Correction: It was "image" that I updated, not "wikimedia_commons".

Correction: It was "image" that I updated, not "wikimedia_commons".

Correction: Corrected image URL (".JPG" for ".jpg")

Disconnecting the access road wasn't entirely accidental. The site appears to be derelict and I didn't have any evidence that it was connected to the new slip-road. On the other hand, I didn't notice any vehicular access to the site from the Bar Hill side either, and the plans and Order don't suggest it's meant to be disconnected. I've reinstated the connection (osm.org/changeset/93370274), but it really needs someone to actually visit the site.

This edit should have been tagged #UCamMap, sorry.

3: It looks like you accidentally attached the boundary #114454952 to node #6876513590 in changeset #75637329. I've detached it again.

4: Yes; what's on the ground is currently pretty incoherent, and the map data reflects that. It might be reasonable to remap the farm entrance as a public connection between that carriageway and the cycle path, but it didn't seem appropriate to do that if that wasn't how it was meant to be used.

2: I've dealt with the divergence around Buckingway Business Park. I corrected another one yesterday.

1: There were indeed some gratuitous GPS artifacts, and I've corrected those. However my photos do indicate that paths aren't entirely symmetric. For instance, the outer crossing of the Bar Hill exit has a strange cut-out from one corner that's missing from the others. I don't think we can do much better without aerials.

Thanks; that allowed me to find a couple of the other boundaries of the weight limit. Even if it were OK for copyright purposes, I wouldn't trust the accuracy of that map. For one thing it says there's a 3t weight limit in central Cambridge and while there are traffic regulation orders to that effect I've never found any sign of it on the ground.

Removing "porters" from each of these entrance= tags caused the porters' lodges to stop being marked on the University Map. I've made them entrance=main;porters, but is there a better way we should be tagging "this entrance leads to the porters' lodge"? I suppose more generally, "this entrance is staffed" -- College-specific terminology isn't really necessary here.

Has this building really been demolished? I ask because that's what completely removing the way (including the building=yes tag) means.

Yes; that's one of the government sources I referred to. The "Addresses" layer of My Cambridgeshire, which I think comes from the National Address Gazetteer, says that the street name precisely follows the parish boundary, so the American cemetery is on St Neots Road, Madingley, but Coton Court and Blue Gates opposite it are on Madingley Road, Coton.

As you suggest, using those as a source might be a bit dubious, so the source I actually used was the Web sites of various places along the road (cemetery, Madingley Mulch, Woodfield House, Rectory Farm). All of them call the road "Madingley Road". In the absence of signs I think that's the nearest thing to an on-the-ground name that we have.

Incidentally, Royal Mail also goes for "Madingley Road, Coton" for the whole length, but the postcodes split precisely on the parish boundaries.

I cycled this section today, and your new alignment was a perfect fit for my GPS track. I wasn't paying attention to what the A14 slip was doing, though.

Note that above I confused "inbound" and "outbound". It's the inbound carriageway that's closed, and the outbound one is being used for two-way traffic.

Sorry about that. Happily I don't think the difference actually affects anything in this edit: all the building sites that I tagged are still building sites in the newer imagery.

May I ask why you made this edit? The Avenue was connected to the A1307 when I surveyed it earlier today, and when I was out that way last weekend. Anyway, I've reconnected it now.

What's going on here? You've mapped an additional road precisely along the line of The Avenue. What change on the ground are you trying to represent?

Does this exist on the ground now? It wasn't obvious at the eastern end when I was out that way on Thursday.

FYI, I just cycled along the road from Dry Drayton to Oakington and the change you mapped there hasn't happened yet: the new road up to the bridge is nowhere near finished. I'll revert the changes in this area.