Re: [Talk-GB] OSMUK and the Open Geospatial Data Stimulus Fund

[Steven Horner]

I was thinking recently how my local council could use OpenStreetMap.

A couple of months ago I put a freedom of information request in to Durham
County Council in the hope of getting a full list of all Waste Bins in the
area with locations. I wanted to use this as a basis to survey for
OpenStreetMap using Mapillary imagery I've been capturing.

I got an initial file back but it was obvious to me that there was massive
holes in the data. I responded pointing out that whole former Council
districts were missing data and the dats that was there was incomplete or
just wrong. The council conducted an internal review and much as I
suspected they admitted they didn't know where their bins are, the data
they had released was from before the Council became a unitary authority 10
years ago.They are reliant on local staff who empty them, there is no
central database.

In this time of cut backs to council services I would imagine it would be
more important than ever to ensure they have the information electronically
to effectively manage the staff that remain and to not lose knowledge if
staff do leave. This would explain why some bins appear to be forgotten
about and are never emptied.

It would make sense to use OpenStreetMap to record their locations then the
Council would be giving back and the public could help. I have been
intending to get back in touch to suggest how this could work but not had
chance recently. I may not be the best placed person to do this either.

I imagine other Council's and public services have similar problems.

On Tue, 7 May 2019, 13:21 Jez Nicholson,  wrote:

> Behind the scenes, your OSMUK Directors are engaging with various groups
> to raise the profile of OpenStreetMap in the UK. We don't always get to
> shout about it at the time, but here goes...
>
> We now have good rapport with the Open Data Institute (the ODI). This in
> part encouraged them to send 2 representatives to State of the Map in Milan
> on a fact-finding mission. They then included OSM as a data source for
> their Open Geospatial Data Stimulus Fund which gave grants to joint
> public/private sector Open Data projects.
> https://theodi.org/article/the-projects-were-funding-to-explore-open-geospatial-data-in-local-government/
>
> We were contacted by thinkWhere on Fairer Falkirk
> http://futurescot.com/fairer-falkirk-thinkwhere/, and Open Data
> Manchester on Mapping Mobility Stockport
> https://medium.com/@opendatamcr/mapping-mobility-in-stockport-1a099758a1eb to
> help them understand how they could use, and add to OSM.
>
> Open Data Manchester have done a great job with making OSM approachable to
> the public through 'Joy Diversion' which I believe they have run 5 times
> now, and an Intro to OSM workshop.
>
> Our key message is that the public sector can benefit by creating and
> enhancing data held in OSM as well as consuming it. e.g. why build your own
> database of local libraries when instead you could budget to improve the
> data held in OSM?
>
> I'll put my trumpet down now ;)
>
> Regards,
>   Jez
> ___
> 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] DoBIH Update - Permission Received

[Steven Horner]

I would think it would be the actual surveyed heights and exact locations
that would be the most use for OSM. Could we not use only the ones that
have been surveyed in the DoBH data, then this could not be claimed to be
Ordnance Surveys data.

Regards,
Steven

On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 12:14 AM Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 23/02/2019 23:04, Adam Snape wrote:
> >
> > Most of the heights should be derivable from OS Open Data mapping layers
>
> ... or from out of copyright OS data.  Hills don't change their height
> much over a human timescale.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> 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] Database of British and Irish hills

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

Is that true though for the hills with details in the survey column, they
have been measured with the instruments listed, eg. Abney level, Leica
Disto D510, etc. If they don't have anything recorded in the survey column
you would have to presume they are derived from OS mapping as there is no
evidence to the contrary. Although does the survey equipment only record
height or also position?

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 12:20 AM Adam Snape  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Sadly, despite the licence I think that much of the positional and
> (especially) the height information is unsuitable for OSM as some of it is
> derived from OS mapping (or otherwise from published lists themselves
> derived from OS Mapping)
> http://www.hills-database.co.uk/database_notes.html#mapinfo_gb
> and thus the OS could legitimately claim a violation of their database
> right.
>
> If they were able to licence the raw GPS/height submitted by walkers and
> others involved in the project then that could be useful.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Adam
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 23:33, Silent Spike 
> wrote:
>
>> I recently came across the DoBIH
>>  which you can see is
>> licensed under CC BY 3.0.
>>
>> This could be a valuable source of accurate height and position
>> information for "natural = peak" nodes in the UK + Ireland (maybe even an
>> import candidate).
>>
>> Would anyone be interested in requesting permission following the wiki
>> guidelines
>> ? I'd do
>> it myself, but it would probably be more professional coming from someone
>> else.
>>
>> Regards
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] GPS longboat positioning

[Steven Horner]

Take a look at http://www.shareyouradventure.com this maybe what you are
looking for. Originally Phil designed it to track walking routes live.

It could certainly be used how you described with an embedded map or direct
on the site. It is now a paid service but very cheap.

You can use a variety of devices to submit the locations from Spot type
devices to a simple Android phone which is probably the cheapest and
easiest in your situation.

The only negative is that I'm not sure if it uses OSM as an option or just
Ordnance Survey and Google Maps. If you do subscribe and OSM isn't an
option then I'm sure you could twist Phil's arm to add it if it isn't
already there.

I used to use it years ago when I walked more regularly and when I walked
the JMT.

Regards,
Steven

On Tue, 5 Feb 2019, 19:44 BD  Hi all,
>
> please see below an email send to Anglia Linux User list. As this is more
> relevant to OSM forum I decided to paste it here.
>
> Phil Thane p...@pthane.co.uk przez
>  earth.li
>
> Hello all,
>
> As the N Wales and Wrexham recipients of this will know, I'm not a
> developer, the Anglian recipients probably don't know me at all but I moved
> here a couple of years ago. Over the last 15 years I've written a lot about
> Linux and FOSS for various magazines and websites, but I'm no expert, so
> bear with me.
>
> Now I'm mostly retired I have a river/canal cruiser. Last year I did a
> single-handed trip of about 10 days in each direction to a boat show. So
> that my family could keep track I enabled 'find my phone' on my mobile and
> gave them the login details. OK as far as it goes but not ideal obvs. I
> also blogged  each day and then wrote it all
> up for a boat magazine. This year I plan a longer trip - to the Llangollen
> International Eisteddfod - about 3 weeks each way. I've sorted out WIFi and
> a laptop charger on the boat so I can blog better, now I'd like to improve
> the mapping. The ideal would be a map I can embed in a WP page on my
> website, that updates every few minutes as I travel. GPS from either my
> phone, or if really necessary a dedicated GPS device.
>
> Does anyone know if such is already possible using OSM + plugins etc? I've
> had a quick look online but most advice refers to Google maps. Most of the
> rest gets very technical very quickly. Goes over my head.
>
> Plan B, is there a dev out there looking for a project? Unpaid and 'free'
> naturally! Would it feasible to create something like FlightRadar' that
> displayed boat positions on inland waterways? There is already
> marinetraffic.com for shipping, but that's way too big. I'm thinking of
> something boat owners could subscribe to that was available online and
> capable of being embedded in a webpage.
>
> --
> Phil
>
> Hopefully someone might have ideas, I'm interested myself as fair few
> other uses come to my mind.
>
> Cheers,
> Bart
>
> ___
> 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] Quarterly Project: Addresses and Postcodes

[Steven Horner]

>
> Postcodes refer to points, not to polygons.

Are you saying a point in OpenStreetMap terms?

UK postcodes generally cover an area/polygon. How big that area is appears
to come down to how much mail that area is likely to receive, I think
that's how its described on Wikipedia. So it could cover one building, a
street or a huge area if rural.

Ordnance Survey sell CodePoint Polygons which is the polygons each postcode
covers. Obviously we can't use that.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Colin Smale  wrote:

> In the UK, this algorithm is useless if you expect to get the actual
> address that you could send a letter to, or that you could ask for
> directions to.
>
>
>
> On 2017-10-19 13:23, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
> Maybe it is interesting to repeat how Nominatim resolves addresses,
> just in case someone wants to do a search after adding an address.
>
> - Nominatim starts from an address point (or building way with
> address). It takes the house number from it and the street name.
> - It tries to match the street name with a nearby street.
> - The rest of the info, suburb, city, country, etc are taken from the
> way. i.e. it looks in which boundary the way lies and work its way up
> the admin levels.
> - In case there is no boundary, it can use a place node as well to
> determine the name of a certain admin level, but that is less precise
>
> - postal codes are taken from the address point, when specified. This
> is needed in UK/USA but not in e.g. Belgium or Germany.
>
>
> http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org is your friend to understand where
> the data is coming from.
>
> Of course, if you only work with a relational database (as Lester
> pointed out), one prefers all data on the address node.
> Relational DB with GIS extensions do not need this (e.g. Nominatim).
>
> Nominatim's approach currently has problems with streets on the border
> of e.g. 2 villages. Sara Hoffmann (Lonvia) told me that there are some
> plans to fix this.
>
> regards
>
> m.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Adam Snape 
> wrote:
>
> I'm convinced that many such addresses are unnecessarily long (are there
> really multiple Weldons in the Swanscome postal area?). Nevertheless we
> should have a way of mapping them if they are the official address. I agree
> that more general guidance would aid consistency. My address mapping
> practice is as follows. I would welcome correction if others feel I am
> doing
> something incorrectly::
>
> The post town
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_post_towns_in_the_United_Kingdom is
> tagged as addr:city (whether or not it is a city or indeed whether an
> otherwise more important place is nearer). Though this should all be in
> upper case when used I add the tag in lower case with an initial capital
> letter as it would normally be written in a sentence.
>
> For sub divisions of this area the wiki has documented tags addr:suburb and
> addr:hamlet. I tend to default to suburb everywhere except when dealing
> with
> an actual isolated hamlet. Where there are two subdivisions as in Steve's
> example, I'd use hamlet for the smaller one  and suburb for the larger one.
>
> The wiki suggests to avoid addr:street and addr:place together but I use
> them for things like named retail/business parks where there is also a
> street address eg. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/527520264
>
> I do not tag the name of the property separately if it is the same as the
> main name=* tag
>
> Counties have not been formally part of postal addresses for many years.
> Royal Mail permits people to optionally add the name of the old Postal
> County, modern administrative or ceremonial county, or traditional county
> to
> their address according to their personal preference, but this plays no
> role
> in delivery. So I do not tag a county in the address.
>
>
> So I'd tag Steve's example: name=The Spring River, addr:street=Talbot Lane,
> addr:hamlet=Weldon, addr:suburb=Ebbsfleet Valley, addr:city=Swanscombe,
> addr:postcode=DA10 1AZ
>
> I hope that helps
>
> Adam
>
>
> On 18 Oct 2017 11:49 p.m., "Steve Doerr"  wrote:
>
> On 10/10/2017 19:07, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>
>
> It doesn't seem to have been mentioned here yet, but this quarter's UK
> mapping project is to improve addresses and postcodes:
> https://osmuk.org/uncategorized/jump-in-to-our-quarterly-mapping-project/
>
>
> It would be useful to have some guidance on tagging for UK addresses. For
> instance, how would you tag the different elements of the following address
> for a pub/carvery that opened recently near me:
>
> The Spring River
> Talbot Lane
> Weldon
> Ebbsfleet Valley
> SWANSCOMBE
> DA10 1AZ
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> 

[Talk-GB] Pebble Core for mapping?

[Steven Horner]

Maybe not quite the correct place but thought other OSM mappers may have
similar thoughts?

The new Pebble Core looks like it could be useful for surveying. It has
GPS, voice input as well as Bluetooth and an API. It could be useful for
recording voice notes with GPS coordinates if the API allows. It does have
a sim card slot but think that's of less interest. Anyone else see the
potential?
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Ways to get a big image of the world?

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

Have you looked at using QGIS and the OpenLayers plugin. You should be able
to use the OpenStreetMap layer and create a new Composer of any size you
like.

QGIS used to not like using Tile sources to create print outs but it did
just work with an internal tile server, it did give a warning but then
worked. I can't test with the actual OpenLayers sources at the moment due
to being behind a restricted corporate firewall. I could test if it works
tonight, if others on here don't confirm it works before then.

regards,
Steven

On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Filip Chirita Rares Cristian 
chirita.ra...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi everyone,

 Long time no talk. I have a question: is there any easy (does not require
 programming) of getting an OSM render of an area of my choice to *any*
 size? I want to get an A0 poster of the world for my room up and OSM seems
 like the best choice, really.

 Let me know if you know of anything, I checked this page:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_on_Paper and the best I could find
 was walking papers but that's only as big as A3.

 Thanks,
 Rares

 ___
 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] OSM Analysis updated with May 2014 OS Locator data

[Steven Horner]

 Use the direction of the way, i.e. the direction in which the OSM
 object was drawn.


Sorry in my defense I had just woken up, clearly not fully. I should have
thought about the direction of the way. The direction isn't all that
obvious if using ID rather than JOSM.



 When I sometimes encountered it, I solved the problem by putting the
 different streetnames on the building addresses, and ignoring the
 issue on the way itself. I wasn't aware of name:left etc!


In my original example of Myrtle Grove, I had done the same as you and
added addresses to the buildings as is desirable anyway. The problem with
this is that when I then do a search for Myrtle Grove, Roddymoor nothing
is returned. Nominatim finds nothing. Try this with another street in the
village High Terrace, Roddymoor and it will be found because the road is
tagged not just the buildings. Yet to confuse things further type try 1
Ivy Crescent, Roddymoor and the house is found yet the road isn't tagged
ideally which you could see by typing Ivy Crescent, Roddymoor

Other streets like East Terrace, Roddymoor don't return the street
because again only the building outlines are tagged.

This then lead me to test postcodes which I have added for some of the
streets where I knew them. Searching for those doesn't take me to the
actual street, which I was surprised about. Even though I tagged them ages
ago I had never tried searching postcodes. A search for East Terraces
postcode of DL15 9QZ returns nothing other than 1 house seperate from the
main street. Even though all of East Terrace have postcodes entered.

Maybe I remember now why I paused adding roads and buildings and stuck to
footpaths.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis updated with May 2014 OS Locator data

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

It's interesting and highlights a few problems local to me, some I had
buried my head in the sand temporarily because I don't know how to fix them
correctly. My biggest problem when tagging roads is what to name a road
when either side of the road is a different street. For instance the
analysis highlights Myrtle Grove as missing here:
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/map_browser?bbox=415474,536751,415809,537148referrer=area

Myrtle grove is the South side of the road labeled Chestnut Grove and
continues around to where the Road is labeled Elm Gardens. Almost all of
the streets in the estate are like this, where it is very misleading
because opposite sides of the road is a different named street. How should
this be mapped, I have steered clear of fixing it because I couldn't find
any guidance on how it should be labeled and technically is it even wrong.
The actual building footprints I have added the correct addresses to.

I use various OS products in my day job and interestingly OSM labels the
streets exactly the same as Vectormap Local does, anyone looking at either
OS or OSM maps would not be able to find Myrtle Grove. Another street where
I have always though was labeled wrong in the village is Roddymoor Road,
there is no street sign and I have near heard anyone refer to it as this.
The street on part of this road is not labeled (buildings are) it is East
Terrace and that's how anyone describing it or looking at signs would
describe it. Again OS do this the same which is probably why OSM has it
tagged like this.

All of this highlights that while OS Locator may have a difference and is
fantastic for finding potential problems, changing it so OS Locator
comparisons are 100% may not be the correct solution?

Any help appreciated and apologies if I should ask in a different list,
surely this is an incredibly common problem that I have somehow missed the
obvious solution to.

regards,
Steven


On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Shaun McDonald
sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.ukwrote:

 ITO’s OSM Analysis has been updated with the latest OS Locator data. Most
 places have dropped out of the 100% completeness compared to OS Locator.
 There’s now 18 places which have less than 95% completeness.

 http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main

 Shaun McDonald
 Developer
 ITO World
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] [OHM] New York Public Library - Building Inspector

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

I would be happy to help in anyway and have previously had a conversation
with Chris at NLS regarding helping georeference some of their maps.

I had been looking into creating my own historical version of OSM for a
local personal project, when I looked a few weeks ago Open Historical Map
was down and was never very usable before that. It sounds like from the
WIKI things maybe starting to happen, date slider planned, etc.

regards,
Steven

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Rob Nickerson
rob.j.nicker...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hi All, Historic Map folks,

 I have now heard from Chris at National Library of Scotland (NLS). He is
 very supportive* of the idea of using something similar to the NYPL
 Building Inspector software and website for digitizing some of NLS's
 historic maps. As NYPL have made all their software Open Source, it should
 be relatively easy to roll this out with NLS's (or other) maps.

 Who's interested in getting involved? You lot set the pace of this :-D

 Regards,
 Rob

 * NLS would be able to supply the scanned and geo-rectified maps. As with
 everyone else their ability to do any more is limited by their level of
 funding. This should not be a problem as we can self host the website.




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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hand-drawn OS maps on Wikimedia Commons

[Steven Horner]

 I think what is best is a 'world file'. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_file.

Apologies I sent an email earlier but had not copied into the list, I
mentioned I had tested using the World file. Copied my email below.

Hello,

I haven't had a lot of time the last few days to look at these again.

I did look at the KMZ files which couldn't be used directly in MAPC2MAPC,
a KMZ is just a zipped KML but when looking at the files they don't show
corner coordinates but the side coordinates. The last thing I did notice
though was that there are also World files available on the British
Library Georeferencing site. I downloaded one of these and renamed the
file extension from .wld to .tfw (I think) and it worked correctly.

If I can get a few hours spare I could download all the images and world
files and process them all.

I intend to do this for myself anyway, happy to upload somewhere?

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hand-drawn OS maps on Wikimedia Commons

[Steven Horner]

 Corner coordinates are now displaying, allowing these to be aligned 
 adjusted to fit. Have fun!


Are the configuration files available already somewhere or is there a plan
to make them available so users of the maps could just load the maps rather
than having to align themselves with the given coordinates.

I have just aligned about half a dozen of the maps using MAPC2MAPC and the
coordinates posted but it's a long job to do the whole 200 files. Happy to
post the files somewhere of the ones I have done.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Hand-drawn OS maps on Wikimedia Commons

[Steven Horner]

On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Rob Nickerson 
rob.j.nicker...@gmail.comwrote:



 Hi Steven,
 
 I've never heard of MAPC2MAPC but it looks great. I posted a comment [1]
 on the talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list noting that there are KMZ/KML
 files available on British Library website that include the corner
 coordinates. It appears that MAPC2MAPC should be able to read these, and
 then assuming the z/x/y.png output in the OSMTracker is standard TMS this
 would be exactly what we need to host these online as a map layer (just
 like Bing or any of the other OS out of copyright maps).


I've bodged together a test website displaying the St Ives map converted to
tiles, displayed with OpenLayers, it's easy to create tiles in MAPC2MAPC.
You can view the test here [1].



 Hope this helps. Do you think we can get these hosted on
 ooc.openstreetmap.org?


It would be good to get them all hosted in one place, I've been looking at
something similar for my own purposes but just hosted locally.


 p.s. Is there a Linux equivalent of MAPC2MAPC?


Not aware of anything like MAPC2MAPC for Linux I'm afraid

[1] https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2657852/OS_Drawings/index.html
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Archaeology

[Steven Horner]

Was it http://www.openhistoricalmap.org you were thinking of?
 On 31 Aug 2013 07:15, Brian Savidge a_sn...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Hi
 A friend of mine belongs to a local Archaeology group and they are going
 to do some surveying shortly using a variety of methods including ground
 penetrating radar.  I thought it would be nice if somehow the results
 get put onto Open Street Map.

 Are buried walls and landscape features suitable for recording on Open
 Street Map perhaps at level -1?  I have a feeling I saw something a while
 ago about a parallel open streetmap that was intended for archaeology and
 recording things that are no longer visible, but I have lost the link and
 can't find any references to the site.

 Any thoughts on the matter?






 ___
 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] Probation offices

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

I am mapping the Probation offices in Durham  Teesside, I work in IT for
them but I am unsure how to actually tag them correctly. Obviously they are
not courts or prisons.

Many probation offices are next to or part of courts.

For an idea of numbers there are around 20 in my area and throughout the
country there will be several hundred. More than there are courts.

Ideally amenity:probation would make sense but that doesn't exist and I
don't just want to create my own tags without discussion.

Any advice appreciated.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Probation offices

[Steven Horner]

Thanks I will go with office=probation unless others disagree. The
operator=* tag will come in useful in the near future when the government
privatises much of it.

Although possibly I should tag as name=Bishop Auckland Probation,
operator=Durham Tees Valley Probation Trust.
I had intended to tag as name:Durham Tees Valley Probation Trust. In the
same way you would for a supermarket chain like name=Tesco.




On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote:

 Many people believe the amenity key is already over used. office=probation
 or office=probation_service might used. An operator=* tag would be useful
 as well as a name if there is one. Discussion and documentation is good,
 but you can tag the offices with something that seems good to you (you are
 an expert in probation) then change the tags later if you discover
 something better later. If the office is part of a shared building, such as
 a court, you could add a tagged node for the office, if it is separate
 building you could just tag the building.

 Go for it!

 Steven Horner ste...@stevenhorner.com wrote:

 Hello,

 I am mapping the Probation offices in Durham  Teesside, I work in IT for
 them but I am unsure how to actually tag them correctly. Obviously they are
 not courts or prisons.

 Many probation offices are next to or part of courts.

 For an idea of numbers there are around 20 in my area and throughout the
 country there will be several hundred. More than there are courts.

 Ideally amenity:probation would make sense but that doesn't exist and I
 don't just want to create my own tags without discussion.

 Any advice appreciated.

 Thanks,
 Steven

 --

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


 ---
 cheers, Chris
 osm user, chillly




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Probation offices

[Steven Horner]

I will add an entry on the Wiki as mentioned and update the existing tags
where appropriate.

Thanks
Steven


On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote:

 You could also have a look at, and perhaps update, other probation
 offices. There are a few scattered about:

 http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=probation#values

 If you search for the names on the main OSM page you can find them to
 inspect the tagging.

 Tom


 On 7 August 2013 14:11, Jonathan Bennett jonobenn...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 07/08/2013 13:47, Steven Horner wrote:
  Thanks I will go with office=probation unless others disagree.

 No disagreement, but *please* document what you've used the tag for on
 the wiki. Don't bother with the approval process, but do give a brief
 description of what a probation office does and why you'd want to visit
 one, so people have an idea when to use the tag.


 J.

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




 --
 http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance

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




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Finding Unmapped public rights of way

[Steven Horner]

Personally I just produced the Durham map to show how much work is still to
be done.

Then use this as a basis to go out and survey.

A lot of the PRoW are incorrect anyway when actually on the ground. Even
when they have been amended officially, either the council doesn't update
their data or ordnance survey have not used the data sent.

This is one of the biggest advantages to OSM, it is updated. If the OSM and
walking community could come together to fill in the missing data. For
instance I know the Ramblers in Durham walked every path in the county a
couple of years ago. I wonder if they have the GPX tracks, I will make
enquiries.

 On 29 Jul 2013 12:53, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 27 July 2013 13:11, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com wrote:
  I'm trying to make use of the row files on rowmaps for derbyshire and
  staffordshire and and merging these with and osm map file to then produce
  maps that can highlight which paths are and aren't mapped.  I can put the
  derbyshire file into JOSM and download parts of the area and merge them
 to
  create an osm file that I can then save locally and import into
 Maperative.

 I assume that these digitised PRoW Maps from local councils are
 released under the OS OpenData License. That being the case, please
 note that Ordnance Survey have recently stated that their OS OpenData
 licence is not forward compatible with the ODC-By and ODbL [1]. Hence
 these datasets cannot currently be used as direct sources for
 contributing to OSM.

 Of course this doesn't prevent individuals generating data comparisons
 and then using them to focus mapping efforts that make use of other
 sources. And hopefully OS will be persuaded to amend their license, so
 we can start making full use of these PRoW GIS datasets.

 Robert.

 [1] http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/os-open-data.html

 --
 Robert Whittaker

 ___
 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] Finding Unmapped public rights of way

[Steven Horner]

I did a little bit of work early this morning on this for County Durham but
its very rough and nowhere near 100% accurate but gives a good idea of the
status of PRoW mapped in the area.

If you have a look at the 2 images linked below they show PRoW in County
Durham, one with background mapping, the other without. Green are PRoW
mapped in OSM, Red are PRoW not mapped in OSM.

Durham PRoW Status (No Background
map)https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4e_k58ZelMMaUgwLTdiR29iblU/edit?usp=sharing
Durham PRoW Status (Stamen
Map)https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4e_k58ZelMMS2l3UmlqNmFtTTg/edit?usp=sharing

This is very far from 100% accurate, but from visual inspection was quite
close.

I created this in QGIS comparing the OSM data to the PRoW released from
Durham County Council, I created a special query using intersects. This is
why it's not perfectly accurate because if an OSM mapped math intersected
with the PRoW data it would show up green, even though it may not be that
actual PRoW. A lot more work could be done to make this more accurate but
this was done in about 90 minutes this morning and most of that time was
spent converting OSM files and filtering out data I did not need.

I intend to write up what I did to create this, rough notes already done
and this may help others and hopefully someone can think of a much better
way. I am a beginner at most of this.


On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 2:05 AM, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:

 On 2013-07-27 13:11, Dudley Ibbett wrote:

 Hi

 I'm trying to make use of the row files on rowmaps for derbyshire and
 staffordshire and and merging these with and osm map file to then
 produce maps that can highlight which paths are and aren't mapped.  I
 can put the derbyshire file into JOSM and download parts of the area and
 merge them to create an osm file that I can then save locally and import
 into Maperative.  A modified rules file allows me to produce the prow
 footpath ways and the osm footpath ways as different coloured dotted
 lines so I can see which are/aren't mapped.  Unfortunately JOSM doesn't
 seem to be able to cope with merging large files.  I maybe asking to
 much of it as the files are quite big.  What I would like is to be able
 to get a merged file of the derbyshire, saffordshire row files and the
 equivalent osm map file on a regular basis (highlighting the rows that
 aren't mapped) so I can slowly pick away at the remaining footpaths the
 need mapping in this area.  Does anyone know of a simple way to do this?


 Depends on how big the files are, and how much memory you have on your
 computer. You can assign more memory to JOSM, which might help. eg run it
 with a command like this:
 java -Xmx1500M -jar josm-tested.jar
 That would allow it 1500MB.


 Or for merging large files, you could use Osmosis.
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/Osmosishttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Osmosis
 ie use a command like this:
 osmosis --rx file2.osm --rx file1.osm --m --wx merged.osm

 Craig


 __**_
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-gbhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Finding Unmapped public rights of way

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

If you are just wanting to visualy inspect them, could you do it in
TileMill. I produced a map of a large part of County Durham that showed
both OSM footpaths and PRoW differently coloured. It produced a MBtiles
file which I then converted to Z,X,Y PNG tiles I then added that as a
source into a local OpenLayers site which allowed me to view it from any
browser. You could convert it to another map format with Mobile Atlas
Creator and view the map that way. You could even use the produced map as a
background in JOSM if you then want to trace the paths?

You could also do it in QGIS and could probably get it to highlight only
the paths that are missing.

Not sure if either of those is exactly what you are after.

Steven

On 27 Jul 2013 13:12, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Hi

 I'm trying to make use of the row files on rowmaps for derbyshire and
 staffordshire and and merging these with and osm map file to then produce
 maps that can highlight which paths are and aren't mapped.  I can put the
 derbyshire file into JOSM and download parts of the area and merge them to
 create an osm file that I can then save locally and import into
 Maperative.  A modified rules file allows me to produce the prow footpath
 ways and the osm footpath ways as different coloured dotted lines so I can
 see which are/aren't mapped.  Unfortunately JOSM doesn't seem to be able to
 cope with merging large files.  I maybe asking to much of it as the files
 are quite big.  What I would like is to be able to get a merged file of the
 derbyshire, saffordshire row files and the equivalent osm map file on a
 regular basis (highlighting the rows that aren't mapped) so I can slowly
 pick away at the remaining footpaths the need mapping in this area.  Does
 anyone know of a simple way to do this?

 Many Thanks

 Dudley

 ___
 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] Historic Maps - Can you help?

[Steven Horner]

I've used the NLS maps a lot and wish there were more maps from England
available. Obviously this isn't a priority for them but would happily help
in anyway I can. I have looked at their online georeferencer but almost all
are done.

It's a shame the English equivelant aren't as open.

Steven
 On 13 Jul 2013 12:51, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi All,

 I have been speaking with the National Library of Scotland (NLS) about
 their large collection of historic maps. Currently they provide a online
 collection of historic maps as set out on their website [1]. Some of these
 are georeferenced and can be used in OSM [2]. There is lots more left to
 scan and georeference!! (Not all of them are Scotland maps, in fact there
 are many non-UK maps too).

 Question: Is anyone interested in helping georeference historic maps? The
 process is quite simple - NLS will do the scanning for us, we just need to
 follow the georeferencing guide [3] using a suitable piece of software such
 as QGIS (free).

 If you are interested in helping, what maps would you like to see? I am
 thinking maybe detailed Town Plans*, but we could also look at some
 emerging places maps (e.g. Antarctica).

 Regards,
 Rob

 *) Some Scottish Town Plans have already been scanned and just need
 georeferencing: http://maps.nls.uk/towns/index.html

 [1] http://maps.nls.uk/
 [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Library_of_Scotland
 [3] http://geo.nls.uk/urbhist/guides_georeferencing.html

 ___
 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] Obstructed Rights of Way

[Steven Horner]

I live near and and am a voluntary ranger for Durham County council. I will
follow them up for you. Will check on the map but if you can pass on any
extra details.

Although to be honest they haven't done anything recently I have reported
On 29 May 2013 20:20, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Hi

 I was doing some walking/mapping in Rookhope (Weardale) a few weeks back.
 Whilst I have managed to map out some walls to the West of Rookhope I
 struggled with the footpaths that go through these fields.  Two I attempted
 were obstructed.  (I've marked them with fixmes)  I have reported the
 problems to Durham County Council but have had no response from their web
 page for reporting problems nor from a direct email request for feedback.

 My general impression was that footpaths leading to the moorland are
 reasonably well marked but those crossing the fields neglected and not
 marked at all apart from the statutory signs by the metalled road.

 I'm not really in the position (too far south) to follow this up and was
 wondering if anyone knows of a walking group in this area that takes an
 interest in maintaining rights of way access that might be willing to take
 this on?

 Regards

 Dudley

 ___
 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] prow_ref

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

I am still not clear of the outcome of how to add the references to OSM,
there doesn't appear to be any standard format across each local authority.

A better source for the data is probably www.rowmaps.com Derbyshire data is
available from there, it's released under an OS Open Data licence so it can
be used.

regards,
Steven


On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.comwrote:

 I have managed to get hold of a couple of maps from our Parish Council
 with the prow reference numbers written on them.  The map itself is marked
 as not to be photo copied and appears to have been issued by Derbyshire
 County Council.  It dates back to 2004.

 Is it going to be OK for me to use this map to put the prow_ref numbers
 into OSM?  I assume the base map is OS and subject to their copyright but
 the numbers appear to have been penned on.  I will only use it for the
 numbers and not for drawing anything else.

 When it comes to adding the numbers I actually have two maps as the PC
 covers two Parishes so the numbers are repeated.  I have read a suggestion
 somewhere that you could add the first letters of the parish before the
 number as a prow reference number.  Has there been any consensus on this.
 i.e. are we just adding the number.  The Parish boundaries are in OSM so
 you can determine the parish related to the number.

 Many Thanks

 Dudley

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




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] help with rights of way and core paths in Scotland

[Steven Horner]

According to the government site below in Scotland the local authorities
don't have to signpost or record the Rights of Way:
https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/public-rights-of-way

The paths are recorded and signposted by the charity Scotways where there
appears to be plenty of information:
http://www.scotways.com/

regards,
Steven


On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Barry Cornelius 
barrycorneliu...@gmail.com wrote:

 I think I understand what councils have to do for public rights of way in
 England and Wales.  However, I don't understand the situation concerning
 rights of way in Scotland.  I would like some help, please.

 What kinds of paths are there in Scotland?
 I've seen mention of both rights of way and core paths.
 What's the difference?
 Who are the authorities that have legal obligations?
 What legal obligations do they have?
 Do they have to maintain a definitive map?

 --
 Barry Cornelius
 http://www.northeastraces.com/
 http://www.thehs2.com/
 http://www.rowmaps.com/
 http://www.oxonpaths.com/
 http://www.barrycornelius.com/


 __**_
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-gbhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Using UK postcode data to generate a heat map

[Steven Horner]

There is a good tutorial using QGIS to create a heat map here:
http://qgis.spatialthoughts.com/2012/07/tutorial-making-heatmaps-using-qgis-and.html

I haven't tried it yet though.

regards,
Steven

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:44 PM, David Fisher djfishe...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi all,

 A friend has come to me with an interesting-sounding request, and I just
 wondered how feasible it might be.
 He has a database of UK postcodes and some measurement or other (not sure
 what yet) and would like to create a heat map.
 Neither of us are techies, but I've been contributing to OSM for a year
 now and am familiar with JOSM and (to a lesser extent) QGIS.
 How difficult a project is likely to be?  (bearing in mind I'd be doing it
 in my spare time as a favour and for my personal interest)

 I assume you'd first have to convert the postcodes to lat/lon?  Then I'd
 need a rendering tool for the heat colours, and then a simple base map on
 which to overlay it (just thinking out loud now).

 It sounds like the sort of thing it'd be useful to have a tutorial for.
 If one exists, great!  If not, and if I'm successful, I might have a go at
 writing one.

 Thanks in advance,

 David.  (user Pgd81)

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




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=

[Steven Horner]

I've been looking at Durham records online (not available to download) they
are recorded like below:

Status: BW
Parish: Crook
Path Number: 37
Path Ref Number: 028037

The long reference number identifies the Parish (first part) and the path
number (last part) or I believe that's how it is made up from checking
different areas.

If sticking with one PROW code then I guess either prow_ref or prow:ref. I
used prow_ref.
If multiple codes are to be used then to my mind it would make sense to use.

prow:ref
prow:parish
prow:authority




On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Barry Cornelius barrycorneliu...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:47:34 Steven Horner ste...@stevenhorner.com
 wrote:

 I have followed the guidelines
 at http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/United_Kingdom_**
 Tagging_Guidelineshttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines
  but
 should I tag the footpath with the local authority reference which would
 aid
 logging the path to the Council if problems like FixMyPaths, if so how?


 Although I cannot add anything useful to the discussion about prow:ref and
 prow_ref, I do have some thoughts about the content of the tag.

 Often the data a council provides about a PROW includes duplication.  For
 example, often the parish is given as a nice friendly name and also as a
 number.  Here's an example of the data given about a PROW that is provided
 by Devon County Council (both council and PROW chosen at random):
SimpleData name=PARISHAbbots Bickington/SimpleData
SimpleData name=STATUSFootpath/**SimpleData
SimpleData name=NUMBER1/SimpleData
SimpleData name=NUMBER00/SimpleData
SimpleData name=CODE801FP1/**SimpleData
SimpleData name=NUMBER1Abbots Bickington Footpath 1/SimpleData

 So the id of the parish appears three times (twice as a name and once
 as a number); the number of the path appears three times; and the fact
 that it is a footpath appears three times.

 For this, I guess you've got a choice betwen using the contents of CODE or
 NUMBER1. I would recommend choosing whatever appears on the Council's
 interactive map.  Devon County Council uses the contents of the NUMBER1
 field, i.e.:
Abbots Bickington Footpath 1


 On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 16:36:53 Craig Loftus 
 craigloftus+osm@googlemail.**comcraigloftus%2b...@googlemail.com
 wrote:

 Is it wise to preclude adding more tags to the namespace? As an example,
 one
 additional tag that occurs to me is prow:operator (or
 prow:authority), to
 describe the local authority the references 'belong' to.


 On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:35:31 Robert Whittaker robert.whittaker+osm@gmail.*
 *com robert.whittaker%2b...@gmail.com wrote:

 I wouldn't have thought that listing the authority would be that
 useful -- you should be able to work that out from the county that the
 way resides in.


 My view is that it would be useful to include the id of the council as I
 do not think it's obvious which authority is involved.  For example, the
 data for Devon does not include Torbay.  And Bedfordshire is provided by
 two councils: Bedford and Central Bedfordshire.  Gloucestershire is
 provided by the councils of Gloucestershire and South Gloucestershire.

 For my web site (www.rowmaps.com), I've chosen to use the two letter
 codes that are used by the OS Opendata 1:50 000 Scale Gazetteer:
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.**uk/oswebsite/products/50k-**
 gazetteer/index.htmlhttp://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/50k-gazetteer/index.html

 The two letter code is in field 12 of their colon-separated file.  There
 are 208 different values.  Fields 13 and 14 of that file also provide short
 names and long names.

 Here are some examples of fields 12, 13 and 14:
BF:Beds:Bedford
BK:C Beds:Central Bedfordshire
DN:Devon:Devon
DU:Durham:Durham
GR:Glos:Gloucestershire
SG:S Glos:South Gloucestershire
TB:Torbay:Torbay

 Either you bundle the id of the council in with the name of the PROW as in:
Devon Abbots Bickington Footpath 1

 Or as suggested by Craig you could provide it in a separate tag - he was
 suggesting prow:operator or prow:authority.

 All of the data for councils that I've seen specify the parish in which
 the PROW appears.  So, really there are three separate pieces of
 information:
id of council
id of parish
id of PROW
 e.g.,:
Devon
Abbots Bickington
Footpath 1
 or:
DN
801
FP1

 --
 Barry Cornelius
 http://www.northeastraces.com/
 http://www.thehs2.com/
 http://www.rowmaps.com/
 http://www.oxonpaths.com/
 http://www.barrycornelius.com/
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http

Re: [Talk-GB] Marking landuse and field boundaries

[Steven Horner]

I hadn't looked at the South of Durham around Houghall before, that is
fantastic. I had seen the centre was well mapped, but to go to the detail
of individual trees. It isn't too much detail either in that particular
setting (in my opinion). There does appear to be quite a few people mapping
County Durham.

I will use Bowburn and South of Durham as a reference and example.


On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote:


 I was inspired by Strange but Untrue mapping from Bowburn and South of
 Durham City. She did amazing detail with the footpaths, types of barriers,
 and gates. She also went on some interesting walks by the looks of it.

 Over a year ago, I did some tracing to make a line of barriers and landuse
 from Croxdale curving S/SE round to Sherburn. The idea to make it a target
 for me to do (including ground surveying as needed  house numbers),
 filling in between there and Durham City. Sadly I've not been too strong on
 it.

 Middlesbrough has a lot more land use are surrounding it. But it's been
 done by as large areas of farmland to quickly fill in the blank canvas,
 and I'm not sure it has much ground-knowledge at all.

 Perhaps together, we could make County Durham a great example of landuse
 and barrier mapping?

 --
 Gregory
 o...@livingwithdragons.com
 http://www.livingwithdragons.com

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




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Marking landuse and field boundaries

[Steven Horner]

Good job there Graham. I know most of the area around there quite well. The
Bing imagery is old, it still shows the cement works which was demolished
in 2005 I think. Compare it to Google and you can see it is there no more.
Although you can't use Google Satellite view to trace there is surely no
harm in looking at it in another window to help identify if something is a
wall or a fence then jumping back to Bing imagery to fill in, maybe that
isn't allowed but you aren't drawing it from Google maps. You can see
several of the bits you missed because you were unsure are clearly walls.

Something I have been considering doing on walks is a timelapse using my
GoPro, setting it to take pictures every few seconds which would aid in
identifying later. The battery doesn't last long so it could only be used
for an hour or so but I will give that a go next time. It has a wide POV so
captures quite a lot.


On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.comwrote:

 I guess it depends on what you think is 'difficult' - to actually survey
 them means a lot of walking, so I tend to only add the ones that I can
 remember when I get home, and get the routes from Bing.

 I have just had another look and for dry stone walls, it is quite easy to
 distinguish some in Bing images, which lends itself to armchair mapping,
 but it depends on the direction of the sun - I feel I need the shadow to be
 confident that it is a wall I am looking at and not a track.  But a
 reasonable guess that there is a feature there is probably more use than a
 sheet full of nothingness...so I have just spent 20 mins with bing imagery
 adding walls to a hillside that I know has lots of walls on it, and I had
 started adding quite a few from my last visit (
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.74429lon=-2.09388zoom=16layers=M).
   The suspicious gaps are where I can not tell/remember if there is a fence
 to replace the apparently disappeared wall   Wire fences of course are
 much harder to spot  I'll look for the errors next time I am there and
 correct them...

 Graham.


 On 1 January 2013 11:15, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com wrote:

 My main motivation for getting involved with OSM was to get a better
 walking map on my garmin.   To this extent I have been adding lots of
 barriers in the southern part of the Peak District.  So it is being done.
  Whilst it is time consuming I wouldn't say it is difficult.  I do survey
 with a GPS and camera as much as possible, mainly on foot.  It can be
 difficult to determine the type of barrier from satellite imagery so having
 pictures to refer to makes it easier.  JOSM supports photo mapping really
 well.  You do need to check GPS tracks against the imagery and be prepared
 to adjust the imagery offset.  I wouldn't get overly concerned about the
 accuracy of the position of the barrier.  A fairly good job can be done
 with the existing tools available and people can always adjust as these
 improve.

 I must admit I don't map land use if it is farmland.  To me if it isn't
 mapped it is farmland.  It would seem a reasonable default.

 Please give barrier mapping a go as we are out there.

 Dudley



 Sent from my iPad

 On 31 Dec 2012, at 22:00, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I would like to see field boundaries and land uses in OSM, for the same
 reason as you.   I think the main reason that there are not many in there,
 is that they are very difficult to survey.  I have just added them from
 memory when I have been able to remember enough - it is more realistic to
 add them now that we have high resolution Bing imagery for countryside
 areas, but it is a lot of work, even from an armchair.

 Graham.

 On 31 December 2012 21:17, Steven Horner ste...@stevenhorner.com wrote:

 Personally I would love to see fields (landuse) and the walls/fences
 that make this up marked on OSM but as per the Wiki this is a complicated
 area:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Land_use_and_areas_of_natural_land

 I mapped a small area with landuse and some fences months ago but
 refrained from doing anymore because not many others appear to be doing it.
 You can see what I did here:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.72508907318115lon=-1.7569917440414429zoom=17

 Some of this I need to fix, it was my early days of OSM editing.

 I would love to use OSM one day as a replacement for Explorer (25K) maps
 but until things like walls/fences are shown it would be hard to do. My
 idea was to use the OSM to produce some walking guides in printed or static
 form but they would need this data added for those areas.

 I know everyones view is different but do others on here use the landuse
 and barrier=fence tags in the same way or does it make it look too
 complicated.

 Steven

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




 --
 Graham Jones
 Hartlepool, UK

[Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM

[Steven Horner]

Hello,

I have been adding to OSM for about 18 months but more active in recent
weeks. I have requested the PRoW from Durham County Council, they currently
have not released their data but do have it electronically, just
not publicly available to download yet. Their response was more postive
than I expected they were looking into it already and were hoping to have a
more official response before Xmas (haven't yet).

I have added several footpaths locally but I am often left wondering how to
tag these or how to break them into sections. I have followed the
guidelines at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines but
should I tag the footpath with the local authority reference which would
aid logging the path to the Council if problems like
FixMyPathshttp://www.free-map.org.uk/hampshire/,
if so how?

The other question is do I add the footpath exactly as the Council 
Ordnance Survey have recorded it or amend it, if I know it is incorrect on
the ground. Currently I have added it as per my own GPX tracks and local
knowledge which is more accurate, but officially the PRoW isn't recorded as
I have added it to OSM. Do I continue as I have, add both tagged
differently or some other way?

Finally should I split the path I have added if it is recorded as
two separate paths on the definitive maps. I'm sure this must of been
discussed somewhere before and I have missed it?

*PRoW from OS:*
I read Bill Chadwick's mention of hopefully one day the OS would release
national paths as Open Data. I don't think that will happen soon, as part
of the OS Insight program they were recently testing a new product that
included all footpaths in vector format. This will be a commercial product,
so unlikely they will be releasing it as Open Data themselves.

Thanks
Steven

-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM

[Steven Horner]

Barry: I applied on Nov 28th but contacted the PRoW team who I have some
contact with, I received the below response on Dec 10th. It's good to read
they have made some progress and applied for an exemption. Do you have any
thoughts on how you would tag the paths if adding to OSM as I mentioned.

I was just looking at the data you have up on your website when your reply
came in ;-)

Steven

*Re: Digital PROW information***



At present we don't supply the digital information other than direct people
to the online Definitive Map.



We are aware of the Government's Open Data project and we (in conjunction
with DCC's GIS people) are looking into the possiblility of making the data
available in alternative ways.



We hope to have sorted something out regarding our policy either this week
or early next week.  I can let you know as soon as I do.



regards

Leigh Coulson

Access  Rights of Way


On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Barry Cornelius 
barrycorneliu...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, 31 Dec 2012, Steven Horner wrote:

 I have been adding to OSM for about 18 months but more active in recent
 weeks. I have requested the PRoW from Durham County Council, they
 currently
 have not released their data but do have it electronically, just
 not publicly available to download yet. Their response was more postive
 than
 I expected they were looking into it already and were hoping to have a
 more
 official response before Xmas (haven't yet).


 I've also applied to Durham County Council for their dataset containing
 details of their PROWs.  I did this on December 6th.  As you say they've
 been positive.  They updated me on December 18th saying that they had
 applied for an exemption from the Ordnance Survey but they thought it
 possible that they would not get this before the Christmas holidays.

 --
 Barry Cornelius
 http://www.northeastraces.com/
 http://www.thehs2.com/
 http://www.rowmaps.com/
 http://www.oxonpaths.com/
 http://www.barrycornelius.com/




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM

[Steven Horner]

Andy raised several good points regarding tagging and references but not
sure I would agree about ignoring paths if not existing on the ground.
Officially if a path exists on the Definitive map then you have the right
to walk it, this is the information I was given by the PRoW team when I
became a volunteer ranger years ago in County Durham. As part of that I
adopted several paths I agreed to walk and report any problems.

Dudley is correct regarding a deadline, a few months ago I wrote a post
regarding some local footpaths and this mentions the deadline:
http://stevenhorner.com/blog/2012/06/06/kittys-wood-public-rights-of-way/
I have seen lots of paths that are PRoW that have been blocked off and/or
diverted usually without notifying the local Council. You can report these
and I would encourage everyone to do this or you will lose them.

Andy: I can see in the link you mentioned where the track isn't marked on
the ground, it is marked on OS Maps, not the one around the edge. From
looking at both Bing  Google satellites it does look like a fainter track
does exist at the location and the more obvious one skirts the edge. A more
interesting example of the differences between on the ground and recorded
PRoW exists here (just NE of your link):
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.91864lon=-0.77876zoom=17layers=M
The actual recorded PRoW  (byway) as shown by OS cuts the corner slightly,
but is shown as not being visible on the ground (the PRoW Byway route is
not recoreded on OSM). The green lines on Explorer maps only show that a
PRoW exists, it is only visible on the ground if it has black dashed lines
under it.

To my mind it would be good if somehow via tags OSM could do something
similar.
designation: public_footpath is only used if it's a PRoW, if it's not
tagged as such then it's not an official PRoW. That is how I understood it
to be used. The surface tag possibly shows if it exists on the ground but
not very reliably because you may tag as grass but is it visible.


Steven


On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Steven Horner ste...@stevenhorner.comwrote:

 Hello,

 I have been adding to OSM for about 18 months but more active in recent
 weeks. I have requested the PRoW from Durham County Council, they currently
 have not released their data but do have it electronically, just
 not publicly available to download yet. Their response was more postive
 than I expected they were looking into it already and were hoping to have a
 more official response before Xmas (haven't yet).

 I have added several footpaths locally but I am often left wondering how
 to tag these or how to break them into sections. I have followed the
 guidelines at
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines but
 should I tag the footpath with the local authority reference which would
 aid logging the path to the Council if problems like 
 FixMyPathshttp://www.free-map.org.uk/hampshire/,
 if so how?

 The other question is do I add the footpath exactly as the Council 
 Ordnance Survey have recorded it or amend it, if I know it is incorrect on
 the ground. Currently I have added it as per my own GPX tracks and local
 knowledge which is more accurate, but officially the PRoW isn't recorded as
 I have added it to OSM. Do I continue as I have, add both tagged
 differently or some other way?

 Finally should I split the path I have added if it is recorded as
 two separate paths on the definitive maps. I'm sure this must of been
 discussed somewhere before and I have missed it?

 *PRoW from OS:*
 I read Bill Chadwick's mention of hopefully one day the OS would release
 national paths as Open Data. I don't think that will happen soon, as part
 of the OS Insight program they were recently testing a new product that
 included all footpaths in vector format. This will be a commercial product,
 so unlikely they will be releasing it as Open Data themselves.

 Thanks
 Steven

 --
 www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
  @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM

[Steven Horner]

Thanks Andy that's what I was looking for. The job of adding footpaths,
bridleways and byways gets more complicated if we want it to be as accurate
as possible. The prow=ref obviously isn't needed but good to have if it's
known.

-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Byway between Muston and Belvoir (was Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM)

[Steven Horner]

By Public Way Identifiers I presume you mean a public footpath or bridleway
sign and the direction they point. I had an angry confrontation once with a
farmer who would have would of worn my finger out if I had a bleep machine.

I had walked across his field according to the map which was a couple of
years old and got to the end of the field to find a padlocked gate. I
returned back to the sign and it was pointing in a different direction
(straight ahead) and also had 3 way markers all pointing straight ahead. I
presumed the route had been changed so followed the arrow after a about 50
yards I heard various abuse from over the wall. The farmer was angry that
we weren't following the map and could we read one. We explained (or tried
to) but he said the gate was someone elses and that was the only way we
could go. There were no visible paths on the ground in any direction.

Ever since then I have never trusted signs and the direction they point. In
this case we thought the path had been changed because there were so many
signs and way markers all pointing a different direction to the map.

Steven


On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 2:15 PM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.ukwrote:

 Steven Horner wrote:

  A more interesting example of the differences between on the ground and
 recorded PRoW exists here (just NE of your link):
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=52.91864lon=-0.77876**
 zoom=17layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.91864lon=-0.77876zoom=17layers=M


 For information I've made the GPS trace public:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/**user/SomeoneElse/traces/**1360385http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/traces/1360385

 It's got waypoints in it - look for those labelled sym=Boat Ramp for
 PROW identifiers.

  The actual recorded PRoW  (byway) as shown by OS cuts the corner
 slightly, but is shown as not being visible on the ground (the PRoW Byway
 route is not recoreded on OSM). The green lines on Explorer maps only show
 that a PRoW exists, it is only visible on the ground if it has black dashed
 lines under it.


 The relevant PROW identifiers are adjacent to these OSM nodes:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/**browse/node/480255185http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/480255185
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/**browse/node/480255309http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/480255309

 The one at node 480255185 just makes it clear that the byway doesn't turn
 northwest.  The one at node 480255309 indicates south and vaguely
 northeast, but not so far different from the track around the edge of the
 field to be sure that the official right of way was definitely cutting
 the corner (unlike the other one by the canal bridge).

 At the time I was there the only transport options you could have used to
 cut the corner with would have been hovercraft or bog-snorkelling - even
 the main track was 6-inches deep in mud in most places.

 If we were able to incorporate PROW data from the council then in this
 case it would make sense to mode the designation=byway_open_to_**all_traffic
 to the direct corner-cutting route, since the sign at node 480255309 is
 ambiguous, but it wouldn't make sense to mark it as a highway.

 Cheers,
 Andy


 __**_
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-gbhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Byway between Muston and Belvoir (was Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM)

[Steven Horner]

It's a small world, the incident I described was also in Weardale near
Thimbleby Hill South of Stanhope. I didn't use OSM then and checking OSM
the path is not marked. A path on the opposite side of the wall where the
farmer was stood is marked which is incorrect and will lead to someone else
being shouted at unless I fix it.

There is a massive job to add all of the paths in Weardale to OSM. I will
gradually add them as I am out walking. I have GPX tracks of many previous
walks and good records.

Steven


On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.comwrote:

 I have had similar issues, but without the abusive farmer in your part of
 the world? (Weardale).  My old OS map said the Weardale w
 Way went through this field, and there was a waymark at the junction with
 the road, but once in the (very large!) field, there was no obvious way out
 - just rusty gates and barbed wire - I think the route was changed, but
 they didn't take down all the old waymarks, which left a lot of paths to
 nowhere.   Can't remember how I mapped that in the end

 Graham.




 I had walked across his field according to the map which was a couple of
 years old and got to the end of the field to find a padlocked gate. I
 returned back to the sign and it was pointing in a different direction
 (straight ahead) and also had 3 way markers all pointing straight ahead. I
 presumed the route had been changed so followed the arrow after a about 50
 yards I heard various abuse from over the wall. The farmer was angry that
 we weren't following the map and could we read one. We explained (or tried
 to) but he said the gate was someone elses and that was the only way we
 could go. There were no visible paths on the ground in any direction.


 --
 Graham Jones
 Hartlepool, UK.




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Byway between Muston and Belvoir (was Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM)

[Steven Horner]

Weardale is a bit hard to define. It is generally thought of as starting at
Wolsingham and running up to the edge of the County Boundary at the high
point above Killhope before dropping down to Nenthead and Cumbria. The
North and South are bounded by the hills above the valley with the
exception running up to Rookhope.

As for staying I would generally say Wolsingham, Frosterley or Stanhope.
All of which have pubs but unsure about which have WiFi. I have used a Cafe
WiFi in Wolsingham before.


On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.comwrote:

 I tried searching on Weardale but there doesn't appear to be a POI marking
 the Dale!

 For those that know this area where would make a good base for walking and
 also have a Pub with wifi for updating OSM in the evening?

 Thanks

 Dudley

 Sent from my iPad

 On 31 Dec 2012, at 16:47, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:

 Even smaller - I am pretty sure the problem I had was just to the North of
 Stanhope

 You are right, there are plenty of opportunities to add footpaths to
 Weardale.
 I concentrated on the Weardale Way (which you can see on Lonvia's Hiking
 Map if you are interested (
 http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=11lat=54.72073lon=-1.8885)).


 When we met a branching footpath I tried to record a short stub to show it
 is there, but we have not followed most of them.There is also a marked
 'Mineral Valley's Walk' through the area that we will probably try to
 follow during 2013but there are huge numbers of 'normal' public
 footpaths too.my challenge is trying to incorporate these into a nice
 walk, as we don't tend to go 'mapping' - we go for a walk, and I take my
 GPX receiver with me!

 Cheers


 Graham.



 On 31 December 2012 16:20, Steven Horner ste...@stevenhorner.com wrote:

 It's a small world, the incident I described was also in Weardale near
 Thimbleby Hill South of Stanhope. I didn't use OSM then and checking OSM
 the path is not marked. A path on the opposite side of the wall where the
 farmer was stood is marked which is incorrect and will lead to someone else
 being shouted at unless I fix it.

 There is a massive job to add all of the paths in Weardale to OSM. I will
 gradually add them as I am out walking. I have GPX tracks of many previous
 walks and good records.

 Steven


 On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Graham Jones 
 grahamjones...@gmail.comwrote:

 I have had similar issues, but without the abusive farmer in your part
 of the world? (Weardale).  My old OS map said the Weardale w
 Way went through this field, and there was a waymark at the junction
 with the road, but once in the (very large!) field, there was no obvious
 way out - just rusty gates and barbed wire - I think the route was changed,
 but they didn't take down all the old waymarks, which left a lot of paths
 to nowhere.   Can't remember how I mapped that in the end

 Graham.




 I had walked across his field according to the map which was a couple
 of years old and got to the end of the field to find a padlocked gate. I
 returned back to the sign and it was pointing in a different direction
 (straight ahead) and also had 3 way markers all pointing straight ahead. I
 presumed the route had been changed so followed the arrow after a about 50
 yards I heard various abuse from over the wall. The farmer was angry that
 we weren't following the map and could we read one. We explained (or tried
 to) but he said the gate was someone elses and that was the only way we
 could go. There were no visible paths on the ground in any direction.


 --
 Graham Jones
 Hartlepool, UK.




 --
 www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
  @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
  0191 645 2265
  stevenhorner




 --
 Graham Jones
 Hartlepool, UK.

 ___

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




-- 
www.stevenhorner.com  http://www.stevenhorner.com
 @stevenhorner http://twitter.com/stevenhorner
 0191 645 2265
 stevenhorner
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Marking landuse and field boundaries

[Steven Horner]

Personally I would love to see fields (landuse) and the walls/fences that
make this up marked on OSM but as per the Wiki this is a complicated area:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Land_use_and_areas_of_natural_land

I mapped a small area with landuse and some fences months ago but refrained
from doing anymore because not many others appear to be doing it. You can
see what I did here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.72508907318115lon=-1.7569917440414429zoom=17

Some of this I need to fix, it was my early days of OSM editing.

I would love to use OSM one day as a replacement for Explorer (25K) maps
but until things like walls/fences are shown it would be hard to do. My
idea was to use the OSM to produce some walking guides in printed or static
form but they would need this data added for those areas.

I know everyones view is different but do others on here use the landuse
and barrier=fence tags in the same way or does it make it look too
complicated.

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