[Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

Rob Nickerson rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com
Mon Nov 6 12:30:31 UTC 2017


I think the point was that nobody has a common format. Some LAs use a
different style when they refer to the same path in the definitive
statement when compared to the GIS data.

Of course we can manipulate OGL data. That's included in the licence. If we
do change then it should be obvious to the LA what we mean if we speak with

I will be sticking with the wiki for any I map as this has been previously
discussed and has therefore grown traction according to taginfo.

For Leicestershire it seems to be an obvious change: they don't include
Parish so just don't include it. So I'd map prow_ref="FP J16" as an example.

P.s. I thought folks usually don't like to add third party database
references to OSM. Hence we came to an agreement of how prow_ref should be
*constructed* based on OGL data (not just a copy of one of the third party
attribute values).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20171106/fcb336cb/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list