<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<p>Thanks Dave,</p>
<p>I've added the OSM map as an optional background (see bottom
icon on right of map for options).</p>
<p>Your second point about "entrance paths" is probably one where
there are different opinions. Within the Sustrans dataset some
of the paths (e.g. connections from the local housing estate to
the NCN) are included in the Sustrans NCN data, some aren't.
Some are labelled as "links", some as "NCN". I'll be encouraging
Sustrans to follow a consistent approach - I don't really care
whether the paths are included or not so long as they are
consistent - and would then argue that OSM should probably
follow the Sustrans approach (whatever it is). <br>
</p>
<p>However, until Sustrans have a consistent approach there don't
seem to be any issues in OSM mappers following their own
decisions for these linking / entrance paths.</p>
<p>Ian<br>
</p>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 27/02/2023 18:10, Dave F wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:a97fb814-7820-fb51-f90b-fdca89344283@btinternet.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
This is useful. Thanks<br>
<br>
The two main discrepancies in my locale are <br>
<br>
1. One way routes, which appear to be all Sustrans' lack of
detail.<br>
2. Entrance paths onto old railway lines/towpaths. Although
technically within Sustrans' maintenance remit, I never
considered them to be a part of the linear route, so won't be
tagging them as NCNs.<br>
<br>
Could you add the standard OSM-Carto layer as an option, maybe
even black & white, as I'm finding the cycle layer can obscure
some of Sustrans' data, such as links. <br>
<br>
DaveF<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 25/02/2023 20:45, Ian Dent wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:12427e86-fc3e-3a74-b1bb-bcfcd74deb63@dent.org.uk">
<p> </p>
<p>I’ve been on a campaign to get the accuracy of the Sustrans
National Cycle Network improved for quite a while now and have
made some progress in engaging with Sustrans.</p>
<p>I’ve found that the NCN plotted on OpenStreetMap differs in a
number of places from that in the Sustrans mapping.</p>
<p>I’ve created a coarse visualisation of the differences – see
<a
href="https://dent.org.uk/sustrans/sustrans-ncn-inconsistences/"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">https://dent.org.uk/sustrans/sustrans-ncn-inconsistences/</a>
- which, by focusing on the thick red and blue areas shows
which areas to investigate in detail. Note this is a snapshot
at Feb 23 and won’t reflect any changes in OSM or Sustrans
data until I update it. Also note it is intended to show where
to focus and some of the smaller focus areas may be errors in
how I’ve done the mapping.</p>
<p>I know the Derbyshire NCN fairly well and have found that
most of the discrepancies are due to errors in the Sustrans
data rather than OSM and suspect this may be the case across
the country. </p>
<p>Sustrans have gone through a process of removing some of
their routes and “reclassifying” others (i.e. not being
responsible for them in the future). I’ve excluded these
removed and reclassified sections from the map and the
comparison with the OSM even though a lot of the routes still
appear in OSM as they still have signage on the ground. I’m
taking advice on what to do about removed and reclassified
routes and will post a separate note on this subject later.</p>
<p>I’m keen that Sustrans internally review the discrepancies
and make changes to their mapping when it is in error. I’ve
had some success in discussions but it is a slow process!
There is discussion about involving the Sustrans volunteer
force who are very geographically spread and will have local
knowledge.</p>
<p>I’m also keen to understand how best to communicate the
discrepancy areas to people within the OSM community with
local knowledge and who can, where the OSM is in error, make
the necessary OSM changes.</p>
<p>Discrepancies are for various reasons including:</p>
<ul>
<li>
<p>mismatches on how the route is mapped (the map shows
differences of 10 metres or more).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Routes that Sustrans have classed as regional but OSM as
national (or vice versa). e.g. NCN 30 south of Lowestoft,
NCN 568 on The Wirral</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>New Sustrans routes that haven’t yet reached OSM – e.g.
NCN 28 east of Plymouth</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Routes that Sustrans classes as “links” but OSM has as
NCN – e.g. NCN 28 near Dartmouth. I think these are
generally Sustrans errors.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Routes that OSM have included as NCN but which are not
part of the Sustrans network. e.g. NCN 627 north of
Sheffield, NCN 422 near Wokingham</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Some ferries are included as routes in OSM – e.g. NCN 2
near Plymouth</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Sustrans data for the NCN can be found at <a
href="https://data-sustrans-uk.opendata.arcgis.com/"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">https://data-sustrans-uk.opendata.arcgis.com/</a>
(Open Government Licence). Note that a lot of this isn’t
accurate so don’t take it as gospel – on the ground survey is
needed.</p>
<p>I’ll continue to work with Sustrans to try and get their
errors improved. I’d appreciate advice on how to get the OSM
community to consider the discrepancies and fix any OSM errors
found (local knowledge needed).</p>
<p>Thanks to those who’ve already discussed this with me –
particularly the recent East Midlands OSM meeting.</p>
<p>Ian<br>
</p>
<p> </p>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>