(reverted in osm.org/changeset/26630372 )

Please don't add "test" features to the main map. If you want to test things, use the "dev" server instead.

What's the source of osm.org/node/3157054132 ? It certainly doesn't look like Bing...

Is osm.org/node/3156913797 really a place=locality? OS_OpenData_StreetView have the north-south ridge feature marked as "The Ridge" - perhaps that's what you were referring to?

This edit has broken the A17 / High Dike junction at Byard's Leap. See osm.org/note/267402 .

FWIW osm.org/relation/4164687 also matches where the "Interim route for walkers" was signed on the ground (where it is signed) when I've walked it.

If osm.org/way/288965624 is a Public Bridleway, then a "designation=public_bridleway" tag is the best way to indicate this. See also osm.wiki/Designation . Of course, if its _name_ really is also "Bridleway" locally then it's fine to keep that as the name as well, but not if it isn't.

Was osm.org/way/310222652 actually surveyed? Its relationship to the hedgerows along the way suggests perhaps not, and if not a fixme or a note at either end would be a good idea to get someone to survey it.

Stuff added from NPE is usually rubbish (or at least in the need of surveying), and the fact that it gets flagged up on QA sites is good - it indicates that it's rubbish and needs surveying. "Fixing" NPE stuff unfortunately removes that.

(or, if I can get it the right way around) "... that museum=railway fails to"?

Does adding "railway=museum" to every railway museum communicate something that perhaps "railway=museum" fails to? If so, I'm missing what it is :-)

What does "added/fixed names" mean? The change to osm.org/way/95193730/history doesn't seem to be name-related; it's added a join to osm.org/way/311181728 (valid I'm sure, but not related to names at all).

For the shops, I'd suggest "shop=charity" for the charity shop, and either "pet_grooming" or "dog_grooming" for the other one, as suggested by taginfo at http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=grooming#values .

Also, it'd be really helpful if you used a descriptive changeset comment each time - "added two shops in Meden Vale" would be much more descriptive than "General Edit" :-)

(physically, that is, rather than just bridleways)

Did "motorcycle=private" perhaps get added to osm.org/way/118550554 by mistake? I'm not sure that it makes a lot of sense as it stands.

Thanks for tidying the Staveley to Chesterfield section of the TPT - it's needed doing for ages.

Thanks for spotting that part of Church Way isn't oneway. I've changed the northern bit (see osm.org/changeset/26548723) to bicycle=yes rather than access=bicycle since "bicycle" (or foot, motor_vehicle, etc.) should replace "access" in access tags with the value being "yes", "no", or whatever.

Hehe - needs more "smoothness" tag :-)

Or perhaps an osm.wiki/Key:mtb:scale ?

It's probably with revisiting this list looking for other issues too. For example, osm.org/way/130305027/history is probably building=yes as well (the imagery certainly suggests so)

It certainly makes sense to sort out the Pennine Bridleway (there are sections where foot, bicycle and horse traffic go different ways). It's also getting too large to manage in one go, so splitting into individual sections, and adding those to super-relations for the various modes of access to the PB proper and things like the "Mary Towneley" would mke sense to me.

(you can blame me for the "route=horse;mtb;hiking" on osm.org/relation/50288 that almost nothing recognises)

Test comment from another user.