@DaveF it transpires that the Komoot route referred to in the associated note/2831988 has mountain biking as the route type...

As it's a highway=path object, might either changing it to highway=footway, or using vehicle=no instead of just bicycle=no might be better? (Or just stop treating highway=path as a valid route for anything other than foot, unless explicitly allowed.)

Hi Andy,

I should have spotted that when I extended the footway. It definitely doesn't go up there - I've walked and run most of the Capital Ring.

Fixed in changeset/111389139

Hi,

Farnhurst Bridge ( way/676136188 ) recently came up on a discussion about named "streets" which are unreachable and cannot be completed by users of CityStrides.

As it does not appear to connect to any other highway objects, would you have any objection to me changing it from highway=track -> man_made=bridge?

No problem. I can revert it if you'd like, but I've no idea how to do it in iD. From the wiki, it looks like you can map a way as natural=tree_row while retaining the original natural=tree nodes.
natural=tree_row

What was the reason for this edit?
Some of the individual trees had species information sourced from GLA/LB Southwark open data, which is lost by merging them into.

When you added your spam POI (gamblizard isn't a place of worship, or indeed in Bloomsbury Square Gardens), you also deleted a section of road, with potentially serious effects on routing.

Fully reverted in changeset/109519790

Thanks for updating this. It can sometimes be worth mapping cycle barriers and the positions of the cycling prohibited traffic signs as well. They're not actually necessary, as highway=footway without bicycle=yes|permissive|designated should stop routers treating it as being usable for cyclists, but can be useful for other mappers.

For cycle barriers, place a node on the way tagged with barrier=cycle_barrier + bicycle=no on the footway.
barrier=cycle_barrier

For a statutory cycling prohibited sign, place a node on the way with traffic_sign=GB:951 + bicycle=no
traffic_sign=*
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/3/made

Thanks! You've just filled in some of the blanks from my edits adding footways/sidewalks to The Highway.

Now for the long wait for them to work properly on Komoot...

Removed in changeset/108941585

I meant to remove it entirely from the cycleways. Although it describes the relation of the segregated/separate footway, it's not much use when not documented as such and is consequently flagged by QA tools.

That was quick, thanks! I was going to do it after breakfast tomorrow :-)

Fully reverted in changeset/107721817

Thanks. I've added the heritage tags from NHLE in changeset #107692732

The parkrun course in the route relation is quite different from the one I ran in 2019 and the parkrun website. Is this a new course from 2020?

@cjmalone In this case, yes, along with "not:junction=roundabout" to make it absolutely clear that it's just a circular section of a residential street with no special status whatsoever. Neither tag should be necessary, but in a previous edit the road geometry was deleted and replaced by a junction=mini_roundabout node (and a fixme stating that it wasn't a mini-roundabout).

You're doing some fantastic mapping in previously neglected parts of Newham, for which I am very grateful.

However in this case, you haven't "corrected" the circular section of Queensberry Place, you have added what is essentially fiction. When I tagged it with "not:junction=roundabout", I did so for a reason.

If you read the wiki page for the junction=roundabout tag, you may note that the following is in bold: "The tag junction=roundabout is used only on road intersections where traffic on the roundabout has right of way."
junction=roundabout

There are no TSRGD Diagram 1003.3 give way markings here, therefore it is not a roundabout for traffic law purposes and traffic on the circular section of road does not have priority.

The oneway=yes tag would be redundant on a real roundabout and requires explicit signage to have effect elsewhere, e.g. TSRGD Diagram 606, the blue circular one way arrow. I am not aware that any such sign exists at this location.

Chapter 6 of the Traffic Signs Manual may be of some assistance in understanding what is, and is not, a roundabout.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/773421/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-05.pdf

I also note that you realigned the roundabout from cadastral to Bing's default offset.

Updated in changeset/107201333

No problem. I've reverted the deletion and marked as disused. Hopefully it can be permanently deleted later in the year, perhaps when ExCeL returns to hosting exhibitions as normal?

node/7326515224

True, but unless you can be certain that all modifications have been removed it might have been better to use the disused:* lifecycle prefix rather than deleting the POI and its history.

osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Thanks. I meant to resolve that one when I got home, but forgot about it.