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