[Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup
Hi everyone This is scheduled for this Thursday Dec 5th at the usual venue The Bull on Price Street. Unfortunately I can't make this month. Have fun and a Merry Xmas! See you in 2014 - perhaps with a new website ;-) Regards Brian ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup
I'll be there, what time do we meet? -- Matthijs On 3 December 2013 17:33, Brian Prangle br...@mappa-mercia.org wrote: Hi everyone This is scheduled for this Thursday Dec 5th at the usual venue The Bull on Price Street. Unfortunately I can't make this month. Have fun and a Merry Xmas! See you in 2014 - perhaps with a new website ;-) Regards Brian ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup
I usually try to get there between 7 and 7:30. I'm very busy this week but currently plan to be there - I'll be in need of a beer by then! Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Matthijs Melissen [mailto:i...@matthijsmelissen.nl] Sent: 03 December 2013 17:49 Cc: OSM Group WM Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup I'll be there, what time do we meet? -- Matthijs On 3 December 2013 17:33, Brian Prangle br...@mappa-mercia.org wrote: Hi everyone This is scheduled for this Thursday Dec 5th at the usual venue The Bull on Price Street. Unfortunately I can't make this month. Have fun and a Merry Xmas! See you in 2014 - perhaps with a new website ;-) Regards Brian ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3629/6887 - Release Date: 12/03/13 ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup
Hi all, I'm busy in the hours before our meeting so cannot give a definite time, but will aim to be there before 8 Rob On 3 December 2013 18:36, Andy Robinson ajrli...@gmail.com wrote: I usually try to get there between 7 and 7:30. I'm very busy this week but currently plan to be there - I'll be in need of a beer by then! Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Matthijs Melissen [mailto:i...@matthijsmelissen.nl] Sent: 03 December 2013 17:49 Cc: OSM Group WM Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup I'll be there, what time do we meet? -- Matthijs On 3 December 2013 17:33, Brian Prangle br...@mappa-mercia.org wrote: Hi everyone This is scheduled for this Thursday Dec 5th at the usual venue The Bull on Price Street. Unfortunately I can't make this month. Have fun and a Merry Xmas! See you in 2014 - perhaps with a new website ;-) Regards Brian ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3629/6887 - Release Date: 12/03/13 ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup
I plan to be there, should be there about 7:30. Ian On 3 December 2013 18:36, Andy Robinson ajrli...@gmail.com wrote: I usually try to get there between 7 and 7:30. I'm very busy this week but currently plan to be there - I'll be in need of a beer by then! Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Matthijs Melissen [mailto:i...@matthijsmelissen.nl] Sent: 03 December 2013 17:49 Cc: OSM Group WM Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December meetup I'll be there, what time do we meet? -- Matthijs On 3 December 2013 17:33, Brian Prangle br...@mappa-mercia.org wrote: Hi everyone This is scheduled for this Thursday Dec 5th at the usual venue The Bull on Price Street. Unfortunately I can't make this month. Have fun and a Merry Xmas! See you in 2014 - perhaps with a new website ;-) Regards Brian ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3629/6887 - Release Date: 12/03/13 ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
[Talk-gb-westmidlands] New Mappa Mercia website
Okay, time to re-focus my efforts on the Mappa Mercia website. The current version of the site is online at http://mappa-mercia.org/ . And the proposed new version is in development at http://mappa.stulester.co.uk/ Looking at the new design again (with SOTM now behind us) I now think we are being too cautious, not changing enough. I suggest we refocus on the community and potential things that the Mappa Mercia can work on (e.g. with a local council, charity or organisation). So I suggest that we: 1. Make the landing page the “About” page but update it to include a carousel of images of the local members, SOTM, GPS surveying and a map render. 2. Remove the “The Maps” page altogether keeping just the drop down menu. If wordpress insists we have a link here then we can just redirect it to the first map in the list. 3. Each map page includes a large map with some text below it. I'm hoping to get a button on there that opens each map in full screen. 4. Rename “News” to “Blog” as previously discussed. 5. Make the “Projects” page our active way of organising projects/current mapping tasks. For now this can start with a list of current projects with links out to the relevant page on the OSM wiki I will be around Thursday evening at our monthly meet-up so we can look through things then. I would also welcome support from outside our normal group, so if you have any web/wordpress skills and can spare a few minutes to help us out, please do get in contact. Thoughts welcome. Best regards, Rob ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Richard Fairhurst richard@... writes: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/announce/ :) (it's a bit unloved though... needs more people volunteering for CWG to help) Could that go into the community blogs for people who follow OSM bu web pages? -- Andrew ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On 2 December 2013 20:40, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: So, we have an announcements list, but there was no announcement there about the recent change, which people are complaining was inadequately, er, announced? I think they may have a case. And here you are, complaining that nobody is volunteering to help write announcements, but at the same time, not volunteering to help. I'm not sure that more people on a committee will be the solution, here. So we don't have enough people helping with CWG, and so there's nobody writing the announcements. But here you are stating that you think having more volunteers on CWG would, err, not help. I'm getting the impression that you are, basically, happy to complain, but unwilling to help. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
Hi Wintonian, As long as you use the shapefile or KML and manipulate the data itself, then there wont be a problem. However, the Hants online map uses OS data which is crown copyright, and has data which has not been released under OpenData, so you can't use copy the data from that. Jason (UniEagle) -Original Message- From: wintonian Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 2:51 AM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data Hello all, Can use this data from Hants CC ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps.htm )? It has been released under the 'Open Goverment License' ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/opendata/licence.htm ). I wish to use it to set the designation for 'rights of way' and for creating the relevant 'ways' where they do not already exist in OSM, unless there is a simple way to just import the data? Regards, wintonian ___ 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] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013, wintonian wrote: Can use this data from Hants CC ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps.htm )? It has been released under the 'Open Goverment License' ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/opendata/licence.htm ). I wish to use it to set the designation for 'rights of way' and for creating the relevant 'ways' where they do not already exist in OSM, unless there is a simple way to just import the data? I lurk on this mailing list and I do not contribute to OSM. So this message may not contain the consensus of OSM contributors. Having said that, I think you should not just import the data from a local authority's dataset into OSM. Let me explain why. For each public right of way (PROW), there are three routes for the PROW: (a) what is shown on the local authority's Definitive Map; (b) the route in the dataset released by the local authority; (c) what happens on the ground. All of these may be different. So a dataset available on the web may be out-of-date because the Definitive Map has recently been modified and the web's dataset has not yet been updated. And on the ground people may go a different way for any number of reasons, e.g., some property has been built on the dataset's route or the dataset's route is overgrown, obstructed, more difficult, ... . Of these only (a) is appropriate for legal purposes. My understanding of OSM is that you should be mapping what appears on the ground, i.e. (c). So I think it is inappropriate to copy a local authority's dataset into OSM. Instead I think that, if you wish to use that dataset, then adopt the following process: look at the dataset, see what PROWs are missing/different in OSM, go out and do a ground survey for each PROW and then use your data to update OSM. You have mentioned Hampshire. They were the first local authority to release their dataset with an Open licence. I'm aware of 8 other local authorities that provide a web page that allows you to download their dataset. They are Bolton, Devon, East Sussex, Norfolk, North York Moors National Park, City of Nottingham, Oxfordshire and Surrey. You can see this if you visit the web pages: http://www.bolton.gov.uk/website/pages/Definitivemapandstatementofpublicrightsofway.aspx http://gis.devon.gov.uk/basedata/download.htm http://data.gov.uk/dataset/eastsussexrightsofway http://data.gov.uk/dataset/norfolk-public-rights-of-way http://www.northyorkmoors.org.uk/living-in/how-the-authority-works/data/dataset-downloads http://www.opendatanottingham.org.uk/dataset.aspx?id=74 http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/countryside-access-maps http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/environment-housing-and-planning/countryside/explore-surreys-countryside/visit-the-countryside/footpaths-byways-and-bridleways/find-out-about-rights-of-way/public-rights-of-way-open-data As well as the above 9 local authorities, my web site: http://www.rowmaps.com currently provides access to the datasets for another 60 local authorities. These datasets have been obtained from the local authority by individuals. Each dataset has been released with an Open licence. My understanding is that some people have argued that, if a local authority has released its dataset on terms equivalent to the Ordnance Survey Opendata Licence, then OSM's licensing does not permit you to copy the data of that dataset. However, I think the licensing issue is irrelevant because, for the reasons given above, I think you have to provide your own data. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
On 3 December 2013 02:51, wintonian m...@wintonian.net wrote: Can use this data from Hants CC ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps.htm )? It has been released under the 'Open Goverment License' ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/opendata/licence.htm ). Data released under the Open Government Licence would be fine to use in OSM. However, according to http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps.htm the RoW GIS data is actually released under the Ordnance Survey Open Data Licence. This licence is slightly difference, and problematic as far as OSM is concerned. See http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/os-open-data.html for a full discussion. The short answer is that we can't use OS OpenData licensed material (or derivativ3e works thereof) without separate permission from the rights holders. It's possible someone may have got that permission for the Hampshire data from Hampshire CC and OS though. See what's written at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_local_councils -- but I'd check with whoever added that comment that it can be relied upon first. (OS have been rather inconsistent in the past in their statements about whether their OS OpenData Licence is compatible with the ODbL that OSM uses.) It looks like the edit where it was added was http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=UK_local_councilsdiff=782218oldid=782215 . As far as Public Rights of Way in general are concerned, another source of information (which OS doesn't claim any rights in) is the written Definitive Statement that each council also has to maintain. Since the data in the statements is owned entirely by the councils, they are free to release it under a suitable licence (e.g. the OGL) for use in OSM. For more information and advice, see http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/council-docs.html . The Hampshire Definitive Statements are online, but I don't know if they've been released under a suitable licence. Hope that helps, Robert. -- Robert Whittaker http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
Thanks for the input all, I'll reply more fully later when I have time but for now I'll just say this. 1, I had considered the potential contradictions of definitive map, dataset and usage but had not yet tackled the question. Interestingly I know of a recent case where the on-line maps at HCC (and dataset) ave been updated before the definitive map has been so it can does work both ways there! 2, I had not noticed the OS involvement in the licence. 3, Good point about the definitive statements - they are of-course releasable (or rather would be if they did not form part of a publication scheme) under the FOI so I would be surprised to find objection to the release under a suitable licence. 4, I guess one can still use the definitive maps/ statements to determine the 'designation' i.e. legal status of the RoW - after all when we tag a way with a value of 'designated' in respect of usage on foot or horse back for example we are referring to its legal status and not private rights or misuse etc. - Have I got that right? 5, I have noticed that other datasets from LA's under the OGL have been used, but then I haven't check to see if the OS stuff has been appended to it. Shame this isn't Wikipedia as I think we would have a reasonable argument for utilising US copyright laws with respect to phone books etc. Regards On 03/12/13 11:17, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: On 3 December 2013 02:51, wintonian m...@wintonian.net wrote: Can use this data from Hants CC ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps.htm )? It has been released under the 'Open Goverment License' ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/opendata/licence.htm ). Data released under the Open Government Licence would be fine to use in OSM. However, according to http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps.htm the RoW GIS data is actually released under the Ordnance Survey Open Data Licence. This licence is slightly difference, and problematic as far as OSM is concerned. See http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/os-open-data.html for a full discussion. The short answer is that we can't use OS OpenData licensed material (or derivativ3e works thereof) without separate permission from the rights holders. It's possible someone may have got that permission for the Hampshire data from Hampshire CC and OS though. See what's written at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_local_councils -- but I'd check with whoever added that comment that it can be relied upon first. (OS have been rather inconsistent in the past in their statements about whether their OS OpenData Licence is compatible with the ODbL that OSM uses.) It looks like the edit where it was added was http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=UK_local_councilsdiff=782218oldid=782215 . As far as Public Rights of Way in general are concerned, another source of information (which OS doesn't claim any rights in) is the written Definitive Statement that each council also has to maintain. Since the data in the statements is owned entirely by the councils, they are free to release it under a suitable licence (e.g. the OGL) for use in OSM. For more information and advice, see http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/council-docs.html . The Hampshire Definitive Statements are online, but I don't know if they've been released under a suitable licence. Hope that helps, Robert. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On the new front page, the search button seems to have a broken link - if you type in a place name (I tried 'Kendal' and 'Barrow') it goes to http://www.openstreetmap.org/search, and says File not found Couldn't find a file/directory/API operation by that name on the OpenStreetMap server (HTTP 404) Roger -- Roger Calvert http://www.rogercalvert.me.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On 03/12/13 14:08, Roger Calvert wrote: On the new front page, the search button seems to have a broken link - if you type in a place name (I tried 'Kendal' and 'Barrow') it goes to http://www.openstreetmap.org/search, and says First of all, if you find a bug please report it in the bug tracker. That said, this works fine for me, and I think if it really was broken in the way you say we would have had many, many reports by now. That means we need to find out what is unusual about your environment that is causing this to happen for you but now for anybody else. What browser are you using? How exactly are you performing the search when it errors - do you enter return after typing? or click the search button with them mouse? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Norfolk editors' help needed
My Twitter contact @Mistlemoon, who works for a library service in Norfolk, would like to contact a local editor to ensure that coverage of branch libraries is complete and accurate. If you're not on Twitter, I can put you in touch. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On 03/12/13 14:22, Tom Hughes wrote: On 03/12/13 14:08, Roger Calvert wrote: On the new front page, the search button seems to have a broken link - if you type in a place name (I tried 'Kendal' and 'Barrow') it goes to http://www.openstreetmap.org/search, and says What browser are you using? How exactly are you performing the search when it errors - do you enter return after typing? or click the search button with them mouse? For me it is broken on Firefox, both on Ubuntu and Android, works OK on android browser. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Norfolk editors' help needed
Why not introduce him to OSM and let him make sure the coverage is complete and accurate, as he seems to be an expert on this? On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.ukwrote: My Twitter contact @Mistlemoon, who works for a library service in Norfolk, would like to contact a local editor to ensure that coverage of branch libraries is complete and accurate. If you're not on Twitter, I can put you in touch. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Life is not the amount of times you breathe, is the moments that take your breath away. To all things comes an end. And to all things comes a beginning. Cred in inspirat, nu in expirat. in vise, nu in somn. In trait, nu in existat. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013, david wrote: For me it is broken on Firefox, both on Ubuntu and Android, works OK on android browser. That's strange. For me, it works fine when I use Firefox, both on Ubuntu and Android. My Ubuntu is Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS and Firefox is 25.0.1. My Android is 4.2.2 and Firefox is also 25.0.1. I tried typing Kendal and clicking the Search button. I also tried typing Kendal and pressing either Enter on Ubuntu or Go on Android. -- 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 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On 03/12/13 16:44, david wrote: On 03/12/13 14:22, Tom Hughes wrote: On 03/12/13 14:08, Roger Calvert wrote: On the new front page, the search button seems to have a broken link - if you type in a place name (I tried 'Kendal' and 'Barrow') it goes to http://www.openstreetmap.org/search, and says What browser are you using? How exactly are you performing the search when it errors - do you enter return after typing? or click the search button with them mouse? For me it is broken on Firefox, both on Ubuntu and Android, works OK on android browser. I've been working with Roger on this for the last couple of hours and I think we have got to the bottom of it now. Basically, this works: http://www.openstreetmap.org/ but this doesnn't: http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html If you use the second one to load the site then you will get an exception during page load that stops things initialising fully. I've just pushed a fix that should be live in the next half hour. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
Hi, The Hants data was one of the first Rights of Way datasets that we got access to. It is my understanding that we did get the permission for using this OS OpenData licensed data above and beyond what the OS OpenData license says (we have permission from both OS and Hants CC). Having said this, it is worth speaking with the local community as they will be best suited to advise on how the data is being integrated. For example, Nick Whitelegg (nickw) should be able to confirm whether they are incorporating the designation type (footpath, bridleway, etc) if a way already exists in OSM without needing a survey. I would imagine they are doing a ground survey when they find a way that is not yet in OSM as a straight import might not reflect what is on the ground. Best wishes, Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
I've been working with Roger on this for the last couple of hours and I think we have got to the bottom of it now. Basically, this works: http://www.openstreetmap.org/ but this doesnn't: http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html If you use the second one to load the site then you will get an exception during page load that stops things initialising fully. I've just pushed a fix that should be live in the next half hour. Tom Thanks. I can confirm my bookmark is set to http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html and it is now working. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
With all this importing going on it's worthwhile remembering the basics. If a footpath has been surveyed it'll have at least one gpx track. If the gpx looks reliable it's probably the best indication of where the footpath goes. Rgds, Vic On 03/12/13 19:32, Rob Nickerson wrote: Hi, The Hants data was one of the first Rights of Way datasets that we got access to. It is my understanding that we did get the permission for using this OS OpenData licensed data above and beyond what the OS OpenData license says (we have permission from both OS and Hants CC). Having said this, it is worth speaking with the local community as they will be best suited to advise on how the data is being integrated. For example, Nick Whitelegg (nickw) should be able to confirm whether they are incorporating the designation type (footpath, bridleway, etc) if a way already exists in OSM without needing a survey. I would imagine they are doing a ground survey when they find a way that is not yet in OSM as a straight import might not reflect what is on the ground. Best wishes, Rob ___ 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] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
Given the efforts of AndyS, NickW, myself and many others - most of Hampshire is very well mapped. An interesting question is how much? (Compared to the Hants CC). There is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hampshire/Rights_of_Way but that was last updated over 2 years ago :( I suspect in terms of raw highways it's mapped98%. In terms of designation these are quite well tagged, I can only hazard a guess maybe as much as 66%. Some of the 'Green Lanes' (ex Roads Used as Public Path?) are a bit mysterious - (seemed to be called 'Public Ways' in West Sussex speak). These don't seem appear in OS Locator or OS Streetview, nor are they covered by the ROW datasets. It's not clear to me where the designation of care lies with these or the legality of using them (especially in terms of Cycling). I suspect several of the remaining ROWs for Hampshire not in OSM are either limited use ones (ways that don't go anywhere useful so no-ones mapped it) or not very visible for some reason. With all this importing going on it's worthwhile remembering the basics. If a footpath has been surveyed it'll have at least one gpx IHMO 'at least' - 'might have a'. As I very rarely upload my GPX tracks. Normally I visually compare Hants KML (and indeed West Sussex) vs OSM tile images to identify missing ROWs and then make that a basis to include in a route for a days out walking or cycling. -- Be Seeing You - Rob. If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving isn't for you. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Well done Tom Roger on tracking that one down. Those can be a real pain to find. But surely www.openstreetmap.org redirects to index.html at least that's the Apache default? Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me On 03/12/2013 19:41, david wrote: I've been working with Roger on this for the last couple of hours and I think we have got to the bottom of it now. Basically, this works: http://www.openstreetmap.org/ but this doesnn't: http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html If you use the second one to load the site then you will get an exception during page load that stops things initialising fully. I've just pushed a fix that should be live in the next half hour. Tom Thanks. I can confirm my bookmark is set to http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html and it is now working. ___ 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] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
Can someone clarify the situation for me. I'm in Worcestershire where permission was previously sought to use the Worcs CC PRoW. However, what is the advice in a situation where you can't use official PRoW data, Bing shows a path across a field, a ground survey also shows a clear path across the field but the signs show a Public Footpath along the edge into another field and rejoining on the other side. Do we map where people are trespassing, maybe with a bland highway=path tag and source=bing;survey or just map the official PRoW. Further more, if there are no clear signs somewhere (often the case), do we just leave it blank, even though the CC show it on their copyright map or again show a highway=path marking the tresspassing. While we may worry about using copyright material, paid for by British taxpayers I might add, I think OSMF could face quite a hefty lawsuit if we were to indicate a PRoW across private land on the back of we surveyed it with GPS and everyone else is walking that way so that's why we mapped it? Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me On 03/12/2013 19:32, Rob Nickerson wrote: Hi, The Hants data was one of the first Rights of Way datasets that we got access to. It is my understanding that we did get the permission for using this OS OpenData licensed data above and beyond what the OS OpenData license says (we have permission from both OS and Hants CC). Having said this, it is worth speaking with the local community as they will be best suited to advise on how the data is being integrated. For example, Nick Whitelegg (nickw) should be able to confirm whether they are incorporating the designation type (footpath, bridleway, etc) if a way already exists in OSM without needing a survey. I would imagine they are doing a ground survey when they find a way that is not yet in OSM as a straight import might not reflect what is on the ground. Best wishes, Rob ___ 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] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Thanks, Tom. I can also confirm the same thing as David. I can't take any credit for this - I just ran various tests under Tom's instructions until he identified the problem. Roger On 03/12/2013 19:41, david wrote: I've been working with Roger on this for the last couple of hours and I think we have got to the bottom of it now. Basically, this works: http://www.openstreetmap.org/ but this doesnn't: http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html If you use the second one to load the site then you will get an exception during page load that stops things initialising fully. I've just pushed a fix that should be live in the next half hour. Tom Thanks. I can confirm my bookmark is set to http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html and it is now working. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Roger Calvert http://www.rogercalvert.me.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Fwd: Meet us in Birmingham on Thursday
Hi all, We are fast approaching the first Thursday of the month and that means it's time for the local West Midlands group to meet up for a drink or two in the evening. All are welcome, so please join us from 7:30pm at The Bull, Price Street, Birmingham. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mappa_Mercia#Next_meeting One topic that will be discussed is the new website - no not the OSM one, our Mappa Mercia site!! Development has been on hold since before State of the Map (we would welcome support from anyone who knows web dev/wordpress). See you Thursday, Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
This was one of the other things I was wondering about. If we are mapping what is actually on the ground (which would seem to be the sensible approach) and then assigning the relevant legal status to the feature i.e. a footpath/ bridleway etc. in this case and the legal line RoW is diffident to that which is currently used then are we not implying that it's OK to trespass on this path, which is effectively what is happening by using it? I'm not to worried about law suits as we could just 'copy' is OS and use a disclaimer (the representation of [...] is no evidence of...), I mean if it works for them... But I will admit it may be a valid concern. as for waymarks and fingerprints pointing a different way they are (according to HCC at least) supposed to point in the direction of the legal RoW and where it looks like people go. However from my experience I don't think they always take a copy of the definitive map with them when they go out on such a task - Oh look it seems people have been walking around the field edge, I doubt the nice farmer would illegally plough their field and not restore it being the such welcoming fellows they are. - Hmm. As for importing the data I know most of the RoW's are in OSM so I was really just thinking about assigning the correct designation to the existing ways and filling in the gaps where they exist (or perhaps I should say don't exist). Lastly I am unclear as to what we do when we come to what I call unspecified rights of way, that is those shown on the OS Explorer series with green dots, which donate routes that are accepted (by the highway authority) as being rights of way but no-one knows exactly what those rights are. These are not shown on definitive maps but the OS obtains the data from the highway authority. I must confess I am a little unclear as to the whole concept of a RoW known about not being on the definitive map. Regards Robert On 03/12/13 22:00, Jonathan wrote: Can someone clarify the situation for me. I'm in Worcestershire where permission was previously sought to use the Worcs CC PRoW. However, what is the advice in a situation where you can't use official PRoW data, Bing shows a path across a field, a ground survey also shows a clear path across the field but the signs show a Public Footpath along the edge into another field and rejoining on the other side. Do we map where people are trespassing, maybe with a bland highway=path tag and source=bing;survey or just map the official PRoW. Further more, if there are no clear signs somewhere (often the case), do we just leave it blank, even though the CC show it on their copyright map or again show a highway=path marking the tresspassing. While we may worry about using copyright material, paid for by British taxpayers I might add, I think OSMF could face quite a hefty lawsuit if we were to indicate a PRoW across private land on the back of we surveyed it with GPS and everyone else is walking that way so that's why we mapped it? Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me On 03/12/2013 19:32, Rob Nickerson wrote: Hi, The Hants data was one of the first Rights of Way datasets that we got access to. It is my understanding that we did get the permission for using this OS OpenData licensed data above and beyond what the OS OpenData license says (we have permission from both OS and Hants CC). Having said this, it is worth speaking with the local community as they will be best suited to advise on how the data is being integrated. For example, Nick Whitelegg (nickw) should be able to confirm whether they are incorporating the designation type (footpath, bridleway, etc) if a way already exists in OSM without needing a survey. I would imagine they are doing a ground survey when they find a way that is not yet in OSM as a straight import might not reflect what is on the ground. Best wishes, Rob ___ 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] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013 21:36:03 + Robert Norris rw_nor...@hotmail.com wrote: An interesting question is how much? (Compared to the Hants CC). There is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hampshire/Rights_of_Way but that was last updated over 2 years ago :( I used to update page manually each month but lost interest during the whole licence change saga. :( I suspect in terms of raw highways it's mapped98%. In terms of designation these are quite well tagged, I can only hazard a guess maybe as much as 66%. A quick comparison of HCC's numbers with the latest Geofabrik Hampshire extract yields the following: 51% designation=public_footpath 60% designation=public_bridleway 58% designation=restricted_byway 111% designation=byway,public_byway,byway_open_to_all_traffic The OSM extract includes the cities of Portsmouth and Southampton as well as bits of other counties near the border but it's probably good enough to get a feel for current progress. Some of the 'Green Lanes' (ex Roads Used as Public Path?) are a bit mysterious - (seemed to be called 'Public Ways' in West Sussex speak). These don't seem appear in OS Locator or OS Streetview, nor are they covered by the ROW datasets. It's not clear to me where the designation of care lies with these or the legality of using them (especially in terms of Cycling). Public roads? Around here there are a number of unmetalled tracks that appear in Hampshire's maintained highways list and are drawn on an OS Explorer map as green dots. -- Regards, Andy Street ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
A quick comparison of HCC's numbers with the latest Geofabrik Hampshire extract yields the following: 51% designation=public_footpath 60% designation=public_bridleway 58% designation=restricted_byway 111% designation=byway,public_byway,byway_open_to_all_traffic Nice - thanks for the stats update. The OSM extract includes the cities of Portsmouth and Southampton as well as bits of other counties near the border but it's probably good enough to get a feel for current progress. Some of the 'Green Lanes' (ex Roads Used as Public Path?) are a bit mysterious - (seemed to be called 'Public Ways' in West Sussex speak). These don't seem appear in OS Locator or OS Streetview, nor are they covered by the ROW datasets. It's not clear to me where the designation of care lies with these or the legality of using them (especially in terms of Cycling). Public roads? Around here there are a number of unmetalled tracks that appear in Hampshire's maintained highways list and are drawn on an OS Explorer map as green dots. Case in point (green dots on OS Explorer, sort of track on NPE, nothing in OS Streetview, perfectly good track for 4x4s (maybe even cars - memory is fuzzy now) mountain bikes). Something I've mapped (Potlatch2 claims AndyS has modified it - but then I've never quite understood Potlatch2's change list compared to one from the OSM website). I don't think it was marked as a Byway hence I did not mark it as such but feels like one (presumably the reasons for the additions Sailor Steve has made). http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41984943/history 'Hampshire's maintained highways list' Are you referring to http://www3.hants.gov.uk/roads/highway-factsheets/maintained-roads.htm ? Or something else? However it's hard to search for unamed/unknown ways, such as the above. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 22:00:20 + Jonathan bigfatfro...@gmail.com wrote: Can someone clarify the situation for me. I'm in Worcestershire where permission was previously sought to use the Worcs CC PRoW. However, what is the advice in a situation where you can't use official PRoW data, Bing shows a path across a field, a ground survey also shows a clear path across the field but the signs show a Public Footpath along the edge into another field and rejoining on the other side. Do we map where people are trespassing, maybe with a bland highway=path tag and source=bing;survey or just map the official PRoW. Further more, if there are no clear signs somewhere (often the case), do we just leave it blank, even though the CC show it on their copyright map or again show a highway=path marking the tresspassing. Map what you know, leave whatever remains for other people or a later date. If you know they are trespassing then it's highway=path, access=private, otherwise just add highway=path as it could be either permissive or private. If you are unable to follow a PRoW on the ground then please consider submitting a fault report to the council. Not only will you be helping fellow mappers who follow in your footsteps but other path users too. -- Regards, Andy Street ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
Really what I meant was where the is a RoW (as evidenced by the definitive map) but the actual line that is used has moved over time, perhaps to avoid a fallen tree or an area that has become wet and boggy over the years or otherwise more difficult to traverse than the new line. Therefore what happens is that that actual line used becomes different to the legal line, sometimes the definitive map is updated to reflect this but this seem to be normally only when there is another reason to modify the entry. I hope that's clearer. Regards Robert On 04/12/13 02:24, Andy Street wrote: On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 22:00:20 + Jonathan bigfatfro...@gmail.com wrote: Can someone clarify the situation for me. I'm in Worcestershire where permission was previously sought to use the Worcs CC PRoW. However, what is the advice in a situation where you can't use official PRoW data, Bing shows a path across a field, a ground survey also shows a clear path across the field but the signs show a Public Footpath along the edge into another field and rejoining on the other side. Do we map where people are trespassing, maybe with a bland highway=path tag and source=bing;survey or just map the official PRoW. Further more, if there are no clear signs somewhere (often the case), do we just leave it blank, even though the CC show it on their copyright map or again show a highway=path marking the tresspassing. Map what you know, leave whatever remains for other people or a later date. If you know they are trespassing then it's highway=path, access=private, otherwise just add highway=path as it could be either permissive or private. If you are unable to follow a PRoW on the ground then please consider submitting a fault report to the council. Not only will you be helping fellow mappers who follow in your footsteps but other path users too. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 00:35:30 + Robert Norris rw_nor...@hotmail.com wrote: Some of the 'Green Lanes' (ex Roads Used as Public Path?) are a bit mysterious - (seemed to be called 'Public Ways' in West Sussex speak). These don't seem appear in OS Locator or OS Streetview, nor are they covered by the ROW datasets. It's not clear to me where the designation of care lies with these or the legality of using them (especially in terms of Cycling). Public roads? Around here there are a number of unmetalled tracks that appear in Hampshire's maintained highways list and are drawn on an OS Explorer map as green dots. Case in point (green dots on OS Explorer, sort of track on NPE, nothing in OS Streetview, perfectly good track for 4x4s (maybe even cars - memory is fuzzy now) mountain bikes). Something I've mapped (Potlatch2 claims AndyS has modified it - but then I've never quite understood Potlatch2's change list compared to one from the OSM website). I don't think it was marked as a Byway hence I did not mark it as such but feels like one (presumably the reasons for the additions Sailor Steve has made). http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41984943/history I'm not 100% but I think that is T183 Chalk Hill (sourced from HCC's website so probably not a OSM compatible licence). 'Hampshire's maintained highways list' Are you referring to http://www3.hants.gov.uk/roads/highway-factsheets/maintained-roads.htm ? Or something else? Yes that is the list I was referring to. However it's hard to search for unamed/unknown ways, such as the above. And seems to be getting harder as it no longer returns an OSGB grid reference for the start and end of each road. :( -- Regards, Andy Street ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
