Well spotted. The gate has been moved sometime in the last few years. And yes Vespucci's snapping put the new one in the wrong place. I have now fixed up the two relations using these segments as well

Thanks for spotting that. Yes, Vespucci is prone to auto-including tags from a totally separate earlier edit.
I did wonder whether to mark the pub closed. It seemed to be, but there was also no notice or boarding so it might have been a one-day emergency.

The spur to the field gate is not part of any of the routes/relations. The mapping was previously wrong, showing the routes (Ridgeway, Icknield Way etc) going along a track that way, with a parallel footway that was not part of any of these relations.

In fact the track through the field no longer exists (if it ever did) - it's just a spur to a field gate, and the 'unimportant parallel footway' is in the fact the main route for Ridgeway, Icknield Way etc. So there is no mistake in the mapping now. It looked to me like the relations were still OK, but I could have been wrong. The spur to the gate should be removed from the relations,.

Hmm. Actually that's not a great example as the main line does not go underground there, and the wires do go above the crossbar on pins on that one. So I guess you would call that an H-frame even though the top cross-bar is not really wider than the poles.
(this sort of thing: https://polesnwires.com/knowledge-base/h-frame/ I see is defo an H-frame ).
I will update my practice, so thanks for pointing this out. I've done a lot of power lines in the last couple of years and have essentially been calling anything with 2 poles a portal. So there are a lot of locations to fix.

Hmm. You are certainly correct according to osm.wiki/Tag%3Apower%3Dportal
and
osm.wiki/Tag%3Apower%3Dpole
But I've been tagging a lot of things like this:
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/C1Y374/uk-pole-mounted-transformer-C1Y374.jpg
and this (standalone transformer so a bit different)
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/CEPH6X/a-pole-mounted-electricity-transformer-CEPH6X.jpg
as 'portals'.
Do you think that C1Y374 image is an H-frame? The wires are not outside, but they are anchored to the top bar rather than passing inside. There are an awful lot of those terminating cables at towns and substations in the UK. I have been calling them portals for the last couple of years.

I'm pretty sure I got that from vespucci and the OSM wiki but I see what you are saying about 'h-frame'. I have certainly tagged some h-frames as portals too, as I was simply unaware of term h-frame. Clearly I need to go back and fix those.
But I'm still a little unsure about all those 2-pole transition towers, usually with a distribution transformer mounted in between them, but not always. How should they be tagged?

Actually vespucci only gives ESRI imagery which is much worse than bing. It's clear in bing that it's the clump that is 30m across. The individual tree is about 16. Fixed now.

Ah yes. I was on a phone and couldn't remember the right tag (and vespucci only offers the trunk circumference by default. This one really does look about 30m across in the bing images, but I agree that seems implausibly large even for a large mature tree. I'll fix it. I meant to check it when I got back to a real computer, but forgot. Thanks for checking.

Thanks for spotting that. Paths connected up, and the one in Bruge which is now a duplicate of Wevershof removed. I think those are side-effects of poor net connectivity at the time of mapping.

They are there because of the unhelpful habit of vespucci (android mapping app) of copying tags from previous edits into new edits. Those two tags came from a location I had edited previously (changeset/154573498)

I have not worked out exactly what sequence of clicks/events causes these spurious tags to appear 4 changesets later in a different edit. But it has happened to me before.

So thanks for spotting that.
Now fixed.

No, that was accidental. Cheers for spotting it. Fixed. I blame Vespucci's drag interface which I don't find easy to get to do what you want.

Vespucci loves to snap things unhelpfully. The charging space is visible in the satellite pics so I've moved it to the correct side of the road and improved the tagging of all the stations I added. It looks like there are a lot of chargers in back-streets that are not yet on the map.

I did actually read that list and couldn't find the UK one so put 'UK' as best effort. But I see it is in there really as bs1363 (but the image of a double domestic-type makes it easy to miss when I was looking for something more like https://electricaldiscountedsupplies.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/ADWP1SKT-Website-600x626.jpg)
Anyway, thanks for reminding me to come back to this. Glad to see someone is doing QC on all this charger info - it can be tricky to get right. Fixed now.
I might even update the wiki image too.

I've been told this test takes more like 3 hours than 1.5, so I'll be there later. maybe 3:30-4?

OK. I'll try and find you there when I come by.
Am I looking for Dr Christopher Lester?

AH yes. In-person hadn't occurred to me (I hadn't realised you were in Cambridge too). The weather is nice so that sounds like a good plan. I've actually got to be in Histon for an annual medical check-up at 12:30. I think that will take 1.5 hours or so but it's also a bit uncertain so actually I should be coming back through town around 2pm-2:30pm. Would coming to find you in Peterhouse be a good plan then? Lunch would be nice but it might be a bit late for that in which case we can presumably find somewhere to chat anyway?

es I am based in Cambridge. A chat would be good.
I suggest https://jitsi.debian.social/kesterlesternwookey (but I think that requires you to have a salsa login which you probably don't have unless you happen also to be a debian contributor - try it - can you just click on that URL and get a video call or not?.
If not use https://meet.jit.si/kesterlesternwookey works for everyone

I'm busy for the rest of today but anytime
wed after 1pm (till about 3am) would work.
Or thur. Then I'm away for a week walking.

I also just (yesterday!) joined #osm-infrastructure matrix channel
which is intended for discussing this stuff
https://matrix.to/#/!CJjtKctuARcgdacUzh:matrix.org?via=matrix.org&via=one.ems.host&via=nobelium.no
sadly the 'make a call' functionality is disabled there, but once on
matrix you can just click to call me personally, audio or video.

Your edit to add 'gas topology' in southern Cambridge has resulted in most/much/all of the gas network being in the map twice. Once as the actual pipelines and once as a more approximate 'gas topology' network, often with the pipelines routed in places they do not exist.
I'd like to resolve this but I'm not sure how to proceed. Where did this topological information come from? It may add useful information where the pipelines connectivity is not otherwise known? Is there any reason why I should not remove it, at least in the area from Cherry Hinton to Addenbrookes where I am pretty certain that the existing pipeline routing is correct.

OK. It's done now. This has taken me all day to sort out so I'm not going to do any more in the area for now!

Hi Tristan. Looks like we both did a pile of building editing in Surlingham at the weekend which has rather unfortunately overlapped. I've been correcting alignment and building shapes, whilst you've been adding housenumbers and also correcting shapes.
Result is 132 conflicts on my upload. I'll try to resolve everything so as to not lose anything but you might want to check back in case I mess anything up. There are a great many buildings in twice now.

Hi. I saw your note about a segment of the old road being deleted by you didn't know how to move NCN51 (and Bernwood Forest Loop) over to the new bridge. I've fixed that today. (along with footpath and power lines north of Claydon Park).