Is it not sensible to use the reference format of the place you are in, rather than create some sudo standard?
If a footpath is in County Durham, and I see OSM has it as ref="Footpath 5", then I know I can call Durham council and say "Repair footpath 5 please.". If another footpath is in Newcastle, and I see OSM has it as ref="NE/06-b", then I can call that council and say "Repair path NE slash 06 dash b, please.". If I call Durham council and ask them to fix "Footpath DH slash 5." they will just be confused why I'm saying DH and slash. Should there be a national referencing system introduced, or at least planned and adopted by some areas, then we can think about using tags such as *ref:uk*, *{name_of_standard}_ref*, or perhaps just *ref* and *old_ref* for the number/format previously used in the area. On 2 June 2012 11:35, Barry Cornelius <barrycorneliu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 31 May 2012, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote: > >> ... (This is Worcestershire, and at the same time, >> >> they've also split the paths up at every junction so that no path has >> two routes leaving a junction, i.e. a path always ends at the first >> junction of rights of way it comes to, and its continuation is now a >> separate new path. I think this may have something to do with >> geometries in GIS software.) >> > > I think this is also adopted by Buckinghamshire. For example, there is a > four way junction where TWY/16/2, TWY/16/3, TWY/19/1 and TWY/19/2 meet. > Oxfordshire don't do this. One of their four way junctions has the meeting > of 265/29, 265/29, 265/33 and 265/33. > > I'm not sure what's best to do for for an overall format. I think we >> may probably have to consider things on a county by county basis, >> trying to keep things as consistent as possible. ... >> > > A web application I'm developing straddles many counties. So I've decided > to adopt the scheme: > code-for-council:code-for-**path-adopted-by-council > Examples are: > BM:TWY/16/2 > BM:TWY/19/1 > ON:265/29 > ON:265/33 > > For the code-for-council (e.g., BM and ON), I've chosen to use the two > letter codes that are used by the OS Opendata 1:50 000 Scale Gazetteer that > is described at: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.**uk/oswebsite/products/50k- > **gazetteer/index.html<http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/50k-gazetteer/index.html> > It's in field 12 of their colon-separated file. There are 208 values. > > Is this sensible? > > -- > Barry Cornelius > http://www.thehs2.com/ > http://www.oxonpaths.com/ > http://www.northeastraces.com/ > http://www.barrycornelius.com/ > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-gb<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb> > -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb