David wrote:
>In other threads, I sense quite a strong lobby for only mapping rights of
way that are so marked on the ground and ignoring any designation that only
appears in a map.
That's news to me! Given that you say "strong" I must assume that you refer
to something other than talk-gb(?).
The main aim, though, of this project is to investigate, using the historical
maps, historical rights of way for the point of view of gathering evidence to
re-open them before 2026.
A possible side-effect of this is to locate new paths to map for OSM. Such
paths would not, of course, be
On 30/09/2019 18:25, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
I made a start on this about a year ago, here's a quck mock-up showing
council data in colours and OSM paths shown in white as a 'tippex'
effect. This allows the identification of historical 'F.P' footpaths on
the historical maps which do not
See
https://www.ramblers.org.uk/get-involved/campaign-with-us/dont-lose-your-way-2026.aspx
https://www.oss.org.uk/what-do-we-fight-for/footpaths-rights-of-way/the-deregulation-act/
Historically we have been able to claim lost rights of way by providing user
evidence and have them added to the
4 matches
Mail list logo
