[Talk-GB] Local walking routes

[Mike Harris]

  Hi

As someone who does quite a bit of work on adding paths (including 
public rights of way) and walking routes to OSM my personal view would 
be to add relations only for routes which are either (a) waymarked as a 
route, and/or (b) carry a specific name e.g. "Little Sodding Millennium 
Walk". This is to avoid a proliferation of routes simply created locally 
- I create a good few each week!

But it's a free country!

Mike


On 19:59, David Ellams wrote:
> Where I live there is a Parish Paths Partnership (P3) Group, where 
> volunteers work with the council on projects to maintain and improve 
> access to public footpaths and brideways, e.g., waymarking, replacing 
> stiles with gates, etc. They publish a number of suggested walks on 
> their website (the walks for the most part just have descriptive 
> titles such as "Circular walk - Pontesbury Hill and Polesgate 
> Coppice"). With one exception, the routes themselves are not 
> signed/marked (though they follow waymarked paths). I am thinking 
> that, once I've got a bit more of the footpath network mapped, I might 
> ask them whether they would like some maps of their routes for their 
> web site, etc. (if I'm feeling really ambitious, I might one day even 
> try to get them involved in the surveying/mapping - a footpath mapping 
> party?).
> My question is whether I should record route relations for these 
> (perhaps slightly unofficial) unsigned walks (ranging from 1.5 to 
> about 5 miles). The Walking Routes page on the wiki suggests that 
> "lwn" is to be used for signed routes.
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Walking_Routes
> This question seems equivalent, to an extent, to this question about 
> the CTC National Byways Network:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Cycle_routes#United_Kingdom_.2F_CTC_National_Byways_Network.3F
> I realise there is nothing to stop me from adding these 
> walking routes (as relations) to OSM, but I'd welcome feedback on 
> whether folk think it is appropriate. Has anyone done anything like 
> this elsewhere? I would not have to add them to OSM in order to 
> produce some maps, so quite relaxed if there is a consensus that it is 
> not appropriate.
> There is also a local Walking For Health group, with some involvement 
> from the council, which publishes routes, but as far as I can see 
> these are waymarked specifically, so I probably will consider creating 
> route relations for those. Likewise, the P3 Group's one specifically 
> waymarked (and named) route, I feel is a good candidate to record in 
> OSM. So shout if you think I'm wrong on that one, too.
> Cheers
> David (davespod)

-- 
*/Mike Harris/*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20100805/69d4c070/attachment.html>