Hi FuzzyUK70,

Thank you for your contribution. It's unlikely the actual name of these roads/tracks is "Private road". Having said that, I couldn't find anything about their previous names ("African Road" and "Indian Road") either. Can you expand on where is this information coming from?

Best regards,
ndrw6

Hi Jon, fyi, there is a new imagery from Maxar showing some of the buildings and roads in Northstowe. You may find it useful.

Hi Ben,

Please use Maxar imagery instead of Esri - much more up-to-date.

I tried to review this changeset but neither achavi nor osmcha can handle it, presumably due to the span. Changes in Canada look legitimate.

Can you describe what else have been changed and where?

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71539517
https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/71539517

Hi ACarlotti,

Has this slip road been already moved to the new location or is it still under construction?

You can see its location in the most recent imagery from Maxar. The shape is similar to what you have drawn but not quite the same (the slip road starts earlier and approach to the roundabout is less curved).

In my recent A14 updates (Changesets 70831438, 70831840, 70832054 and 70833013) I aligned roads to imagery, but there were still some roads left where new imagery is not yet available. These may need new estimates.

Is that an actual place name or someone's house? Searching for "Hanif's House" in Cambridge produces no results.

Please can you also describe your changesets. Don't just reuse descriptions of your previous changesets.

Sure. Should be fixed now. Please check if that is what you intended to add.

Hi, can you please fix the dragged node. You can see the Craven Road is now distorted. Let me know if you need help.

Reverted in changeset/68476947.

Unfortunately, we are not allowed to use google maps, or indeed any other copyrighted sources without an explicit permission (license) from their owners. In practice, that means all your work has to be reverted. Sorry about that.

If there is anything you've added based on your local knowledge or a survey, it can be re-added afterwards.

Bernard, I believe it was me who added building nodes with postcodes (from CodePoint Open). I plan surveying this and neighbouring areas myself, so if there are any errors I'll be happy to correct them.

Skidds19, welcome to OSM and keep up a good work. As Bernard said, there is nothing better than a proper survey. Take a GPX trace, video recording and plenty of notes (I usually record myself reading out house numbers, street or POI names etc).

Flagging for review. User deleted the account shortly after closing the changeset.

Hi BCNorwich, this looks like a mistake:
way/603151628#map=18/52.28773/0.06079

Looks like an accidental break in Water Lane.

Sorry for late reply, I've been away.
This changeset was based entirely on information from Code-Point Open and imagery. Parts of this building contained different postcodes. This method is prone to errors, especially when buildings have multiple addresses and boundaries are not clear.

Hi dzidek23, I have only added a postcode, which coincided with a CodePoint Open unit, and changed area=yes into building:part=yes. The way (way/653532526/history) existed before.

Hi RAC_UK,

Do not revert your changes but also please wait a bit before changing more addresses. There are some community members in favour of the scheme you are using (with small modifications) and AFAIK proposals are being prepared.

Hi devonshire,

Any tips for adding postcodes from code-point open faster? I thought I am pretty efficient but this is a different league.

Best regards,
ndrw6

(I don't have an opinion on what conventions should we use, as long as it is clear and generally accepted)

I like an idea of mapping post towns in one form or another. Whether we like it or not, they form a part of an official address and they can be useful (e.g. when addressing isolated houses that don't seem to belong to any town or village). Perhaps instead of using tags we should draw boundaries?

By the way, folks on #osm-gb advised it is OK to use addr:place for mapping names of smaller areas like business parks or campuses even if wiki says otherwise. Again, I am not sure if that qualifies as a consensus but it seems reasonable.

Hi RAC_UK,

I've been previously told this is not how addr:place should be used. It is a replacement for addr:street for villages that have no street names and are instead addressed by the village name itself.

Also, I am not at all sure what are we supposed to tag as addr:city. Towns? If so, what do we call a town? Post towns? Not a bad idea, especially in combination with post codes but it would often require a lower level place name, like addr:place you used in your changeset.

I think that's a material for a broader discussion. As far as I know, current consensus is: addr:place are very rare in the UK, addr:city are for town names but naming criteria are unclear.

Regards,
ndrw6