If the feature cannot currently be seen then I suggest this should go in OpenHistoricalMap [1] and not OSM.
Andy. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenHistoricalMap/FAQ On Monday, 1 September 2025 19:17 Daniel Hatton via Talk-GB wrote: > I've just tentatively marked a line - way #1426446375 - which is of > historical significance for three reasons: > > - it's a former route of the public right of way whose current route is > on the map as ways #236141514, #1316968262, #499954461, #236141513, > and #499954465 > > - it was the eastern boundary of one of the fields ("Church Field") in > the pre-inclosure strip farming system of the parish where it's > situated > > - it's the route of a Roman road that was widely misidentified in the > 19th century as the Icknield Way (the current consensus is that the > name "Icknield Way" belongs to another Roman road running parallel > with it, about 2.7km further east) > I've looked both on the ground and in satellite imagery, and there's no > obvious trace of the line currently at surface. > What's people's view on whether this line should be marked in OSM, and > if so, what tags it should have? > > -- > > Kind regards, > Dan Hatton > Dr. Daniel C. Hatton > E-mail: [email protected] > Signal: dch.28 > SIP: [email protected] _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
