Just a quick bump on the above comment. I'm not trying to get it changed back, just want to understand your reasoning.

Hi. Thanks for reviewing.
I made this change as you hadn't replied to my message on changeset 160581198, so I assumed you were happy for me to go ahead with transitioning it to a separate way.
Your justification makes sense - I wasn't aware of that specification on the wiki.

One other question - what was the reasoning for deleting way 1345252245 (the pedestrian area)? The wiki describes a pedestrian area as "a road or area designated mainly or exclusively for pedestrians" / "wide expanses of hard surface are provided for pedestrians to walk". I would argue the non-car-park area of the station qualifies as a pedestrian area, as it isn't just a set of linear footpaths. Representing it as a walkable, dedicated pedestrian area makes sense to me, particularly now that the station is represented accurately as a roof over an outdoor space rather than a 'normal' building.

Hi -

Thanks for the response. Yes, there are no permanent stalls, but I've seen both Rings and Things and Maureen's operating during the week, even during the closure of the station for repairs. I walk through regularly during the week visiting Sainsbury's.

Maureen's is operating out of a small green marquee. They were in front of the construction fencing near Green Park Bike Station during the renovations (roughly ///fries.trader.crust) but they have now moved the marquee to the far end, where I marked them (roughly ///courier.tolls.found). Rings and Things were operating on the edge of the farmers' market area in the same sort of vicinity, but now have also moved, to the location where I marked them. Not sure about the milk vending machine, which is why I left it as is. Previously it was in the corner of the shelter between Sainsbury's and the station but didn't seem to be in use, but I haven't looked out for it since the renovation finished.

I didn't know the huts were returning; that makes sense.

Thanks for the note re the Brasserie - that makes sense too.

I've just had a look at your other changesets on Green Park Station and they all look good - thanks for doing those.

Hi -

That's a good point; I hadn't noticed that tag on the road. Happy for that part of the edit to be reverted, though I believe there is an argument for removing the cycleway tag from the road and leaving the geometry this way as it's easier to read as a human looking at the map.

Hi there. I see you reverted a number of my changes, and just wanted to check these.

Firstly, I see you marked Maureen's and Rings & Things as disused again. These stalls are operating in Green Park Station on a regular basis, so I don't think this is correct.

Secondly, I see you re-added the disused shops that I removed. My logic for removing these was that the wooden huts are no longer physically there, but if we want to persist disused amenities indefinitely, even after there is no evidence of them ever existing, that's fine.

Regarding the Brasserie - I see you changed this back from a node to an area. I'm fine with this; I thought I should explain that I just made this change so that the Brasserie was consistent with the other shops inside the Station, and so we didn't have any overlapping buildings. I initially left it as an area, but this led to iD giving me a warning due to overlapping features.

In summary, the only thing I think is incorrect here is the change of Maureen's and Rings & Things to be disused again. I had moved them to their current location and marked them as no longer disused, as they are still open, and have remained in operation even while the station was partially closed for repairs. With that said, I also wanted to check the other changes that you seem to have reverted as I believe I had relatively sound logic for making those changes.

Thanks :)

Seems I misread osm.wiki/Key:3d_printing. Changing to yes.

Changes:
- Replace pedestrian area with footpaths
- Update fence to reflect reality (including gaps for entrances)

I'd also argue that (as nice as it does look) the pedestrian area should be converted to footpaths as that more closely reflects reality and presumably would improve routing.

Unsure if the added features should be footpaths or pavement; my justification for using footpaths is that it seems wrong to use pavement when it's not running parallel to the road.

Apologies, should probably read the whole comment before responding! I'll sort that out now; thanks for the feedback.

Hi Paul,
You make a good point; I'd be inclined to agree. Do you think they'd be best removed?