Hi
Thanks to David for raising this one and - as always - to Robert for a
well thought through response.
I would be happy for an automated change to be made to prow:ref (as long
as someone else does the work (:>) along the lines suggested by Robert.
I agree that road numbering takes priority over PRoW numbering - not
least because of the various vehicle routing uses of the road data. We
should probably use the format suggested in an earlier message from
David (as parish numbering is variable and could also lead to duplicates
in different boroughs) and I think that this is in fact the format that
Robert and I both now use - i.e. FP/BR/RB/BY<space><parish name in
text><space><alphanumeric>.
However, I am conscious that I may in the past sometimes have used
"BOAT" instead of "BY" (and these should be changed to "BY"). Any old
"RUPP" should also be changed to "RB" in view of updated legislation.
Also - to expand on Robert's response - we would need to be careful with
the field "alphanumeric" as it is fairly common for a PRoW to have a
designation that has a letter suffixed to the number, e.g.
"Tushingham-cum-Grindley BR 19A" - and the usage of the suffix letter is
not consistent between councils (some use it where the status of the way
has been changed (e.g. in Cheshire West & Chester), others use it where
a segment of the PRoW 'owned' by one authority lies on the 'territory'
of a neighbouring authority (e.g. in Cheshire East) - either because of
mapping registration issues relating to the definitive map or because of
boundary changes. I don't think that this is too big a problem as I
don't think the format is ever more complex than "nc" where "n" is any
number of numerical digits (three is the highest I have seen!) and "c"
is a single alphabetical character.
I agree that any remaining exceptions can be dealt with manually (if
someone gives me a list or tells me how to filter to produce a list).
Mike
On 20/06/2012 15:43, [email protected] wrote:
Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road (David Groom)
2. Re: PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
(Robert Whittaker (OSM))
3. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (Graham Stewart (GrahamS))
4. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (David Earl)
5. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (Richard Mann)
6. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (Graham Stewart (GrahamS))
7. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (Andy Allan)
8. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (Andy Allan)
9. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (Andy Allan)
10. Re: England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
available for merging (Andy Allan)
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
--
*Mike Harris*
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
