[Talk-GB] Property extents

Gareth L o.i at live.co.uk
Thu Jan 10 07:24:26 UTC 2019

I’d maybe see the benefit for this data in more accurate/consistent landuse=residential areas? The whole “do you include the road, or create the area up to the road” decision.

On 10 Jan 2019, at 00:19, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com<mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com>> wrote:

Even if it were open .. does OSM want it?

I don't see any specific tags for it?

And you do want to have them accurate and up to date.


Example of inaccurate property extent problems .. from Australia - https://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/news/coroner-hits-out-at-police-use-of-google-maps-printouts-in-search-for-missing-man/news-story/0d005d8018e694433313ab2b941c7df4

A recent coroner hit out at the decision to rely on Google Maps printouts in the manhunt — noting that Queensland Police Service (QPS) had better tools available to them to search the area.

In fact, the inquest detailed how officers on the case were later given a much more informative aerial map of the area from the local council, at no cost to police whatsoever.

“It is quite apparent the quality of the images of the property on this map is far superior to the Google map images used in the search of the property and one wonders if the same mistake in conducting a search of only half the property would have been made if this map had been obtained,” Deputy State Coroner John Lock said in his report.


There are lots of potential problems from mapping private property extents. Don't think I would want to go there.

On 09/01/19 23:40, Andy Robinson wrote:
Tom, Jerry, Chris thanks for the very helpful prompts.


From: Chris Hill [mailto:osm at raggedred.net]
Sent: 09 January 2019 12:37
To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Property extents

Here's one of Jerry's blog posts about the not-so-open Land Registry data:


and my post about testing using them:


As Tom says, these datasets are not Open Data and we cannot use them as a data source in OSM. I feel that the Open Government Licence should not be used in this case as it isn't  Open.

On 09/01/2019 11:47, SK53 wrote:
Hi Andy,

Both Chris Hill & I blogged about them at the time, but they NEVER had any semblance of being open data.

The same proved to be true of the Land Registry Prices Paid which now can only be used if you are an estate agent.

Owen has covered both on his Map Gubbins blog.

Have to dash, so no time to find the links.


On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 11:07, Andy Robinson <ajrlists at gmail.com<mailto:ajrlists at gmail.com>> wrote:
As a follow-up, has anyone looked at the OGL licenced INSPIRE Land Registry index polygons?

Data is in GML format.


-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Robinson [mailto:ajrlists at gmail.com<mailto:ajrlists at gmail.com>]
Sent: 09 January 2019 10:56
To: 'David Woolley'; talk-gb at openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: RE: [Talk-GB] Property extents

On Wed 09/01/2019 10:35 David Woolley wrote:
>Actually, that seems more valuable to OSM than the building
>outlines as it is much more difficult to accurately recover from
>aerial imagery and ground surveys can normally only see front yards.

Agreed, though I wonder whether this will have any correlation with Land Registry. I'm guessing .gov isn’t that joined up.


Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org<mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20190110/6e6e99c0/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list