Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
Couple of comments on this in addition to the responses by others. 1. The definitive information is not always on a map. For instance, local footpath rights of way can be found in text form in many libraries. Its pretty easy to then correlate the description information with a walk of a particular path. Don't be surprised to find there are mismatches. 2. Although local authorities are responsible for maintaining public footpaths not all treat them in the same way. I know for a fact that the OS does not survey footpath changes outside of urban areas, so again the definitive information will be with the LA, and it might be in text form or it might be on an OS map (or both). My best advice is to pop into your local library first and see what they have. Their docs may be a bit out of date but is a good and easy place to start and you can always go back to the LA with any queries. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Ian Spencer Sent: 11 May 2010 10:55 AM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source (Newbie alert!!) I suspect this has been discussed before, but it seems to me that there is a big hole in open source mapping, and that is getting hold of definitive maps in electronic form to be able to document them. I presume that the definitive map is a public document that should be freely available. (???!!!) What I am interested in is the gaps between the footpaths people recognise and those which are registered on the definitive lists as there is a deadline in around 10 years for getting missing paths registered. I know local authorities are responsible for the definitive maps in their areas. Is it practical to contact the LAs and get definitive maps in electronic form, or is there a central source (knowing that OS have not released this). If there is a problem, is there an opportunity to work with the Ramblers Assoc to get definitive way mapping released? I've read the tagging controversy and it seems there is a lack of finality on tagging - is there anyone trying to resolve this? In the end, only the OS maps seem to have legal status, but they aren't releasing footpaths :( Anyway, just off for some Coast to Coast cycling... Cheers! Spenny No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2868 - Release Date: 05/11/10 19:40:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
Robert Whittaker (OSM Talk GB) Sent: 11 May 2010 11:43 PM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source On 11 May 2010 21:30, martyn i...@dynoyo.plus.com wrote: In Hertfordshire, East Herts publish maps that are drawn on top of an OS layer. But for each parish, they also publish a text description of each numbered right of way, last updated in 2006. Useful as not all real-world physical signs have the number. So using that with the NPE layer in Potlatch it should be possible to check and reconstruct the present ROWs. Anyone see any problems with this method? If the textural descriptions (known as the Definitive Statement) have been written in part by someone looking at the maps (rather than just looking at the ground) then there is argument that they too are a derivative work of the OS maps, and hence contain IP rights belonging to OS. Having read quite a few of these I've yet to see any real evidence that the statement has been prepared from a map. Each time I've looked that them to me the read the other way around, that someone has translated the statement onto the map. The reason I say this is because sometimes the maps miss some of the subtle detail described in the statement. Bearing in mind that the statements form part of the legal paper chase between the LA and the landowner and lawyers always tend to work with words, I'm confident that statements dont include OS data. I also consider statements fair game, and have added all the footpath referencing for my local area by reference to them, though for the route on the ground I only trust the GPS and the physical way marked or trodden route. I don't know exactly what copyright protects, so wouldn't like to comment on whether or not the argument is valid. But without expert legal advice, I don't think it's a risk OSM should take. On the bright side though, I thought part of the result of the OS consultation was that they would look to clarify the rules on derived data. In particular, this may help with respect to PRoW data. Another avenue in the mean time would be to get copies of the definitive map and statement as they were 50 years ago (for which crown copyright will have expired), and also a list of paths that have been modified since (modification orders are hard to get, so there may not be that many). We can then get definitive information on most of the current public rights of way. My local library has the definitive statements in the one book, with subsequent versions over the ages added into the binding. So as you say its easy to compare what the statement says 50+ years ago and the changes that have occurred periodically with time. Updates in my area seem to be about every 20 years or so. Cheers Andy -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2868 - Release Date: 05/11/10 19:40:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
James Davis wrote on 12/05/2010 10:05: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: My local library has the definitive statements in the one book, with subsequent versions over the ages added into the binding. So as you say its easy to compare what the statement says 50+ years ago and the changes that have occurred periodically with time. Updates in my area seem to be about every 20 years or so. This looks like it varies a lot by area. I recently went to view the definitive map for our area and it was a bit of a mishmash. Everything is currently on paper, with no electronic records at all and I'm not at all convinced that there's any clear separation between data that belongs to the OS and data that belongs to the local authority. I spotted no differences between the data on the definitive map and the latest OS mapping of the area, but there are still plenty of inconsistencies to be found: - I've found rights of way referred to in other council documents that aren't marked on either. - I've found accessible and open footpaths that clearly at some stage, by their construction, were being maintained by the local authority but aren't recorded. - I've found rights of way that terminate at a parish boundary, with the physical track on the ground continuing and being open to users, but with no records of where the right of way disappeared to. Having access to the prow data would be great but I'm no longer convinced by it's definitiveness :) James _ Having done a little more background reading it strikes me that OSM and public involvement might be the solution that the Rights of Way review is looking for. The 2026 cut off date for the footpath review is on hold as basically the government department gave up trying to rationalise the pre-1949 paths and they are going to report back at some point. In other words, I think it has dawned on the Government that it is not convinced by its definitiveness either, James Ian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
(Newbie alert!!) I suspect this has been discussed before, but it seems to me that there is a big hole in open source mapping, and that is getting hold of definitive maps in electronic form to be able to document them. I presume that the definitive map is a public document that should be freely available. (???!!!) What I am interested in is the gaps between the footpaths people recognise and those which are registered on the definitive lists as there is a deadline in around 10 years for getting missing paths registered. I know local authorities are responsible for the definitive maps in their areas. Is it practical to contact the LAs and get definitive maps in electronic form, or is there a central source (knowing that OS have not released this). If there is a problem, is there an opportunity to work with the Ramblers Assoc to get definitive way mapping released? I've read the tagging "controversy" and it seems there is a lack of finality on tagging - is there anyone trying to resolve this? In the end, only the OS maps seem to have legal status, but they aren't releasing footpaths :( Anyway, just off for some Coast to Coast cycling... Cheers! Spenny ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
(Newbie alert!! - another try without the HTML setting) I suspect this has been discussed before, but it seems to me that there is a big hole in open source mapping, and that is getting hold of definitive maps in electronic form to be able to document them. I presume that the definitive map is a public document that should be freely available. (???!!!) What I am interested in is the gaps between the footpaths people recognise and those which are registered on the definitive lists as there is a deadline in around 10 years for getting missing paths registered. I know local authorities are responsible for the definitive maps in their areas. Is it practical to contact the LAs and get definitive maps in electronic form, or is there a central source (knowing that OS have not released this). If there is a problem, is there an opportunity to work with the Ramblers Assoc to get definitive way mapping released? I've read the tagging controversy and it seems there is a lack of finality on tagging - is there anyone trying to resolve this? In the end, only the OS maps seem to have legal status, but they aren't releasing footpaths :( Anyway, just off for some Coast to Coast cycling... Cheers! Spenny ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
On 11/05/10 11:22, Ian Spencer wrote: I presume that the definitive map is a public document that should be freely available. (???!!!) You assume wrongly. Well sort of - you have a right to inspect it but that doesn't mean you have a right to copy things from it. The main problem is that definitive maps are drawn over OS maps and are therefore considered (by OS at least) to be derived from their mapping and hence local authorities are unable to give permission to copy from them even if they wanted to. The issue of OS derived data is supposed to be getting cleared up, but for now it is still a problem. I know local authorities are responsible for the definitive maps in their areas. Is it practical to contact the LAs and get definitive maps in electronic form, or is there a central source (knowing that OS have not released this). If there is a problem, is there an opportunity to work with the Ramblers Assoc to get definitive way mapping released? I suspect in most cases the definitive version of the definitive map is on paper so getting hold of the data electronically may be hard/impossible. That's not to say that the data may not be in the council's GIS system but simply that if you exercise your right to view it then you're likely to be shown a paper version. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
OK. Thanks for the correction. I guess after that hullabaloo down South settles down, the thing to do is to get my local friendly MP to table a question on this and see where that leads. you'd hope it'd be a fairly open door, as it should not need the underlying mapping released and public scrutiny of definitive ways is essential under the current legislation. I'll pop a question to the Ramblers and see where they have got to. Ian Tom Hughes wrote on 11/05/2010 11:29: On 11/05/10 11:22, Ian Spencer wrote: I presume that the definitive map is a public document that should be freely available. (???!!!) You assume wrongly. Well sort of - you have a right to inspect it but that doesn't mean you have a right to copy things from it. The main problem is that definitive maps are drawn over OS maps and are therefore considered (by OS at least) to be derived from their mapping and hence local authorities are unable to give permission to copy from them even if they wanted to. The issue of OS derived data is supposed to be getting cleared up, but for now it is still a problem. I know local authorities are responsible for the definitive maps in their areas. Is it practical to contact the LAs and get definitive maps in electronic form, or is there a central source (knowing that OS have not released this). If there is a problem, is there an opportunity to work with the Ramblers Assoc to get definitive way mapping released? I suspect in most cases the definitive version of the definitive map is on paper so getting hold of the data electronically may be hard/impossible. That's not to say that the data may not be in the council's GIS system but simply that if you exercise your right to view it then you're likely to be shown a paper version. Tom ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
On 11/05/10 11:39, Ian Spencer wrote: OK. Thanks for the correction. I guess after that hullabaloo down South settles down, the thing to do is to get my local friendly MP to table a question on this and see where that leads. you'd hope it'd be a fairly open door, as it should not need the underlying mapping released and public scrutiny of definitive ways is essential under the current legislation. I'll pop a question to the Ramblers and see where they have got to. If you read the consultation response you'll see that one of the results (in addition to the open data release) was agreeing to sort out the derived data issues so there should be something happening. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
On 11 May 2010 11:58, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote: It's my intention to ask about the whole path issue (will they release footpaths; definitive maps; derived data) at the presentation tomorrow evening (see other message). There are some interesting comments from OS about why they didn't / couldn't include footpath / Public Rights of Way (PRoW) data in any of the OS OpenData products in the comments at http://blog.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/2010/04/os-opendata-goes-live/ Apparently OS regards the PRoW data as containing IP belonging to the local authorities (who maintain the definitive maps), and so were unable to release them as part of OpenData. There is an agreement that allows OS to include PRoW data in their Explorer and Landranger Maps. -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
Robert Whittaker (OSM Talk GB robert.whittaker+osm-talk...@... writes: Apparently OS regards the PRoW data as containing IP belonging to the local authorities (who maintain the definitive maps), and so were unable to release them as part of OpenData. This is a nicely executed bureaucratic tangle. It might help to have an official statement from OS that they are happy to waive their interest in local authority right-of-way maps even when those maps have been produced using some OS data. Then we'd just have to ask each local authority (and point them to the OS disclaimer). -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
In Hertfordshire, East Herts publish maps that are drawn on top of an OS layer. But for each parish, they also publish a text description of each numbered right of way, last updated in 2006. Useful as not all real-world physical signs have the number. So using that with the NPE layer in Potlatch it should be possible to check and reconstruct the present ROWs. Anyone see any problems with this method? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source
On 11 May 2010 21:30, martyn i...@dynoyo.plus.com wrote: In Hertfordshire, East Herts publish maps that are drawn on top of an OS layer. But for each parish, they also publish a text description of each numbered right of way, last updated in 2006. Useful as not all real-world physical signs have the number. So using that with the NPE layer in Potlatch it should be possible to check and reconstruct the present ROWs. Anyone see any problems with this method? If the textural descriptions (known as the Definitive Statement) have been written in part by someone looking at the maps (rather than just looking at the ground) then there is argument that they too are a derivative work of the OS maps, and hence contain IP rights belonging to OS. I don't know exactly what copyright protects, so wouldn't like to comment on whether or not the argument is valid. But without expert legal advice, I don't think it's a risk OSM should take. On the bright side though, I thought part of the result of the OS consultation was that they would look to clarify the rules on derived data. In particular, this may help with respect to PRoW data. Another avenue in the mean time would be to get copies of the definitive map and statement as they were 50 years ago (for which crown copyright will have expired), and also a list of paths that have been modified since (modification orders are hard to get, so there may not be that many). We can then get definitive information on most of the current public rights of way. -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
