<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Hey Tom,<br>
looks like an interesting claim with the perfect alignment, although
I am myself a bit skeptical. <br>
For example, importing raw cadastral shapefile for Glasgow (from
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://ros.locationcentre.co.uk/inspire/">https://ros.locationcentre.co.uk/inspire/</a>) and comparing it to the
cadastral overlay shows some misalignment. Not sure if it's just my
JOSM mucking up the import/overlay though.<br>
<img src="cid:part1.FBE60332.DBBD9A8E@gmail.com" alt="" width="604"
height="537"><br>
(hopefully the image works - blue lines are the overlay from JOSM;
you can see there is some misalignment in between these two sources)<br>
Btw, the source is mentioned in OSMUK presentation here:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://osmuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/UK_open_data-20200704.pdf">https://osmuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/UK_open_data-20200704.pdf</a>
(you could try your local area to see if you have similar
misalignment issues?)<br>
<br>
Maybe there is someone from OSMUK on this mailing list that could
perhaps explain whether the overlay is good to be used as a sort-of
point of truth for other imagery alignment? It would be awesome to
have a single point of truth in that regards for UK; for example
mappers in Czech Republic can use a fairly detailed cadastral map
(CUZK RUIAN) to align imagery for quite some time now.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michal<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/03/2021 13:04, Tom Crocker wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAHmUbmdtwJ3hR5mvvXBJzNkPe1zPUf15qz50pvL=v_HQcCPJ7g@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I spotted the new land registry imagery in JOSM - thank to
those who have made this available - and the claim of perfect
alignment in the info box. I assume this means perfectly
aligned with Land Registry's data and therefore some default
legal position on ownership (although my memory from buying a
house was that boundaries aren't just about what is marked on
a map). Anyway, looking at the layer it seemed closer than the
Bing alignment to what I have been mapping to based on quite a
lot of GPS tracks, but still offset by about 1 (metre?) in
either direction. Although there are going to be boundaries
that have shifted and presumably inaccuracies in the
surveying, would it be fair to assume that the majority of
their data is likely more accurately placed than I can
estimate with multiple tracks from my phone GPS, particularly
around new estates where I guess OS have done a recent survey
with far better equipment than me? <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In short, should I just switch to using their typical
alignment as it's probably better?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Tom<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>