[Talk-GB] Rights of way vs. tracks

[Andy Townsend]

On 29/09/2019 19:37, Edward Bainton wrote:
>
> Do I mark a track, with all it's passability tags, and then tag horses 
> & foot=designated? That acknowledges the track, but disregards the 
> documentation here 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway#England_and_Wales:_Public_bridleways> 
> which says "Public bridleways should be tagged:highway 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=bridlewayanddesignation 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:designation>=public_bridleway" .
>
I've edited the relevant wiki page to make it clearer:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway#England_and_Wales%3A_Public_bridleways

If something is designated as a public bridleway add the 
"designation=public_bridleway" tag.  This is separate to the highway tag 
- that might be highway=bridleway, but as you point out could very 
easily be highway=track or highway=service.  I've also seen examples 
that on the ground really aren't substantial enough to be called 
highway=bridleway, but are legally signed as that.

>
> 2.
> What should I do with this footpath 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/729709956>, which appears on OSM 
> and also on the OS map 
> <http://streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=511004&y=298838&z=115&sv=511004,298838&st=4&ar=y&mapp=map.srf&searchp=ids.srf&dn=577&ax=511004&ay=298838&lm=0> 
> as a public footpath.
>
> There is absolutely no indication of it on the ground: no beaten path, 
> no fingerboard, no break in the hedge at the SW end (it wouldn't need 
> one at the NE end, open country).
>
> Do I delete as probably sourced from OS, or leave as it's a right of way?

That's a good question.  Cambridgeshire is listed at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors , so I suspect that the 
data from the council would be licence-appropriate for OSM per 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility .

If there's no physical access through a hedge I'd definitely ensure that 
there isn't a "highway=footway" running through a hedge.

Given the complicated history of the ways involved, it isn't necessarily 
the case that someone "copied from OS"; they may just have seen a public 
footpath sign at one end and tagged the way there, unaware that the 
footpath crossed several roads and went through a hedge.  I've certainly 
done that in the past.  In fact:

>
> (For some reason the history shows me as the author of Version #1 of 
> that path, but actually it long predated my edits in this area. iirc 
> the history, before my edits elsewhere apparently over-wrote it, 
> showed it as added several years ago)

It is possible to find out what happened here.  Here's a query for the 
ways in mid-2015:

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MHs

and here's one for mid-2016:

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MHt

The way that was there before many, many splits is 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/210211088/history , and the edit that 
joined it to the Peterborough road was 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35688401 back at the end of 2015 
(the changeset comment helpfully says that the GPS trace used was from 
June 2015).  Obviously back then it's quite possible that there was 
signage and no hedge.

Best Regards,

Andy



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20190929/4d446d06/attachment.html>