<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
I found this interesting paper on footpath attribution prepared by Scottish Natural Heritage.<BR><br><BR>There are some really interesting ideas for how best to grade access, surface, gradients etc.<br><BR><br><BR><a href="http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/442.pdf">http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/442.pdf</a><BR><br><BR>Worth a read. <BR><br><BR>Tim<BR><br>> From: talk-gb-request@openstreetmap.org<br>> Subject: Talk-GB Digest, Vol 56, Issue 31<br>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<br>> Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 12:00:03 +0100<br>> <br>> Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to<br>> talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<br>> <br>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb<br>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>> talk-gb-request@openstreetmap.org<br>> <br>> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>> talk-gb-owner@openstreetmap.org<br>> <br>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>> than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..."<br>> <br>> <br>> Today's Topics:<br>> <br>> 1. Re: Kent Open Data, KCC (Gregory Williams)<br>> 2. Any interest in a mapping party S Wales Sunday 26th June<br>> (SK53 on OSM)<br>> 3. Re: Tracks and there place in society (Richard Fairhurst)<br>> 4. Re: Tracks and there place in society (Nick Whitelegg)<br>> <br>> <br>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> <br>> Message: 1<br>> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 16:00:17 +0100<br>> From: "Gregory Williams" <gregory.williams@purplegeodesoftware.co.uk><br>> To: "'TimSC'" <mapping@sheerman-chase.org.uk>,<br>> <talk-gb@openstreetmap.org><br>> Cc: Noel.Hatch2@kent.gov.uk<br>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC<br>> Message-ID:<br>> <018e01cc1a23$4b654f90$e22feeb0$@williams@purplegeodesoftware.co.uk><br>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>> <br>> Looking at the school data I see that it's not completely up-to-date. I note<br>> that one school shows the previous head's name (the current head has been in<br>> place for a couple of years) and doesn't reflect that it's recently become<br>> an academy. This despite the fact that it's noted that it was last modified<br>> yesterday.<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> So, based upon this admittedly isolated case, we shouldn't assume that all<br>> of the data is current - we might have more up-to-date data than KCC.<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> From: TimSC [mailto:mapping@sheerman-chase.org.uk] <br>> Sent: 23 May 2011 18:32<br>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<br>> Cc: Noel.Hatch2@kent.gov.uk<br>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> I have been informed that the beta OpenKent site, with more data and<br>> visualisation tools is here:<br>> <br>> http://www.openkent.org.uk/<br>> <br>> Some things that caught my eye: lists of librarys, GPs, opticians, pharmacy,<br>> KCC offices, medway car parks, schools. This would be good for validation,<br>> as I said. <br>> <br>> As well as what has already been mentioned (speed limits, etc), we could<br>> also do with lists of post offices, alchohol licensed buildings, sure starts<br>> (kindergartens), petrol stations (or petrol storage), public telephones*,<br>> taxi ranks*, dentists*, arts centres, public art, law courts, crematoria,<br>> fire stations, police stations, council grave yards*, markets*, prisons,<br>> recycling points, public toilets, places of worship*, parks, landfills,<br>> allotments, sports centres, tourist information offices, museums, highway<br>> maintenance depots, quarries, planning permissions, amusements, auction<br>> licenses, animal boardings, pet shops, tattoo shops, sex establishments,<br>> horse riding establishments, gambling locations, zoos, trees (apparently the<br>> highway authority has a tree database), park parks (including outside<br>> medway), highway renaming, new highway designations, changes to rights of<br>> way, all business premises .... did I miss anything?! If that is too much,<br>> we can prioritise our request to the council. We might start by asking for<br>> data that no one else has on their map and that is hard to comprehensively<br>> survey without their information. (Remember, I am not proposing to import<br>> anything yet, just to check against what the council has.) Hackey council<br>> has a list of many things they license, on the web [1], which is good for<br>> ideas.<br>> <br>> * that is if the council holds the data.<br>> <br>> If people can think of more data sets, we can put together a doodle poll to<br>> find the most wanted and to provide some justification (i.e. public demand)<br>> for us requesting the data.<br>> <br>> Btw, I found the parish data I was looking for in OS OpenData, so no need to<br>> pester the council for that.<br>> <br>> TimSC<br>> <br>> [1] http://www.hackney.gov.uk/licensing.htm<br>> <br>> On 23/05/11 16:10, Gregory Williams wrote: <br>> <br>> I've seen excerpts of that data in reports presented to the various Joint<br>> Transport Board meetings, so yes they have it.<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> Gregory<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> -------------- next part --------------<br>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20110524/d1a82a69/attachment-0001.html><br>> <br>> ------------------------------<br>> <br>> Message: 2<br>> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:28:27 +0100<br>> From: Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM <SK53_osm@yahoo.co.uk><br>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<br>> Subject: [Talk-GB] Any interest in a mapping party S Wales Sunday 26th<br>> June<br>> Message-ID: <4DDBDCAB.1030901@yahoo.co.uk><br>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed<br>> <br>> I plan to be in S. Wales for a few days late June, and will be free on <br>> Sunday 26th June.<br>> <br>> My suggestion would be Carmarthen : its not well mapped and is <br>> convenient for me, and reachable by public transport.<br>> <br>> Any takers?<br>> <br>> Jerry<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> ------------------------------<br>> <br>> Message: 3<br>> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 20:53:31 +0100 (BST)<br>> From: "Richard Fairhurst" <richard@systemeD.net><br>> To: "Ben Robbins" <ben_robbins_@hotmail.com><br>> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org, talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<br>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Tracks and there place in society<br>> Message-ID:<br>> <e8a8bc0156a2b0d611e931fa1ededd50.squirrel@www.systemed.net><br>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1<br>> <br>> Ben Robbins wrote:<br>> > Also, I have no idea how to take this to talk-gb, except by simply<br>> > replying there not here, and breaking up a string of responses. I did<br>> > however justify why it's here, which your welcome to read. I'm still<br>> > struggling some what with getting these replies in the right place, so<br>> > sorry about that.<br>> <br>> I find nabble.com is really good for being able to follow threaded<br>> discussions on the OSM lists without having ten tons of messages dumped in<br>> your inbox every day. :) I've crossposted this to talk-gb so you can reply<br>> there.<br>> <br>> > So to get back on track, and I think the answer is clear. There is no way<br>> > to get a byway on a track to render as a byway on a track on either mapnik<br>> > or osmarender. Is that correct? And if so, does the current tagging<br>> > scehem simply require a render change to allow this<br>> <br>> Yep.<br>> <br>> The tag "highway=byway" has fallen out of use. It doesn't really make<br>> sense to anyone outside the UK.<br>> <br>> Instead, in the UK, those of us who like tagging byways tend to add<br>> "designation=restricted_byway" or "designation=byway_open_to_all_traffic"<br>> (which are the two legal categories, and imply access) to a more physical<br>> tag - usually "highway=bridleway" or "highway=track".<br>> <br>> So if you wanted a map that highlights byways, you'd just need to make<br>> sure that the stylesheet noticed those tags and chose the rendering<br>> occasionally. I _think_ Nick W's Freemap does this already. Personally I<br>> think it's fairly unlikely for either Mapnik or Osmarender, because<br>> they're worldwide stylesheets. But you can always ask!<br>> <br>> cheers<br>> Richard<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> ------------------------------<br>> <br>> Message: 4<br>> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 21:12:04 +0100<br>> From: Nick Whitelegg <Nick.Whitelegg@solent.ac.uk><br>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<br>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Tracks and there place in society<br>> Message-ID:<br>> <OFFA49F9FD.CE90D324-ON8025789A.006EF7F0-8025789A.006EF7F2@solent.ac.uk><br>> <br>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>> <br>> <br>> >So if you wanted a map that highlights byways, you'd just need to make<br>> >sure that the stylesheet noticed those tags and chose the rendering<br>> >occasionally. I _think_ Nick W's Freemap does this already. Personally I<br>> >think it's fairly unlikely for either Mapnik or Osmarender, because<br>> >they're worldwide stylesheets. But you can always ask!<br>> <br>> Yes, it does recognise designation=public_byway, restricted_byway, byway, byway_open_to_all_traffic, and will render them in red. However (Ben, in response to your earlier question) it doesn't re-render instantly. The tileserver has been very generously provided by, and is managed, Swansea University Computer Society,? and re-renders a tile (I believe) one day after it's requested.<br>> <br>> So patience! ;-)<br>> <br>> Nick<br>> <br>> <br>> -------------- next part --------------<br>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20110524/77dce690/attachment-0001.html><br>> <br>> ------------------------------<br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Talk-GB mailing list<br>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<br>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb<br>> <br>> <br>> End of Talk-GB Digest, Vol 56, Issue 31<br>> ***************************************<br> </body>
</html>