Just wanted to add that in my view the other reason to list by parish name, type and number is that these directly relate to the legal record. Parish Footpath 11 has usually been Parish Footpath 11 since the 1950s and will continue to be so unless a formal legal process is followed to change something. The numeric references for districts and parishes exist only in an internal database of relatively recent creation. If 5 years down the line the council adopts a new system any numeric references in OSM would then be meaningless.
Kind regards, Adam On Mon, 11 May 2020, 15:50 Robert Whittaker (OSM lists), < robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 14:12, nathan case <nathanc...@outlook.com> wrote: > > Thanks Tony and Adam for your responses. It is good to know that LCC > have released the parish IDs in the data as well. Makes a lookup table easy > to produce. > > > > It still remains that if I were a casual mapper and wanted to add an > unmapped path to OSM, the primary source for the prow_ref is the council’s > map. > > Unless you've been given permission by the copyright holder to make > use of a map like that, then it's off-limits for use in OSM. The map > at > https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/roads-parking-and-travel/public-rights-of-way/public-rights-of-way-map/ > is currently not working for me, but is does say "(c) Crown copyright > and database rights 2020 Ordnance Survey 100023320" below it. It's > likely that it was showing lines for Rights of Way on top of an > Ordnance Survey base map -- in which case it certainly couldn't be > used for OSM mapping. You might be able to get permission to use the > overlay lines, but you'd have to detach them from the base map before > using them. Otherwise you might be inferring location details from the > OS base map. Ordnance Survey are quite strict on what they consider to > be derived data from their maps, so OSM needs to be very careful > around them. > > What we do have permission to use in OSM is the raw GIS files from > Lancashire. As already noted, these contain both the parish IDs and > names. It's up to whoever renders them what to show as labels. > Hopefully we can agree on a prow_ref format here, and then any tool > authors will follow that in what they display to mappers. > > > It is then complicated that other sources use an mix of formats. (Even > for me, parish IDs are the most straightforward way of adding prow_ref data > to OSM.) > > Both myself (who runs PRoW Comparison tools) and Nick (who runs MapThe > Paths) intend to ensure our tools show whatever prow_ref format is > agreed. So that should be two common sources of data for mappers to > use. > > Best wishes, > > Robert. > > -- > Robert Whittaker > > _______________________________________________ > 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
