Adding descriptions as "names" isn't generally done in OSM.

Pretty much -- there were 2/3 places where a "way" (line) crossed another without a "node" (point) -- that was probably why the edit checker complained a tiny bit.

There's no signed restriction here -- should probably be removed.

Most tools have a mechanism to square up buildings - pretty sure ID has one -- haven't used it for a while.

Normally OpenStreetMap doesn't map temporary changes.

For Covid19 related items you should follow the guidance on: osm.wiki/COVID-19_-_How_to_Map#Pop-up_Bike_Lane:_cycle_track_and_temporary_infrastructures and at least add: description:covid19=temporary cycleway

All ways that cross need to be connected by a node -- routing software only change ways at nodes -- without them directions won't work. Have added a couple.

Just in case: If the "cycle" tracks are for off-road / bmx bikes, then they might need some extra tags.

This looks a bit strange -- you've drawn a park right on top of a recreation ground.Some maps might not display a recreation ground -- but that doesn't mean it's not correct.

So, not sure what you're trying to achieve, so thought I'd ask -- rather than just undoing it.

Was this surveyed on foot? Most of the track looks like a hedgerow on Bing.

It's really useful to include a meaningfuil changeset message and it's always appreciated by local mappers -- "no comment" doesn't really help.

Please ensure you match existing drawn buildings by adjusting the Bing offset. Best regards.

It's a good edit with ESRI clarity - but unfortunately the area is under construction - hence the landuse construction - so Bing is more up to date now (and Maxar too). I'll edit it to match newer imagery.

Well I’m not trained - but I do check osm edits around Bristol - it might have been less contentious to link to Bristol open data website rather than mention bcc pinpoint. Glad to hear you’re an old editor - so I hope you and the other weca editors will be filling in the mapping commercially details on your profiles soon.

Have fun mapping.

Yes.

You’re a new editor adding names to roads that don’t have signs - certainly the Clifton Down edit - and mentioning BCC pinpoint as a source which has copyright Ordnance Survey all over it. Or asking colleagues and not knowing how they got their data.

You can’t copy from other maps or data sources which aren’t compatible with obdl - whatever the circumstances.

Plus weca has made some dubious edits around Bristol bridge that at least initially messed up a lot of routing for all motor vehicles - not just cars.

It’s great that you’re adding stuff to Osm but you need to follow the licensing and not use copyright data sources - or give the misleading impression that you might be doing so. I’ve had some of my edits questioned but I can always refer to an open data source, e.g. a photo I’ve taken.

The highway clearly exists and shouldn't be deleted -- I've marked it as a footway.

osm.wiki/Ordnance_Survey_OpenData

That’s great, but if they use Ordnance Survey data to get the names and that O/S data isn’t compatible with obdl then all your changes will have to be revoked.

If you check this at the start there may be less rework.

You are adding names based on BCC pinpoint which has large copyright ordnance survey attribution - how have you checked that your changes are compatible with open data and the obdl licence used by OpenStreetMap?

I have updated your edit -- you added barrier=bollard to the entire road -- I presume that wasn't intentional.

It would be great if you could leave changeset comments -- especially for such large ones :-)