@pitscheplatsch what does "Revert of changeset/154734941" mean? Both are changesets in iD by the same user.

Hello,
See changeset/173539410
Best Regards,
Andy

Diskuterades något av följande med den bredare svenska gemenskapen:
1) Det ursprungliga tillägget av en ny kartläggare som deras första changeset för 6 dagar sedan changeset/173402413
2) Borttagningen här
3) Återställningen av borttagningen changeset/173577171 .
ALLA skulle ha gynnats av en bredare diskussion i gemenskapen.

Were any of the following discussed with the wider Swedish community:
1) The original addition by a new mapper as their first changeset 6 days ago changeset/173402413
2) The deletion here
3) The revert of the deletion changeset/173577171 .
ALL would have benefited from wider community discussion.

Thanks!

I'm guessing that "Pudey" in some of these names should perhaps be "Pudsey"?

(for info see also changeset/172948051 , where someone from Sustrans was tidying these up).

Hello,
Just wondered - do you know what the difference is between relation/123318 and relation/19284290 ? They both look like superroutes of NCN5, but with slightly different constituents?
Best Regards,
Andy

The "other" NCN5 superroute is relation/123318 , and by the version number, that looks like the older one. I'll ask the person who created the duplicate if they're in the middle of tidying it up.

Doing the same for "National Cycle Network Route 5" we get to relation/19284284 (you'll notice when you click something the URL bar changes). You can also see on that "browse" page that it says "Part of 1 relation Relation 5 (19284290) (as main)".
That's the "superroute" (a "relation of relations", created because individual relation size is limited).
That has 10 members:
" Relation 5 (359098) as main
Relation 5 (19284288) as main
Relation 5 (19284285) as main
Relation National Cycle Network Route 5 (19284284) as main
Relation 5 (19284287) as alternative
Relation 5 (19284286) as alternative
relation/9466687 as connection
relation/9466685 as connection
relation/9466688 as connection
relation/9466686 as connection"

So that's 4 main parts, two "alternatives" and 4 connections. You can click on each of those on that page to see what they are.

I have to say that relation/17077005 looks like rubbish, because (a) it's proposed and does not exist yet, (b) it's a "collection" rather than an actual route and (c) it's added by mrpacmanmap, who is, ... not the most reliable contributor. So I think we can draw a veil over that one.

If you search taginfo for a name of anything in OSM you'll be able to find it, so from https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=Starley+Regional+Cycle+Network#values you can click through to https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/description=Starley%20(TfWM)%20Regional%20Cycle%20Network%20(Proposed%20route) and from there there is an overpass turbo link to https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2dMV and if you click on that you get to relation/17077005#map=11/52.5080/-1.8073 . As clear as mud :)

Veuillez utiliser de meilleurs commentaires sur les ensembles de modifications. « À corriger » ne sert à rien.
Cordialement,
Andy Townsend, au nom du groupe de travail sur les données d'OSM

Please use better changeset comments. "À corriger " helps no-one.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

The bus bay isn't all the way up the street though? Where did you see the bus bay?

I've no idea what "Starley Network" is - can you link to it?
What is the link to the NCN5 that you can see?
In my comment above I've linked to two superroute relations that both claim to be NCN5, in this changeset you've modified both of those and a few routes that are constituents of them. I'm confused not because this is wrong but because I don't understand what they are :)

Pas de problème, je pense avoir corrigé les problèmes plus tôt

No problem - I think I've corrected the problems earlier

I'd definitely suggest adding "designation=core_path" where relevant, as per https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/designation=core_path .

I suspect that "yes" makes no more sense than "3" here. I suspect that "bus_bay" is a typing error for another tag, perhaps "width"?
The only way to be sure is to check with a local. When I see "obviously wrong values like "bus_bay=3" but can't see what the mapper obviously meant, I leave the errors as they are so that in future QA tools will still find them.