On 07/12/2016 17:50, Andy Robinson wrote:
Andy T,
As far as I can see the new 2b shapefiles now uploaded to OSM are the "confirmed" and
"consulting" route sections as shown on page 8 of:
Andy T,
As far as I can see the new 2b shapefiles now uploaded to OSM are the
"confirmed" and "consulting" route sections as shown on page 8 of:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/568502/D1_Route_refinement_consultation_document_FINAL.PDF
Obviously the
HS2 changes made. The routes now sit under 4 relations as follows:
1986960 - HS2 Phase 1 - London to West Midlands (No changes - Route as per
Hybrid Bill)
6748946 - HS2 Phase 2a - West Midlands to Crewe (Jan 2016 preferred route)
6775224 - HS2 Phase 2b - Crewe to Manchester (Nov 2016 preferred
On 7 December 2016 at 12:43, Chris Hill wrote:
> It would be good to improve the road names
We could also improve street name etymology. For instance the new
"Derbyshire Way" in Coventry could be tagged:
etymology = Delia Derbyshire
etymology:wikidata = Q29544
It would be good to improve the road names. I feel it is easier to do the
survey that is needed to weed out the rather odd 'errors' that pepper the OS
Locator when the days are longer.
Cheers, Chris (chillly)
On 7 December 2016 12:37:52 GMT+00:00, Martyn Evans
wrote:
How about streets and their names ?
According to the ITO OSM analysis, at 24/11/2016, compared to OS
Locator, there were 17,687 missing major roads. The UK is 97.8%
complete, only 16 out of 408 areas are 100% complete, and in the last
month only 68 were added.
The ITO tool is available to
I've got the Nov 16 shape files for 2b but haven’t looked at them yet. I would
expect them to be the same alignments as shown on the Nov 16 plans. What they
didn’t release (at least not separately) are the station and maintenance yard
land take polygons.
Should get to taking a look before the
On 07/12/2016 10:36, Paul Berry wrote:
... but I believe you're referring to:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-plan-and-profile-maps-woodall-to-conisbrough
North of there actually, up through Mexborough.
If you know previous route mapping has changed in areas, and remains
I'm not sufficiently up on (read: have not had time to study) what is
firmly planned and what is still under consideration, to be honest, but I
believe you're referring to:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-plan-and-profile-maps-woodall-to-conisbrough
If you know previous route
On 07/12/2016 08:25, Paul Berry wrote:
I We don't know if it's going to take a city centre route or spur from
the Don Valley route yet so unless things change the current relation
still stands: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4124756
I thought that, at least here:
Nice ideas. My thoughts:
* GLAMs seems a well-defined, well-scoped and accessible task, I like it!
* Shops - no, IMHO. I've said this before, but a one-off push to
update a high street's shops is unhelpful in my experience it leaves
rapidly outdated data thereafter. Shops data needs local
I would say don't plot it if the route's not at all certain. You might even
meet mapping vandalism if you laid down routes in Sheffield: it's an
extremely touchy subject there. We don't know if it's going to take a city
centre route or spur from the Don Valley route yet so unless things change
the
I'd vote for the pubs one, spurred on by the poor dataset that maths team
used to find the pub crawl: it missed about 10 pubs near me, all long
established. Now if they'd used OSM for the dataset and the mapping...
Regards,
*Paul*
On 6 December 2016 at 19:32, Andy Mabbett
13 matches
Mail list logo