[Talk-gb-london] bulk importing london open data to osm

[Joseph Leach]

hello


import 
guidelines
 state that community buy-in is a pre-requisite for osm bulk data import and as 
part of the gis team at london city hall i would like to seek community backing 
for open data releases


as a trial run, i am manually adding eighteen newly founded drinking water 
amenities, but for larger datasets would like to investigate the feasibility of 
bulk imports, for example charging stations


joe


GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY NOTICE:
The information in this email may contain confidential or privileged materials.
For more information see https://www.london.gov.uk/about-us/email-notice/

___
Talk-gb-london mailing list
Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london

Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway or track?

[Devonshire]

Both footway and path infer a way of a certain width suitable for people to 
use, neither infers any legal right of use as far as I am concerned.

If starting over path is a better word as people outside of OSM have clue what 
it is but otherwise I see them as interchangeable.

Kevin


On Tue, Mar 12, 2019, at 7:37 AM, Adam Snape wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2019, 12:54 Devonshire,  wrote:
>> __
>> I have personally deprecated highway=bridleway|byway etc. as the combination 
>> of highway=footway|track|service and designation=public_footpath etc. 
>> contains more useful information both for map rendering and for active map 
>> users. Whether you wan't to do the same is up to you.
>> 
>> Kevin
> 
> Byway is universally depreciated these days. 
> 
> It seems somewhat odd to reject bridleway whilst using footway which shares 
> the same arguable 'flaw' of tagging both physical appearance and implied 
> access in one tag. For those unhappy with these tags, as Dave mentions, the 
> highway=path tag was designed to physically describe a physical path and be 
> used in combination with access tags.
> 
> Now, I can understand using either the 'classic' (highway=footway or 
> highway=bridleway) or 'alternate' (highway=path + access tags) tagging 
> schemes but I'd think that a hybrid resulting in combinations like 
> highway=footway horse=designated is best avoided .
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
>> 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway or track?

[Martin Wynne]

On 11/03/2019 12:53, Devonshire wrote:

I have personally deprecated highway=bridleway|byway etc. as the combination of 
highway=footway|track|service and designation=public_footpath etc. contains 
more useful information both for map rendering and for active map users. 
Whether you wan't to do the same is up to you.


Thanks Kevin.

This still leaves unanswered the question of what is a track?

The wiki refers only to its *width* as the deciding matter and nothing else:

"This tag represents roads for mostly agricultural use, forest tracks 
etc.; that are suitable for two-track vehicles, such as tractors or 
jeeps. If the way is not wide enough for a two-track vehicle, it should 
be tagged as highway=path."


Is it still a track if it is wide enough for such use, and clearly has 
been a track in times past, is shown as such on old maps, but is now 
blocked off for vehicular access and there is no evidence of current 
vehicular use?


Here is a bit more of the public bridleway which I posted previously:

 http://85a.uk/blocked_track1_960x580.jpg

Is this

a) highway=bridleway + access designations (deprecated ?)

b) highway=path + access designations (too wide ?)

c) highway=track + access designations (no physical vehicular access ?)

cheers,

Martin.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway or track?

[Adam Snape]

On Mon, 11 Mar 2019, 12:54 Devonshire,  wrote:

> I have personally deprecated highway=bridleway|byway etc. as the
> combination of highway=footway|track|service and
> designation=public_footpath etc. contains more useful information both for
> map rendering and for active map users. Whether you wan't to do the same is
> up to you.
>
> Kevin
>

Byway is universally depreciated these days.

It seems somewhat odd to reject bridleway whilst using footway which shares
the same arguable 'flaw' of tagging both physical appearance and implied
access in one tag. For those unhappy with these tags, as Dave mentions, the
highway=path tag was designed to physically describe a physical path and be
used in combination with access tags.

Now, I can understand using either the 'classic' (highway=footway or
highway=bridleway) or 'alternate' (highway=path + access tags) tagging
schemes but I'd think that a hybrid resulting in combinations like
highway=footway horse=designated is best avoided .

Kind regards

Adam
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb