[Talk-GB] OS "standard map" and use of OSM ways marked private

[Chris Hodges]

I see that from the other end - when I report issues in Komoot, I check 
them in OSM first. I either fix OSM, or more likely, include the fact 
that the underlying data is right in my bug report.  I've seen several 
issues. It's not usually access= with them (though there are edge 
cases), but the the most common is that they seem to assume turn 
restrictions don't apply to bikes. That can be hazardous on multi-lane 
roads.


But in general a lot of renderers (e.g. OpenAndroMaps Elevate) seem to 
prioritise the type of a way over access, even when they clearly can 
deal with access.  My suspicion is that the developers are from 
somewhere with nothing like the UK's rights of way systems


Chris


On 22/07/2022 16:44, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 22/07/2022 15:23, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
>> "and that OS will refer the public to OSM stating it's an OSM issue. "
>>
>> That's an unfounded assumption on your part.
>>
> As a DWG member I see complaints about almost all apps that show any 
> OSM attribution, including but not limited to:
>
>   * Facebook/Instagram
>   * Bing, Apple and other map sites
>   * Alltrails (and other "hiking" apps)
>   * Komoot and other routers
>   * ... and yes, Ordnance Survey (and OS customers)
>
> Most of these complaints are unfounded.  A very common problem is that 
> (as in this case) access information is available from OSM but is 
> ignored by the company using the data*.  It is unfortunately common 
> that these companies refer their users to OSM about non-OSM problems 
> (at least 4 of the examples above have done so).
>
>
> Picking up on something that Jez said in another reply:
>
>> The footpaths layer in Mapbox Streets is neither attributed with 
>> 'access' nor split into separate permitted/private layers, so a 
>> developer is unable to tell whether there is an access restriction.
> I think it's a little unfair on Mapbox.  If the OS has chosen to use a 
> product that is unfit for their purpose then that's their fault, not 
> Mapbox's, surely?  I would hope that OSM UK (given that they are in 
> contact with the OS) would make that clear.  If it would help, I'd be 
> happy to explain "how access tags work in OSM" to the OS with a DWG 
> hat on; just drop an introductory email to data at openstreetmap.org .
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
> (from the DWG** which tends to get the complaints that the top of this 
> mail suggested do not occur)
>
> * another is where the company concerned has their own source of 
> "places" data (think Facebook/Instagram) which is overlaid onto an OSM 
> background, and OSM gets the complaint
>
> ** https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220722/3e8a0e7c/attachment.htm>