[Talk-GB] Future quarterly project idea

[Philip Barnes]

I have just been listening to Rory McCann talking about mapping Irish
Townlands and the challenges they faced obtaining the data and tracing
it from historic OS maps. The townlands are admin_level=10 relations,
the same level as our civil parishes.

Its a lot easier in the UK, we have a source of open data in OS
Opendata Boundary Lines so I feel that this would be a relatively
simple armchair, or at least swivel chair, project for those dark
winter nights.

They are an important level, our lowest level of Parish/Town councils
use these boundaries, they are used in planning and are uselful when
reporting issues with rights of way, in many counties path numbers
change at the boundary.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Future quarterly project idea

[Colin Smale]

Over the last couple of years I have been slowly but surely working my
way up the country with the civil parishes. I have South East England,
South West England London, and East of England are just about complete.
I am now working on East Midlands. 

North East England, North West England, Yorkshire and the Humber, West
Midlands and Wales could do with some love however, and Northern Ireland
is a special case as the OSNI haven't released the boundary data AFAIK.

//colin 

On 2016-09-24 13:50, Philip Barnes wrote:

> I have just been listening to Rory McCann talking about mapping Irish
> Townlands and the challenges they faced obtaining the data and tracing
> it from historic OS maps. The townlands are admin_level=10 relations,
> the same level as our civil parishes.
> 
> Its a lot easier in the UK, we have a source of open data in OS
> Opendata Boundary Lines so I feel that this would be a relatively
> simple armchair, or at least swivel chair, project for those dark
> winter nights.
> 
> They are an important level, our lowest level of Parish/Town councils
> use these boundaries, they are used in planning and are uselful when
> reporting issues with rights of way, in many counties path numbers
> change at the boundary.
> 
> Phil (trigpoint)
> 
> ___
> 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] Fwd: ANNOUNCING GB1900 -- Online volunteers needed to build the most comprehensive gazetteer of British place names

[Tom Hughes]

On 23/09/16 19:15, SK53 wrote:


I'd be very interested in this providing it has a decent licence. AFAIK
Vision of Britain has a restrictive licence which means that I have
spent some time recreating small parts of their data on OHM (e.g.,
London Boroughs of the LCC). There's still a tendency for academia to
choose Non-commercial licences, which means local historians still need
permission to use the data in their, typically, modestly priced
publications. Of course just like Google & OSM, the sceptre of
ancestry.com  probably affects the licence model.


Yes I was just saying earlier today at SotM that I'd dearly love to get 
hold of the historical boundary data that Vision of Britain has but 
chooses for some reason only to make available to people with an 
academic affiliation


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] Fwd: ANNOUNCING GB1900 -- Online volunteers needed to build the most comprehensive gazetteer of British place names

[Paul]

Hi all

You may notice that this project comes from the same teaM AS vision of 
Britain, so maybe lessons have been learned. Also OS were involved in 
Vision of Britain when they hadn't heard of open licences, before they 
fought openness.


Paul

On Saturday, 24 September 2016 15:53:57 BST, Tom Hughes wrote:

On 23/09/16 19:15, SK53 wrote:


I'd be very interested in this providing it has a decent licence. AFAIK
Vision of Britain has a restrictive licence which means that I have
spent some time recreating small parts of their data on OHM (e.g.,
London Boroughs of the LCC). There's still a tendency for academia to
choose Non-commercial licences, which means local historians still need
permission to use the data in their, typically, modestly priced
publications. Of course just like Google & OSM, the sceptre of
ancestry.com  probably affects the licence model.


Yes I was just saying earlier today at SotM that I'd dearly 
love to get hold of the historical boundary data that Vision of 
Britain has but chooses for some reason only to make available 
to people with an academic affiliation


Tom




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