Re: [Talk-GB] Propose automated edit to update NAPTAN data in the west mids

2017-02-05 Thread Stuart Reynolds
Hi Matthijs, Wherever possible the names in NaPTAN should match what is on the flag or shelter. There are however some instances where this is not possible or desirable. For instance, the stop might carry a historic name such as for a long closed pub which has been updated in data but not on

Re: [Talk-GB] Propose automated edit to update NAPTAN data in the west mids

2017-02-05 Thread Matthijs Melissen
On 3 February 2017 at 19:29, Stuart Reynolds < stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk> wrote: > Also, there is often some confusion about what name goes into which fields > - people will insist on compounding names, for example, because that’s what > their consuming system wants, rather than getting

Re: [Talk-GB] Propose automated edit to update NAPTAN data in the west mids

2017-02-05 Thread Matthijs Melissen
Hi Brian, Great to see this going forward! Some technicalities: > Process overview This is not very clear to me. I think this section either needs more detail, or less (with the detail moved to the individual steps). Also, what do you mean with opening a csv in JOSM? > Each chunk will create a

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

2017-02-05 Thread SK53
Hi Rob, I actually had the impenetrable barrier case 3 weeks ago: a stile deep in a hedge & no sign of any path on the other side. It is in Leics CC data & a path is shown on old 1:25k maps, so again I've added it without any highway tag. In Carmarthenshire the state of the paths was such that

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

2017-02-05 Thread Rob
Thanks to Colin and Jerry for your responses. Although I understand and agree with what you're saying Colin, I probably didn't make it clear enough in my attempt to be concise that it's the representation on OSM that I've got queries about as I'm fairly au fait with the law on this. I'll

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

2017-02-05 Thread SK53
Hi Rob, Generally the ideal is a path followed & mapped as it appears on the ground, with the status (designation) of the path based on waymarkers and fingerposts. This will inevitably mean that in places the mapped path does not follow the line shown on the definitive map: most usually because

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

2017-02-05 Thread Rob
Hi, I've just read Colin's reply again - more thoroughly this time! I should have made it clear that I was thinking of paths where there's only a slight discrepancy - up to 40m say. For example where there's no longer a stile through a hedge because everyone heads for the nearest gate. Or

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

2017-02-05 Thread Rob
Hi, I'm a relative newcomer to contributing to OSM but trying to get to grips as quickly as possible with the consensus on various topics, one of which is PROWs. The emails below raise questions I've had for a while. I'm hoping for guidance as paths can include these two types: 1. Definitive

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

2017-02-05 Thread Colin Smale
My understanding is that the definitive data held by the appropriate local authority is exactly that, definitive. There may be legitimate errors in there of course, but where a path has been willfully and legally rerouted, that is a different type of error - lack of currency, i.e. an order has

[Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

2017-02-05 Thread Dave F
Hi If you're using local authority data/os open data to map paths, as a contributor current is in Somerset, please don't assume their layout corresponds with what's on the ground or is more accurate than what's mapped in OSM. These official ways are often outdated, being based on redundant