It depends on the county, in most cases the council right of way data is still covered by OS copyright, so is not suitable for inclusion in OSM. I would be in breach of OS copyright if I was to do the same in Shropshire.
Right of way data also lacks the location of stiles, gates etc. Adding these is a very important way in which we can produce a better map. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 18/11/2013 13:33 Jonathan wrote: I should re-phrase my comment, GPS traces are important, but for small niche parts of the map or brand new developments. I do use GPS, but the bulk of editing is done from other sources, and I don't mean Bing, there are loads of sources coming online every day. In Worcestershire, where the local council make available a TMS service of the public rights of way and add to that overhead imagery to confirm where people are actually walking across a field and I've mapped a huge percentage of the PRoW around here without leaving home. Yes some bits need an onsite verification but the bulk is armchair. I'm not ashamed of armchair mapping and all power to those who have the time and resources to go and survey on foot but the vast percentage of my mapping time is spent online. If I do ground survey it's when I'm somewhere for work. Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me On 18/11/2013 13:15, Philip Barnes wrote: Also the area we are lacking at the moment is rights of way, these are often not visible on satellite imagery and the only way to map them is to go out and walk them with a GPS. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 18/11/2013 13:03 SomeoneElse wrote: Jonathan wrote: ... but are traces really that important now? They have some uses but the bulk of sources now and going forward are from other methods? If "other methods" means "copying from other data sources rather than actually going out and surveying" then you're never going to get "the best map", only "a map that is in some areas almost as good as some others". For example, yesterday I was here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/53.2346/-0.3269 Without going there you'd be able to guess at the exent of the woodland (depending on the age of the Bing imagery) and you'd think (based on what OS OpenData says) that it's called "Stanfield Wood". If you go and have a look you can see the correct name ("Stainfield Wood" - which matches the village to the north), who runs it, and the fact that it's not open to the public. The actual GPS trace is useful for helping to spot places where Bing is offset from reality (although here in flat Lincolnshire it's only a 4-5m at a guess). Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ 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
