[Talk-GB] Definitive Ways - tagging? (was Re: Talk-GB Digest, Vol 44, Issue 19)

[Ian Spencer]

I think it would be useful to have a think about how we might tag 
validated definitive ways in addition to the public footpath recognising 
that there are potentially 3 different versions of a path:

1) The official published rights of way - say from OS.
2) OSM interpretation of rights of way (sourced from a combination of 
survey, reinterpretation of LA data and OS data) which could differ. 
(The difference between (1) & (2) is the to-do list with the LA effectively)
3) The walkable paths which are considered by the public to be the way, 
even if they are not the formal definition.

While I wouldn't argue with a farmer based on OSM, if we knew what the 
derivation was, and the status of any diversions, then at least you can 
stride across that newly planted crop with a bit more confidence. I 
don't think the current tagging regime exactly covers the above - and I 
doubt there is great confidence in the legal validity of of a footpath 
tagged in OSM as a Public Footpath.

It seems to be that there should be a definitive-way tag with status of 
yes, disputed, (and implicitly, no) and another of definitive-way-source 
as you cannot establish a definitive way by GPS, even though you can for 
the de facto line of the path (being able to see the difference could be 
useful).

Ian


Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote on 13/05/2010 10:51:
> Mike,
>
> A very comprehensive reply, thanks for that. It would be worth having what
> you have written on a relevant wiki page as its probably the best write-up
> of the arrangements as we know them.
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
>    
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: talk-gb-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
>> bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Mike Harris
>> Sent: 13 May 2010 9:06 AM
>> To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Talk-GB Digest, Vol 44, Issue 19
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> My understanding of PRoW law is that:
>