The designation is correct.

Designations as per definitive map added.

Hi, A few problems. Way: 1248342808, Way: 1248342809, and Way: 1248342810 are duplications of existing highways. This duplication disrupts routing so I've removed them.

If a way needs amending or correcting this should be done to any existing ways so that the way history is maintained. I've amended the existing highway tags to show the public status as per the Blackburn and Darwen definitive map.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, These two highways are designated as Public Rights of Way. Thus there is public access on foot along these private service roads. I've amended the tags to suit.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

This is a natural peak as indicated by osm mappers and the Ordnance Survey so I've reinstated it. You may not deem it necessary to be mapped which is OK but others do, and it does exist. there has been some history of it actually being named.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've moved the spa node off of the road, placing it within the building area of The Circle.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Tower Bridge is already mapped as an attraction, please see here:- node/2079674503#map=19/51.50552/-0.07537&layers=N Thus I've removed your duplicated data.

Regards Bernard.

Regarding Way: 385698843, is this way public or permissive? The tags access=permissive with
designation=public_footpath indicate both. The tags ought be amended to reflect the single correct status.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Please be aware of the warnings given above about crossing ways.

What you had somehow done is placed several paths on top of existing paths making for duplication and in one case triplication. If an existing way needs correcting please make the correction to the existing way.

I've removed the duplicated paths,
Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

OSM is a live worldwide database so the addition of test data disrupts the compiling of maps. The duplicated highways you've introduced disrupt routing. Thus I've reverted this changeset.

Regards Bernard.

Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Please don't place a highway on top of an existing highway. This duplication of highways disrupts routing. I've removed the duplicated highways in this changeset.

I don't think any changes were needed here. If a way does need amending/correcting the correction should be done to the existing way. This is OSM best practice that maintains a way history.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

OSM is a live worldwide database from which probably thousands of maps are compiled and serves other purposes as well. Uploading test data only corrupts the database, thus I've removed your new area.

Please don't upload test data. You might be better off having a good read of the help section before adding data. Need any help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi Martin, Sorry for the confusion. I just now opened up JOSM and yes the change failed to upload. It was quite likely my fault though.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Thanks for your recent addition of info to the database.

I've reverted the road status to residential, as it's not a trunk road.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Please don't add fiction to OpenStreetMap. I've removed the duplicate highway tagged as a motorway that you added.

I've removed this fiction and reinstated the buildings you deleted.

Fiction was removed by reverting this changeset.

Hello, Concerning the paths you recently added, Way: 1235864075, Way: 1235861531 and Way: 1235862015. You placed these paths zig zagging across and in part duplicating existing paths. It looks like there are three named hiking routes using this line. In which case the three routes should share the one path line.

It is OSM practice that if a way needs amending/correcting then the existing way is amended, (not duplicated). Thus your new route should share the existing one path and a route relation should be created for your new path route.

Need any help please just ask.
Regards Bernard.

Hi, Just to let you know that OSM best practice is not to use the tag area:highway=footway. Instead use the tag highway=footway and area=yes.

The proposals area:highway= has been abandoned, please see here:- osm.wiki/Proposal:Area:highway

I've amended the tags in this area.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Please be aware that you are making lots of highway duplications (placing a new way on top of an existing one). I've just removed about ten such sections of duplicated highways, these would have disrupted routing.

Regards Bernard.