Probably needs reverting given that the contributor is unresponsive and it was an undiscussed automated edit.

Buggeration, forgot to close the changeset before starting something new. Sorry about that.

Hi - not sure what you were trying to achieve here but the bus=yes tag already indicates that PSV access is permitted. motor_vehicle should be no because the road is closed to private cars. I've changed it back.

Ha! That actually looks like an editor bug - the US element of the changeset wasn't actually changed (it's what I was looking at before, but didn't edit), so I'm not sure why P3 decided to upload it. But I don't have any excuse on that score given that I wrote P3. ;)

Hi! When you're adding a driveway to which the public has no access, could you make sure you add the tags service=driveway and access=private? Thank you.

Thank you!

Hi: there are reports in the EuroVelo discussion group on F*ceb**k that this route isn't rideable. Any idea? https://www.facebook.com/groups/2291565217760811/?multi_permalinks=2944508135799846

Hi - is way/104803566 really smoothness=impassable?

Adding motor_vehicle=discouraged is a good way of mapping roads where motor vehicles are allowed but there's signage discouraging use.

highway=service should only be used in a rural context like this if you add access tags (i.e. osm.wiki/Tag:motor_vehicle=, osm.wiki/Tag:bicycle=, osm.wiki/Tag:foot=, osm.wiki/Tag:horse=...). Otherwise it's difficult to distinguish from a farm road with no right of access.

Cool, maybe you can do that some time. I'll fix it remotely for now so that cyclists stop getting mistakenly getting diverted down there.

Until then, perhaps you could consider being a little less aggressive to other people in changeset comments (as per https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=14846&commented), because it turns out that everyone makes mistakes sometimes.

Ok. Am I allowed to change way/453419513 too, which makes even less sense?

When you're adding service roads (e.g. way/453419520), could you make sure you add an access tag? As it stands there's no way to tell who's allowed to use this. Given that Geograph shows pretty clear access signage exists (https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1918421) I'm at a loss to think why you haven't mapped it.

(But that aside, thanks for the work you've been doing on improving cycle route data :) )

Hi,

Please don't do this - by changing MTB trails to cycle routes, you are misleading routing apps into thinking that these are good paths to send normal bikes along. They aren't!

If you think that they're not clear enough on a particular cycle map, please contact the person who makes that map, rather than breaking the data.

Hi kusweta,

Access in England and Wales works the other way round. The track is private _unless_ there's a sign (or similar evidence) to say otherwise. If the track is open to all then you would expect a signpost saying that it's a byway, bridleway, or public footpath.

At the very least I would suggest you add a 'fixme=check access' tag if you're unsure.

Richard

Hi,

You added way/842952310 in this changeset. What evidence do you have that this is a road with a public right of access, as highway=service would imply?

Richard

It has literally taken me less than a minute to find a stretch of single-carriageway highway=trunk with a 40km/h limit, and three roundabouts a few hundred metres from each other, in a mainland European country.

Maybe it might behove you to learn a bit more about OSM, perhaps do a few more edits than just 86, before lecturing others on how OSM "clearly" works. I'm (I think) the third or fourth longest-standing active participant in OSM and even I wouldn't steam into a country and start reclassifying their roads willy-nilly.

Where someone with just 86 edits decides that they know better than 10+ years of the settled community will, and decides to break numerous downstream apps without consultation, that is vandalism pure and simple.

There are numerous countries that use highway=trunk in a similar way to the UK, and frankly I have already wasted enough of my day on this ****.

Reverted in changeset/111245094 .

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/111245094 where the changeset comment is: Revert extensive vandalism to road classification that goes against long-agreed practice and breaks downstream uses