[Talk-GB] Resurrecting the 'find the missing paths for 2026' project

David Woolley forums at david-woolley.me.uk
Tue Oct 1 12:56:55 UTC 2019

On 30/09/2019 18:25, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> I made a start on this about a year ago, here's a quck mock-up showing 
> council data in colours and OSM paths shown in white as a 'tippex' 
> effect. This allows the identification of historical 'F.P' footpaths on 
> the historical maps which do not correspond either to current council 
> RoWs or current OSM paths, and thus would be candidates for 
> investigation to see if the path is in a usable state or there is 
> evidence of use.

Such paths are not going to have finger boards with "public footpath" on 
them.  In other threads, I sense quite a strong lobby for only mapping 
rights of way that are so marked on the ground and ignoring any 
designation that only appears in a map.

As such, you will end up with at best a permissive status recorded on 
OSM.  Even that is actually likely to be subjective.

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list