Walls and Foot Bridges data


Forum » General Forums » Mapping

By pwb999 on 05/11/19 at 5:36pm

Hi Beth and Paul

I understand that one of the main benefits of OS 1:25 maps is that they depict field boundaries and in the case of the Lakes that means lots of lovely dry stone walls that are excellent handrails for navigation. I don't know the source of this feature in the case of Waymaps. I presume that the source is OSM and that would explain why some areas in Waymaps are "missing" such detail. I presume this is one of the USP of OS 1:25 maps to explain their cost.

But how have OSM got some of these field boundaries. Did someone overlay an aerial image map and then "trace" some of the wall features for inclusion to the OSM database.?

Thank you for the Stile and Gate font change. I find such markers real useful as little "tick" points along a path to mark progress and position. On a recent walk along the Coniston Coppermines trails I noticed that the two single beam foot bridges across its becks were not marked as such on Waymaps. One is however marked on OS 1:25. Again I was wondering if such Footbridges could be marked on your maps ie FB as I was getting a bit worried about finding a way to cross these becks. Both of these bridges are shown on the current OSM map which I believe is just one part of your dataset to compile your unique maps.

Once again many thanks for your excellent mapping and guiding services,

Regards Peter B.

PS Have you ever thought of approaching Cicerone publishing to encourage them to recommend your maps/website for local walk information. I met one of their authors recently and informed him that in my humble opinion Waymaps were better than Harveys. Just a thought!


By TallPaul on 06/11/19 at 11:00am (last edited 06/11/19 at 11:08am)

Wow, lots of questions. OK, here goes:

Field boundaries - yup, field boundaries are a huge help with navigation which is why, historically, we both only used OS 1:25K for walking. As you guessed with Waymaps the source is OSM so it's crowdsourced and its quality varies. However in the Lakes we're lucky in that there's a lot of work been done on it by mappers (including us).

As to how do OSM mappers map field boundaries? It is, as you suspected, mainly by tracing from aerial photography. There's some good aerial photography which can be legally used, mainly Bing and ESRI, and the main mapping tools used, e.g. josm, make it easy to work with those.

Stiles and gates: again these are from OSM and this requires more work as it needs surveys on the ground i.e. OSM mappers walking the paths. Again in the Lakes we're lucky as there's a lot of that been done but the quality varies around the British Isles. And thanks for your comments on the new way we're showing them: we like it too :D

You say:

On a recent walk along the Coniston Coppermines trails I noticed that the two single beam foot bridges across its becks were not marked as such on Waymaps. One is however marked on OS 1:25. Again I was wondering if such Footbridges could be marked on your maps ie FB as I was getting a bit worried about finding a way to cross these becks. Both of these bridges are shown on the current OSM map which I believe is just one part of your dataset to compile your unique maps.

OK, if they've in the OSM geodata we can probably do something about that. We'll look into it.

As for Cicerone we have had some conversations with them in the past. What we'd really like is to get them to use our mapping in their books but we've not got there yet. We have had some success in that regard though, for example with an article in The Country Gentlemen's Association magazine.



WalkLakes recognises that hill walking, or walking in the mountains, is an activity with a danger of personal injury or death.
Participants in these activities should be aware of and accept these risks and be responsible for their own actions.