While field-testing an app I’m building for walking Public Rights of Way (MOROW), I found a real one. Chippenham parish path CHIP108, a legally recorded Byway Open to All Traffic, was mapped in OSM with highway=bridleway, ref=CHIP108, and a free-text note describing its BOAT status, but no designation= and no prow_ref=. Those are the two tags any PRoW-aware tool actually reads, so the path was rendering as an ordinary, unremarkable line. I fixed that one way directly (changeset 185555601), but the obvious next question was whether the same mistake, recording a council’s path reference under the generic ref= tag instead of prow_ref=, is a one-off or systematic.

Before building anything to find out, I went looking for prior art, and found it. Robert Whittaker’s UK PRoW toolkit (https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/) already does this properly, county by county, comparing OSM against official Definitive Map data and generating per-parish tagging-error reports with real way IDs ready to work through. For Wiltshire alone: 8,354 recorded rights of way, only 58% carrying designation=, only 24% carrying prow_ref=. That’s roughly 4,450 km of Wiltshire’s legal PRoW network without a prow_ref tag, a scale question the tool had already answered, far beyond anything I’d have worked out from scratch.

CHIP108 itself doesn’t appear on either of Wiltshire’s error lists, most likely because the detection starts from ways already carrying some PRoW tag and checks the other; CHIP108 had neither. I’ve asked on Robert’s forum thread (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/roberts-openstreetmap- stuff-osm-mathmos-net/112981) whether that’s a known gap or something worth extending for.

Testing the fix workflow

… See full entry

I am proposing a major initiative to “ratify” and enhance the military fortification data on OpenStreetMap. This project actually began with a very specific personal goal: identifying and submitting newly discovered nodes for the UKBOTA (UK Bunkers On The Air) scheme.

UKBOTA is a fantastic amateur radio award program that encourages the “activation” of historical bunkers and pillboxes. While searching for sites to submit to their database, I realized that while many valid sites exist in specialized archaeological records, our coverage on OSM is often incomplete, misplaced, or lacks the specific metadata (like precise coordinates and typology) required for schemes like UKBOTA. This led me to a broader vision: cross-referencing our map with high-quality datasets—specifically the Extended Defence of Britain (eDoB) database.

The Vision

I have been in discussion with Matt Aldred, the lead developer of the eDoB Online viewer, about bridging his extensive research with our global map. The eDoB database is an evolution of the original Defence of Britain project, offering corrected coordinates, Lidar verification, and specific structural classifications.

By aligning these datasets, we don’t just help the radio community; we create a professional-grade, ratified record of these historical assets for everyone. With tens of thousands of potential nodes to process, doing this entirely by hand would be a nightmare. Therefore, I am proposing a structured bulk import and data enrichment project, conducted in full compliance with the OSM Import Guidelines.

Integration with Wikidata

… See full entry

Do we (OSM) have a league table for all countries/ entities (non-countries?), which is based on the quality of OSM mapping in that country?

I ask this question, because I was undertaking a MapRoulette challenge, to help with mapping in Algiers, and although some pockets of excellent mapping existed, it seemed clear that this was very much the exception.

1. How do we gather metrics, to assess the quality of mapping in a given country, so that quality can be improved?

2. How do we engage with the ‘local’ OSM community, to perhaps help them to improve mapping?

3. Can we define a regular (and repeatable) set of MapRoulette challenges, that would enable remote mapping to be carried out, in support of ‘hands-on’ mapping/ surveying carried out by ‘locals on the ground’?

4. How do we publicise tools such as StreetComplete, to help populate the data/ metadata of a country, in order to build upon the ‘big picture’ data that is gathered?

5. What are we missing, above?

Please add to this, and edit, as appropriate.

Many thanks,

Chris

I live in Wiltshire (UK), and when out walking, often see public footpaths that have fallen into disuse, and risk being completely overgrown and overlooked by the general public.

Using existing OSM data, I wonder whether lesser used footpaths could be revived; and UK (and beyond?) users encouraged to use paths, for health and wellbeing benefits, and contribution to mapping.

My idea is that this could be gamified. Users of a simple new app, or of functionality added to an existing app, would score points for walking/ wheeling along recognized paths. Different scoring could be used, for example:

*For every 100 yds/ mtrs, or path segment (?), a point could be earned.

*For paths that are used less regularly, i.e., haven’t had a GPS trace for a specified amount of time, could score more points.

*In order to encourage use of the path by a diverse range of users, including wheelchair users, significantly more points could be awarded for these users taking part.

*Points for a successful upload of a recorded GPS track.

The obvious benefits to the OSM community, and users, would be the potential to increase the amount of GPS traces that are uploaded, therefore enabling accuracy checks, and also being able to offer up additional mapping data, perhaps by using apps such as StreetComplete.

An additional benefit in the UK, would be for the Ramblers “Don’t Lose Your Way” project. This initiative is seeking to reclaim footpaths that have for, historical reasons, dropped off the Definitive Map, as Public Rights of Way. As these paths are reclaimed, walkers and wheelers would be encouraged to use the reclaimed routes, in order to earn points; therefore establishing usage and encouraging more people to use the route.

If you have any thoughts around this idea, please comment here.

Many thanks,

Chris.

2 Sep 2024: Update:

“MOROW” added to GitHub

2 Jun 2026: Update:

… See full entry

Ok, following on from my earlier writing, I can confirm that I have installed and tried capturing data with both the SmartRoadSense and Roadroid Android applications, on my Pixel 6. Both apps had good points, and ‘areas for development’. I was only able to capture data, submit it, and see it on a map, with Roadroid. My understanding is that I can’t do this with SmartRoadSense, because the app infrastructure is currently dormant, due to EU funding coming to an end, but I understand from the devs, that they are about to reinvigorate the project.

Lars Forslof (Roadroid) is doing some excellent work with his propriety solution, but I think the nature of his objectives, are business oriented, and enables a ‘customer’ to request survey coverage for a defined area, which is then coordinated, at a financial cost.

My main questions/ thoughts now, are:

1. Is road surface data useful to anyone? I would suggest it is useful for deciding on routing, and can be used under open source terms, to enable interested bodies, such as highway/ local authorities to have an initial understanding of where surfaces don’t meet a required standard.
2. Is OSM the right place to record the values?
3. Can the open source community encourage the good people at SmartRoadSense to work with us, or do we need to create a new app, with infrastructure? The algorithm used to process the data is currently closed source. My preference would be to work with SmartRoadSense, and have a backlog of potential improvements, hosted on GitHub https://github.com/SmartRoadSense
4. Encourage interested users to install the SmartRoadSense APK, and to give feedback at the GitHub address. The app didn’t appear in Play Store, in the UK on a Pixel 6, so I’ve used APK https://m.apkpure.com/smartroadsense/it.uniurb.smartroadsense
5. I will write to the SmartRoadSense devs, to highlight these thoughts.

What is needed (Requirements capture)? (MoSCoW)

M= Must Have S= Should Have C= Could Have W= Won’t Have

… See full entry

What’s the problem (Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF))?

See my original post, here: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/lidar-mapping-of-roads/97100/14

Hi, everybody!

Motivated by the state of roads in the UK, I’m wondering if anyone is aware of any Open Source/ crowdsourced efforts to assess the condition of surfaces, and then to map them?

I’m aware of lower cost LIDAR equipment, and I believe that some Apple phones have a LIDAR capability.

I’m thinking of something like Mapillary/ Kartaview. Sensor imagery could be gathered, and then scored appropriately, so severity could be seen. I’m thinking that a 100mm pothole on an unclassified and little used road/ lane, would potentially be of less interest/ lower priority than a 50mm pothole on a major motorway/ autobahn/ freeway.

Obviously, potholes are just one example, other immediate possibilities are subsidence, wear and tear, accident damage.

I’d be keen to hear any thoughts/ feedback. Please add to this page, if you can.

Many thanks, Chris chris_debian UK

What can we do about this?

Road damages create comfort-, environmental- and security problems. Existing measurement technologies are very expensive and can only be used rarely. With smartphones you can measure often or in remote areas.

Regarding ‘mapping potholes’, I expect this to be a layer applied to OSM, not data contained within OSM. It will be open source information, for people that can use it. My thinking being that OSM isn’t a repository for other data, but it can help us gather data, and we may be able to give back to OSM.

What has already been done, by whom?

SmartRoadSense info@smartroadsense.it (seems to be broken), github and APK

• “Open Data” under the Open Data Commons Open Database License (OdbL)
• Map= https://smartroadsense.it/data/map/
• Privacy= https://smartroadsense.it/data/privacy/

Roadroid map

… See full entry

20090112_113331_266_andnav.gpx

Minor roads around Corsham. Charles St, etc.