[Talk-GB] Great North Trail MTB Route
adam.c.snape at gmail.com
Sun Jul 12 11:32:43 UTC 2020
It's already tagged as network=ncn and I think there seems pretty much
universal agreement from commenters thus far that is not correct, because
it isn't part of the National Cycle Network (which as you suggest is
Sustrans' responsibility) and it is a mountain bike route.
My main concern here is about whether we should be mapping unmarked routes
at all and especially whether it is okay to import them without discussion
or the explicit permission of the copyright holder.
On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 at 12:20, Tony OSM <tonyosm9 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustrans the first line is '*Sustrans*
> is a UK walking and cycling charity and custodian of the National Cycle
> Network <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cycle_Network>.'
> Custodian is the important term.
> The Sustrans website
> does not make that claim (please correct me) but the whole of the site
> suggests it is the custodian and that they make decisions about the NCN.
> As Sustrans is described as the custodian and its website infers/implies
> that it is, then unless a route is on their website or literature it is not
> part of the NCN. OSM does not have the right to make a decision like that
> no matter how good the intentions.
> So please do not tag as ncn; but please keep as a route.
> As the route is tagged mtb I think that it may not meet the design
> principles as shown on the referred Sustrans page.
> Tony - TonyS999
> On 12/07/2020 11:34, Adam Snape wrote:
> A mapper has recently added a long mountain bike route to OSM and there
> has been a difference of opinions in the changeset comments
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/87757341 .So I thought I'd share
> here to try to achieve some community consensus.
> Personally I'm concerned that it appears to be an undiscussed import
> without explicit copyright owner permission, possibly containing OS-derived
> data. It goes against the general principle that we only map what's on the
> ground, potentially opening the floodgates for all kinds of such unmarked
> routes. The route is tagged as ncn despite not being part of the National
> Cycle Network and as a mountain bike route is largely unsuitable for
> general bicycle routing.
> Does anybody have any further thoughts? I'll make the original mapper
> aware of this discussion.
> Kind regards,
> Talk-GB mailing listTalk-GB at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB