Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi Jerry, Nick, Richard,

Footpaths was what got me in to OSM so I'm so pleased to see all this :-)
You've got me excited about getting back out there over the summer and
picking up as many new paths as possible.

@Jerry: Your comment about the GB1900 caught me off guard at first. You
seem to be saying that even with filtering there are still too many results
from GB1900 to investigate. Caught off guard because isn't this OSM's
strength - the ability to go out and crowd source all this? Re-reading your
post, I see that what you are saying is that OSM has a lot of missing paths
but the rowmaps data is just a good as a starting point for finding these.
The GB1900 data might them be used to find stuff missing from the local
authorities dataset. Is that right or am I still not understanding?

I think we can do a project here. As you know, I'm not so good on the
technical side, but am more than willing to throw my support behind any
project where I can (e.g. engaging with NLS, comms, promotion, seeking new
members to join the hunt and therefore join OSM). It sounds like this is
what the 3 of you are looking at this already :-). Give me a shout if you
need anything.

>Is there permission to use OOC tiles

>The NLS 6 inch maps are needed for good comparison, although I suspect
many paths will be on 1:25k

I'm not sure about the OOC tiles; I think Andy Robinson (blackadder) was
involved with the scanning, but ultimatley these are hosted on OSM servers
so you need to check with them.

We do have a great relationship with the NLS though. Although they have put
some of their maps behind a subscription API, they are big supporters of
the OSM (and OHM) projects. The publish 6 inch and 25 inch [1] for all of
Great Britain now. I am more than willing to speak with NLS to see if we
can formalise this as part of a footpath project. There's no harm in
asking! Just let me know.

P.S. Sorry if this feels like me being slow / repeating the obviously - am
feeling under the weather at the moment

[1] https://maps.nls.uk/openlayers/?m=1=176

*Rob*


On Fri, 11 May 2018 at 16:40, SK53  wrote:

> Quick impressions:
>
>- There's a fair amount of noise in text, but most are "F.P."
>- Lat/lon could be reduced from 15 decimal places, would make file
>size far smaller. OSM use 7, but I suspect 5 (~ 1 m accuracy) would be 
> fine.
>- Filtering by a buffer round OSM roads does not reduce count enough
>to be useful. 21k points in East Mids goes to 14k with 20 m buffer, 10 with
>50 m buffer.
>- Instead created 1000 m buffer around points and looked for distance
>from OSM highways in that buffer. This allows to focus on points which are
>distant from existing highways.
>- In the main dots which are a long way from highways are clustered in
>areas we already know lack footpaths. Map shows points over 400 m from an
>OSM highway, underlain by a heatmap of total length of missing prows. It is
>apparent that these are coincident (W of Derby, around Buxton, SE
>Derbyshire, Trent Valley in N Notts, much of Lincolnshire). Other areas may
>be simply a result of rather different comparison periods for the data
>(distance from road is 3 years old OSM data).
>https://www.dropbox.com/s/nz0893l9io61vtk/gb1900_fps1.jpg?dl=0
>- Paths which were formerly isolated may now be close to new roads and
>therefore get discarded with use of buffers or short distances.
>- Not clear that searching in urban areas is worthwhile. Using
>something like the OS Urban Area shape files may reduce volume.
>- Even with these filters the total points more than 500 m from a
>(2015) OSM road is nearly a 1000 for the East Midlands
>- The NLS 6 inch maps are needed for good comparison, although I
>suspect many paths will be on 1:25k
>- There are interesting paths which seem to have disappeared entirely
>from the PRoW network, but noting them does require local knowledge rather
>than a bulk comparison. Here are a couple I noted, which also appear on
>1:25k and therefore look like prima facie cases for lost paths:
>- https://openstreetmap.lu/os-ooc-nls.html#16/52.9181/-1.2688/nlsos1
>   path N-S from New Farm
>   - https://openstreetmap.lu/os-ooc-nls.html#16/52.9503/-1.2603/nlsos1
>   path from Noggins Nook to Swanacar Farm
>
> So broadly in conclusion: it doesn't seem to give more than comparison
> against rowmaps for identifying missing paths for OSM, but it does have
> potential for finding lost paths. For the latter case rather more
> annotation of information would be needed.
>
>
> Jerry
>
> On 10 May 2018 at 22:50, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
>
>> Many thanks. Now shared with Richard, Nick and Jerry. Wont share publicly
>> yet as I wouldn't want to disrupt the project comms plan.
>>
>> @Dave: Oh yes this is definitely not for OSM import. It's node data for
>> linear features for a start!! No, instead this 

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[SK53]

I've put up 2 umap instances:

   - Footpaths
   

   for parts of Notts quickly traced in JOSM from NPE maps (with a few from
   1:25k provisional edition. Uses NPE 1:25k maps as background
   - Footpaths
   

   for Rushcliffe District (a district seems reasonable load for umap,
   counties tend to be too much). with NPE map background, Rushcliffe PRoW in
   white as per Richard's example, and existing OSM highways with designation
   (not checked for valid values) with a thinner red line. I've added the
   gb1900 points w/o metadata as a layer which is not visible by default.

1:25k maps seem to contain pretty much the same data regarding paths as NPE
maps but are much better aligned.

I've never tried directly adding data to umap, nor editing existing data
but I believe this is a possibility.

A specific place to look is around Wiverton Hall (15/52.9234/-0.9393) where
a path runs from the River Smite slightly E of N and close to the hall.
This no longer exists: a fact I know from a recent ground survey. The
terrain is flat arable land: this year mainly fields of rape.

Jerry

On 12 May 2018 at 15:30, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:

> Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> > I realise this is going a bit OT for OSM but wondering if this data,
> > together with the newer historic maps from the earlier part of the
> > 20th century, could be used to build a platform for the purpose of
> > finding these lost paths? Had a quick look yesterday and there
> > doesn't appear to currently be a web platform for this purpose.
> >
> > We could have a base layer of an OOC OS Map from the earlier 20th
> > century (up to 50 years ago) with both OSM data and the location of
> > these "F.P"s superimposed for the purpose of users searching for these
> > lost paths.
>
> I experimented with something like that earlier this year:
> https://twitter.com/richardf/status/948578070692290560
>
> Would be great to do it properly but I'm pushed for time at the moment.
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html
>
> ___
> 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] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Nick Whitelegg]

Nice.


I may well have time to do it over summer if there's sufficient interest 
(forget May, but June-Sep are relatively quiet for me) from a coding POV but 
would need someone else to do a nice UI/front end for it.


Nick



From: Richard Fairhurst 
Sent: 12 May 2018 15:30:17
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> I realise this is going a bit OT for OSM but wondering if this data,
> together with the newer historic maps from the earlier part of the
> 20th century, could be used to build a platform for the purpose of
> finding these lost paths? Had a quick look yesterday and there
> doesn't appear to currently be a web platform for this purpose.
>
> We could have a base layer of an OOC OS Map from the earlier 20th
> century (up to 50 years ago) with both OSM data and the location of
> these "F.P"s superimposed for the purpose of users searching for these
> lost paths.

I experimented with something like that earlier this year:
https://twitter.com/richardf/status/948578070692290560

Would be great to do it properly but I'm pushed for time at the moment.

cheers
Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html

___
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] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Richard Fairhurst]

Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> I realise this is going a bit OT for OSM but wondering if this data,
> together with the newer historic maps from the earlier part of the 
> 20th century, could be used to build a platform for the purpose of 
> finding these lost paths? Had a quick look yesterday and there 
> doesn't appear to currently be a web platform for this purpose.
>
> We could have a base layer of an OOC OS Map from the earlier 20th 
> century (up to 50 years ago) with both OSM data and the location of 
> these "F.P"s superimposed for the purpose of users searching for these 
> lost paths.

I experimented with something like that earlier this year:
https://twitter.com/richardf/status/948578070692290560

Would be great to do it properly but I'm pushed for time at the moment.

cheers
Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Nick Whitelegg]

I realise this is going a bit OT for OSM but wondering if this data, together 
with the newer historic maps from the earlier part of the 20th century, could 
be used to build a platform for the purpose of finding these lost paths? Had a 
quick look yesterday and there doesn't appear to currently be a web platform 
for this purpose.


We could have a base layer of an OOC OS Map from the earlier 20th century (up 
to 50 years ago) with both OSM data and the location of these "F.P"s 
superimposed for the purpose of users searching for these lost paths. When a 
user visits an area with an "F.P" they could annotate with evidence of possible 
current use.


A side effect of people searching for these historic paths could of course be 
finding missing still-extant rights of way  for OSM.


Thoughts on this? Is there permission to use OOC tiles (I've lost track of who 
maintains OOC tileservers these days) in third party projects?


Thanks,

Nick




From: SK53 
Sent: 11 May 2018 16:40:21
To: Rob Nickerson
Cc: Nick Whitelegg; Talk-GB
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

Quick impressions:

  *   There's a fair amount of noise in text, but most are "F.P."
  *   Lat/lon could be reduced from 15 decimal places, would make file size far 
smaller. OSM use 7, but I suspect 5 (~ 1 m accuracy) would be fine.
  *   Filtering by a buffer round OSM roads does not reduce count enough to be 
useful. 21k points in East Mids goes to 14k with 20 m buffer, 10 with 50 m 
buffer.
  *   Instead created 1000 m buffer around points and looked for distance from 
OSM highways in that buffer. This allows to focus on points which are distant 
from existing highways.
  *   In the main dots which are a long way from highways are clustered in 
areas we already know lack footpaths. Map shows points over 400 m from an OSM 
highway, underlain by a heatmap of total length of missing prows. It is 
apparent that these are coincident (W of Derby, around Buxton, SE Derbyshire, 
Trent Valley in N Notts, much of Lincolnshire). Other areas may be simply a 
result of rather different comparison periods for the data (distance from road 
is 3 years old OSM data). 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nz0893l9io61vtk/gb1900_fps1.jpg?dl=0
  *   Paths which were formerly isolated may now be close to new roads and 
therefore get discarded with use of buffers or short distances.
  *   Not clear that searching in urban areas is worthwhile. Using something 
like the OS Urban Area shape files may reduce volume.
  *   Even with these filters the total points more than 500 m from a (2015) 
OSM road is nearly a 1000 for the East Midlands
  *   The NLS 6 inch maps are needed for good comparison, although I suspect 
many paths will be on 1:25k
  *   There are interesting paths which seem to have disappeared entirely from 
the PRoW network, but noting them does require local knowledge rather than a 
bulk comparison. Here are a couple I noted, which also appear on 1:25k and 
therefore look like prima facie cases for lost paths:
 *   https://openstreetmap.lu/os-ooc-nls.html#16/52.9181/-1.2688/nlsos1 
path N-S from New Farm
 *   https://openstreetmap.lu/os-ooc-nls.html#16/52.9503/-1.2603/nlsos1 
path from Noggins Nook to Swanacar Farm

So broadly in conclusion: it doesn't seem to give more than comparison against 
rowmaps for identifying missing paths for OSM, but it does have potential for 
finding lost paths. For the latter case rather more annotation of information 
would be needed.


Jerry

On 10 May 2018 at 22:50, Rob Nickerson 
> wrote:
Many thanks. Now shared with Richard, Nick and Jerry. Wont share publicly yet 
as I wouldn't want to disrupt the project comms plan.

@Dave: Oh yes this is definitely not for OSM import. It's node data for linear 
features for a start!! No, instead this can be used to identify possible 
missing paths which should then be investigated using ground survey, aerial 
imagery and GPS (or Strava) data. See it as a helping hand to direct you where 
to look.

Best,
Rob





On Thu, 10 May 2018, 13:54 SK53, 
> wrote:
Quick correction, as I uploaded heat map to wrong Flickr account. This is the 
proper link: https://flic.kr/p/JSXgyh.

J

On 10 May 2018 1:54 p.m., "SK53" 
> wrote:
Quick correction, as I uploaded heat map to wrong Flickr account. This is the 
proper link: https://flic.kr/p/JSXgyh.

J

On 10 May 2018 at 13:07, SK53 > 
wrote:
I just checked on the Vision of Britain site: the core data is currently 
released under CC-BY-NC. I presume OSM-UK have a waiver from these terms.

Undoubtedly there will be rights of way which have effectively fallen in to 
abeyance. I noted one the other day which was on NPE maps, but no