[Talk-GB] DfT Consultation - Traffic orders: simplifying (& mapping?) the process

[Paul Bivand]

I was thinking in relation to the Satnav summit, but I suppose it fits here as 
well.

If DfT was willing to help... set up an OSM toolchain to collect local 
authority changesets under Open Government Licence, which were then available 
for OSM (and forks) and for the commercial map providers.

It would then be up to the commercial people to translate OSM changesets 
submitted by local councils into their own formats.

I was thinking of new changes rather than current patterns, which are rather 
more satnav summit material. 

I presume for consultation purposes these would have to be tagged 'proposed' 
and then the tag removed when actioned. 

Setting up an XML schema when we've got one that works seems a bit like 
reinventing wheels. 

Such a system would automatically flow through into Satnavs using OSM, and via 
the commercial providers, into other satnavs as well (subject to their 
updating processes/costs)

Paul Bivand (paulbiv)

On Monday 30 Jan 2012 16:14:04 Ralph Smyth wrote:
> DfT has launched a new consultation today on amending requirements
> placed on traffic authorities in England when they propose and make
> temporary and permanent traffic orders (TOs):
> www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2012-06/
> 
> Traffic Orders cover things like (non-national) speed limits, parking
> restrictions, restricted turns/access etc. There are lots of potential
> advantages of digitising this data and making it available to third
> parties, whether reducing the need for signage clutter or the risk of
> drivers going round in circles looking for loading bays. I'm trying to
> highlight the link between this and the 'Satnav summit' being held by
> the DfT in March.
> 
> Quick summary:
> 
> '4.20 Instead [of using local newspapers], authorities would be under a
> general duty to publicise their orders in whatever they consider to be
> the most appropriate way. We propose to supplement this general duty
> with some non-statutory guidance setting out options available for
> publicising TOs, and identifying where each method would be appropriate.
> This would also encourage the use of innovative communication channels
> which already exist, and those which may evolve in the future.
> 
> 4.21 We anticipate that traffic authorities will welcome the
> recommendation to use on-line publicity for their TOs. We would see this
> being used as a way of conveying the full details of the TO, which could
> be 'sign-posted' from other sources. With that in mind, we will propose
> a format for on-line advertising of TOs alongside the guidance with the
> intention of increasing the consistency of how TOs are advertised
> on-line.'
> 
> Having been a member of the DfT's Traffic Signs Policy Review, which led
> to this consultation, I'm meeting officials on Thursday morning (Feb
> 2nd) for a discussion and would be interested in any views how new
> guidance and a new format could best fit with open data principles.
> 
> Peter Miller has already suggested use of principles from XML schemas:
> 
> http://interim.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/govtalk/schemasstandards/xmlschemas/
> developerguide/e-government_schema_guidelines_for_xml.aspx
> <blocked::http://interim.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/govtalk/schemasstandards/x
> mlschemas/developerguide/e-government_schema_guidelines_for_xml.aspx>
> http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.cabinetoffice.gov
> .uk/govtalk/schemasstandards.aspx
> 
> I'm also interested how this could be made to work with new civil
> society tools, such as the Cyclescape project. So sorry for the short
> notice but any ideas on this list over the next few days would be most
> welcome. Otherwise you have until late April to respond to the
> consultation.
> 
> thanks
> 
> Ralph Smyth
> Senior Transport Campaigner, Barrister
> Campaign to Protect Rural England
> 128 Southwark Street, London SE1 0SW
> www.cpre.org.uk/what-we-do/transport
> <http://www.cpre.org.uk/what-we-do/transport>