It is just used to indicate the general direction of the viewpoint in degrees. It could probably be changed here to include a more specific range.

osm.wiki/Tag:tourism=viewpoint?uselang=en-GB#Direction_of_view

Great thanks 👍

Hi, I can see you've marked the Tramway near Pandy as not accessible to horse or cyclists (osm.org/way/55740719). This seems to conflict with the signed route The Ceiriog Trail managed by Wrexham council. The information on their website mentions it as a permissive bridleway https://www.wrexham.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2022-03/riding-routes-ceiriog-trail.pdf - could you please clarify this change? Last time I was there the access signs were still up. Thanks.

Hey Phil! No signed turn restriction but I'm pretty sure I put this here because there are physical "keep left" barrier islands (visible on bing maps) making it impractical/impossible to make a right turn from the slip roads without mounting the kerb.

I have added implicit=yes tags to the relations. It might be better to account for the keep left islands by splitting the road into individual ways.

Good spot. https://www.bubbleoncup.com/ works although it currently just redirects to their facebook page.

Hey DaveF, thanks for the comment.

I think this is a quirk with the iD editor and a script I sometimes use to copy tags to blank areas.

I'll keep a look out for it in the future.

I'm fairly sure that way was split from osm.org/way/23712583 so the designation tag was left over from that (my bad). The tunnel at the south is public so I suspect a historic route that is redirected.

I'll do another survey to check.

This has highlighted one way that is (was?) a PROW but is now redirected (osm.org/way/223403981). I have removed the designation tag and remarked private. If I get time I'll go down and review the other ways affected.

Whilst I think I agree with the sentiment of this changeset persistently doing so in such a heavy handed way is wrong. More time should be put into actually looking at what you're changing.

Reading kevjs1982's comment is interesting as it is quite common locally to assume the *=designated tag takes priority over the access one so you end up with tracks tagged as access=private+foot=designated which imo is much more concise but I gather would be an issue for some people.

Source survey/aerial imagery

Yes I missed that, thanks Phil.

Good point, I'll update them.

Hi Phil, yes this is just the H&M store. Anecdotally it is used as a shortcut by quite a few people, but I agree it would be a bit weird to be routed this way.

I have removed the way, although as far as I can tell there isn't anything on the wiki saying not to map inside shops.

Just a note that Lunts has relocated to the new Riverside site and the building is now owned by The Salopian (same goes for the building to the west).

Hi Mauls, I've noticed that you've reverted my edits merging the abandoned railway with the cyclepath/footpath/road. The old railway mapping is a bit of a mystery to me, but this appears to be the recommended way of mapping them on the wiki.

Please could you advise as I'd like to know why these changes were necessary. Perhaps a relation containing the rail information/ways would be better suited?

Ha yes, I only clocked it after they trimmed the bushes back.

Legally this toll is supposed to apply to cycles/motorcycle traffic, which I'm guessing is why the main barriers don't extend the whole way across.

Hi John! I've reverted this as the footpath is also used as a driveway and access for vehicles. The footpath designation shows that people have legal right of way to walk but not drive or ride.

Hi FrankSkye, did you mark this car park as having a fee because it is paying customers only or because there is a monetary fee for using the car park? Thanks

Hi FrankSkye, thanks for contributing to OSM. I've undone some of the cycle lane changes you've made in the Gains Park area as they don't match what is currently there - can you make sure you corroborate your changes in the future.

Cheers

Hey Phil, I've adjusted the west most part of the path to line up with the GPS. Just to note that the water north of the path looked like standing water - maybe an overflow drain for the road or Uffington pool. No bridge but the path/track is deliberately raised in that area, so I expect there is a buried pipe connecting it to the main stream.

Hi, thanks for the message.

Sorry if I've put my foot in it again. I've undone the rights of access for Nook Lane. It is under dispute and the application might have been resolved since the street level imagery was taken (ref. https://www.shropshire.gov.uk/media/17086/application-ref-200-prees.pdf see "Outcome of the evaluation" length A - B - E).

I used the streetlevel imagery to verify the bridleways from the West side but as above this might have changed since 2009.

The weather this weekend looks good, so I hope to do a survey in person.

Does using the overlays on council website (https://maps.shropshire.gov.uk/greatoutdoors/index.html) for access rights (not tracing routes) come under the copy right issues? I'd be interested as anecdotally restricted byways don't tend to have the best signage.