[Talk-GB] Bridleway across field

Nick Whitelegg nick.whitelegg at solent.ac.uk
Tue Dec 8 16:06:18 UTC 2020


This reminds me a bit of this location, also in Wiltshire:

https://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/?lat=51.06209564615185&lon=-2.0421791551466137&zoom=3&mode=0

Note the orange diagonal line. That is the line of a bridleway according to the Wiltshire ROW data as sourced on rowmaps.com (so not necessarily the definitive map). Contrast that to the brown line a bit to its north and west which is the bridleway as mapped on OSM, using bridleway signs apparent on the ground plus a bit of assumption. The brown line is a well-defined and easily-navigable (on horse and bike as well as foot) track, but there are no actual bridleway signs on the bit which diverges from the orange  line so it 'may not' be an actual bridleway - even though ground evidence suggests it 'probably' is. I first mapped this in 2010 from a ground survey,, but lacking any legal source for it not being a bridleway, it's remained an OSM bridleway ever since even though part of it technically isn't.

The orange line is a random line across a field with no evidence on the ground whatsoever. No signs, no gates, no stiles, no nothing - and therefore not mappable.

Wiltshire seems to be like this quite often, incidentally: its signposting can be a bit inconsistent and I've noticed quite a few divergences between web-based council data and ground evidence. We need the definitive data to be legally used in OSM in these cases; though maybe the council should really be trying to actually divert the path to the on-the-ground route that people actually use!

Nick


________________________________
From: nathan case <nathancase at outlook.com>
Sent: 08 December 2020 15:11
To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway across field

That's a fair viewpoint and I'm open to changing my method.

But what would you suggest in the situation where a PROW runs through a building(s)? Map through it as a fully-fledged footway? Doesn't matter what your abilities are, you won't be able to go through there - well unless you can pass through walls...  At what point does a completely inaccessible, or even re-rerouted path (just not in the PROW data), become disused?

I am interested as a path I recently mapped is a PROW but is very dangerous to cross. It is now marked as disused:highway=path with access=discourged;designated but it is stilla PROW (byway open to all traffic in this case): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/93427676

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave F via Talk-GB <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 2:10 PM
To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway across field

On 08/12/2020 12:36, nathan case wrote:
> but instead setting as disused:highway. This is what I tend to do when the PROW route is clearly inaccessible from aerial imagery (e.g. due to new buildings, or rivers).

IMO, this is bad mapping.
Just because one person concludes it isn't used by staring at photograph taken thousands of feet in the air doesn't mean it isn't.

Accessibility is variable & subjective. What might be a deterrent to a wheelchair user, could be considered easy by a high jumper.

Even if it is found to be inaccessible after an on ground survey it doesn't mean it's been declared disused.

DaveF

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20201208/9ad9c3d5/attachment.htm>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list