Re: [Talk-GB] National Park extensions

[Colin Smale]

Hi, 

In May I worked with Shaun Lewis to update the Brecon Beacons NP
boundary. He is the GIS Officer for the Brecon Beacons National Park - I
know that's in Wales, and may not be 100% relevant here. He told me the
following: 

"The boundary was digitized on historical OS mapping, aerial
photography, and also Ordnance Survey Mastermap. But i went through a
process with the Ordnance Survey to make it open data, and it now falls
under the Open Government Licence: 

https://data.gov.uk/dataset/brecon-beacons-national-park-boundary "

If there are any residual issues about licensing, maybe Shaun would be
able to assist with some relevant experience. 

//colin 

On 2016-08-17 18:38, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

> On 17 August 2016 at 16:42, jc...@mail.com  wrote: 
> 
>> I know there has been some caution against using Natural England data 
>> directly in OSM, so I wasn't surprised that the boundaries weren't 
>> immediately updated when the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National 
>> Parks were expanded from 1st August. [1]
> 
> I presume the caution that this was because of Licensing issues.
> Natural England are/were using a custom version of the OGL for which
> compatibility with the ODbL used by OSM wasn't guaranteed. They should
> have switched to using the OGL 3 now, but not everything has been
> updated last time I looked.
> 
> If you follow the link from
> https://data.gov.uk/dataset/national-parks-england and register, I
> think you can get a download of the National Park boundaries in either
> Mapinfo or Shapefile format. The website claims they've been updated
> for the August changes (I haven't checked.) Despite some contradictory
> messages along the way, the only thing that could be interpreted as a
> licence that's included with the download says it's OGL3 -- which
> would mean it's ok to use in OSM, provided the appropriate attribution
> statement is added to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors
> .
> 
> Robert Whittaker
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] National Park extensions

[Phillip Barnett]

Can the written description be used as a source?

> On 17 Aug 2016, at 19:57, Andy Townsend  wrote:
> 
>> On 17/08/2016 16:42, jc...@mail.com wrote:
>> As a result much of what has been added is inaccurate, not least because 
>> many nodes are shared with highways etc. despite the written descriptions 
>> clearly stating "...it follows the edge..." (Yorkshire Dales was mostly 
>> clean of shared nodes but Lake District did have shared nodes/ways before, 
>> hence A6 road got broken - partially fixed by another mapper)
> 
> Before doing anything else I'd mention the issue (tactfully) to the mapper 
> who did the change, perhaps on a changeset discussion.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] National Park extensions

[Andy Townsend]

On 17/08/2016 16:42, jc...@mail.com wrote:

As a result much of what has been added is inaccurate, not least because many nodes are 
shared with highways etc. despite the written descriptions clearly stating "...it 
follows the edge..." (Yorkshire Dales was mostly clean of shared nodes but Lake 
District did have shared nodes/ways before, hence A6 road got broken - partially fixed by 
another mapper)


Before doing anything else I'd mention the issue (tactfully) to the 
mapper who did the change, perhaps on a changeset discussion.


Cheers,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] National Park extensions

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On 17 August 2016 at 16:42, jc...@mail.com  wrote:
> I know there has been some caution against using Natural England data 
> directly in OSM, so I wasn't surprised that the boundaries weren't 
> immediately updated when the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National Parks 
> were expanded from 1st August. [1]

I presume the caution that this was because of Licensing issues.
Natural England are/were using a custom version of the OGL for which
compatibility with the ODbL used by OSM wasn't guaranteed. They should
have switched to using the OGL 3 now, but not everything has been
updated last time I looked.

If you follow the link from
https://data.gov.uk/dataset/national-parks-england and register, I
think you can get a download of the National Park boundaries in either
Mapinfo or Shapefile format. The website claims they've been updated
for the August changes (I haven't checked.) Despite some contradictory
messages along the way, the only thing that could be interpreted as a
licence that's included with the download says it's OGL3 -- which
would mean it's ok to use in OSM, provided the appropriate attribution
statement is added to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors
.

Robert Whittaker

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] National Park extensions

[jc...@mail.com]

I know there has been some caution against using Natural England data directly 
in OSM, so I wasn't surprised that the boundaries weren't immediately updated 
when the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National Parks were expanded from 
1st August. [1]

However since coming back from holiday, I see the OSM boundary relations have 
now been modified [2] but using the low-res PDFs from the gov.uk website. 

As a result much of what has been added is inaccurate, not least because many 
nodes are shared with highways etc. despite the written descriptions clearly 
stating "...it follows the edge..." (Yorkshire Dales was mostly clean of shared 
nodes but Lake District did have shared nodes/ways before, hence A6 road got 
broken - partially fixed by another mapper)

I think the changesets need to be reverted (can anyone on this list do this?) 
but where do we go from here in terms of new Nat Park boundaries? Is there a 
source other than Natural England?

Jez C

[1] 
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/national-parks-to-extend-by-size-of-isle-of-wight
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/spiregrain/history
e.g. way 398069815

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb