FYI
I deleted your duplicate Lea Green station as there should only be one per station.

Dawesy went to private email

Why have you marked this path as non accessible?

Well, that's annoying to see. FB haven't updated their render in over a year! Puts OSM in a poor light.
I've asked on one of their forums if there's anything that can be done. Short term - probably not. but will keep you posted.

I didn't check the substation. Is that the building to the left in my photo? Looks to abut straight onto the road.

Just because something isn't mapped at one location doesn't mean the same object can't be added elsewhere. If you wish to add these parking service roads (& car parks), go for it. It adds good detail to the map.

Any idea where this is?:
note/1941123#map=18/51.44356/-2.56655&layers=N

When i first started in OSM I was informed: "if it's physical & stationary, you can map it"

These service roads are for multiple parking spaces for multiple houses so not even private drives.

service=driveway

I know where the photographs were shot- I took them.

Driveways are mapped as service roads.

Please revert /your/ erroneous edit.

From OSM's welcome page: "OpenStreetMap is a place for mapping things that are both real and current "

Virtual is an antonym of real.

Virtual means it doesn't exist.

highway=virtual is ambiguous in class. It could be a motorway!

This is one of the most ridiculous OSM tags I've come across.

Pedestrianized areas, by their definition, means people can walk in all directions.
If there is a designated route (PROW for example) then map it as highway=footway with the assortment of required subtags.

Please reinstate those roads as the do exist.
To the left:
https://snipboard.io/Rp8Nbz.jpg
To the right:
https://snipboard.io/APCfEk.jpg

Are you sure the cul-de-sacs have the same name as the existing road?

What a pathetic response. And not a very nice way to talk about employees of travelline.

The wiki is a collaboration of many hundreds of OSM's contributors. The OSM database is similar but in thousands.
The consensus is clear: bus/psv=designated is a fully accepted tag. Editors have it listed as a default.

It's very disappointing a company believes they're entitled to ride rough-shod over agreed practices.

psv=*

This is another example of you thinking the tail can wag the dog.
bus/psv=designated is a perfectly correct tag & your company's software code needs to be amended to suit.

I'm fully aware you didn't add the tag.
I still think your suppliers are confused.
motor_vehicle=destination allows buses and taxis access to the area, but there's a no through road beyond that.

Do you have contact details for your suplliers?

Hi
FYI When a highway passes though a building:
way/734224603#map=19/51.37952/-2.37321

The accurate tag is:
tunnel=*#tunnel=building_passage

Note it doesn't require a layer tag as it;s at grounf level, but the building should have one with a positive integer.

I think they're misunderstanding. Do you have an email contact for them?

Thanks
As you say "no such dog parks exist" I've deleted it.

Dog parks are usually specific sectioned of areas for canines to have a shit.

Is this in fact just a normal recreation ground where some people occasionally take their charges for a walk?

way/544685765

Humour me: What's a "virtual" path?

I believe there are two separate issues here:

1. I don't think your software should throw an error for 'destination' as the station is, after all, the bus's destination.

2. I don't think destination is appropriate on these ways as there's no signs (AFAIK) indicating restricted access to the station & car parks. There should be (& is) a destination tag for the stretch of road behind the multi-storey where there is a 'no through road' sign

What tag was preventing PSVs from using these roads?