Hi,
Yes, looks like you're quite correct. But the feature should be footpath rather than path. The issue I was trying to fix was the incorrect indication that there was cycle access on many of the paths in the area, which there isn't. If this is set up correctly for a public footpath rather than a generic path then that would be the correct way to do it I think. I think I was probably looking at the OS map, where this path is obscured by a parking symbol and it isn't clear if there is a public footpath underneath it. Feel free to correct it.
Roger