Hi and welcome to OSM. Not entirely sure what you are trying to add to the map here. The South Downs Light Railway is already on the map, has something changed such as it being closed?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107909621

Hi shelbe, thanks for your edit, however it doesn't quite look like you've done it right. the noexit tag is normally used for roads that are not through roads, rather than at a blocked point. I presume the gap between the points youv'e marked as no exit is still able to be used by pedestrians and maybe cyclists too. If this is the case then it would the bit between the two points should be mapped as a footway or cycleway. The points can then lose the noexit tags, or get a barrier tag if there is a physical obstruction here such as a bollard or gate.
Hope this helps, if there are any question feel free to ask in the discussion on this changeset.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107917445

Hi mark. Not too sure if these changes for the cycleway on Madeira Drive area good thing. I know for fact that there isn't a prohibition on pedestrians, although "use_sidepath" could be applied in this situation. Also access for horses shouldn't have to be specified since it would be a bridleway instead of cycleway if they were allowed.
oneway was set to no, as the adjacent road (which technically is on the same carriageway) is one-way.
Wih surface tags its better to keep to known ones unless they are no describable as commonly used tags, so in this case asphalt is the best used.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107926450

no worries

Hi Mark, how is the dog access restricted?

dog=*
If you follow this guide it will say what to tag the paths or park as.
Hope that helps.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107756006

Hi Mark, this change set seems to be okay at face value, however "incline" tag is usually set to up/down (going forward on the way), or it can be set to a % of the incline or decent.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107756321

Hi Mark, these ways are correctly tagged to have contra-flow cycle traffic. If there are marked contra-flow lanes (i.e. a painted line on the ground to segregate contra-flow cycle traffic) from with-flow traffic then you can add "cycleway:right=lane"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107756080

If there is no central reserve then it must be mapped as a single way. Doesn't matter how wide the road is or if there are traffic islands or a wide hatched area.
Mini roundabouts are not the same as roundabouts, again it doesn't matter how big they are, if there is no central island then it must be tagged as a way.

highway=mini_roundabout
osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway#Not_dual_carriageways

Would you like to make the changes back, or would you like me to do it?

In this change set you have appeared to of deleted some ways only to replace them like-for-like with less tags. Could you explain why you have done this? This ultimately removed the 18+ versions of history of these ways and made tagging worse. It would also break any relations that used those ways such as bus & cycle routes as well as banned turns.
Also in this change set you have replaced mini roundabouts with regular roundabouts, this is incorrect.

example way replacement: 8134667 -> 963253266
example roundabout: n/243880847 -> w/963253259
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107758716

Hi Luke.
In this changeset you have made Langney Rise &
Willingdon Drove dual carraigeways at some junctions. As well as making so mini roundabouts into roundabouts. Have the roads here actually changed, the imagery suggest not and I was here about 12 months ago and it wasn't like this, so have recent works changed this?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107775408

I don't think that the entire footway on the southwestern side of the road is designated to bicycles as well. By the looks of it the sections around the edge of the roundabout is shared. Its very badly designed.
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2261338
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107319971

Is the phone number you added correct? It doesn't match the one on the website.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107198787

While smoothness is very subjective, there are some which I'd disagree with. For example ways 36136287
& 511766889 (among many others) you have marked as "intermediate", however these were recently resurfaced and I'd tag it personally as "excellent", although "good" would still be okay. Also way/210216720 is tagged as "bad" which I'd tag as "good" (but not "excellent"). I certainty would take my road bike along all of those roads which suggest it is "good" or above.

By tagging these roads any worse than "good" it will impact on routing software for bicycles (especially road bikes).

Please check the smoothness tags that you have added. Some road have been tagged with "bad" or "intermediate" when they are "excellent" or "good".
Have a look at smoothness=* if you are unsure what to use.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107053288

If this still called a TA centre?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106943513

On the wiki, service should be used when it serves properties (and a few other cases like parking & laybys), such in this case these roads serve a few houses and farms as well as fields. Track should only be used when it is only access to fields. Also generally speaking "service" are paved while tracks are usually unpaved, although in some circumstances "track" may be paved.

In general for the UK, roads that are adopted and paved are unclassified and above, and unadopted roads in a rural environment are usually only service or track.

highway=track

The roads between Isacc's Lane and Rocky Lane are better suited as highway=service rather than track since these roads serve properties & homes. Track should be used when its purpose is to access land around it such as crop fields

In this changeset you have set access tags to "no" for some roundabouts & roads. To set something to "no" that mode of transport has to be explictly banned (usually by signs), this isn't the case in these changes. While the roundabouts and roads may be unsuitable for pedestrians, a router wouldn't choose them unless there were no better alternative because most routers will assume trunk & primary roads to not be suitable for pedestrians unless there is a sidewalk tag or low speed limit. I've changed these back to not specify any foot access
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106538187

Congrats on finishing mapping every house in Burgess Hill!

Some of these old railways would be better tagged as railway=razed rather than abandoned, including WAY: 937109313 which you changed from razed to abandoned although it seems there is no evidence on the ground of the former railway
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105429088