OK, only 2 hours of my work was wasted.

My intention here, as an experiment with relations was to determine a hierarchical model of power distribution here in the South.
I'm interested in this from a renewable energy EV point of view.
I can't see anything which would better replace site relations.

To me, both 'St' and 'St.' are ambiguous abbreviations for the word 'Saint', and I don't see the harm of describing the word in full.

Thanks, I'll try that

Can anybody suggest a better method of collating dispersed sites?

I'm new to relations and still got some learning to do.
"523176 : NORWICH DRIVE" is how the site name is given on the ground on the signage of the compound.

You are welcome. Did it successfully answer your question?

Do you have a particular vendetta against me Mr. Pigeon?
I consider this vandalism. I will give you this opportunity to explain yourself.

A site relation is used to group several objects which have a single identity as a whole, but cannot be accurately described by other data types. Like a multipolygon relation, a site allows representation of a single discontiguous geometry, as opposed to an organizational relationship or a spatial relationship that is merely a coincidence.

Your first link refers to Wiki contributions and not best mapping practice.
The second link deals with best mapping practice
I describe a change of use from Hotel to migrant hostel on each of these sites.
"Do not map where individuals live; specifically, do not add the names of inhabitants to dwellings" No problem here,
"OpenStreetMap is not a property registry; thus, do not map individual ownership of buildings or plots " Still no problem.
"OpenStreetMap is not a phone book. Do not map contact data of individuals" No issues.
"Do not name individuals in OpenStreetMap tags" Fine here
"Do not map the personal behaviors, preferences, or habits of individuals" Information of that sort may be found elswhere, but not at all indicated in my changeset.
"Limit the detail of mapping private backyards"Still no problem.
"Do not map personal possessions or their locations" Nothing of the sort included in my changeset.
"Do not map personal private indoor facilities" Still a non-issue.
Unless I have missed anything, your assertions are incorrect.

Thanks

Nice work Paul.
What is the process of doing that?

Often, F5 simply doesn't cut it.
With Brave, I use CTRL+Shift+R

Another thought, when I was using F4 Map a lot more, I thought their server was really slow in updating.
It turned out that it was my browser's local cache which simply wasn't getting flushed. Depending on you environment and web browser, look up the shortcut key for a deep cache flush.

Oh hell yeah!
JOSM is good. It's ugly as sin to look at, but all of the error checking behind the UI in the code is excellent.
Urban Eye is a great 3D viewer plug-in for JOSM as it works on your local cache without requiring the tedium of uploading and checking to see how it renders

Hi Paul, I made a bit of a pig's ear of that. They look like towers but are actually just parapets, and walls of any height would not render in Urban Eye 3D. It only renders building or building:part.
I've done a proper 3D job on it now, see what you think.
I might make a relation for the RSCH this evening.

The house previously marked a house as 30 Downsway is actually 571 Falmer Road.
I have corrected this.

See
osm.wiki/Abbreviations

Sorry, that was a huge mistake on my part. I am aware of what difficulties this form of badly framed data entry can cause.

I would like like to see it formalised under a street art kind of setting.
It really is quite cute to see.