No worries, easy mistake to make.

Hi SB329.

On way/112249410#map=16/50.8034/0.0792&layers=T

You changed the highway tag from track to bridleway. Whilst this track is a bridleway, it is also used for farm vehicles so should be tagged as a track. The other tags such as "designation=public_bridleway" show that this is a public bridleway.

Its an easy mistake to make, but just keep in mind that a Public right of way status doesn't mean the way should be tagged with that (i.e. some residential roads are "public footways", but would still be tagged as "highway=residential", as you should always use the highest highway classification)

Further guidance on this can be found at: osm.wiki/Further_guidance_on_tagging_Public_Rights_of_Way_in_the_United_Kingdom

Kind regards,
Thomas

Cheers Nathan, I'll remove the foot tags in a future changeset.

Hi Nathan.
Bit of an old CS to comment on, but just checking foot=no tags. Here you added foot=no tags because signs sate the path is only for bicycles.
I'm guessing that is a "cycle only" sign, which on its own doesn't prohibit pedestrians. wondering if you could cast your mind back to March 21 and remember if there are also signs prohibiting pedestrians?

Kind Regards,
Thomas

I'm not sure that there is a no right turn restriction here. Coming from western road there is a no left turn, but as Queens square is on its own phase, there would be no reason to ban a right turn

I don't believe that this restriction is correct.

There is no signage on approach or on the signs saying no right turn or a mandatory left turn.

There is a no right turns sign on the exit of the junction facing North, which is really badly placed as it actually refers to no right turn onto Kings Road, although cycles are able to.

Hi, you have used a wrong tag here. You added a node with highway=rest_area . This is used for rest areas off of a major road, but this has been placed within the city centre of Brighton where no such facilities exist. What were you trying to describe this place as?

Hi Ian, these bike stands you added look fine 👍. Welcome to OpenStreetMap as well!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124317574

Hi IronVeil,

Please ensure that if you are marking a road as prohibited for pedestrians, that there is actually a restriction on pedestrians. The vast majority of roads do not prohibit pedestrians, although they may be unsuitable for pedestrians. High Speed Dual Carriageways like the A27 may be unsuitable for pedestrians, but they still have a legal right to use them. Routers that use OSM data will however see that the road is marked as trunk, with a speed limit of 70mph and no pavement, and will avoid them for any significant distances.

I would have left it how it was. disused:highway = motorway_link shows that it is a highway, and disused as part of its lifecycle. disused:highway would suggest that the physical carriageway is still present, but disused which reflects the situation. It hasn't taken up any other purpose so doesn't need a highway tag to supersede that.

You have changed the old slip road into a service road. However this is not a service road. it is a completely abandoned motorway slip road which is not used for even service access.

Hi Hinks. Although this road is not suitable for walking or riding/leading a horse - it is not illegal and is legally permitted. Therefor setting the foot and horse tags as "no" is not correct. I've remove these tags from the roads now. Routing software should avoid suggesting pedestrians & horse riders from using this road as it is tagged as a "primary" road, along with a 70mph speed limit and no sidewalk tags.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123143535

Hi Mark,

Cycle contraflows are a mapping oddity in OSM, however
cycleway:right = opposite isn't the correct way to tag this.
I had corrected the tagging on the cycleway. because its a marked (with lane markings) it is a "lane". because its on the right side of the way (as it is orientated in the direction of the way-one street) it would be cycleway:right = lane. Coupled with oneway:bicycle = no, it was fully compliant with standards.

Have a read of the following wiki pages, they do somewhat contradict each other, but all do suggest that the best way is what I've done.
cycleway=opposite
cycleway:right=*

next time you are making an edit could you remove this?
way/1062465914

I don't have the survey footage to hand for this change.
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/6989770
This sign says "gated road", although maybe more of a description than the road's name.
I might be heading out that way next week, so ill see if I can take a look at it again.

Welcome to Open Street Map. Your edits seem to be fine at a glace, however when uploading/saving your changes, please ensure they are in a similar location (i.e. same town). Because in this changeset you have made edits in both India and the UK, it appears on all areas between that for people reviewing changes.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120514273

The Westbound diverge shouldn't have a name or ref tag as it is not open to traffic, and there are no signs showing the junction number or name. Also the overbridge shouldn't carry the junction name either unless the road is known as that, which I think is unlikely.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120424564

This looks like a zebra crossing not a Pelican.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120394963

Changes reverted in 120277421. Please do not add fictional streets & changes to Open Street Map. Please view my comment on your first change for more information.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120274221

Changes reverted in 120277421. Please do not add fictional streets & changes to Open Street Map. Please view my comment on your first change for more information.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120273983