[Talk-GB] Hants CC - Open Government Licence & use of data

[wintonian]

This was one of the other things I was wondering about.

If we are mapping what is actually on the ground (which would seem to be 
the sensible approach) and then assigning the relevant legal status to 
the feature i.e. a footpath/ bridleway etc. in this case and the legal 
line RoW is diffident to that which is currently used then are we not 
implying that it's OK to trespass on this path, which is effectively 
what is happening by using it?

I'm not to worried about law suits as we could just 'copy' is OS and use 
a disclaimer ("the representation of [...] is no evidence of..."), I 
mean if it works for them... But I will admit it may be a valid concern.

as for waymarks and fingerprints pointing a different way they are 
(according to HCC at least) supposed to point in the direction of the 
legal RoW and where it looks like people go. However from my experience 
I don't think they always take a copy of the definitive map with them 
when they go out on such a task - "Oh look it seems people have been 
walking around the field edge, I doubt the nice farmer would illegally 
plough their field and not restore it being the such welcoming fellows 
they are." - Hmm.

As for importing the data I know most of the RoW's are in OSM so I was 
really just thinking about assigning the correct designation to the 
existing ways and filling in the gaps where they exist (or perhaps I 
should say don't exist).

Lastly I am unclear as to what we do when we come to what I call 
unspecified rights of way, that is those shown on the OS Explorer series 
with green dots, which donate routes that are accepted (by the highway 
authority) as being rights of way but no-one knows exactly what those 
rights are. These are not shown on definitive maps but the OS obtains 
the data from the highway authority. I must confess I am a little 
unclear as to the whole concept of a RoW known about not being on the 
definitive map.

Regards
Robert

On 03/12/13 22:00, Jonathan wrote:
> Can someone clarify the situation for me.  I'm in Worcestershire where
> permission was previously sought to use the Worcs CC PRoW.  However,
> what is the advice in a situation where you can't use official PRoW
> data, Bing shows a path across a field, a ground survey also shows a
> clear path across the field but the signs show a Public Footpath along
> the edge into another field and rejoining on the other side.
>
> Do we map where people are trespassing, maybe with a bland highway=path
> tag and source=bing;survey or just map the official PRoW.  Further more,
> if there are no clear signs somewhere (often the case), do we just leave
> it blank, even though the CC show it on their copyright map or again
> show a highway=path marking the tresspassing.
>
> While we may worry about using copyright material, paid for by British
> taxpayers I might add, I think OSMF could face quite a hefty lawsuit if
> we were to indicate a PRoW across private land on the back of "we
> surveyed it with GPS and everyone else is walking that way so that's why
> we mapped it"?
>
> Jonathan
>
> http://bigfatfrog67.me
>
> On 03/12/2013 19:32, Rob Nickerson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The Hants data was one of the first Rights of Way datasets that we got
>> access to. It is my understanding that we did get the permission for
>> using this OS OpenData licensed data above and beyond what the OS
>> OpenData license says (we have permission from both OS and Hants CC).
>>
>> Having said this, it is worth speaking with the local community as
>> they will be best suited to advise on how the data is being
>> integrated. For example, Nick Whitelegg (nickw) should be able to
>> confirm whether they are incorporating the designation type (footpath,
>> bridleway, etc) if a way already exists in OSM without needing a
>> survey. I would imagine they are doing a ground survey when they find
>> a way that is not yet in OSM as a straight import might not reflect
>> what is on the ground.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Rob
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>