[Talk-GB] Public Rights of Way mapping guidance for Wiki

[SK53]

I think this idea ignores a basic need to keep contributing to OSM simple
for people who do not suffer from OCDS. OSM is not a repository of legal
information the map data is ultimately a practical tool to enable people to
do things. The number of people who wish to document discrepancies between
the definitive map/statement and what is on the ground is vastly smaller
than those who merely wish to use OSM to help them find a walk & navigate
along it.

We'd do well not to lose sight of this.

Jerry

On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 at 09:28, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <
robert.whittaker+osm at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 at 09:07, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB
> <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > My own personal view is that the 'on the ground route' is what counts,
> if it has been officially signed by the council. This means that it's the
> de-facto route, the one the council is recommending you use, and the one
> which is is used practically.
>
> I disagree. The legal route is what is shown on the Definitive Map.
> There is a legal process that can be gone through to change this, but
> the council cannot just unilaterally decide to alter the route.
> Putting up official signage does not (itself) divert or create a Right
> of Way. Also, I've certainly come across cases where land-owners have
> adjusted the official waymarks themselves in order to discourage
> people from using the legal route. So I'd very much prefer to see both
> routes marked in OSM. Doing this also makes a record of any
> discrepancies (which could be useful for Rights of Way campaigners)
> and allows for better automated checks between OSM data and the
> council GIS data.
>
> 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/20210107/441d038c/attachment.htm>