Rather amusing to see myself, as the JOSM tiles at the time I noticed it wasn't resulted in that. Presumably when downloading the area I managed to miss all the vertices!

I've checked with the county council FOI request for list of streets and matched up the names and ways for Bawburgh Road, which didn't include the one in question. So I've removed the name and source:name tags now and still suspect it's a historic name that OS has kept but that the council no longer recognises.

It's quite a few years ago I made that edit and I suspect I was going through public notices in the EDP24 newspaper. Interestingly the OS detailed map still shows it as Bawburgh Road. You're right in that both ends now have private gates and there is the disused village of Algarsthorpe between the two other Bawburgh Roads. I can imagine the road from Algarsthorpe through to Bawburgh probably did take a SE path to join to the current southerly one, so it's likely a historic leftover.

There was no need to add an additional node point of interest as nearly all your tags were already on the building closed way. It is up to the various renderers in terms of how they display the data. It is considered a bad thing to map specifically for a particular renderer. It is more useful to tag an area than a point on the ground in terms of dealership retail building.

If you wish to add post codes to roads could you please add only postal_code=tag? The addr:* tags are appropriate for deliverable properties only, per Royal Mail addressing.

Indeed, which is why I opted for a reasonable self-made suffix in the hope that software displaying opening hours my be able to parse out the variants for the end-user to comprehend when they apply. Ideally it would all be exact, but real world and all.

Whenever the local operator determines essentially, as I was surprised to find they had changed on last survey. In this case, the season is what is commonly known as Christmas, but others could be Easter, New Year's Eve/Day, bank/public holidays, who knows.

That they do, but due to the government funding for the NDR the A1194 is actually funded and operator by the county council, so from their point of view not trunk. Much like the Western end of the NDR itself.

Have been for a quick drive with dash-cam to confirm and have updated using Esri imagery. Node removed too.

https://www.norfolk.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/major-projects-and-improvement-plans/norwich/city-centre-improvements/improvement-projects/recently-completed/hall-road

If you are sure that Hall Road is currently 30 mph then that will need revising as it is all 40 mph between the two roundabouts, and in that case the note node can be removed fully.

I'm not sure why you removed my note. It was beside Sandy Lane, that throughout lack of the 30 mph sign at junction with Hall Road will be interpreted by drivers as 40 mph initially, contradicted by the 30 mph sign at the southern end of Bessemer Road. So it is indeed likely a missing 30 mph road sign, that the council have yet to fix even after I told them years ago.

There's already a source:name=OS_OpenData_Locator for where the name came from. It's not an official council one, and OS' is indeed more a description than an actual signed name, but it's the nearest thing to a name for it in that case. Could add a signed=no tag perhaps.

It appears you changed official_ref but not source:official_ref, can you complete this please?

They were correct at time of authoring in those less common cases, and there are plenty of instances where the county council has what I consider outdated but legally defined uses of C-road where obviously things moved on, dual carriageways occurred, roads downgraded into paths etc. so they still technically have those references until the council renumbers, which seems to be a never-ending saga of non-happening.

I'm not quite sure that you understand the meaning of accuracy, as amalgamating has nothing to do with that, but being more specific with the key name potentially does (at the cost of repeating the primary key name and increasing length).

My point was about the lack of a wiki article. I added those references for most of Norfolk in the first instance, and had freedom to chose what I thought was the most sensible key name. I'm not sure how the database is any more accurate now than it was before, you've added nothing of new value other than easing a perceived issue with search/canonicalisation that I've already pointed out isn't a problem elsewhere. My critique of your key choice is in changeset/35989077. Aren't you meant to discuss this sort of mass edit in advance?

If you're going to batch change tagging nationally without the consent of authoring users based on a 3-year old thread among a few then I suggest you at least make a wiki page documenting your particular preferred key name, as surely not all C roads have been mapped nationally yet?

The re-use of "highway" in an alternative reference key name, when there's already a highway main key, seems a bit excess to me. These references after all are mostly issued and used by the main official provider, be that a transport authority or street name and numbering department of a city/county council. If there's more than one then the usual approach of ":provider" suffix would do. I'm not sure why the alternate name needs to be more precise, the valuable information is the identifier value itself. Of note, Nominatim doesn't index any of these key names (and said they wouldn't when asked), so search will likely seek keys ending in '_ref' I imagine.

Not sure what happened there, was uploaded in JOSM with title "Store closure (signs remain)" and source "survey".