Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
Here is an alternative view of the National Byway as a KML overlay on OSM Cycle Map. http://www.reedhome.org.uk/Documents/osmembed.html?kml=http://www.reedhome.o rg.uk/Documents/KML/natbyway.kml http://www.reedhome.org.uk/Documents/osmembed.html?kml=http://www.reedhome. org.uk/Documents/KML/natbyway.kmlmap=cyclemap map=cyclemap I'm afraid the data is a few weeks old, because I've generated it from a local copy of the planet file that I pulled at the start of April. Also, it may not be picking up everything. It uses relations that were tagged network=national_byway or operator=national_byway at the time. Click on a segment to see the relation name and road name. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
It might be easier using this link - - http://tinyurl.com/3oondxj Here is an alternative view of the National Byway as a KML overlay on OSM Cycle Map. http://www.reedhome.org.uk/Documents/osmembed.html?kml=http://www.reedhome.o rg.uk/Documents/KML/natbyway.kml http://www.reedhome.org.uk/Documents/osmembed.html?kml=http://www.reedhome. org.uk/Documents/KML/natbyway.kmlmap=cyclemap map=cyclemap I'm afraid the data is a few weeks old, because I've generated it from a local copy of the planet file that I pulled at the start of April. Also, it may not be picking up everything. It uses relations that were tagged network=national_byway or operator=national_byway at the time. Click on a segment to see the relation name and road name. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
David Dixon wrote: OK, I've updated the tagging of all the National Byway relations listed on the wiki to network=rcn, and also updated the wiki to reflect the changes. I suppose I ought to go out and fill in some of the local gaps now! Thumbs up to all of that. :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/National-Byway-rendering-on-OpenCycleMap-tp6287466p6297886.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
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
David Dixon wrote: Richard - are you prepared to humour the rest of us and give this a go? Well, I can't stop you! If I were someone wanting the National Byway to render right now, I'd tag it as rcn, not ncn, because I believe if it quacks like a duck, tag it like a duck and the quality and design of the National Byway is much more akin to an old-style county cycleway (now generally Regional Routes) than to our National Cycle Network. If I were the guy who runs OpenCycleMap and was looking for a way to render it without putting in NB-specific logic, I'd tweak the rendering rules to show route=bicycle, without a network tag, in green (and move the MTB routes to brown, because, well, it's mud and that). But as I'm neither of those, you do what you like. And one of these days I might get the magical extra hours to set up a renderer that does things the _right_ way. ;) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/National-Byway-rendering-on-OpenCycleMap-tp6287466p6293878.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
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: an old-style county cycleway (now generally Regional Routes) ... Does anyone object if longish-distance routes (eg the round-Berkshire route) are now coded as rcn (rather than lcn), given that Sustrans have moved away from making a distinction between their national and regional routes? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
Richard Mann wrote: Does anyone object if longish-distance routes (eg the round-Berkshire route) are now coded as rcn (rather than lcn), given that Sustrans have moved away from making a distinction between their national and regional routes? Personally I think that'd be a great improvement. There's quite a lot in Northern Ireland that should be RCN, too, not LCN. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 21/04/2011 13:42, Richard Fairhurst wrote: If I were someone wanting the National Byway to render right now, I'd tag it as rcn, not ncn, because I believe if it quacks like a duck, tag it like a duck and the quality and design of the National Byway is much more akin to an old-style county cycleway (now generally Regional Routes) than to our National Cycle Network. I agree it feel more like an RCN. I'll retag my local section and see what emerges. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 21/04/2011 13:42, Richard Fairhurst wrote: David Dixon wrote: Richard - are you prepared to humour the rest of us and give this a go? Well, I can't stop you! If I were someone wanting the National Byway to render right now, I'd tag it as rcn, not ncn, because I believe if it quacks like a duck, tag it like a duck and the quality and design of the National Byway is much more akin to an old-style county cycleway (now generally Regional Routes) than to our National Cycle Network. OK, I've updated the tagging of all the National Byway relations listed on the wiki to network=rcn, and also updated the wiki to reflect the changes. I suppose I ought to go out and fill in some of the local gaps now! David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:22 PM, monxton gm...@jordan-maynard.org wrote: So I hope his sense of humour is robust enough for me to mention that it's 3.5 years since since the schedule for rendering the National Byway was this week. eeek! Let's face it though, in the face of trying to keep the server running under ever-increasing pressures, and dealing with problems and improvements in the cartography that affect the whole planet, it's not hugely surprising that the National Byway hasn't quite bubbled up to the top of my todo list. I mean, the key hasn't been updated in 3.5 years either, and I've never gotten around to documenting my wonderful system for highlighting places that serve fryups, and I think both of those are more important :-) But on the National Byway issue, there are a few fundamental things. I've pretty much settled on not adding any new types of cycle route highlighting, since I think three levels of hierarchy have pretty much proven sufficient in many different countries. I disagree (with Richard) that there's anything fundamentally different between a cycle route of national importance organised by one UK charity as opposed to a cycle route of national importance organised by a different UK charity. However, I'm aware that we are doing lots of non-cyclists a disfavour by classifying the national byway as only being for cycling (with the route=bicycle tag). If we keep the route=bicycle I would suggest network=ncn, name = National Byway and therefore bring it into line with all the other national cycling routes in every other country in OSM. If anyone cares about the differences between a Sustrans route and other routes, then the operator tag would be appropriate. So I expect to render it at some point (still), but it's never really been a great priority for me, and when it does get rendered I'll be treating it the same way as all the other national cycling routes[1] around the world. Cheers, Andy [1] I was at a Sustrans rangers meeting once where the big guns were discussing the fact that their network was for both cyclists and walkers, and why did so many people think it was only for cyclists. I laughed slightly and pointed out that they'd called it the National Cycle Network and the clue to the cause of the confusion might be in the name. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
Thanks for response Andy. I'm with you regarding tagging the NB as ncn= for the reasons you give. Appreciate all your hard work in keeping the cyclemap up and running. It's a fantastic resource. On your note re Sustrans walking/cycling I did the same chuckle. I'm also surprised that they haven't yet changed the standard ranger sticker from the cycling one to the one that adds the pedestrian at the top as well. Every ranger patch I put up I have to add the walking/cycling (SPB) patch which is just a waste. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Andy Allan [mailto:gravityst...@gmail.com] Sent: 20 April 2011 9:23 AM To: monxton Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:22 PM, monxton gm...@jordan-maynard.org wrote: So I hope his sense of humour is robust enough for me to mention that it's 3.5 years since since the schedule for rendering the National Byway was this week. eeek! Let's face it though, in the face of trying to keep the server running under ever-increasing pressures, and dealing with problems and improvements in the cartography that affect the whole planet, it's not hugely surprising that the National Byway hasn't quite bubbled up to the top of my todo list. I mean, the key hasn't been updated in 3.5 years either, and I've never gotten around to documenting my wonderful system for highlighting places that serve fryups, and I think both of those are more important :-) But on the National Byway issue, there are a few fundamental things. I've pretty much settled on not adding any new types of cycle route highlighting, since I think three levels of hierarchy have pretty much proven sufficient in many different countries. I disagree (with Richard) that there's anything fundamentally different between a cycle route of national importance organised by one UK charity as opposed to a cycle route of national importance organised by a different UK charity. However, I'm aware that we are doing lots of non-cyclists a disfavour by classifying the national byway as only being for cycling (with the route=bicycle tag). If we keep the route=bicycle I would suggest network=ncn, name = National Byway and therefore bring it into line with all the other national cycling routes in every other country in OSM. If anyone cares about the differences between a Sustrans route and other routes, then the operator tag would be appropriate. So I expect to render it at some point (still), but it's never really been a great priority for me, and when it does get rendered I'll be treating it the same way as all the other national cycling routes[1] around the world. Cheers, Andy [1] I was at a Sustrans rangers meeting once where the big guns were discussing the fact that their network was for both cyclists and walkers, and why did so many people think it was only for cyclists. I laughed slightly and pointed out that they'd called it the National Cycle Network and the clue to the cause of the confusion might be in the name. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3584 - Release Date: 04/19/11 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
Andy Allan wrote: If we keep the route=bicycle I would suggest network=ncn, name = National Byway and therefore bring it into line with all the other national cycling routes in every other country in OSM. Strongly disagree. But then you know that. :) I think the root (route?) problem is that we're tagging everything as networks even if they're not. I've been as guilty as anyone of this: when I mapped the Four Castles Cycle Route around Abergavenny, I tagged it as lcn, just to get it to render. But it isn't a network, really. It's just a route. Lots of other people have done this, to the extent that I wince whenever I look at OCM at z13 - all that obtrusive dark blue in places which really don't have local cycle networks at all. From OSM's point of view, there's no reason at all why a route=bicycle relation needs a network= tag. If it's a bicycle route, tagging it as route=bicycle should be sufficient. If it's a bicycle route, it would also be great to see it on the Cycle Map. But since the Cycle Map requires a network= tag, so we all add one. So what would be most awesome of all would be if OCM rendered route=bicycle without a network tag - whether this be the Four Castles, the National Byway, the Wiltshire Cycleway, or whatever. flutters eyelashes cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/National-Byway-rendering-on-OpenCycleMap-tp6287466p6290064.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
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I think the root (route?) problem is that we're tagging everything as networks even if they're not. I've been as guilty as anyone of this: when I mapped the Four Castles Cycle Route around Abergavenny, I tagged it as lcn, just to get it to render. But it isn't a network, really. It's just a route. Ooh, a golden opportunity to point out (to Richard of all people :-) ) that the key / value pairs are just arbitrary UTF8 strings and can mean whatever we want them to mean. So the letters n-e-t-w-o-r-k could mean importance classification and n-c-n could mean cycling route of national importance and we can all go home happy. After all, the letters ncn is a historical accident. I thought sustrans called each route something like NCN 4, when it turned out they call them NCR 4 (see wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCR_4 ). The lcn was - despite some revisionist history that I've been 100% part of - clearly started as the London Cycle Network, and the s/London/local/ bit was revisionism on my part to head off arguments. The network tag seemed appropriate when all these ncn, lcn, rcn were supposedly each ending in the work network, but as soon as someone asked about a standalone local route then I said don't worry about it, just use lcn, nobody cares whether a route is part of a larger network or not. And all over the world people are getting along fine with the ambiguities. Perhaps when all the tags are meaningless foreign words people worry less about them. So don't let the repeated use of the letters n-e-t-w-o-r-k get in the way of mapping! Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
Richard Fairhurst [mailto:rich...@systemed.net] wrote: Sent: 20 April 2011 10:17 AM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap Andy Allan wrote: If we keep the route=bicycle I would suggest network=ncn, name = National Byway and therefore bring it into line with all the other national cycling routes in every other country in OSM. Strongly disagree. But then you know that. :) I think the root (route?) problem is that we're tagging everything as networks even if they're not. I've been as guilty as anyone of this: when I mapped the Four Castles Cycle Route around Abergavenny, I tagged it as lcn, just to get it to render. But it isn't a network, really. It's just a route. Lots of other people have done this, to the extent that I wince whenever I look at OCM at z13 - all that obtrusive dark blue in places which really don't have local cycle networks at all. This raises an important point that cropped up last week in Brum where Brian had tagged a serious of routes that the local campaign group, Pushbikes, are promoting. The issue was that these routes don't exist on the ground. Like a bus route there is nothing really to tell you a route exists though there is clearly information around (paper map etc) that confirms they do and shows you where they go, a bus route map would be similar. So for me whether it is part of a network or not is immaterial. As far as I'm concerned using ncn/lcn/lcn is the best way of tagging a signed logical route whether its part of a bigger network or not. For routes that are not signed perhaps another layer is needed so that you can print the route and follow it but it doesn't clutter the signed physical network version of the cycle map. For now I've removed the lcn tags from a couple of the Pushbikes unsigned routes in Brum and Brian and I have it on our to-do to work out how best to handle them locally going forwards as we want to help promote Pushbikes excellent work. Cheers Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 20 April 2011 10:46, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Andy Allan wrote: Ooh, a golden opportunity to point out (to Richard of all people :-) ) that the key / value pairs are just arbitrary UTF8 strings and can mean whatever we want them to mean. So the letters n-e-t-w-o-r-k could mean importance classification and n-c-n could mean cycling route of national importance and we can all go home happy. So now I can point out to you that arbitrary importance scales are generally considered harmful in OSM and we can have that argument too. It just gets better. ;) Your map, your call. Personally I'd be very saddened to see the National Byway rendered in the same way as the National Cycle Network as I think it'd (a) look shit (b) not be helpful to users. But it's not my map. What tagging would you expect us to use within OSM to identify something as being part of this network? Fyi, I notice that highway=byway is depreciated by the wiki and that designation=restricted_byway is proposed in its place. There is a scattering of both tags in the current OSM DB, but nothing that creates a coherent network. I am also not convinced that either of these are the right tag for this purpose. When we agree what the tags should be used then ITO can host an overlay map showing the view and maintain it going forward using ITO Map. We might even be able to get the National Byways website to include a slippy map on their website based on it. Regards, Peter Miller ITO World Ltd cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
Peter Miller wrote: What tagging would you expect us to use within OSM to identify something as being part of this network? Just route=bicycle, name=National Byway should be enough IMO. I wouldn't really call the National Byway a network - it's a circular route with the odd spur - but I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. (Bear in mind that, though I wouldn't go so far as to call the NB vapourware, its ambition has thus far exceeded its reach. It's a lovely project but I think the completion date has slipped by about 10 years so far. It's a bit like standing at a station when the departure board always says it'll be here 3 minutes from now... and does so for an hour. We should be fairly careful to tag what the NB is, not what it wants to be. Even the 'National Map' on the NB website overstates its existence: there is no signage in Gloucestershire, and only intermittent signage in Oxfordshire where it coincides with the NCN, even though it claims both were completed in 2009.) Fyi, I notice that highway=byway is depreciated by the wiki and that designation=restricted_byway is proposed in its place. There is a scattering of both tags in the current OSM DB, but nothing that creates a coherent network. I am also not convinced that either of these are the right tag for this purpose. Oh, absolutely. The National Byway is not made up of byways - in fact, it's expressly meant to be more an on-road network than (say) the NCN, which is why touring cyclists like it. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 20 April 2011 12:11, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Peter Miller wrote: What tagging would you expect us to use within OSM to identify something as being part of this network? Just route=bicycle, name=National Byway should be enough IMO. I wouldn't really call the National Byway a network - it's a circular route with the odd spur - but I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. I can't see any obvious instances of this tagging in the database at present. Can you give me some example ways? Regards, Peter (Bear in mind that, though I wouldn't go so far as to call the NB vapourware, its ambition has thus far exceeded its reach. It's a lovely project but I think the completion date has slipped by about 10 years so far. It's a bit like standing at a station when the departure board always says it'll be here 3 minutes from now... and does so for an hour. We should be fairly careful to tag what the NB is, not what it wants to be. Even the 'National Map' on the NB website overstates its existence: there is no signage in Gloucestershire, and only intermittent signage in Oxfordshire where it coincides with the NCN, even though it claims both were completed in 2009.) Fyi, I notice that highway=byway is depreciated by the wiki and that designation=restricted_byway is proposed in its place. There is a scattering of both tags in the current OSM DB, but nothing that creates a coherent network. I am also not convinced that either of these are the right tag for this purpose. Oh, absolutely. The National Byway is not made up of byways - in fact, it's expressly meant to be more an on-road network than (say) the NCN, which is why touring cyclists like it. Thanks for the clarification. Regards, Peter cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 20/04/2011 11:24, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: This raises an important point that cropped up last week in Brum where Brian had tagged a serious of routes that the local campaign group, Pushbikes, are promoting. The issue was that these routes don't exist on the ground. Like a bus route there is nothing really to tell you a route exists though there is clearly information around (paper map etc) that confirms they do and shows you where they go, a bus route map would be similar. So for me whether it is part of a network or not is immaterial. As far as I'm concerned using ncn/lcn/lcn is the best way of tagging a signed logical route whether its part of a bigger network or not. For routes that are not signed perhaps another layer is needed so that you can print the route and follow it but it doesn't clutter the signed physical network version of the cycle map. Bus routes do have a physical manifestation inasmuch as they usually have physical stops which usually list the routes which stop there. This is pretty much like a bicycle route which has signs only at the junctions. But yes, I would only tag a bicycle route which is signed on the ground. Though the OCM does support proposed routes, using dashed lines. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
I have created a new ITO Map overlay showing highway=byway in red and designation=restricted_byway in blue. It would also show ways with route=bicycle and name=National Byway as a thick green line, however there aren't any that I can see as yet. You can try it here: http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=90 Note: this overlay map does not appear in the ITO Map layer selection list so as to avoid confusing users in other parts of the world - you will need to bookmark this URL if you want to return to it. t also doesn't have a key as yet as it is likely to evolve to meet some need or other or it may get canned in the near future if we don't need it any more! Regards, Peter On 20 April 2011 12:23, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: On 20 April 2011 12:11, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Peter Miller wrote: What tagging would you expect us to use within OSM to identify something as being part of this network? Just route=bicycle, name=National Byway should be enough IMO. I wouldn't really call the National Byway a network - it's a circular route with the odd spur - but I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. I can't see any obvious instances of this tagging in the database at present. Can you give me some example ways? Regards, Peter (Bear in mind that, though I wouldn't go so far as to call the NB vapourware, its ambition has thus far exceeded its reach. It's a lovely project but I think the completion date has slipped by about 10 years so far. It's a bit like standing at a station when the departure board always says it'll be here 3 minutes from now... and does so for an hour. We should be fairly careful to tag what the NB is, not what it wants to be. Even the 'National Map' on the NB website overstates its existence: there is no signage in Gloucestershire, and only intermittent signage in Oxfordshire where it coincides with the NCN, even though it claims both were completed in 2009.) Fyi, I notice that highway=byway is depreciated by the wiki and that designation=restricted_byway is proposed in its place. There is a scattering of both tags in the current OSM DB, but nothing that creates a coherent network. I am also not convinced that either of these are the right tag for this purpose. Oh, absolutely. The National Byway is not made up of byways - in fact, it's expressly meant to be more an on-road network than (say) the NCN, which is why touring cyclists like it. Thanks for the clarification. Regards, Peter cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
Peter Miller wrote: I can't see any obvious instances of this tagging in the database at present. Can you give me some example ways? Ah, well, if you're asking about how it's tagged at present: it's grouped in _relations_ (as cycle routes usually are) which have tags route=bicycle, network=national_byway. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Byway . To reiterate: the National Byway has _nothing_ to do with byways of any other sort. highway=byway and designation=restricted_byway are entirely separate beasts. The NB people just happened upon the name because it has nice connotations of quiet lanes and pretty countryside, I guess. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 20/04/2011 12:11, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Peter Miller wrote: What tagging would you expect us to use within OSM to identify something as being part of this network? Just route=bicycle, name=National Byway should be enough IMO. I wouldn't really call the National Byway a network - it's a circular route with the odd spur - but I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. People seem to find this an important distinction, but it's a little opaque to me. I mean, I understand that mathematically a network is a collection of connected points (so that you can always navigate between any two), and that a route is one way between two nodes. But that doesn't help me distinguish between the NB and the Sustrans NCN - just that the Sustrans network is bigger. If I am planning a cycling trip (oops nearly used the word route there) then I will choose whatever works best, which is likely to be a collection of segments from several different routes. (Bear in mind that, though I wouldn't go so far as to call the NB vapourware, its ambition has thus far exceeded its reach. It's a lovely project but I think the completion date has slipped by about 10 years so far. It's a bit like standing at a station when the departure board always says it'll be here 3 minutes from now... and does so for an hour. We should be fairly careful to tag what the NB is, not what it wants to be. Even the 'National Map' on the NB website overstates its existence: there is no signage in Gloucestershire, and only intermittent signage in Oxfordshire where it coincides with the NCN, even though it claims both were completed in 2009.) I completely agree about only tagging what's on the ground. But I've had the opposite experience of the NB from you - in the south west I have found signs in places where I had not expected them. (Mind you it's hard to know what to expect as the NB south-west map is out of date and out of print too.) That's one reason I am keen to get them rendered on the OCM. Oh, absolutely. The National Byway is not made up of byways - in fact, it's expressly meant to be more an on-road network than (say) the NCN, which is why touring cyclists like it. I think there's an older meaning of the word byway to mean any minor / unclassified / back road. Perhaps that meaning has been eclipsed since the (relatively) recent reclassification of RUPPs and BOATs, but I guess it was what the NB people intended. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 20/04/2011 10:03, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: On your note re Sustrans walking/cycling I did the same chuckle. I'm also surprised that they haven't yet changed the standard ranger sticker from the cycling one to the one that adds the pedestrian at the top as well. Every ranger patch I put up I have to add the walking/cycling (SPB) patch which is just a waste. The useful to pedestrians as well bit might explain why Sustrans' (and now OS) maps near me have people following NCN67 jumping off a former railway bridge onto the road below and then cycling up a footpath to get onto the next bit! I guess that they'll sort it out when they put the signposts up. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 20/04/2011 12:31, Peter Miller wrote: I have created a new ITO Map overlay showing highway=byway in red and designation=restricted_byway in blue. It would also show ways with route=bicycle and name=National Byway as a thick green line, however there aren't any that I can see as yet. You can try it here: http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=90 That's an interesting map, but it's not what we're discussing here. Often the ways officially designated as byway or restricted_byway are not cyclable. Cyclists are entitled to use them, but in practice usually cannot. More often they are usable by MTBs. The National Byway is currently tagged as : route=bicycle network=national_byway name=National Byway (region name) but the proposal being discussed here is to change to network=ncn ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 20/04/2011 13:19, monxton wrote: The National Byway is currently tagged as : route=bicycle network=national_byway name=National Byway (region name) but the proposal being discussed here is to change to network=ncn I started one of the older threads on the same topic, so I've been following this with interest. It seems the majority is in favour of the above change. Richard - are you prepared to humour the rest of us and give this a go? Andy A. - is there a straightforward way of distinguishing between different classes of NCR / RCR / LCR on OCM, say for example by including a colour = XXX tag that the renderer uses? Apart from making the map easier to view, the routes could match the signs on the ground. Finally, I bumped into one of our Council's rights of way officers today, who has a lot to do with cycling provision. I'd previously brought OCM to her attention and she was very impressed. She's been showing her colleagues, and realises that there's no point trying to produce a dedicated map of cycling infrastructure as it already exists as OCM, and she's looking into how the Council's data can be incorporated - a big thumbs up both to Andy and all the mappers! David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
I recently cycled following Byway signs to the Cambridgeshire border near Gamlingay (where the signs disappeared ..) I later extended the relation for that part of the Byway which I found by searching the Wiki. The Sustrans network is often better mapped in OSM than on the Sustrans website. I recently rode some local signed roads that are not on the Sustrans website. The National Byway website, in contrast, has no serious online mapping. There is a low resolution representation that is useless for planning an actual cycle trip. They sell maps, but some are out of stock, and the whole Byway (and local Loops) is not covered. The Byway needs a good map, and OSM/OpenCycleMap is ideally equipped to provide it. to quote Andy Allan in another context: One of the phrases I started using a few years ago is “render and they will map” – or, in other words, if you are interested in a particular aspect of mapping data being improved then the best way to encourage mappers to improve that is to make it visible and useful. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
monxton [mailto:gm...@jordan-maynard.org] wrote: Sent: 19 April 2011 3:24 PM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap Lately I've been doing some tagging of the South-West region of the National Byway, and I'm finding it quite disappointing that it is not rendered on the cycle map. I've rummaged around in the history of this issue and located what I think are the most relevant thread starters: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2010-May/009449.html http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2007- September/005861.html also Richard's summary on the forum: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=4141 These, and other threads I haven't listed, tend to end with Andy saying that he will render the National Byway tags in their own colour some time in the future. I guess we need to be patient with Andy. Yes it would be nice to see it rendered as a brown line or whatever with little http://www.thenationalbyway.org/img/nb_logo.gif shields instead of the Sustrans NCN numbering. But I'm sure it will happen eventually. Is there any likelihood that that time is nigh? I know this sounds like a nag, so if there anything that can be done (style files?) to help get to that point, I'm happy to volunteer. (I know not everyone here cares for the National Byway. For me, it hits the spot for route planning much better than the Sustrans routes, which tend to be just too slow for long journeys.) The two are trying to do very different things, each to their own. Cheers Andy (Yet another Sustrans Volunteer) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
On 19/04/2011 17:05, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: monxton [mailto:gm...@jordan-maynard.org] wrote: These, and other threads I haven't listed, tend to end with Andy saying that he will render the National Byway tags in their own colour some time in the future. I guess we need to be patient with Andy. Yes it would be nice to see it rendered as a brown line or whatever with little http://www.thenationalbyway.org/img/nb_logo.gif shields instead of the Sustrans NCN numbering. But I'm sure it will happen eventually. It would be nice to see it rendered anyhow. I really, really, don't want to annoy Andy, because if we didn't love the cycle map so much we wouldn't care what it rendered. So I hope his sense of humour is robust enough for me to mention that it's 3.5 years since since the schedule for rendering the National Byway was this week. I'll get my coat. I know not everyone here cares for the National Byway. For me, it hits the spot for route planning much better than the Sustrans routes, which tend to be just too slow for long journeys. The two are trying to do very different things, each to their own. That's something that's said a few times on this list, but IMHO it's only partly true. I'd rather say that the Sustrans routes are trying to do about three different things, and the National Byway does only one of those three. If that were not so, there would not be so many places where the NB takes the same route as a Sustrans route. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
