[Talk-GB] Permissive paths and "uncrecorded rights of way"

[cotswolds mapper]

[New here (to OSM, not to mapping), so I'm not sure if I'm making this
point in the right way or the right place. It's effectively a comment on
the UK wiki changes, but I can't see how to reply to that thread.]

It's been bothering me for a while that there is a gap in tagging
guidelines relating to well-used (and possibly long-standing) paths that
are not official rights of way.  Certainly a newcomer reading the
guidelines could get the impression that everything is one of RoW,
permissive path or unknown, and I don't think that is true.

Two examples from the area I'm working in (Cotswolds between
Stroud/Cirencester/Birdlip).

1) There is a path through a wood I have been using on and off for nearly
twenty years. It's clearly well used, mainly by dog walkers. There are no
signs indicating the wood is private, and they are using it as of right. If
someone tried to close it, I'm pretty sure it could be proved that a right
of way exists.

2) In several villages (e.g. Eastcombe) I have found public 'ways' which
are not official RoWs:
On OS 1:25k maps (both historic and modern) they are shown as white roads.
They feel like public rather than private land, with dry stone walls on
both sides, and no stiles or gates or restrictions.
'Proper' rights of way branch off them.
They are maintained at public expense (parish council workman cuts the
grass twice a year, and sometimes there's a tarmac strip), and are well
used (because the roads are narrow with no pavement).
I would expect them to be ORPAs, but mostly they are not, and I have found
too many for it to be an OS transcription error.

In both cases, 'permissive' is completely inappropriate because people have
used these ways as of right for many years, but they are not status unknown.

More generally, I have read that there are thousands of miles of
'lost/unrecorded' RoW in... (England? UK? ... can't remember), and OSM
mappers should be finding some of these. While all sorts of tags are
possible for the experienced, the novice is likely to restrict themselves
to wiki options.

At the moment, the wiki reads to me as if 'permissive' is the fall through
option once you have established that a way is not a RoW.  IMO mappers
should be discouraged from thinking like that and only record a way as
'permissive' if there is clear evidence that it is not used as of right.
(And also be open to the idea that permissive signs may be wrong, but
that's for another thread...)

I think there then needs to be a tag (or two) for other ways that are not
RoW, but not clearly permissive. For my first example, maybe 'traditional'
or 'informal' would do.

For my second example, which seems to me an obvious example of something
falling through the crack between the council road's department and RoW
department, I would be inclined to use 'de facto RoW', because it's hard to
imagine anyone disputing the use, but there would need to be a high
standard of evidence on the ground to use that term.

Rob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20120426/a7ae2bd6/attachment.html>