[Talk-GB] prow_ref format for Dorset Public Rights of Way

Tony OSM tonyosm9 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 16 14:18:12 UTC 2020


Hi Rob

There is a very similar state in Lancashire, I can imagine the 
Lancashire officer providing  a very similar response to that from Dorset.

Dorset are saying that their definitive statement is listed by named 
parish, status and route number.

I believe that as the public definitive reference is named parish, 
status and route number then that should be what is in OSM, using number 
references looks to me like an internal workaround for earlier computers 
and spreadsheets.

Using named parish, status and route number also makes it easier to use 
on maps - eg Andy Townsends 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=13&lat=53.6423&lon=-2.5975

Regards and mapsafe

Tony Shield

TonyS999

On 16/04/2020 14:18, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> I've recently been looking at increasing the coverage of my PRoW
> comparison tool https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/ by adding new
> counties. In particular, I've been looking at the data from Dorset.
> I've hit a small issue though, in that the council uses two different
> formats for their Right of Way Numbers. We really need to just select
> one for the county in order to be consistent in OSM.
>
> One format has a parish code followed by a slash and then the route
> number within the parish (e.g. "SE4/22" for path number 22 in
> Affpuddle and Turnerspuddle parish). The other would be to use the
> full parish name, right of way type, and number. I asked their
> Definitive Map officer about this and got the response:
>
> "Both systems are used in parallel. For mapping (where the status and
> parish are obvious) and for internal use, we use the numbering system,
> but when reporting to Committee members or members of the public who
> will not be familiar with the numbering system, we name the parish and
> describe the status. Our sealed statements are listed by named parish,
> status and route number. Our working statement spreadsheet uses parish
> number, status and route number."
>
> The "SE4/22" style numbers are what are used on Dorset Council's own
> online map at https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/countryside-coast-parks/rights-of-way/rights-of-way-map-where-to-walk-ride-or-cycle.aspx
> . Currently in OSM we have about 394km of routes in Dorset using this
> style in the prow_ref tag, and another 98km using this style with a
> space instead of the slash. That a total of around 492km based on the
> parish codes and numbers. Conversely, there's only around 125km of
> routes in Dorset that have a prow_ref tag that includes a parish name.
>
> Based on this, my preference would be to standardise on the "SE4/22"
> style format for the prow_ref in Dorset, and convert any other
> instances found to this. What does everyone else think? I'll invite
> Nick Whitelegg (who developed the "map the paths" site) and also a few
> mappers who've made significant contributions to Dorset PRoW's in OSM
> to this thread to get their input too.
>
> Best wishes,
> Robert.
>



More information about the Talk-GB mailing list