Regions & coverage
The record grows city by city. Two things are true of every region at once — how much we've mapped it, and whether the open data to map it even exists.
How far the mapping has got — Live, Partial, WIP, or queued (Planned). We push each as far as it goes, then open the next front.
Whether open public data exists at all. It's not evenly distributed.
The open-access gap. The right to see public space is not shared equally. In the UK and much of Europe, accessible-asset registers, OpenStreetMap coverage, planning portals and freedom-of-information let us enumerate unit types authoritatively — open access. In much of the Global South, no such register exists: Bangkok is completely uncovered from a unit-type perspective, so the record there is gathered on foot by members and every classification is provisional. We surface that difference rather than flatten it — an open commons in one place and an opaque one in another is exactly the inequity the movement exists to name (SDG 11.7).
London
Open public data — the accessible bus-stop register, OSM, and planning portals let us enumerate unit types authoritatively. The most complete set on the record.
Bristol
Adfree Cities' home city. Open data available; mapping underway.
Manchester
Open-data UK city — queued.
Glasgow
Open-data UK city — queued.
Paris
Déboulonneurs / Brandalism heritage. Open EU data; queued.
Berlin
Open EU data; queued.
Amsterdam
Open EU data; queued.
Vancouver
Adbusters' base. Mixed open data; queued.
Bangkok
No open public register of outdoor units. Presence is field-gathered by members; unit types are provisional and largely uncovered. Classification follows the field, not a database.
Chiang Mai
Field-only, like Bangkok — no open register to lean on.