Existing problems reported with 22
- I just tried to write a review for one of the Plymouth-Plymstock routes today (22/05/2021), along with 3 photos, and I received an Error 500 message after submitting. Reported 22 May 2021
- I think this review is also on the wrong route. It mentions going on Bowen Drive and past Kingswood House and they are both on WesCry 2 but not here. It's a bit confusing, especially as the writer then discusses a whole load of other roads/places, some of which might actually be on WesCry 1. I saw there is a flag on one of the reviews, so perhaps someone already noticed and adding the flag was the workaround to stop it counting. Reported 16 Sep 2023
- Inconsistency in photo thumbnail display for portrait oriented photos (and one other), possibly linked to the process by which they were uploaded. E.g. Rombre 2 thumbnails on route Overview page. Photos 1-7 uploaded with route: portrait photos = 6, 7: both thumbnails are portrait. Photos 8-21 from a review: portrait = 17: thumbnail is landscape but only shows middle part of photo - missing the full scope. Photos 22-28 from a photo survey: portrait = 22, 24, 26: thumbnails are all portrait. But photo 28 is different again as the photo is actually landscape (just! 1280 x 1251 pixels) but the whitespace surrounds the thumbnail display as if it were portrait. Is this is a new feature? I remember "portrait" thumbnails like photo 17 before. I'm not sure it's a success as the amount of white space now on the page rather defeats the purpose of a quick view of thumbnails, particularly when using a landscape computer screen. Maybe the whitespace could be shown as vertical white bands within portrait thumbnails so the on-route-page alignment and white space doesn't change? Or just return it to all being like 17 again - is there a functional need for full scope thumbnails for every portrait oriented photo? Reported 29 Dec 2023
- This is a follow-up to your previous request #846 "Problem with a General: Site" Hi Christie I have tried to report two bugs/errors for a few days but keep getting Error 500, so I am trying emailing them. First A few of days ago, I accidentally clicked a second time to submit my review of Prebam Two, which I had created, when the first submission didn't show up quickly. My review is now duplicated, so please could you remove one of them. Second My Waylist map is showing Barrhead to Thorniebank (Bartho) which I didn’t add, and have never even viewed. When I click that route, and View Route Details, it takes me to Preley Two. Beneath my review is Other Routes for Barrhead—Thornliebank. Thanks Mary Oz (Austin) Reported 19 Feb 2022
- Hello, a route I uploaded and reviewed Potenf2 (potters Bar to Enfield Town Two) has disappeared. Instead I have Ascot to Lightwater in its place. I had some void Ascot routes last year but this was recognised and fixed. I can re-do Potenf2, but can it be recovered? And can the void route Asclig be removed (again). Thank you. Tony Reported 30 Jun 2022
- I walked this route (most of it) today using OS Maps with GPS. At approx. GR 391892, 394425 the path turns down Warren Close, then enters ginnels before leaving the housing area at GR 391709, 394629. The path follows the edge of some garden fences, behind back gardens, and is poor quality, then reaches open ground where the way is not marked and the right of way is almost ‘disguised’. This gets worse - at about GR 391626, 394656 the right of way is barred by a fence and a padlocked gate. (Perhaps there has been a tactical move to make the right of way ‘unused’.). I had the GPS working on my phone at the time, and I am fairly confident that it was the right of way - which on paper looks fine - used by the start team that was blocked. The footpaths on the OS map to the north were also very indeterminate, and at one point I got through a gap that had been made in a chain link fence, to reach Windmill Lane and rejoin the route at the A57. I have reviewed Stoden 1 as a one star, given that the path is barred. Perhaps it should be culled? I have put in an alternative, which does use a bit more road, but the A57 on Stoden 1 is not pleasant, (the vehicles turning into the side roads one has to cross is the worst aspect), and the alternative does use straight lines, minor roads, and makes use of the park near the destination, and is a bit shorter. Unfortunately the route is definitely not wheels-useable, with apart from anything else a series of steps at approx. GR 390613, 393345. Reported 30 Apr 2021
- The route is quite badly drawn in places, for example near Woodside. It looks as if it has been done at too low a resolution. I have a GPX track of the route from St Boswells to Woodhouse, if that would be helpful. One of my fellow walkers will be doing the bit from Woodhouse to Jedburgh and will submit a separate report. Reported 04 May 2022
- This route appears to take in the A17. The A17 is a major trunk road used by HGV with no footpath and in my opinion it is too dangerous to walk along Reported 12 Aug 2023
- Part of this route would involve walking along the B2068 past Farthing Common Plant Centre. This is a fast road with no footpath, of which I would not recommend walking along. Reported 28 Apr 2021
- This route is impossible to follow. It goes across gardens and school grounds in urban areas. I think there is a problem with the GPS and it was shifted to the south or something similar. I have submitted an alternative route which is followable, and I think is better than the original intention as it spends more time in Foots Cray Meadows. I know the area a little and it is a public park/reserve of sorts. There are many paths maintained by Bexley Council beyond the PRoW shown on OS maps, and luckily these are on OSM. Reported 21 Jun 2022
- I submitted this route myself but having tried to walk it yesterday, it is currently impassable due to the HS2 works having blocked one of the footpaths for three years with no diversion in place. I will upload the alternative route I walked yesterday. Reported 13 Nov 2022
- Hi Cristie, For some time DawTop1 has not worked - it returns an ERROR 500. The Rail Resilience Project has caused closure of sections to which I referred in an earlier review (long lost I suspect) and which also led Dan to create DawTop 2. Should it still exist my original review is no longer valid and neither is Dan's as the major part of his diversion is now no longer necessary. I had posted a July date when the final short stretch was to be opened but unexpected foundation problems have forced this to be delayed and the latest permission states the closure is valid "until 07 September 2022 or when completed whichever is the earlier" (my italics). (The sensitivities of local Parish Councillors have been offended!) I felt some update was called for and have submitted a DawTop3 to which I have added a review and survey to repeat/update data conveyed in my original review/survey. I leave you to decide what further tidying-up is required but it might be worth renaming DawTop3 to DawTop1 and removing the malfunctioning DawTop1 and Dan's alternative (DawTop 2) while retaining his review, photos and validation and Pilea's review and validation in the new DawTop1 (aka Dawtop3) if they are agreeable? All 3 are exactly the same track which is indubitably the most appropriate from 07 September 2022. There are some other issues. I have submitted it with the original DawTop .gpx although I am a little uncomfortable with it. At times it drifts up to 25m from the true track although this is not usually an issue - just means someone following the screen track zoomed in would be aware of apparently criss-crossing the mainline railway on occasions and paddling below the low-water tide line on others! However, it starts from inside Geronimo's coffee bar, ploughs straight through the station booking office walls and exits into the station car park dead-end on the wrong side of the tracks! I have allowed for this in the review. However, if required I can re-walk the route after 7 September (or when possible) and submit a new .gpx track. In the description and review I have also drawn attention to the irregularity of the ferry timetable and the complications of arriving to learn the next ferry is due at 1000 on the first Friday of next month given that a further walk of up to 3km is the only way out to civilisation! Seemed important. While in contact . . . . A couple of other observations. ChuDaw1 includes a seriously dangerous stretch of blind bends on a very busy road without footpaths, bordered by impregnable Devon banks and a reputation as one of the most dangerous roads in the County! I condemned the Way and note another contributor to ChuTei1, which uses the same stretch, has done likewise. It is lethal and frankly the thought that it remains a possible Slow Way worries me. It is inappropriate for anyone (I tried it and felt exceedingly irresponsible and inconsiderate [and a bl---- fool]). I shudder to think of a family, young children or someone with a dog attempting it. I've always thought the star system should allow for zero stars to be awarded as on a dark night even one star is a vote of confidence! My suggested alternative (ChuDaw2) is a really great, off-road alternative - and is actually slightly shorter - even the version I uploaded which in fairness could be shortened still further by using road stretches for the purity of "directness" BUT at the expense of some outstanding bridle ways and paths even by Devon standards. I expect all 4 Daw ways to be snailed this year. This target is closer than appears from just looking at current validations but ChuDaw is proving a bit more of an issue because of its length and climbs. However, we have a tradition of 19th century naval press-ganging in South Devon , , , , , , . . . I also plan to re-visit each of my descriptions and reviews following the full restoration of the seawall which I shall upload using the new edit feature. Thank you, Cristie, for your earlier correspondence and encouragement and I hope you can see your way to perhaps resolving the DawTop problem. Please pass my thanks to Dan also - I was delighted he walked and clearly enjoyed my TeiDaw2 alternative. With very best wishes Tony (Leigh) PS. What a way to start your Friday morning. If you park this email until Monday I shall not be offended :-) Reported 09 Jun 2022
- I have downloaded and printed the survey forms and completed them by hand. How to I send these to you. There are supplementary documents on an error in the route. I was hoping to scan these and send them as a pdf, but cannot find such a facility on the slow ways website. Ken Perrett Reported 30 Apr 2021