[OSM-talk] amenity=doctor or amenity=doctors ? [tagging]

Mike Harris mikh43 at googlemail.com
Thu Feb 26 10:31:15 GMT 2009


Nick

Interesting to hear that Hampshire has  this - so far Cheshire only has it
for (vehicular) highway faults but wants to add PRoWs. I wasn't aware of
your Freemap .... Clearly I need to go and take a look as a priority ...
Sounds right up my street (if that isn't a  bad pun).

Btw, I've been doing some further research and you may be reassured to know
that the definitive maps for Cheshire PRoWs have a "relevant date" (a term
with legal significance) of 1 November 1956 - so are out of copyright, even
including the OS mapping itself. The exceptions to this are the City of
Chester, which did its definitive map later and, of course, later amendments
to the network (of most of which I am personally aware on the basis of
personal knowledge and many of which I was involved in negotiating) - so I
don't think I'm wrecking OSM with my Cheshire activities (:>) and I don't
propose that I add path reference numbers outside of Cheshire.

I'm still pretty convinced that OS would have a hard time making a case that
the public need an OS licence to know the name or number given by a highway
authority to identify a *public* *right* of way in order that the public can
exercise their statutory rights with regard to that way. I've been in some
pretty tough negotiations in my time (used to work a lot of the time in UN
and EU meetings) but this one would take the biscuit!

Of course, if we can get the LAs to use FreeMap in the way you describe that
would be fantastic. I fear that in Cheshire their interactive mapping site
is so established on the  basis of OS mapping that it would be hard to get
them to change - but it could be very attractive to cash-strapped
authorities who have not yet gone so far down this road.

I have found this exchange very useful - thanks for expressing your concerns
as this forced me to think harder and dig deeper - even if I have yet to
change my view!

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Whitelegg [mailto:Nick.Whitelegg at solent.ac.uk] 
Sent: 25 February 2009 13:33
To: Mike Harris
Cc: talk at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=doctor or amenity=doctors ? [tagging]

Hello Mike,

(cced to list in case of interest)

>Incidentally, the next step that 'my' County Council is planning is to 
>enhance their public domain interactive mapping system (which
acknowledges
>that the *base* mapping is OS) by allowing any member of the public to
click
>on the map to report a problem with a public right of way (they already
have
>this working for highways on the list of streets - another public 
>domain database). No grid reference involved here - but I would myself 
>be
concerned
>that the 'clicker' is 'using' the base map to decide where to click. 
What's
>the view on this?

Hampshire also does this.

But one of my plans for Freemap (shortly to be re-launched as OpenFootMap,
all being well) is to add a nationwide "Fix My Paths" feature where users
can use OSM-derived maps to report a problem with a path. In other words,
they could click on the map, then the corresponding OSM way could be located
in the database and they could tag the way with an issue. Councils could
then potentially subscribe to an RSS feed of, or view a web page of, path
issues reported through OpenFootMap.

Users could also report the issues in the field using a mobile client (I
already kind-of have code to do this).

Nick





More information about the talk mailing list