Yes I think I would call them berms.

The one's I've mapped closest to this are in the Val St Antonien (and are very characteristic of Walser houses in that valley), and I did use berm (see osm.wiki/Avalanche_protection#House_defenses_in_St_Antonien,_Graubunden).

It's a bit awkward that there are very good terms in DE and it's a little hard to translate or find the appropriate equivalent in EN.

I suppose this is the consensus, I don't think they are fences though, even though they are distinctly barriers.

There are all sorts of odd tags with avalanche protection (passive) and (active) which I think can lead to confusion : e.g., showing CatEx as aerialways. There is a distinct problem with proper snow fences (which are fences :-)) which protect from drifting snow (good examples on Parsennbahn), but not avalanches not being distinguished in some mapping from snow bridges.

There are also some more unusual avalanche protection features (not all of which I've been able to map, e..g. above Tasch). It might be worth exploring some of these on the community website.

Jerry aka SK53

PS. It's a very long way down from Spi da Baselgia to Zernez! I only learnt at the summit that many people took a local taxi up the forestry road to around 1800 m on the Zernez side and then walked to Lavin, but I did it the other way!

Postal address of Hollinside Terrace is Lanchester, Durham not Hollinside, Durham (just received a letter)

Hi Steven,

No, not in a position to make such judgements. Years since I used to frequent the area. I just happened to see something about the Dodo micropub & was intrigued if it had been mapped & saw the opportunity to add some "fhrs:id" values.

I totally agree about "outside seating" and "beer garden", and have been mapping accordingly.

Jerry

Done.

Not my intention, so I'll put it back to yes.

Jerry

Hi Shaun,

My suspicion also. I'll remove it. I'm sure there is a pub with a royal_cypher somewhere (old telephone exchange or similar, as this one which has a Travelodge inside relation/8239597), but this one looks unlikely :-)

Jerry

Hi Shaun,

Does the Carriers Arms really have a royal_cypher=EIIR? Seems unlikely, but hope you might remember.

I'm trawling through some of the odder keys on pubs (quite a lot given there are 800 different keys across just England & Wales).

Jerry

Minor point, but usually the numeric references for SAC Scale have a "T" prefix, at least in Swiss guidebooks & on the Hikr website. These also seem to be the common values on OSM, see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/sac_scale_ref#values.

Personally I have always used these, and often forget which way round the more descriptive names go.

The editor should pull common values when you type in the first part "sac_scale_ref" so you can see what others have used.

Jerry aka SK53

Just an addition: I can see that the editor only showed this as an entrance not a shop & address node, so obvious how you missed it. It took me a while to find it.

J

Hi,

Many thanks for doing these surveys along Derby Road. I've modified the Tattershalls building as the old Craft studio was still showing (there's a mix of mapping addresses & shops on the door & on the building here, which is a bit confusing).

BTW: I believe Windblowers has also closed or is closing & that the Hand & Heart is not open currently. If you have any info on either let me know.

Cheers,

Jerry aka SK53

I think you need to be careful to distinguish permissive from tolerated.

A landowner might not be fussed if the odd bike goes this way (it might even be them or their kids after all), but we know from a lot of experience on OSM, that if traffic goes beyond a certain level then toleration ceases. This was very common during the early months of Covid when many more people were walking and cycling and suddenly there were influxes on private land which hadn't been a noticeable influx before.

Adding yes or permissive will mean that routers will use it (Komoot, Strava, RideWithGPS etc.) and they're bad enough at understanding E&W PRoW access anyway!

Building heights in this changeset appear to be in feet not metres. A value of height without units defaults to metres.

Hi Risteárd,

Is the cycleway mapped crossing Vaughan Way outside Highcross accurate now? Looks inconsistent with aerial imagery. I haven't been this way since all the construction started, so am out-of-date.

Jerry aka SK53

Hi,

I'll take a closer look later tonight. The online editor does slightly odd things if you try & rearrange areas which are meant to avoid bigger issues, but can be pretty puzzling at first impressions.

SK53

Hi Simon,

Thanks.

You can see a fair bit of footpath/PRoW mapping done some years ago around Gringley on the Hill. Three of us met up there and covered areas to the N, SW, S and SE. This link (https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15&lat=54.209&lon=-1.23322) shows another OSM-based map which aims to be more useful for UK-based walkers (showing designation tags, etc). Lancaster Road S of Gringley is a good example of a farm track which is only designated as a public footpath. Similarly there are a network of tracks which are designated as bridleways on the Everton Carrs.

Cheers,

Jerry

If you have added the designation tag, you can keep it as a track (i.e., obvious signs of vehicles using it), and just use the highway=bridleway for public bridleways which aren't used by vehicles (provided there is enough headroom for a rider : I'm sure some public bridleways are not practicable for horses). Keeping the two separate is useful for understanding the character of the way.

HTH,

Jerry aka SK53

Hi Jay,

You marked Fairham Drive as having a width of 5.25 m. I think all the roads in the interwar council estates are actually 13ft or 4m (at least that's what I make measuring them both in iD & on old maps on the NCC site).

Jerry

Reverted in changeset/125242625

I dont know if you can remember if way/24016687 looked like a track? It does on aerial images, but I merely drove past last time I surveyed in Kneeton.

I plan to change the first bit to track for now.

Jerry aka SK53