Why delete the website tag, rather than add a schema? It's https://www.leshuttle.com/

Thanks.

This POI is not a historic memorial, it's an artistic representation of fictitious and therefore ahistorical character.

A statue, bust or blue plaque commemorating Peter Pan's author would be a historic memorial.

I would have the same objection if any statue or sculpture of a character from myth or legend were tagged as a historical memorial.

Hi,

I can see what you were trying to do with this edit, but the tag motor_vehicle=designated means that it is designated for ALL motor vehicles. Think of the designated access value as being like yes, but stronger. For example, public footpaths are generally tagged designation=public_footpath + foot=designated.

The previous tagging of access=private + bus=yes means that buses may always use this road, but other transport modes, like TfL tow trucks and Newham street cleaning vehicles may only do so with explicit permission. It might make more sense to change it to access=private + bus=designated

Did I miss tourism=artwork + artwork_type=sculpture being deprecated?

How can an artistic representation of a fictional character possibly be a memorial? It's clearly a tourism=artwork, not historic=memorial. Please revert.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for adding this public footpath.

If you're updating public rights of way in this area, you might find this resource useful:
https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/oxon/south-oxon/

I've added the PRoW tags to the path you added.

There may be a reasonable case for making it access=destination, but this user's edit to the Browning Road bridge in #152538450 suggests that they're trying to fix a bug in routing software by editing OSM

Reverted. If you don't understand the tagging, please don't change it.

The camera "catches" people who make a deliberate choice to break the law by deliberately ignoring a traffic sign.

Reverted.

Not being able to use this as a short-cut is access=permissive (as previously tagged) or access=destination. If your routing software sent you this way, you should file a bug report with the software provider.

I'd just revert. I knew what I was doing and why I was doing it when I tagged this as permissive.

Did you mean to delete the name of bus stop L (Valley Drive)? Was the name incorrect and if so what is it called?

Thanks for updating this.

As you asked for a review of this changeset, I would suggest using a lifecycle prefix rather than the disused key, in this case disused:amenity=bank. It can also be worth moving the name to old_name. I've updated the tags here and there's a link to the wiki page for lifecycle prefixes below.

Is the Barclays ATM (mapped as a separate node) still there?

osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

What was your source for this unsigned weight limit?

You appear to have tagged a section of Bath Road as foot=no in response to a StreetComplete task asking "Are pedestrians forbidden to walk on this road here?"

I'm trying to find any evidence in Bing Streetside imagery that there really is a (signed) pedestrian prohibition here. I cannot see any TSRGD diagram 625.1 "pedestrians prohibited" signs on the imagery, so do not believe that a prohibition exists. Is this a new signed restriction created by a traffic order more recent than the Bing streetside imagery?
https://www.bing.com/maps?toWww=1&redig=0E61462A315B4089ADF0DBB49CFAA9E5&cp=51.444843%7E-2.57872&lvl=22.0&mo=om.1&pi=-10.6&style=x&dir=5.2

The wiki states that access tags reflect legal access. Subjective opinions about whether it would be pleasant, a good idea, safe, etc. for a particular transport mode are not relevant to legal access.
foot=*

As real pedestrian prohibitions on public roads other than those tagged as highway=motorway or motorroad=yes in the UK are quite rare and are always signed, this quest is probably better left disabled.

I can't get up there to check at the moment, but there was a post today on the Better Streets Waltham Forest Facebook group about this crossing now being complete.

Yes, they were correctly tagged as highways. You may be conflating the legal concept of a highway with the OpenStreetMap highway=* object tag.

As these highways exist and are visible on the aerial imagery, the correct approach is to add the access=private tag, not to delete them from the map.

Please read the following wiki articles before you proceed further:
osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property
osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F

Some of these track are also shown on OS OpenMap Local, which does not provide for marking them as private access. There is absolutely no prospect of you convincing OS to delete these.

Reverted in changeset/152234116

The criteria which StreetComplete and SCEE use for this quest make sense in many parts of the world, where pedestrians often are prohibited on sections of road like this. Unfortunately, it doesn't really work in the UK: we either get a correct (but unhelpful to routers) foot=yes, or an incorrect foot=no.

I use SCEE most days and this is the only quest of which I am aware which regularly causes tagging errors.

I'll remove the tag.

@BCNorwich It's a canal, so leisure=swimming_area is unlikely.

You appear to have tagged a section of Walsall Road as foot=no in response to a StreetComplete task asking "Are pedestrians forbidden to walk on this road here?"

I'm trying to find any evidence in Bing Streetside imagery that there really is a (signed) pedestrian prohibition here. I cannot see any TSRGD diagram 625.1 "pedestrians prohibited" signs on the imagery, so do not believe that a prohibition exists. Is this a new signed restriction created by a traffic order more recent than the Bing streetside imagery?
https://www.bing.com/maps?toWww=1&redig=0E61462A315B4089ADF0DBB49CFAA9E5&cp=52.545149%7E-1.932508&lvl=19.1&mo=om.1&pi=3.6&style=x&dir=340.5

The wiki states that access tags reflect legal access. Subjective opinions about whether it would be pleasant, a good idea, safe, etc. for a particular transport mode are not relevant to legal access.
foot=*

As real pedestrian prohibitions on public roads other than those tagged as highway=motorway or motorroad=yes in the UK are quite rare and are always signed, this quest is probably better left disabled.