[Talk-gb-westmidlands] FW: [Talk-GB] Use of PRoW Definitive Statements from Hertfordshire, Oxfordshire, Worcestershire

[Andy Robinson]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Whittaker (OSM) [mailto:robert.whittaker+osm at gmail.com]
> Sent: 21 June 2012 23:56
> To: talk-gb
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Use of PRoW Definitive Statements from Hertfordshire,
> Oxfordshire, Worcestershire
> 
> I'm pleased to be able to report that three councils have agreed to let us
use
> their Definitive Statements of Public Rights of Way under the UK Open
> Government License (OGL). (I'll be posting the emails I sent to the
councils
> and some other notes about the correspondence I had with them in a
> separate message for anyone who's interested.) The councils who've told
> me we can use their Definitive Statements under the OGL are:
> 
> * Hertfordshire
> * Oxfordshire
> * Worcestershire
> 
> The first two of these have the statements online in a convenient form
[1],
> [2]. Worcestershire does not, but the text of each right of way is
available
> from a link in the popup by clicking on the interactive map [3]. Accessing
> them in this way, it will be hard to avoid inadvertently making use of the
> additional information about the route of each way from the map. So I've
> obtained a list of all the image files, which I'm planning to use to allow
direct
> access to the statements for each parish. Watch this space for more
details,
> though first I have to chase up a few of the files that seem to be
missing.
> 
> The OGL requires attribution, so I've added details of these three
counties to
> the appropriate wiki page [4]. (Unfortunately though, this page isn't
> obviously linked from the main OSM map or official copyright/license page
> [5] so I'm not convinced that attribution statements on [4] completely
fulfil
> our obligations at the moment.
> Yes, we've provided attribution, but it's not somewhere that we could
> reasonably expect users to find it. I've been in touch with LWG about
this,
> and fixing things is on their to do list -- though it seem from their
minutes
> that this has been the case since September 2011. Does anyone know who is
> able to edit the text on [5]?)
> 
> I'm hopeful that we'll be able to make use of the statements to verify the
> designation of already mapped ways, and add the appropriate designation
> tag where it's missing. In most cases, the description probably won't be
> enough to be able to map a way without a survey.
> However in conjunction with aerial imagery and maybe a bit of local
> knowledge, it may be possible to do so for some routes. But the statements
> will certainly be helpful in any effort of complete the mapping of public
rights
> of way by identifying missing routes in need of a survey.
> 
> To help with matching routes up and checking off what has been found, it
will
> be useful to tag the ways with the Council's reference number, using our
> ref=* key. Doing so has been discussed on this list before [6]. (Though
> following some more recent discussion [7] we may be heading towards using
> prow:ref=* instead to avoid a clash with other uses of ref on the same
ways.)
> In the thread at [6] it's been observed that different councils use
different
> path numbering schemes, so we'll probably be unable to use a common
> scheme across the whole country.
> Looking at the numbering scheme used by the three councils above, I'd
> suggest the following ref formats:
> 
> * Hertfordshire: "[Parish] [0Num]"
> * Oxfordshire: "[Pn]/[Num]"
> * Worcestershire: "[PC]-[0Num]"
> 
> where [Parish] is the full parish name (in Title case), [Pn] is a
numerical parish
> code, [PC] is a two letter parish code (with upper-case letters), [Num] is
the
> numerical path number without leading zeros, and [0Num] is the numerical
> path number with leading zeros.
> 
> (Note that Worcestershire has re-numbered all their paths, giving each
> segment between path junctions a distinct number within the parish.
> The definitive statements still use the old numbers in the route
descriptions,
> and it might not be possible to tell which segment of each route has which
> new number. It it probably a good idea to store the original reference
> numbers in OSM too, eg with old_ref="[Parish] [Num]" top make using the
> definitive statements easier.)
> 
> Finally, when tagging ways with designation=* and/or ref=* based on the
> definitive statements, I think it would be useful to indicate the source.
I'd
> suggest using source:designation=definitive_statement
> and/or source:ref=definitive_statement as appropriate.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Robert.
> 
> [1]
> http://www.hertsdirect.org/services/envplan/countryside/walkingandriding
> /row/defmap/defstate/
> [2] http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/definitive-map-and-
> statement-online
> [3] http://gis.worcestershire.gov.uk/website/Countryside/
> [4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#United_Kingdom
> [5] http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
> [6] Thread starts at
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-May/013314.html
> [7] Thread starts at
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-June/013411.html
> 
> --
> Robert Whittaker
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb