Does anyone use OpenStreetMap.....

[jethro10]

Does anyone use Open Street Map for creating routes - there are several online sites that allow GPX creation.


If so, how accurate do you find the data and do you contribute.


Just curious.
I have never used anything else to create routes - mostly the lake district, and find the paths in the fells very accurate.
My only bugbear, is the paths are often made up of too long straight lines, they don't weave enough, so a route I create as 12K ends up being quite a bit longer as you meander more on the ground in real life
I often feed back to the map after a walk.


J

[ninthace]

I do use OSM and I contribute by letting OSM use the traces I publish on gpsies.com.
My normal procedure these days is to start with open source maps and use them to get the idea for a route, especially as they can indicate paths that exist but are not on the Ordnance Survey or vice versa (i.e. paths that the OS thinks that are there but aren't).  Having plotted the outline of a route on OSM I then download an OS map tile to cover the route and use the superior detail therein to refine my route. Finally, I will use another open source, GoogleEarth to further refine my plan before printing out my intended route on an OS map. I also hold OSM on my gps as a back up to the map tile should I end up having to stray off my route for some reason.

[MikeW]

Pretty much as above when following paths. When just wandering 'off piste', finding my own way up something or to link up 2 paths that aren't otherwise linked then, in order of priority, its OS 1:25000, view ranger landscape and google earth. Also remember the likes of Bristly Ridge is shown as a 'simple path' on OSM.

[quixoticgeek]

Yes. But I like to use the open cycle map render of open street map, it's slightly more useful in some respects for non road based stuff.


Have used it for route planning in the UK, Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg.


J

[jethro10]

Also remember the likes of Bristly Ridge is shown as a 'simple path' on OSM.

Sorry to bring this up at such a late date. What do you mean by this? So would Striding edge etc.
So is there an alternative that shows it for what it is? that actually helps more?
Looking now, Ordanance Survey is no better, Google maps doesn't even show it and OpenStreetMap shows it as a path with:-


sac_scale demanding_alpine_hiking
As a ridge, and with a wikipedia link.


I'm not seeing anything else do it better, or even as good?
J

[DK]

No point just looking at paths without understanding the contours and other specific information the map is giving you. Would anyone really look at Bristly or Striding as simple paths without reading the map and visualising what it tells you?
Many paths shown on OSM are no longer maintained/no longer exist, particularly in forested areas. A good example is the Under Skiddaw/Dodd Wood area which shows paths that are so overgrown they can't be traversed.

[MikeW]

Just making the point that anyone wanting to go for a walk without going up or down something steep that would be classified a scramble would not be able to rely solely on following dotted lines marked on OSM as 'footpaths'.

Sorry to bring this up at such a late date. What do you mean by this? So would Striding edge etc.
So is there an alternative that shows it for what it is? that actually helps more?
Looking now, Ordanance Survey is no better, Google maps doesn't even show it and OpenStreetMap shows it as a path with:-


sac_scale demanding_alpine_hiking
As a ridge, and with a wikipedia link.


I'm not seeing anything else do it better, or even as good?
J

[sussamb]

Just making the point that anyone wanting to go for a walk without going up or down something steep that would be classified a scramble would not be able to rely solely on following dotted lines marked on OSM as 'footpaths'.

Or indeed on an OS map.  Generally OSM maps are more up to date, but no map is even near 100% accurate.

[jethro10]

I don't have an affinity with any product really. I use OSM to pick potential routes, then research them via Google afterwards for gotchas.
On average I've found OSM more accurate and useful.
what we really need is one map, with all the disparate work put into one.


J

[rambling oldie]

Slight digression but a couple more sites might help


http://cwr.naturalengland.org.uk/walk-ride.aspx  The Defra site that shows permissive paths that are never shown on ordnance survey maps. Generally short paths but they can make useful connections in a route.


http://localviewmaps.hants.gov.uk/LocalViewmaps/Sites/ROWOnline/  This is the Hampshire site for definitive rights of way.  Click on the lollipop icon to show the key.  I don't know what other counties provide but I would think it likely that similar facilities would be on offer.  Worth a trawl perhaps.  The advantage on the hants site is that path closures are shown where OS would't show them. This is often where 4 wheel drives have ruined the surface of a byway (Grrr! Rant!) and sometimes walkers and cyclists are still allowed. Again, useful data for route planning.