[Talk-GB] Quarterly Project 2021Q

[Edward Bainton]

Slight thread-fork, but just to let you all know I received an email from
the Open Spaces Society (oss.org) in response to mine: they'd like to be
involved and their case officer will be in touch, but due to workload that
won't be for a few weeks.




On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 15:07, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <
robert.whittaker+osm at gmail.com> wrote:

>  On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 14:09, nathan case <nathancase at outlook.com> wrote:
> > > Also I think it would be better to use the terms used in The
> Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.
> > foot=designated
> > designation=registered_common_land
> > and
> > designation=open_access_land
> >
> > I'm a little confused by this.
> >
> > "Common" land has a public "right to roam" attached to it [1]. A
> village/town green does not [1]. "Right to roam" land is  "open access
> land" [2].
> >
> > So the two labels seem to be equivalent and both describe common land -
> not village/town green. How about designation=open_access_land and
> designaton=village_green?
>
> Registered Commons are not the same as Access Land. Common Land is an
> ancient concept, whereas Access Land is a modern invention connected
> with the so-called "Right to Roam". As I understand it, almost all
> Registered Common Land will also be Access Land, but there is
> certainly also a lot of Access Land that is not Common Land. Common
> Land has additional restrictions on development, and possibly other
> rights for certain people, which don't apply to Access Land in
> general. So I think it's good to maintain a distinction in our
> tagging.
>
> I guess there's a question about whether we tag Access Land Commons
> with just designation=registered_common_land (and assume access_land
> is implied) or if we explicitly include both designations: e.g.
> designation=registered_common_land;access_land .
>
> While I'm here: do people have a preference between
> designation=registered_common_land and designation=common ? The latter
> is what's currently in use (about 140 times in the UK) but the former
> is the full term used in CRoW Act 2000. I'd prefer the former:
> although it's a longer tag value, I think it's more obvious that it
> corresponds to a formal legal designation, and so is less likely to
> get mis-applied.
>
> Robert.
> --
> Robert Whittaker
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210211/fa6e4620/attachment.htm>