[Talk-GB] Proposal to do some mapping in North Lancashire
Hi Chris, Philip I take your point about the buildings polygons being very low quality. The merging is not too bad in rural areas like these where the building density is low, but a lot of detail is missing. My plan was just to use the OS stuff as a starting point, then modify the polygon using a combination of EA Lidar data and Bing Imagery. Taking into account your suggestions. I think I will modify my workflow to do what I can to improve the quality of the footprints in QGIS before putting the data in OSM. I have copied this post to talk-gb and will move over there. BTW you can see some of my post processed lidar imagery at https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153566350398437.1073741827.629788436=1=3ae0282808 I am making some further progress on the lidar data using QGIS and BREC. Roger On 13/05/16 11:11, Chris Hill wrote: It's great that you want to add to the map data. Please do not add the OS OpenMap Local building outlines. They are heavily simplified and as such, poor quality. You can't distinguish how many residences there are in a building outline, so is it detached, semi-detached or a terrace? Adding buildings is valuable, but I believe in quality not quantity, so I would trace building outlines from aerial images and not import the 'dumbed-down' OS Open data. Let's make the best map we can, not just import OS's deliberately reduced quality stuff. Cheers, Chris (chillly) BTW, this list list is almost dead. If you really want to reach people I would use talk-gb. On 13/05/16 10:50, Roger James wrote: Hi, I am proposing to do some mapping in a couple of parishes in North Lancashire. These are "Slyne-with-Hest" and "Nether Kellet". I plan to use the latest OS OpenMap Local dataset to provide basic building boundaries where none previously exist. I will be using OSTN02 data to do the transforms. Any comments or suggestions gratefully accepted. Roger ___ Talk-gb-thenorth mailing list talk-gb-theno...@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-thenorth ___ Talk-gb-thenorth mailing list talk-gb-theno...@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-thenorth ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] weeklyOSM 303 now available in English
The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 303, is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/7456 - Highlights ... - *... “*urban mappers*” and a regulation bill, which tries to regulate a lot more than Indian bounderies in India* - ... an *official map which is significantly outdated in Mexico* - *... Open Cage data blog interviewed Brian Prangle and Rob Nickerson in the UK * - *... Simone Cortesi and "Wikimusesums" in Napels, Italy* - *... **more than 4000 km of bicycle routes crowedsourced in less than two weeks *in * Mainz, Germany * ... and much more ... Enjoy! weeklyOSM is brought to you by ... https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Languages -- ## Manfred Reiter - - ## www.weeklyOSM.eu ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references
On 13/05/16 11:17, Dave F wrote: I think you're combining two separate issues. Designated cycle route NCN4 was implemented along the K canal long before 2012. There a was short time when a free license was required to officially use it. Whether individual people had a license or not made no difference to it's status. I think the problem is that bicycle= is being used for two different purposes, which are somewhat orthogonal. One is to indicate access and the other is to indicate designation. I think the situation is that the designated cycle route runs over a permissive path, not a public right of way. You either need bicycle=permissive;designated, or to have a combined value, something like bicycle=permissive-designated. The latter is better as the multi value notation tends to imply a union of permissions, not an intersection. Designating as public footpath or bridleway gives certain legal rights, e.g. the right to not have the path obstructed, whereas designating a permissive path as a national cycle route only gives a routing preference. There are also long distance foot routes that often go over permissive paths. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references
I think you're combining two separate issues. Designated cycle route NCN4 was implemented along the K canal long before 2012. There a was short time when a free license was required to officially use it. Whether individual people had a license or not made no difference to it's status. Dave F. On 13/05/2016 10:08, David Woolley wrote: On 12/05/16 23:53, Andy Townsend wrote: It depends where you are, I think. Certainly the canal towpath nearest to me (Cromford Canal) is mostly public footpath. It's all been surveyed, and the designation has been added fairly conservatively, i.e. only where there's signage, and even on that basis most is still public footpath. Before the BWB to CRT transition, there was no public right of way on bicycle on most English towpaths. You needed an explicit licence, although the licence was free and really only about agreeing to safety and other usage rules. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-gb-thenorth] Proposal to do some mapping in North Lancashire
It's great that you want to add to the map data. Please do not add the OS OpenMap Local building outlines. They are heavily simplified and as such, poor quality. You can't distinguish how many residences there are in a building outline, so is it detached, semi-detached or a terrace? Adding buildings is valuable, but I believe in quality not quantity, so I would trace building outlines from aerial images and not import the 'dumbed-down' OS Open data. Let's make the best map we can, not just import OS's deliberately reduced quality stuff. Cheers, Chris (chillly) BTW, this list list is almost dead. If you really want to reach people I would use talk-gb. On 13/05/16 10:50, Roger James wrote: Hi, I am proposing to do some mapping in a couple of parishes in North Lancashire. These are "Slyne-with-Hest" and "Nether Kellet". I plan to use the latest OS OpenMap Local dataset to provide basic building boundaries where none previously exist. I will be using OSTN02 data to do the transforms. Any comments or suggestions gratefully accepted. Roger ___ Talk-gb-thenorth mailing list Talk-gb-thenorth@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-thenorth ___ Talk-gb-thenorth mailing list Talk-gb-thenorth@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-thenorth
[Talk-gb-thenorth] Proposal to do some mapping in North Lancashire
Hi, I am proposing to do some mapping in a couple of parishes in North Lancashire. These are "Slyne-with-Hest" and "Nether Kellet". I plan to use the latest OS OpenMap Local dataset to provide basic building boundaries where none previously exist. I will be using OSTN02 data to do the transforms. Any comments or suggestions gratefully accepted. Roger ___ Talk-gb-thenorth mailing list Talk-gb-thenorth@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-thenorth
Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references
On 12/05/16 23:53, Andy Townsend wrote: It depends where you are, I think. Certainly the canal towpath nearest to me (Cromford Canal) is mostly public footpath. It's all been surveyed, and the designation has been added fairly conservatively, i.e. only where there's signage, and even on that basis most is still public footpath. Before the BWB to CRT transition, there was no public right of way on bicycle on most English towpaths. You needed an explicit licence, although the licence was free and really only about agreeing to safety and other usage rules. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references
David Woolley wrote: > For canal towpaths, bicycle=designated is misleading, as it tends > to imply a public right of way, whereas these are normally > access=permissive, and privately owned by the Canal and River > Trust. Again, Scotland is different. :) Scotland's canals didn't go to CRT: they're still owned and run by the British Waterways Board. Because CRT has all the ex-BW England & Wales canals, the British Waterways Board has rebranded itself "Scottish Canals", though legally it's still BWB. Scotland's access laws are also different, and for that reason the old BW cycle permits weren't needed on Scottish towpaths as BW believed it had no legal basis to apply them. In this case I'd simply just go for bicycle=yes. (As Andy says, towpaths on canals in England & Wales can occasionally be PRoWs too - sometimes in the case of under-restoration canals like the Cromford, sometimes on restored canals that are now part of the CRT system, and sometimes just on ex-BW CRT waterways.) Richard (former BW employee!) -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/New-user-renaming-highway-cycleway-with-NCN-references-tp5873121p5873460.html Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
