
| 125865828 | over 3 years ago | Source survey/aerial imagery |
| 125560125 | over 3 years ago | Yes I missed that, thanks Phil. |
| 124145955 | over 3 years ago | Good point, I'll update them. |
| 118059766 | almost 4 years ago | Hi Phil, yes this is just the H&M store. Anecdotally it is used as a shortcut by quite a few people, but I agree it would be a bit weird to be routed this way. I have removed the way, although as far as I can tell there isn't anything on the wiki saying not to map inside shops. |
| 117829630 | almost 4 years ago | Just a note that Lunts has relocated to the new Riverside site and the building is now owned by The Salopian (same goes for the building to the west). |
| 115803208 | almost 4 years ago | Hi Mauls, I've noticed that you've reverted my edits merging the abandoned railway with the cyclepath/footpath/road. The old railway mapping is a bit of a mystery to me, but this appears to be the recommended way of mapping them on the wiki. Please could you advise as I'd like to know why these changes were necessary. Perhaps a relation containing the rail information/ways would be better suited? |
| 103046158 | almost 4 years ago | Ha yes, I only clocked it after they trimmed the bushes back. Legally this toll is supposed to apply to cycles/motorcycle traffic, which I'm guessing is why the main barriers don't extend the whole way across. |