On 18 June 2012 14:46, Andy Allan <gravityst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Will the errors/discrepancies we identify be fed back to the DfT? > > Unless Martin knows more than I do, then in all honesty I doubt it. > I'm hoping instead that whenever the DfT next want cycling data - say > 2-3 years down the line, they won't commission a separate dataset and > will instead use OSM directly.
Going by my work so far around Southwark / Lewisham, they would definitely do better in the future by starting with our data and supplementing it. I've added lots of useful metadata about lighting, surfaces and traffic calming. I started to add individual traffic calming features in when tracing buildings as they're easy to see on the Bing imagery, so I'm glad CycleStreets now uses them. Perhaps cyclists will be told to avoid my local area as a result! But there's almost no surface or lighting data round here. But I've also ignored a lot of misclassification of highway types in the DfT data, ignored some features that don't exist, and wondered about the very patchy nature of the data where it starts and stops along consistent LCN routes with big gaps in between. I'm not convinced the DfT data would be terribly useful on its own. Many thanks to Andy, Martin and anyone else involved for setting this up. Regards, Tom -- http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
