Hi,

This appears to be part of an organised edit. Please could you give the OSM mapping community some information about #waymap-project-SB by adding an entry to the Organised Editing/Activities page at

osm.wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities

It might also have been beneficial for you and your team to read and follow the Organised Editing Guidelines.

https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines
then upd

Most of the crossings added in this changeset don't appear to be unmarked. In fact, they don't appear at all on available imagery, for the simple reason that they don't exist.

If mapping separate sidewalks requires the addition of fictitious crossings in order for routing to work as expected, this is a very strong indicator that those sidewalks should have been mapped as tags on the road instead.

"Don't tag for the renderer" also applies to tagging for the router.
osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Some of these have been deleted and the other non-existent crossings will soon be joining them in oblivion.
osm.org/changeset/131466123
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/128176153

According to the local authority, the part of Norland Road (w606519484) changed from cycleway->footway is "a pedestrian and cycle zone".

The Kensington and Chelsea (Prescribed Routes) (No. 2) Traffic Order 2022
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4027262
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124816262

Thanks @Fizzie41

Why did you disconnect w237330195 from Holland Park Avenue? Was changing a cycleway to a footway in changeset #125225715 deemed insufficient?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125233688

Also just noticed: a correctly mapped puffin crossing n1674808373 deleted and replaced by n9995372381 (crossing=marked).

At the junction of Harrow Road/College Road, I see that you deleted an ASL and replaced a correctly mapped and surveyed crossing. While this damage has been repaired, the local mappers who are cleaning up your mess are entitled to an explanation of what you're doing and why you're doing it.

osm.org/changeset/129976770

@Derick I've started threads about these in Talk-GB and Talk-GB-London, if you'd like to join in.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125705132

Thanks!

@trigpoint Did you ever get an answer?

Is the entire length of the kerb w933011649 really lowered? How could you possibly tell from Bing aerial imagery?

Drawing a decorative sidewalk around a block is usually detrimental to pedestrian routing.

Why add layer=-1 to footways/sidewalks which are clearly not subterranean?

Looking at your other edits breaking cycleways in the area, this is starting to look deliberate #DWG

Changing segment w1070108461 in the middle of a cycleway to a footway/sidewalk broke cycle routing. We tend not to have sidewalks in the middle of, and perpendicular to, the highway.

Thanks, but highway=cycleway already implies foot=yes unless explicitly tagged otherwise. The presence of segregated=* also makes it fairly clear that it's shared.

A blue dotted line on the OSM Carto map tiles does not imply that the way is not shared, or that pedestrians do not have priority.

Please consider reverting your change.

osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
osm.wiki/Cycling_in_the_United_Kingdom

Thanks!

A list of the words, which might be slightly rude in some contexts, which have been deemed "profanities" would be helpful.

Oh joy, OSM Carto's maintainers seem unlikely to support highway=busway any time soon. Never mind, it was only approved in 2020.

Changed back to highway=service in
osm.org/changeset/131207705

@yasslay I suspect that this may be a StreetComplete issue of not confining changesets to an appropriately sized bounding box, rather than user error.

See:
https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/4582