Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
On 03/01/2010 11:36, Colin Smale wrote: While searching the internet for arbitration in a case where local wisdom appeared to conflict with OSM data I came across the Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer. It contains a complete list of roads in Kent, including their reference, road number, name, official classification, parish and length. It's a PDF file, linked from here: http://www.kent.gov.uk/roads_and_transport/transport_policies/road_status/adopted_and_private_streets.aspx I would like to use this document to classify minor roads correctly as unclassified or tertiary, add the official road number, at least to the tertiary roads, i.e. C-roads, and possibly access=permissive where the road is a privately maintained road (assuming unhindered access etc. as described on the Wiki). A couple of questions about C-roads... Is there a consensus about how these should be treated? Given that they are not a 'public-facing' classification (never appear on road signs or on any map you would buy from W. H. Smith's), I'm not sure we want the standard renderings cluttered up with them, do we? Should we invent a tag such as ref:internal (say) for these? Secondly, am I right in thinking that these are not unique references like the A- and B-roads? (Unique within the UK, that is.) In other words, whereas Wrotham Road near me is 'the A227', nearby Coldharbour Road is not 'the C364', it's just one of many C364s, albeit the only one in Kent? Should this be reflected in the tagging? I see in the States they use network=US:[state]:[county] to tag county roads. -- Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Steve Doerr steve.do...@blueyonder.co.ukwrote: A couple of questions about C-roads... Is there a consensus about how these should be treated? Given that they are not a 'public-facing' classification (never appear on road signs or on any map you would buy from W. H. Smith's), I'm not sure we want the standard renderings cluttered up with them, do we? Should we invent a tag such as ref:internal (say) for these? C roads are marked as yellow on OS landranger maps. Secondly, am I right in thinking that these are not unique references like the A- and B-roads? (Unique within the UK, that is.) In other words, whereas Wrotham Road near me is 'the A227', nearby Coldharbour Road is not 'the C364', it's just one of many C364s, albeit the only one in Kent? Should this be reflected in the tagging? I see in the States they use network=US:[state]:[county] to tag county roads. No idea whether c-class road references are nationally unique. It seems both plausible and implausible at the same time. Trevor ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
On 04/03/10 09:51, Trevor Hook wrote: C roads are marked as yellow on OS landranger maps. I don't believe that's true. IIRC the key on such maps claims that the colouring is determined by the width of the road not any internal local government classification of it. No idea whether c-class road references are nationally unique. It seems both plausible and implausible at the same time. I don't believe they are - in fact each authority has it's own numbering scheme for such roads. Some just use Cxxx, some use Cxxx and Dxxx, some use Uxxx and so on. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
No idea whether c-class road references are nationally unique. It seems both plausible and implausible at the same time. The C-numbers seem to low (1000) for them to be national. You'd probably end up with 6-figure C roads if they were nationally numbered... Also Kent isn't in region 3 for road numbering (between the A3 and A4, i.e. Wessex and southwest England) which would mean it's unlikely to be a national scheme. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
If this information is available then its useful data within OSM in the same way that references to gritting routes and customary bus stops are useful. However, because these things are difficult or impossible to verify on the ground its doubly important that if they are added to the database they include appropriate source tagging. I certainly would not encourage changing the highway= tag just because the local authority has referenced the road as C, D or U. Just treat the detail as additional useful information to someone, not necessarily the OSM rendered map. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Steve Doerr Sent: 04 March 2010 9:33 AM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer On 03/01/2010 11:36, Colin Smale wrote: While searching the internet for arbitration in a case where local wisdom appeared to conflict with OSM data I came across the Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer. It contains a complete list of roads in Kent, including their reference, road number, name, official classification, parish and length. It's a PDF file, linked from here: http://www.kent.gov.uk/roads_and_transport/transport_policies/road_status/a dopted_and_private_streets.aspx I would like to use this document to classify minor roads correctly as unclassified or tertiary, add the official road number, at least to the tertiary roads, i.e. C-roads, and possibly access=permissive where the road is a privately maintained road (assuming unhindered access etc. as described on the Wiki). A couple of questions about C-roads... Is there a consensus about how these should be treated? Given that they are not a 'public-facing' classification (never appear on road signs or on any map you would buy from W. H. Smith's), I'm not sure we want the standard renderings cluttered up with them, do we? Should we invent a tag such as ref:internal (say) for these? Secondly, am I right in thinking that these are not unique references like the A- and B-roads? (Unique within the UK, that is.) In other words, whereas Wrotham Road near me is 'the A227', nearby Coldharbour Road is not 'the C364', it's just one of many C364s, albeit the only one in Kent? Should this be reflected in the tagging? I see in the States they use network=US:[state]:[county] to tag county roads. -- Steve ___ 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: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2721 - Release Date: 03/03/10 19:34:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
On 04/03/2010 11:15, Tom Hughes wrote: On 04/03/10 09:51, Trevor Hook wrote: C roads are marked as yellow on OS landranger maps. I don't believe that's true. IIRC the key on such maps claims that the colouring is determined by the width of the road not any internal local government classification of it. No idea whether c-class road references are nationally unique. It seems both plausible and implausible at the same time. I don't believe they are - in fact each authority has it's own numbering scheme for such roads. Some just use Cxxx, some use Cxxx and Dxxx, some use Uxxx and so on. At the top of the KCC Gazetteer it says: National Convention for Road Numbering: `U' stands for `Unclassified' `P' stands for `Private Street' So it appears there is a national convention, implying that authorities are not obliged to follow it. It might exist as a formal document, but it might be just a de facto convention. Uxxx appears to mean explicitly unclassified whereas a Cxxx or Dxxx road is not unclassified - it's a C-road or a D-road. Colin ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
On 04/03/2010 10:31, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: .and for around £50 you can look and feel the part: Shouldn't that be *a* part? -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
[Snip] A couple of questions about C-roads... Is there a consensus about how these should be treated? Given that they are not a 'public-facing' classification (never appear on road signs or on any map you would buy from W. H. Smith's), I'm not sure we want the standard renderings cluttered up with them, do we? Should we invent a tag such as ref:internal (say) for these? No. That would be tagging for the renderer. Even if it's generally a non-visible ref in the outside world (though I've seen three C-roads leak onto signs in my travels) I believe that it's the render's choice as to whether they should show up on the maps, not for us to say that there's something special about the fact. A fact's a fact. Secondly, am I right in thinking that these are not unique references like the A- and B-roads? (Unique within the UK, that is.) In other words, whereas Wrotham Road near me is 'the A227', nearby Coldharbour Road is not 'the C364', it's just one of many C364s, albeit the only one in Kent? Should this be reflected in the tagging? I see in the States they use network=US:[state]:[county] to tag county roads. I'm not sure whether they're nationally unique references, but they'll be unique per authority and we've got pretty good bounding areas for those in OSM now. Gregory ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
WHy excluding Medway? Isn't KCC HQ in Chatham? On Feb 26, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Colin Smale wrote: I applied to KCC for permission to use data from their Highways Gazetteer in OSM. They have approved on the condition that the data is attributed to them. My request and their official reply are below. What this gives us is an authorititave source for road numbering and classification in Kent (excluding Medway), although it does require a little bit of thinking as there are no coordinates, only road and place names. So for example we take Whitehill Road and Highcross Road between Longfield and Bean [1] the Gazetteer makes clear that these roads are still officially the B255, even though the signs have not revealed this for years. For the attribution they require I intend to use source:ref=kent.gov.uk. Which brings me to a dilemma: If a road is ostensibly one type but officially another, how should this be tagged? Both are verifiable. Traditionally the official classification takes precedence - otherwise the single-track A-roads in the Scottish highlands and islands might better be tagged as as track in some cases... The Wiki [2] specifically refers to the Administrative classifications. Another use of this Gazetteer is to arbitrate between road classes, particularly between tertiary (i.e. C-roads) and unclassified, where there is mostly no visible difference on the ground. That throws up the odd anomaly as well: New Ash Green [3] got its very own bypass in the seventies, which is single carriageway but very wide. The much smaller original main road which goes through the village still retains the C classification, and the relatively enormous bypass is still unclassified. It occurred to the cynic in me that the lengths of roads of various classes might be fed into some spreadsheet in Whitehall to calculate some kind of grant to the local councils, giving them an interest in keeping the administrative classifications as high as possible, despite downgrading them on the ground. But that's unlikely to be true of course. Colin Smale [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.40868lon=0.2965zoom=15layers=B000FTF [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Highway [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.3665lon=0.30171zoom=15layers=B000FTF = Dear Sirs, I am one of an army of volunteers who collectively are producing and maintaining openstreetmap.org ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/ ), a crowd-sourced map of the world under the CC-BY-SA (Creative Commons by Share-Alike) licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ ), with which you may be familiar. Having found the KCC Highways Gazetteer, I would like to request your permission to use and republish certain information contained in this document by incorporating it in OpenStreetMap. One of the problems we frequently face is that the official category of a road (or segment thereof) is not always immediately obvious on the ground. I would like to use this document to classify (minor) roads correctly as (for example distinguishing between unclassified and tertiary), add the official road number, and possibly its status as a private (unadopted) street. The Highways Gazetteer contains no location information (other than place names) and therefore is probably unencumbered by Ordnance Survey restrictions, which would render the data unusable in the CC-BY-SA licence model. The alignment of the road will still be surveyed on the ground, but thereafter the Gazetteer will be used to classify the road correctly as mentioned. Yours sincerely, Colin Smale = Dear Mr Smale, Further to your request for information relating to re-use of information from the Kent Highways Gazetteer, because the information you have requested falls under the scope of the Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) and is information held within the Environment, Highways Waste Directorate (the directorate), your request has been forwarded to me so that I can co-ordinate the response on behalf of the directorate. This is to comply with procedures that the County Council has for dealing with all FoIA requests. You ask the Council: • Having found the KCC Highways Gazetteer, I would like to request your permission to use and republish certain information contained in this document by incorporating it in OpenStreetMap Although the response below has been sent from me, I have liaised with Kent Highway Services who have provided the following in answer to your request: Kent County Council are willing to allow the information in the Highway Gazetteer to be used for the purpose of Open Street Map on the proviso that we receive confirmation that the data source is kent.gov.uk. = On 03/01/2010 12:36, Colin Smale wrote: While searching the internet for arbitration in a
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
On 27/02/2010 18:11, SteveC wrote: WHy excluding Medway? Isn't KCC HQ in Chatham? No, KCC HQ is in Maidstone, the County Town of Kent. Medway has been a Unitary Authority since 1998 and as such has its own Highways department - see http://www.medway.gov.uk/index/environment/roads.htm Colin ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
I applied to KCC for permission to use data from their Highways Gazetteer in OSM. They have approved on the condition that the data is attributed to them. My request and their official reply are below. What this gives us is an authorititave source for road numbering and classification in Kent (excluding Medway), although it does require a little bit of thinking as there are no coordinates, only road and place names. So for example we take Whitehill Road and Highcross Road between Longfield and Bean [1] the Gazetteer makes clear that these roads are still officially the B255, even though the signs have not revealed this for years. For the attribution they require I intend to use source:ref=kent.gov.uk. Which brings me to a dilemma: If a road is ostensibly one type but officially another, how should this be tagged? Both are verifiable. Traditionally the official classification takes precedence - otherwise the single-track A-roads in the Scottish highlands and islands might better be tagged as as track in some cases... The Wiki [2] specifically refers to the Administrative classifications. Another use of this Gazetteer is to arbitrate between road classes, particularly between tertiary (i.e. C-roads) and unclassified, where there is mostly no visible difference on the ground. That throws up the odd anomaly as well: New Ash Green [3] got its very own bypass in the seventies, which is single carriageway but very wide. The much smaller original main road which goes through the village still retains the C classification, and the relatively enormous bypass is still unclassified. It occurred to the cynic in me that the lengths of roads of various classes might be fed into some spreadsheet in Whitehall to calculate some kind of grant to the local councils, giving them an interest in keeping the administrative classifications as high as possible, despite downgrading them on the ground. But that's unlikely to be true of course. Colin Smale [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.40868lon=0.2965zoom=15layers=B000FTF http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.40868lon=0.2965zoom=15layers=B000FTF [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Highway [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.3665lon=0.30171zoom=15layers=B000FTF http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.3665lon=0.30171zoom=15layers=B000FTF = Dear Sirs, I am one of an army of volunteers who collectively are producing and maintaining openstreetmap.org ( _http://www.openstreetmap.org/_ ), a crowd-sourced map of the world under the CC-BY-SA (Creative Commons by Share-Alike) licence ( _http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/_ ), with which you may be familiar. Having found the KCC Highways Gazetteer, I would like to request your permission to use and republish certain information contained in this document by incorporating it in OpenStreetMap. One of the problems we frequently face is that the official category of a road (or segment thereof) is not always immediately obvious on the ground. I would like to use this document to classify (minor) roads correctly as (for example distinguishing between unclassified and tertiary), add the official road number, and possibly its status as a private (unadopted) street. The Highways Gazetteer contains no location information (other than place names) and therefore is probably unencumbered by Ordnance Survey restrictions, which would render the data unusable in the CC-BY-SA licence model. The alignment of the road will still be surveyed on the ground, but thereafter the Gazetteer will be used to classify the road correctly as mentioned. Yours sincerely, Colin Smale = Dear Mr Smale, Further to your request for information relating to re-use of information from the Kent Highways Gazetteer, because the information you have requested falls under the scope of the Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) and is information held within the Environment, Highways Waste Directorate (the directorate), your request has been forwarded to me so that I can co-ordinate the response on behalf of the directorate. This is to comply with procedures that the County Council has for dealing with all FoIA requests. You ask the Council: * Having found the KCC Highways Gazetteer, I would like to request your permission to use and republish certain information contained in this document by incorporating it in OpenStreetMap Although the response below has been sent from me, I have liaised with Kent Highway Services who have provided the following in answer to your request: Kent County Council are willing to allow the information in the Highway Gazetteer to be used for the purpose of Open Street Map on the proviso that we receive confirmation that the data source is kent.gov.uk. = On 03/01/2010 12:36, Colin Smale wrote: While searching the internet for arbitration in a case where
Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer
Colin Smale wrote: Would it be OK to derive tagging in this way? Should we get explicit permission from KCC first? Anyone got any experience with this, or example emails for this kind of request? I'd certainly ask permission first. The document will be copyright even if it doesn't bear a copyright statement, so you need written permission to use it - an email is fine. You can then post a copy of their email into the Wiki. I have sent emails to my local council using their general contact address from their web site and got fairly quick, useful answers from the right person. It is a good opportunity to spread the message about OSM, don't forget to send a link to the Kent area of the map. Cheers, Chris ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
