United Kingdom Long Distance Paths

Posted by srbrook on 22 September 2011 in English (English)

I have been updating the WikiProject United Kingdom Long Distance Paths page. I have split the huge table of English paths into sections for each letter of the alphabet, (except for U, X, Y, Z for which we still need to create walks).

I have also taken the opportunity to check all the relation links are still valid, add links to web sites providing more information about the walk where it was missing and to update the % complete columns. I used the hiking map site to help with the calculations and to find missing relations.

Does anyone else think that the Tracks, Mapped and Labelled columns in the table for England and Wales should be merged into a single % Complete column as is done for Scotland and the National Trails?

Comment from EdLoach on 23 September 2011 at 07:29

What do the Tracks, Mapped and Labelled columns actually refer to? I can guess that tracks might mean that GPS traces have been uploaded for the route and Mapped is based on the length of ways added to the relation, but labelled? I had assumed that the single % column in the other table was the equivalent of the Mapped column only.

Comment from quantumstate on 23 September 2011 at 09:23

Wow, that has improved it a lot and must have been a lot of work. Thank you.

Comment from Vclaw on 23 September 2011 at 12:21

I agree that the Tracks/Mapped/Labelled columns are not really very useful.

Though I think a single column for completeness is a bit simplistic. Some people are setting it to 100% just because the length of ways in the route relation is equal to the 'official' distance. Without actually walking the route to check whether it is actually correct.

Also, even if the route is correct, is it all tagged correctly? ie I've noticed quite a few parts of routes tagged as highway=track, when they actually paths or minor roads etc. And then there's tags for access, surface, tracktype etc.
Plus facilities along the route, eg toilets, drinking water, shops, cafes, campsites etc.

So I don't think a route is really "complete" unless most of this has been done.

Comment from srbrook on 26 September 2011 at 12:04

I agree that [[user:Vclaw]]'s view of "really complete" is ideal measure of 100%, however it is not measurable (for any map). What can be measured is 'relation length' divided by 'official distance'. Where this is close to or exceeds 100% then I take a closer look at the relation and check that it is sorted, in one piece without gaps and it starts and finishes at the designated start and end points. Without this it would only get say 98% in my view.

Comment from StephenRD on 3 October 2011 at 18:11

I hadn't managed to deduce an effective difference between Tracks and Mapped. I would consider that a column (whatever the heading) for "proportion of the route which is mapped and assigned to the route relation" is useful and reasonably measurable. If it starts in the right place, finishes in the right place, and has no gaps, then it's a reasonable starting assumption that the answer is 100%.

I had taken "Labelled" to be a synonym for "Named", i.e. relevant paths/tracks etc. given a Name tag so that on Mapnik rendering rural sections are marked with the name of the route, in a similar way to the OS does it.

Login to leave a comment