[Talk-GB] Lancashire prow_ref reference table

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 at 14:32, Dave F via Talk-GB
<talk-gb at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> On 26/11/2019 12:01, Tony OSM wrote:
> >  to the preferred prow_ref format  Adlington FP 5.
>
> As previous, this is not the preferred format. The format should be as
> supplied by the LA, the organisation which has the *authority* to name
> PROWs.

My reading of the original post is that Tony is saying that the
Council themselves are inconsistent in how they refer to their PRoWs.
In which case, I think we should use the format that is most prevalent
on the underlying legal documents (i.e. the Definitive Map and
Statement) rather than any electronic working datasets that are
produced from these. The onilne map at
https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/roads-parking-and-travel/public-rights-of-way/public-rights-of-way-map/
uses the "9-5-FP 23" style numbers, but probably doesn't have any
legal force. I can't find any actual Definitive Statements online for
Lancashire, but there are what seem to be some Definitive Map extracts
in their DMMO register at
http://www3.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate/dmmoview/ . These mostly look
to just use the "FP 34", "BW 45" numbers, without an explicit parish.
My guess would be that the parishes are named in the Definitive Map
and Statement, rather than using reference numbers (which are probably
an artefact of digitisation). So unless the council has officially
adopted the electronic version with the "9-5-FP 23" style numbers as
it's legal Definitive Map, we should be looking at accepting parish
names in the official reference numbers. The question then is how does
the council itself refer to the Rights of Way when using named
parishes rather than IDs. What is *their* preferred format?

If we can agree on the appropriate prow_ref format to use in OSM, then
I can load the GIS data into my tool at
https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/ and have it display the refs in
the agreed format. Tony, if you've got a CSV file that converts
between the ID numbers and named districts/parishes that you could
send me, that would be really helpful, whichever format we end up
agreeing to use in OSM. It will also automatically produce a table
like https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/essex/parishes with the
parish names and numbers for anyone to reference.

Best wishes,

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker