Dave F. wrote > > I'm not sure OSM should want it...OSM tagging system is more detailed & > accurate. >
Yeah the OSM data is more accurate and detailed, no question, but the Sustrans data is way more complete in terms of coverage. For example in my area (Newcastle/Gateshead) I've worked to get good surveys and mapping of the NCN72, but the NCN14 on the south side of the river is very patchy and isn't mapped at all for large stretches. If we had the Sustrans data to compare to then it could highlight such missing sections and indicate where surveys and mapping work are required. To be clear, I'm definitely NOT suggesting a large scale import. As you say the Sustrans data has its own issues. But we /could/ do a piecemeal merge based on surveys and local knowledge, as we are doing for the DfT Cycling Data; or we could use it as a background tileset; or ITO might step forward to provide one of their excellent comparison tools. I think any of these approaches would greatly benefit us, especially given the number of cycling maps built on OSM data (BikeHub, CycleStreets, OpenCycleMap, MotionX etc). And we could feed back any map vs survey discrepancies to Sustrans which would benefit them. -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Google-Maps-using-Sustrans-Cycling-data-tp5716106p5716223.html Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
