For access restrictions, a footway is presumed designated for foot traffic, so foot=yes is redundant, but still useful.
If this is a public footpath it can also be tagged with designation=public_footpath too
designation=*
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116345922

The name ought to be put onto a route relation, rather than the ways.
see route=bicycle
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116062297

Heads up that you made a typo. surveillance:type= ALPR
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116110729

Is this school open yet? Also I'm fairly certain it does go further south boarding School Road
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116084466

ROTTMS are the displays which show road work information closures. They are at fixed points 200 yards, 400 yards, 600 yards, 800 yards before the start of the closure point.
No where else have them mapped yet, but I'm slowly mapping other motorways in this detail.
Also after the fact I realised I gave them the wrong distances, the nearest display is 200 yards, not 0.

Hi Hawk UK. On the ways edited in this CS, you have used tags in ways that they are not intended to be used. "entrance" is used at an entrance point to a building or enclosed area, such as a doorway or gateway. In this CS (and others) you have been using it in a way it was not intended for. In this case to mark where "keep clear" markings may exist on the carriageway. Parking/Waiting/Stopping restrictions should be applied to the road way, and not its own area. If you wish to mircomap the parking / waiting restrictions you can use parking:lane tag (parking:lane=*)
for example here it may be "parking:condition:left=no"

Also the "name" tag should only be used to for the name of the street/path/building etc,. here "keep clear" could be the description, but not name (osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions)

In addition, with the other CS in this area, you have been disconnecting the footways from the road, they need to be connected otherwise routers cannot use these - the map is used for more than just visuals, software depends on using these connections to produce routes.

Hope this helps, if there are any questions feel free to message me or you can always ask the community on the discord server
Thomas

Forgot to change CS description, this one is adding detail to M23 VMS & other things nearby the road

When aligning road please ensure that the imagery itself is also aligned. Here Bing needs to be offset by 4.93; -2.09. The roads were near enough perfectly aligned before, but now they are out by about 5 metres. Also ways 1019206367 & 1019206366 is not needed since there is no physical separation. Would you mind me reverting this back to how it was, whilst keeping the additional footway you added under the bridge?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115889852

I do sometimes see it tagged the way you have, but since its not documented in the wiki, and JOSM's presents forces traffic_signals+crossing_ref I presumed that was the correct way.

I've had a look to see which one is most common and:

According to taginfo for the UK. crossing=toucan has been used on 2,479 nodes whilst crossing=traffic_signals has been used on 37,938 nodes with crossing_ref=toucan being on 6,665 of those nodes.

Within the local area there were 48 cases of crossing_ref=toucan and 33 cases of crossing=toucan, so both are used here, so no need to change it back for consistency since its not very consistent.

With the bicycle tag, whilst a toucan crossing it is implied, but providing it in addition means that routers that don't understand UK specific tags still know it is for bicycles. In general I think its better to have it on there than not, even if it is redundant.

With the crossing island, I usually only give yes if there is a localised island at that point and the road is a single carriageway, since the two sides of the central reserve have their own crossing node then I don't consider that to be an island. Islands usually only appear at uncontrolled/marked refuge crossings, although there are cases where they are signalised

Maybe it is worth bringing this to the talk-gb mailing list so see if the tagging of crossings can be standardized across the whole of the UK? Its a bit silly the wiki is completely blank on this alternative tagging scheme

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/crossing=toucan#overview

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/crossing=traffic_signals#overview

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/crossing_ref=toucan#overview

I'm slightly confused at the need of adding "Interchange" at the end of the name of the junction along with adding the interchange name to the gyratory, even though it doesn't have a name, but I'll let that slide. But could you explain the need of changing the Toucan crossings from the usual tagging scheme to something that hasn't been documented at all. Why has "crossing=traffic_signals" been replaced by "crossing=toucan" along with then removal of "bicycle=yes" and the incorrect changing of "crossing:island=no" to "yes"???
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115686003

I've ran some of your translations through a translator and whilst most of them make sense, The "东海岸线铁道" does not not mean "East Coastway Line", instead means "East Coast Line Railway". East Coastway is not the same as East Coast as the name of the railway line referrers to the line running East from Brighton along the Southern Coast, rather than a railway line running along the East Coast - such as the actual East Coast Main Line.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115687468

Just a heads up that putting land use onto roads ways is discouraged as it may cause issues when edits are made to a road, as well as not being correct on the ground.
Landuse edges should be at the highway boundary like how it was

Okay, that open a long time before I expected it too!

I imagine that this road & the southern end of the Lyminster Bypass would not open as the "A284", instead just as an tertiary road. And then when the Northern end of the Lyminster Bypass opens (still many years off), the whole corridor will become the A284 and the old corridor to become a B class road.
But if you get a change to check the signage that would be great and change it down to tertiary for the interim period. I might be in the area in the next few weeks to check it if you can't.

Hi Strimplers, is this road really fully open already?

And also, if it is open to all traffic already, is it actually signed as the A284 & the old A284 signs taken down?

According to ESCC adopted road map, this is just a spur of Newton Road and not called New Road
https://escc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f1ebafa02f6746a39a693e7ead3ff1fb

Hate to be a pain, but I thought the former halt here was on the Southern side of Monteswood Lane. Whats the source it was on the Northern side?

Hi MWoolner,

How to tag Public Rights of Way is outlined in this wiki page -> osm.wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom#Public_Rights_of_Way

Also I see you have added motor_vehicle = yes, this would mean that anyone is allowed to drive a motor vehicle along here, which I presume isn't correct. Either remove the motor_vehicle tag or change "yes" to "destination".
Also access = permissive isn't needed.
Hope this helps,
Thomas

Hi Florent,
This edit appears okay to me.
the access=no is only really the one that matters here, with the additional note.

Wiki says "... ideally level with the stop line at the front of the painted box."
I read that as put the ASL node at the ASL which is at the front of the [painted] box.
The diagram on the wiki shows the "highway=traffic_signals" node on the junction interchange node, which is acceptable, however placing "highway=traffic_signals" on the stop line with "direction=forward" or "backward" is still acceptable similar to what you have done.
Also everywhere I've seen ASL tagged, it has been beyond the highway=traffic_signals node

You have put the ASLs before the traffic signals. This ought to be the other way around with the traffic signals put on the stop line & ASL put on the ASL and not the other way around.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113260427