Yes - good catch. Now fixed.

That Google link was just a redirection to http://www.dundryview.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SBL-newsletter.pdf, where the outline of the lime kilns looks very different to that on OSM - perhaps it needs a re-survey? If you're in the area, you may be able to get access to the new roundabout too. I only get to this region about once every five years or so, so don't wait for me to do it!

I moved the roundabout because that's where my GPS trace of the southbound side located it. Yes, that oneway tag should have been proposed:oneway - I'll fix that if no-one else got to it first.

Fixed (both - I saw no evidence of one-way working)

Yes, I have the photos, but I don't generally publish my survey photos or GPS tracks. Is there something in particular that you want a picture of?

No, it's not - I disconnected that a while ago when I surveyed the new access from B981 under the railway viaduct.

Thanks for spotting this. I think that the cycleway is routed over the new track to Low Street - I've made a best-guess edit in changeset 42182872; it could do with an on-the-ground check to be completely sure. None of my photos have any NCN signage in them at all.

Thanks for the update; I've changed my tag templates over to the new format.

No, there's not supposed to be a gap - looks like the section under the bridge (with reduced lane count and possibly height limit) got deleted. I'll fix it as soon as I get back to my editing workstation (tonight, I hope).

This one is not handmade - it looks like a proper highways sign - aluminium, reflective coat, etc. It really is an official advisory one-way. Like I say, I've never seen anything similar elsewhere.

Hi Gerd, Crossgreen drive is signposted as a recommended one-way (I can't remember the exact wording on the sign, but could look it it up if necessary; it's certainly something I've never seen elsewhere). I take that to mean that there's no legal order preventing other-way traffic, but that if everyone follows the advice, then traffic will flow more freely (the road isn't generally wide enough for two-way traffic).

Aerial photos can take a year or more to catch up on new developments.

Thanks - fixed in changeset 34722439.

Thanks - fix committed.

And a couple of missed speed limit fixes in south Livingston and Dumfriesshire.

It's not something I've ever done. It would look better done by you (to make clear it's not a hostile action!). If I were doing it, I'd start with the Wiki: osm.wiki/Change_rollback - is that any help?

I've noticed poor alignment of aerial photography in other places - most notably on steep slopes such as this zig-zag ascent west of Torridon: osm.org/#map=18/57.55422/-5.54483

Yes, my visits there (including a transit of the natural arch) corresponds much better with the OpenData outlines than with Bing aerial. I can probably dig out my track logs if you need to see them.

This outline appears very badly aligned, compared to OS OpenData and confirmed by my personal traces. Please can you revert this change? Thanks.

I was using StreetView on http://os.openstreetmap.org/sv/ - it seems not to have been updated since November.

I've changed the ref to A4017 as you suggest, and set old_ref to avoid any future confusion. (changeset 26762646)