[Talk-GB] UPRN Locations Map

Mark Goodge mark at good-stuff.co.uk
Sat Jul 4 11:28:10 UTC 2020

On 04/07/2020 12:16, Stephen Knox wrote:
> I don't think there is value in bringing in the points themselves but
> I think there definitely is value in tagging existing buildings /
> locations with the UPRN where it is incontrovertible - e.g. a single
> unit house. This is the vast majority of the buildings in the UK, if
> not the addresses. There are difficulties to overcome with multiple
> unit buildings, that probably needs a lot of further thought and
> possibly further open data releases to do properly, which may appear
> eventually. How historical values are managed is also a consideration
> to deal with.

I agree. I think we have to bear in mind that UPRNs will become 
increasingly important to map users, and having them in the tag data 
will be useful. If it's a known fact about a building, then it does no 
harm, and will be potentially beneficial, to tag the building with the UPRN.

But we do need to be wary of historic data and overlapping UPRNs. Unless 
we have incontrovertible local knowledge from a compatible source, then 
we shouldn't add a UPRN tag if the open data is in any way ambiguous.

The same applies to USRNs. Where we can unambiguously match a road or 
street on OSM to a USRN, then we should add the tag. But only if we can 
be certain.

> Arguably of more use for OSM for the here and now is the change to
> the licence of the UK Land Registry INSPIRE polygons to OGL, which I
> haven't seen much or any discussion of on this list. This means that
> we now have an authoritative reference for boundaries and can use
> that to alter and check geometries of things like semi-detached house
> boundaries, gardens, hedges
> etc.https://www.gov.uk/guidance/inspire-index-polygons-spatial-data.

I agree with that, too.


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list