[Talk-GB] Remapping update

Craig Loftus craigloftus+osm at googlemail.com
Fri Mar 23 13:02:08 GMT 2012


> Incidentally, is just "knowing the footpaths" evidence enough to tag with
> "odbl=clean"? Or is there the risk that the footpath was created with "iffy"
> sources?

As I read it, if the nodes along the way are clean then by marking the
way odbl clean you're just checking the properties are clean... so if
it is just a highway=footway and you know it exists there shouldn't be
a problem.

Craig

On 23 March 2012 12:58, Nick Whitelegg <Nick.Whitelegg at solent.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Incidentally, is just "knowing the footpaths" evidence enough to tag with
> "odbl=clean"? Or is there the risk that the footpath was created with "iffy"
> sources?
>
> I ask as I am intending to do some remapping of Andy Street's paths in the
> Bishops Waltham/Meon Valley area and wondering whether I have to actually
> walk the paths again or just tag with "odbl=clean"
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
> -----Robert Norris <rw_norris at hotmail.com> wrote: -----
>
> To: <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
> From: Robert Norris <rw_norris at hotmail.com>
> Date: 23/03/2012 12:07AM
>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
>
> Re: Andy Streets changes in Hampshire.
>
> So I thought I should get around at least to sticking in odbl=clean on ways
> (mainly paths & tracks) I know to be OK, that I've personally been on whilst
> cycling or walking.
>
> Which turned out to be more interesting than I thought...
>
> First via using JOSM it was telling me some ways might have problems, the
> history check wasn't a green CT for the user
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/essjayhch.
>
> Initially I thought odd, since they have agreed to the CTs, however checking
> their diary entry revealed they have been entering in C classifications for
> roads from Hampshire Council Council (via
> http://www3.hants.gov.uk/adoptedroadsearch/). It's not clear this is allowed
> - hence I assume essjayhch has been 'black listed' some how - but not
> reverted as I guess these edits will be removed/reverted come the license
> change switch. They also seem to have entered in many footpath refs too.
>
> Clearly I can't stick a odbl=clean on any such way.
>
> Next I then discover Andy Street had been also using Hampshire Council
> Council as a source reference in various changesets, such as:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/changeset/5184209
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/changeset/8257081
>
> Possibly this could a reason why he can not accept the CTs
>
> In my check the other day I did not check for this type of source reference.
> This also means potentially any of his 2000 changesets could be problematic
> - so not just after 1st April 2010 for the OS Locator/Streetview allowed
> data.
>
>
> PS Thanks Nick Austin for your efforts in Portsmouth (and all over
> Hampshire). I don't have the patience / time / willing to do that amount of
> remapping.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>



More information about the Talk-GB mailing list