On 19/07/2019 16:43, Lester Caine wrote:
> That it is not now a 'preferred route' is a problem, which in practice
> was screwed up by giving it the A5191 designation in the first place,
This does make me wonder how other sat-nav providers handle this road.
In any case, I wonder if this section
19 Jul 2019, 13:55 by for...@david-woolley.me.uk:
> I think mapping it in conflict with a published official designation will
> devalue OSM.
>
Not sure is it happening in UK but Poland has some private driveways that
are officially assigned status of major road ("droga krajowa").
There is also
On 19/07/2019 18:05, David Woolley wrote:
On 19/07/2019 15:37, Mark Goodge wrote:
There are, though, two potentially useful open data coordinate mapping
systems that can be used by the likes of OSM. One is Mapcode, the
other is Google's Open Location Code (aka Plus Codes). Both have the
On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 07:06 -0700, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Tom Hughes wrote:
> > That doesn't follow - in the UK we have always (with very rare
> > exceptions like Oxford High Street) mapped secondary, primary
> > and trunk to the official status of the road.
>
> It's slightly more nuanced
On 19/07/2019 15:37, Mark Goodge wrote:
There are, though, two potentially useful open data coordinate mapping
systems that can be used by the likes of OSM. One is Mapcode, the other
is Google's Open Location Code (aka Plus Codes). Both have the advantage
of not only being entirely free and
On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 16:43 +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 19/07/2019 16:04, Philip Barnes wrote:
> > As the sabristi have already discovered this one, and the OSM edits
> > appear linked to Sabre Wiki edits, I will identify it.
> >
> > In this case I am concentrating on A5191 (Coleham Head,
On 19/07/2019 16:04, Philip Barnes wrote:
As the sabristi have already discovered this one, and the OSM edits
appear linked to Sabre Wiki edits, I will identify it.
In this case I am concentrating on A5191 (Coleham Head, Belle Vue Road,
Hereford
On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 15:06 +0100, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 19/07/2019 14:17, David Woolley wrote:
> > On 19/07/2019 13:37, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > > > I would say the logical consequence of that argument is that no
> > > > road
> > > > should be mapped as tertiary, as, unless taken from OS, it is
>
On 19/07/2019 13:50, Andy G Wood wrote:
On Friday, 19 July 2019 13:30:48 BST Martin Wynne wrote:
On 19/07/2019 12:55, David Woolley wrote:
...
(As a variation on the last point, one of my pet hates, these days, is
how few houses now have house numbers in the UK. It make it difficult
to
On 19/07/2019 15:14, David Woolley wrote:
The logical consequence of ignoring the official classification if it is
not signposted, is that you cannot map tertiary, because with, very rare
exceptions, they are not signposted and you can only distinguish them
from residential by using the
On 19/07/2019 15:06, Tom Hughes wrote:
You then followed up by saying that the logical consequence
of it being a primary (which I was assuming was correct) was
that nothing was tertiary, which didn't seem to make much
sense to me
The logical consequence of ignoring the official classification
On 19/07/2019 14:17, David Woolley wrote:
On 19/07/2019 13:37, Tom Hughes wrote:
I would say the logical consequence of that argument is that no road
should be mapped as tertiary, as, unless taken from OS, it is a
subjective judgement and can't be consistently verified.
That doesn't follow -
Tom Hughes wrote:
> That doesn't follow - in the UK we have always (with very rare
> exceptions like Oxford High Street) mapped secondary, primary
> and trunk to the official status of the road.
It's slightly more nuanced than that - we have always mapped secondary,
primary and trunk to the
On 19/07/2019 13:37, Tom Hughes wrote:
I would say the logical consequence of that argument is that no road
should be mapped as tertiary, as, unless taken from OS, it is a
subjective judgement and can't be consistently verified.
That doesn't follow - in the UK we have always (with very rare
On 19/07/2019 13:37, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 19/07/2019 12:55, David Woolley wrote:
On 19/07/2019 12:36, Philip Barnes wrote:
I cannot dispute this is legally a primary, OS Opendata shows it.
I would say the logical consequence of that argument is that no road
should be mapped as tertiary, as,
On Friday, 19 July 2019 13:30:48 BST Martin Wynne wrote:
> On 19/07/2019 12:55, David Woolley wrote:
> ...
>
> > (As a variation on the last point, one of my pet hates, these days, is
> > how few houses now have house numbers in the UK. It make it difficult
> > to give accurate locations for fly
On 19/07/2019 12:55, David Woolley wrote:
On 19/07/2019 12:36, Philip Barnes wrote:
I cannot dispute this is legally a primary, OS Opendata shows it.
I would say the logical consequence of that argument is that no road
should be mapped as tertiary, as, unless taken from OS, it is a
On 19/07/2019 12:55, David Woolley wrote:
...
(As a variation on the last point, one of my pet hates, these days, is
how few houses now have house numbers in the UK. It make it difficult
to give accurate locations for fly tips
Have you seen: https://what3words.com/
Every 3m (10ft) square on
On 19/07/2019 12:36, Philip Barnes wrote:
I cannot dispute this is legally a primary, OS Opendata shows it.
I would say the logical consequence of that argument is that no road
should be mapped as tertiary, as, unless taken from OS, it is a
subjective judgement and can't be consistently
I have always held the view that the great strength of OSM is boots on
the ground and mapping what we see is always better than other sources.
I currently have a dispute with a remote mapper who is upgrading
tertiary roads to primary.
In the case of one I see a quiet tertiary road, with no
20 matches
Mail list logo
