On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 at 09:02, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
wrote:
> > Maybe we should develop some sort of (crowd-sourced?) service which looks
> > up parishes based on parish codes to allow easy contribution of descriptive
> > prow_refs?
>
> I've started an effort in that direction at
>
On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 15:34, Nick Whitelegg
wrote:
> I wasn't familiar with the situation in Dorset but MapThePaths uses the 'SE
> 4/22' scheme (actually it appears as 'SE 4 22') so if people want to use MTP
> as a source for prow_refs, then that would be the format to use.
In general, I
From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
Sent: 16 April 2020 14:18
To: talk-gb
Subject: [Talk-GB] prow_ref format for Dorset Public Rights of Way
I've recently been looking at increasing the coverage of my PRoW
comparison tool https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/ by adding new
counties. In particul
Hi Rob
There is a very similar state in Lancashire, I can imagine the
Lancashire officer providing a very similar response to that from Dorset.
Dorset are saying that their definitive statement is listed by named
parish, status and route number.
I believe that as the public definitive
I've recently been looking at increasing the coverage of my PRoW
comparison tool https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/ by adding new
counties. In particular, I've been looking at the data from Dorset.
I've hit a small issue though, in that the council uses two different
formats for their Right of
5 matches
Mail list logo
