On 11 May 2017 at 08:04, John Aldridge <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11-May-17 00:20, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: >> The presence of prow_ref=* >> tags to allow matching with official data is almost non-existent.) > > So what's the best way to fix this? > > If I click on your map, it shows me something like > > Teversham FP 3 > (MS: 0 | ΔL/L: —) > > which is a bit cryptic! Is the first line the prow_ref? Should I just copy > it from there?
Yes, that's exactly right. If you add "prow_ref=Teversham FP 3" to a way in the parish, and also ensure it's tagged with designation=public_footpath, then the next time the data is refreshed it will be counted in the table at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/cambs/south-cambs/teversham/ . I've tried to add a bit more detail to the parish pages to make this clearer now. (For those who are interested, the second line in the popups contain the "Mapping Status" (a manual number from 0 to 5 describing how complete the mapping is thought to be) and the % discrepancy in the mapped length compared to the official length. Things may make more sense for a parish that's more complete, e.g. http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/norfolk/breckland/little-dunham/ ) Robert. -- Robert Whittaker _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
