Thank you for your comment. I did this unintentionally, I'll be more careful now

Thank you for your comment. Yes, I agree, the service here is more suitable, fixed.

osm.org/changeset/126250845

Thanks 🙏

Thank you very much for your comment and clarification. Fixed.

I added restrictions as Bing streetside and Mapillary shows road markings 2 solid lines. If I am not mistaken, then they can be crossed when turning left, moving along the road. If it is possible to cross them when leaving the courtyards and adjacent territories, let me know, please, I will definitely correct them?!

Yes indeed, thank you very much for your comment and edits.
This happened by chance, now I will be even more careful when making edits and saving changes!

Hello!
Yes, you are right, thanks for your comment and detailed explanations. Always happy to help if you need it.
Best Regards,
Ivan

Hello!
Thank you for your comment. I put highway=unclassified for Chantry Lane to Saxton, as this road connected Chantry Lane to B1217 based on osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified, however I did not have data for the entire road, so I changed only part.

Also Chantry Lane was formerly highway=tertiary and Chantry Lane to Saxton was formerly a highway=bridleway. Therefore, I agree that there are unusual classifications here. Thanks for your edits!

Thank you for your comment. I agree, in these cases I overdid it a little. I will be more attentive to these points.

Now I understand, thanks for your clarification. I wanted to add, but you've already corrected it, thanks.
It might be better to add the cycleway:right=opposite_lane tag instead of cycleway=opposite for more precision, what do you think?

https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=51.460789~-2.507634&lvl=17&dir=315.154&style=x&v=2&sV=1

The left side of the sign and the road markings refer to oneway traffic for vehicles and the right side for cyclists. This is also confirmed by signs on the other side of this Moravian Road section.ttps://www.bing.com/maps?osid=4a418b2d-d163-42dc-afc2-09b99fea097e&cp=51.461243~-2.507735&lvl=19&dir=155.23178&pi=-8.496526&style=x&mo=z.0&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027

I was guided by these mapillary images when I did the edit.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=_1GzdH4hHcONuXcVZV29nA&lat=51.52868158777143&lng=-2.5036922061142852&z=17
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=yTlCaxofd8LR-tQb1fZz_Q&lat=51.5294040667913&lng=-2.5033669540762276&z=17

Yes, you are right.

Maybe you have a suggestion on a suitable list of tags so that this case can be solved as correct as possible?

Thank you for your comment. Since this is a private chemical plant, a tag access=private has been added for service roads.
Please tell me, maybe you have some kind of information on which service roads need to leave tag access=no?

In this changeset, I added a small driveway. Thank you for your comment and reminder, next time I will try to leave more description in the changeset comment.

https://www.essexhighways.org/highway-schemes-and-developments/highway-schemes/mundon-wash-bridge-mundon-road-mundon-maldon.aspx

Disallowing 180-degree turns maybe have a chance to solve this problem, but it definately destroy navigation.

As it explained in osm.wiki/Relation:restriction, "*Don't map* turn restrictions that are *the default* for a given jurisdiction *and* are *not signed*". As I said before, there is the road markings that regulates traffic and they are clearly visible on satellite images, so I assume that this "only straight" is clearly signed. This is an "implicit restriction", i.e. that discussed here osm.wiki/Implicit_access_restrictions , and more information you can read here: https://labs.mapbox.com/mapping/mapping-for-navigation/implicit-restrictions/ .

I'll fix back your revert with implicit=yes tag, to be more exact.

Hi, thanks for your comment.

There is the road markings that regulate traffic are clearly visible on satellite images, so I assume that this ""only straight"" is clearly signed. Also, the driver’s report confirmed, as he drove on and did not turn around in this place.
This kind of intersections between roads may be assumed by navigation engines as crossings with allowed u-turn, and that may confuse the driver. We are working not only on data as a community, we are also always trying to make OSM data better for end users.
Please share, maybe there is other way to prevent this false u-turn?

Hi again, Phil!
Horsley Lane was initially tagged as bridleway back in 2006. And this tag was adopted by all segments of this road. I assumed this road is unclassified because it is too long to be a service=driveway. But I agree that highway=sevice is good too.
But I can't find in wiki any limitations about using
highway=unclassified + designated=public_bridleway, is that specified somewhere?
Also I agree that motor_vehicle=private could be added, I just can't find any information about that in open sources. What I could use as a reason to add this tag?
Thank you for commenting, this is really important for us.