Re: [Talk-GB] Unfit for motors - tagging for routing

[Peter Rounce]

from the wiki
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features

motor_vehicl e=no
Access permission for any motorized vehicle


these routes do have access permission, but are signed as unsuitable/unfit
which is more advisory


Best Wishes
Peter


On 10 December 2012 14:30, Aidan McGinley
wrote:

> motor_vehicl e=no
> should suffice I would have thought?
>
> On 10 December 2012 13:36, cotswolds mapper wrote:
>
>> There are lots of roads where I map which have "Unfit for motors" signs
>> (blue/white advisory) but are normal maintained roads in limited but
>> regular use. Typically they are narrowish, with lots of bends and often
>> steep. In general anything up to maybe the size of a skip lorry can get
>> through (though some are too narrow), but what makes them unfit for motors
>> is very long stretches without passing places,so if you meet something
>> coming the other way, one of you has a very long, difficult reverse.
>>
>> They are currently tagged in OSM as minor roads, which of course means
>> they are eligible for routing. As an example, most (all?) routing services
>> (not just OSM-based, Google Maps has the same problem) will route Chalford
>> Hill to Stroud along Dark Lane, but Dark Lane has an "Unfit for motors"
>> sign.  It's the shortest and most direct route from the A419 to most of
>> Chalford Hill, but very few locals use it.
>>
>> I'd like to tag these roads so that routing services will avoid them, but
>> can't find any direct way of doing this. I've seen elsewhere that one
>> mapper has tagged similar roads as Service roads. This has two advantages:
>> routing services will ignore them(?); and service roads render differently
>> so anyone using the map visually will be less likely to use these roads.
>> It's pushing the current definition of service road rather a lot, but if
>> you consider a service road to be a road that should only be used to access
>> locations connected to the service road, then it seems within the spirit of
>> the definition.
>>
>> There's a specific issue with Chalford Hill at the moment. Road closures
>> (due to collapsed retaining walls) mean that the popular routes to the
>> valley (Old Neighbourhood and to a lesser extent Coppice Hill) are closed
>> and likely to remain so for over a month. My local source (a parish
>> councilor) says that most locals are using a long diversion and avoiding
>> Dark Lane. (Traffic on Dark Lane has increased, and there was recently a
>> fist fight when two cars met and neither driver would reverse. Locals want
>> to make it temporarily one way, which would massively increase its
>> usefulness, but there's no quick way of doing this.)
>>
>> My two questions:
>>
>> 1) Should OSM data discourage use of routes that locals -  who are likely
>> to be better than outsiders at coping with narrow lanes - avoid as too
>> problematic;
>>
>> 2) Is tagging usable but 'Unfit for motors' roads as service roads an
>> acceptable way of doing this or is there a better method (that is
>> recognised by current renderers and routing engines).
>>
>> As my opinion on (1) is yes, I've tagged Dark Lane and a couple of even
>> more difficult roads as service roads, at least for the duration of the
>> road closures, but will happily revert the tag if there's a better way.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Garmin eTrex 30 - just reduced on amazon

[Peter Rounce]

Garmin suggested retail price £229.99
Amazon had it at £178 until yesterday

today..
Garmin eTrex 30 Outdoor Handheld GPS
Unit
 £157.49

looks pretty good
can put OSM maps on it

http://talkytoaster.info/ukmaps.htm

http://shop.opencyclemap.org/collections/sd-cards/products/opencyclemap-gps-uk-ireland
http://shop.opencyclemap.org/collections/digital-downloads/uk


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

Re: [Talk-GB] SotM 2013

[Peter Rounce]

seconded

On 13 September 2012 16:53, Jonathan Bennett
wrote:

> On 13/09/2012 13:30, Gregory wrote:
> > Other city suggestions (I would still help loads!)?
>
> Although everyone is going to do this, I'd like to suggest Guildford,
> where I live. The things is has going for it is:
>
> * less than an hour from both Heathrow and Gatwick for international
> attendees.
> * 40 minutes by train from that there London
> * Rail connections from Reading for the civilised parts of the country
> * The A3 trunk road (by OSM *and* DfT definitions) runs right through
> the town, connecting with the M25 and the south coast.
> * So does the Wey Navigation, so RichardF can even get there
> * The University of Surrey is an established conference venue, with
> low-cost accommodation on-site
> * The town & campus are already well-mapped
> * Alan Turing used to live here
> * There's some *fantastic* cycle routes around here...
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> --
> Jonathan (Jonobennett)
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Fwd: Use of PRoW Definitive Statements from Hertfordshire, Oxfordshire, Worcestershire

[Peter Rounce]

That's great news.
I'm interested in your correspondence, which is clearly working well.
Also wanted to add a link to the current Definitive Statements of Public
Rights of Way status updates, here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_local_councils

Regards
Peter


On 21 June 2012 23:55, Robert Whittaker (OSM) <
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm pleased to be able to report that three councils have agreed to
> let us use their Definitive Statements of Public Rights of Way under
> the UK Open Government License (OGL). (I'll be posting the emails I
> sent to the councils and some other notes about the correspondence I
> had with them in a separate message for anyone who's interested.) The
> councils who've told me we can use their Definitive Statements under
> the OGL are:
>
> * Hertfordshire
> * Oxfordshire
> * Worcestershire
>
> The first two of these have the statements online in a convenient form
> [1], [2]. Worcestershire does not, but the text of each right of way
> is available from a link in the popup by clicking on the interactive
> map [3]. Accessing them in this way, it will be hard to avoid
> inadvertently making use of the additional information about the route
> of each way from the map. So I've obtained a list of all the image
> files, which I'm planning to use to allow direct access to the
> statements for each parish. Watch this space for more details, though
> first I have to chase up a few of the files that seem to be missing.
>
> The OGL requires attribution, so I've added details of these three
> counties to the appropriate wiki page [4]. (Unfortunately though, this
> page isn't obviously linked from the main OSM map or official
> copyright/license page [5] so I'm not convinced that attribution
> statements on [4] completely fulfil our obligations at the moment.
> Yes, we've provided attribution, but it's not somewhere that we could
> reasonably expect users to find it. I've been in touch with LWG about
> this, and fixing things is on their to do list -- though it seem from
> their minutes that this has been the case since September 2011. Does
> anyone know who is able to edit the text on [5]?)
>
> I'm hopeful that we'll be able to make use of the statements to verify
> the designation of already mapped ways, and add the appropriate
> designation tag where it's missing. In most cases, the description
> probably won't be enough to be able to map a way without a survey.
> However in conjunction with aerial imagery and maybe a bit of local
> knowledge, it may be possible to do so for some routes. But the
> statements will certainly be helpful in any effort of complete the
> mapping of public rights of way by identifying missing routes in need
> of a survey.
>
> To help with matching routes up and checking off what has been found,
> it will be useful to tag the ways with the Council's reference number,
> using our ref=* key. Doing so has been discussed on this list before
> [6]. (Though following some more recent discussion [7] we may be
> heading towards using prow:ref=* instead to avoid a clash with other
> uses of ref on the same ways.) In the thread at [6] it's been observed
> that different councils use different path numbering schemes, so we'll
> probably be unable to use a common scheme across the whole country.
> Looking at the numbering scheme used by the three councils above, I'd
> suggest the following ref formats:
>
> * Hertfordshire: "[Parish] [0Num]"
> * Oxfordshire: "[Pn]/[Num]"
> * Worcestershire: "[PC]-[0Num]"
>
> where [Parish] is the full parish name (in Title case), [Pn] is a
> numerical parish code, [PC] is a two letter parish code (with
> upper-case letters), [Num] is the numerical path number without
> leading zeros, and [0Num] is the numerical path number with leading
> zeros.
>
> (Note that Worcestershire has re-numbered all their paths, giving each
> segment between path junctions a distinct number within the parish.
> The definitive statements still use the old numbers in the route
> descriptions, and it might not be possible to tell which segment of
> each route has which new number. It it probably a good idea to store
> the original reference numbers in OSM too, eg with old_ref="[Parish]
> [Num]" top make using the definitive statements easier.)
>
> Finally, when tagging ways with designation=* and/or ref=* based on
> the definitive statements, I think it would be useful to indicate the
> source. I'd suggest using source:designation=definitive_statement
> and/or source:ref=definitive_statement as appropriate.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Robert.
>
> [1]
> http://www.hertsdirect.org/services/envplan/countryside/walkingandriding/row/defmap/defstate/
> [2]
> http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/definitive-map-and-statement-online
> [3] http://gis.worcestershire.gov.uk/website/Countryside/
> [4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#United_Kingdom
> [5] http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
> [6] Thread starts at
> http://lists.openstreetmap.or

Re: [Talk-GB] Unclassified Country Road (UCR)

[Peter Rounce]

Rob Nickerson wrote:

> Now that the Public Right of Way documentation [1] has settled down a bit,
> I have had a chance to pick up some of the other comments received in the
> last few weeks. One of which was on Unclassified Country Roads (UCR).



Here is some more opinion and information on UCRs (aka. ORPAs, White Roads
(both OS terms).
Note that UCR stands for Unclassified *County* Road.


*highway tag*
from [4] OSM Map Features tags wiki page
"
highway=unclassified
To be used for minor roads in the public road network which are not
residential and of a lower classification than tertiary. Please do not use
this as a marker for roads where the classification is unknown, for
which highway=road should be used. Use highway=residential for minor roads
lined with housing. See highway=service for access roads

highway=track
Rough roads, often with unpaved/unsealed surfaces and normally used for
agricultural or forestry uses etc. Use tracktype=* for tagging to describe
the surface.
"
seems to me that these should be highway=unclassified as these are minor
roads in the public road network
if they should not be routed down for the ford mondeo, then this vehicle
suitability can be covered with a specific tag like [4wd_only] or [surface]
or a new one

*designation tag*
The designation tag should be the main indicator of legal status so a
consistent tagging of designation=unclassified_highway sounds best.

*surface tag*
Ideally this would be set to indicate if the road is metalled, concrete,
stoney, grassy, ...

*4wd_only tag* [1]
This appears to be the best way to indicate that a road is only suitable
for vehicles capable of on-road and off-road.

*access tags*
Great for indicating that a road may be used by motorbikes but not cars,
for example.

*restriction tag *
Could be used where there is a TTRO (Temporary Traffic Regulation Order) or
PTRO (Permenant Traffic Regulation Order) modifying road use which does not
justify changing the access tag.


>From [2]:

"An unclassified road is simply a public road which does not have an A, B
or C road classification. The majority of unclassified roads are normal
tarmac motor roads but there are also a small number which are un-surfaced
Green Lanes. These are often referred to as UCR (unclassified county road -
an obsolete term) or UUCR (unsealed, unclassified county road).

All unclassified roads (tarmac or otherwise) are recorded on a document
known as the List of Streets.This is the official record of
all highways that are maintained at public expense and every highway
authority should have one.

It is important to realise that the inclusion of a route on the List of
Streets is not conclusive evidence that vehicular rights exist!

This is because all pubic rights of way are technically highways so in
theory the List of Streets could include footpaths and bridleways. In
practice though this is rarely the case but it has led some authorities to
question the exact status of their unclassified roads.

It is possible for a route to appear on both the List of Streets and
the Definitive Map (so called Dual Status routes). Where this occurs there
is a presumption that any motoring rights which may have existed in the
past would have been extinguished by recent legislative
changes. However, where an unclassified road appears on the List of
Street but not on the Definitive Map, it is reasonable to assume that it is
a vehicular highway.
There is no offence of using a motor vehicle on an Unclassified Road and
the presence or absence of a tarmac is no indication of status."


Cheers
Peter


[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:4wd_only%3Dyes
[2] http://www.trf.org.uk/rights-of-way/public-information.html
[3]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions
[4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features


On 31 May 2012 19:13, Robert Whittaker (OSM) 
wrote:
>
> On 31 May 2012 17:10, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> > Now that the Public Right of Way documentation [1] has settled down a
bit, I
> > have had a chance to pick up some of the other comments received in the
last
> > few weeks. One of which was on Unclassified Country Roads (UCR).
>
> Whether the term is obsolete or not, there are certainly roads that
> appear on a Council's "List of Streets Maintainable at the Public
> Expense" which are not classified as primary, secondary or tertiary.
> It would seem natural to term these "Unclassified". We already have
> the OSM tagging highway=unclassified which will work for most of
> these.
>
> However, I think highway=unclassified brings with it the implicit
> assumption that the route will be suitable for motor traffic, and (in
> the UK at least) will have a metalled surface. This is not true of all
> these Unclassified Highways in the UK, some of which will have the
> appearance of dirt farm tracks. In the spirit of duck tagging, I would
> suggest that even if these roads are technically Unclassified
> Highways, we tag them with highway=track if that's w

[Talk-GB] UK Rights of Way - WikiProject

[Peter Rounce]

In view of recent interest in UK rights of way, should we set up a wiki
project, possibly at:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_Kingdom/RightsOfWay

It would seem to be a good addition to the current UK projects.
Current Projects

Mapping of this country has been split into a number of key projects, as
well as being included in a number of UK projects.

   - UK Mapping
Priorities
(larger
   urban areas with low levels of mapping)
   - UK A 
Roads
   - UK 
Motorways
   - UK 
Boundaries
(Administrative
   boundaries)
   - UK Postcodes
A
   project to map the postcodes in the UK
   - UK National Parks and
AONBs
   - UK 
Railways
   - UK 
Waterways
   - UK National Cycle
Network
(National
   and regional routes)
   - UK Long-distance
footpaths


from.. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Permissive paths and "uncrecorded rights of way"

[Peter Rounce]

In addition to the definitive map, there is a "list of streets" which
should be kept by councils and London boroughs.
These are also rights of way.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66
...
The council of every county [F93, metropolitan district] and London borough
and the Common Council shall cause to be made, and shall keep corrected up
to date, a list of the streets within their area which are highways
maintainable at the public expense.
(7)Every list made under subsection (6) above shall be kept deposited at
the offices of the council by whom it was made and may be inspected by any
person free of charge at all reasonable hours and in the case of a list made
by the council of a county [F94in England], the county council shall supply
to the council of each district in the county an up to date list of the
streets within the area of the district that are highways maintainable at
the public expense, and the list so supplied shall be kept deposited at the
office of the district council and may be inspected by any person free
of charge
at all reasonable hours.
...


Peter

On 1 May 2012 14:07, Jason Cunningham  wrote:

> On 27 April 2012 15:00, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
>
>> * Public rights of way are recorded by the local council on the
>> "Definitive map and statement". I am pulling all the details together and
>> will contact all England councils asking for access to the definitive
>> statements (and requesting its release under the OGL license). This will be
>> the topic of a later email and will be summarised on the wiki.
>> * Any path not recorded on the councils definitive map and statement by
>> 2026 will no longer be a public right of way - Once we have these
>> statements I encourage you to write to the council about missing footpaths
>> (details to follow). For now you can make use of note=, fixme= and perhaps
>> suspected=row as suggested by Nick.
>>
>
> I'm not sure if this has come up before, but inner London council's are
> not obliged to hold a "definitive map & statement" for public rights of
> way. The Ramblers association have  a campaign to encourage inner london
> councils to create definitive maps, but I assume the Ramblers association
> are not really bothered about the copyright issues.
> http://www.ramblers.org.uk/Campaigns+Policy/maplondon.htm
> http://www.ramblers.org.uk/Campaigns+Policy/map+london+council+feedback.htm
>
> I guess it would be very useful if people used the wiki to let others know
> how their contact with councils went, especially the requests for the
> council to apply to OS to release the data using current legislation.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Statements (Was: Hampshire.../Rights of Way...)

[Peter Rounce]

There is also a 'list of streets' document held by councils which may be
useful.
This often contains details of some tracks (roads without tarmac surface)
as well as the usual roads.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66
...
The council of every county [F93, metropolitan district] and London borough
and the Common Council shall cause to be made, and shall keep corrected up
to date, a list of the streets within their area which are highways
maintainable at the public expense.
(7)Every list made under subsection (6) above shall be kept deposited at
the offices of the council by whom it was made and may be inspected by any
person free of charge at all reasonable hours and in the case of a list
made by the council of a county [F94in England], the county council shall
supply to the council of each district in the county an up to date list of
the streets within the area of the district that are highways maintainable
at the public expense, and the list so supplied shall be kept deposited at
the office of the district council and may be inspected by any person free
of charge at all reasonable hours.
...


On 22 April 2012 14:05,  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I like the idea of having a wiki page with the list of authorities and
> links to their Definitive Statement. Perhaps we could also have a column to
> indicate whether they have agreed to release the data under a suitable
> license (e.g. OGL).
>
> Maybe we could mass mail a request out (combining a FoI request with a OGL
> license request) - thoughts?
>
> I have pulled the list of so called "surveying authorities" together for
> England. My research found that definitive maps and statements have to be
> compiled for all of England (and Wales) except the 12 inner London
> boroughs, where the borough council can choose whether or not to adopt the
> procedures and produce a map. The responsibility lies with the
> non-metropolitan councils, and unitary authorities (effectively includes
> metropolitan districts). I have therefore taken this list from the ONS
> website (Tab seperated so should copy fine into spreadsheet)
>
>
> ONS code Old ONS cose Name Entity County Region
> E1002 11 Buckinghamshire county Buckinghamshire South East England
> E1003 12 Cambridgeshire county Cambridgeshire East of England
> E1006 16 Cumbria county Cumbria North West England
> E1007 17 Derbyshire county Derbyshire East Midlands
> E1008 18 Devon county Devon South West England
> E1009 19 Dorset county Dorset South West England
> E1011 21 East Sussex county East Sussex South East England
> E1012 22 Essex county Essex East of England
> E1013 23 Gloucestershire county Gloucestershire South West England
> E1014 24 Hampshire county Hampshire South East England
> E1015 26 Hertfordshire county Hertfordshire East of England
> E1016 29 Kent county Kent South East England
> E1017 30 Lancashire county Lancashire North West England
> E1018 31 Leicestershire county Leicestershire East Midlands
> E1019 32 Lincolnshire county Lincolnshire East of England
> E1020 33 Norfolk county Norfolk East of England
> E1021 34 Northamptonshire county Northamptonshire East Midlands
> E1023 36 North Yorkshire county North Yorkshire Yorkshire and the
> Humber
> E1024 37 Nottinghamshire county Nottinghamshire East Midlands
> E1025 38 Oxfordshire county Oxfordshire South East England
> E1027 40 Somerset county Somerset South West England
> E1028 41 Staffordshire county Staffordshire West Midlands
> E1029 42 Suffolk county Suffolk East of England
> E1030 43 Surrey county Surrey South East England
> E1031 44 Warwickshire county Warwickshire West Midlands
> E1032 45 West Sussex county West Sussex South East England
> E1034 47 Worcestershire county Worcestershire West Midlands
> E0902 00AB Barking and Dagenham unitary London London
> E0903 00AC Barnet unitary London London
> E0904 00AD Bexley unitary London London
> E0905 00AE Brent unitary London London
> E0906 00AF Bromley unitary London London
> E0908 00AH Croydon unitary London London
> E0909 00AJ Ealing unitary London London
> E0910 00AK Enfield unitary London London
> E0914 00AP Haringey unitary London London
> E0915 00AQ Harrow unitary London London
> E0916 00AR Havering unitary London London
> E0917 00AS Hillingdon unitary London London
> E0918 00AT Hounslow unitary London London
> E0921 00AX Kingston upon Thames unitary London London
> E0924 00BA Merton unitary London London
> E0925 00BB Newham unitary London London
> E0926 00BC Redbridge unitary London London
> E0927 00BD Richmond upon Thames unitary London London
> E0929 00BF Sutton unitary London London
> E0931 00BH Waltham Forest unitary London London
> E0801 00BL Bolton unitary Greater Manchester North West England
> E0802 00BM Bury unitary Greater Manchester North West England
> E0803 00BN Manchester unitary Great

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Tagging Guideline - wiki page proposals

[Peter Rounce]

Hi Rob,


Great to see the action on UK RoW tagging in OSM and I'm sure it will end
up clearer and better.

2 review comments from me

(1)
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines_Consultation
Achadwick's RoW table section
Byway Open to All Traffic column
motor_vehicle tag row
*
*
*I believe this should be 'yes' instead of '~'.*

from..
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Presets/EnglandWalesRightsOfWay




(2)
A section for Unclassified Highways or Unclassified County Roads.
Probably highway=track, designation=unclassified_highway and motor_vehicle,
vehicle, horse, pedestrian tags as appropriate



I'd also note that there is a lot of great information in this email from
Robert Whittaker (which may be on a different thread but is relevant to
this one).
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-April/013081.html


Best,
Peter

On 21 April 2012 15:17,  wrote:

> Thanks Richard, Andy,
>
> Couple of points to feedback:
>
> * Good point on the cycle paths along roads. I left this section mostly
> unchanged from the original wiki page, but think we can easily add in the
> details you raised.
> * I might be 'brave' but am not brave enough to remove the UK Classic vs
> Global. As this page is also for newcomers then I feel we need to address
> highway=path as they will likely already have seen it on the OSM wiki and
> will be confused as to when to use it (like I was). Unless someone can show
> global use of the alternative tagging scheme, I am happy to call it just
> "Alternative" and drop the "global".
>
> Planned Timeline (5 weeks total):
>
> * Consultation on proposed page - 2 weeks
> * Collecting feedback - 1 Week
> * Implementing feedback - 1 week
> * Second review - 1 week (unless objections)
> * New UK Tagging Guidelines page goes live
>
>
> Please continue to send in feedback and I will collate it. I see that
> Rights of Way have come up again on the talk-gb list and like Roberts links
> (http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/) so will add some of these to the
> wiki page.
>
> Regards,
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> On , Andy  wrote:
> > Just a couple of quick notes:
> >
> >
> >
> > * The cycle path section is a bit misleading as it stands. The tagging
> >
> > you have shown is for standalone paths (i.e. mapped separately from a
> >
> > road); the majority of cycle paths in the UK are on the side of a road
> >
> > and thus should be tagged something like
> >
> > "highway=, cycleway=track, segregated=yes/no".
>
> >
> > I've copied the relevant section onto my user page and altered it:
> >
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Spark
> >
> >
> >
> > * I would prefer to see the 'UK Classic vs Global' stuff taken out -
> >
> > these are the *UK* guidelines and hence the best/commonest practice in
> >
> > the UK should be given.
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Hampshire Vandalization - No Bere Forest?

[Peter Rounce]

Hello gents (and ladies?),


I am new to OSM and mapping but have an interest in rights of way -
particularly unsurfaced roads.
These are generally referred to as byways, ORPAs, UCRs .
I see that the OSM data has some of these, but possibly only 10% to 20%
coverage.

There are a few things I'd like to do to improve this.
(1) Surveys - I am doing what I can but it's a slow process.
(2) Update designation='public_byway' to
designation='byway_open_to_all_traffic' or designation='restricted_byway'
as appropriate
Perhaps a FIXME tag on designation='public_byway' would be useful - any
advice on this welcome.
(3) Use council definitive statements to update the data semi-automatically
as I understand the licensing may be ok.
(4) Create more knowledge/clarity on tagging UCRs/ORPAs/unsurfaced roads.
I am trying to understand the optimum tagging from the OSM KB here, and
update/collate this.

Any help/advice would be very welcome.

Also - a meetup/mapping party/social would be good.. I'm based in
Haslemere, Surrey (bordering Surrey/Sussex/Hampshire).


Peter


On 20 April 2012 09:21, Nick Whitelegg  wrote:

>
>
> >
> >>> I'm up for it. Finding enough to sustain a mapping party might be
> >>> difficult (South Hants is more or less road and footpath complete) but
> >>> we could make it a social. Anyone else interested?
> >
> >>> Andy
> >>
> >> Yes, I'd be interested. Robert - I'm aware of you via 'robbieonsea'
> edits (usually in the exact same type of areas I tend to go!) so would be
> great to meet up >>with you. Anyone else - Caroline? 'Sailor Steve' ?
>
> >Sure. Also I bumped into jjrscott last night, he might be interested too.
>
> OK, shall I do a doodle poll?
>
> How does somewhere in Southampton sound? Could be Portsmouth or Winchester
> if people would prefer that.
>
> Nick
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb