Apologies, I see that you added the crossings in osm.org/changeset/156206389

If you could also update the tags on the parent street from sidewalk=both to sidewalk:both=separate that also gives hints to data consumers.
osm.wiki/Sidewalks#Sidewalk_as_separate_way

How can a highway=cycleway have a prohibition for bicycles?

Has the toucan crossing here been replaced with another crossing type, and if so, what?
osm.org/node/4860857576

Have these signs been removed and replaced?
https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=51.532102%7E0.003973&lvl=20.2&mo=om.1&pi=-0.2&style=x&dir=347.5
https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/rskedgell?lat=51.4779829&lng=-0.0180406&z=18.20477552230186&pKey=1134111453754457&focus=photo

How will these benefit pedestrian routing, as they don't connect via crossings?

osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

There is nothing wrong with place=village being a node. Please read the wiki before making arbitrary decisions on whether or not an object in OSM is "unnecessary".

osm.wiki/Tag:place%3Dvillage

Of the 15k place=village objects in the UK, about 99% are mapped as nodes. The reasons for this are in the wiki.

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/place=village#overview

Please use meaningful changeset comments.

osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for updating this.

If the business has gone permanently, you could delete the node for the POI and add the address to the polygon for the house which contained it.
osm.org/way/1301684507

Watford General Hospital has been mapped as a polygon for ~17 years, so adding a duplicate node is unnecesary. The same applies to the duplicate leisure=park nodes which you have added.
osm.org/way/7989424

Also, when you use the addr:street tag, this is for the name of the street only. There's documentation on addresses in the UK at osm.wiki/Addresses_in_the_United_Kingdom

@Vas111 feel free

The opening hours can be implemented using conditional restrictions, so you might have something like this:
foot = permissive
foot:conditional = no @ (17:00-09:00)
osm.wiki/Conditional_restrictions

Mapping indoor=corridor adds area mapping to the linear highway=* ways. There are some examples of shopping centres where this has been done here:
osm.wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging

Hi Milhouse,

I add quite a lot of separate sidewalks and detailed crossings, because I also want effective routing for pedestrians and those with visual or mobility impairments.

The crossing tags I deleted were adding by inactive user @alisonlung (see osm.org/user_blocks/6775 ). They were using a task manager on Waymap's site and were not supervised, adding decorative sidewalks and fictitious crossings which were detrimental to pedestrian routing. They also "accidentally" broke cycle routing in a few places with their edits. Many of the crossings they added were fictions connecting decorative and now deleted sidewalks.

18 months later, I am still cleaning up the mess they made. I have just reversed a rather heavy-handed bulk deletion of sidewalks around a part of Kensal Rise which I missed earlier. Discussion of this is on the community forum:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/undiscussed-mass-deletion-of-separate-sidewalks/117491

If you're interested in improving pedestrian routing in central London, this MapWithAI project may be of interest:
https://tasks.mapwith.ai/projects/165

Why? Unless the pedestrian walkways inside the shopping centre no longer exist, there is no reason to delete them.

They could probably be tagged better than as highway=pedestrian, e.g. as highway=corridor

I have reverted your changeset and changed the tagging in
osm.org/changeset/155993714
and
osm.org/changeset/155993753

Thanks for updating this. You might find the resource linked below useful if you are mapping your local PRoWs:

https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/hants/east-hants/buriton/

Unlikely to be on the carriageway of Longstone Avenue and without an address, it's not much use and unlikely to be verifiable on the ground. Deleted.

Already mapped, although it was only updated a fortnight ago osm.org/way/291672069

Not the most helpful response from Autocab, unfortunately.

I've taken a quick look at the Bing street side imagery from the Berwell Road and Drayton Park ends of the service road. To me, this looks more like a pedestrian way which is occasionally used by service vehicles, rather than as a service road which is occasionally used by pedestrians. As you are presumably more familiar with the area around the stadium, does that sound like a better way to describe it?

I have added and updated the crossings at the Linden Avenue end of the separate sidewalks on Mostyn Gardens, Bolton Gardens, Dagmar Gardens and Station Terrace. This should deter future attempts to delete them by other users.

It was already correctly tagged as motor_vehicle=private, so mis-tagging OpenStreetMap probably won't fix a buggy router. Which routing software are you using?

It was already correctly tagged as motor_vehicle=private, so mis-tagging OpenStreetMap probably won't fix a buggy router. Which routing software are you using?

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for relocating the florist.

You don't actually need to set oneway=no on most streets, as the default assumption is that they are two way. Adding the tag does no harm and there is no need to remove it, but in most cases it will have no effect on routing software.
osm.wiki/Key:oneway#oneway_=_no

I've got a race in Battersea Park next Wednesday, so I'll check if I have time. I've left a note in case I don't.

osm.org/note/4396917