Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Node vs. relation for railway station

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

This schema is straight from the osm wiki on how to map stations

Regards

Brian

On Thu, 2 Jun 2022, 16:31 Andy Mabbett,  wrote:

> I'm not sure why we need (for example) this node:
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/21257480
>
> for Perry Barr railway station, when we have a relation:
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6892614
>
> Can someone explain the reason; or can we agree to move tags from the
> node to the relation?
>
> --
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Mapping of roads in Digbeth

[Brian Prangle]

Agreed. I change them when I come across them

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022, 14:31 Nathan Case,  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> First time posting to this mailing list as I'm new (ish) to the area.
>
> I've found that a lot of the roads in Digbeth (Birmingham) are tagged as
> residential roads. These roads, as far as I'm aware, are minor roads
> through a fairly industrial part of town. I'd have thought they'd be
> better tagged as unclassified.
>
> An example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4928916/history
>
> Streetview link:
>
> https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4761302,-1.8821697,3a,75y,121.59h,95.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suTQd72R3sEPSM92JbYfjRg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuTQd72R3sEPSM92JbYfjRg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D43.86864%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
>
> I can see many (all?) were changed from unclassified to residential
> about 4 years ago in a rather large changeset
> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/57843252) by a now-banned user
> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1898).
>
> I know there isn't a huge difference between these unclassified and
> residential in terms of route planning or rendering, but do you agree
> they should be reverted back to unclassified?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Nathan
>
>
> ___
> 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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Restarting face to face meetings

[Brian Prangle]

We should get these going again. If you younger folk want to get it going
again please do so - I shall wait probably until May before I feel
confident about mixing outside my immediate circle but if infections
decrease substantially in April I might be tempted

Regards

Brain
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Access to High Street, Birmingham for blue badge holders.

[Brian Prangle]

I've changed it to motor_vehicle=destination as that is the most sense I
could make of the wiki. Your link Rob was all in German.

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 19:45, Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> No it's the other way round. More specific tags override the general tags.
>
> So in the example
>
> access=destination
> motor_vehicle=no
>
> The first tag marks all transport modes (including foot) as destination
> only, and motor_vehicle then changes this for that specific subset of
> transportation modes to "no". In effect this is saying motorised vehicles
> are not allowed, while non motorised vehicles, (horses) and pedestrians are
> only allowed when going to their destination.
>
> Simplified Hierarchy diagram:
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:access#/media/File%3AAccess_hierarchy_simple2.png
>
> Best regards
> Rob
>
>
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022, 12:55 Andy Mabbett, 
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 09:33, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>> >
>> > I've added the 7 disabled spaces round the corner on Albert Street and
>> New Meeting
>> > Street.
>>
>> Thank you, but I think your edit may have failed to save (or someone
>> has since deleted them). I can find no such objects (I can see you
>> node in High Street).
>>
>> > I've used access=destination
>>
>> I'm still confused, as we now have roads with:
>>
>>access=destination
>>motor_vehicle=no
>>
>> Is there an implicit priority whereby the former overrides the latter?
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> https://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
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Access to High Street, Birmingham for blue badge holders.

[Brian Prangle]

I had a good nose round yesterday and updated the area. The disabled space
opposite Boots also has "Taxi" marking on the road so what the status is is
anyone's guess. The issue is moot  as there is a trench right through most
of it so I've amended it to amenity:disused. I've added the 7 disabled
spaces round the corner on Albert Street and New Meeting Street. I've also
referenced the TRO in a note tag. I've used access=destination  as this
seems correct from the TRO

Regards

Brian

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 13:30, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 22:09, Ryan Underwood 
> wrote:
>
> > The section between Carrs Lane and Dale End is shut to all traffic
> except buses and, I imagine, black cabs.
>
> Vehicles used[*] by Blue Badge holders may also use this section;
> indeed, it is their only option once they have traversed Carrs Lane.
>
> Note that the restriction sign also permits "loading at any time", and
> "authorised vehicles 7pm-6am".
>
>
> [*] This includes vehicles which have already dropped off, or are
> about to pick up, Blue Badge holders, on the road(s) concerned.
>
> --
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Access to High Street, Birmingham for blue badge holders.

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

Don't recall seeing any BB spaces there but the whole place is a mess with
the tram roadworks and the data is probably a mess too -I gave up on trying
to fix it after so many people editing trying to interpret the bus gates.
When are you going in? Can't guarantee when I'll be in the city next

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 19:50, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> I'm planning a trip by car to central Birmingham for a relative who
> has restricted mobility, and so has a blue badge.
>
> Birmingham CIty Council say there are three spaces for BB holders on
> the stretch of High Street between Carrs Lane and Dale End, opposite
> Boots.
>
> OSM has that length of road as "motor_vehicle=no"; it has the same on
> Carrs Lane; and on the stretch of Moor Street Queensway after Albert
> Street, by which one would approach Carrs Lane from the north (Aston
> University) end. The southern end of Dale End (which one would have to
> use to leave the area; presuming Lower Bull Street is still closed) is
> marked "acccess=destination".
>
> Are these incorrect?
>
> GSV shows a "Pedestrian and cycle zone - except Blue badge [and other
> exceptions]" sign on MSQ, after Albert Street when coming from the
> north, but in images dated March 2021; and the same on Carrs Lane,
> from September 2020. Are they still there?
>
> Can Carrs Lane be approached via MSQ from Digbeth?
>
> I can do a survey during the trip, but this is chicken-and-egg!
>
> --
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Perry Barr Island redesign

[Brian Prangle]

Visited Perry Barr today. What a mess! I've updated stuff as best as I can.
I'm sure it's not all correct and there's still lots of change to come.
Needs a constant watch. It looks like the railway station is nearly complete

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 at 22:17, Ryan Underwood 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The Perry Barr island (A4040 and A34 Birchfield Road) was recently
> redesigned. It's no longer a roundabout and is now a regular four way
> intersection.  If you have a look at Google Maps you'll see they've already
> got it updated. There should be a diagram buried somewhere on Birmingham
> City Council's website for the new road layout, however I can't locate it
> after a brief search.
>
> Would anybody be willing to do a bit of digging and perhaps ground level
> surveying to get this new layout in place on OSM?  Would do it myself but a
> bit busy with other ventures at the moment!
>
> Might be a bit of fiddling needed for bus route relations on the many
> segments of the existing roundabout lines.
>
> Thanks all.
>
> Kind regards,
> Ryan.
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Disability wheelchair curb project

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Mark

You have a great project to undertake. It's unlikely I'll have the time to
do a workshop- even a brief one (and I suspect there will be no others
either as we're all volunteers) but the resources I've indicated below
should be a good guide. You know OpenStreetMap already so these resources
should be sufficient for you and there's nothing that can beat learning by
doing!  If you have any questions or problems that crop up then email the
local talk list but frankly there's more activity on the national talk-gb
list and you're more likely to get a rapid response there

Happy Mapping

Brian

Why OpenStreetMap? 
is a great and brief introduction

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wheelchair  is a good place to
start for how to map wheelchair access

Wheelmap  is good app for
showing whether establishments have wheelchair accessibility

Wheelchair routing 
is a German project but has a wealth of information on highway attributes
to survey and how to map them (in English)

If you only want to map dropped kerbs/ tactile paving then this page
 is a good guide

There are a variety of mobile apps to assist in mapping but I find them
clumsy and slow  to use and for beginners it could get overwhelming.
Vespucci is the leader, Mapzen is another. Others may have  a different
opinion.

Best to either annotate a GPS logger in the field (multiple mobile apps
available) and then upload at home/office/cafe to a laptop and edit with ID
(beginners/intermediate) or JOSM (advanced)

Whilst surveying it's easy to miss things so a photo is a good idea
.Kartaview or Mapillary are two "OSM-approved" apps that will upload photos
to your editor of choice, and also make them available to other mappers

On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 6:59 AM Mark Croft Redditch Linux Mint <
mark.croft@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>
> Hi
>
> We at kickstart project are going too bring back the project back.too life.
>
> The idea is that we map a small area of city too show where all.the curbs
> for wheelchair users to find shortage route n.navigation around town..
>
> Anyone can do a small.talk.about osm?
>
> Help with what app too use on a mobile device to tag the kurbs on the map?
>
> The principles of open data how too stop it getting tie too closed source
> data. We want the data too.be used as much as possible.. Hopefully used
> in a satnav app.
>
> We can come too you n have this meeting
>
> We based in Kidderminster..
>
> Mark Redditch
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Wishaw Lane, Minworth and the Peddimore industrial development

[Brian Prangle]

Well done Andy saved me a trip

On Sun, 10 Oct 2021, 20:43 Andy Robinson,  wrote:

> Had time on Friday on a quick trip to Brum to pop out to Minworth to update
> the map with the current Peddimore development activity. The huge site is
> crawling with earth movers.
> Map updated though it will need a further visit when they start earthworks
> on the east side of Wishaw Lane
>
> https://osm.org/go/euzPtdmN--
>
> Cheers
> Andy
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Robinson 
> Sent: 22 September 2021 09:01
> To: talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Wishaw Lane, Minworth and the Peddimore industrial development
>
> I understand from friends that Wishaw Lane, Minworth has permanently closed
> as part of the Peddimore development. I've not edited as I'm not sure
> exactly where it is physically stopped up at each end. Please also keep an
> eye out for construction works commencing for the new industrial
> development
> which fills most of the space between the A38 and Wiggins Hill Road to the
> south of Peddimore Hall and north of the canal. A new roundabout is due to
> be built on the A38 to access the site.
>
> Cheers
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Voi scooter parking racks

[Brian Prangle]

amenity=parking
parking=e-scooter
operator=Voi

On Mon, 24 May 2021, 01:30 Ryan Underwood,  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> See article -
> https://www.uktech.news/news/to-reduce-street-hazards-voi-introduces-parking-racks-for-e-scooters-in-the-uk-20210520
>
> I've spotted a couple of these Voi e-scooter parking racks about in
> Birmingham city centre. They hold ten scooters each, and are RNIB certified.
>
> Just wondering how these could be tagged?
>
> Cheers,
> Ryan.
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Inland Border Facilities

[Brian Prangle]

Thinking more about this  these new facilities are really  road transport
logistics hubs which are needed for the purposes of checking brexit customs
paperwork and easing bottlenecks at ports so perhaps landuse=commercial
operator=HMRC (and DEFRA where appropriate).It might also be worthwhile to
differentiate between outbound only hubs (like Birmingham Airport) and
inbound/outbound ones and inbound only,

On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 14:53, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Dec 6, 2020, 15:05 by sk53@gmail.com:
>
> I was wondering if there were any equivalents elsewhere.
>
> Closest I can think of is this location
> 
> between Feldkirch & Bludenz, which although described as a goods vehicle
> checkpoint from my personal experience is also operated as in internal
> custom checkpoint (and therefore amenity=police might be wrong too). As a
> group travelling from Zurich to Soelden many of us were stopped for a
> passport/car check. A friend who worked in marketing for BAT was driving a
> company van, and was hugely amused at the idea that smuggling cigarettes
> from Switzerland to Austria might be a way of making money.
>
> Close to the Poland/Belarus borders there are Border Guard
>  stations, such as this
> one . I think these are
> mainly concerned with immigration rather customs. Certainly if travelling
> in a car with non-local numberplates one can be expected to stopped &
> documents checked (first time was stressful as unexpected & about 5:30 in
> the morning).
>
> Looking at description in Polish it seems to be about handling smuggling
> and illegal migration,
> not about handling customs of legally traveling cargo (AFAIK it would
> happen at border crossing,
> such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.47616/23.35744 ).
>
> BTW, it should be probably tagged as police-type force, not as
> military-type force.
>
> On their website they imply that they enforce ban on presence on part of a
> border
> ("od znaku granicznego nr 303 do znaku granicznego nr 317 wprowadzono zakaz
> przebywania na pasie drogi granicznej").
>
> Even traditional land borders with heavy duty border controls don't seem
> to be tagged in an obvious way:
>
> For example see
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/700736522#map=16/52.4744/23.3651
> 
> - just fence mapped and some objects inside, no tag for the entire feature
> ___
> 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

[Talk-GB] Inland Border Facilities

[Brian Prangle]

I've just mapped the one at Birmingham Airport- construction site only so
far. There are several on the go . Is
anyone up to date on mapping the others? What should they be tagged as when
they are operational?

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] featdesc & featcode

[Brian Prangle]

Dump for external databases? Surely not! FHRS? UPRN? USRN? Edubase?

Regards

Brian

On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 at 19:09, Dave F via Talk-GB 
wrote:

> Thanks for that.
>
> I'm struggling to see the benefit of this in OSM, & given only one
> contributor has added them I presume I'm not alone.
> The codes appear to be another company's database reference system, of
> which OSM has its own.
> OSM should not become a dump for external databases. Anyone with valid
> reasons for not removing these tags?
>
> DaveF
>
> On 19/11/2020 16:49, Martin Wynne wrote:
> > On 19/11/2020 16:24, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
> > >
> > > Anybody know what featdesc & featcode refer to? Local authority
> > > references?
> >
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > Sorry about poor formatting, copied from:
> >
> >
> >
> https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/documents/os-vectormap-district-product-guide.pdf
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > OS VectorMap District technical specification feature codes  v1.8 –
> > 09/2016   © Crown copyright   Page 51 of 56
> >
> >   Feature Codes
> >
> >
> > Feature Codes represented in the vector product
> >
> > FeatureType  classification   featureCode
> > Building25014
> > Glasshouse25016
> > Road  Motorway  25710
> >   Primary Road  25723
> >   A Road  25729
> >   B Road  25743
> >   Minor Road  25750
> >   Local Street  25760
> >   Private Road Publicly Accessible  25780
> >   Pedestrianised Street  25790
> >   Motorway, Collapsed Dual Carriageway  25719
> >   Primary Road, Collapsed Dual Carriageway  25735
> >   A Road, Collapsed Dual Carriageway  25739
> >   B Road, Collapsed Dual Carriageway  25749
> >   Minor Road, Collapsed Dual Carriageway  25759
> > RoadTunnel25792
> > MotorwayJunction25796
> > Roundabout  Primary Road  25703
> >   A Road  25704
> >   B Road  25705
> >   Minor Road  25706
> >   Local Street  25707
> >   Private Road Publicly Accessible  25708
> > SurfaceWater_Line25600
> > SurfaceWater_Area25609
> > TidalWater  High Water Mark  25608
> > TidalBoundary  High Water Mark Low Water Mark  25604
> >   Low Water Mark  25605
> > Foreshore25612
> > AdministrativeBoundary  National  25204
> >   Parish Or Community  25200
> >   District Or London Borough  25201
> >   County Or Region Or Island  25202
> > RailwayTrack  Multi Track  25300
> >   Single Track  25301
> >   Narrow Gauge  25302
> > RailwayTunnel25303
> > RailwayStation  Light Rapid Transit Station  25420
> >   Railway Station  25422
> >   London Underground Station  25423
> >   Railway Station And London Underground Station  25424
> > OS VectorMap District technical specification feature codes  v1.8 –
> > 09/2016   © Crown copyright   Page 52 of 56
> >   Light Rapid Transit Station And Railway Station  25425
> >   Light Rapid Transit Station And London Underground Station 25426
> > FunctionalSite  Education Facility - School  25250
> >   Police Station  25251
> >   Medical Care  25252
> >   Place Of Worship  25253
> >   Leisure Or Sports Centre  25254
> >   Air Transport  25255
> >   Education Facility - Higher  25256
> >   Water Transport  25257
> >   Road Transport  25258
> >   Road Services  25259
> > Woodland25999
> > Ornament25550
> > ElectricityTransmissionLine25102
> > NamedPlace  Populated Place  25801
> >   Landform  25802
> >   Woodland Or Forest  25803
> >   Hydrography  25804
> >   Landcover  25805
> > SpotHeight25810
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Turn Restrictions at roundabouts

[Brian Prangle]

Where I've seen them they're on every exit

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020, 15:49 Dave F via Talk-GB, 
wrote:

> There is a lot of garbage in OSM due to those creating routers being too
> lazy to write a few lines of code, or even use common sense.
>
> However, in this case I believe it's other contributors who think, for
> reasons that escape me, routers require it.
>
> Routing software must be of a poor standard if it returns the commuter to
> the roundabout after just 10 metres or so after leaving it.
>
>  I partially agree with Phil's suggestion that they're harmless, if turn
> restrictions are by themselves. However if there are  multiple at one
> junction it can become error prone. Any that aren't required are best
> removed.
>
> DaveF
>
>
> On 03/10/2020 14:05, Brian Prangle wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> There seems to be a predilection for adding turn restrictions , either no
> right rurns or no U turns at the exit flares of roundabouts to prevent
> turning back into the entry flares where there are no explicit signed
> restrictions. I suspect this is "rendering for routers". Do routers
> actually need this data?  I'm tempted just to delete them all wherever I
> meet them, but I suspect there are thousands of them and there'll be howls
> of complaint.
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing 
> listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
> ___
> 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

[Talk-GB] Turn Restrictions at roundabouts

[Brian Prangle]

Hi

There seems to be a predilection for adding turn restrictions , either no
right rurns or no U turns at the exit flares of roundabouts to prevent
turning back into the entry flares where there are no explicit signed
restrictions. I suspect this is "rendering for routers". Do routers
actually need this data?  I'm tempted just to delete them all wherever I
meet them, but I suspect there are thousands of them and there'll be howls
of complaint.

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Brian Prangle]

This island, in the bristol Channel between Weston super Mare and Barry
seems to be in two countries  at once. It's on the Welsh side of the
national boundary but also in South West England City of Bristol. This is
either a map error with the Welsh boundary or a legal anomaly I don't know
which.  If it's one of those legal quirks then wouldn't it be better as an
exclave of England in Wales?

Apologies if this has come up before.

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Fwd: Pop-up cycle lanes

[Brian Prangle]

Anyone willing to take up this offer?

-- Forwarded message -
From: Andrew Radford 
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020, 16:36
Subject: RE: Pop-up cycle lanes
To: Brian Prangle 


Brian



Perhaps a cheeky request but would you (or someone else) be able to provide
a short training session on how to update the map (probably with the online
tools, rather than JOSM) if I get a few interested of the project team
(probably 2 or 3) on board.



The project people would probably be able to update the map off the top of
their head, rather than having to produce intermediate OS-free maps.



A



*From:* Brian Prangle 
*Sent:* 20 August 2020 14:16
*To:* Andrew Radford 
*Subject:* Re: Pop-up cycle lanes



Hi Andrew



Good to hear from you. It doesn't seem that complicated. Just add
cycleway=lane to the relevant stretches of road if there are to be
cycleways on both sides or use cycleway:left=lane or cycleway:right = lane
as appropriate if not.  Add  a tag like description:COVID19=temporary for
future selection for easy maintenance. Glad to help out editing these if
you can provide a rollout timetable and a map that isn't OS copyright
tainted.  Also I'd like to include the  local neighbourhood active travel
plans plans for Kings Heath and Lozells with the proposed installation of
modal filters and the pedestrianisation of York Road. Again a rollout
timetable and an OS copyright-free map would help obviate the need for a
ground survey. (perhaps you should publish public-facing maps on one of the
OS open-licensed  products? Or perhaps you are and are just adding the
OS-required attribution, if so some clarity would be helpful.) For the
modal filters best practice seems to be just convert a short stretch of the
road to highway=cycleway with perhaps barrier=modal_filter. And finally if
you could provide me with details of the school street programme ready for
September rollout I'd be grateful. I've placed notes on each of the schools
affected but I need details of which bits of which roads are covered and
what times .Perhaps there's   already a web page up?



Good to be planning work with you again



Regards



Brian







On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 3:18 PM Andrew Radford <
andrew.radf...@birmingham.gov.uk> wrote:

Hi Brian,



BCC are currently building a bunch of pop=up cycle lanes for COVID –
consultation and maps here:-



https://covidmeasuresbirmingham.commonplace.is
<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcovidmeasuresbirmingham.commonplace.is%2F=02%7C01%7CAndrew.Radford%40birmingham.gov.uk%7Ce17ef893af4b4eb018e208d8450b4c96%7C699ace67d2e44bcdb303d2bbe2b9bbf1%7C0%7C1%7C637335262137331978=P2ErNRfs6PHitTa5eS%2FItCwQenXA9vBSvr71p2hPApI%3D=0>



The question has come up as to whether these should go on OSM. I noted that
there is a wiki page about COVID but I’m not sure I’m knowledgeble enough
to put things on to the map with that level of complexity. I understand
some of the features will remain forever, but others will get taken out.



Could you let me know your views on all this?





Andy


***


***

The information contained within this e-mail (and any attachment) sent by
Birmingham City Council is confidential and may be legally privileged. It
is intended only for the named recipient or entity to whom it is addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient please accept our apologies and
notify the sender immediately. Unauthorised access, use, disclosure,
storage or copying is not permitted and may be unlawful. Any e-mail
including its content may be monitored and used by Birmingham City Council
for reasons of security and for monitoring internal compliance with the
office policy on staff use. E-mail blocking software may also be used. Any
views or opinions presented are solely those of the originator and do not
necessarily represent those of Birmingham City Council. We cannot guarantee
that this message or any attachment is virus free or has not been
intercepted and amended.

***


***


***

The information contained within this e-mail (and any attachment) sent by
Birmingham City Council is confidential and may be legally privileged. It
is intended only for the named recipient or entity to whom it is addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient please accept our apologies and
notify the sender immediately. Unauthorised access, use, disclosure,
storage or copying is not permitted and may be unlawful. Any e-mail
including its content may be monitored and used by Birmingham City Council
for reasons of security and for monitoring internal compliance with the
office policy on staff use. E-mail blocking software may also be use

Re: [Talk-GB] Admin Boundaries and Combined Authorities

[Brian Prangle]

I favour admin  level 5 too. West Midlands CA is tagged as 6 which was a
pure estimate by me as being at least equivalent to the constituent LA
members.  Transport is a heck of a slice of its budget and function
(capital £300m and operating £100m) It  also plays a big role in economic
development ( which includes skills development) and strategic planning for
housing (with a big budget for brownfield remediation) and has just been
given a budget of £100m  for taking on the responsibility for adult
education. WMCA also has projects in the area of mental health and I
believe the Manchester CA has responsibility for health generally. So CAs
do have quite a few uber admin functions at a level "above" existing
authorities which the constituent members have relinquished and should be
given an admin level.  Quite how you represent the associate "observer"
members is a puzzle I've steered clear of

regards

Brian

On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 at 23:52, Colin Smale  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think we need to discuss tagging of Combined Authorities. I spotted an
> edit that changed the tagging on West Yorkshire Combined Authority, and it
> was pointed out to me that there were already other instances of similar
> tagging for Combined Authorities (Greater Manchester for example).
>
> CAs have basically zero interaction with the public, except for the
> directly elected Mayor; although they have certain statutory tasks (public
> transport etc). They can be seen as a grouping of local authorities, as
> opposed to a LA in their own right. Should they really be tagged as
> boundary=administrative at all? Or should they have a parallel hierarchy as
> is used for police areas for example?
>
> If they are accepted as boundary=administrative, what admin level should
> be used? The LAs of which the CAs are composed are sometimes Metropolitan
> Boroughs with admin_level=8, and sometimes Unitary Authorities with
> admin_level=6. I am tending towards admin_level=5; this value is/was in use
> for the Regions, but they no longer have an admin function (if they ever
> had one) so I consider admin level 5 as "available" for use by Combined
> Authorities.
>
> An alternative may be to represent them as relations containing as members
> the constituent authorities. This would have the advantage of the ability
> (through the use of roles) to distinguish between "constituent councils"
> which are full members and "non-constituent councils" which only
> participate in certain committees.
>
> Any thoughts or comments?
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Scheduled Monument

[Brian Prangle]

I use listed_status =Scheduled Monument

On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, 10:19 Tony OSM,  wrote:

> Whilst mapping some of my local historic places I have found Scheduled
> Monuments. They are described in the Historic England list as Heritage
> Category: Scheduled Monument and has a List Entry Number.
>
> Building are listed as Heritage Category: Listed Building , Grade: (I,
> II*, II) and a list entry number.
>
> I can find tagging guidelines for a listed building but not for Scheduled
> Monument or for any of the other Heritage Categories (Protected Wreck Site,
> Park and Garden, Battlefield, World Heritage Site, Certificate of
> Immunity, Building Preservation Notice)
>
> Can someone point me to the correct place for English guidelines?
>
> I have looked at:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:listed_status
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:HE_ref
>
> For a building or similar I presently use
> HE_ref=1072653 heritage=2 heritage:operator= Historic England historic=
> heritage listed_status=Grade II name= War Memorial Gateway to Astley Park
> barrier=gate
> start_date= mid C19 website=
> https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1072653
>
> Could listed_status be expanded to hold the above definitions?
>
>
> Tony Shield -  TonyS999
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Black Country Geopark

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy and mappamercia

I've delved into this some more and it appears that the Geopark is a
collection of pre-existing sites so mapping them as a relation shouldn't be
too difficult. However the list of sites is published on the geopark
website <https://blackcountrygeopark.dudley.gov.uk/sites-to-see/>with a
copyright claim so presumably we need to get explicit permission  to use
the list.(blackcountrygeop...@dudley.gov.uk). @Andy do you feel like
writing a nice diplomatic email to them?. I'll take a look at the UNESCO
resources to see if they have a copyright free list. Assuming we get a list
that's useable we could create a multipolygon for all the existing parks,
nature reserves that are included but there are a number of sites that
might be nodes - so how to include them?.

Proposed tagging
heritage=1
heritage:operator=UNESCO
operator= Black Country Geopark
boundary=protected_area
protect_class=3;98
protection_class= Global Geopark
start_date=2020-07-10
name= Black Country UNESCO Global Geopark
website=https://blackcountrygeopark.dudley.gov.uk/bcg

Interesting project for us to complete. Pity they have a google map to show
the extent of the geopark

Regards

Brian

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 11:18 AM Brian Prangle  wrote:

> Hi Andy
>
> Great news that this has been achieved after the failure several years
> ago. Once we have the boundaries from a licence-compatible source I'm happy
> to complete this.
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
> On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 21:04, Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
>> Do we have plans to map the new "Black Country Geopark":
>>
>>http://blackcountrygeopark.org.uk
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Country_Geopark
>>
>> or to tag the various components as belonging to it? Is this suitable
>> for a "relation"?
>>
>> --
>> 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
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Black Country Geopark

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

Great news that this has been achieved after the failure several years ago.
Once we have the boundaries from a licence-compatible source I'm happy to
complete this.

Regards

Brian

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 21:04, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> Do we have plans to map the new "Black Country Geopark":
>
>http://blackcountrygeopark.org.uk
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Country_Geopark
>
> or to tag the various components as belonging to it? Is this suitable
> for a "relation"?
>
> --
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] One-way in Wolverhampton

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

Didn't catch this piece myself. Couple of questions:

How long is temporary? If it's too short-term - not really worth it

Is this a plan or has it been executed?

Really needs a site survey if it is to be done at all

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 at 18:51, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> According to Midlands today just now, there's a new, temporary,
> one-way system and bike lanes in Wolverhampton, and the speed limit on
> the ring-road has changed from 40 to 30 mph.
>
> This has also resulted in changes to bus stops/ routes.
>
> Is anyone able to map all this? Can we armchair map it, given the
> "current situation"?
>
> --
> 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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] HS2footpath diversions

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Who is closest to this and wants to do a survey?

CubbingtonThe path known as 129d off Mill Lane has been temporarily
diverted at the edge of South Cubbington Wood. The diversion will be in
place while enabling works take place along 129d for site set-up,
archaeology, ground investigations, surveys and creating new wildlife
habitats for HS2’s green corridor. These activities involve heavy machinery
crossing parts of the 129d, requiring a diversion.The public right of way
known as W130 will be temporarily closed, with a diversion in place, from
early March 2020. HS2’s enabling works contractor will oversee the
construction of two diversionsfor W130 to create a safe walking loop around
our worksites
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] TfL Cycle Infrastructure Database - matching against OSM

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Thanks Richard for the huge effort you've put into this ( and Martin) . I'm
happy to help with any manual editing as long as the data is ready-to-go in
JOSM. I think that this is such a vote of confidence in OSM by TfL - and
such a potential global case study - that it warrants a big UK volunteer
takeup to augment the resource that TfL are committing. If it needs
organising as a project then the UK chapter could step into the breach.

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 21:16, Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> Hi Richard, Hi all,
>
> (Sorry for not replying properly to the thread - I don't receive the
> emails into my inbox and nabble is complaining about a broken certificate
> today)
>
> It sounds like you are making good progress. Thanks for all the written
> documentation for those, like myself, who are not so good with ruby. It
> would be good to see those uncontentious edits going in to OSM fairly soon.
> Is the plan to get this fully automated with a test in the dev version of
> osm first?
>
> As for the rest, I am unclear what editor you are planning for people to
> use. Out of interest what editor are the TfL employees being trained on?
> The raster tilesets are obviously a huge advantage but do you plan for
> something that integrates a bit more with the editor? Something along the
> lines of the P2 merging tool, RapID or Hootenanny (also ID)?
>
> Thank you,
> *Rob*
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Brian Prangle]

Thanks Mark

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 16:13, Mark Goodge  wrote:

>
>
> On 17/04/2020 15:15, Brian Prangle wrote:
> > Rather than mappers up and down the country with varying evels of Excel
> > skills spending many dozens of hours cleaning up this csv could somebody
> > be kind enough to publish somewhere a cleaned up copy? It would be a
> > great resource for the QP.
>
> OK, here you go. Here are Excel and proper comma separated csv versions.
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ekokv1lz4wlgxfg/Pharmacies.xlsx?dl=0
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/xhszbngsps4p14e/Pharmacies.csv?dl=0
>
> I haven't made any attempt to normalise the addresses. Doing so reliably
> would require referencing AddressBase or the PAF, and therefore render
> the data non-open. And doing it unreliably is probably worse than not
> doing it at all.
>
> It is not, though, particularly difficult to import the original version
> into a spreadsheet or database, and I would recommend that anyone who
> wants to use this data regularly does take a bit of time to learn how.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 Phase 1 Construction NTP

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

I think maybe a bit premature to make the change you've suggested. OK to
convert parcels of land to landuse-=construction as and when HS2 activity
gets going - even if its only demolition.

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 11:48, Andy Robinson  wrote:

> Tony, thus far all the construction activity has been and is enabling
> works. That is mostly related to relocating utilities (especially the major
> ones), site clearances and the establishment of the working compounds. Many
> of these have already in full or in part been mapped into OSM. As yet they
> haven’t mostly been fencing off the main line route. I expect we will see
> that happen soon for the over land sections. In London not much change will
> be visible beyond the current clearances and site compound set-ups. The
> shafts and portals for the main tunnels will be about the only obvious new
> work in the future outside of the station developments. The construction of
> the stations themselves is not yet confirmed.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* Tony OSM [mailto:tonyo...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 17 April 2020 10:02
> *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 Phase 1 Construction NTP
>
>
>
> we've seen news reports of parts of the alignment fenced off and invaded
> by protestors - those parts are certainly under construction, and the
> pictures show that bulldozers have been active. I think if we can identify
> those areas then construction is now correct.
>
> Tony Shield
>
> TonyS999
>
> On 17/04/2020 09:14, Andy Robinson wrote:
>
> Jez, I think the actual rails may be a long way off but I agree it’s an
> opportunity to stay ahead of the completion.
>
>
>
> A question for the whole list. How do folks feel about changing the Phase
> 1 route from rail=proposed to rail=construction. Perhaps it’s a bit
> premature but then perhaps not.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* Jez Nicholson [mailto:jez.nichol...@gmail.com
> ]
> *Sent:* 16 April 2020 22:15
> *To:* Andy Robinson
> *Cc:* Talk-GB
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 Phase 1 Construction NTP
>
>
>
> Thanks Andy, this is opportunity for OSM to be *the* best source of HS2
> rails data.
>
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020, 17:48 Andy Robinson,  wrote:
>
> Government issued Notice to Procced for Phase 1 today, which means the
> main contracts construction between London and Birmingham will start
> imminently so keep an eye out for major new works in your area soon (though
> I expect these will be slow to spot while we are in lockdown!)
>
>
>
> Till now all works relating to HS2 have been enabling works or design
> related.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
> ___
> 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
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Brian Prangle]

Rather than mappers up and down the country with varying evels of Excel
skills spending many dozens of hours cleaning up this csv could somebody be
kind enough to publish somewhere a cleaned up copy? It would be a great
resource for the QP.

Regards

Brian

On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 16:00, Peter Neale via Talk-GB <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Thanks for pointing out how to import and convert the file.  After a bit
> of trial and error, I discovered how to get Excel to use the "¬" as the
> delimiter and (as you said), the addresses are quite inconsistent, but the
> data all lines up again in the Post Code Column.  There are some further
> issues in the ParentName Column, with the County sometimes duplicated there
> and sometimes there instead of the County Column.
>
> Thank you for taking me a step forward in my "How to Use Excel" course!
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
>
> On Thursday, 16 April 2020, 13:52:06 BST, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <
> robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 12:27, Peter Neale  wrote:
> > I tried following the link to your proposed new source of “official”
> data, but none of the 3 links to the data worked very well for me.
> >
> > Link 1:  (API format) led to http 404 error.
> > Link 2  (CSV(TSV) format – led to http 404 error
> > Link 3  (XSV format) downloaded a file with a “.csv” file extension that
> seemed to be tab-separated, rather than comma-separated.  I took that into
> a text editor and did a global Find and Replace of Tab with Comma.  The
> resultant .csv file loaded into Excel just fine, but it has over 11,000
> lines and many of them must now have additional commas, because a number of
> fields are right-shifted (Post Code in the Latitude Column, Latitude in the
> Longitude Column, etc.)  Also, over 700 have Blank in the Address1 Field,
> with the whole address in Address 2, Address 3, etc.  Then quite a few
> (from my sample in the first 30) have County values in the ParentName
> Field.  So I fear that, unless you can do a better conversion than I did
> (and you almost certainly could, I know!) you will have a lot of manual
> cleaning up to do, before you can use this data.
>
> Yes, the first two links at
> https://data.gov.uk/dataset/e373eb6a-fffd-48e5-b306-71eb17f97af2/pharmacies
> are broken for me as well. For the third link, it looks like they
> tried to do CSV, but didn't understand how to escape commas within the
> fields, and so opted to use a different character "¬" instead. If you
> import this into a spreadsheet, and tell it to use just "¬" as the
> column separator, I think it works out fine, with all the entries in
> the right place. (You can certainly do this with LibreOffice; I'm not
> sure about Excel.) The address lines seem to be used inconsistently,
> but everything is back aligned when you get to the postcode field.
>
> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission to release UPRN/ UPSN identifiers under Open Government Licence

[Brian Prangle]

Can I ask two  basic daft questions?
What use are these in OSM if we only pick at them instead of importing the
lot ( which is  highly unlikely)?
Is it possible to derive street names from USRN in a way that is licence
compatible?

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 13:14, Mark Goodge  wrote:

>
>
> On 09/04/2020 20:58, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote:
> > If uprn is supposed to denote an address, why not simply use addr:uprn?
>
> It doesn't denote an address. While a lot of premises that have a UPRN
> also have an address, there are also many that don't. Every individual
> field in an agricultural area has a UPRN, for example, as do things like
> telephone boxes and street lamps. In fact, one of the main reasons
> behind the adoption of UPRNs as the unique identifier for properties is
> that addresses alone can't fulfil that purpose.
>
> Mark
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding missing roads using Facebook detections

[Brian Prangle]

I echo Richard's comments - best to confine yourselves to new roads in
recently constructed residential developments - and even here you need to
be careful  as on the ground some roads will be service roads and some
will  be living streets and there will also be gated communities (can you
detect gates?). So definitely do not add access tags as these require a
ground survey.

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 12:18, Richard Fairhurst 
wrote:

> Jothirnadh Guthula wrote:
> > With a team of mappers @Amazon we are planning to improve
> > missing roads in UK using Facebook detections as a source. Please
> > let us know if you have any ongoing projects using this data source.
> > While adding missing roads, we will be adding all the associated
> > access tags as per available on-ground resources.
>
> I'd urge extreme caution on this, particularly in rural areas, for two
> reasons.
>
> Firstly, as Martin says, there are virtually no public roads unmapped in
> the
> UK. New construction aside, I think in the last five years, I've spotted
> two, both in Powys.
>
> Secondly, UK access rights are unique and complex, and can only be
> discerned
> either by survey or by consulting Definitive Statements where these exist.
> You should not be adding access tags, nor adding highway types that imply
> access rights (for example, highway=unclassified implies general public
> access to all vehicle types), unless you've surveyed the location or
> consulted a Definitive Statement.
>
> For an example of the issues, please see this changeset discussion:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71668172
>
> In this case an Amazon Logistics mapper added motor_vehicle=yes which was
> inaccurate. In this particular case I was lucky to find an openly licensed
> photo to demonstrate the real access rights on that way.
>
> If you're exclusively mapping new housing estates in urban areas, though,
> go
> for it. :)
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html
>
> ___
> 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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Meetings

[Brian Prangle]

I think we'll have to cancel our monthly meetings until further notice @Ian
I hope your rail trip is not too chaotic

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Abusive posts

[Brian Prangle]

Thanks Matthew


On Sat, 14 Mar 2020, 12:14 Matthew Newton, <
matthew-...@newtoncomputing.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Seen all the messages. Apologies for the delay in sorting this.
>
> In all the years I've been monitoring this list I don't ever recall
> seeing behaviour like that. It most certainly isn't acceptable. Minor
> disagreements at times, sure, but outright abuse is way over the top.
>
> He's gone.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matthew
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] European Water Project - Introduction

[Brian Prangle]

Can an admin please remove this swearing jerk from the mailing list, for
totally unacceptable behaviour?

On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 at 16:03, Peter Neale via Talk-GB <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Well. That's a powerful, reasoned argument (NOT!).
>
> If you don't have anything constructive to add to the debate   I suggest
> that you keep your opinions to yourself.
>
> Peter
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> 
>
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 at 11:29, Daniel Holsey
>  wrote:
> ___
> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] March Meeting

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Thursday March 5th 730 The Bull. Come with ideas for travelling meetings in
the summer

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging showgrounds

[Brian Prangle]

This is a case where landcover and landuse get confused in the OSM scheme
of things. Yes it's grass but that's not its use. Its use is commercial :
the  space is rented commercially to exhibitors who sell goods to attendees
who pay an entrance fee, with a semi-cultural event attached. I'm not sure
about access rights during times when there is no event , but I suspect
it's private, so an open space justification might not be appropriate.

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 09:58, Mark Goodge  wrote:

> Morning all,
>
> Someone has commented on a change I made to the Three Counties
> showground last year when I changed the tagging to landuse=grass rather
> than landuse=commercial. Their suggestion is that it really ought to be
> landuse=recreation_ground, with a secondary tag of surface=grass.
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74103491#map=16/52.0834/-2.3235
>
> I've responded to that comment on the changeset, but I thought it would
> be worth throwing out here as well.
>
> I do think that tagging showgrounds as landuse=commercial is generally
> incorrect; it doesn't match the description of 'commercial' in the wiki
> and doesn't reflect the typical uses of showgrounds both when a show is
> on and when one isn't.
>
> The reason I tagged the Three Counties showground as grass is because,
> most of the year, that's precisely what it is - an open area of
> grassland. Unless there is an event on (which only happens for a
> minority of days in a year) it is just an open space.
>
> Looking at a few other showgrounds across the country, we don't seem to
> have any consistency.
>
> The East of England Showground is tagged as landuse=recreation_ground:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/52.5456/-0.3170
>
> The Suffolk Showground is tagged as a park:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/52.0330/1.2277
>
> So is the Staffordshire County Showgound:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/52.8255/-2.0643
>
> The former Royal Showground at Stoneleigh is tagged as commercial, but
> in that case that's probably now correct as it's no longer used as a
> showground and is gradually being redeveloped as a business park:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/52.3435/-1.5220
>
> The Great Yorkshire Showground isn't tagged as an area at all, just a
> network of roads and individual features:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.9830/-1.5065
>
> Similarly with the Norfolk Showground
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/52.6490/1.1793
>
> And the Bath and West Showground:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/51.1552/-2.5265
>
> So, what do people think? Personally, I think that showgrounds ought to
> be tagged as an area, because they do, typically, have clear boundaries
> and are distinct from their surrounding context. But I'm less sure what
> the area should be tagged as. I think commercial is usually wrong, for
> the reasons I've already given, but I can see an argument for either
> grass, recreation_ground or even park.
>
> Thoughts, anyone?
>
> Mark
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge

[Brian Prangle]

"OSM is not beholden to data consumers.
They take the data 'as is'. That includes any amendments

My planned amendment can always be reversed if there is a valid reason.
Upsetting CU isn't one"

 Not a great way to build a community when the data user in question put in
a lot of resource in order to create the OSM data in the firstplac
e


On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 14:35, Dave F via Talk-GB 
wrote:

> Hi Jerry
>
> On 06/02/2020 10:19, SK53 wrote:
> > Funnily enough this long-standing issue came up at our pub meeting last
> > month. Although my reaction has always been to let sleeping dogs lie,
> this
> > was clearly not the consensus.
>
> It's detrimental to the quality of the OSM database. it requires sorting
> out.
>
> > I've sent a message to University of Cambridge Information Services who
> run
> > the map.cam.ac.uk site which consumes the OSM data
>
> Is this their sole use? There was a hint in a university blog there were
> other sites
>
> > , to warn them that a
> > change is impending. It's probably worth holding off for a week or so to
> > allow them to assess any impact on their map.
>
> I was going to give it a week from my post to allow other OSM
> contributors to have their say. I don't want this to fizzle out as has
> happened on previous occasions. OSM is not beholden to data consumers.
> They take the data 'as is'. That includes any amendments.
>
> My planned amendment can always be reversed if there is a valid reason.
> Upsetting CU isn't one.
>
> >   Incidentally, knowing a
> > specific contact point would help as university IT departments can be big
> > beasts these days. It does show that having a good contact point is
> always
> > a good idea for directed edits when data is in use.
>
> It depends how the institution is set up, but I've found bursar/estates
> departments are the more interested in the map's appearance. IT
> departments focus more on 0 & 1s.
>
> > As others have said there is a lot of inconsistency: particular with
> former
> > houses taken into University or College ownership which sometimes get
> > building=house/semi and other times building=university. There are other
> > college buildings of this type which are not hit by amenity=university at
> > all.
>
> These are to assess what would bel eft after I make my planned amendment.
> Note these are not all CU (ie Anglia Ruskin)
>
> Buildings=yes, without amenity but have 'university' in the operator tag:
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/QsU
>
> Buildings that aren't '=yes', without amenity but have 'university' in
> the operator tag:
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/QsT
>
> Non building, amenity=university, Has 'University of Cambridge' in the
> operator tag
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Qt3
>
> Non building, amenity=university, operator is not 'University of Cambridge'
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Qt1
>
> Non building, amenity=university, No operator tag
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Qt4
>
> > Other general points I noticed relating to  inconsistency/issues (largely
> > arising because Cambridge got mapped earlier than many places or it just
> > has a lot of things which are otherwise rare):
> >
> > - Theological Colleges are loosely associated with the university,
> and
> > are equally loosely amenity=university in their own right. I don't
> know if
> > we have a regular way of tagging non-degree awarding religious
> training
> > centres. These are something of an Oxbridge speciality. I see the
> London
> > Institute of Theology is tagged
> >  as a college. Years
> ago I
> > mapped Coleg Trefecca as a conference centre, but used old_ tags to
> > indicate it's historical role as a college training people for the
> > ministry. Fortunately some of the odder places
> >  of former
> > times have similarly changed their roles.
> > - Sports facilities (especially isolated playing fields and
> boathouses)
> > are just tagged with a ref and operator. Pavilions are often tagged
> > building=university, as is the sports centre.
> > - Cambridge colleges are independent corporations in their own
> right, so
> > probably should have separate amenity=university relations (although
> the
> > world is unlikely to end if not).
>
> They maybe financially independent, but still stand under the umbrella
> of CU. Why can't they have separate college or faculty relations?
>
> >   They mostly form discrete campuses.
> > Isolated parts are named separately so just replacing these with a
> relation
> > doesn't work. North Court, Emma is one such example. There are
> similarly
> > very well known parts of the university with their own widely used
> names:
> > Downing Site, New Museums, West Cambridge etc. This is true of most
> > universities now that many are 

Re: [Talk-GB] "OSMUK-in-a-box"

[Brian Prangle]

Looks like you've got yourself a show and tell session at the OSMUK AGM
Jez!

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 12:31, Jez Nicholson  wrote:

> I come from a database background, and when a question isn't easily
> answered with Taginfo or Overpass Turbo I jump to my trusty local postgres
> database of UK data. I have a script that downloads the British Isles from
> Geofabrik, loads it with osm2pgsql, adds some useful indexes, and then
> removes Eire. Thereafter I can run SQL queries across the whole database to
> get 'UK-wide' results.
>
> I think that this would be useful for people on hackdays and the like and
> would be a good service for OSMUK to provide, so have just added a new
> github repository https://github.com/osm-uk/osmuk2pgsql
>
> Friendly-worded Issues are welcome, as are code contributions. I'd like to
> put it on a Docker environment so that it works quickly-and-easily on
> Windows, Linux, Mac, whatever.
>
> Comments? Thoughts?
>
> Regards,
>  Jez
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Mark Renn, sculptor

[Brian Prangle]

Thanks for this Andy. Any reason why he didn't justify an article whilst he
was alive? I'll try to fill in some of the gaps. BTW is Ben Mabbett a
relative?He's doing lots of mapping in the W Mids

Regards

Brian

On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 5:41 PM Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> Happy New Year to you all.
>
> Those of you who appreciate public art might be interested in a
> Wikipedia article I've just written, on Birmingham sculptor Mark Renn,
> who sadly died last month:
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Renn
>
> Some of his works don't seem to be mapped, and some of those in the
> table on the article need coordinates and/ or photos.
>
> --
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] HS2 phase 1 updates - Solihull interchange station

[Brian Prangle]

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
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Banksy

[Brian Prangle]

Well done - you beat me to it

On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 at 22:09, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> It's OK folks, you can relax.
>
> I've added Birmingham's new Banksy artwork to the map:
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7047824939
>
> --
> 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

[Talk-GB] OpenStreetCam in JOSM

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Does anyone else have a problem displaying photo  images in JOSM with the
OSC plugin? I can only get the road sign icons and no photos. I've
reinstalled the plugin and update JOSM but to no effect

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] ITO! World Tools

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Shaun

Would it be possible for itoworld to let us ( the UK chapter) have the
source code for the road names feature - we're keen to replicate it using
the new source of OS road names from OS Open Roads and we're hoping that
other than dealing with a new datasource the comparison logic and rendering
backend could be re-used. It might lessen the development effort and it
might be easier to get some volunteers.

Regards

Brian

On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 10:51, Shaun McDonald 
wrote:

>
>
> On 28 Nov 2019, at 10:26, SK53  wrote:
>
> The big difference of the old Locator layer from ITO is that it displayed
> the name. The other tool which used OS locator is Robert Scott's OSL
> Musical Chairs .
> Both suffer because OS Locator was last released in 2016.
>
>
> The OS Locator data having last been released in 2016, with no plans to
> update to the OS Open Roads mentioned below, and the majority of the UK
> having street names. Combined with no new streets ever going to come up,
> and demolished/removed street names needing to have the not:name forever
> more, a hardware failure, were all contributory factors for the service
> being discontinued.
>
>
> One way to get potentially missing names is to use OS Open Roads. These
> are big shape files, so its probably best to cut them down using something
> like ogr2ogr, or QGIS. The file can be pulled in as a custom layer in iD,
> Potlatch and as a standard layer in JOSM.
>
>
>
>
> On 28 Nov 2019, at 10:30, Jez Nicholson  wrote:
>
> As Jerry says, the key feature was that it compared OS road names to OSM
> and highlighted the differences.
>
> The Microsoft Open Data Team recently analysed
> streets-with-no-name-but-lots-of-houses which threw up positive hits, and
> some potentially false positives of new housing estates which do not have
> road names yet and auxiliary service roads.
>
> I'd like to see a new tool be builti'd also like someone to fund it
> being built and sustain it either through a grant or donated work.
>
>
> We at Ito are also hopeful that the community would implement new more up
> to date tools with a more modern look.
>
> Shaun McDonald
> Ito World
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December - Christmas curry

[Brian Prangle]

Gosh it come around quickly! See you there

On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 18:34, Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Just a reminder that this is tomorrow (Manzils Restaurant, Digbeth
> - Thursday, 5th December meet at 7:30).
>
> Hope to see you there.
>
> Rob
>
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2019, 21:42 Rob Nickerson, 
> wrote:
>
>> Great. Anyone else able to make it?
>> *Rob*
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 at 15:14, Brian Prangle 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Works for me
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 10:05 PM Rob Nickerson <
>>> rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> In what is now becoming a bit of a tradition, we discussed going for
>>>> curry for our December mappa mercia meeting. If in agreement I suggest we
>>>> stick to the same place as previous years (Manzils Restaurant, Digbeth).
>>>>
>>>> First Thursday of the month would make it 5th December. Shall we say to
>>>> meet at 7:30?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> *Rob*
>>>> ___
>>>> 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
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] HSBC UK edit

[Brian Prangle]

Why restrict it to w mids? Do the whole UK and have done with it . It's no
more work.
Rgds
Brian

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019, 21:33 Rob Nickerson,  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> In line with the Automated Edit guidelines I would like to draw your
> attention to the following proposal. This proposal would update HSBC banks
> in the West Midlands region (hence this mailing list) to reflect the new
> HSBC UK brand.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/RobJN
>
> I've suggested December 2019, but if supportive I might be able to do this
> before the end of November.
>
> Best regards,
> *Rob*
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] December - Christmas curry

[Brian Prangle]

Works for me

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 10:05 PM Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> In what is now becoming a bit of a tradition, we discussed going for curry
> for our December mappa mercia meeting. If in agreement I suggest we stick
> to the same place as previous years (Manzils Restaurant, Digbeth).
>
> First Thursday of the month would make it 5th December. Shall we say to
> meet at 7:30?
>
> Best regards,
> *Rob*
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM-UK misunderstands the British Isles

[Brian Prangle]

Bit of a misunderstanding here Dave  - this is the wiki page of the UK
mapping community not the UK OSM chapter. Everone is free to contribute to
improve the wiki page, so if you find poor information there - just edit it
to improve its content.

Regards

Brian

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 15:19, Dave F via Talk-GB 
wrote:

> Here's OSM-UK's page
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom#Guidelines
>
> On 13/11/2019 15:08, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Someone involved with OSM-UK may wish to check the definition of The
> > British Isles:
> > https://www.britannica.com/place/British-Isles
> >
> > They may also wish to have a read of this:
> >
> https://www.gov.im/about-the-government/departments/cabinet-office/external-relations/constitution/
> >
> >
> >
> > What is the size of OSM-UK's membership?
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> > DaveF
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Poly Tunnels vs Greenhouses

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Everyone

Large areas of farmland are being covered with poly tunnels which are
readily apparent from aerial imagery which are sometimes tagged as
building=greenhouse. I've always hesitated from tagging them at all as they
are not to me really buildings: they are more temporarily constructed,
using cheap materials akin to a transparent tent or marquee and certainly
without permanent foundations.
They could certainly be tagged as man_made= ( but what? ). No great
preferences here from me but it would be good to have a UK tagging guideline

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Today's meetup

[Brian Prangle]

Dreadful weather: cancelled
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Zebra crossings being lost in iD - how to respond

[Brian Prangle]

I think all 3 tags should be the  standard.

On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 11:45, Jez Nicholson  wrote:

> +1 for a bot edit
>
> are you suggesting to just add crossing_ref=zebra, or to convert
> crossing=zebra into highway=crossing + crossing=uncontrolled too?
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 8:23 AM Mateusz Konieczny 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 24 Oct 2019, 22:48 by rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> *Before I start this message, I would like to say that I am looking for
>> solutions and not wishing to open the flood gates on abuse of the iD
>> editors. On the whole they do a great job and even when we disagree it
>> should be with respect. Right now on to the message itself:*
>>
>>
>> It seems like the iD editor's "upgrade this" feature is replacing
>> crossing=zebra with crossing=marked but NOT adding crossing_ref=zebra to
>> the node. If lots of users make use of this "feature" in the UK then we
>> stand to lose some valuable data. Taginfo UK says there are 4,710
>> crossing=zebra features in the UK.
>>
>> I have added a comment on to the GitHub issue but no reply yet.
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6962
>>
>> I would suggest opening a new issue request GB specific - maybe with
>> something like
>> "I checked sample of 100 crossing tagged this way, error rate is low".
>>
>> Comments in a closed issue are likely to be lost/unnoticed.
>>
>> Though with just 5k crossing it seems that bot edit would be preferable if
>> - error rate is considered low
>> - crossing_ref tagging is acceptable
>> - there is no realistic plan to fight with iD over deprecating
>> crossing=zebra
>> - bot edits are considered as acceptable
>>
>> Why bot edit is preferable?
>> - cooperation with iD developers is not necessary
>> - more people can do it (I may do it in case of a clear support)
>> - adding complex region-based handling for 5k objects is making
>> maintenance of editor
>> complex, it is likely to not be done by iD developers
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Saturday at Houton

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Let's meet at the Visitors Centre Car Park for 10am to decide what and how
to map. The Tuning Fork(adjacent) do good grub so we could have lunch
there. If there has been insufficient progress on new roads/houses since
our last visit to occupy us, we can discuss where else to map

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

[Talk-GB] FIXME/fixme/OSm Notes Quarterly Project

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

So  far according tothe taginfo script we've managed to ADD 415 fixmes and
remove 84 FIXMEs. I don't have data yet on OSM Notes. Don't know what's
going on here with the increase when the aim of the project is to reduce
the numbers by fixing the issues indicated nad thereby improve the qualit
yof the data.

Should we be converting fixmes to OSM Notes -will this give the occasional
mapper more chance of seeing them and adding detail or fixing them?

Should we be actively dissuading the use of fixmes for the same reason?

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Fixmes and Notes

[Brian Prangle]

Good work Rob

There is a paint style in JOSM to show fixmes and notes (k=v notes not
OSM.org notes)
Your overpass query on footpaths should also query fixme=continues (as well
as continue)

Regards

Brian

On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 at 13:58, Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We've just started the next quarterly project on fixmes and notes. The
> wiki page has some ideas - do you have any other ideas?
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2019_Q4_Project:_Fixmes_and_Notes
>
> It strikes me that a large proportion of the fixmes relate to incomplete
> paths. So in effect tacking this would be an extension of our previous
> quarterly project on paths. Here is an overpass turbo query to show those
> fixmes:
>
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/N56
>
> Happy mapping!
> *Rob*
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Mappa Mercia October mapping

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Gareth

My only two free dates are 19 and 26 October. Of the two I'd prefer 26
October. So I propose 26 October unless it's inconvenient for anyone else

Regards

Brian

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Gareth L  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Has a Saturday to visit Houlton, this October, been decided upon?
>
> The link road (from Clifton-upon-dunsmore/butlers leap) wass due to be
> opened imminently, although it was scheduled “late september/early october”
> and now it sounds like December.
>
>
>
> A lot more construction work is underway, to the west of the visitors
> centre - closer to hillmorton - although my brief passing through the other
> night made it look mostly like groundwork and foundations, with a portion
> of the crick road having a lane closure and a trench dug along it.
>
>
>
> Gareth
> ___
> 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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Southam meetup Sat 21st Sep

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

I shall concentrate on mapping the Kineton Road Industrial Estate See you
there at the Bowling Green pub at about 1245

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] September meeting

[Brian Prangle]

OK we're on for Saturday 21st September. I suggest we meet at the Bowling
Green High Street Southam
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/647270898#map=16/52.2524/-1.3842> from
about 1245.Map either in Southam or one of the surrounding villages.If
you'relanning to attend let us know here where you intend to map sowe don't
duplicate effort.

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 23:17, Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> Works for me.
>
> Best wishes,
> Rob
>
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, 18:41 Brian Prangle,  wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone
>> This was planned for a Saturday meeting and the next place on our list is
>> Southam in Warwickshire.
>> The only free Saturday I have is 21st so I'm proposing that. If there are
>> any takers then I'll look for a pub. Perhaps we advertise on talk GB too if
>> we're going ahead?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Brian
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] September meeting

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone
This was planned for a Saturday meeting and the next place on our list is
Southam in Warwickshire.
The only free Saturday I have is 21st so I'm proposing that. If there are
any takers then I'll look for a pub. Perhaps we advertise on talk GB too if
we're going ahead?

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar Panels Quarterly Project: 39 days to go

[Brian Prangle]

Stupendous though the progress is - we're unlikely to achieve more than
about 20% of the total by the end of the project so perhaps it would be
better to concentrate for the remainder of the time on the larger solar
farms where we already have approx 50% of the total and have reasonable
prospect of getting them all. It would be good to  have a quartlery project
where we achieve completion. Perhaps someone with the data skills could
compare the REPD ofgem data with OSM data and prepare a map (or even just a
csv with lat/lon for use in JOSM) showing the missing ones?

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 at 16:34, Dan S  wrote:

> Hi Jerry and all,
>
> Indeed we've over 500 solar farms - I can check the exact number this
> weekend. (From the OfGEM data, I estimate that approx 1100 exist.)
>
> Here are some comments from the point of view of a data consumer:
>
> As I think Gregory commented - we don'tt really "need" much detail on
> solar farms (e.g. the panels contained within them). In general, we have
> metadata for solar farms, so we just need their outlines, plus either their
> output capacity and/or their ID in the REPD dataset (repd:id=*).
>
> Much more important is to spot the *small-scale* solar - that's a vital
> piece of the puzzle that *none* of the official data sources are very
> good at.
>
> As Jerry suggests, it's good to aim for high coverage on a few chosen
> regions (e.g. local authorities). This will help with the machine learning
> but the more direct importance is that it will help piloting solar energy
> forecasting, using those regions.
> In particular, it might be helpful for at least someone to focus on
> *Cornwall*. That's an area with a lot of solar installations, and the
> National Grid know it as an area that often gives a lot of "reverse flow",
> i.e. a large amount of small-scale generation feeding back into the grid.
> I've had a bit of a look at Cornwall and various imagery looks really nice
> and clear there.
>
> Have a sunny weekend!
>
> Cheers
> Dan
>
>
>
> Op vr 23 aug. 2019 om 13:05 schreef SK53 :
>
>> Thought I'd write a really quick summary of progress on the quarterly
>> project:
>>
>>- As of last night we had a total of 67,475 installations
>> (solar farms
>>enclosing several groups of panels are treated as one installation. At the
>>time of writing another 500 have been added this morning.
>>- 8 local authorities have more than 50% of the estimated total
>>number (based on FIT data), in descending order : Nottingham, Ashfield,
>>Liverpool, Knowsley, Tameside, Wrecsam, Bassetlaw, Peterborough, and
>>Manfield.
>>- During August anywhere from 1500 to nearly 2500 panels have been
>>mapped each day. Even if only average 1000 a day for the remainder of the
>>project it means we should comfortably exceed 100k mapped installations
>>(between 10 & 12% of the total).
>>- There's no shortage of places where it is easy to add a lot of
>>panels in a short time (I added nearly 500 in Worksop yesterday). 
>> Gregory's
>>site has a list of candidates at the bottom of the main page.
>>- As expected urban areas are easier to do than rural areas.
>>- General areas with a lot of mapping are: West Midlands, North-East
>>(Tyneside, Wearside etc), North-West, East Mids and Kent. I think you can
>>guess who the likely suspects are.
>>- I don't have any immediate stats on solar farms, but Dan pointed
>>out that we have over 50%. perhaps Dan or Jex can provide an update.
>>
>> Apart from a general target of 100k installations some other things are
>> worth focussing on for the remainder of the project:
>>
>>- Getting a few LAs over 75%. Ashfield
>> is surprising
>>because installations are widely distributed. Liverpool
>> is more
>>typical: two-thirds are mapped but perhaps 80% of the LSOAs have not been
>>touched, and over a 1000 are in 4 LSOAs around Speke. So finding the
>>additional panels may be less rewarding.
>>- Searching a small number of rural LAs intensively: small ones are
>>probably best: Anglesey, Isle of Wight, Rutland etc. My suspicion is that
>>panels are harder to find, but also that imagery is often quite a bit 
>> older.
>>- Get more done in Scotland (and Northern Ireland). Gregory's site
>>doesn't allow the micro-targeting by LSOA which has been so effective for
>>England & Wales.
>>
>> The first two are because there is the possibility of using located
>> rooftop solar panels as training sets for more automated identification
>> using machine learning. Dan may want to say more on this.
>>
>> Lastly, a couple of remarks stemming from jumping around England & Wales
>> about OSM mapping in general:
>>
>>- Buildings have been diligently mapped in all sorts of unexpected
>>

[Talk-GB] ITOworld maps

[Brian Prangle]

ITOworld  maps which showed a huge variety of visualisations of OSM data
seems to have gone offline. For about a week now I've been getting 503
Service Unavailable
No server is available to handle this request.

Does anybody know what's happenng here? - those maps were incredibly useful

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Trig Point references

[Brian Prangle]

I've noticed that some trigpoints are tagged with  a reference prefixed
TPUK. This is a reference to the numbers assigned by the website
http://trigpointing.uk/ which has the following text as a footer: "The
TrigpointingUK database is owned and maintained by Ian Harris (Teasel)"
That doesn't sound very open to me - does anyone know what permission we
have to use this data? The OSM wiki says we *can* use it but who has the
text of  the explicit permission (or licence) and shouldn't we have  a
system of being able to reference(hyperlink) permissions such as these from
the wiki (just to be safe)?

Apologies if there is a talk-gb thread buried in the archives relating to
this

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Tonight's meeting

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone
I'llbe surveying the industrial estate behind Morrisons Buntsford Park Road

Rgds

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing NaPTAN Data

[Brian Prangle]

 naptan:verified=no dates back to the original import in 2009 and was there
to indicate the bus stop needed surveying to verify its position- when a
survey was done the process was for this tag to be deleted. Might be good
to adopt this process here too?

Regards

Brian

On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 16:10, Dave F via Talk-GB 
wrote:

>
> Please, please don't use public_transport=platform unless you're
> actually mapping an actual, physical, raised object, similar to railway
> platforms.
>
> 'platform' has been misappropriated from the physical railway=platform
> by those who developed the PT schema to mean an arbitrary area of
> pavement that's somewhere, roughly near where a bus stops. In OSM we map
> *physical* objects only.
>
> It has now been regressed one stage further, being superfluously added
> to highway=bus_stop nodes. So much of the PT schema is just duplicating
> valid, existing data which leads to confusion & errors. It is a waste of
> time & effort.
>
> --
>
> if you're adding the bus stop & your source is naptan how can
> naptan:verified=no?
>
> DaveF
>
>
> On 02/07/2019 11:06, Ed Loach wrote:
> > David wrote:
> >
> >> Given that few people like maintenance work, if you can't map all
> >> the
> >> stops from first principles, it is very unlikely that imported ones will
> >> get maintained.  Retaining the NaPTAN tagging is important in
> >> allowing
> >> any later remerge of the updated NaPTAN data.
> > I've been regularly updating local bus route relations (all now upgraded
> to PT schema v2) in Tendring [1], Colchester [1] and Maldon [2] areas of
> Essex. This involves more maintenance than just the bus stops (which for
> Essex were imported some years ago). I've written a program to help me with
> this, comparing the opendata with the OSM data so I can work out what needs
> updating.
> >
> > Occasionally I encounter a bus stop used by a bus route which wasn't
> imported previously. In these cases I add the stop from NaPTAN (based on
> their latitude and longitude) and add the tags:
> > highway=bus_stop
> > public_transport=platform
> > source=naptan
> > naptan:verified=no
> > name=(NaPTAN name)
> > naptan:AtcoCode=(whatever)
> > naptan:NaptanCode=(whatever)
> >
> > If the bus stop type is not MKD I add
> >
> > naptan:BusStopType=(bus stop type)
> >
> > and if the status is not "act" I add
> >
> > naptan:Status=(status)
> >
> > This last one is very rare as I think it is only once that I've found a
> deleted bus stop still part of a bus route (the road had been diverted and
> new stops installed - the old stop was on what is now a cycle path).
> >
> >> Another problem with NaPTAN stops, which applies to non-OSM
> >> users as
> >> well is that they have virtual stops in Hail and Ride areas.  Routers
> >> seem to only like people boarding at those place, so, in my case, can
> >> take me about 7 minutes out of my way against the direction of
> >> travel,
> >> so tell me I have missed a bus that could be easily caught.
> > I'll agree with this. I've been adding them at the NaPTAN location as
> described above if they aren't already in, but these are occasionally up
> cul-de-sacs (usually at the start or end of the route).
> >
> > Ed
> >
> > [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tendring(Essex)/Bus_Routes
> > [2]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maldon(Essex_District)/Bus_Routes
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > 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
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing NaPTAN Data

[Brian Prangle]

It's also useful to add

shelter=yes if there is one
route_ref= x;y  indicating bus route nos that stop there (if indicated on
the stop)
CUS stops are also useful to add but omitting the highway=bus-stop tag (
you can always add the public tranpsort stop_poisition as a node on the
highway). They often become marked with pole over time
There's also a relatively new tag to indicate if the bus stop allows the
bus to pull in to a small layby off the main highway (but I've forgotten
what it is)

Your local bus authority might also be able to help (in the West Mids TfWM
have been very helpful)

Personally I've given up on bus route relations: they're a time sink in
editing them in the first place and they're even more of a time sink to
maintain. I think they're better off in a separate layer in dedicated
journey planners maintained by public transport authorities.

Regards

Brian

Regards

Brian

On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 14:54, Silent Spike  wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 11:07 AM Ed Loach  wrote:
>
>> highway=bus_stop
>> public_transport=platform
>> source=naptan
>> naptan:verified=no
>> name=(NaPTAN name)
>> naptan:AtcoCode=(whatever)
>> naptan:NaptanCode=(whatever)
>>
>> If the bus stop type is not MKD I add
>>
>> naptan:BusStopType=(bus stop type)
>>
>> and if the status is not "act" I add
>>
>> naptan:Status=(status)
>>
>
> These tags all seem reasonable to import to me. Would be curious to learn
> more about your route maintenance process. I have a list of local bus route
> relations I've been meaning to update, but it's hard to do so without all
> of the stops mapped (hence my desire to import the available data).
>
>
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Bromsgrove meetup Pub

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Ewe & Lamb Stoke Heath for 8pm (south Bromsgrove)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/443974668#map=18/52.31191/-2.07669

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar Panels Q3 Project taster

[Brian Prangle]

Anther good source might be Aldi stores and distribution centres - see this
(old) news release from 2017
https://www.edie.net/news/6/Aldi-to-install-96-000-solar-panels-across-UK-stores-this-year/

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 at 23:07, SK53  wrote:

> I have set up a very small project  to map
> Solar panels in the Yorkshire colliery village of Rossington using the
> Swiss OSM instance of Tasking Manager. There are still 4 LSOAs which
> haven't been worked on yet: solar panel density is high & imagery good so
> this is a 'target-rich environment'.
>
> I plan to produce another similar task with around 50 LSOAs with a large
> number (50 or more) of solar panels for tomorrow. I hope to provide a
> reasonable spread across the country but all LSOAs will be urban. Also I'll
> expand on a couple of points in the instructions regarding search strategy
> & false positives.
>
> Depending on how useful people find these as a way of directing their
> mapping I hope to produce additional TM projects over the course of the
> quarter.
>
> Happy mapping,
>
> Jerry
> ___
> 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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] July Meetup

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone
This month we revert to our Trursday setup which is this week July 4th. As
part of our summer wanderings this month we're in Bromsgrove. Haven't had
time to select a pub yet so if anyone knows a good pub with decent food get
in touch. When we know where we're meeting I'll let you know but we'll meet
at 8 after the usual early evening mapping

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Adjacent nature reserves

[Brian Prangle]

I've changed this back to 3 reserves based on the unanimous opinion against
Martin's proposal. The whole area needs simplification to replace multiple
overlaid ways with multipolygon relations . I do have some knowledge of the
area having done 2 walking surveys there. There is also an SSSI  for part
of the site  which I'll need to work on further to see if and how it should
be mapped.

regards

Brian

On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 01:20, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 09/06/19 23:58, Martin Wynne wrote:
> >> we now have 2 natural=heaths named  as nature reserves and with
> >> operator tags but
> >> without nature reserve tags.
> >
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > But they are now nested within a larger area which does have a nature
> > reserve tag. Much of the publicity material for this area treats it as
> > a single nature reserve.
>
> But the nature reserveS have different names and ownership and should be
> tagged as such.
>
> The heath is the common aspect between the two yet this is where the
> names and ownership are applied? This is clearly tagging for the render.
>
> And it fails
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/query?lat=52.3600=-2.2836
> Results in the wood and the combined nature reserve ... but no idea of
> which nature reserve applies here.
>
>
> The two nature reserves should be separate entries as nature reserves -
> which is what they are. Truth in tagging should be applied.
>
>
> --- Quibble
> There is also the aspect that the heath has a wood in it .. yet the
> heath covers the wood. The heath should be a multipolygon relation with
> an inner for the wood
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Swift Payzones .

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

All the original swift collectors were mapped in collaboration  with TfWM.
They're tagged as per this example

amenity=vending_machine
category=Interchange
name=The Pavillions
operator=TfWM
payment=no
postal_code=B4 7SE
public_transport_ticket=Swift Card
source=TfWM;survey
top_up=yes
vending=public_transport_tickets

TfWM have shown no interest in maintaining this data in OpenStreetMap
despite repeated prompts from me,so as they've rolled out they haven't been
added.

Payzones - nothing done so far. Good luck with this - don't know how you'd
tag this - perhaps you'll just have to invent something- perhaps the
talk-transit mailing list might help

Regards

Brian

On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 17:09, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> In our collaboration with Centro/ TfWM, have we mapped any of the
> "Swift Payzones" (in shops; and kiosks in bus stations) and on-street
> "Swift Collectors"? [1]
>
> Neither of the two closest to my home seem to be mapped, and I'm
> looking for a model of best practice - though if we could get TfWM to
> add and maintain them, so much the better.
>
>
> [1] See: https://www.networkwesmidlands.com/swift/topping-up/
>
>
> --
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Snowdonia National Park missing?

[Brian Prangle]

That doesn't mean I understood it enough to have the confidence to tackle
such a task

On Tue, 18 Jun 2019, 21:29 Dave F via Talk-GB, 
wrote:

> I thought how to fix it was explained to you last time:
> http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=287245
>
> On 18/06/2019 20:23, Brian Prangle wrote:
>
> Hi everyone
>
> Probably a broken a relation. Beyond my skills to investigate and fix. Can
> someone suitably equipped please take a look?
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing 
> listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
> ___
> 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

[Talk-GB] Snowdonia National Park missing?

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Probably a broken a relation. Beyond my skills to investigate and fix. Can
someone suitably equipped please take a look?

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Saturday mapping event: 22 June in Wombourne

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

This month's monthly meeting will be on Saturday 22 June in order to give
us  most of the day to map Wombourne
 in
South Staffs. Pub meetup for lunch at 1pm at the Waggon and Horses
 which
is a canalside Banks's pub and looks like it has  good menu. Lots of gaps
to map, sparse level of detail - which is why we picked it of course.

Regards

Brian

On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 9:59 PM Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> We suggested a Saturday mapping event in June in Wombourne, Staffordshire.
> This will be on 22 June. Brian has kindly offered to pick a pub / cafe.
>
> P.S. I see this is the same date as the next Norwich meeting [1]. Given
> that this is quite a long trip for us (2hr 30min from Coventry, longer if
> starting from further away), I hope that this is not a conflict.
>
> [1]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2019-June/022994.html
>
> *Rob*
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Road junctions

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Rob

Replied in a similar vein to Gareth with a  reworked JOSM file for him to
study and/or upload

Regards

Brian

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 1:29 PM Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> I would put a lot less feeder roads in. How does it look if you only split
> the road when there is a physical object it needs to go around? For example
> don't split the left/right turn lanes when driving frm Technology Drive to
> Mill Road as there is no physical barrier between these lanes.
>
> If you'd like, I can have a go at mapping it how I would do it so that you
> can compare...let me know?
>
> *Rob*
>
>
> On Tue, 28 May 2019 at 23:53, Gareth L  wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Is there a nice example of mapping road junctions? Particularly ones that
>> are spread out?
>>
>> Basically, I’ve had a punt at mapping the junction between technology
>> drive and mill road in Rugby.
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.38125/-1.24981 It has all the
>> turn restrictions correct, and I’d expect it to route beautifully, but...
>> avoiding the mapping for the renderer pitfalls, it looks rather rough.
>>
>> My objective here was actually to allow myself to map the
>> pedestrian/cycle ways more clearly - especially the crossing islands - as
>> the crossing doesn’t clear right across the junction, just across the lane.
>> The issue is this large T junction is spread over a very large area of
>> asphalt with filter lanes etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> I guess my gripe is having a bunch of ways representing what is really a
>> field of asphalt. I’d welcome some advice on this, even if it’s “oh gads,
>> revert that to a simple T junction immediately”, although in that case I’d
>> really like to know the right way to do it, if such a thing exists.
>>
>>
>>
>> There’s substantial mapillary and google streetview imagery available of
>> this location if you want some context.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Gareth
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Mail  for
>> Windows 10
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Collaboration with Shire transport authorities followup

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone
Thanks to everyone who volunteered. We now have totoal coverage except for
Staffordshire north of Stafford and especially Stoke on Trent .

Maybe volunteers could feedback in about  3 months about what they were
asked to fix and how the collaboration went?

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

[Talk-GB] Collaboration with Shire transport authorities followup

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone
Thanks to everyone who volunteered. We now have totoal coverage except for
Staffordshire north of Stafford and especially Stoke on Trent .

Maybe volunteers could feedback in about  3 months about what they were
asked to fix and how the collaboration went?

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] River Rea, West of Kings Norton Park

[Brian Prangle]

delete the name on the tributary should do the trick

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:05 PM Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> Compare the tagging on:
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34080550
>
> and:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/591479120
>
> and ways upstream (west) of the latter.
>
> I think the former is a tributary, and the latter is the river proper.
> What needs to be changed?
>
> --
> 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

[Talk-GB] West Mids May meetup

[Brian Prangle]

 Hi everyone

Our May meeting is scheduled for Thursday this week and we're in Coventry
this month. Mapping first from whenever you can get there: we've chosen the
area around  Far Gosford Street
which looks in need of
improvement (lots of retail premises missing so fits in with our UK
Quarterly Project). So that we don't trip over each other and duplicate
effort let us know what you intend to do.If you've got another area of
Coventry you'd like to map that's OK too.
We'll meet for chat eats and drinks at the Botanist(not mapped yet!) in
Broadgate in the City Centre  from 8

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] OSM West Mids May meetup

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Our May meeting is scheduled for Thursday this week and we're in Coventry
this month. Mapping first from whenever you can get there: we've chosen the
area around  Far Gosford Street
which looks in need of
improvement (lots of retail premises missing so fits in with our UK
Quarterly Project). So that we don't trip over each other and duplicate
effort let us know what you intend to do.If you've got another area of
Coventry you'd like to map that's OK too.
We'll meet for chat eats and drinks at the Botanist(not mapped yet!) in
Broadgate in the City Centre  from 8

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Collaboration with shire tansport authorities

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Mainly for west mids mappers but cross-posted to talkgb for a wider
audience.

For some time I've collaborated with TfWM who make extensive use of
OpenStreetMap. Together we've refreshed the entire NapTAN dataset for the
West Midlands and we're engaged on an ongoing basis in solving data quality
issues where the OSM data throws up errors with their bus routeing software.
Word spreads and at a regional meeting of  shire transport authorities
there was a request for contact with local OSM volunteers in the following
areas:

Herefordshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Stoke, Telford, Warwickshire,
Worcestershire

If anyone wants to volunteer please get in touch with me and I can put you
in touch. It will mainly involve dealing with errors they spot such as
missing/wrong roadnames, missing/wrong roads. With TfWM there's been an
average of one of these week, sometimes bunched together followed by weeks
with nothing - so not a heavy workload and worth the effort to improve the
data.

If my experience is anything to go by, there'll be an initial peak and then
they'll realise, with a little prompting, it's easier and quicker to fix
the errors themselves. But it's good to have an initial period of
handholding as  I think they are respectful  of causing any damage

Regards


Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] A34 cycle route

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy  - a great improvement over on-road cycle lanes. Very safe but
dreary given the nature of the road and the traffic volume alongside. Not
much cycle traffic on it yet so uneducated pedestrians walking along it not
yet a problem. Where the cycle lane is furthest away from the road
pedestrians seem to prefer it as it makes them feel safer. It will be
interesting to see how much vehicles respect the give way signs where the
cycle lane crosses a road without a crosssing and indeed cyclisst where
they meet a give way sign onto a shared space. It will need regular
sweeping as it is already accumulating a layer of grit from the traffic on
the road.
The shared space around some bus stops and pedestrian crossings could get
interesting once cycle traffic builds up. Interesting to see traffic
signals and turn restrictions on a cycle route!

BTW thanks for all your work on HS2

Regards

Brian

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 11:04, Andy Robinson  wrote:

> Hi Brian,
>
> Great. As a cyclist what was your impression of the route?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 15 April 2019 19:52
> *To:* Andy Robinson
> *Cc:* Brian Prangle; OSM Group WM
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] A34 cycle route
>
>
>
> Hi Andy
>
>
>
> Just to make absolutley sure I cycled this route today and added/corrected
> detail and also took the opportunity to check upon the progress of the
> Commonwealth Games Athletes Village - the old BCU is completely demolished
> apart from the pub - maybe they're going to retain it as an example of
> English quaintness.
>
>
>
> The Bristol Road cycleway is way behind schedule but I've added an
> untagged way ready for the opening
>
>
>
> Rgds
>
>
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 08:37, Andy Robinson  wrote:
>
> Excellent, Cheers Brian.
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* Brian Prangle [mailto:br...@mappa-mercia.org]
> *Sent:* 09 April 2019 22:04
> *To:* Andy Robinson
> *Cc:* OSM Group WM
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] A34 cycle route
>
>
>
> All in hand I have surveyed most of it and added it as an untagged way
>
> I'll tag it tomorrow
>
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019, 21:15 Andy Robinson,  wrote:
>
> I see the new A34 cycle route is basically open. Looks like there is some
> mapping to do! Alas I can’t get onto it anytime soon.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy (now very definitely in Cheshire)
>
> ___
> 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
>
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] A34 cycle route

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

Just to make absolutley sure I cycled this route today and added/corrected
detail and also took the opportunity to check upon the progress of the
Commonwealth Games Athletes Village - the old BCU is completely demolished
apart from the pub - maybe they're going to retain it as an example of
English quaintness.

The Bristol Road cycleway is way behind schedule but I've added an untagged
way ready for the opening

Rgds

Brian

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 08:37, Andy Robinson  wrote:

> Excellent, Cheers Brian.
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* Brian Prangle [mailto:br...@mappa-mercia.org]
> *Sent:* 09 April 2019 22:04
> *To:* Andy Robinson
> *Cc:* OSM Group WM
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] A34 cycle route
>
>
>
> All in hand I have surveyed most of it and added it as an untagged way
>
> I'll tag it tomorrow
>
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019, 21:15 Andy Robinson,  wrote:
>
> I see the new A34 cycle route is basically open. Looks like there is some
> mapping to do! Alas I can’t get onto it anytime soon.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy (now very definitely in Cheshire)
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] A34 cycle route

[Brian Prangle]

All in hand I have surveyed most of it and added it as an untagged way
I'll tag it tomorrow

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019, 21:15 Andy Robinson,  wrote:

> I see the new A34 cycle route is basically open. Looks like there is some
> mapping to do! Alas I can’t get onto it anytime soon.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy (now very definitely in Cheshire)
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project Apr-Jun

[Brian Prangle]

An idea to increase a wider participation in our latest Quarterly Project

Using Pascal Neis's site Overview of OpenStreetMap Contributors aka Who's
around me? <http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/oooc?layers=B00FTT> and
zooming to the locality you're interested in and locating a suitable user (
preferably active recently) you could use the following template to
encourage wider participation in our quarterly project. It's obviously also
amendable for other "ghosts"

Thanks for your contribution to OpenStreetMap. Can I ask a small favour to
help improve our map? I'd like you check  a detail local to you : go to the
 bank  ENTER LOCATION HERE  which we have labelled as Lloyds TSB and find
out if it is now Lloyds or TSB (or indeed closed). You can edit the map
directly, leave a note on the main map on the OSM website or reply to this
email whichver is easiest for you. . This would greatly help our current
national Quarterly Project which is trying to get up to date with all the
name changes and closures on our High Streets. If you'd like to do more in
you locality for this project then details can be found here
<https://osm.mathmos.net/ghosts/>


If this finds traction then we would probably need to co-ordinate by
region/locality to prevent us from duplicating commuications  to users
which would only piss them off rather than encourage them


Regards


Brian

On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 13:56, Brian Prangle  wrote:

> Hi everyone
>
> Our current Quarterly Project -  using Food Hygiene Rating Standard data
> to improve addresses - ends today. We now have nearly 70,000 entities
> tagged with their fhrs:id identifier. During the quarter the addition of
> postcode data showed little sign of abating
> <https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/history/>.
>
> So we've had another productive Quarterly Project- thank you to everyone
> who contributed
>
> Our next Quartely Project continues the theme of addresses but from
> another angle. This quarter should see us address the issue of the major
> change under way on all our high streets as the retail sector continues its
> restructuring under the impact of online services
>
> The first priority should be to reduce the number of "Ghosts". Ghosts are
> businesses that no longer exist (e.g Toys R US, BHS) or have changed name
> due to merger or takeover or rebranding (e.g Lloyds TSB, Staples,
> Co-operative Pharmacies).
>
> A comprehensive list can be found here <https://osm.mathmos.net/ghosts/>.
>
>
> There are probably more announcements to be made to add to our work, as
> bank and atm networks continue to retract. This could be a good opportunity
> to build community links by contacting local mappers in areas that need
> some attention to their high streets, rather than armchairing the exercise.
>
> Of course  not all retail businesses on our High Streets are  chains so
> the project can be regarded as generally improving coverage  and detail
> of retail areas.
>
> Some other resources to help you
>
> Nameless shops and other POIs <https://osm.mathmos.net/nameless/>
>
> Survey Me! <https://osm.mathmos.net/survey/>
>
> We are also trying to get a StreetComplete instance set up to help with
> surveying/editing.  Adam  from the OSMUK Board is leading
> this initiative and is keen to get some assistance.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Brian
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

[Brian Prangle]

Given Stuart's professional knowledge in this area and the practice already
established by some of you to delete these I think their days are numbered.
Unless there's a huge protest to keep them I'll get started next week
In response to Andy's request sources for public transport applications
will include any site run  byTraveline  (just google travel line) or by the
major bus companies e.g Stagecoach, Arriva,Firstgroup, National Express, or
regional tansport bodies e.g tfwm,tfgm,wymetro or just google uk bus
journey planner. Or you could just use the fabulous(but unofficial)
bustimes.org
A related site  developed by Tom Forth
from ODI Leeds displays dat feeds on actual bus times

Regards

Brian

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 16:49, Ed Loach  wrote:

> The interactive map on the plusbus site, e.g.
> http://www.plusbus.info/clacton-on-s perhaps has a better display as it
> shows the individual stops and perhaps rather than having the area mapped
> we should add a naptan tag to the stop nodes (for signposted stops I tend
> to just add naptancode and atcocode for stops that are new since the
> original import, e.g.
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4942644320
>
> )
>
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> *From:* SK53 
> *Sent:* 04 April 2019 16:17
> *To:* Andy Townsend 
> *Cc:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data
>
>
>
> Like Andy I can find these useful, particularly as the ones on local PTE
> websites are very difficult to interpret. However, they suffer from the
> deficiencies of being a) unmaintained on OSM; b) not necessarily reflecting
> multiple bus pass zones; c) being fairly crude hulls of bus stops in the
> zone.
>
>
>
> I quickly made this comparison
>  between
> the NAPTAN pay_scale_area (plusbuszone) for Nottingham (orange) and two
> concave hulls calculated with different parameters in QGIS (cyan (0.2) and
> blue (0.15)). All Naptan stops have a field imported into OSM as
> naptan:PlusbusZoneRef, that for Nottingham being NTNG which is what I used
> to identify bus stops for calculating the area.
>
>
>
> Thus providing information is held on bus stops or (tram & train stops)
> for a given transport zone  these zones can be derived from other data in
> OSM, and indeed can be derived in such as way as to be more informative
> (e.g. excluding sea for coastal towns). It may be worth discussing other
> ways to store information about bus pass zones.
>
>
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 11:28, Andy Townsend  wrote:
>
> On 04/04/2019 11:05, Philip Barnes wrote:
> > I believe they were the zones covered by plusbus tickets.
> >
> I believe (and Stuart will know far more about this than me!) they
> predate the widescale adoption of PlusBus in the UK. Certainly when
> PlusBus was introduced in Chesterfield it didn't match the existing pay
> scale area, and since then neither current pay scale area (there is a
> small and a large one) operated by the local monopoly bus company
> matches the pay scale area that was in OSM before I deleted it.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Back in the day of the original NapPTAN import we imported pay scale areas
- tagged as public_transport=pay_scale_area. I don't know why we ever did
this - there's no evidence on the ground and it's highly unlikely that any
OSM data consumer makes use of them ( if indeed they are still current).
The information is better in public_transport applications run by public
transport bodies

So I'm proposing that they are all deleted

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] April 4 - Meeting in Alcester

[Brian Prangle]

See you there- I'll do a Waylens OpenStreetCam survey of the major roads
and add names to the bdgs in Arden Industrial Estate. I'll try to populate
more bdgs by armchair in the meantime - all assistance greatly appreciated
in this regard  Rgds Brian

On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 13:56, Rob Nickerson 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As you will know from Brian's "Summer programme of meetings" email, we are
> heading to Alcester, Warwickshire, this Thursday.
>
> Plenty of pub options in the high street. I suggest we meet at the Turks
> Head between 7:30 and 8:00 after an afternoon/evening of mapping the town.
>
> In regards to mapping, there is plenty to do. I have traced buildings
> which are missing address data, there are more buildings to add. The high
> street and industrial estate were last surveyed a few years ago so likely
> to be some updates needed there too.
>
> I hope to see you there.
>
> *Rob*
> ___
> 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

[Talk-GB] Quarterly Project Apr-Jun

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

Our current Quarterly Project -  using Food Hygiene Rating Standard data to
improve addresses - ends today. We now have nearly 70,000 entities tagged
with their fhrs:id identifier. During the quarter the addition of postcode
data showed little sign of abating
.

So we've had another productive Quarterly Project- thank you to everyone
who contributed

Our next Quartely Project continues the theme of addresses but from another
angle. This quarter should see us address the issue of the major change
under way on all our high streets as the retail sector continues its
restructuring
under the impact of online services

The first priority should be to reduce the number of "Ghosts". Ghosts are
businesses that no longer exist (e.g Toys R US, BHS) or have changed name
due to merger or takeover or rebranding (e.g Lloyds TSB, Staples,
Co-operative Pharmacies).

A comprehensive list can be found here .

There are probably more announcements to be made to add to our work, as
bank and atm networks continue to retract. This could be a good opportunity
to build community links by contacting local mappers in areas that need
some attention to their high streets, rather than armchairing the exercise.

Of course  not all retail businesses on our High Streets are  chains so the
project can be regarded as generally improving coverage  and detail of
retail areas.

Some other resources to help you

Nameless shops and other POIs 

Survey Me! 

We are also trying to get a StreetComplete instance set up to help with
surveying/editing.  Adam  from the OSMUK Board is leading
this initiative and is keen to get some assistance.


Regards


Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Summer programme of meetings

[Brian Prangle]

As usual we travel around the region in the summer, improving the map away
from our usual haunts.

April-  usual evening - Alcester- Rob to find a pub
May - usual evening - Coventry - Rob to pick an area
June - Saturday TBA - Wombourne
July- usual evening- Bromsgrove
Aug- Saturday TBA- Southam
Sep - usual evening- Droitwich
Oct - Saturday TBA - joint visit to Rugby and a catchup for Houlton New Town

The usual evening is the first Thursday in the month

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Measuring building height

[Brian Prangle]

There are also theodolite apps for smartphones

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019, 00:17 Rob Nickerson,  wrote:

> For building heights why not try using a laser measure? Those with a
> Pythagoras Measurement mode should automate the calculations for you.
>
> Price has fallen a lot over the years. Seems like even a basic £30 device
> is sufficient.
>
> Best regards,
> Rob
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Invalid building levels and building (part) height license compatibility

[Brian Prangle]

Try this site
:
origin of building height data is Environment Agency LIDAR data under OGL

Regards

Brian

On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 at 19:20, Neil Matthews  wrote:

> Anyone mapping in Manchester might want to take a look for strange
> fractional building:levels.
>
> It's possible that some commercial editors found that they got better
> results with open source 3D renderers by using ~0.75 per building level,
> rather than the documented value of 1.
> We recently had a spate of strange edits around Aztec West -- with some
> 1-level mobile homes being labelled as 1.5 (presumably thought they were
> a "scaled" two storey house when satellite mapping).
>
> On a similar vein, what are acceptable data sources for building:height
> -- and how far should one ask for proof that these haven't come from a
> source that would be problematic to OpenStreetmap?
>
> Cheers,
> Neil
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

[Talk-GB] Lake District NationalPark

[Brian Prangle]

Can someone take a look at this relation? It doesn't seem to be rendering
on the main map

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map new housing?

[Brian Prangle]

Whilst being immensely useful, Planning Applications are usually heavily
annotated as Copyright,  both Crown Copyright and Developer Copyright- so
even if the developer gives you permission you're still lumbered with OS
encumbrance

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 11:24, Lester Caine  wrote:

> On 08/03/2019 10:35, Dave Abbott wrote:
> > I'm quite new to OSM, and am wondering how I might go about mapping new
> > housing plots in my area.
> >
> > In general, there is nothing on the imagery - I know I can walk the new
> > streets and map them with GPS - but how to go about mapping the new
> > buildings?
> >
> > Is there a guide I can look at?
>
> One source of information that I use is the planning application.
> Although it may also be necessary to ask the builders if you can use it
> directly. It's a useful background on josm ... when combined with a GPS
> walk around.
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -
> Contact - https://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - https://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.co.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Fw: Road name contradictions in the UK

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Andy

Try  OS  Open Roads


On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 10:16, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 07/03/2019 13:56, Gregory Marler wrote:
> > 1) Can you elaborate on the source(s) of suspected road names?
> > 2) It would helpful if each of us could look at your list in a more
> > localised aspect. Either including county would be more helpful, or at
> > least having latitude and longitude in separate columns makes it
> > easier to use in other tools usually.
> > 3) There's some obvious reasons why some of those aren't in OSM just
> > by looking at the first 5.
> > 3a) One was on a caravan park, so it might not have an official name
> > or even a sign (again I would like to question the source).
> > 3b) A way was about 3 metres to connect one road to another, it's
> > debatable whether it should be named itself but could be fixed without
> > a survey.
> > 3c) There are lots of abbreviated names in your spreadsheet, even
> > "Clos" which I presume is a strange shortening of "Close".
> >
> > A Maproulette challenge might tempt people to copy the names from your
> > spreadsheet (the legality and suitability of that is very unknown!).
> >
> +1 to all of that.  Without knowing the source of these names any
> spreadsheet containing "missing names" is going to be very
> problematical.  If a missing name isn't signed on the ground, then
> what?  If an unsigned name's "correct" (e.g. it's available from OS
> OpenData or another similarly admissible source) I'd typically add it
> and then add "name:signed=no" to indicate that it's not useful for
> giving directions.  In this case we've got a list of names which mostly
> probably won't be signed on the road (caravan parks, buildings, etc.)
>
> OS Locator is/was a good source of those missing names, as shown in
> "Musical Chairs" here:
>
>
> https://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/map?zoom=16=53.19551=-1.38645=B0TT_mode=pseudorandom
>
> but as the OS have been playing "musical chairs" with their open data
> offerings it may be that there isn't a more recent open OS source (that
> example shows some missing new build roads).
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map new housing?

[Brian Prangle]

If you've got no imagery - basically you're stuffed for building outlines
except for guesswork ( I tag these as "visual estimate" - sound a bit
better). Digital Globe Imagery tends to have more new housing estates than
other imagery sets .If you've surveyed an area just add address nodes

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 10:37, Dave Abbott 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm quite new to OSM, and am wondering how I might go about mapping new
> housing plots in my area.
>
> In general, there is nothing on the imagery - I know I can walk the new
> streets and map them with GPS - but how to go about mapping the new
> buildings?
>
> Is there a guide I can look at?
>
> TIA,
>
> Dave Abbott
>
> ___
> 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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] March Meeting

[Brian Prangle]

Hi everyone

This Thursday 7 March is our scheduled date for our monthly meeting. I've
checked that the Bull has re-opened so see you there at about 730

Regards

Brian
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] BT phoneboxes

[Brian Prangle]

OSMUK chapter currently has a csv file of all the Inlink locations,
supplied by Inlink but the licence is incompatible and we are currently in
discussion with them. However perhaps Rober Whitaker might be able to
produe a map similar to the one for Royal Mail  postboxes where the
copyright is acknowledged and there is a heavy disclaimer that the map is a
guide to locating items for a ground survey and the data mus not  be copied
per se into OSM. BT were unwilling to supply either the locationsof the
Inlink replacements or a schedule of closures of current phoneboxes

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 at 16:48, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 at 17:48, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>
> > BT are planning to remove thousands of phoneboxes, many of
> > which we will have mapped.I understand that for every two they
> > remove they will be installing one  InLink
> >
> > These street "pods" have free wifi, free calls, free device charging  and
> > an information tablet: all financed by the inbuilt advertising screens.
>
> There's some controversy about these InLink devices:
>
>https://www.adrianshort.org/posts/2019/bt-inlink-permitted-development/
>
> and Adrian Short has compiled a list of related planning applications,
> which may be useful for folk wanting to find examples to map:
>
>https://kiosks.adrianshort.org/
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] BT phoneboxes

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Jez

I've tagged a couple with amenity=telephone,  advertising=screen,
wifi=free, device_charging=usb, operator=InLink BT

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 at 09:48, Jez Nicholson  wrote:

> Going back to this January discussion, has anyone tagged a kiosk/pod yet?
> what would you tag it if it isn't a
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dtelephone any more?
>
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:56 PM Adam Snape  wrote:
>
>> On 4 January 2018 at 17:26, Andrew Black 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Do we know what a proportion are going to be left.  Is it going to be
>>> close to none.
>>>
>>
>> About half: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40934210
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] We're missing changes to M1 Junction 36 which have apparently been in place for a year.

[Brian Prangle]

OS OpenRoads is also good for missing road names especially on new housing
developments. I've looked at Highways England  Delivery Plans 2018-19

where Annex 1 lists 108 road improvements either completed, underway or
planned. Perhap we could use that as  a checklist to see if there are any
other  missing  examples like M1J36.

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 16:08, SK53  wrote:

> Hi Paul,
>
> Proper survey is of course best.
>
> I think that there's quite a lot more to sort out. For instance the most
> northerly link road coming off the M1 roundabout looks odd (I wonder if
> it's actually a new alignment), and I think the middle roundabout is a
> different shape now. According to Nick's MapthePaths site (which
> incidentally also uses newer OS raster data) there are quite a few missing
> PRoW in the area too.
>
> I've just added the petrol station by the pub at Cross Keys Lane (its
> referred to in FHRS, Navads & in the bus stop data).
>
> I'm currently looking at the OS OpenRoads shapefiles with a view to
> perhaps using them to spot missing roads.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 15:11, Paul Berry  wrote:
>
>> Jerry,
>>
>> No worries. I think I'll still pop down for a survey anyway because I now
>> want to try the GPS + car trick and see how it turns out. We'll compare
>> changesets later :)
>>
>> Regards,
>> *Paul*
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 13:45, SK53  wrote:
>>
>>> Must say I feel a bit of a twit now; and perhaps I've saved Paul a
>>> journey.
>>>
>>> OS Local Open Data, of course, has at least some of these roads, I have
>>> added  the link from
>>> near Cross Keys Lane to the Rockingham Roundabout using the version I
>>> downloaded in October.
>>>
>>> I'm obviously not the only person who forgets about these sources of
>>> open data. I suspect that because they are not visible in the same way as
>>> OS StreetView & Locator  that they get neglected. We could really do with
>>> an imagery layer based on OS OpenData Local.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>>
>>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 11:07, Paul Berry  wrote:
>>>
 OK, I'll give that a try this week and see how the GPS traces come out.

 Regards,
 *Paul*

 On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 10:31, John Aldridge  wrote:

> On 11-Feb-19 09:37, Paul Berry wrote:
> > However I'm not overly keen on attempting to map the confluence
> > of four major roads on foot.
> >
> > What have others done in similar circumstances?
> Driving round the roads with a GPSr in the car should get good enough
> data to be going on with.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> John
>
> ___
> 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

>>> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] We're missing changes to M1 Junction 36 which have apparently been in place for a year.

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Jerry

OS Open Roads is a better source - I've added the remainder  - still some
surveying to do though - like positioning the traffic signals

Regards

Brian

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 13:45, SK53  wrote:

> Must say I feel a bit of a twit now; and perhaps I've saved Paul a journey.
>
> OS Local Open Data, of course, has at least some of these roads, I have
> added  the link from
> near Cross Keys Lane to the Rockingham Roundabout using the version I
> downloaded in October.
>
> I'm obviously not the only person who forgets about these sources of open
> data. I suspect that because they are not visible in the same way as OS
> StreetView & Locator  that they get neglected. We could really do with an
> imagery layer based on OS OpenData Local.
>
> HTH,
>
> Jerry
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 11:07, Paul Berry  wrote:
>
>> OK, I'll give that a try this week and see how the GPS traces come out.
>>
>> Regards,
>> *Paul*
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 10:31, John Aldridge  wrote:
>>
>>> On 11-Feb-19 09:37, Paul Berry wrote:
>>> > However I'm not overly keen on attempting to map the confluence
>>> > of four major roads on foot.
>>> >
>>> > What have others done in similar circumstances?
>>> Driving round the roads with a GPSr in the car should get good enough
>>> data to be going on with.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> John
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] We're missing changes to M1 Junction 36 which have apparently been in place for a year.

[Brian Prangle]

Hi Jerry

You've spotted a major omission!  You can see  the road layout in
Sentinel-2  Satellite Imagery ( if you've got good eyes - resolution is
pretty poor). But you've raised a much wider question. I've always felt
that we kind o f owe it to people who have bothered to alert us to errors
via notes to fix them as quickly as we can ( and encourage them to enter
more notes). However notes are undifferentiated as to what is major what is
old etc which makes "patrolling" notes irksome. and so we fail to respond
adequately I feel we need something a little more organised and the UK
chapter has had a plan for a notes application
 to help with this
but just doesn't have the resources in terms of time to complete it. Any
help appreciated from teh UK community. Other ideas might be to have a
future Quarterly Project deveoted to clearing up notes, and to have
designated  "patrol" areas where OSMers check for major errors and we have
a an alert mechanism.
I'll contact  Amazon Logistics offlist to see if they can resolve this

Regards

Brian

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 at 10:41, SK53  wrote:

> * A message on the forum points out that the roads immediately to the east
> of Junction 36 have been substantially altered:
> https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=65350
>
> * There is a note dating back over a year too:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1221610#map=15/53.4976/-1.4580=N
>
> Aerial imagery, GPS traces, and ImproveOSM do not seem to offer any help.
> There are however traces on the Strava layers, but these are no longer
> suitable for making edits directly.
>
> I'm a bit surprised this hasn't been picked up the Amazon Logistics
> editors as I would have thought this would be relevant to them.
>
> Jerry
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Driving Test Centres

[Brian Prangle]

You might want to add operator=DVSA. I tag them like Tony too

On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 at 23:04, Silent Spike  wrote:

> Thanks Tony, as the only reply here so far I've followed your approach.
>
> Could be valuable in future to develop a tagging scheme for these centres
> as they each do testing for different types of license, etc.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 9:47 AM Tony Shield 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Had same problem earlier. I gave a node (5490954973) within the
>> building=office outline
>>
>> office=government
>>
>> name=Chorley Driving Test Centre
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> TonyS999
>> On 25/01/2019 22:06, Silent Spike wrote:
>>
>> Searching the wiki I can't find anything that feels right for mapping
>> driving test centres.
>>
>> If anyone has mapped these in the past I'd be curious to know how you
>> tagged them (both practical and theory test centres).
>>
>> Also curious as to how they've been named (if at all) as the DVSA just
>> refers to them by where they are located.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing 
>> listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] OS National Grid References

[Brian Prangle]

Thanks for your knowledgeable replies which reassure me that grid refs are
not copyright, but the 1995 court case is still perplexing. My source was a
news item from the Guardian and I can't find any accessible online source
which has the legal argument and details of the case. Does anyone know any
more about this case? Perhaps I should ask OS.

Regards

Brian

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 23:53, SK53  wrote:

> As virtually every biological recording scheme has used National Grid
> references extensively since the early 1960s , and OSGB have not (yet) sued
> me for my user name, I think you can take that this is pretty much a dead
> letter.
>
> I can also cite Constable walking guides from the 1970s.
>
> Any attempt by OSGB to enforce copyright would undoubtedly be
> self-defeating, so I cant see them doing it.
>
> Jerry
>
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 16:21, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>
>> Are these covered by copyright? I've found conflicting opinions:
>>
>> out of copyright in 1986 - since it was 50 years since the introduction
>> of the NG in 1936
>>
>> and
>>
>> "current case law supports this ownership, given in Ordnance Survey vs
>> Younger and others (Ch 10 April 1995), in which Sir Jeremy Vinelott,
>> sitting as a Judge of the High Court, ruled that "OS copyright material
>> includes the National Grid" and that "the OS retain the right to refuse to
>> allow ... [someone] ... to use the National Grid", a right taken up in that
>> case. "
>>
>> Can anyone shed any light on this?
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Brian
>> ___
>> 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

[Talk-GB] OS National Grid References

[Brian Prangle]

Are these covered by copyright? I've found conflicting opinions:

out of copyright in 1986 - since it was 50 years since the introduction of
the NG in 1936

and

"current case law supports this ownership, given in Ordnance Survey vs
Younger and others (Ch 10 April 1995), in which Sir Jeremy Vinelott,
sitting as a Judge of the High Court, ruled that "OS copyright material
includes the National Grid" and that "the OS retain the right to refuse to
allow ... [someone] ... to use the National Grid", a right taken up in that
case. "

Can anyone shed any light on this?

regards

Brian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb