Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] HS2 phase 1 updates - Solihull interchange station
I always had diffculty in the mapping for the HS2 provided by the Department for Transport. It's difficult to find the appropriate PDF and when you've got the right PDF it's big and difficult to orientate. So, in case it helps (possibly in several years time!), I've a website that provides mapping for the HS2: http://www.thehs2.com/ For phase 1, the mapping uses data for the route that was published by the DfT on January 10th 2012. I believe this to be the lastest data that is available. However, it may be out-of-date. On Wed, 18 Dec 2019, Andy Robinson wrote: Brian, Still a bit early to mobilise the troops for general HS2 related mapping. Clearance, demolition, utility diversions and compound establishment is still the focus along with infrastructure that facilitates HS2 like the work near the NEC. The main construction should get underway next year but it could be 2021 in some areas. The first signs will be when fencing contractors start to fence off either side of the land take for the main linear construction works. There is a wiki page at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/High_Speed_2 but it’s probably time to create a new page specifically for the Phase 1 construction so I’ve added an empty stub link at the top of the High Speed 2 page if anyone fancies dropping in any text/info. Folks who are keeping an eye on their patch can if they like add their name and any notes to the construction page to save duplication of mapping effort and improve communication. As for site entrances & references etc, useful to have them in OSM but note some may change as the project moves from enabling works to full HS2 construction. Not all compounds are the responsibility of the main HS2 contractors. Cheers Andy From: Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com] Sent: 16 December 2019 20:33 To: Andy Robinson Cc: talk-gb-westmidlands Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] HS2 phase 1 updates - Solihull interchange station Thanks for the update Andy: drove past there on Sunday and things have moved on considerably. I've updated appropriately. Do you think it's necessary to have the compounds identified by name and entrance? They're going to be around for a couple of years and folk will need to get to them. I've also updated some demolition areas in Birmingham. I'm on the updates list for HS2 for Warwicks and Birmingham now. Do you think it would be a good idea for OSMers to adopt a stretch of the HS2 route and keep an eye on it - possible set HS2 up as a UK OSM national project with its own wiki page ( you might already have done this). Thanks for all your sterling efforts in getting the data in. Regards and Merry Xmas Brian On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 at 16:29, Andy Robinson wrote: The link below provides info on compounds and new highway bridge structures being set-up and constructed next year in and around the proposed interchange station by the NEC. https://tinyurl.com/rmspe8q Cheers Andy ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.oxonraces.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Hamstead
You mentioned wishing to see a "street sign". Google street view (dated Apr 2017) has a sign attached to a lamppost on B4124 Hamstead Hill at its junction with Austin Way. It's for those going Northbound along Hamstead Hill. It's outside Circuit Coatings. There's a screenshot of this sign taken from Google street view at: http://www.northeastraces.com/temporary/hie.png On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, Thomas Szabunia wrote: (Apologies for the double email, this seemed to get lost as I was switching emails) This is the sort of stuff I enjoy, this seems like the best point to contact them from, their link to the PAF Code of Practice is broken as well (reported that as well but be darned if I can find a proper contact form for web issues). Maybe if they get a few reports of it it'll get fixed ,sent one myself but I don't know how seriously they'll take it when I'm not actually at the address. https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4696 Funny thing is a few of the businesses on the estate list their address as "Hampstead" on their website too. I did have a try and finding some reference to it on the Council's webpage or a street sign as some extra proof but I can't see anything currently. __ From: Thomas Szabunia Sent: 15 February 2019 10:37 To: Andy Mabbett; talk-gb-westmidlands Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Hamstead I've also just submitted edits to all the listings on Google Maps that are listed with the "p" Thomas Szabunia -Original Message- From: Andy Mabbett [mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk] Sent: 14 February 2019 22:12 To: talk-gb-westmidlands Subject: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Hamstead I noticed today that the BBC reported a road accident as: M6 in Hampstead Industrial Estate exit slip road partially blocked southbound at J7, A34 (Great Barr) There is no "Hampstead Industrial Estate exit" at junction 7, and in any case the estate is "Hamstead Industrial Estate" (no "p"): https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.5284=-1.9260#map=15/52.5284/-1.9260 and so I told them this on Twitter. Someone has argued that "Hampstead Industrial Estate" is correct, as that's what Google Maps calls it. I thought I would settle the matter by referring to the Royal Mail postcode database - and was surprised that they too have it as "Hampstead Industrial Estate" - try searching for "B42 1DU" at: https://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode Has anyone had any luck, getting errors in the postcode database fixed? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.oxonraces.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-GB] Local Authority rights of way information
It's not all gloom as some local authorities do advertise their licence on their website. Examples are Brecon Beacons NPA, Bucks, Derbyshire, Gateshead, Hampshire, Manchester, North York Moors NPA, Norfolk, Nottingham, Oldham, Oxfordshire, Redcar and Cleveland, Salford, Stockton, Trafford, Wirral. On 22 December 2016 16:45:41 WET, SK53 <sk53@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi Barry, > >This is all very useful and clarifies some issues for various datasets. > >I and others have indeed been using rowmaps data in the way you >suggest: as >a tool for planning surveys. > >I still think it's a shame that councils are so reluctant to clearly >state >the nature of licences on their own websites, and rely on you to >perform >this service with the inevitable issues of introducing more steps which >is >already complicated by the different roles of LAs/OSGB. > >Regards, > >Jerry > >On 22 December 2016 at 15:53, Barry Cornelius ><barrycorneliu...@gmail.com> >wrote: > >> I've received a tweet drawing my attention to a thread with the >subject >> "Local Authority rights of way information". I wasn't receiving the >emails >> for this list and I can't see a way of replying to an e-mail if you >didn't >> receive it. So I guess I'm starting a new thread which is annoying. >> >> On Wed Dec 21 11:17:17, Chris Hill wrote: >> > Row maps is definitely not based on OGL data. >> >> If you go to: >> http://www.rowmaps.com/datasets >> and then go to the pages for each of North Lincolnshire, Oldham, >> Portsmouth, Salford, Wigan and the Wirral, you'll see that these >datasets >> are released with the OGL. >> >> The datasets for most of the other local authorities were released >under >> terms equivalent to the OS OpenData Licence. When I e-mailed the >Ordnance >> Survey about the local authorities that had, during the last few >years, >> successfully obtained an exemption from the Public Sector Mapping >Agreement >> and released their data under terms equivalent to the OS OpenData >Licence, >> Richard Mortara [Public Sector Contracts Manager, Ordnance Survey] >replied: >> "All data exempted by Ordnance Survey is now covered by the Open >Government >> Licence (OGL), which superseded its own OS OpenData licence in April >2015." >> >> > [Row maps] includes E Yorks and Hull data that both councils have >> explicitly refused to release as OGL. >> >> Actually the website www.rowmaps.com does not yet provide data for >Hull. >> >> As far as East Yorkshire is concerned, I received an e-mail from >Judith >> Rockliff [Engineer (Definitive Map), Asset Strategy, Planning and >Economic >> Regeneration, East Riding of Yorkshire Council] on 10th January 2013 >that >> said "I am pleased to be able to tell you that a request from East >Riding >> of Yorkshire Council for a derived data exemption in relation to its >Public >> Rights of Way (PRoW) datasets has now been approved. As a >consequence, the >> terms equivalent to OS OpenData (see http://www.ordnancesurvey.co. >> uk/oswebsite/opendata/docs/os-opendata-licence.pdf ) may now also be >> applied to the dataset being released." >> >> When I requested an update in 2014, I received a reply from Gordon >Grimley >> [Assistant Engineer (Definitive Map), Asset Strategy (AS 67), >Planning and >> Economic Regeneration, East Riding of Yorkshire Council] on 27th >February >> 2014 saying "Attached is the most recent copy of the shapefile. All >the >> same licences etc apply." >> >> > I have asked Barry for his sources and there has been a stoney >silence. >> >> I don't normally ignore e-mails. So maybe your e-mail didn't get to >me. >> >> > If anyone has used rowmaps as a source for OSM edits I would revert >that >> edit. >> >> Although I don't do the hard grind of adding to OSM, it has always >been my >> view that's it's irrelevant as to what licence the data has been >released >> with. As others have pointed out in this thread, the data from >> www.rowmaps.com can best be used to identify a PROW that needs >surveying: >> what's in the data may be quite different from what happens on the >ground. >> And this disclaimer that www.rowmaps.com shows alongside any map is >also >> appropriate: "An authority's Definitive Map is the authoritative >source of >> their rights of way. The details of the public rights of way network >> contained in an authority's data are for information only, and are an >> interpretation of the De
[Talk-GB] Local Authority rights of way information
I've received a tweet drawing my attention to a thread with the subject "Local Authority rights of way information". I wasn't receiving the emails for this list and I can't see a way of replying to an e-mail if you didn't receive it. So I guess I'm starting a new thread which is annoying. On Wed Dec 21 11:17:17, Chris Hill wrote: > Row maps is definitely not based on OGL data. If you go to: http://www.rowmaps.com/datasets and then go to the pages for each of North Lincolnshire, Oldham, Portsmouth, Salford, Wigan and the Wirral, you'll see that these datasets are released with the OGL. The datasets for most of the other local authorities were released under terms equivalent to the OS OpenData Licence. When I e-mailed the Ordnance Survey about the local authorities that had, during the last few years, successfully obtained an exemption from the Public Sector Mapping Agreement and released their data under terms equivalent to the OS OpenData Licence, Richard Mortara [Public Sector Contracts Manager, Ordnance Survey] replied: "All data exempted by Ordnance Survey is now covered by the Open Government Licence (OGL), which superseded its own OS OpenData licence in April 2015." > [Row maps] includes E Yorks and Hull data that both councils have explicitly > refused to release as OGL. Actually the website www.rowmaps.com does not yet provide data for Hull. As far as East Yorkshire is concerned, I received an e-mail from Judith Rockliff [Engineer (Definitive Map), Asset Strategy, Planning and Economic Regeneration, East Riding of Yorkshire Council] on 10th January 2013 that said "I am pleased to be able to tell you that a request from East Riding of Yorkshire Council for a derived data exemption in relation to its Public Rights of Way (PRoW) datasets has now been approved. As a consequence, the terms equivalent to OS OpenData (see http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/docs/os-opendata-licence.pdf ) may now also be applied to the dataset being released." When I requested an update in 2014, I received a reply from Gordon Grimley [Assistant Engineer (Definitive Map), Asset Strategy (AS 67), Planning and Economic Regeneration, East Riding of Yorkshire Council] on 27th February 2014 saying "Attached is the most recent copy of the shapefile. All the same licences etc apply." > I have asked Barry for his sources and there has been a stoney silence. I don't normally ignore e-mails. So maybe your e-mail didn't get to me. > If anyone has used rowmaps as a source for OSM edits I would revert that edit. Although I don't do the hard grind of adding to OSM, it has always been my view that's it's irrelevant as to what licence the data has been released with. As others have pointed out in this thread, the data from www.rowmaps.com can best be used to identify a PROW that needs surveying: what's in the data may be quite different from what happens on the ground. And this disclaimer that www.rowmaps.com shows alongside any map is also appropriate: "An authority's Definitive Map is the authoritative source of their rights of way. The details of the public rights of way network contained in an authority's data are for information only, and are an interpretation of the Definitive Map, not the Definitive Map itself, and should not be relied on for determining the position or alignment of any public right of way. For legal purposes, an authority's data does not replace their Definitive Map. And changes may have been made to the Definitive Map that are not included in their data." -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.oxonraces.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] OS adopts OGL version 3.0 in place of OS OpenData licence
As part of ongoing moves to make our data even more accessible and easier for start-ups and others to understand and use, we are pleased to announce that following close work with The National Archives we have now adopted the Open Government Licence (OGL) version 3.0 in place of our OS OpenData licence. http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/02/were-using-the-open-government-licence-to-encourage-greater-use-of-os-opendata-products/?utm_campaign=OS+Innovation+Spring+2015+v2utm_source=emailCampaignutm_medium=emailutm_content= -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.oxonraces.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] cannot update wiki page
I'm trying to update: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_local_councils I click on Save page, type in the captcha code, click on Save page. The browser goes to: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=UK_local_councilsaction=submit I then get: Could not open socket I've tried a few times in the last 10 minutes. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.oxonraces.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence use of data
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013, wintonian wrote: Can use this data from Hants CC ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps.htm )? It has been released under the 'Open Goverment License' ( http://www3.hants.gov.uk/opendata/licence.htm ). I wish to use it to set the designation for 'rights of way' and for creating the relevant 'ways' where they do not already exist in OSM, unless there is a simple way to just import the data? I lurk on this mailing list and I do not contribute to OSM. So this message may not contain the consensus of OSM contributors. Having said that, I think you should not just import the data from a local authority's dataset into OSM. Let me explain why. For each public right of way (PROW), there are three routes for the PROW: (a) what is shown on the local authority's Definitive Map; (b) the route in the dataset released by the local authority; (c) what happens on the ground. All of these may be different. So a dataset available on the web may be out-of-date because the Definitive Map has recently been modified and the web's dataset has not yet been updated. And on the ground people may go a different way for any number of reasons, e.g., some property has been built on the dataset's route or the dataset's route is overgrown, obstructed, more difficult, ... . Of these only (a) is appropriate for legal purposes. My understanding of OSM is that you should be mapping what appears on the ground, i.e. (c). So I think it is inappropriate to copy a local authority's dataset into OSM. Instead I think that, if you wish to use that dataset, then adopt the following process: look at the dataset, see what PROWs are missing/different in OSM, go out and do a ground survey for each PROW and then use your data to update OSM. You have mentioned Hampshire. They were the first local authority to release their dataset with an Open licence. I'm aware of 8 other local authorities that provide a web page that allows you to download their dataset. They are Bolton, Devon, East Sussex, Norfolk, North York Moors National Park, City of Nottingham, Oxfordshire and Surrey. You can see this if you visit the web pages: http://www.bolton.gov.uk/website/pages/Definitivemapandstatementofpublicrightsofway.aspx http://gis.devon.gov.uk/basedata/download.htm http://data.gov.uk/dataset/eastsussexrightsofway http://data.gov.uk/dataset/norfolk-public-rights-of-way http://www.northyorkmoors.org.uk/living-in/how-the-authority-works/data/dataset-downloads http://www.opendatanottingham.org.uk/dataset.aspx?id=74 http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/countryside-access-maps http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/environment-housing-and-planning/countryside/explore-surreys-countryside/visit-the-countryside/footpaths-byways-and-bridleways/find-out-about-rights-of-way/public-rights-of-way-open-data As well as the above 9 local authorities, my web site: http://www.rowmaps.com currently provides access to the datasets for another 60 local authorities. These datasets have been obtained from the local authority by individuals. Each dataset has been released with an Open licence. My understanding is that some people have argued that, if a local authority has released its dataset on terms equivalent to the Ordnance Survey Opendata Licence, then OSM's licensing does not permit you to copy the data of that dataset. However, I think the licensing issue is irrelevant because, for the reasons given above, I think you have to provide your own data. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013, david wrote: For me it is broken on Firefox, both on Ubuntu and Android, works OK on android browser. That's strange. For me, it works fine when I use Firefox, both on Ubuntu and Android. My Ubuntu is Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS and Firefox is 25.0.1. My Android is 4.2.2 and Firefox is also 25.0.1. I tried typing Kendal and clicking the Search button. I also tried typing Kendal and pressing either Enter on Ubuntu or Go on Android. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013, David Earl wrote: Both the links it provided are duplicated in the banner anyway (Learn More == About and Start Mapping == Sign Up), it was always only signposting these more prominently. To make that more obvious, wouldn't be better to use the same words on the buttons in both places? -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National speed limit changes
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013, Richard Mann wrote: So...on the basis that we should tag what is there, we see a white sign with a black diagonal line on it then that is what we should indicate. We do of course interpret that by putting what we believe if the correct legal speed limit in maxspeed. As such a single carriageway national limit is coded as maxspeed:type=gb:national,maxspeed=60 mph. As dual carriageway is tagged as maxspeed:type=gb:national,maxspeed=70 mph. The motorway version is highway=motorway,maxspeed:type=gb:national,maxspeed=70 mph. I was once on a speed awareness course. Many of the attendees were unaware of what the limits were on the different kinds of road. So the question was raised as to why a black diagonal line is used and not a value like 50 or 60 or 70 which make life a lot easier. The reason is that the maximum speed is dependent on the kind of vehicle you are driving. It's defined in Rule 125 of the Highway Code which is at: https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/control-of-the-vehicle-117-to-126 So I wonder whether it is appropriate to include maxspeed=70 mph in OSM as it could be misunderstood. It is only appropriate for some road users. This was certainly the argument being proposed for not having 70 on road signs. Of course, another reason for not using numerical values on road signs is that if the UK were ever to change the value of the national speed limits then it would mean a lot of signs to change! I guess this does not apply to OSM as global editing is a little easier. Although I lurk on this list, I'm not an OSM contributor. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] National speed limit changes
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013, Peter Miller wrote: Are you saying that a road marked with a numeric sign of '60 mph' defines a different legal maximum speed for some vehicle types from a single carriageway road marked with a white sign and a black diagonal? For example that a bus/coach/car+trailer/HGV less that 7.5 tonnes are only be able to operate at 50 mph on a national limit single carriageway road (for examples one tagged marked maxspeed=60 mph,maxspeed:type=gb:national), but can operate at 60mph on a dual carriageway road signed numerically (ie maxspeed=60 mph;maxspeed:type=sign)? I'm no expert in this area. It may help to look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limits_in_the_United_Kingdom#Fixed_speed_limits -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 mapping
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Peter Miller wrote: Thanks for that. Is there any chance that this ROW information can be added to OSM? Possibly I am missing something, but it seems to be adding complexity to have to fish around in another database for this information. Although I rarely contribute to OSM, I lurk on this list. It is my understanding from being on this list is that it is not as easy as bulk adding the information to OSM as the data provided by a council can be out-of-date and it is necessary to check whether the data agrees with what's on the ground. There are also licensing issues. My aim was to draw people's attention to a source that might make it easier for people to find out what is missing from OSM. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 mapping
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Peter Miller wrote: Just to highlight some mapping ITO have just released [http://hs2maps.com/], which was developed with CPRE showing the construction, landuse and operation impacts of the High Speed 2 line. ... Would be great to get more detail into OSM along the route, in particular footpaths and heritage details so the project is based on a thorough understanding of the impacts. We will update the maps from time to time, and use the latest OSM data when we do so. If you wish to detect which public rights of way (PROWs) are close to the route of the proposed HS2, my web site http://www.thehs2.com may help. www.thehs2.com can be used to display a map showing: the route of the HS2; the PROWs that are close to the route of the HS2; the points at which these PROWs cross the route of the HS2. The underlying map can be from the Ordnance Survey, OpenStreetMap, Google or Bing. Examples are: Phase 1 (from London to the West Midlands): http://www.thehs2.com/phase1/maps/showmap.php?place=South%20Heathtype=rcOSMlat=51.705lon=-0.677zoom=13 Phase 2 (from the West Midlands to the North West and the North East): http://www.thehs2.com/phase2/maps/showmap.php?place=Culchethtype=rcOSMlat=53.45lon=-2.52zoom=13 Those web pages show a map from OpenStreetMap with various items superimposed on the map: a multi-coloured line that shows the route of the HS2; some cyan coloured lines showing the route of PROWs; some circles showing crossing points (i.e., where HS2 and a PROW meet). You can click on any of these items to get more details about the item. www.thehs2.com provides information about PROWs close to the HS2 as follows: Phase 1: Only for those PROWs which I've walked. This is all but two of the crossing points between Euston and Offchurch (near Leamington Spa). Because of my GPS device, this data is inaccurate in places. Phase 2: Only for those PROWs where the council has released data about their PROWs. This is actually most of the PROWs as only the councils of Manchester, Sheffield and Trafford are unable to supply data. The data is also available in KML format: Phase 1: crossing points: http://www.thehs2.com/phase1/kmls/c/all.kml PROWs: http://www.thehs2.com/phase1/kmls/r/all.kml Phase 2: crossing points: http://www.thehs2.com/phase2/kmls/c/all.kml PROWs: http://www.thehs2.com/phase2/kmls/r/all.kml The crossing points are also available in csv files: Phase 1: http://www.thehs2.com/phase1/kmls/c/all.csv Phase 2: http://www.thehs2.com/phase2/kmls/c/all.csv In these csv files, the word Fill means embankment and the phrase At Grade means level with the nearby land. So these maps/data may help you find the PROWs which cross the route of the HS2 that are missing from OpenStreetMap and so need some mapping done. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Current status on UK Council footpath data
On Thu, 6 Jun 2013, sk53.osm wrote: One thing which concerns me is the 'private' release of Open Data. A number of counties have given ProW data to persistent pesterers (not meant perjoratively) apparently under a suitable license. I'd far rather see this published on the official websites of the Highway Authorities, not least because then one is reasonably sure that they have checked with OSGB re. OS data. This approach to releasing PROW data is taken only by the local authorities of Devon, Hampshire, North York Moors National Park, Nottingham (City of) and Oxfordshire. The appropriate web pages are: http://gis.devon.gov.uk/basedata/download.htm http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/row-maps http://www.northyorkmoors.org.uk/living-in/how-the-authority-works/data/dataset-downloads http://www.opendatanottingham.org.uk/dataset.aspx?id=74 http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/countryside-access-maps If you know of any other local authority that has a web page releasing their data, please let me know. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 phase 2 routes
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Rob Nickerson wrote: Try here: http://www.thehs2.com/ Thanks Barry :-) I was just about to reply. In particular, have a look at: http://www.thehs2.com/phase2/shapes/ The DfT's shape files were released to me with the OGL on March 7th. I don't understand why it isn't the OS ODL but it's definitely the OGL. I have derived some KML files from the DfT's shape files: http://www.thehs2.com/phase2/kmls/ -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] prow_ref
Is it going to be OK for me to use this map to put the prow_ref numbers into OSM? I assume the base map is OS and subject to their copyright but the numbers appear to have been penned on. I will only use it for the numbers and not for drawing anything else. The Council provides an online map at: http://derbyshiremaps.derbyshire.gov.uk/launch_portal.asp? From that source, you can get details about a PROW, e.g.: Prow label: Sutton cum Duckmanton FP 19 Routecode: NE18/19/1 Parish: Sutton cum Duckmanton Prow status: Footpath Prow number: 19 I'm not sure about the licensing of this information. Steven mentioned my web site: http://www.rowmaps.com I've been using the FOI Act to request data about public rights of way from councils. Often a council will have this data in an ESRI Shape File or MapInfo files. So far I have seen data from 52 councils. Whenever I get new data from a council, I update the wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_local_councils All the data I receive from councils is released with an Open licence. I convert this data into KML and GeoJSON. One reason for doing this is that I use the GeoJSON on my web site in order to display public rights of way on maps from the Ordnance Survey, OpenStreetMap, Google or Bing. This works seamlessly across council boundaries. As far as Derbyshire is concerned, I've obtained some MapInfo files. These have been released with the Ordnance Survey OpenData licence: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/docs/licences/os-opendata-licence.pdf The data I obtained from Derbyshire is available from: http://www.rowmaps.com/datasets/DY/ I have converted the MapInfo files into KML: http://www.rowmaps.com/kmls/DY/ and released the KML with the Ordnance Survey OpenData licence: In particular, from the file: http://www.rowmaps.com/kmls/DY/original.kml you can get: SimpleData name=RouteCodeNE18/19/1/SimpleData SimpleData name=ParentRouteCodeNE18/19/SimpleData SimpleData name=ParishCodeNE18/SimpleData SimpleData name=PROW_Number19/SimpleData SimpleData name=LinkNo1/SimpleData SimpleData name=PROW_DistrictNorth-East Derbyshire/SimpleData SimpleData name=ParishSutton cum Duckmanton/SimpleData SimpleData name=PROW_StatusFootpath/SimpleData I would recommend tagging with either: Sutton cum Duckmanton FP 19 or: NE18/19/1 as this is what is used on Derbyshire's online map. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] prow_ref
I'll use the code without the county council letters as this is what is in the name tag in JOSM. I'll debate as to whether to split the path number according to the last number as this would require quite a bit of work and I've still not mapped all the paths in the parish yet! As you refer to http://www.rowmaps.com/kmls/DY/converted.kml DY|AV3|3/1 I guess you have grabbed: http://www.rowmaps.com/kmls/DY/converted.kml or: http://www.rowmaps.com/kmls/DY/augmented.kml In order to be consistent across councils, those files have mutations of the original data. The file: http://www.rowmaps.com/kmls/DY/original.kml is a non-tampered-with version of Derbyshire's data. For DY|AV3|3/1, it has: SimpleData name=RouteCodeAV3/3/1/SimpleData SimpleData name=ParentRouteCodeAV3/3/SimpleData SimpleData name=ParishCodeAV3/SimpleData SimpleData name=PROW_Number3/SimpleData SimpleData name=LinkNo1/SimpleData SimpleData name=PROW_DistrictAmber Valley/SimpleData SimpleData name=ParishAshleyhay/SimpleData SimpleData name=PROW_StatusFootpath/SimpleData I agree with your decision to remove the DY. I think you've also decided not to include the Parish. But if you change your mind, then do what Rob Nickerson said in his e-mail: add the reference in the same format as used by the Local Authority I think this means choose either: AV3/3 or: Ashleyhay FP 3 as I think that will be what's on Derbyshire's online map. So there are no occurrences of the | character! -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] help with rights of way and core paths in Scotland
I think I understand what councils have to do for public rights of way in England and Wales. However, I don't understand the situation concerning rights of way in Scotland. I would like some help, please. What kinds of paths are there in Scotland? I've seen mention of both rights of way and core paths. What's the difference? Who are the authorities that have legal obligations? What legal obligations do they have? Do they have to maintain a definitive map? -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)
On Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Kevin Peat wrote: If you look at DN Dartmouth Bridleway 1 with the OS map background you can see it is offset a little to the south. Following some e-mail exchanges with Devon County Council, on 23rd December I corrected a few errors in the metadata of a few routes. Unfortunately, at the same time I introduced the error that you detected. Sorry about that. I've now fixed the maps, the KML files and the GeoJSON files. Please can you confirm that the routes are now better. Thanks. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Rob Nickerson wrote: Barry, Local government regions in England can be very confusing. For public rights of way the responsibility of legally collating these on the Definitive Map and Statement lies with those regions that are “surveying authorities”. This is the same as the 152 (151 if you exclude the “City of London”) Local Authorities listed in the Principal Authorities table: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_government_in_England ... A belated thank you for that message which helped me a lot. I've now added a section for Wales to: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_local_councils that gives some basic information. I hope it's OK. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013, Kevin Peat wrote: I also noticed that the Devon data (using the kml from your site in josm) appears to be consistently offset a few metres south of where it should be. Not a big deal just FYI really. Which kml file are you referring to? Please give me a URL so that I can download the kml and check. Thanks. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013, Kevin Peat wrote: The Converted kml file for Devon on this page: http://www.rowmaps.com/kmls/DN/ Great, thanks. Each path has a name, e.g.: DN Seaton Footpath 2 It would help if you gave the names of some of the paths you have problems with. Sorry, I should have asked this earlier. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:47:34 Steven Horner ste...@stevenhorner.com wrote: I have followed the guidelines at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines but should I tag the footpath with the local authority reference which would aid logging the path to the Council if problems like FixMyPaths, if so how? Although I cannot add anything useful to the discussion about prow:ref and prow_ref, I do have some thoughts about the content of the tag. Often the data a council provides about a PROW includes duplication. For example, often the parish is given as a nice friendly name and also as a number. Here's an example of the data given about a PROW that is provided by Devon County Council (both council and PROW chosen at random): SimpleData name=PARISHAbbots Bickington/SimpleData SimpleData name=STATUSFootpath/SimpleData SimpleData name=NUMBER1/SimpleData SimpleData name=NUMBER00/SimpleData SimpleData name=CODE801FP1/SimpleData SimpleData name=NUMBER1Abbots Bickington Footpath 1/SimpleData So the id of the parish appears three times (twice as a name and once as a number); the number of the path appears three times; and the fact that it is a footpath appears three times. For this, I guess you've got a choice betwen using the contents of CODE or NUMBER1. I would recommend choosing whatever appears on the Council's interactive map. Devon County Council uses the contents of the NUMBER1 field, i.e.: Abbots Bickington Footpath 1 On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 16:36:53 Craig Loftus craigloftus+...@googlemail.com wrote: Is it wise to preclude adding more tags to the namespace? As an example, one additional tag that occurs to me is prow:operator (or prow:authority), to describe the local authority the references 'belong' to. On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:35:31 Robert Whittaker robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote: I wouldn't have thought that listing the authority would be that useful -- you should be able to work that out from the county that the way resides in. My view is that it would be useful to include the id of the council as I do not think it's obvious which authority is involved. For example, the data for Devon does not include Torbay. And Bedfordshire is provided by two councils: Bedford and Central Bedfordshire. Gloucestershire is provided by the councils of Gloucestershire and South Gloucestershire. For my web site (www.rowmaps.com), I've chosen to use the two letter codes that are used by the OS Opendata 1:50 000 Scale Gazetteer: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/50k-gazetteer/index.html The two letter code is in field 12 of their colon-separated file. There are 208 different values. Fields 13 and 14 of that file also provide short names and long names. Here are some examples of fields 12, 13 and 14: BF:Beds:Bedford BK:C Beds:Central Bedfordshire DN:Devon:Devon DU:Durham:Durham GR:Glos:Gloucestershire SG:S Glos:South Gloucestershire TB:Torbay:Torbay Either you bundle the id of the council in with the name of the PROW as in: Devon Abbots Bickington Footpath 1 Or as suggested by Craig you could provide it in a separate tag - he was suggesting prow:operator or prow:authority. All of the data for councils that I've seen specify the parish in which the PROW appears. So, really there are three separate pieces of information: id of council id of parish id of PROW e.g.,: Devon Abbots Bickington Footpath 1 or: DN 801 FP1 -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012, Steven Horner wrote: I have been adding to OSM for about 18 months but more active in recent weeks. I have requested the PRoW from Durham County Council, they currently have not released their data but do have it electronically, just not publicly available to download yet. Their response was more postive than I expected they were looking into it already and were hoping to have a more official response before Xmas (haven't yet). I've also applied to Durham County Council for their dataset containing details of their PROWs. I did this on December 6th. As you say they've been positive. They updated me on December 18th saying that they had applied for an exemption from the Ordnance Survey but they thought it possible that they would not get this before the Christmas holidays. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN Bus Stops
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012, Donald Noble wrote: I tried downloading the XML file from data.gov.uk: The XML file is mentioned at: http://data.gov.uk/dataset/naptan and it is available as a zip file at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/NaPTAN/snapshot/NaPTANxml.zip I think it gets regularly updated. but when I opened it the 500MB file was all on the second line, apart from the XML version tag on the first line. This meant I struggled to even look at the file to see if I could do anything useful with it. The file NaPTANxml.zip is about 31MB and, as you say, after unzipping it NaPTAN.xml is about 500MB. If you're using linux, you can format NaPTAN.xml using: xmllint --format NaPTAN.xml format.xml The file format.xml is about 750MB. I think xmllint is in the debian package called libxml2-utils. Therefore I was wondering if anyone has (or is able to produce) an extract for the area around Glasgow (or even for Scotland) preferably already in osm format that I could use. I haven't done that. However, in case it's of any use, I've put a zipped version of format.xml at: http://www.rowmaps.com/temporary/format.zip It's about 36MB. I regard this directory as a temporary space and so I will delete this file later. Regard it as having the same licence as the original file: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ To whet your appetite, here's an extract: StopPoint CreationDateTime=2003-08-27T00:00:00 ModificationDateTime=2012-07-02T14:24:40 Modification=new RevisionNumber=0 Status=active AtcoCode60901000/AtcoCode NaptanCode45238737/NaptanCode Descriptor CommonNameBalmore Square/CommonName LandmarkBalmore Square/Landmark StreetBalmore Road/Street Indicatorbefore/Indicator /Descriptor Place NptgLocalityRefN0076070/NptgLocalityRef TownGlasgow/Town LocalityCentre1/LocalityCentre Location Translation GridTypeUKOS/GridType Easting258877/Easting Northing668372/Northing Longitude-4.2579340692/Longitude Latitude55.8877326565/Latitude /Translation /Location /Place StopClassification StopTypeBCT/StopType OnStreet Bus BusStopTypeMKD/BusStopType TimingStatusOTH/TimingStatus MarkedPoint Bearing CompassPointNW/CompassPoint /Bearing /MarkedPoint /Bus /OnStreet /StopClassification StopAreas StopAreaRef CreationDateTime=2012-11-28T15:27:31 Modification=new Status=active609G04088/StopAreaRef /StopAreas AdministrativeAreaRef127/AdministrativeAreaRef PlusbusZones PlusbusZoneRef CreationDateTime=2010-10-07T14:27:15 ModificationDateTime=2010-10-07T14:27:15 Modification=new RevisionNumber=0 Status=activeGLGC/PlusbusZoneRef /PlusbusZones /StopPoint There's some explanation at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/naptan/schema/2.1/guide/naptan-070325.doc -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] streetmap.co.uk
They credit Open Street Map rather than OpenStreetMap. -- Barry Cornelius http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.rowmaps.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref codes (WAS:Hampshire Rights of Way Data released under OS OpenData licence)
On Thu, 31 May 2012, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote: ... (This is Worcestershire, and at the same time, they've also split the paths up at every junction so that no path has two routes leaving a junction, i.e. a path always ends at the first junction of rights of way it comes to, and its continuation is now a separate new path. I think this may have something to do with geometries in GIS software.) I think this is also adopted by Buckinghamshire. For example, there is a four way junction where TWY/16/2, TWY/16/3, TWY/19/1 and TWY/19/2 meet. Oxfordshire don't do this. One of their four way junctions has the meeting of 265/29, 265/29, 265/33 and 265/33. I'm not sure what's best to do for for an overall format. I think we may probably have to consider things on a county by county basis, trying to keep things as consistent as possible. ... A web application I'm developing straddles many counties. So I've decided to adopt the scheme: code-for-council:code-for-path-adopted-by-council Examples are: BM:TWY/16/2 BM:TWY/19/1 ON:265/29 ON:265/33 For the code-for-council (e.g., BM and ON), I've chosen to use the two letter codes that are used by the OS Opendata 1:50 000 Scale Gazetteer that is described at: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/50k-gazetteer/index.html It's in field 12 of their colon-separated file. There are 208 values. Is this sensible? -- Barry Cornelius http://www.thehs2.com/ http://www.oxonpaths.com/ http://www.northeastraces.com/ http://www.barrycornelius.com/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
