Hiya, could I get a response in the coming days please

Hiya, could I get a response to my comment. cheers

Hi Tony.
So on OSM things are mapped as they appear. So if it looks like a track, it is a track.. Access tags and other information can be added show routers (like Komoot) know what paths & tracks different modes of transport can use.
So for this track I'd recommend that it is:
highway=track
agricultural=yes
bicycle=permissive horse=permissive
foot=permissive
motor_vehicle=private
and then you could remove the "access = no"

There are loads of different access tags you can add depending on the situation - access=*

If you have any issues let me know!
Happy mapping!
~Thomas

Hi Pawelaa,
I've been through here recently and the A96 is not a dual carriageway. I edited this road, and some others in the area to a single carriageway. Wondering why you have edited it back to a dual carriageway?
osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway

Hi!
I see in this changeset you've changed a track that runs beside the A24 to a path. From imagery this looks like it is wide enough and used by motor vehicles, rather than just as a path for pedestrians. Please confirm if this is a track or path
:)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151668946

Hi Pawelaa
I see you added a bus way at the bus stop (w/1271187892)
I think this is incorrect as this is only a bus stop layby, and as it is not a segregated layby it doesn't need any way added, just the bus stop node.

yeah thats a mistake

Hi RustySnoot.

Imma revert this change as there are no prohibitions on pedestrians on the roads which you've changed to foot=no
There is a pedestrian prohibition on the M23 J11 gyratory & link to services, but that's it within the areas which you've changed

Sorry large cs area. my edit conflicted with the Monarch's Way relation due to changeset/147856872. I resolved to my version and then edited their fix back to how it was in 147857208

Hi Joe,

Welcome to Open Street Map & thank you for your contributions. When adding bridges, they should be added to a "way" (a line) rather than a "node" (a point). I see in this edit you added 4 bridges to the node, however all of these bridges were already added correctly. If you wish to add the bridge's name to the way, you can use the "bridge:name" tag, or in some cases the "name" tag. But this should only be added if there is an official or well known name for the bridge such as "Cliffe Bridge", but not like "Disused Railway Bridge"

Kind Regards,
Thomas

Hi, Usul. Welcome to Open Street Map.

The terminals themselves are correctly mapped and do not require an airport tag as it is a single airport

The A272 is a primary route, whilst the A29 is a non-primary route. This has been confirmed by WSCC. This means that this section should be mapped as primary instead of trunk.

Hi CoastalResident.

I've reverted this changeset as it appears that you have only glued two roads together, which results in the two ways sharing the exact same nodes which isn't allowed as it causes errors.

144973287
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144951521

Hi Rco97,

From memory, this road has no access for motor vehicles, except buses.
If this is still the case it should have been left how it was (highway = pedestrians && motor_vehicle = no), although it should also have bus = yes. I see you have changed the highway type & motor vehicle access, has the road changed in the past year or two to allow any motor vehicles to use it? Also it currently does not have oneway tags applied to it

So a while ago I removed the oneway from this "roundabout" as there is no signage which requires road users to proceed around it in a clockwise direction, or to keep left.

Hi Sammiisle,
Just to confirm your edit. The gate here allows pedestrians & cyclists through, however no motor vehicles at all are allowed, including those belonging to residents on the street?

https://cdn.drawception.com/images/panels/2014/5-10/BaRcSD1knE-2.png

Hi Steve, your edit here looks fine other than address being on Faygate Lane, did you mean Road? I've added additional information for the whole area too.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143249115

Hi Riderrobbo

I've reverted this change and your other changes where you added access tags to the A23 for bicycles, horses & foot.
This section of the A23, although a trunk road, doesn't have any orders preventing certain modes of transport. The road is tagged as 70mph & primary with no sidewalk, so customers such as routers would not suggest horses, cyclists or pedestrians to use the road (unless there was no other choice).

Reverting changes from CSs:
142608917
142608961
142609002
142609034
142609317
143269044