Is the node at node/4587558092 in the correct location? (I've just added some buildings and roads for Apperley Court from arial imagery. Should be node be within the building?)

You also appear to have changed the address of node/3678978022/history to one that isn't correct for that location. Is DeBe Lasers no longer at the St. Francis Way site? If so, do you know what is there instead now?

Are you sure the postcode "BB12 9AW" that you added here is correct?

Code-Point Open has the centroid for this unit located on a different road 1.8km away at osm.org/?mlat=53.811503&mlon=-2.316621&zoom=16

Yes, that's right. I'm not sure if it's the best way to tag it. One of the nodes was previously incorrectly tagged as an amenity=post_box , which obviously isn't right, so I needed something to use instead.

Both nodes node/3528302841 and node/2915566318 have now had their typos corrected (yes there are two separate boxes there).

Thanks for spotting my mistake.

Hi, In this edit (changeset) that you made to OpenStreetMap, you added a triangular building and tagged this as a place of worship called "Tor's Secret Temple" (way/455557297). There is no evidence of such a building on aerial imagery, so I am wondering if this temple really exists. OpenStreetMap is a public map, and mappers should only include real-life verifiable objects. Can you confirm if this temple is real, and if not please remove it from the map. Thanks!

I'm curious as to the source for the postcodes in this edit. In particular the Houses on the outside of the south-west part of Rhodes Avenue (numbers 1-47 odd, e.g. way/330070359 ) were tagged wtih addr:postcode=BB1 8ND, but according to Code-Point Open, this is the postcode is for the houses on Ramsgate Drive, such as way/361843123 . Do you know what the actual postcode of those Rhodes Avenue houses should be?

Are you sure that the postcode on way/158587050/ is correct? The centroid location of TR17 0AE in Code-Point Open is about 25km away from the church.

Interesting. Going by FHRS and Code-Point Open, that does look more likely, so I've changed it.

Given the name added in this changeset, should node/639173896/ be changed from shop=convenience to shop=shop=funeral_directors? Also, should the postcode be EX4?

The address details added for way/314024341 in this changeset do not match its location on Arbour Lane. Are you sure this business is located here?

Are you sure this edit is right? way/435823945 has been given a postcode of GL56 9AE with an address of Bourton on the Hill, but the location of the way in OSM is miles away near Devizes.

The postcode of "SW9 8JT" on the houses along Hartford Road, e.g. way/436951345 looks wrong. (SW is south-west London.)

Are you sure that way/451551792 is the definitive line of Brockdish FP 1 (as it's currently tagged)?

The Definitive Statement says that from TM 21108044, "The path turns west through a field opening, then runs generally south west inside the boundary of an arable field for approximately 315 metres to TM 20918022." This suggests the Definitive Line may well follow the mapped path way/452116687 through the field instead.

Good catch. I've found the correct address using the FHRS data, so node/939888254 should look better now.

Yes, you're right on both counts (though the ele one wasn't down to me). I've now updated the node.

FYI: the not:addr:postcode is there because that's what's in the FHRS database, but it's wrong. It's a discontinued postcode, so presumably it's an old one for the Centre Parcs site.

Yes, that looks like an error. I've found my GPS track, and it's got a waypoint there with "crown inn left. h tavern right" as I was driving towards Fritton. I've now fixed node/294628457/history -- thanks.

It's a typo for source:prow=*.

But it it looks like the single instance at way/437413485 has already been corrected by another mapper.

Is node/4051381385 (currently tagged with name=Defibrillator) an Automated External Defibrillator (AED)? If so, it should be tagged with emergency=defibrillator. See emergency=defibrillator

I've check my GPS track POIs, and it's what I guessed -- it should have been barrier=gate. OSM now corrected.

I think you're mistaken here. The Definitive Statement is a legal document, and forms part of teh "Definitive Map and Statement" that surveying authorities are required to maintain. Moreover, the online map is not the Definitive Map (it's just a working copy), so the reference to the current parish there is not a legal one.

While the Right of Way may well be located in a different parish now, I don't think that has any effect on the legal identifier/name unless the Definitive Map and Statement have been legally modified.

So for OSM, I think we should use the prow_ref as specified by the Definitive Statement. This is certainly not the only case of a RoW now being located in a different parish from that suggested by its identifier. While changing the parish name works in this case, in other cases there could well already be a RoW with the same number in the current parish.

I see you've tagged way/423458145 as "Fritton and St Olaves FP 1", but according to the Statements I have at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/norfolk/great-yarmouth.pdf it should be "Old Parish of Herringfleet FP 1".

However, those statements are potentially out of date, so perhaps you have more recent copy?