Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12018-08-11 21:06:46 UTCjpennycook Hello.
In this changeset, you deleted the bridleway in Tilford across the weir ( and and marked the narrow pavement alongside Tilford Street/Tilford Road as a cyclepath (bicycle=yes). I've resto...
22018-08-13 15:32:20 UTCAJR-GB Thanks for the corrections Jon, I am not as familiar with that area and was going based on maps as I was trying to follow the new surrey cycle routes. If as you say the footpath is in fact a pavement it should be changed to sidewalk?
32018-08-13 15:46:37 UTCjpennycook Hello.

When adding new cycle routes to OSM, I always make sure that I perform a detailed on-site survey first, where I record data on surface/tracktype, right of way designation if applicable, way type, speed limits, etc. This is particularly important if the source map has restrictive copyright ...
12018-08-05 17:34:29 UTCjpennycook Hi.
In reply to your note on this changeset - roughly east of Thrashers Lane is access land, so pedestrian access will be allowed on many roads in the area. A lot of the roads joining the public bridleways seem to have signs only forbidding motor vehicles (if anything), implying that horses and bic...
22018-08-05 18:07:41 UTCShohreh Thanks for the confirmation.

As it would have been a very long detour even by bike to reach South Haven Point, I went ahead anyway… and was relieved to see pedestrians further East and then some NCN signs.
32018-08-08 17:57:40 UTCjpennycook I did some work yesterday on the east-west road from Wytch Heath as far as the bridleway to Ower Quay, and the north-south road from Rempstone/Bushey Lane to the east-west road, based on the signs. I'll do some more work on the other roads and tracks in the Rempstone Estate when I get chance.
12018-07-28 19:23:05 UTCjpennycook Hello Sailor Steve.

You changed a number of tertiary roads to unclassified, but the roads had an "official_ref" beginning "C". Was this intentional?
For example:-
Green Lane, C180 -
Northside Lane, C127 - https://www.openstreetma...
22018-07-29 10:51:20 UTCSailor Steve Hi Jon,

I've been driving in the area over the last few weeks and trying to use OSM to find the best routes through. I've noticed that some single track lanes have been tagged as 'tertiary' routes which is obviously misleading. The wiki UK guidelines are clear that this tag should be used for h...
32018-07-29 10:54:48 UTCjpennycook Hello Steve.

Thanks for the explanation. I must admit that I was surprised that some of the narrow, windy roads were C roads.

12018-06-10 15:05:56 UTCjpennycook Hello.

You added a roundabout on Wellington Road, between the pelican crossing and the Elms Road miniroundabout. There is no roundabout there (

12018-05-24 14:51:15 UTCAA_NP A33 - It cannot have a break at Turgis Green between Primary and Trunk Roads. This section is a trunk road. The UK primary network should be coded as trunk roads on OSM. This is the same for the A339 between M3 Jct 6 and the Berkshire border.
22018-05-24 17:07:46 UTCjpennycook Thanks - I will fix it shortly
12018-05-15 13:20:15 UTC4004 Hey,
Nice to see someone still trying to improve Bracknell! (and in a vintage editor as well).
The aerial photography you refer to - was this taken by yourself or is there a treasure trove somewhere?
22018-05-15 16:29:22 UTCjpennycook Hello.

I noticed that you were also fixing Bracknell! I'm mostly interested in the cycling routes there, including the new National Cycle Network route 422.

I got used to PotLatch, so didn't bother learning about newer editors.

The "aerial photography" means Bing usually, someti...
32018-05-15 17:14:12 UTC4004 Ah, ok. I was being overly optimistic thinking OpenAerialMap drone footage was becoming a thing in the UK.
I probably won’t be touching the cycle network, but instead small fixes to ways/crossings around my commute/survey area, and some bing as well
12018-04-27 21:48:22 UTCjpennycook (should be M4, not M3)
12018-04-16 23:06:47 UTCMike Baggaley Hi, I suspect that way 402784688 should be named Wells Lane and that the "& St Georges School" part just indicates that the school is to be found down there rather than being part of the name. Can you confirm whether this is the case? (I'm assuming you are local.) I note that St George...
22018-04-17 06:20:23 UTCjpennycook Hello Mike.
Thanks for the message.
The full name is shown on a street name sign, like you'd find on a normal residential street, so I thought I ought to record it on OSM in case people are looking out for the sign with the name. However, I believe the name of the road, as opposed to the name on ...
32018-04-17 16:13:08 UTCMike Baggaley Hi Jon, thanks for the quick reply. I think that we should record the real name of the street rather than the including the extended detail in the name tag. Any objections if I change this and add a note saying what is on the sign?
42018-04-17 16:31:39 UTCjpennycook Hello Mike.

Thanks for checking with me. That's fine - please go ahead.

12018-04-11 17:54:35 UTCjpennycook Hello.
In this changeset, you've set Rose Kiln Lane/A33 to cycleway=track, which is an on-road cycleway separated by a kerb or other barrier, and then removed the bicycle access from the path and converted the path from highway=cycleway to highway=footway. When I was last here, the cycleway was ac...
12018-04-02 17:10:47 UTCjpennycook Hello mattgirling.

In this changeset, you changed from motor_vehicle=no to motor_vehicle=designated. This seems odd for a road with description=Bus Lane and service=busway. This makes this road "A preferred or designated route for" all...
22018-04-02 17:23:49 UTCmattgirling You're right—my understanding of the values of Key:access#Access_tag_values were a bit off. Have changed properties accordingly. Ta
32018-04-02 20:57:38 UTCjpennycook Thanks!

12018-01-16 20:31:15 UTCjpennycook Hello WhosThisThen.
In this changeset, you've changed the sections of cycle path along Reading Road in Winnersh to be footways with the comment "many sidewalks and pedestrian road crossings were incorrectly listed as cycle paths."
They are clearly marked with the blue cycle path signs so...
22018-01-16 21:54:07 UTCWhosThisThen What was previously listed as cycle paths and I changed to sidewalks are in fact sidewalks.

The cycle paths are actually cycle lanes in the road themselves - different to the pavements. I intend to add the cycle paths to their correct position in the next day or so.
32018-01-16 22:39:34 UTCjpennycook Hello.
I've regularly cycled along these cycle paths. There are short sections, around the traffic lights, e.g., where cyclists are instructed to dismount, but the rest are shared use paths marked with the blue circular sign. One of the goals of the &qu...
42018-01-16 22:42:24 UTCjpennycook Hello again.

This link will be better:
As you can see, the council refers to the paths as "cycleways".

"Current project status

From 2014 to 2016 we completed phases 1, 2 ...
52018-01-16 22:46:09 UTCjpennycook The project leaflet,, says that the existing shared use paths...
12017-12-30 20:14:50 UTCjpennycook updates from aerial photography
12017-12-09 22:28:26 UTCjpennycook Hello.
You changed a few miniroundabouts ( to full roundabouts ( Are you sure that they are not just miniroundabouts (i.e ones without a kerb or barrier...
12017-12-04 20:23:00 UTCjpennycook Hello Alexander Mytton-Bayley

In this changeset, you renamed "Aldershot Military Town" to "Aldershot Town" and changed the landuse from military to residential. Could you reverse this change, please? The land IS military. OpenStreetMap is used for other purposes in addition...
12017-12-04 20:20:31 UTCjpennycook Hello Alexander Mytton-Bayley

In this changeset, you removed the landuse=military tag from
Can you confirm that the Aldershot and District Military Byelaws (
12017-12-04 19:05:06 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03

Once again, you have changed bridleways to footways. is a Public Bridleway and was marked as highway=bridleway.

Further to my comments on previous changesets (, can you ...
22017-12-04 19:07:06 UTCjpennycook You have also changed - a public bridleway that I fixed 6 days ago from highway=bridleway to highway=footway
32017-12-04 19:08:42 UTCjpennycook - another public bridleway that I fixed 6 days ago, where you have changed highway=bridleway to highway=footway
42017-12-04 19:09:28 UTCjpennycook Another one, this time one I last edited 11 months ago -
52017-12-04 19:10:13 UTCjpennycook Another bridleway that I fixed 6 days ago -
62017-12-04 19:30:17 UTCjpennycook is a track used as a public bridleway. You have changed it from highway=track to highway=footway
12017-12-04 19:21:36 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03.

in this changeset, you changed from highway=bridleway to highway=track. When I travelled along this bridleway in November, this was not a track - it was a dirt path, hence highway=bridleway. Could you reverse this change please?

22017-12-04 19:23:53 UTCjpennycook You have also changed from highway=footway to highway=track. When I last travelled along this, it was a path, not wide enough for two-wheeled vehicles. Could you reverse this change please?
32017-12-04 19:24:54 UTCjpennycook was also too narrow for a two-wheeled vehicle.
42017-12-04 19:26:42 UTCjpennycook When I saw the southern end of this way: about three weeks ago, it was not wide enough to be called a track
52017-12-04 19:27:31 UTCjpennycook Again with this path -
Certainly at the southern end it was too narrow to be a track
12017-12-01 20:00:16 UTCjpennycook by accident, some changes were made as part of
12017-12-01 19:57:22 UTCjpennycook most of the changes in this changeset should have been part of Changeset: 54244735
"Relation: Basingstoke Canal Cycle Permissive Route (2867308) covers a subset of Relation: Basingstoke Canal Towpath (162070), so removing 2867308"
12017-11-29 16:53:59 UTCjpennycook Hello BCNorwich

Thanks for fixing the problem I caused with the woods around Frith Hill.

12017-11-12 19:48:03 UTCjpennycook Hello Raygungoth.

In this changeset, you added as highway=steps. I have cycled many times from Brewery Road to the bridge over the canal, and did not have to dismount for steps. Could you double-check that this isn't a nearby way separate to t...
22017-11-13 09:10:54 UTCRaygunGoth Thanks for highlighting this - it turns out I forgot to account for/mistook the cycle path on the canal path! There is a separate pair of step-free/cycle-friendly paths either side of that set of steps, serving the ground level and the WWF building entrance. I've cleared that up.
32017-11-13 09:55:21 UTCjpennycook Thanks. For some reason, it's usually dark when I go this way, and I'm in a hurry to get to the station, so I've usually been unaware of the footway and steps.
Is the cyclepath? If so, I'll mark it up like
12017-10-29 16:05:53 UTCMike Baggaley HI, the change to way 146988534 seems to have lost the foot/horse/bicycle tags and added motor_vehicle=seasonal. Can you please review the non vehicular access? Also, seasonal restrictions are best added using the :conditional suffix (e.g. motor_vehicle:conditional) - see http://wiki.openstreetmap....
22017-10-29 17:07:28 UTCjpennycook Hello Mike.

Thanks for your message. I've replaced the missing access tags which I had removed incorrectly. Your message gave me an excuse to check again.

Regarding the motor_vehicle restriction - I a...
32017-10-29 17:13:51 UTCjpennycook fixed in changesets #53347402 and #53346966
12017-10-21 20:04:49 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03.

In this changeset, you changed the cycle path leading from Kingfield Road to Woking Park, signposted as part of the Mars Cycle Trail, from highway=cycleway to highway=footway, and another one linking the Mars Cycle Trail with the Phobos Cycle Trail. Can I ask why? At least the Mar...
22017-10-21 21:05:35 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03.

You can see some photos on the CycleStreets photomap around Woking Park here: and here:

32017-10-21 21:06:00 UTCjpennycook Note that the Mars Trail section is also part of the National Cycle Network, route number 223
12017-10-21 19:54:45 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03.

In this changeset, you changed from highway=bridleway to highway=footway. The way is tagged as a Public Bridleway. Was there a reason for restricting this to pedestrians, or was this change a mistake?

22017-10-21 20:13:10 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03. is also a Public Bridleway. Can I ask why you changed it from highway=track to highway=footway?

32017-10-21 20:18:16 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03.

You also changed Frith Hill Road ( from highway=track to highway=footway. I've cycled on this way, and it was a track, hence the source=survey tag. Can I ask why you downgraded it to a pedestrian path please?

42018-01-31 09:35:57 UTCConstable Also this one isn't a pool, it's a damn private greenhouse.
12017-10-21 19:52:36 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03.

In this changeset, you changed and other ways between Red Road and Brentmoor Road from highway=track to highway=footway. Was this by mistake?
This is a public bridleway - if it was narrow, then it should be tagged as highway=bridleway, o...
22017-10-21 20:10:27 UTCjpennycook Hello Rigi03.

In addition, you changed the track that runs parallel to The Maultway and Red Road from highway=track to highway=footway. I've used this track, and it's definitely a track. Could you change it back to highway=track please?
12017-10-07 18:02:07 UTCjpennycook Hello NickEd90.

In this edit, you joined footway 32404316 with a building ( The footway is not part of the building (the walls would present a barrier to walking) but separate. Could you unjoin them please?

12017-09-30 21:16:15 UTCmapper999 Could you please have a look at . The number of steps seems to be a bit too high.
22017-09-30 21:27:46 UTCjpennycook Thanks for the message. Fixed in Changeset #52522284

12017-09-24 08:28:02 UTCHarald Hartmann Hello jpennycook. At
you have tagged `servoice` instead of `service`, right? #typo
22017-09-24 08:44:34 UTCjpennycook Hello.

Thanks for the message. I've fixed these in Changeset #52322726

12017-09-19 13:29:57 UTCGinaroZ Hi, just to let you know that should be landuse=allotments :)
22017-09-19 13:59:17 UTCjpennycook Hello GinaroZ

Thanks for the message, and thanks for fixing it too!

12017-09-08 18:11:08 UTCjpennycook Hello.

In this changeset, you changed at least pelican crossing from highway=crossing; crossing=traffic_signals; crossing_ref=pelican to highway=crossing; crossing=pelican; crossing_ref=pelican
According to the crossing should be traffic_signals, a...
12017-09-05 20:08:12 UTCjpennycook Hello TurboTippy.

In this changeset you changed the node for the bollard at the eastern end of Hogwood Lane to a kissing gate. I forgot to update this node when I changed the surface detail, but my notes say the bollards were replaced by a metal cycle barrier. Was the metal cycle barrier subseq...
22017-09-06 10:33:56 UTCTurboTippy Hi yes, you are absolutely right. Actually I was looking in the system for a metal cycling barrier now found and changed. Sorry about that. Agree the wooden kissing gates on the greenway aren't good.
32017-09-06 11:44:51 UTCjpennycook Thanks - I was worried my notes were wrong. I was a bit rushed when I was looking at Hogwood Lane on Sunday - trying to avoid the rain and wind.

12017-08-26 21:16:10 UTCjpennycook Hello franck60

You added a walkway with the following tags, near Walton-on-Thames:-
bicycle \tyes
crossing \tzebra
footway \tcrossing
highway \tfootway
surface \tgravel
Can you confirm that you saw a sign allowing bicycles?
Secondly, how does one access the footway - it is only linked to a...
22017-08-29 08:25:42 UTCfrankc60 Hi Jon,
No sign allowing bicycles, but as I've walked down this new path, I have meet several people on bikes. Yes, it is linked via the car park, there may be another path on the other side, but I haven't been there yet to confirm. Yes, is not a zebra crossing, I will amend. Thanks for the questio...
32017-08-29 08:31:02 UTCjpennycook Hello Frank.

Thanks for the reply. Perhaps bicycle=permissive might be appropriate.

12017-08-26 21:00:37 UTCjpennycook Hello Wiggly.

This edit does not make sense:-
amenity \tplace_of_worship
cuisine \tburger
name \tThe Blue bucket
Can you correct it, please?

12017-08-26 20:56:10 UTCjpennycook Hello Wiggly.

I see you have created some places of worship with names like "GNB sniper position 3". Are these really places of worship (as the names suggest otherwise)? If so, could you complete the "religion" and "denomination" tags, please?

12017-08-26 20:55:59 UTCjpennycook Hello Wiggly.

I see you have created some places of worship with names like "GNB sniper position 1". Are these really places of worship (as the names suggest otherwise)? If so, could you complete the "religion" and "denomination" tags, please?

12017-08-01 18:15:48 UTCjpennycook Hello.

Thanks for getting rid of the duplicate roads. I noticed some duplicate paths, and deleted them in

12017-07-31 19:06:08 UTCjpennycook Hello C1c51.

Thanks for adding all of these paths. I've noticed that you've created some duplicates - e.g. duplicates although the latter (which is the original) has more data. Were you trying to achieve some...
12017-07-27 18:32:00 UTCjpennycook Hello Flumpdaddy.

I see you created a number of gates in this changeset at the junctions of roads with footpaths and of bridleway with footpaths. This implies that the road is blocked by the gate. I'll move them off the roads and onto the footpaths.

12017-07-03 20:48:04 UTCjpennycook Hello Joerm19.

In this changeset, you converted two houses into ponds, and added a stadium on top of another house. Did you mean to do this to the map, or was it a test?

22017-07-07 19:22:57 UTCjpennycook changes in changesets 49987141 and 49986907 reversed in changeset 50116356 as the original changes appeared to be test changes - e.g. changing houses to ponds
12017-07-07 19:22:45 UTCjpennycook changes in changesets 49987141 and 49986907 reversed in changeset 50116356 as the original changes appeared to be test changes - e.g. changing houses to ponds
12017-05-31 17:33:10 UTCjpennycook Hi.

Thanks for fixing my error on this node!

12017-05-06 14:07:30 UTCrobert OS Locator seems to think the northernmost cul de sac on of "James Road" is named "James Way". If you're sure it's not it might be nice to add a "not:name" tag to it to stop QA tools complaining:
22017-05-06 16:38:57 UTCjpennycook Thanks Robert.

Not sure what happened there - I've fixed it (way 23841657)

32017-05-06 16:52:07 UTCrobert Subscribing to the following rss feed would allow you to catch similar breakages made by you or other mappers in this area,51.205539,-0.227558,51.593656
42017-05-06 16:54:25 UTCrobert (actually this will load faster and cover a more focused area,51.30395,-0.57603,51.498004)
52017-05-06 16:56:16 UTCjpennycook Thanks for the feed link - I'll take a look later

12017-05-06 14:04:03 UTCrobert Are you sure about the change of "Byworth Close" -> "Thornbridge Road" in this changeset? Disagreement with OS Locator:
22017-05-06 16:46:36 UTCjpennycook Thanks Robert - I've fixed it

12017-04-11 22:44:08 UTCrobert You changed "Barton Close" into another part of "Manor Farm Avenue" in this changeset - are you sure about this? It disagrees with OS Locator:
22017-04-12 06:39:38 UTCjpennycook Thanks Robert - dodgy copying and pasting without keeping the correct name. I will fix it.
12017-04-08 17:01:51 UTCjpennycook Hello.

Can you tell me why you deleted the cyclepath to the right-hand side of Kingsmead, next to Premier Inn, in Farnborough? It existed last weekend when I cycled along it - see

You also

22017-04-08 17:04:18 UTCjpennycook sorry - I submitted too early. You also deleted two other footways that I had edited.
12017-04-05 17:21:34 UTCMike Baggaley HI, can you take a look at the change you have made to way 244895368 and a few nearby ways? In the latest change foot=yes has been removed. Are pedestrians actually prohibited? I think there is a wide pavement for this segment and unless there is a sign prohibiting pedestrians, I don't think foot ac...
22017-04-05 17:26:01 UTCjpennycook Hello Mike.

I will take a look shortly, and get back to you.

32017-04-05 17:28:36 UTCjpennycook I see what you mean about the London Street bus access roads - I will fix it. Thanks for pointing that out.
42017-04-05 18:14:02 UTCjpennycook Hello Mike.

I've changed access=no to motor_vehicle=no, which seems the easiest thing to do.

Thanks again,

12017-03-13 20:56:56 UTCMike Baggaley Hi, I note that you have removed pedestrian access from the busway in way 156761024 and adjoining ways. Is there an explicit no pedestrians sign, or was the removal unintentional? With the access mapped at present, from Shrewsbury Avenue, pedestrians share the cycle way then have nowhere to go when ...
22017-03-13 21:02:48 UTCjpennycook Hello Mike.

Thanks for the message. I will take a look tomorrow - I thought I had gone back and fixed this since, but I may have only thought about it.

32017-03-14 12:54:26 UTCjpennycook Hello Mike

Clearly I only thought about it, but didn't fix it. Hopefully this is now fixed in changesets #46834542 and
42017-03-14 12:54:40 UTCjpennycook #46840173

12017-03-08 21:00:15 UTCjpennycook comment made in changeset #46680980:
"Hello Andy.
I see you removed the traffic signals in this edit. I mapped them separately because he Wiki page for Traffic Signals has "strongly recommended" for separately listing traffic signals from the associated crossing. It gives an an exam...
12017-03-08 18:29:53 UTCjpennycook Hello Andy.
I see you removed the traffic signals in this edit. I mapped them separately because he Wiki page for Traffic Signals has "strongly recommended" for separately listing traffic signals from the associated crossing. It gives an an example under "Pedestrian crossing withou...
22017-03-08 20:35:08 UTCAndyJ71 Hi Jon, yes it does look like that example is relevant in this case. I had looked at this before and I note the examples have since been updated in October 16. It does represent a change to how crossings in the UK have been generally mapped so far (and there is some discussion on that on the talk pa...
32017-03-09 12:32:33 UTCACS1986 Hi,
I noticed this changeset and it made me question whether I had been mapping crossings correctly. I've started a thread on the Talk-GB mailing list to see if there is any consensus among other UK mappers about how they should be tagged:
42017-03-09 12:58:33 UTCAndyJ71 Hi ACS1986, that was my initial thought too about routers seeing multiple lights. I suspect that different routing engines will interpret this differently. Looking at it does appear that highway tags are used for routing, ...
52017-03-09 13:24:16 UTCACS1986 Thanks Andy, that's good to know.
It had also occurred to me since writing my message that crossings at complex junctions are often mapped separately, particularly where cycleways are involved so it would be an existing problem for routers if they did count crossings as separate sets of lights. My ...
12016-12-24 19:35:37 UTCjpennycook primitive GPS technology unfortunately
12016-11-10 22:06:12 UTCjpennycook Adgestone Quiet Roads: cycleway shared lane
12016-09-07 18:05:40 UTCjpennycook correction: survey of 05/06/2016
12016-09-07 18:05:37 UTCjpennycook correction: survey of 05/06/2016
12016-09-07 18:05:35 UTCjpennycook correction: survey of 05/06/2016
12016-08-03 08:22:04 UTCDerick Rethans Hi!

You seem to have misspelled traffic_signals wrong in your changes:

An extra "r" in every case.

22016-08-03 08:42:02 UTCjpennycook Hello Derick

Thanks for spotting that and letting me know. I've fixed them now.

12015-12-26 06:32:23 UTCGerdP Hi there!
I noticed a typo crossing=trafic_signals (one missing f) here:
I did not yet change it because you've also added two nodes with
highway=_trafic_signals (same typo) and I think these are obsolete as they are duplicating the meaning of the a...
22015-12-26 08:59:31 UTCjpennycook Thanks GerdP.

I'll fix the typo later on. I really disagree with your suggestion that this system is obsolete - my sat nav thinks that a highway=traffic_signals node slows down cycling, but a highway=crossing is good for cycling and when combined with crossing=traffic_signals node is even better ...
32015-12-26 09:08:47 UTCGerdP Hi Jon,
my thinking was that the traffic lights are only for the crossing, not for anything else. In that case it seems redundant to me.
12015-11-14 21:44:59 UTCrobert This edit broke a match against "Yield Hall Lane" in OS Locator:

If you're sure you're right and OS is wrong, how about adding a not:name= tag?
22015-11-15 00:44:15 UTCjpennycook Hello Robert.
Thanks for your message. I expect I accidentally copied the name from the adjacent way. I've changed it back.
12015-11-07 21:32:50 UTCjpennycook Hello.
I see that you created an A road, named Safe Haven Route, over the top of the existing residential road called West Road. It's not clear to me what your intent was - did you mean to edit West Road rather than create a new road over the top?

12015-10-21 18:25:18 UTCGerdP please help me to understand:
why do you connect nodes with
highway=traffic_signals as with
way 296332286 ?
You used amenity=traffic_signals,
now (after a mass edit) they are all
highway=traffic_signals, which looks
completely nonsense.
22015-10-21 19:32:26 UTCjpennycook Hello.
Amenity=traffic_signals was listed in a wiki article for relating a group of traffic lights, individually tagged with highway=traffic_signals. I no longer use the relationship and only tag individual lights with the highway tag.
32015-10-21 19:37:49 UTCGerdP okay, I think I understand now. The idea
was to show that those traffic signals were
controlled by one logic/computer/whatever.
Do you think that the mass edit which changed them all to highway=traffic_signals
should be reverted or should I simply remove those ways?
I stumbled over them because...
42015-10-21 21:44:55 UTCjpennycook I stopped using the relationship because of the mass edit - the result made no sense to me either. Yes - the intention was to show a set of traffic lights controlled as a unit.
I tend to stay out of debates, but my opinion is that a relationship is useful, as a route planner should only take one tr...
52015-10-22 03:14:36 UTCGerdP okay, so I think the best is to remove these
wrong highways and review the tagging of the nodes with the traffic_signals tag.
See also
which shows solutions for the router problem.
62015-10-22 08:32:12 UTCSomeoneElse For info, I've stuck a link to here on so that the person who did the mechanical edit is aware of the effects.
Cheers, Andy
72015-10-22 08:56:32 UTCGerdP thanks, I did not yet change more of them
as it is really difficult to understand the mapping of traffic_signals without local knowledge.

12015-10-20 19:59:02 UTCjpennycook Thanks for fixing that. I must have had too many ways selected at the same time.
12015-10-20 15:57:40 UTCDeanna Earley I know it can be hard to verify data you upload, but you may want to check that you're not marking major trunk roads as a dirt surface :)
I've now corrected a few segments that were causing routing oddities.
22015-10-20 19:56:48 UTCjpennycook Oops - sorry about that. Thanks for fixing my mistakes - when I get chance, I'll double check that changeset to see if there were any more problems.
12015-10-13 20:49:10 UTCjpennycook Hello Sailor_Steve.

I see you've removed tracktype=grade5 from
My journey planner/sat nav uses tracktype on both tracks and bridleways to work out if a way is suitable for a bicycle - the surface tag is not granular enough for bicycles as it does not gi...
22015-10-14 10:12:51 UTCSailor Steve Hi Jon,

Sorry, that was a 'fat finger' mistake on my part

12015-10-13 20:24:35 UTCjpennycook Hello Sailor_Steve.

I see you've removed access=private and tracktype=grade2 from the track
My sat nav/journey planner assumes that highway=track is open to all, unless otherwise specified, hence access=private/foot=designated is better than a long lis...
22015-10-13 20:25:49 UTCjpennycook Apologies - I see you didn't remove tracktype from this section, but the point on access is still valid.
32015-10-14 10:29:25 UTCSailor Steve Hi Jon,

Access=private tag on PROW creates rendering and routing problems -

OSM maps render these ways as access no/private, indistinguishable from a genuine private way

OSMAnd refuses to route via ways with this tag

The top level tag access=private is defined as no access without indivi...
42015-10-16 10:34:42 UTCSomeoneElse In case anyone's not aware, there was previous discussion about some of these tagging questions at and . It's actually probably better suited to g...
12015-10-12 19:27:05 UTCrobert Did you mean to remove the name "Long Drove" from way 97233450 in this changeset? It has broken a match with OS Locator:
22015-10-12 20:28:15 UTCjpennycook Hello Robert.
Thanks for your message. Yes - the road signs said the road was called South Fen Road from the junction with Counter Drain Drove. I've added not:name=Long Drove to cover this.
12015-10-11 00:44:38 UTCjpennycook Hello.
I see you linked West Street with High Street in Odiham. These roads are only linked by the footpath - I've disconnected them again in changeset #34560613.
22015-10-11 10:38:57 UTCandygol Hey, jpennycook.

It is good that you are familiar with this place! Unfortunately shadow of the house falls on the way and there is hard to see this area. Thank you for correcting my mistakes. Do not hesitate to contact me on my edits to OSM.
Regards Andygol.
12015-10-04 08:56:44 UTCjpennycook Hello.

I see that you renamed in your changeset, with comments "Correct street name, as per OS Mapping to Station Road, not River Road." I had marked this as not:name=Station Road because the correct name is not Station Road. The OS Open Data...
12015-06-14 21:21:43 UTCjpennycook Hello.
I see you added Node: Isnage Farm (3495136722) on 3rd May 2015, quite close to Isnage Farm (507966898) which was added on 26th September 2009. I've noticed that, from time to time, you've added a "place=farm" or "place=isolated_dwelling" right next to an existing node wi...
22015-06-21 07:46:55 UTCjpennycook I've also removed Burkham House (3495124952) which was added next to Burkham House (491862843) - created in 2009.
32015-06-21 07:48:34 UTCjpennycook also Tickley (3495124965) and Tickley (194001328) - created in 2012
42015-06-23 11:49:38 UTCabc26324 Sorry this was my mistake - human error. I shall endeavour to be more careful in the future.
12015-02-23 18:44:43 UTCrobert The Grove -> Fieldhurst Close: are you sure about this? 3 things...
1. OS Locator disagrees with you
2. Fieldhurst Close is the road one down from this one.
3. The road you've assigned the name to is not a close.
22015-02-23 20:37:29 UTCjpennycook Fixed in and replied to Robert
jpennycook has contributed to 68 changeset discussions(s) with a total of 151 comment(s)