Thanks for these interpolations, I was able to get the buildings fully mapped and addressed

Where do you specifically see an issue? Street name and numbers...

Wonky construction I think, but I do see an unclosed one. Oh well, omlettes and broken eggs.

You left a fixme a these tracks (on the construction site). They are gone now, I have removed them.

Landuses are overlapping here. I agree they may touch, but not overlap

North of the Curragh army barracks is the Curragh racecourse. The area has been substantially redesigned and redeveloped, so I had to delete or repurpose your pathways and barriers. The sat imagery I used is still showing four major construction zones, so I just used that.

What is this building. I don't see "dorms" in the area you marked them. Has there been a demolition?

There are a number of unusual tagging decisions here. Mainly the use of area=yes, which isn't a good way to tag as it adds unnecessary layers. Secondly the items being tagged are hedges, which should not be represented in area style, instead unclosed ways and barrier=hedge is required. Finally, in pure and simple geometry there are overlapping landuses here and there which automatically creates a error. I appreciate this could be contributions from other authors. Let me know if you have the time to fix this as it requires a tidy up, and I am doing the buildings and trying to pass by this area quickly.

Thanks for getting the number interpolations in Esker Lane. I was able to add them to the building objects I am mapping there. If you are still in that area I would be glad of any more you might have.

I can't see where you mean. We are supposedly using a task manager to stop this

Hi Andrew, I am labelling these two buildings as houses

The interpolation in Ventry Avenue went up to 32, but was two rows too far up. I moved it and left it there for you to note, and applied the house numbers. I was confident of this because the road is West(even) East(odd) and started at 1 and 2 in the north and progressed south.

I couldn't see why this was a relation. Osmose says this is a mistake in any case, so I just made it into a closed way

I'm going to replace the building realtion you have here because it isn't a polygon with an enclosed area. Not even close to being that. I do guess you may have seen some foundations?? Either way the present imagery and a little bit of local knowledge will do to fix it

Ah, hope you reversed that

I can't see anything except maybe I took a node off it that joined it to something. I have no idea about these lines, especially where they are amalgams of any available line, they haven't been touched for years. Maybe it is supposed to be that shape

Hi noelf. It is possible to make the building shapes more accurate by orthogonalising them. You seem to us the ID editor, so if you select the building object and press S the four corners will conform to 90 degree angles. Have a look around the area, I have improved a few of the shapes

Yes it is. I left it there for the moment as it seems to be bleeding through the terracing tool and applying that name in place of the addr:housenumber=*. Never saw this problem before.

The Parnell Pub here is now gone several years and it appears as though there are houses, and maybe a shop - though empty - on the outer property beside the main road. I will change the landuse and include the new buildings

Thank you so much for these interpolations. The mapillaries are too close to the number surfaces [high risk of blurring] and so this gave me certainty and less guesswork [and no return visits :) to this area]