Yes, they probably do, and entrance =yes/home/shop is probably appropriate, but I’m not going to go back and retag the thousands of addresses I’ve mapped. If someone else wants to improve the tags, please go ahead.

oops! I've just quickly searched and +44 1875 820350 still seems the number for the Inn Garrage. I suspect what's happened is I've left in the 131 for Edinburgh where I normally map, and 1875 is the local code for Gorebridge.

Feel free to fix these if you can, or I'll try and do it when I get the time.

Thanks for flagging the error.

The Guide to a Floating Offshore Wind Farm states "Array cables are typically rated at 66 kV. In the next few years, array cable voltages are expected to increase to 132 kV."

https://guidetofloatingoffshorewind.com/guide/b-balance-of-plant/b-1-cables/b-1-1-array-cable/

Cheers, looked into this a bit more and perhaps they were planing 33kV, as this is on some pages as you say, but changed to 66kV during hte design phase. The Equinor page also states 66kV, so I've updated it.
https://www.equinor.com/energy/hywind-tampen

Hi, these cables are marked as 33kV, but this article [1] states they are 66kV. Curious if you have a better source, or if they should be changed?
Cheers, Donald

[1] https://www.offshore-mag.com/field-development/article/14071989/jdr-adapting-power-cables-for-hywind-tampen-floating-wind-farm

No, have removed it :)
Thanks for flagging, Donald

Thanks for adding this, but I'm not sure the bit on Stafford Street/Alva Street should be mapped as a cycleway, it gives the false impression this might be segregated like Melville Street. Probably better to specify these sections as not one-way for cycling.

Thanks for correcting my typo

Yes, the map has been updated already on this, although bus routes have not been fixed

Thanks for highlighting this, it was an autocomplete typo, it should be asphalt but i typed q not a and didn't spot it, updated now

There seem to be multiple pipelines in this location with (at least) two distinct sets of markers, but I didn’t have my video running to get the exact location of the latter one (in the geograph photo)

Don't think this should be tagged as a motorway services. Is this parking?

Hi, sorry for not replying on this, just saw it again when clearing through old emails.

I take your point that adding both tags might not be clear for data consumers. I think perhaps just using shop=vacant is better, as someone could add shop=something without realising there is a disused:shop=something tag. The old value will be there in the history, but is probably not that interesting for data consumers to know what the previous use was.
Cheers, Donald

Should have included I meant way 96937897 and way 914173544

Did you mean to delete the grass to NE of Priory Gate Estate and woods N of old railway line to the coal reserve? Are these no longer there?

It was not! Have fixed now, thanks

Have tried to add the Fast Park lanes from ESRI/survey, as it is no longer like this

Hi,
Can I ask why you removed the clearly signposted name "Gate 1" in this changeset? Maybe junction is not the best tagging, but the name should remain as it is a useful marker for people trying to access the correct part of the hospital site
Thanks, Donald

Hi, The old railway line is already mapped according to its new use of the cycle path, so I am not sure what benefit adding another way alongside gives. You could add old_name and historic:operator tags to the existing way, but there are now 2 features representing the same (historic) railway.
Cheers, Donald

I wonder if it might be that this is tagged as a site relation, whereas Westminster uses type=multipolygon. But I don't think adjacent buildings should be tagged with a multiploygon, as those are for representing holes in buildings etc.

Either that or it is an anti-independence conspiracy...