Hmm. Messy. At a functional level many of the Great Trails seem a bit small to be labelled "national" trails. SCW is shown as "63% mapped" as only the Scottish segment is considered. I think a single "national" relation makes the most sense.

I don't think it makes sense to have two separate relations, since the lack of significance of the border is a feature. I don't think the Scottish part is "national" since it only covers a small part of the borders. "regional" works for the route as a whole.

Possibly not. I was fixing things so that the two at least had the same network tagging. The SR was "national" and the relation "local", which made no sense!

I think landuse=meadow without qualification is sound for "farmed grassland":
landuse=meadow

I think you'd need meadow=perpetual or natural=grassland (which I generally use for "wild" meadow).

I'm wary of adding meadow=pasture or meadow=agricultural without clear evidence of one vs. the other.

I do think distinguishing landuse=meadow from landuse=farmland is very helping for walking - there's big difference between a path across a muddy crop field and a path through grassland!

True. I've removed the note, but also adjusted the area so that the skate park is not separate from the playground.

Good point. I was primarily correcting for the roads being tagged incorrectly as tertiary, and bumping them down to unclassified. Adjusted.

Got it! It's clear from my photo that the pad is present. I'll "reactivate".

Hi,

I'm intrigued by the defibrillator on Quebec village hall being tagged as disused. I was going past this today and it looked functional. The only thing I can see amiss on the photo is that the location panel is empty. Not sure how we would resolve this!

Thanks for adding this PRoW information. I'm just going to adjust the
access=private
(set by the original mapper) to
motor_vehicle=private
since
access=private conflicts with the public rights of way.

Personally I think the most useful tag is
designation=public_bridleway

If you have a highway=bridleway it is always correct to put
foot=yes/designated
bicycle=yes/designated
horse=yes/designated
[yes and designated are functionally equivalent, but I would use bicycle=designated for a bridleway since this emphases that it is legal right and doesn't imply it's practical, which bicycle=yes might.]

But, I don't tend to add detailed access tags, since a good router would work these out from designation=public_bridleway, and a map user can see it from the distinctive rendering of highway=bridleway.

This is a useful website:
https://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/

I was looking at the bridleway around Pecknell Cottage (WNW of Barnard Castle). and was checking the combination of access=no and foot/bicycle/horse=yes. This would mean that bridleway was temporarily completely out of use (e.g. due to landslip or equivalent).
Or did you mean motor_vehicle=no [no vehicle traffic]? Paul H.

Sorted!

This doesn't look right to me. Did you mean to add the blockage at a specific point (node on the way)? By turning the roadway into barrier=log, it has completely disappeared.

Wrong bridge I'm afraid! It was New Elvet bridge that was closed. Reverting Elvet Bridge to pedestrian.

Looks fine to me! I think addresses in OSM are a bit of a mess (comes from being worldwide). addr:village is perhaps clearer than addr:place. I think the key thing is the housenumber/name and the street.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109198205

Yes, because it's not a locality - the feature that should be found on a search for Egglestone Abbey is the abbey. There should be something identifiable at mapped location.

It was included as the "admin centre" for the parish, but that was incorrect, since it's a combined parish with no admin centre. I added the parish council website to the parish boundary.

I'm just reverting the removal of orienteering information
osm.wiki/Orienteering
I noticed in Durham area. If unsure of purpose of tags, please don't remove!

Looks good to me. It suggests (which is probably) the case that it is farm access track rather than a footpath. Ideally somebody would check on the ground, but would be wary myself as it's probably private land. Cheers! Paul

Sorry - hope you don't think I'm picking on your edits! I'm fixing this to a culvert going underneath the path.

Paul H.

Hi,
Is this path passable on foot from Beaurepaire all the way to the railway path? The Strava data suggests that it's difficult/impossible to ford on foot. There clearly is some kind of track, but could this be a private farm access route to the pair of fields across the river?