Ah! Well spotted, thank you 😊 Yes I must have missed this in changeset/123379950. That road was definitely opened, I can confirm from survey (although not a recent survey). Please do remove the access restriction.

It looks like there are some minor name capitalisation issues in the adjacent ways which could be fixed at the same time, if you don't mind doing so.

Hi borovac,

That was quite a large changeset at the time, and I can't see any ways that are still mapped as closed. Which particular way/road are you referring to?

Yeah, you're right - I think I was erroneously swayed by 3D rendering, which defaults to displaying as roof:levels=1 unless otherwise specified, so was tagging relative to that. I'll change to 0.5 and add a roof:height tag.

Oh, wow! That's a failure of pretty epic proportions, especially considering the timescales. Thanks for the background info!

I've updated based on those tweeted images (and another which shows updated routing of the crossing to the NW). I've also added notes to explain why the map doesn't match what's on the ground, and that the way is "due" to be relined...

Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

(It seems strange I know - but it reflects what is on the ground.)

Hi, thanks for checking. Yes, it is meant to be one way - there is painted text on the cycle path at this point that says "no entry" in eastbound direction, and eastbound cyclists are forced to take the crossing. Painted lines and arrows reinforce this. Routing should direct cyclists onto the opposite carriageway.

Ugh, forgive poor typing on a phone - "the previous routing"

I should add, tge previous routine of the way was incorrect, and made it look more like the cycleway would have continued from Lampton Park straight through to the Great West Road - but as you'll see on updated layout, it's not the case and there is a dogleg junction instead. I think it most likely that the designated cycle route continues west to Willow Gardens and does not dogleg up this footpath, while it may have looked more likely with the old mapped layout.

I haven't, and from your thread you've done plenty of digging in other council areas so well done! Street-level imagery shows what may be byelaw signage at the point this path meets the Great West Road, which might shed some light - but I no longer live in London so can't check. I suppose I was taking a different approach of mapping only affirmative signage, as the cycleway to the south and another on the east side of Lampton School are signed as shared cycleways, while this is not, and the omission leads me to mark this as foot designated only. Perhaps the most pragmatic option is to add a fixme tag asking someone to survey the path and check smallprint signage at North end to confirm whether bicycles are allowed?

Apols for typos in last sentence, I mean bicycle=yes and bicycle=permissive of course.

Thanks for the link - an interesting read (and irritating for mappers and the public, naturally! Councils' ambiguous application of signage, standards and byelaws certainly makes a mess of the situation...)

My main concern on that particular way is that it was set for cycles only with no provision for foot traffic, when the exact opposite appears to be the case on the ground. Historically it was always a footpath (hence changing to footway), and on a recent visit I saw no signage designating it for cycles. It also has a rather dangerous blind junction at the south end (incidentally with a path which *is* explicilty marked as a shared cycleway). At the north end the footpath joins with a segregated foot pavement (physically separated from the cycleway), and the path itself isn't in a park, although Lampton Park is in the vicinity.

So I think this one is a bit more clear cut to be honest? Although separately to the south, where the adjacent shared cycleway joins footways in Lampton Park, which I updated with cycle=yes (at least all those that are wide enough and have good sightlines), your method of cycle=permissive could be more appropriate.

There are issues with changing ways from under construction, to constructed with access=no and no highway classification, to fully open with full classification.

1. Some ways will go between these states in quite quick succession - OSM practice with roads (e.g. when an existing road is closed for work) is to only change closure status when that status will remain for around 3 months or more - reason being that it reduces the chances of GPS navigation software updating their maps during a period that the road is briefly in flux, and then retaining that status potentially for the following year or more.
2. There is no established threshold as to whether the road is constructed or not. Is it when the first tar goes down? When the wearing course is added? When lines are painted? How do we know there's nothing still to be constructed like barriers, or if tar needs to be lifted and relaid? IMO the only point that a road is no longer under construction is when opened to traffic. Construction traffic doesn't count, because if it did, we'd be mapping all the site traffic tracks, which would change from day to day anyway - there is no benefit to mapping what contruction traffic can use, as opposed to considering the road still under construction.
3. When other editors come to open the road, they don't necessarily know to remove or convert the access=no, proposed:ref proposed:bicycle etc into normal access/ref tags, so there is a mess of legacy tags that has to be tidied up (I've been doing some recently around N22 Macroom). But if it was left as under construction, the way can contain all of the relevant tags ready to go, so that all that remains is to convert construction tags to highway tags when the road opens.

I'd strongly advocate VictorIE's suggested way of working with road construction.

Hi Mackerski, I just spotted your edit. I had thought from expressway=* that this road met all the requirements of an expressway? Essentially that it has full access control and isn't a motorway. It's a step beyond dual carriageway (dual_carriageway=yes), due to its grade separation and lack of local exits, except for a few highway maintenance roads which are LILO.

For routing, it seems worthwhile having one or other, but expressway seems more suitable to me, or is there a different consensus on this? (I did have a hoke around the Ireland Roads wiki pages but didn't find anything.)

For another example - it's in use on the new A6 in NI: way/601375429#map=14/54.7439/-6.3959

I've reverted the change.

Hi Isaac, thanks for your edits. Unfortunately some of this is quite wrong around the Dunkettle interchange - you have reopened the roundabout and a number of roads which have long ago closed (permanently). There is recent aerial footage of what this area actually looks like now, and if you were to view on the ground you would also see the changes. You've added stretches of road which are not yet completed (see https://twitter.com/dunkettleint for current updates about the construction) and added bridges where they don't exist...

Just letting you know before I revert some of the changes you've made.

Hi MacLondon, roundabouts should be the same road designation throughout the junction - otherwise this confuses GPS routing greatly. It should be tagged with the road of highest importance that passes through it:
junction=roundabout#Selection_of_the_right_highway_tag

Hi Openallhours, just a tip - when removing ways, it's best rather than deleting them, to change their highway= tag to demolished:highway=

This is because all the imagery still shows that they "exist", so to the average editor it looks like they should be reinstated. Leaving the lines and nodes present, but marked as "demolished:", provides more information to editors and makes it clear that a mistake hasn't been made that needs resetting.

Hi WADEENG,
Can I ask whether your removal of the highway=cycleway here was in error? I had mapped the cycleway from video & photo footage, and I was under the impression that it's open - happy to be corrected though.

Ah! Fair enough then - interesting that Sabre doesn't have this ref; perhaps a redesignation occurred after the 40s. Another part of the nebulous world of B- and C-roads... Thanks for confirming 😊

Hi _Madfly, I just noticed this changeset where the Clandeboye Road was given the ref B109. Looking it up, the Sabre roads site shows that what was the B109 (de-designated in the mid 20th century) went along Rathgael Road and south east, and not towards the centre of town. I was about to remove this ref and de-designate to a tertiary road, but wanted to check in case you have other information on this to keep it?