[Talk-GB] Documenting prow_ref formats (Was: MapthePaths & Lancashire)

[Andrew Black]

Surrey seems ot have a format of " Banstead NCP 123A".  But existing
entries in OSM are "FP 37".

What does NCP mean. I will enter then as  f " Banstead FP 37" unless told
otherwise!




On 14 July 2018 at 17:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <
robert.whittaker+osm at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 13 July 2018 at 19:26, Andrew Black <andrewdblack at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> > I am pondering a similar but simpler question. I would like to add a
> table
> > listing each authority at https://wiki.openstreetmap.
> org/wiki/Key:prow_ref
> > describing the conventions used.
>
> I've been working on something like this already as part of my PRoW
> Progress/Comparison tool at
> http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/ . The tool needs to know
> the format that's used in each area in order to correctly parse the
> prow_ref values use in OSM, and to generate Right of Way numbers to
> display. The formats are stored in my database as a regular expression
> for parsing and a sprinf format string for generating the output. I've
> been displaying the formats on the county and parish pages for some
> time, but I've now added a page showing the formats for each county
> where one is defined:
>
> http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/
>
> These are the formats currently used by my tool. They may not always
> be the best one, as sometimes there didn't seem to be a consistent
> format in use (either by the Council or in OSM), and so sometimes I've
> just opted for my default "[Parish Name] [Type] [Number]" style. I can
> add other counties on request. I'm also more than happy to amend any
> of the formats already there if there's a consensus amongst local
> mappers to use something different.
>
> One thing to be aware of though, is that the GIS data provided by the
> councils is usually not the official Definitive Map, but just a
> working representation of it. Often the council will assign reference
> numbers to parishes, and segment numbers to the ways that are just for
> internal convenience, and don't form part of the official PRoW number
> as defined in the Definitive Map and Statement. My philosophy in the
> above is to try to stick to the official numbering as used in the
> Definitive Map and Statement.
>
> I plan to add a download of the data at
> http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ (probably in JSON
> format) at some point so anyone else who wants to can make us of this
> data more easily. I also have CSV files containing parish IDs and
> names for the counties where it's necessary to do this translation,
> which I can make available. For those using rowmaps data, sometimes
> you'll find the parish name in the INFO field, but the presence and
> format of this varies from county to county.
>
> Robert.
>
> --
> Robert Whittaker
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180719/670cbc25/attachment.html>