Following on from the Fatmap thread and given that a lot of folk on here use OSM maps in some form or other this thread is about editing the core OSM data.

One way of looking at it is like Wikipedia for maps: anyone can edit the data and the next time Garmin, Komoot or whoever pull the data and rebuild their maps then those changes will appear. That latter point is quite important – it may be several months between those “map makers” pulling the data so don’t expect changes to become public overnight.

Signing up. The usual form for your email, password, username. Free to do and dead simple. Given the general complexity of editing it’s probably best done on a desktop – a stubby finger isn’t the most accurate of devices.

Once signed up and then logged in you’ll get a dialog box asking if you want a tour or to start editing. Choose the latter and a satellite image will appear, similar to Google Maps and Bing Maps. Scroll your way around to the area you are interested in.

You can only edit features once you’ve zoomed in to a certain level of detail so either click the “+” icon or press the “+” key until you see a graphical overlay of whatever features have been added in the area you are looking at. Click on a feature and the sidebar on the left will display the attributes for it. Obviously these are dependent on what you’ve clicked as not all attributes are relevant to every feature.

In the case of bridleways and rights of way you’ll probably see the following fields:

Name: obvious. If the RoW has a name this should be the official name not biking specific or “doggers’ alley”

Track type: choose from one of the various descriptions from the drop down list.

Surface: a bit of a duplicate of the track type. I try and select the best combination that describes the track.

Width: obvious, in metres.

Allowed access: This is the interesting one. If the track is a legal right of way then “All” should be set to “yes”. Then you designate each vehicle type an appropriate value to fine tune that generic setting. So a footpath would just have “foot” as “yes” whereas a BW would have “foot”, “bicycles” and “horses” as “yes”. There are options for permissive, permit, etc. Note this is the legal status, not whether it’s rideable or whether you ride it regularly.

Smoothness: This just seems like another duplicate of surface and track type but the drop down uses different types of vehicle as suggestions about what can travel along it.

Once you’ve done your changes, click the save button at top right of the screen. Enter a short comment about what you’ve changed and click “Submit”. If you are unsure about what you’ve done then check the “have someone review my changes” box before submitting.

That’s pretty much it. If a BW crosses a stream or similar then the sidebar will show conflicts but I’ve found it’s a bit odd what happens when you try and resolve them so I just ignore them.

There are help pages for each field, just click on the “i” and you’ll get into that system.

that’s a great intro… I’ll be signing up and seeing what I can update in the Petersfield area.

[edit] have now signed up

Great!

I find it useful to have something like streetmap.co.uk which uses Ordnance Survey mapping open in another tab then I can cross reference whether something really is a footpath, BW, permissive BW, etc.

If you get stuck, ask back here and between us all we should be able to muddle it out.

I find it useful to have something like streetmap.co.uk which uses Ordnance Survey mapping open in another tab then I can cross reference whether something really is a footpath, BW, permissive BW, etc.

First rule of OSM: Don’t copy from other maps (unless you have specific permission to do so). Copying from OS maps is a copyright infringement.
And I wouldn’t assume the OS maps are correct and accurate.

Well given that many bridleways on OS maps don’t follow the actual line of the track/path on the ground I’d say you are applying the correct legal status to the correct delineation of the route 😉 More verifying information than copying.

Here’s a classic example of the OS marking out a right of way that really doesn’t exist on the ground – https://streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=256733&Y=347343&A=Y&Z=115 The path actually follows the black dashed line to the east. The “footpath” well that takes a shortcut over a 500ft cliff!

I mostly load new tracks from a GPX file. It starts getting complicated when there are intersections/junctions with existing tracks and you want to make them routable.

Well given that many bridleways on OS maps don’t follow the actual line of the track/path on the ground

That’s because they are two different things. The right of way doesn’t necessarily follow the easiest route, which is where people tend to walk, so you see a lot of divergence from the ROW on the ground. However, the right of way doesn’t change just because people ignore it.

My memory is there is a good online tutorial that is worth following.  One of the important things is to get junctions correctly joined up otherwise a lot of routing goes wrong.  It’s not difficult but it helps to be aware

First rule of OSM: Don’t copy from other maps (unless you have specific permission to do so). Copying from OS maps is a copyright infringement.

Several years ago I added a very specific entry to OSM (a stone circle my dad and I built out of reclaimed granite gate posts). It’s invisible from the road and only shows up on satellite maps if you know exactly where to look.

I was, therefore, quite surprised to see it on an Ordnance Survey map a few years later. I know they can legally copy from OSM, but it is a bit hypocritical of them all the same.

The OS has a flying unit that captures aerial imagery, which is the used to update its base mapping. I doubt they’d copy from OSM. https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2017/03/behind-scenes-flying-unit/

The OS have a rolling programme of aerial photography that’s detailed enough to see individual fence posts. They don’t rely on satellite imagery. I would be very surprised if they copy OSM because they have much higher standards.

OpenStreetMap on the other hand is full of people taking liberties with copyrighted maps. It’s easy to see – there’s a road round here that’s named differently on the ground than it is on Google maps and the OSM version keeps getting changed to match Google. There’s also a road junction that keeps getting reset to match how it looks on the Google maps satellite imagery rather than reality.

You’re better taking RoW lines from your local council’s online Definitive Map which is more up to date than the OS and, by definition, shows the official line.

Cheers, good post.

Re council online row, I find the below a lot, lot better

http://www.rowmaps.com/

All official rights of way will have a number e.g. BW2 or FP1. At Peak District MTB we have asked Facebook followers for suggestions of potential upgrades. What this did identify is that each right of way will also include details of the Parish Council e.g. Derwent FP11 or Hope Woodlands BW25

“I was, therefore, quite surprised to see it on an Ordnance Survey map a few years later”

I deal with OS as a partner and have had detailed discussions with them around map updates and surveying. I am almost 99.9999% certain this would not have been copied without an on the ground check. They seem fastidious about surveying and I would be very very surprised. Can you point me to the location so I can check?

That’s because they are two different things. The right of way doesn’t necessarily follow the easiest route, which is where people tend to walk, so you see a lot of divergence from the ROW on the ground. However, the right of way doesn’t change just because people ignore it.

Desire lines. Not the album of the same name.

Re council online row, I find the below a lot, lot better

http://www.rowmaps.com/

First search I tried with this turned up an inaccurate depiction of a RoW. It also isn’t the legal Definitive Map.

Hi Neil, Maybe you could drop the bloke a line with details, my understanding is he is simply ‘interfacing’ the council supplied definitive map data, if something is not correct/working properly It would be worth letting him know.

What a useful thread

I’ll have to look at my local area when I get home

FYI OS maps will have deliberate errors so that they can tell if they have been copied