Forgot to add source as imagery... but it tagged it anyway. Phew!

Source was survey.

Ok, should be fixed now at Ardtalnaig. Let me know if I have missed anything else.

Hi Andy,

Looks like, after splitting that section to allow the braid, I missed the re-adding. I will fix that now!

Thanks for spotting!

James

Notice nobody had commented on your question. Sometimes with browsers you need to hold down shift key and refresh the page to clear the cache. It normally should refresh at some zoom levels in 15 minutes, but you need to refresh that browser cache to see it.

Apologies! Mea Culpa...

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/routes-forward-backward-role-and-use-when-a-route-has-a-portion-with-two-routing-choices/122723

I owe you a coffee/beer/cake

OK... there is a bit in documentation:

_Note: to ensure a route is properly connected when using a two alternative directions (alternative route A1 and A2, using the Role forward and Role backward roles), make sure the element before the branch connects to the first element in A1 and the element after the branch connects to the last element of A2. Also note that the Role forward and Role backward roles refer to the directionality of the ways in A1 which need to be going in the same direction; if not all ways in A1 run in the same direction it may be necessary to use both Role forward and Role backward for the same alternate route A1._

which is not very clear. However using JOSM Editor it makes some sense as it is explain how to do those part of a linear path that in places has two choices.

Getting these portions (with two routing options) correctly ordered requires the forward/backward Role to be right.

https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=15.0/56.2041/-2.7687

Let me know if I am missing something?

Thanks for responding. The tagging is only where the FCP had a marked alternative route. In JOSM, when editing a route relation, there is a tool to aid the ordering of the relation parts. This ensures the route is coherent - probably best visualised in Waymarked Trails.

I am away at the moment but will double check and provide a more complete answer when I get back home.

Out of curiosity, are you seeing any negative consequences of the edit?

Yes, no visible trail. At least at ends. Too much foliage change. That is not to say some remnants may be visible in between.

Can confirm there is no 'spoons here. Could you explain your note?

Thanks for getting in touch. The castles/kopjes are prominent above the surrounding hill top. They are natural but look like supernatural castles. From satellite imagery you might see shadows cast but it may difficult to identify without visiting or using ground level imagery. That said, any mapping is useful. Hope that helps?

Well spotted! None other than it is the boulder Olly Stephenson uses for a navigation target. It is sited conveniently at a distinct contour feature. If it offends, just remove it.

Source should have said local knowledge - apologies for the trigger-happy commit.

Hi Rostranimin,

Thank-you for the feedback. Your fix makes more sense. It is also a relief to have some feedback from OpenStreetMap users - thank-you.

The path is currently in the idea stage. It is a bit of a rough walk, wade and clamber at the moment. The aim is to make it suitable for walking and cycling.

Hope you were able to enjoy the Corbenic Poetry Path too?

Glad you had a lovely weekend.

James

Hi, That is a fair point. The Poetry Path provides a designated way around the residential areas. Note this is residential care for vulnerable adults hence I was needing to check whether section 11 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2003/2/pdfs/asp_20030002_en.pdf (due to the pandemic) had been enforced. It seems there are now no exemptions. I'll avoid the use of private though, thanks, James

Yes, the route does follow the highway out of the estate for that section. The highway is one way for vehicular traffic.