For what it's worth, neither Bridge Street nor Back Bridge Street are physically named anywhere either, as far as I know. But I don't have much of an opinion on this sort of mapping either way, so feel free to make whatever changes you desire.

Hi, I did not create Cherry Avenue from scratch per se, it's simply a way split from way/4019214 with the name. It is a named path part of the new Bristol Civic Society's tree trail for the park; one of the trees has a little tag with the name for the path. It's not really official but I figured including it is innocuous enough.

The other path names are not my doing, but another editor some years ago who presumably desired to show the names of the former streets. Not exactly correct but not something I personally wish to remove either.

colston ave not st stephen st, but same idea regardless

Hi,
Thanks for the heads up about that. I'm really not great with actually mapping out these route relations but I will definitely be more careful to avoid leaving any gaps next time! Been a while since I've edited OSM so apologies if there's been any other errors I've introduced in other change sets

All the best

There are a few other county roads tagged like this in your prior changesets:
way/20835154
way/21052368
way/21093720

Hi,
I just wanted to bring to your attention that you have removed the names of public (county) roads and tagged them as driveways, e.g.:
way/20927531
way/21103347

These have also been tagged with "accesshighway=*=service"

If this a mistake, please revert these changes

Thank you :)

Hi, what I was trying to map in that changeset was the fact there are two service roads at different levels. One can be seen in imagery, and the other below it goes through a tunnel through the building. The sidewalks were joined to their respective level after they go through the building. Perhaps it is incorrectly tagged?

What's with way #1151643179?

If anything, I think it makes it a lot harder to edit (things such as multilingual names) when there are now dozens of relations that have to be located and selected any time another user wants to make a change consistently.

I understand the purpose of it, but the way it is done seems to be the equivalent of splitting the United States up into a bunch of areas as if it is multiple separate countries, when in reality it is only one contiguous area. If it cannot be worked on in iD, wouldn't it be better to use JOSM instead?

But now there is more than one Rainy Lake. Wouldn't it be more accurate to split the ways and include them in a single relation as outer members?

Apologies for that. I wasn't trying to intentionally omit anything, I simply didn't realize those were cricket pitches in the imagery. I'm not familiar enough with the sport to delineate them properly, could you please add them back for me?

Hey, I noticed you're adding the numbers to the markers for fire hydrants instead of the hydrants themselves. The top number on markers can be added to the hydrant as fire_hydrant:diameter in millimeters, usually a value of 75 or 100, and the lower number is just the distance from the marker to the hydrant itself in meters. There are some older markers as well that use inches for the diameter (3 or 4) and feet for the distance, more commonly affixed to houses or walls than the newer adhesive stickers. https://www.osmhydrant.org/en/ is also a pretty good tool to visualize coverage in OSM (takes a while to load).

Hi, apologies for the late response. There is a small rentable space in the building somewhere that can be used to project tapes and DVDs on. In a previous discussion with ndm (changeset/70526562), I decided to keep both shop=video and amenity=cinema.

sidewalk=separate doesn't seem to be specifically for sidewalks physically separated from the street but for any drawn separately, at least not according to the wiki. From sidewalk=* "This road has sidewalks but these are mapped using separate ways."

Routing on separately drawn sidewalks seems to work okay for me, as long as crossings are mapped as well (I've actually missed a couple here, I'll add those). Considering those are mapped, the router will (or should) preemptively cross to the right side of the street for the user. Otherwise, to me it seems it should be up to user discretion when to cross, which doesn't seem too different to the alternative method of tagging sidewalks where the router simply doesn't tell the user to cross until the street intersects.

I'm currently trying out mapping like this because of the newer aerial imagery that allows for detailed mapping like this, but I don't want to accidentally break routing in the areas I map. The lack of street names when routing on separately drawn sidewalks is a noticeable issue that could probably be fixed with some tagging, however there doesn't seem to be any current consensus on how to remedy this. If you can see any other issues with it, feel free to let me know

Sorry for the delay. Yes, this seems to be recent, there are no entry signs where the street joins Stapleton Road now. Satellite imagery shows recent road narrowing, perhaps the imagery is from before the one way system began. Or it's just showing the type of drivers in this area.

Joining landuses to river areas is fine since the river is the boundary of the landuse.

i added amenity=cinema back, but I still don't feel like it is correct. It's only a pull down screen and a projector, only noteworthy because it was reported by a few places as being a "record"

No, but i think shop=video fits more since the primary focus of the store is video rental - the "cinema" seems more like a gimmick than the primary focus of the store