I have reviewed 1,034 churches in Norfolk and the Church of England website and I would say around 60% of them use the written word Saint when self-describing. The signage is shortened I believe through brevity, a contraction, not an abbreviation, and for search systems it is far easier to reduce than to expand to assist in search matches. A user could search for "St Something", "St. Something" or "Saint Something" and all should resolve.

Why use "St " abbreviation in churches when "St " has for years been unaccepted for road name abbreviations?

See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Please stop adding the parish/village geographic name to churches. The churches are primarily named after saint dedication. It isn't sufficient to append location to uniquely identify, given St Margaret in each of the two Wiltons. Nominatim certainly isn't up to the job of search, given it can't find suburb names or locate objects near to hamlet/village/town properly, but that's a separate issue to the data.

Good spot, seems I tagged that erroneously thinking it was only bus/taxis/cycle but the restrictive sign is indeed just for motor vehicles.

Curious that, perhaps an excess tag paste on to an adjusted location from aerial imagery alignment during editing (as the wrong mounting value hints). There was only one box there, so I have deleted my newer node and refined the position of existing slightly.

I put the addr:* and phone tags on the building, since it is the building that is addressable for postal delivery and location, plus the land line installation was there too. Extracting these to the outer polygon is perhaps useful for school search result, but is less precise. Plus you'll note there are hundreds of schools already mapped in the way described above.

Have only memory of walking around the area from a year or so ago, driving past and Bing aerial. Looking at the aerial imagery again for The Londis there does look to be a sizeable building with non-residential new-looking roofing. So I've drawn that and tagged it. Suggest you confirm via http://www.overstrandparishcouncil.org.uk/contact-us/

I don't think there was anything explicitly saying the cycle access was one-directional. It just happens to be along the southern end of Hardwick Road where the best facilities are. I tend to tag with cycleway:left=share_sidewalk when there's no physical separation aside from kerb between the road and shared pavement where it runs for a long distance. If you wish to tag these as explicit separate ways then I'm fine with that, I normally just do it if there is sufficient distance apart. Most cycle routers will see cycleway:left as a hint that facilities exist, even if they don't understand the value. The share_sidewalk tag value should probably be documented, but I think it quite logical.

I've reviewed your changes and enhanced the route relation further given the crossings of Hardwick Road and Scania Way.

I didn't realise, my apologies about that. Thanks for fixing it early. Overall the change to valid speed limits was worth it for the interim period. I normally try to ensure relations remain unaffected.

See https://1drv.ms/i/s!Ah1Oa_WAIEBgxXkxjWDnjhKKNGGS (JPG, 2.5 MB)

As am I. There's an information notice displayed near to Willow House, that expired in 2007. I queried this with Norwich Council but they stated it was not a project of theirs, but that the information was still useful. Only the landowner will know for sure. I have often walked that route during my trip to work, and assumed it was an official footpath only until recently. Hence the changeset comment.

For reference, there are 62 uses of "unsuitable" versus 5 for "discouraged" via TagInfo. Also, discouraged is a different meaning to unsuitable. If one owns a particularly slim motor vehicle then the gap could be made comfortably, so the judgement is per case not a general discouragement for all. Of interest, the Google StreetView car appears to have gone through successfully.

The sign says "unsuitable" explicitly. No would imply no access at all. Discouraged is perhaps an acceptable synonym, but again the sign says unsuitable, and the access is, well, unsuitable. So perhaps the 'standard' access values are outdated?

I would recommend checking with the current NaPTAN data first, but I don't mind.

The former is the stop code area reference, see relation/4264945/history

The latter two look to be a zero-based suffix to describe the individual stop points.

Those tags are from around two years ago so the NaPTAN DB may have changed since.

If Wendene is a secondary road from the A1074 then what's its B-Road ref?

It was a gate similar to that shown at http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-a-ramblers-gate-on-a-public-footpath-by-the-river-bure-at-little-hautbois-59542871.html

Which is where I likely got the name from, not spotting a suitable match on the OSM wiki barrier page. The phrase "squeeze gate" comes to mind, only a few examples at http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/barrier#values

I've added The Royal Horseshoes, that appears to still be active. The Marquis of Granby nearby permanently closed according to WhatPub.com.