[Talk-GB] Other Routes With Public Access

[Colin Smale]

This page gives a bit of background info about these ORPAs on OS maps 

https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/about/governance/foi/questions/2011/0041.html

--colin 

On 2016-02-13 21:10, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

> Hello Dudley, 
> 
> Not sure if it's standard but I use either "designation=orpa" if there's explicit evidence of it being one, or "suspected=orpa" if there isn't (e.g. a 'green lane' which is unsignposted but has evidence of regular foot/horse use). 
> 
> Nick 
> 
> -------------------------
> 
> FROM: Dudley Ibbett <dudleyibbett at hotmail.com>
> SENT: 13 February 2016 14:57
> TO: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
> SUBJECT: Re: [Talk-GB] Other Routes With Public Access 
> 
> Hi
> 
> I came across a paved single lane "road" on a recent walk that was sign posted in both directions as a "Public Road" It makes a loop between two "unclassified" roads.
> Functionally, is seems to be a service route for an isolated farm that sits at the top of the loop, although it would make quite an useful link road between the two "unclassified" roads .  I crossed it at the top of the loop so I don't know what there was with regards to signs at each end.  On the OS 1:25 it is marked as "Other Routes With Public Access".  Is there anything I can infer from the use of the term "Public Road".  i.e foot, horse, bicycle, vehicle = yes/no? How are people tagging the "designation" of such routes,  i.e. are people using  "designation=other routes with public access"?
> 
> Many Thanks
> 
> Dudley 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20160213/6469d4f6/attachment.html>