Re: [Talk-GB] Documenting prow_ref formats (Was: MapthePaths & Lancashire)
I think it's Non-Civil Parish. Sent from Mailspring (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/0?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fgetmailspring.com%2F=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D), the best free email app for work On Jul 19 2018, at 2:14 am, Andrew Black wrote: > > Surrey seems ot have a format of " Banstead NCP 123A". But existing entries > in OSM are "FP 37". > > What does NCP mean. I will enter then as f " Banstead FP 37" unless told > otherwise! > > > > > On 14 July 2018 at 17:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/1?redirect=mailto%3Arobert.whittaker%2Bosm%40gmail.com=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)> > wrote: > > On 13 July 2018 at 19:26, Andrew Black > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/2?redirect=mailto%3Aandrewdblack%40googlemail.com=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)> > > wrote: > > > I am pondering a similar but simpler question. I would like to add a table > > > listing each authority at > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:prow_ref > > > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/3?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.openstreetmap.org%2Fwiki%2FKey%3Aprow_ref=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D) > > > describing the conventions used. > > > > I've been working on something like this already as part of my PRoW > > Progress/Comparison tool at > > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/ > > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/4?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Frobert.mathmos.net%2Fosm%2Fprow%2Fprogress%2F=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D) > > . The tool needs to know > > the format that's used in each area in order to correctly parse the > > prow_ref values use in OSM, and to generate Right of Way numbers to > > display. The formats are stored in my database as a regular expression > > for parsing and a sprinf format string for generating the output. I've > > been displaying the formats on the county and parish pages for some > > time, but I've now added a page showing the formats for each county > > where one is defined: > > > > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ > > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/5?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Frobert.mathmos.net%2Fosm%2Fprow%2Fref-formats%2F=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D) > > These are the formats currently used by my tool. They may not always > > be the best one, as sometimes there didn't seem to be a consistent > > format in use (either by the Council or in OSM), and so sometimes I've > > just opted for my default "[Parish Name] [Type] [Number]" style. I can > > add other counties on request. I'm also more than happy to amend any > > of the formats already there if there's a consensus amongst local > > mappers to use something different. > > > > One thing to be aware of though, is that the GIS data provided by the > > councils is usually not the official Definitive Map, but just a > > working representation of it. Often the council will assign reference > > numbers to parishes, and segment numbers to the ways that are just for > > internal convenience, and don't form part of the official PRoW number > > as defined in the Definitive Map and Statement. My philosophy in the > > above is to try to stick to the official numbering as used in the > > Definitive Map and Statement. > > > > I plan to add a download of the data at > > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ > > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/6?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Frobert.mathmos.net%2Fosm%2Fprow%2Fref-formats%2F=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D) > > (probably in JSON > > format) at some point so anyone else who wants to can make us of this > > data more easily. I also have CSV files containing parish IDs and > > names for the counties where it's necessary to do this translation, > > which I can make available. For those using rowmaps data, sometimes > > you'll find the parish name in the INFO field, but the presence and > > format of this varies from county to county. > > > > Robert. > > -- > > Robert Whittaker > > > > ___ > > Talk-GB mailing list > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/7?redirect=mailto%3ATalk-GB%40openstreetmap.org=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D) > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > >
Re: [Talk-GB] Documenting prow_ref formats (Was: MapthePaths & Lancashire)
Surrey seems ot have a format of " Banstead NCP 123A". But existing entries in OSM are "FP 37". What does NCP mean. I will enter then as f " Banstead FP 37" unless told otherwise! On 14 July 2018 at 17:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) < robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 July 2018 at 19:26, Andrew Black > wrote: > > I am pondering a similar but simpler question. I would like to add a > table > > listing each authority at https://wiki.openstreetmap. > org/wiki/Key:prow_ref > > describing the conventions used. > > I've been working on something like this already as part of my PRoW > Progress/Comparison tool at > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/ . The tool needs to know > the format that's used in each area in order to correctly parse the > prow_ref values use in OSM, and to generate Right of Way numbers to > display. The formats are stored in my database as a regular expression > for parsing and a sprinf format string for generating the output. I've > been displaying the formats on the county and parish pages for some > time, but I've now added a page showing the formats for each county > where one is defined: > > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ > > These are the formats currently used by my tool. They may not always > be the best one, as sometimes there didn't seem to be a consistent > format in use (either by the Council or in OSM), and so sometimes I've > just opted for my default "[Parish Name] [Type] [Number]" style. I can > add other counties on request. I'm also more than happy to amend any > of the formats already there if there's a consensus amongst local > mappers to use something different. > > One thing to be aware of though, is that the GIS data provided by the > councils is usually not the official Definitive Map, but just a > working representation of it. Often the council will assign reference > numbers to parishes, and segment numbers to the ways that are just for > internal convenience, and don't form part of the official PRoW number > as defined in the Definitive Map and Statement. My philosophy in the > above is to try to stick to the official numbering as used in the > Definitive Map and Statement. > > I plan to add a download of the data at > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ (probably in JSON > format) at some point so anyone else who wants to can make us of this > data more easily. I also have CSV files containing parish IDs and > names for the counties where it's necessary to do this translation, > which I can make available. For those using rowmaps data, sometimes > you'll find the parish name in the INFO field, but the presence and > format of this varies from county to county. > > Robert. > > -- > Robert Whittaker > > ___ > 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] Documenting prow_ref formats (Was: MapthePaths & Lancashire)
On 13 July 2018 at 19:26, Andrew Black wrote: > I am pondering a similar but simpler question. I would like to add a table > listing each authority at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:prow_ref > describing the conventions used. I've been working on something like this already as part of my PRoW Progress/Comparison tool at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/ . The tool needs to know the format that's used in each area in order to correctly parse the prow_ref values use in OSM, and to generate Right of Way numbers to display. The formats are stored in my database as a regular expression for parsing and a sprinf format string for generating the output. I've been displaying the formats on the county and parish pages for some time, but I've now added a page showing the formats for each county where one is defined: http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ These are the formats currently used by my tool. They may not always be the best one, as sometimes there didn't seem to be a consistent format in use (either by the Council or in OSM), and so sometimes I've just opted for my default "[Parish Name] [Type] [Number]" style. I can add other counties on request. I'm also more than happy to amend any of the formats already there if there's a consensus amongst local mappers to use something different. One thing to be aware of though, is that the GIS data provided by the councils is usually not the official Definitive Map, but just a working representation of it. Often the council will assign reference numbers to parishes, and segment numbers to the ways that are just for internal convenience, and don't form part of the official PRoW number as defined in the Definitive Map and Statement. My philosophy in the above is to try to stick to the official numbering as used in the Definitive Map and Statement. I plan to add a download of the data at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ (probably in JSON format) at some point so anyone else who wants to can make us of this data more easily. I also have CSV files containing parish IDs and names for the counties where it's necessary to do this translation, which I can make available. For those using rowmaps data, sometimes you'll find the parish name in the INFO field, but the presence and format of this varies from county to county. Robert. -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
