Cool, thanks.

What's way/132072543 ?

Yeah, i think they are. Not sure about WH Smith. It's' underground so it's not infeasible it's there. So far i've just tried to tidy up the existing tagging.

(There's an H&M inside and out -- i left the outside one.)

Actually, i think it's ok -- is there something i missed?

Hi, yes, you're right. The entrance is by Fat Face. My intention was to only touch the bit under car park C, but it seems i got carried away. I'll fix it, thanks.

You're right. Not sure why there isn't one (the edit cafe comment is automatic when you specify a cafe poi is osmand). I'll fix this when i get better internet access.

Thanks.

Hi: i passed by here today and could not see Greenport. Their website links to Google maps which puts them on the opposite side of Waterloo road and further south. Did you put it where you intended?

Looks like it should be Judd Street Open Space with Bramber Green as the "alt_name":
http://cindex.camden.gov.uk/kb5/camden/cd/service.page?id=5Wq8Gs8XeRo
Apologies.

Thanks for getting in touch. The name came from the estate map displayed somewhere nearby.
https://imgur.com/a/nI0L3
I can't remember for sure why i removed "Judd Street Open Space", though it sounds like i was wrong to do so.

This seems to be the same path as the more detailed footpath besides it. Should these two features be merged?

After staring at it a bit on mapillary, i decided residential

Thanks for this. I'm not sure what to tag it now! Service road may be the right one. It is a road providing access to residential apartments. It's more than a driveway since it's not within property bounds, though residential seems like a an aggrandisation. It fits the Cambridge dictionary definition of service road, but not so comfortably within the osm wiki definition, which seems to use service as a subclass of access roads for more commercial/industrial purposes. Would you still suggest service in this case?

What can i say, not everyone sells lentils :(

Fixed, thanks!

Thanks for flagging this. I think my tags could do with tidying.

The cycle lanes along the causeway have been removed and replaced with a shared use path along the south side. The way you highlighted connected the on-road lanes to the marked pavement path over the bridge. Iirc there were never any markings on the pavement on the west side of the traffic lights /crossing. Hence, i removed the cycle way tag (but missed a few connecting ways i think).

So, i think the cycle way tags to the north of the causeway and west of the lights should be removed, but would welcome another survey to make sure i didn't miss something (i can do this next time i pass through, but it's not often).

amenity=parcel_service sounds good to me :)

I expect the wiki takes a more international view: Fedex and UPS seem to be generally tagged as post_office also. I think Doddle sits happily with these two (packages can be sent and received and there is a customer service desk). It is also the typical tagging of Doddle in the UK (admittedly n~=10). I was ok with Doddle being a post office, rather than the Post Office, and with the "operator" tag (and name) to distinguish it. (Or at least, wasn't unhappy enough to justify a new tag to myself.)

parcel_collection_point misses the ability to send. If it were a vending machine, there's vending=parcel_pickup;parcel_mail_in. I'd be fine with something along these lines if you want to change it. Perhaps amentiy=parcel_pickup;parcel_mail_in to be consistent with the existing vending scheme?

The description of post_office on the wiki seems appropriate, though it doesn't match the intuitive meaning in the uk.

amenity=post_office

There is one in Birmingham tagged parcel_collection_point, but googling for this doesn't turn up anything for me.

It's a good question. Doddle is a service to which you can have packages delivered and then pick them up (eg on the way home from work). I'm not 100% happy it's a post office, but i'm not sure what else to tag it, and post_office had been used elsewhere to tag Doddles. If there's a more accurate tag it should be updated.

Dang, thanks for that. I forgot JOSM is a bit dodgy with copy-pasting tags. I should have checked more carefully. I've restored them manually from the node I deleted.

You're right, thanks. I'll fix it.