<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi Tony,</div><div><br></div><div>Anybody interested in the scans are welcome to view, use or host them (subject to the OGL) or suggest somewhere I can upload them. Beware that the Statements are often brief, outdated or otherwise less useful than might be imagined. The Survey cards date from circa 1950 and were working documents and not part of the final definitive legal record.<br></div><div><br></div><div> The links below are the versions of the data I have backed up online. They do differ very slightly from the original versions supplied by the council in that I've retitled some of the folders so that they state the name of the area covered rather than just a number. I could upload the versions exactly as received from the council if requested.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Statements:<br></div><div><a href="https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XgJHkDeSrsUnLsVNrGSwmwBqUZ1y8fvd" target="_blank">https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XgJHkDeSrsUnLsVNrGSwmwBqUZ1y8fvd</a></div><div>
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0
</div><div><br></div><div>Original Parish Survey Cards:<br></div><div><a href="https://drive.google.com/open?id=1l0JxeByzWZSMdboGjCuWCzcg6HtTZiRk" target="_blank">https://drive.google.com/open?id=1l0JxeByzWZSMdboGjCuWCzcg6HtTZiRk</a></div><div>
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0
</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Adam<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 at 23:44, Tony OSM <<a href="mailto:tonyosm9@gmail.com" target="_blank">tonyosm9@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 bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Adam, thank you</p>
<p>Anderton and Adlington parishes are next to each other on the
ground - a good example of read across error which needs to be
avoided.</p>
<p>Euxton Parish Council have published a recent LCC notice on their
website - <a href="http://www.euxtoncouncil.org.uk/news.php?id=83" target="_blank">http://www.euxtoncouncil.org.uk/news.php?id=83</a></p>
<p>which refers to PUBLIC FOOTPATHS EUXTON 37 & 38, CHORLEY
BOROUGH .</p>
<p>Separately on Chorley Borough Council website, a modification
order
<a href="https://democracy.chorley.gov.uk/ecSDDisplay.aspx?NAME=SD2280&ID=2280&RPID=6590173" target="_blank">https://democracy.chorley.gov.uk/ecSDDisplay.aspx?NAME=SD2280&ID=2280&RPID=6590173</a>
refers</p>
<p><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Add </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">to </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">the </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Definitive </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Statement
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">for </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Croston </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">the </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">following:</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Restricted </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Byway </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">26 </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">from </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">a </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">junction </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">with
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Back </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Drinkhouse </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Lane
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">at </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">SD </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">4853 </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">1838</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace"> running </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">in </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">an </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">approximately </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">easterly
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">direction </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">along </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">an </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">enclosed </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">track
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">to </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">pass </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">through </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">bollards </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">at
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">SD </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">4854 </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">1838 </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">and </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">continuing </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">to </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">terminate </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">at </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">SD </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">4859 </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">1838 </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">at </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">a </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">junction</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace"> with </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Drinkhouse </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Road
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">between </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">properties </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">17
</span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">and </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">19 </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Drinkhouse </span><span style="font-size:20.0006px;font-family:monospace">Road.</span></p>
<div>It seems clear that LCC have no formal
nomenclature reference rules, so the method described by you and
your reasoning is that which we in Lancashire should adopt.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'd like to see the data supplied to
you made more widely available - as that public availability was
part of my original question. I shall send to Rob the data I
extracted from the data supplied.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards <br>
</div>
<div>Tony<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On 26/11/2019 21:12, Adam Snape wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Firstly, Tony, I think 9-4 is Anderton and 9-1 is
Adlington.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As part of the original FOI/EIR/Re-use request for the
GIS dataset, I also requested (and was supplied) the
council's scanned copies of the Definitive Statements along
with permission to use them under the OGL. They appear to be
complete as of when they were scanned (Early 2000s) but
don't include any subsequent modification orders (like many
councils Lancs don't frequently update the Map/Statement
themselves, the documents have to be read in conjunction
with any relevant modification orders).. If Tony or anyone
else is interested in the Statements I can send a download
link. If anybody knows anywhere where they could be hosted
to be publicly accessible in the long term then that would
be great. With the statements the Council also supplied and
OGL licensed scans of the county's surviving original parish
survey cards which were used as part of the process for
drawing up the draft definitive maps/statements. The same
applies to these (though beware that these only cover a
fraction of the County (the Rural Districts of Lancaster,
Fylde, Wigan, West Lancs and Chorley).<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The paper Definitive Maps and Statements for Lancashire
don't go as far as naming the paths or supplying a
definitive reference and as Robert suspected I've not seen
any pre-digitisation records which use anything like 9-4-5.
Parishes are not numbered on either the map or Statement.
Paths are numbered individually and colour coded by status
on the maps. The format varied over time but most of the
statements are tabulated by (named) parish with column
headings 'path number', 'kind of path', 'position',
'length', 'any other particulars', there is no section for
path name or reference, though where the statement for one
path it refers to another path it is usually in the form of
parish, path type, path number. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Whilst there is a pretty much de facto standard
when discussing rights of way to use the format parish, path
type (often abbreviated), path no., I'm really not sure we
need to be overly bothered about the (perceived) formatting
preference of each county (I've never heard of a coucnil
actually having a preference on path referencing format). In
this context differences in formatting don't change the
meaning 'Rivington FP3' is synonymous with 'Rivington
Footpath 3', is synonymous with 'Public Footpath Number 3 in
the Parish of Rivington'. It is much more meaningful to have
national consistency than to slavishly following what we
imagine to be the formatting preference of each individual
authority.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>Kind regards,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Adam</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, 16:04
Robert Whittaker (OSM lists), <<a href="mailto:robert.whittaker%2Bosm@gmail.com" target="_blank">robert.whittaker+osm@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">On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 at
14:32, Dave F via Talk-GB<br>
<<a href="mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">talk-gb@openstreetmap.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> On 26/11/2019 12:01, Tony OSM wrote:<br>
> > to the preferred prow_ref format Adlington FP
5.<br>
><br>
> As previous, this is not the preferred format. The
format should be as<br>
> supplied by the LA, the organisation which has the
*authority* to name<br>
> PROWs.<br>
<br>
My reading of the original post is that Tony is saying
that the<br>
Council themselves are inconsistent in how they refer to
their PRoWs.<br>
In which case, I think we should use the format that is
most prevalent<br>
on the underlying legal documents (i.e. the Definitive Map
and<br>
Statement) rather than any electronic working datasets
that are<br>
produced from these. The onilne map at<br>
<a href="https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/roads-parking-and-travel/public-rights-of-way/public-rights-of-way-map/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/roads-parking-and-travel/public-rights-of-way/public-rights-of-way-map/</a><br>
uses the "9-5-FP 23" style numbers, but probably doesn't
have any<br>
legal force. I can't find any actual Definitive Statements
online for<br>
Lancashire, but there are what seem to be some Definitive
Map extracts<br>
in their DMMO register at<br>
<a href="http://www3.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate/dmmoview/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www3.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate/dmmoview/</a>
. These mostly look<br>
to just use the "FP 34", "BW 45" numbers, without an
explicit parish.<br>
My guess would be that the parishes are named in the
Definitive Map<br>
and Statement, rather than using reference numbers (which
are probably<br>
an artefact of digitisation). So unless the council has
officially<br>
adopted the electronic version with the "9-5-FP 23" style
numbers as<br>
it's legal Definitive Map, we should be looking at
accepting parish<br>
names in the official reference numbers. The question then
is how does<br>
the council itself refer to the Rights of Way when using
named<br>
parishes rather than IDs. What is *their* preferred
format?<br>
<br>
If we can agree on the appropriate prow_ref format to use
in OSM, then<br>
I can load the GIS data into my tool at<br>
<a href="https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/</a>
and have it display the refs in<br>
the agreed format. Tony, if you've got a CSV file that
converts<br>
between the ID numbers and named districts/parishes that
you could<br>
send me, that would be really helpful, whichever format we
end up<br>
agreeing to use in OSM. It will also automatically produce
a table<br>
like <a href="https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/essex/parishes" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/essex/parishes</a>
with the<br>
parish names and numbers for anyone to reference.<br>
<br>
Best wishes,<br>
<br>
Robert.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Robert Whittaker<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</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>