Dragged building outline restored.

Hi, No response so I've removed the duplicated highways and tweaked the paths.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Is the highway line (Way: Delhi-Sahranpur-Dehradun Expressway (1151636493)), tagged as a highway under construction actually an intended motorway and a very long bridge? If not it should be removed.

The imagery seems to show that it's not needed.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You inadvertently dragged the driveway out of alignment which I've corrected. To mark a highway as private just add the tag access=private.

Need help just ask. Regards Bernard,

Hi, There's a couple of things wrong here. The main thing is that you've introduced a short section of triplicated highway. (If in iD editor you zoom right in then select the traffic light or the crossing node, move it to the side a bit, you'll then see the triplicated section of highway, Way: High Street North (154545583), Way: High Street North (742478357) and Way: West Street (139387027) in the same position atop each other.)

The crossing node is tagged as uncontrolled;traffic_signals, what is it uncontrolled or controlled by traffic_signals?

Note that there are several relations involved at this crossroads making for difficult amendments. The best amendment would be to remove the central traffic light note and map all the individual lights and relations. This could leave a central node tagged only as a crossing point. In any case the replicated section should be removed.

The simplest but rough solution is to join the crossing and traffic light nodes, thus removing the triplication. remove the crossing tags from the node which actually are not needed as you have the footway tagged as a crossing.

What do you think?
Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The school name, along with other school details, is held on the outline of the school premises as per OSM practice. It's therefore not needed on the building. If the building has an independent formal name it can be on the building.

Regards Bernard.

Building reinstated minus B&B tags

Hi, The tracks Way: 55805214, Way: 1150481901 and Way: 1150414262 make a very long ford, probably mistakenly. There is no need to make such large changesets it only makes checking your own work almost impossible. Hence continued mistakes.

I've not made corrections but left the fords for you to see.

Regards Bernard

There are several problems now with buildings across buildings and buildings across highways as stated in the warnings above. Please take heed of such warnings and address them if possible.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've removed the tag building=yes from the site as the site is not a building but an amenity area containing buildings.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

A problem, the school area outline is already mapped, and your new area is a duplication. It's OSM practice to correct/amend existing features where possible so you should correct the existing line in this case. Your new line also extends over Barton Road which is incorrect. Thus I've removed your new outline.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've reverted this changeset for you. Need any help please just ask. Oh and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Access=no means there is no access at all except for the owner or operator of the land. These areas/ways are usually signed and/or have barriers indicating that there is no access at all. Entering any such areas/ways, unless you have express permission is trespass. The public do have a right of access to a PRoW even if it is on private land to which there is no other access right, thus such areas/ways cannot be access=no as there clearly is access by right to some form of traffic (foot on a public footpath).

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You are correct and that is what I've done here. I removed the path section that was mapped on top of the track and transferred the PRoW tags to the section of the track.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, But there is foot access. If public access by vehicles is excluded then vehicile=no. If it's a farm track then access=agricultural would exclude all other vehicles. Please remember that the wiki is not always right, in fact it's quite often wrong.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've removed part of Way: 1150294287 because it duplicated an existing highway. I've also corrected some of the tagging.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, ref bridleway Way: 1150292515, there is access to this PRoW therefore tagging access=no is incorrect, you should specify the traffic that has no access. I've removed the tag.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The warnings above are because your new steps are not connected to the highway network. Thus they cannot be used to route from one place to another. Also a couple of times you placed steps beside a mapped footpath, the path should have the steps inserted. Otherwise, you have a highway atop a highway, confusing for routers. I've corrected these instances, please check them.

Regards Bernard.

Sorry for the spelling mistakes.

Hi, It's usual practice to add a lately tag to bridges so that the render and route properly, please see:- bridge=*#Layers
I've added layer=1 to this bridge.

Regards Bernard.