<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000099">
Hi<br>
<br>
My understanding of PRoW law is that:<br>
<br>
1. The definitive statement (which is prepared by an actual survey on
the ground - not from a map - although it might subsequently be plotted
onto a map) takes precedence over the definitive map where there are
differences between the two. Thus the statement should not involve the
OS.<br>
2. The definitive map - properly defined - is the copy kept by the
Highway Authority (HA). There may be 'definitive map copies' issued in
hard copy to involved parties (like the charity for which I work) or in
electronic form (some HAs issue full 'interactive' versions of the
definitive map on the web). These have no legal standing - although
very useful - and may not be as up-to-date as "THE" definitive map.<br>
3. Even "the" definitive map may be a bit out of date as HAs often have
a backlog in creating the "Definitive Map Modification Orders" (DMMOs)
that enshrine a change in the PRoW network (diversion, creation,
extinguishment, dedication) - this backlog may be more than a year in
some areas and will worsen as funds disappear under present financial
constraints.<br>
4. OS mapping at 1:25k of PRoWs relies (especially outside of urban
areas and ways on the 'List of Streets') on the OS being notified of
any changes. This is often done (but rather haphazardly) by the HA -
but can equally be done by a member of the public. They do not keep
PRoWs up-to-date pro-actively. Even when notified, the OS may take
years to do an update. In theory the update should be on the next copy
of the relevant 1:25k map (and does tend to appear earlier on digital
than on paper versions) but it can - and often does - take several
years. Complex and major changes in my area have taken over 10 years of
constant nagging to get the OS to update!<br>
5. Anomalies on the ground with OS mapping are common. I log about 100
per annum in my area. There may also be anomalies on the ground
compared with the definitive map. These two sets of anomalies may
themselves differ. Anomalies include:<br>
<br>
- minor unofficial diversions made by the landowner (or sometimes the
general public!) for convenience. This does not change the line of the
PRoW.<br>
- major unofficial diversions made by a landowner for his/her
convenience (sometimes with the legal route being blocked). This does
not change the line of the PRoW.<br>
- official diversions not yet recorded by the OS (see above). This does
not change the line of the PRoW.<br>
- genuine legal anomalies such as a path ending at a parish boundary
(often because the magistrate charged with making the definitive map
record was also the local landowner and 'forgot' to record the path on
the original definitive map).<br>
- 'lost ways' that got missed off the original definitive map (and
under current legislation will be lost for ever if not added by 2025).<br>
<br>
It's complicated and I'm not advising anyone what to do or not do
(apart from forcing the OS to come clean and disavow any copyright
interest in PRoW data - as others have said, the HAs are usually more
than happy to release PRoW data as part of their public duty but
unfortunately the OS have lost all sense of public duty - as opposed
to commercial self-interest - unless pressured).<br>
<br>
mikh43<br>
<br>
On 12/05/2010 12:00, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk-gb-request@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb-request@openstreetmap.org</a> wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:mailman.26.1273662009.14279.talk-gb@openstreetmap.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb@openstreetmap.org</a>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk-gb-request@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb-request@openstreetmap.org</a>
You can reach the person managing the list at
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk-gb-owner@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb-owner@openstreetmap.org</a>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..."
</pre>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Definitive Paths Map Source (Robert Whittaker (OSM Talk GB))
2. Re: National Byway cycle route (Dave F.)
3. Re: National Byway cycle route (Sam Vekemans)
4. Re: Definitive Paths Map Source (Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists))
5. Re: Definitive Paths Map Source (Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists))
6. Re: Definitive Paths Map Source (James Davis)
</pre>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<b><i>Mike Harris</i></b></div>
</body>
</html>