<div dir="ltr">> as I understand it Sustrans near Derby changed their mapping to match what was in OSM<div><br></div><div>So that is now in their GIS and so on OS and so OS needs to acknowledge OSM at <a href="http://osmaps.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ncn">osmaps.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ncn</a>?</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 18:29, Andy Townsend <<a href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com">ajt1047@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>On 04/11/2019 18:19, Edward Bainton
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">(much snippage)<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Sustrans appear to have moved the NCN routes off their own
site altogether (perhaps not news to you), and link directly
to <a href="http://osmaps.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ncn" target="_blank">osmaps.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ncn</a>.
The behaviour is pretty horrible - eg, can't cope with more
than one NCN/LCN route on a given stretch of road, which the
OpenCycleMap layer does very nicely. OTOH there's a link to a
route description and to buy the Sustrans paper map. I've no
experience of these.</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Just to throw in a local anecdote as an aside, as I understand it
Sustrans near Derby changed their mapping to match what was in OSM
because (a) what we had was a better representation of the signage
on the ground and (b) it was a better route for cyclists!</p>
<p>Best Regards,</p>
<p>Andy</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</blockquote></div>