Ah thanks. The PRoWs are listed at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/norfolk/kings-lynn-west-norfolk/upwell-isle/ , but there are no entries for this 'parish' in the Definitive Statement file I have at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/norfolk/kings-lynn-west-norfolk.pdf

Anyway, I've now added a prow_ref tag to that way, and tagged some of the other Upwell Isle Rights of Way that were alrady mapped.

Are you sure that this is a Public Footpath? It doesn't seem to appear on the official lists I have from Norfolk County Council -- http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/norfolk/kings-lynn-west-norfolk/upwell/

If it is a Public Footpath, do you know its parish and number?

As far as I can see, this changeset changed way/150203447 from designation=restricted_byway to designation=byway_open_to_all_traffic.

The data I have at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/norfolk/south-norfolk/wacton/ says this route is Wacton RB 17. Has the classification been changed recently?

I think you're right -- though it wasn't me who originally tagged way/395344444 as amenity=school. Feel free to change it.

Better would be to agree whether or not carriage is the same as horse_drawn_vehicle as far as access tags in OSM are concerned.

If so, then the tags can be changed to carriage=*.

If not, then we'd need to introduce and document horse_drawn_vehicle=* as a separate value. It would then be down to users and developers to interpret the new tag appropriately.

THe wiki 'definition' is not very precise, as it just says "horse(s) + carriage". It's not clear to me that all horse-drawn vehicles would be called "carriages", and the UK Traffic sign at the western end of this track is specifically "Horse Drawn Vehicles Prohibited" (diagram 622.5 in https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223943/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf)

One thing that I might be able to do is to have a list of postcode corrections to apply to the official data. So if you can find the right postcodes for the individual schools, I could look at implementing that. Then they won't all show under NN.

Not easily, but if you can find the correct locations for them and there's an OSM way or relation that can be tagged with the Edubase URN, then they'll show as matched next time the data is refreshed.

From its website Worcester Snoezelen way/392376528 doesn't look like it's really a school. It seems to be more like a specialised activity centre. I wonder if amenity=school is the most appropriate tag for it.

In way/391869459 you've put ref:edubase="Southfield School", which can't be right. But is the "Southfield School" bit significant for this school or just a random copy and paste error?

Is this building way/33584728 actually used as a 'school'? If not then it probably shouldn't be tagged as amenity=school.

Also, I think the Edubase URNs should only be added to the actual location of each individual institution -- just because this location is the forwarding address, it doesn't make it the schools.

Shouldn't this route be Denham FP 2 and not Hoxne FP 24?

See http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/suffolk/mid-suffolk/denham/

According to http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=130715 the establishment "Pershore Group of Colleges" closed in 2007, so 130715 is not a valid Edubase URN to use for a currently open college.

If the site at way/171571197 is now part of the Warwickshire College Group (http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=130835) then ref:edubase=130835 should be used instead.

Way way/124779765 is currently tagged as designation=public_bridleway, but I don't think it appears on the Definitive Map and the only access tag is foot=permissive. Should it be e.g. designation=permissive_bridleway instead?

The way in question is way/128403160

It's certainly a highway of some sort, as it allows access to the dunes/beach. I don't recall the surface, but it may be tarmaced. The name was taken from an official EA sign, so it is the official name of something -- perhaps of the gap in the dunes and the constructs in and around it, rather than of just the highway running through it though.

way/32626353 now has an official_ref=* and no ref=* tag, so surely the source:ref=* tag should be changed to source:official_ref=*.

This looks rather like an automated edit. Was it discussed beforehand?

Have you changed any source:ref tags present at the same time as the ref=* keys were changed? Have you also changed ref=U* tags on other highways types (including tracks) to match the new tagging?

It's what's now described in the wiki as traffic_calming=choker. I've updated the tagging accordingly.

Am I right in thinking that one of the actions in this changeset was to merge two post box nodes node/343522465/history and node/343522467/history ?

If these two nodes mapped two physically separate boxes (presumably a meter box and a type C double pillar), then they would be better mapped as two distinct nodes as they were before. Can these changes be undone?