Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[David Woolley]

On 13/05/16 11:17, Dave F wrote:

I think you're combining two separate issues.

Designated cycle route NCN4 was implemented along the K canal long
before 2012. There a was short time when a free license was required to
officially use it.

Whether individual people had a license or not made no difference to
it's status.


I think the problem is that bicycle= is being used for two different 
purposes, which are somewhat orthogonal.  One is to indicate access and 
the other is to indicate designation.  I think the situation is that the 
designated cycle route runs over a permissive path, not a public right 
of way.  You either need bicycle=permissive;designated, or to have a 
combined value, something like bicycle=permissive-designated.  The 
latter is better as the multi value notation tends to imply a union of 
permissions, not an intersection.


Designating as public footpath or bridleway gives certain legal rights, 
e.g. the right to not have the path obstructed, whereas designating a 
permissive path as a national cycle route only gives a routing 
preference.  There are also long distance foot routes that often go over 
permissive paths.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Dave F]

I think you're combining two separate issues.

Designated cycle route NCN4 was implemented along the K canal long 
before 2012. There a was short time when a free license was required to 
officially use it.


Whether individual people had a license or not made no difference to 
it's status.


Dave F.

On 13/05/2016 10:08, David Woolley wrote:

On 12/05/16 23:53, Andy Townsend wrote:

It depends where you are, I think. Certainly the canal towpath nearest
to me (Cromford Canal) is mostly public footpath. It's all been
surveyed, and the designation has been added fairly conservatively, i.e.
only where there's signage, and even on that basis most is still public
footpath.


Before the BWB to CRT transition, there was no public right of way on 
bicycle on most English towpaths.  You needed an explicit licence, 
although the licence was free and really only about agreeing to safety 
and other usage rules.


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



---
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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[David Woolley]

On 12/05/16 23:53, Andy Townsend wrote:

It depends where you are, I think.  Certainly the canal towpath nearest
to me (Cromford Canal) is mostly public footpath. It's all been
surveyed, and the designation has been added fairly conservatively, i.e.
only where there's signage, and even on that basis most is still public
footpath.


Before the BWB to CRT transition, there was no public right of way on 
bicycle on most English towpaths.  You needed an explicit licence, 
although the licence was free and really only about agreeing to safety 
and other usage rules.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Richard Fairhurst]

David Woolley wrote:
> For canal towpaths, bicycle=designated is misleading, as it tends 
> to imply a public right of way, whereas these are normally 
> access=permissive, and privately owned by the Canal and River 
> Trust.

Again, Scotland is different. :)

Scotland's canals didn't go to CRT: they're still owned and run by the
British Waterways Board. Because CRT has all the ex-BW England & Wales
canals, the British Waterways Board has rebranded itself "Scottish Canals",
though legally it's still BWB.

Scotland's access laws are also different, and for that reason the old BW
cycle permits weren't needed on Scottish towpaths as BW believed it had no
legal basis to apply them.

In this case I'd simply just go for bicycle=yes.

(As Andy says, towpaths on canals in England & Wales can occasionally be
PRoWs too - sometimes in the case of under-restoration canals like the
Cromford, sometimes on restored canals that are now part of the CRT system,
and sometimes just on ex-BW CRT waterways.)

Richard
(former BW employee!)



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/New-user-renaming-highway-cycleway-with-NCN-references-tp5873121p5873460.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Andy Townsend]

On 12/05/2016 23:13, David Woolley wrote:


They started their life being purely for private profit, got 
nationalised, then handed to a charity, but never got made public 
rights of way.


It depends where you are, I think.  Certainly the canal towpath nearest 
to me (Cromford Canal) is mostly public footpath. It's all been 
surveyed, and the designation has been added fairly conservatively, i.e. 
only where there's signage, and even on that basis most is still public 
footpath.


Cheers,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[David Woolley]

On 12/05/16 12:30, Eric Grosso wrote:


At the moment, the different tags (in link with this discussion) used
for these ways are:highway=path, surface=paved, bicycle=designated,
segregated=no, width=1.75, ncn_ref=754 (Tobi added yesterday a ncn_ref
in addition to the associated relation).


For canal towpaths, bicycle=designated is misleading, as it tends to 
imply a public right of way, whereas these are normally 
access=permissive, and privately owned by the Canal and River Trust.


They started their life being purely for private profit, got 
nationalised, then handed to a charity, but never got made public rights 
of way.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Richard Fairhurst]

Craig Wallace wrote:
> Maybe the consensus in England.
> In Scotland, where paths can be used on foot, bicycle, horse etc, 
> then highway=path makes sense. And that is how they are 
> generally tagged in OSM.

Yes, access laws are indeed different in Scotland to England & Wales.

However, the point remains that highway=path, alone, does not tell you
anything about the character of a path, nor provide any way for you to
deduce it with a >50% certainty. So if you must use highway=path, then
surface and access tags are absolute essentials, and width tags etc. are
helpful. Or, alternatively, use a meaningful tag like =cycleway, which is
simpler for mappers and safer for consumers.

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/New-user-renaming-highway-cycleway-with-NCN-references-tp5873121p5873396.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Craig Wallace]

On 2016-05-11 06:44, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

On 10/05/2016 20:59, Eric Grosso wrote:

What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of
a NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both
part of a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?


Please don't use highway=path:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333

For a towpath I'd use (and I believe the general UK consensus is)
highway=cycleway if it's been improved (widened, resurfaced) to
shared-use standard; or highway=footway, bicycle=yes if it's still
largely unimproved. And, as ever, add a surface tag.


Maybe the consensus in England.
In Scotland, where paths can be used on foot, bicycle, horse etc, then 
highway=path makes sense. And that is how they are generally tagged in OSM.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Eric Grosso]

Thanks Chris, thanks Richard.

If we take the example of the Union Canal Towpath (e.g.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222362355), it was originally a footway,
upgraded (i.e. resurfaced) at several points in time (but a lot have been
done in 2005-2006), so it became easier and easier for cyclists to use it.
Then it became recently a NCN route. But as Chris mentioned, it's not wide
at all so cyclists have to slow down when they meet with pedestrians. Thus
it's really a mix between a footway and a cycleway now, so it seems
difficult (at least for me) to think about it in term of footway or
cycleway as it's both.

If we tag this kind of way as a footway, the meaning would be, according to
the OSM specifications ((http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway), a
way which is "for designated footpaths; i.e., mainly/exclusively for
pedestrians". Is it the best option here as this way became a shared space.

At the moment, the different tags (in link with this discussion) used for
these ways are: highway=path, surface=paved, bicycle=designated, segregated=
no, width=1.75, ncn_ref=754 (Tobi added yesterday a ncn_ref in addition to
the associated relation). These ways are also linked to this relation (
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/51479) with type=route and
route=bicycle. All these tags and association seem to reflect what this way
is in reality and it means that it stays quite neutral (or let's say
objective) for both communities (walkers/hikers and cyclists).

I read your diary entry about it Richard. I easily understand that it's
easier for data consumers (especially software developers but also GIS
users when they create a legend -- as many many cases have to be considered
) to deal with a tag which appears quite high in the OSM hierarchy, i.e. at
the highway level.

So is there still somewhere and sometimes a place to use highway=path (in a
similar context to the one described above) in a general context of "Please
don't use highway=path"?

Thanks
Eric



On 11 May 2016 at 06:44, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:

> On 10/05/2016 20:59, Eric Grosso wrote:
>
>> What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of
>> a NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both
>> part of a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?
>>
>
> Please don't use highway=path:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333
>
> For a towpath I'd use (and I believe the general UK consensus is)
> highway=cycleway if it's been improved (widened, resurfaced) to shared-use
> standard; or highway=footway, bicycle=yes if it's still largely unimproved.
> And, as ever, add a surface tag.
>
> Richard
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Richard Fairhurst]

On 10/05/2016 20:59, Eric Grosso wrote:

What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of
a NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both
part of a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?


Please don't use highway=path:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333

For a towpath I'd use (and I believe the general UK consensus is) 
highway=cycleway if it's been improved (widened, resurfaced) to 
shared-use standard; or highway=footway, bicycle=yes if it's still 
largely unimproved. And, as ever, add a surface tag.


Richard

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Chris Fleming]

Also meant to add to my last email. Has anyone been in touch with
tintin2873?

Cheers
Chris

On Tue, 10 May 2016 at 23:15  wrote:

> On 10/05/16 at 08:59pm, Eric Grosso wrote:
> > I removed the NCN names associated to the roads/paths in Edinburgh (at
> > least until the City By-pass) modified this week-end and I also re-added
> > the railway=abandoned parts as it was before tintin2873's edits --
> > changeset #39226002.
> >
> > I discovered that some parts of the Union Canal Towpath and the Water of
> > Leith Walkway are mapped as highway=path, some others as
> highway=cycleway.
> > tintin2873 changed all of these highways in cycleways (tagged previously
> as
> > paths). Despite the fact that these highways became part of the NCN, I
> > still consider that these highways are still primarily paths by nature.
>
> Think parts of the towpath are debatable, but given the narrow width and
> shared use. path with designanated bicycle is probably most correct.
> >
> > What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of
> a
> > NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both part
> of
> > a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?
>
> I think it depends of the width of the path and likelyhood of being
> shared, needing to slow down for pedestrians. On a cycleway, it should
> not normally be necessary to reduce speed to pass.
>
> Cheers
> Chris
>
>
> ___
> 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] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[me]

On 10/05/16 at 08:59pm, Eric Grosso wrote:
> I removed the NCN names associated to the roads/paths in Edinburgh (at
> least until the City By-pass) modified this week-end and I also re-added
> the railway=abandoned parts as it was before tintin2873's edits --
> changeset #39226002.
> 
> I discovered that some parts of the Union Canal Towpath and the Water of
> Leith Walkway are mapped as highway=path, some others as highway=cycleway.
> tintin2873 changed all of these highways in cycleways (tagged previously as
> paths). Despite the fact that these highways became part of the NCN, I
> still consider that these highways are still primarily paths by nature.

Think parts of the towpath are debatable, but given the narrow width and
shared use. path with designanated bicycle is probably most correct. 
> 
> What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of a
> NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both part of
> a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?

I think it depends of the width of the path and likelyhood of being
shared, needing to slow down for pedestrians. On a cycleway, it should
not normally be necessary to reduce speed to pass. 

Cheers
Chris 


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Eric Grosso]

I removed the NCN names associated to the roads/paths in Edinburgh (at
least until the City By-pass) modified this week-end and I also re-added
the railway=abandoned parts as it was before tintin2873's edits --
changeset #39226002.

I discovered that some parts of the Union Canal Towpath and the Water of
Leith Walkway are mapped as highway=path, some others as highway=cycleway.
tintin2873 changed all of these highways in cycleways (tagged previously as
paths). Despite the fact that these highways became part of the NCN, I
still consider that these highways are still primarily paths by nature.

What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of a
NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both part of
a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Eric Grosso]

It isn't just a renaming. The value of the highway tag has been changed too
from path to cycleway in some places, e.g.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8116531/history

It seems relatively complex to use the revert tool in JOSM as these edits
have been done individually.

Eric

On 9 May 2016 at 07:25, Eric Grosso  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> This user started to change back his own edits, e.g.:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207979578/history#map=17/55.88829/-4.37323
>
> Eric
>
> On 8 May 2016 at 18:21, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
>
>> David Woolley wrote:
>> > I'm not sure of the likely sources (assuming they have missed
>> > the reference in the existing mapping) but Sustrans have a no
>> > commercial use restriction, that is incompatible with OSM.
>>
>> I wouldn't assume bad faith in this or indeed any NCN-related case. As I
>> thought was fairly well known, a lot of Sustrans rangers are OSM editors,
>> including several subscribers to this list. Indeed, OSM is often updated
>> with the latest NCN openings/reroutings _before_ the official Sustrans
>> mapping!
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/New-user-renaming-highway-cycleway-with-NCN-references-tp5873121p5873147.html
>> Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Eric Grosso]

Hi all,

This user started to change back his own edits, e.g.:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207979578/history#map=17/55.88829/-4.37323

Eric

On 8 May 2016 at 18:21, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:

> David Woolley wrote:
> > I'm not sure of the likely sources (assuming they have missed
> > the reference in the existing mapping) but Sustrans have a no
> > commercial use restriction, that is incompatible with OSM.
>
> I wouldn't assume bad faith in this or indeed any NCN-related case. As I
> thought was fairly well known, a lot of Sustrans rangers are OSM editors,
> including several subscribers to this list. Indeed, OSM is often updated
> with the latest NCN openings/reroutings _before_ the official Sustrans
> mapping!
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/New-user-renaming-highway-cycleway-with-NCN-references-tp5873121p5873147.html
> Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> 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] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Richard Fairhurst]

David Woolley wrote:
> I'm not sure of the likely sources (assuming they have missed 
> the reference in the existing mapping) but Sustrans have a no 
> commercial use restriction, that is incompatible with OSM.

I wouldn't assume bad faith in this or indeed any NCN-related case. As I
thought was fairly well known, a lot of Sustrans rangers are OSM editors,
including several subscribers to this list. Indeed, OSM is often updated
with the latest NCN openings/reroutings _before_ the official Sustrans
mapping!

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/New-user-renaming-highway-cycleway-with-NCN-references-tp5873121p5873147.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Dave F]

Thanks

* I meant restoring not redacting.

Should we point out there's a quicker way than doing each edit 
individually or is this a good way to learn a lesson? ;-)


Dave F.

On 08/05/2016 13:38, Philip Barnes wrote:

On Sun, 2016-05-08 at 13:11 +0100, Dave F wrote:

Did someone contact him, as he appears to be redacting*.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38353814/history#map=15/55.4568/-3.6478


I saw that Richard Fairhurst has added a changeset comment.

Phil (trigpoint)




On 07/05/2016 22:21, Donald Noble wrote:

Hi all,

I spotted in Edinburgh first, and across the central belt of 
Scotland, that a relatively new user, tintin2873 [1], has been 
renaming a lot of the ways that make up the national cycle network 
to include the NCN reference number. e.g. "Middle Meadow Walk" has 
been changed to "Middle Meadow Walk (NCN1)" [2]. Where there was no 
name, they seem to have just called the path by the NCN reference. 
The NCN route information is already in OSM via relations, and 
displayed via the cycle map layer.


I have not contacted the user, as not quite sure how best to word an 
email.


There are also a large number of ways that should probably have the 
name reverted, as they seem to have done most of NCN1, 75, 754, and 
possibly others.


Suggestions, or actions, of how to best resolve this issue appreciated.

regards, Donald

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/tintin2873
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39162752


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



 
	Virus-free. www.avast.com 
 



___
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




---
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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Philip Barnes]

On Sun, 2016-05-08 at 13:11 +0100, Dave F wrote:
> Did someone contact him, as he appears to be redacting.
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38353814/history#map=15/55.4568/-3.
> 6478
> 
I saw that Richard Fairhurst has added a changeset comment.
Phil (trigpoint)
> On 07/05/2016 22:21, Donald Noble
>   wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> >   > > Hi all,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > I spotted in Edinburgh first, and across the central belt
> >   of Scotland, that a relatively new user, tintin2873 [1], has
> >   been renaming a lot of the ways that make up the national
> >   cycle network to include the NCN reference number. e.g.
> >   "Middle Meadow Walk" has been changed to "Middle Meadow Walk
> >   (NCN1)" [2]. Where there was no name, they seem to have just
> >   called the path by the NCN reference. The NCN route
> >   information is already in OSM via relations, and displayed via
> >   the cycle map layer.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > I have not contacted the user, as not quite sure how best
> >   to word an email. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > There are also a large number of ways that should probably
> >   have the name reverted, as they seem to have done most of
> >   NCN1, 75, 754, and possibly others.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > Suggestions, or actions, of how to best resolve this issue
> >   appreciated.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > regards, Donald 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/tintin2873 
> > 
> > > > [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39162752 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> >   
> > 
> >   > > 
> >   
> > 
> >   > > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > 
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org> > 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb> > 

> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
>   > 
> > > 
>   > Virus-free. www.avast.com
> 
>   > 
>   > 


> ___
> 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] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Dave F]

Did someone contact him, as he appears to be redacting.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38353814/history#map=15/55.4568/-3.6478

On 07/05/2016 22:21, Donald Noble wrote:

Hi all,

I spotted in Edinburgh first, and across the central belt of Scotland, 
that a relatively new user, tintin2873 [1], has been renaming a lot of 
the ways that make up the national cycle network to include the NCN 
reference number. e.g. "Middle Meadow Walk" has been changed to 
"Middle Meadow Walk (NCN1)" [2]. Where there was no name, they seem to 
have just called the path by the NCN reference. The NCN route 
information is already in OSM via relations, and displayed via the 
cycle map layer.


I have not contacted the user, as not quite sure how best to word an 
email.


There are also a large number of ways that should probably have the 
name reverted, as they seem to have done most of NCN1, 75, 754, and 
possibly others.


Suggestions, or actions, of how to best resolve this issue appreciated.

regards, Donald

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/tintin2873
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39162752


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




---
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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[David Woolley]

On 08/05/16 09:39, Bob wrote:

It sounds like there is passion but not enough direction


Another concern I would have here is that they are probably importing a 
copyright database (or at least one that they haven't checked for 
copyright releases).  Unfortunately using copyright restricted sources 
seems to be very common where passion is involved.  (I suspect there is 
an awful lot of Google mapping data in OSM as a result of passion.)


I'm not sure of the likely sources (assuming they have missed the 
reference in the existing mapping) but Sustrans have a no commercial use 
restriction, that is incompatible with OSM.


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

[Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Donald Noble]

Hi all,

I spotted in Edinburgh first, and across the central belt of Scotland, that
a relatively new user, tintin2873 [1], has been renaming a lot of the ways
that make up the national cycle network to include the NCN reference
number. e.g. "Middle Meadow Walk" has been changed to "Middle Meadow Walk
(NCN1)" [2]. Where there was no name, they seem to have just called the
path by the NCN reference. The NCN route information is already in OSM via
relations, and displayed via the cycle map layer.

I have not contacted the user, as not quite sure how best to word an email.

There are also a large number of ways that should probably have the name
reverted, as they seem to have done most of NCN1, 75, 754, and possibly
others.

Suggestions, or actions, of how to best resolve this issue appreciated.

regards, Donald

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/tintin2873
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39162752
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb