Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Mark Williams]

Gregory wrote:
> Ah, I hadn't seen http://openbusmap.org/ / http://www.öpnvkarte.de/
>  before.
> It looks cool and I sometimes want to know the route the buses take (in
> a non-schematic way). Just a quick look of my parents place and I've
> spotted two routes that are slightly off.
> 

It does look a nice render - I was impressed that the IOW Steam Railway
shows as well as the 'main line' train. All the ferries too! This beats
several of the commercial maps, my car still refuses to believe in the
Southampton-Cowes fairy!

It only appears to go to Zoom 13 though - not quite big enough to read
the print, without getting out of my chair...

I shall show it to some folk & see what enthusiasm it can engender :)

Mark


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

[Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Bob Hawkins]

Footpaths and bridleways are numbered on definitive maps but rarely on 
signposts or waymarks.  Often numbered on a parish or community basis (HA10, 
for example), their use appears to be for legal puposes mainly, rather than as 
an aid to navigation.  Having said that, my local Chiltern Society footpath map 
is annotated with the definitve numbers.  So, I wonder what OSM mappers in GB 
feel about adding the official numbers to such ways.  I suspect copyright is an 
issue because the rights of way numbers will invariably be on maps based upon 
the Ordnance Survey, unless anyone knows that they are available from another 
source. ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Thomas Wood]

Bob Hawkins wrote:
> Footpaths and bridleways are numbered on definitive maps but rarely on 
> signposts or waymarks.  Often numbered on a parish or community basis 
> (HA10, for example), their use appears to be for legal puposes mainly, 
> rather than as an aid to navigation.  Having said that, my local 
> /Chiltern Society/ footpath map is annotated with the definitve 
> numbers.  So, I wonder what OSM mappers in GB feel about adding the 
> official numbers to such ways.  I suspect copyright is an issue because 
> the rights of way numbers will invariably be on maps based upon the 
> Ordnance Survey, unless anyone knows that they are available from 
> another source.

I find them very regularly numbered in my home area of South London, and 
I have also seen them explicitly numbered on some of the more frequented 
trails in a national park (I cannot remember which, probably the Peak 
District though).

Where the source is a signpost, I'd say include the number, I'd err on 
the side of caution and not source from a map, but I'd also be happy to 
source footpath numbers from the written definitive description of the 
right of way, which should be available from the council.

I have put a little effort into finding and mapping the footpaths in my 
home borough, when the council numbered the signs, I didn't quite get 
around to mapping them all though...
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Sutton_England/PROWs
http://www.flickr.com/photos/grandedgemaster/3386460488/

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Gregory Williams]

I wouldn't take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely confident
that it's compatible with OSM's license. It sounds like your Chiltern
Society map is an annotated OS map, therefore unsuitable.

 

Unfortunately I think it depends upon where you live as to how well the refs
are put up on signs. In the last few years I've found that my area of Kent
have done pretty well with getting refs displayed.

 

From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Bob Hawkins
Sent: 17 March 2010 08:52
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

 

Footpaths and bridleways are numbered on definitive maps but rarely on
signposts or waymarks.  Often numbered on a parish or community basis (HA10,
for example), their use appears to be for legal puposes mainly, rather than
as an aid to navigation.  Having said that, my local Chiltern Society
footpath map is annotated with the definitve numbers.  So, I wonder what OSM
mappers in GB feel about adding the official numbers to such ways.  I
suspect copyright is an issue because the rights of way numbers will
invariably be on maps based upon the Ordnance Survey, unless anyone knows
that they are available from another source. 

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Peter Childs]

On 17 March 2010 07:09, Mark Williams  wrote:
> Gregory wrote:
>> Ah, I hadn't seen http://openbusmap.org/ / http://www.öpnvkarte.de/
>>  before.
>> It looks cool and I sometimes want to know the route the buses take (in
>> a non-schematic way). Just a quick look of my parents place and I've
>> spotted two routes that are slightly off.
>>
>
> It does look a nice render - I was impressed that the IOW Steam Railway
> shows as well as the 'main line' train. All the ferries too! This beats
> several of the commercial maps, my car still refuses to believe in the
> Southampton-Cowes fairy!
>
> It only appears to go to Zoom 13 though - not quite big enough to read
> the print, without getting out of my chair...
>
> I shall show it to some folk & see what enthusiasm it can engender :)
>
> Mark
>
>

Fun more work, That will be a fun couple of days work adding routes
for every South Eastern Train, and then I'll have to get on to the
Medway buses too.

Nice map shame about the lack of data guess we'll just have to add it.

Peter.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Richard Mann]

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Mark Williams
 wrote:
> Gregory wrote:
> It only appears to go to Zoom 13 though - not quite big enough to read
> the print, without getting out of my chair...

It goes all the way to z18, but just gives you a blank if you go
somewhere it's not rendered. Blanks get rendered on demand, so go back
when it's had a chance to render them. I haven't figured out quite how
often it updates, but it's probably roughly weekly.

Richard

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Nick Whitelegg]

>I wouldn?t take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely 
confident that it?s compatible with OSM?s license. It sounds like your 
Chiltern Society >map is an annotated OS map, therefore unsuitable.

Is it though? (I don't know, just a rhetorical question)

The OS did not come up with the numbers, the council did. So how can the 
OS claim copyright over the numbering?

Nick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Nick Whitelegg]

>I wouldn?t take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely 
confident that it?s compatible with OSM?s license

Sorry, meant to raise this point in my last reply. 

Would "any source" also include footpath signs with the number on? This is 
common practice on the Isle of Wight, and I myself have used these signs 
as a source before. These signs would be equivalent to road signs showing 
the road number, and will have been erected by the council - so I 
definitely can't see an issue there.

Nick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

I've last week added all the ref= numbers for my local footpaths. I went
into the library and took the definitive written route description book off
the shelf, not the map. Is the written list that is definitive (or at least
used to be).

Cheers

Andy

>-Original Message-
>From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
>boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Bob Hawkins
>Sent: 17 March 2010 8:52 AM
>To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering
>
>Footpaths and bridleways are numbered on definitive maps but rarely on
>signposts or waymarks.  Often numbered on a parish or community basis
>(HA10, for example), their use appears to be for legal puposes mainly,
>rather than as an aid to navigation.  Having said that, my local Chiltern
>Society footpath map is annotated with the definitve numbers.  So, I wonder
>what OSM mappers in GB feel about adding the official numbers to such ways.
>I suspect copyright is an issue because the rights of way numbers will
>invariably be on maps based upon the Ordnance Survey, unless anyone knows
>that they are available from another source.
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 9.0.791 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2752 - Release Date: 03/17/10
>07:33:00
>



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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

We've been using it on the
http://mappa-mercia.org/public-transport-map.shtml site for the last year
and it's been invaluable. Generally the updates have been about a week to 10
days behind but sometimes up to 3 weeks in the past.

Cheers

Andy 

>-Original Message-
>From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
>boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Mann
>Sent: 17 March 2010 9:29 AM
>To: Mark Williams
>Cc: Public transport/transit/shared taxi related topics; OSM - Talk GB
>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?
>
>On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Mark Williams
> wrote:
>> Gregory wrote:
>> It only appears to go to Zoom 13 though - not quite big enough to read
>> the print, without getting out of my chair...
>
>It goes all the way to z18, but just gives you a blank if you go
>somewhere it's not rendered. Blanks get rendered on demand, so go back
>when it's had a chance to render them. I haven't figured out quite how
>often it updates, but it's probably roughly weekly.
>
>Richard
>
>___
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 9.0.791 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2752 - Release Date: 03/17/10
>07:33:00


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[David Groom]

- Original Message - 
From: "Nick Whitelegg" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering


>
>>I wouldn?t take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely
> confident that it?s compatible with OSM?s license
>
> Sorry, meant to raise this point in my last reply.
>
> Would "any source" also include footpath signs with the number on? This is
> common practice on the Isle of Wight, and I myself have used these signs
> as a source before. These signs would be equivalent to road signs showing
> the road number, and will have been erected by the council - so I
> definitely can't see an issue there.
>
I confirm I've been following the same practice as Nick outlines above on 
the IOW.

Probably well over 90% of  footpath / bridleways / byways signs on the IOW 
have a ref number on them, and I see no difference using this as a source 
for OSM than using road signs as a source for road names.

David


> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Gregory Williams]

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Nick Whitelegg
> Sent: 17 March 2010 10:22
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering
> 
> >I wouldn?t take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely
> confident that it?s compatible with OSM?s license
> 
> Sorry, meant to raise this point in my last reply.
> 
> Would "any source" also include footpath signs with the number on? This
> is
> common practice on the Isle of Wight, and I myself have used these
> signs
> as a source before. These signs would be equivalent to road signs
> showing
> the road number, and will have been erected by the council - so I
> definitely can't see an issue there.

Ah, I did write that a bit ambiguously really I guess. I, and I think
virtually everyone surveying data in OSM, think that getting the refs from
the signs in-situ is perfectly fine. It's just like getting road refs or
street names from signs at the edge of the road.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] High speed rail link

[Peter Miller]

On 12 Mar 2010, at 18:21, Andy Mabbett wrote:

>
> On Fri, March 12, 2010 18:13, Nicholas Barnes wrote:
>
>> As somebody who'll be affected by the new High Speed Rail Link
>> (http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/), I thought it  
>> may be
>> useful to map the proposed changes.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I haven't the first clue where to start.
>
> Somebody already made a KML file, using OpenStreetMap data:
>
>   http://bit.ly/cAdu76
>
> but that does not inlcude the Birmingham spur, and, judging by some  
> of the
> anles, is only an outline.

That 'someone' was me and a couple of us have been working on it  
adding detail to the map over the past 24 hours including the spur and  
station boundaries.

It is a 'wiki map' so others are also free to edit it however    
the UMapper site has none of the required social tools to moderate  
changes, not even a list of who has changed it and when, no roll back  
and no transaction locking - for that reason I am now intending to  
lock it down to a list of trusted editors in 24 hours time.

Check out the Route section of the High Speed 2 Wikipedia article for  
links to viewing the KML on Google Maps etc. Also add your name to the  
talk page if you want to be a 'trusted editor'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_2#Route

I would love to see a way of creating overlays like this using  
Potlatch which is far cleverer than UMapper's editor. Such an overlay  
does not belong in OSM, but needs to be 'on' OSM.


Regards,


Peter


>
> -- 
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> ** via webmail **
>
>
> ___
> 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] Footpath numbering

[Mike Collinson]

And I discovered something interesting that may be applicable countrywide.  A 
member of the Ramblers Association kindly made a definitive footpath map for me 
in the 1970s - hand-inked on the Otley and Ilkley OS 1:25000 sheets. As I 
recall, this was around the time the original PRoW survey was done.  Both OS 
sheets were the latest available at the time but published in the 1950s ... so 
they are now clearly out of copyright. I wonder if the same applies to the bulk 
of original maps that the councils around the country hold? I have never seen 
one.

Mike


At 11:19 AM 17/03/2010, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
>>I wouldn?t take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely 
>confident that it?s compatible with OSM?s license. It sounds like your 
>Chiltern Society >map is an annotated OS map, therefore unsuitable.
>
>Is it though? (I don't know, just a rhetorical question)
>
>The OS did not come up with the numbers, the council did. So how can the 
>OS claim copyright over the numbering?
>
>Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Steve Doerr]

On 17/03/2010 09:12, Peter Childs wrote:

Fun more work, That will be a fun couple of days work adding routes
for every South Eastern Train, and then I'll have to get on to the
Medway buses too.

Nice map shame about the lack of data guess we'll just have to add it.

Presumably we can't crib from published bus-maps and timetables, as that 
would be breach of copyright? I guess it means riding every bus route 
from terminus to terminus? Hopefully they sell 'rover' tickets!


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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Tom Chance]

On 17 March 2010 15:21, Steve Doerr  wrote:

>  Presumably we can't crib from published bus-maps and timetables, as that
> would be breach of copyright? I guess it means riding every bus route from
> terminus to terminus? Hopefully they sell 'rover' tickets!
>
>
All those floating bus stops give a pretty good indication of where buses
go. I've found that some routes I use occasionally were easy to enter by
using my memory and following the stops. There aren't many routes in my
patch of south east London that really wiggle around.

Best,
Tom

-- 
http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

[Gregory]

When living in Durham last year I would get the free local paper through the
door and flick straight to the planning notices. If a footpath was closed I
got it's reference number from the description, and sometimes 2-4 other
references. Occasionally I got a road name that I had missed (broken sign
etc.). I was also looking out for construction work that might add a road or
something, although there is a long wait and then I need to go out an survey
it, I kept them in mind.

I never made it to the library to look at old maps or descriptions. I
thought about it, but I'm not sure what library branch I would have to go to
or if it was a special one where you have to request the books. I think my
small local library in London is good for stuff like that (but less
footpaths).

-- 
Gregory
o...@livingwithdragons.com
http://www.livingwithdragons.com
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Gregory]

On 17 March 2010 00:09, Mark Williams  wrote:

> All the ferries too! This beats several of the commercial maps, my car
> still refuses to believe in the
> Southampton-Cowes *fairy*!
>

It only opens it's wings and flies when your car is sleeping.


Yes, a lot of routes can be surveyed based on the bus stops. But it is one
of those things that should only be done by local knowledge, as sometimes
they go strange ways for unknown reasons (such as certain residents getting
annoyed).

I just noticed a problem with the render (although a tricky one to fix).
Where two routes share the road, but one only goes one way, the arrows are
not shown.
Here 
http://www.öpnvkarte.de/?zoom=16&lat=51.42521&lon=-0.3781&layers=BTthe
R70 comes from the East on Broad Lane and turns North to join the
111(going North/South). The R70 does a large loop (which is not shown when
it is still with the 111), before getting back on Broad LAne in the West and
crossing the 111 path to head back on the East section of Broad Lane.
FWIW: Yesterday I updated part of the loop section where the R70 and 111
briefly separate. After The Avenue someone said the buses go left but they
actually both go right. The 111 turns up Nightinggale Avenue, but the R70
goes to the end of Acacia Road, does a sharp left U turn, and passes 3 more
stops than the 111. The Nightingale Road (only the 111 stops there) stop
would probably confuse anyone without local knowledge and they might even
wrongly move it around the corner of Hanworth Road (NaPTAN inaccuracy?).
It's possible a driver was being naughty or got lost and went the way the
route relation is mapped.

I'll be able to add (or at least start) a few more London bus routes when I
get my computer (and JOSM) working again. I'm not there to survey it, but I
have enough local knowledge and know the buses too well.

Oh, that also get's me thinking. What about routes that are occasionally
extended? I wouldn't like the extension to show up with it being clear it is
infrequent? Or should I just trust people to look up the timetables (or use
a timetable & OSM mash up serivce that is going to be created).

-- 
Gregory
o...@livingwithdragons.com
http://www.livingwithdragons.com
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb