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

[Jez Nicholson]

I'm sort of pleased that the ENS has at least listened to the UK mappers,
who used both pharmacy and chemist, and not imposed their own views.

Just as a supermarket can have a pharmacy in it, Boots chemist stores have
a separate pharmacy counter. So could/should they have their own node? This
would hook in to the FHRS where I think there can be separate records for
the main store and the pharmacy counter.

On Mon, 25 May 2020, 19:42 Cj Malone via Talk-GB, 
wrote:

> I think a lot of the confusion comes from the name suggestion index (some
> of the presets for iD) listing Boots twice. However basically all (if not
> all) of Boots in the UK are pharmacies, because they do prescriptions. In
> some regions this is not the case, Boots without prescriptions is a chemist.
>
> In the UK it's more obvious using Superdrug as an example, some stores do
> prescriptions, some don't. If Superdrug does prescriptions it may be
> amenity=pharmacy or it may have a separate node for the pharmacy, with
> different contract details and opening times, but I don't think this is
> usually worth it for small shops.
>
> Supermarkets on the other hand, I would have there pharmacies as separate
> nodes, partly for the above, different details. But also because the
> location inside the store can be massively helpful for people who just want
> the pharmacy, not the supermarket. See Sainsbury's with a Lloyds Pharmacy
> inside it https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6868601075 Tesco with a
> Tesco pharmacy inside https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6841571554
>
> ___
> 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

[Cj Malone via Talk-GB]

I think a lot of the confusion comes from the name suggestion index (some of 
the presets for iD) listing Boots twice. However basically all (if not all) of 
Boots in the UK are pharmacies, because they do prescriptions. In some regions 
this is not the case, Boots without prescriptions is a chemist.

In the UK it's more obvious using Superdrug as an example, some stores do 
prescriptions, some don't. If Superdrug does prescriptions it may be 
amenity=pharmacy or it may have a separate node for the pharmacy, with 
different contract details and opening times, but I don't think this is usually 
worth it for small shops.

Supermarkets on the other hand, I would have there pharmacies as separate 
nodes, partly for the above, different details. But also because the location 
inside the store can be massively helpful for people who just want the 
pharmacy, not the supermarket. See Sainsbury's with a Lloyds Pharmacy inside it 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6868601075 Tesco with a Tesco pharmacy 
inside https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6841571554

___
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

[Dave Love]

On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 16:10 +0100, Andy Mabbett wrote:

> How are we showing pharmacy references like those in:
> 
> 
> https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/registers/pharmacy/registrationnumber/1124246
> 
> 
> https://www.nhs.uk/Services/pharmacies/Overview/DefaultView.aspx?id=9164
> 
> Do we have an exemplar for pharmacies (or several, by type:
> stand-alone shop; in GP practice/ medical centre; in supermarket; in
> Boots-style shop)?

Meanwhile, much later...  Since I haven't seen an answer to this, I
haven't done any work on it -- map updates or possibly raising issues
against iD (or wherever its rules come from, which I don't know).  I
don't see the point of a project without information on how to work on
it.  Can someone provide some?

For what it's worth, I found that iD actually offers two variants on
some brands, like Boots, (chemist and pharmacy) but complains about
tagging as both chemist and pharmacy.


___
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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Mark Goodge]

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

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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Dave F via Talk-GB]

Are you sure it's upto date?:

Page last reviewed: 15 December 2016
Next review due: 15 December 2019


The 'GPs' is corrupted with Chines symbols.



On 16/04/2020 17:18, Mike Baggaley wrote:

The data at https://data.gov.uk/dataset/e373eb6a-fffd-48e5-b306-71eb17f97af2/pharmacies looks like 
an out of date copy of the NHS data to me. You can use the data at 
https://www.nhs.uk/about-us/nhs-website-datasets/ which is regularly updated. It even includes an 
opening hours file which can be linked to the pharmacies. You will need to use "¬" as the 
column separator. Instead of double clicking on the csv file, open Excel with an empty spreadsheet 
and use import file. You can then choose the column separator. If you follow the "About our 
data downloads" link it tells you how to import the data.  I assume the data is combined from 
various regions which use their own systems, hence the variety of ways of holding the address data.

Regards,
Mike


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.



___
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

[Mike Baggaley]

The data at 
https://data.gov.uk/dataset/e373eb6a-fffd-48e5-b306-71eb17f97af2/pharmacies 
looks like an out of date copy of the NHS data to me. You can use the data at 
https://www.nhs.uk/about-us/nhs-website-datasets/ which is regularly updated. 
It even includes an opening hours file which can be linked to the pharmacies. 
You will need to use "¬" as the column separator. Instead of double clicking on 
the csv file, open Excel with an empty spreadsheet and use import file. You can 
then choose the column separator. If you follow the "About our data downloads" 
link it tells you how to import the data.  I assume the data is combined from 
various regions which use their own systems, hence the variety of ways of 
holding the address data.

Regards,
Mike

>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.



___
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

[Andy Mabbett]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 15:32, Peter Neale  wrote:
>
> "Anyone?"  Huh?  (seems to be lacking the back-story!)

Apologies; that was meant to be a quote of this email:

   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-April/024410.html

in which I asked:

How are we showing pharmacy references like those in:


https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/registers/pharmacy/registrationnumber/1124246

https://www.nhs.uk/Services/pharmacies/Overview/DefaultView.aspx?id=9164

Do we have an exemplar for pharmacies (or several, by type:
stand-alone shop; in GP practice/ medical centre; in supermarket; in
Boots-style shop)?


-- 
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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

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) 
 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

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

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

"Anyone?"  Huh?  (seems to be lacking the back-story!)
Regards,Peter

On Thursday, 16 April 2020, 15:16:45 BST, Andy Mabbett 
 wrote:  
 
 Anyone?

___
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

[Andy Mabbett]

Anyone?

___
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

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

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

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

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

Hi Robert,
I also don’t want to delete the objects completely; as they do exist, so we 
should be able to map them.  
However, I do take your point that a pharmacy which is not open to the public 
is not an “amenity” in OSM.  So my 2 “wholesale” pharmacies do not meet the 
wiki definition of “amenity=pharmacy: a shop where a pharmacist sells 
medications” > “A shop is a place selling retail products or services.”
I think they may both be better tagged as “office=company” (I know that one of 
them is also the head office of the company and they both function as offices). 
 I could add a Note explaining why they are not tagged as “amenity-pharmacy”, 
which might deter other mappers from using this tagging, in response to the 
flag generated by your excellent tool.
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 errorLink 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.
The good news is that neither of my “wholesale” pharmacies is in that 
downloaded file, so, if you were able to use it as a source for your comparison 
tool, it would no longer flag them as “missing pharmacies”.
Good luck and thanks for the excellent tools, which keep me busy, trying to 
find missing post boxes, pharmacies and the like.


Regards,Peter 

On Wednesday, 15 April 2020, 16:46:43 BST, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
 wrote:  
 
 On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 20:40, Peter Neale  wrote:
> I looked up my 2 "wholesale" pharmacies on the list.  Unfortunately, they are 
> both classed as "community", so will continue to be included in your checking 
> tool.
>
> So... ...should we:
> a.  Continue as we are: Plot them in OSM, tag them as pharmacies, but give 
> them a name that makes it clear that they are not publicly accessible?
> b.  Delete them from OSM, so that consumers don't think they are publicly 
> accessible.  (But they do exist and who knows what consumers will really want 
> to find?)  Then we could ask you to manually delete them from the checking 
> tool (but you probably won't want to keep doing that).
> c.  Do something else?

I certainly wouldn't advocate any inappropriate tagging just to keep
my tool happy! So if we don't think they should be amenity=pharmacy,
then we shouldn't tag them like that. While they may technically be
pharmacies, I would think that amenity=pharmacy is best reserved for
places that are amenities for the general public to use, which would
rule out option (a). As for (b), I wouldn't necessarily delete the
objects completely from OSM: if there's a business presence on the
ground, that could still be tagged. The question then is whether it's
worth tweaking my tool to remove these false positives. You could just
ignore the "missing pharmacy" markers local to you that you know are
wrong. As you say, I would have a manually maintained "ignore" list,
but that would be more effort for me.

What I'd prefer to to is to switch to a better data source for my
pharmacy list. There is a list of NHS-contracted pharmacies at
https://data.gov.uk/dataset/e373eb6a-fffd-48e5-b306-71eb17f97af2/pharmacies
which I think would closer match what we want for amenity=pharmacy,
but unfortunately that list appears to be England only. So I'd need to
find corresponding lists for Wales and Scotland. (NI isn't in the data
I'm currently using. I've found
https://www.psni.org.uk/registration/premises-registration/changes-to-the-premises-register/
but the data is all locked up in PDFs.) Can anyone help out here?

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

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

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 20:40, Peter Neale  wrote:
> I looked up my 2 "wholesale" pharmacies on the list.  Unfortunately, they are 
> both classed as "community", so will continue to be included in your checking 
> tool.
>
> So... ...should we:
> a.  Continue as we are: Plot them in OSM, tag them as pharmacies, but give 
> them a name that makes it clear that they are not publicly accessible?
> b.  Delete them from OSM, so that consumers don't think they are publicly 
> accessible.  (But they do exist and who knows what consumers will really want 
> to find?)  Then we could ask you to manually delete them from the checking 
> tool (but you probably won't want to keep doing that).
> c.  Do something else?

I certainly wouldn't advocate any inappropriate tagging just to keep
my tool happy! So if we don't think they should be amenity=pharmacy,
then we shouldn't tag them like that. While they may technically be
pharmacies, I would think that amenity=pharmacy is best reserved for
places that are amenities for the general public to use, which would
rule out option (a). As for (b), I wouldn't necessarily delete the
objects completely from OSM: if there's a business presence on the
ground, that could still be tagged. The question then is whether it's
worth tweaking my tool to remove these false positives. You could just
ignore the "missing pharmacy" markers local to you that you know are
wrong. As you say, I would have a manually maintained "ignore" list,
but that would be more effort for me.

What I'd prefer to to is to switch to a better data source for my
pharmacy list. There is a list of NHS-contracted pharmacies at
https://data.gov.uk/dataset/e373eb6a-fffd-48e5-b306-71eb17f97af2/pharmacies
which I think would closer match what we want for amenity=pharmacy,
but unfortunately that list appears to be England only. So I'd need to
find corresponding lists for Wales and Scotland. (NI isn't in the data
I'm currently using. I've found
https://www.psni.org.uk/registration/premises-registration/changes-to-the-premises-register/
but the data is all locked up in PDFs.) Can anyone help out here?

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
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

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

Hi  Robert,
I looked up my 2 "wholesale" pharmacies on the list.  Unfortunately, they are 
both classed as "community", so will continue to be included in your checking 
tool.
So... ...should we:a.  Continue as we are: Plot them in OSM, tag them as 
pharmacies, but give them a name that makes it clear that they are not publicly 
accessible?b.  Delete them from OSM, so that consumers don't think they are 
publicly accessible.  (But they do exist and who knows what consumers will 
really want to find?)  Then we could ask you to manually delete them from the 
checking tool (but you probably won't want to keep doing that). c.  Do 
something else?
Regards,Peter 

   >On Sunday, 12 April 2020, 18:44:35 BST, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
 wrote:  > > >On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 18:08, 
Peter Neale  wrote:
>> As Boots' stores don't ALL have a pharmacy counter, IMHO they should be 
>> tagged as "shop=chemist".  Those that DO have a >>pharmacy (dispensing 
>> prescriptions) should be additionally tagged, either with "pharmacy=yes", or 
>> with a separate node for the >>pharmacy.  I think that would fit with the 
>> checking that you describe for your tool.
>>
>Both of those will get picked up by my tool. You could also do
>shop=chemist and amenity=pharmacy together, or just amenity=pharmacy
>on it's own. The best choice will probably depend on the nature of the
>Boots branch. Some may essentially just be a pharmacy counter with a
>small range of other medicines also available. Others branches will be
>a much larger store, where the pharmacy counter is more incidental.
>
>> As regards "pharmacy type", does your data identify what I would call 
>> "wholesale pharmacies", who have no public access, but supply >>medicines to 
>> hospitals, care homes and individual customers in their homes?  I know of 2 
>> in my area.  In one case, I changed the >>name to "Jardines (on line)" 
>> (Node: 6409354480) and in the other to "Mediva Private Pharmacy" (Node: 
>> 6443190532), in an attempt to >>make it clear that there is no public access.
>> Could these be excluded in future?
>
>The data I use can be downloaded from
>https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/registers -- it's the "list of
>registered pharmacies". As of today, I'm now just keeping those with a
>Type (the last column) of either "Community" or "Temporary -
>Community/Portacabin". I think doing this corresponds most closely to
>what we'd want to tag as amenity=pharmacy in OSM. For internal
>hospital and prison pharmacies, and for internet-only pharmacies that
>you can't get prescriptions from as a walk-in customer, I don't think
>they should be tagged as amenity=pharmacy.
>
>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

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

[SK53]

My local two Boots are:

a) a dedicated pharmacy (with limited OTC pharmaceutical products)
associated with the GP practice (which is huge, 40k registered patients)
and b) a chemist selling mainly beauty/personal grooming products and
sandwiches.

In the middle of town there is a very large Boots which at one time was
like a small department store, and a smaller more typicsl high street
outlet.

Moral: there is no one size fits all. However, amenity=pharmacy is nearly
always a more important piece of information than shop =chemist (most
people around the world map pharmacies as POIs very early on. I think using
pharmacy=yes in this case does not fit with how things have been mapped for
at least 15 years. By all means use both tags or create a separate node for
the pharmacy counter, but dont change things in such a way as to surprise
people.

Most pharmacies in supermarkets or heslth centres should be mapped
separately anyway.

Jerry


On Sun, 12 Apr 2020, 18:09 Peter Neale via Talk-GB, <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> As Boots' stores don't ALL have a pharmacy counter, IMHO they should be
> tagged as "shop=chemist".  Those that DO have a pharmacy (dispensing
> prescriptions) should be additionally tagged, either with "pharmacy=yes",
> or with a separate node for the pharmacy.  I think that would fit with the
> checking that you describe for your tool.
>
> As regards "pharmacy type", does your data identify what I would call
> "wholesale pharmacies", who have no public access, but supply medicines to
> hospitals, care homes and individual customers in their homes?  I know of 2
> in my area.  In one case, I changed the name to "Jardines (on line)" (Node:
> 6409354480) and in the other to "Mediva Private Pharmacy" (Node:
> 6443190532), in an attempt to make it clear that there is no public
> access.
> Could these be excluded in future?
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
>
> On Sunday, 12 April 2020, 14:41:01 BST, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <
> robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 18:39, Dave Love  wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 2020-04-09 at 12:08 +0100, SK53 wrote:
> >> > Robert Whittaker has a Pharmacy QA  >> > > site
> >>
> >> That shows a Boots missing which I tagged as the brand from the
> >> correction iD wanted (brand=Boots shop=chemist).  How should Boots be
> >> tagged, and does iD need a fix?  (I assume all Boots have pharmacies,
> >> but maybe not.)
> >
> >As far as my tool at https://osm.mathmos.net/pharmacy/progress/ is
> >concerned, pharmacies are recognised as OSM objects tagged with either
> >amenity=pharmacy or pharmacy=yes*. (The latter can be used on things
> >like supermarkets and doctors surgeries, when things aren't mapped in
> >enough detail to have a separate amenity=pharmacy node.)
> >
> >As for whether all Boots stores have pharmacies, I think most do, but
> >some don't:
> https://www.boots-uk.com/about-boots-uk/about-boots/boots-in-numbers/
> >says there are 2,465 Boots stores, but in the General Pharmaceutical
> >Council register of Pharmacies, there are only 2304 premises
> >registered to 'Boots UK Limited'.
> >
> >Robert
> >
> >PS: I've just noticed that the data I'm using for my tool now contains
> >a "Pharmacy Type" field. This means I can exclude internet only
> >pharmacies, temporary locations (e.g. for events) and internal
> >hospital and prisons pharmacies. This will hopefully make the
> >comparison shown by the tool must more useful.
> >
> >* Because of the change to exclude hospital and prison pharmacies from
> >the GPhC data, OSM objects with pharmacy=yes will only be picked up in
> >my tool if they do not also have amenity=hospital or amenity=prison
> >too.
>
>
> --
> 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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 18:08, Peter Neale  wrote:
> As Boots' stores don't ALL have a pharmacy counter, IMHO they should be 
> tagged as "shop=chemist".  Those that DO have a pharmacy (dispensing 
> prescriptions) should be additionally tagged, either with "pharmacy=yes", or 
> with a separate node for the pharmacy.  I think that would fit with the 
> checking that you describe for your tool.

Both of those will get picked up by my tool. You could also do
shop=chemist and amenity=pharmacy together, or just amenity=pharmacy
on it's own. The best choice will probably depend on the nature of the
Boots branch. Some may essentially just be a pharmacy counter with a
small range of other medicines also available. Others branches will be
a much larger store, where the pharmacy counter is more incidental.

> As regards "pharmacy type", does your data identify what I would call 
> "wholesale pharmacies", who have no public access, but supply medicines to 
> hospitals, care homes and individual customers in their homes?  I know of 2 
> in my area.  In one case, I changed the name to "Jardines (on line)" (Node: 
> 6409354480) and in the other to "Mediva Private Pharmacy" (Node: 6443190532), 
> in an attempt to make it clear that there is no public access.
> Could these be excluded in future?

The data I use can be downloaded from
https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/registers -- it's the "list of
registered pharmacies". As of today, I'm now just keeping those with a
Type (the last column) of either "Community" or "Temporary -
Community/Portacabin". I think doing this corresponds most closely to
what we'd want to tag as amenity=pharmacy in OSM. For internal
hospital and prison pharmacies, and for internet-only pharmacies that
you can't get prescriptions from as a walk-in customer, I don't think
they should be tagged as amenity=pharmacy.

Best wishes,
Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
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

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

Hi Robert,
As Boots' stores don't ALL have a pharmacy counter, IMHO they should be tagged 
as "shop=chemist".  Those that DO have a pharmacy (dispensing prescriptions) 
should be additionally tagged, either with "pharmacy=yes", or with a separate 
node for the pharmacy.  I think that would fit with the checking that you 
describe for your tool.
As regards "pharmacy type", does your data identify what I would call 
"wholesale pharmacies", who have no public access, but supply medicines to 
hospitals, care homes and individual customers in their homes?  I know of 2 in 
my area.  In one case, I changed the name to "Jardines (on line)" (Node: 
6409354480) and in the other to "Mediva Private Pharmacy" (Node: 6443190532), 
in an attempt to make it clear that there is no public access.   Could these be 
excluded in future? Regards,Peter 

On Sunday, 12 April 2020, 14:41:01 BST, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
 wrote:  
 
 >On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 18:39, Dave Love  wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 2020-04-09 at 12:08 +0100, SK53 wrote:
>> > Robert Whittaker has a Pharmacy QA > > > site
>>
>> That shows a Boots missing which I tagged as the brand from the
>> correction iD wanted (brand=Boots shop=chemist).  How should Boots be
>> tagged, and does iD need a fix?  (I assume all Boots have pharmacies,
>> but maybe not.)
>
>As far as my tool at https://osm.mathmos.net/pharmacy/progress/ is
>concerned, pharmacies are recognised as OSM objects tagged with 
>either>amenity=pharmacy or pharmacy=yes*. (The latter can be used on things
>like supermarkets and doctors surgeries, when things aren't mapped in
>enough detail to have a separate amenity=pharmacy node.)
>
>As for whether all Boots stores have pharmacies, I think most do, but
>some don't: 
>https://www.boots-uk.com/about-boots-uk/about-boots/boots-in-numbers/
>says there are 2,465 Boots stores, but in the General Pharmaceutical
>Council register of Pharmacies, there are only 2304 premises
>registered to 'Boots UK Limited'.
>
>Robert
>
>PS: I've just noticed that the data I'm using for my tool now contains
>a "Pharmacy Type" field. This means I can exclude internet only
>pharmacies, temporary locations (e.g. for events) and internal
>hospital and prisons pharmacies. This will hopefully make the
>comparison shown by the tool must more useful.
>
>* Because of the change to exclude hospital and prison pharmacies from
>the GPhC data, OSM objects with pharmacy=yes will only be picked up in
>my tool if they do not also have amenity=hospital or amenity=prison
>too.

--
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

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

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 18:39, Dave Love  wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2020-04-09 at 12:08 +0100, SK53 wrote:
> > Robert Whittaker has a Pharmacy QA  > > site
>
> That shows a Boots missing which I tagged as the brand from the
> correction iD wanted (brand=Boots shop=chemist).  How should Boots be
> tagged, and does iD need a fix?  (I assume all Boots have pharmacies,
> but maybe not.)

As far as my tool at https://osm.mathmos.net/pharmacy/progress/ is
concerned, pharmacies are recognised as OSM objects tagged with either
amenity=pharmacy or pharmacy=yes*. (The latter can be used on things
like supermarkets and doctors surgeries, when things aren't mapped in
enough detail to have a separate amenity=pharmacy node.)

As for whether all Boots stores have pharmacies, I think most do, but
some don't: 
https://www.boots-uk.com/about-boots-uk/about-boots/boots-in-numbers/
says there are 2,465 Boots stores, but in the General Pharmaceutical
Council register of Pharmacies, there are only 2304 premises
registered to 'Boots UK Limited'.

Robert

PS: I've just noticed that the data I'm using for my tool now contains
a "Pharmacy Type" field. This means I can exclude internet only
pharmacies, temporary locations (e.g. for events) and internal
hospital and prisons pharmacies. This will hopefully make the
comparison shown by the tool must more useful.

* Because of the change to exclude hospital and prison pharmacies from
the GPhC data, OSM objects with pharmacy=yes will only be picked up in
my tool if they do not also have amenity=hospital or amenity=prison
too.

--
Robert Whittaker

___
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

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:55, Gareth L  wrote:

> The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP Surgeries and 
> health
> sites. The wiki page is
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2020_Q2_Project:_GP_Surgeries_and_Healthsites

How are we showing pharmacy references like those in:


https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/registers/pharmacy/registrationnumber/1124246

https://www.nhs.uk/Services/pharmacies/Overview/DefaultView.aspx?id=9164

Do we have an exemplar for pharmacies (or several, by type:
stand-alone shop; in GP practice/ medical centre; in supermarket; in
Boots-style shop)?

-- 
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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Andy Townsend]

On 11/04/2020 18:38, Dave Love wrote:

On Thu, 2020-04-09 at 12:08 +0100, SK53 wrote:

Robert Whittaker has a Pharmacy QA 

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

[Dave Love]

On Thu, 2020-04-09 at 12:08 +0100, SK53 wrote:
> Robert Whittaker has a Pharmacy QA  > site

That shows a Boots missing which I tagged as the brand from the
correction iD wanted (brand=Boots shop=chemist).  How should Boots be
tagged, and does iD need a fix?  (I assume all Boots have pharmacies,
but maybe not.)


___
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

[Edward Bainton]

Sorry to come late to this party.

It would also be useful to indicate morgues & their capacity, if people
have access to that information.

Eg, most mosques have one.

Schedule 28 Coronavirus Act gives powers to local authorities to demand
this information. Would be good if it were there in half-decent form on OSM
before needed.

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 17:27, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:55, Gareth L  wrote:
>
> > The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP
> > Surgeries and health sites.
>
> Good to know; thank you.
>
> Do we have, or plan, any social media promotion of this activity? I'd
> be happy to amplify it, and my contacts at Wikimedia UK will do so,
> too.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Jez Nicholson]

That's a great idea. I'll get the OSMUK machine rolling.

On Thu, 9 Apr 2020, 17:27 Andy Mabbett,  wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:55, Gareth L  wrote:
>
> > The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP
> > Surgeries and health sites.
>
> Good to know; thank you.
>
> Do we have, or plan, any social media promotion of this activity? I'd
> be happy to amplify it, and my contacts at Wikimedia UK will do so,
> too.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:55, Gareth L  wrote:

> The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP
> Surgeries and health sites.

Good to know; thank you.

Do we have, or plan, any social media promotion of this activity? I'd
be happy to amplify it, and my contacts at Wikimedia UK will do so,
too.

-- 
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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Jez Nicholson]

I've added Jerry's comments to
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2020_Q2_Project:_GP_Surgeries_and_Healthsites#Potential_sources_and_tools
which
is there for all of you to edit and add to.

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 12:09 PM SK53  wrote:

> Robert Whittaker has a Pharmacy QA 
> site (usefulness is somewhat limited because of on-line pharmacies & in
> hospital ones). Most ordinary pharmacies appear in FHRS data as well.
>
> All CQC data (including dentists & care homes) is available on Will
> Phillips OSM-Nottingham site. Just move the map to the area of interest and
> search for a term using open data sources (this can be restricted to CQC).
> Data are usually located at the post code centroid (this example
> 
> is all CQC entries for DE1 postcode district).
>
> Jerry
>
> On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:55, Gareth L  wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP Surgeries
>> and health sites. The wiki page is
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2020_Q2_Project:_GP_Surgeries_and_Healthsites
>>
>>
>>
>> A couple interesting sources of data, the Care Quality Commission appears
>> to provide a data set similar to the food hygiene rating system so should
>> be good for addresses, but they only cover England. Does anyone know of
>> Wales/Scotland/N. Ireland equivalents?
>>
>> https://healthsites.io is a global project which has a lot of overlap.
>>
>>
>>
>> It would be good to have a source for pharmacies. A potential source is
>> https://inspections.pharmacyregulation.org/ however it is not
>> immediately clear if they share their data, let alone under what license.
>> Has this been pursued before?
>>
>>
>>
>> Warm regards
>>
>> Gareth
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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

[SK53]

Robert Whittaker has a Pharmacy QA  site
(usefulness is somewhat limited because of on-line pharmacies & in hospital
ones). Most ordinary pharmacies appear in FHRS data as well.

All CQC data (including dentists & care homes) is available on Will
Phillips OSM-Nottingham site. Just move the map to the area of interest and
search for a term using open data sources (this can be restricted to CQC).
Data are usually located at the post code centroid (this example

is all CQC entries for DE1 postcode district).

Jerry

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:55, Gareth L  wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP Surgeries and
> health sites. The wiki page is
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2020_Q2_Project:_GP_Surgeries_and_Healthsites
>
>
>
> A couple interesting sources of data, the Care Quality Commission appears
> to provide a data set similar to the food hygiene rating system so should
> be good for addresses, but they only cover England. Does anyone know of
> Wales/Scotland/N. Ireland equivalents?
>
> https://healthsites.io is a global project which has a lot of overlap.
>
>
>
> It would be good to have a source for pharmacies. A potential source is
> https://inspections.pharmacyregulation.org/ however it is not immediately
> clear if they share their data, let alone under what license. Has this been
> pursued before?
>
>
>
> Warm regards
>
> Gareth
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Q2 2020 Quarterly project GP Surgeries and health sites

[Gareth L]

Hello,

The UK quarterly project for Q2 2020 has been selected as GP Surgeries and 
health sites. The wiki page is 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2020_Q2_Project:_GP_Surgeries_and_Healthsites

A couple interesting sources of data, the Care Quality Commission appears to 
provide a data set similar to the food hygiene rating system so should be good 
for addresses, but they only cover England. Does anyone know of 
Wales/Scotland/N. Ireland equivalents?
https://healthsites.io is a global project which has a lot of overlap.

It would be good to have a source for pharmacies. A potential source is 
https://inspections.pharmacyregulation.org/ however it is not immediately clear 
if they share their data, let alone under what license. Has this been pursued 
before?

Warm regards
Gareth



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