[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey

Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrlists at googlemail.com
Mon Apr 5 20:17:11 BST 2010


I'm in line with this view too. We cannot assume that the OS mapping is
correct, it may or may not be current or accurate, so it's useful as a guide
in the absence of any other verification source.

Streetview as a product is still a long way short of the level of detail we
are routinely creating ourselves. The VetorMap District product that is
being released next month won't add that much either, yes we can map landuse
areas a bit better if there is no other source. We also noted that
residential streets are not named in VMD so like Y! imagery there is little
point in importing for unmapped areas unless someone is prepared to add the
street names from ground survey, or (second best) from OS Streetview, which
may or may not be accurate in terms of what is on the ground.

Please don't be fooled, the OS may be a great organisation and produces
great mapping that we have in the past relied upon for so many uses, but our
map is a pretty damn good product too and once verified in an particular
area is probably always going to be up to date and richer than any OS
OpenData product.

Cheers

Andy


>-----Original Message-----
>From: talk-gb-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
>bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Matt Williams
>Sent: 05 April 2010 7:24 PM
>To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
>
>On 5 April 2010 18:43, Andy Allan <gravitystorm at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Tim François <sk1ppy14 at yahoo.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>>
>>> The idea of OSM, as I see it, is to create a free-as-in-speech map of
>the world. All data which goes into the map must be the same sort of
>'free'. Whether that be surveying or "copying other people's maps" is
>irrelevant - the end goal is to create a complete map.
>>
>> It's not irrelevant. There are many of us who believe, and have much
>> evidence to show, that making the map in a certain way produces
>> superior results. We're not interested in building a crappy-but-free
>> map of the world (see TIGER) but in an awesome-and-free map of the
>> world. And if there are things that seem to help but actually don't
>> (see imports) then many of us will defend the ultimate end-goal - the
>> awesome-and-free map.
>>
>> However, I disagree with the crowd on the tracing of OS Street View.
>> Crack on with it, and make a good job of it. But if you're going to
>> trace areas that you've got no knowledge of or intention to visit,
>> then take it apon yourself to increase the awesomeness of the mapping
>> - maybe organise a mapping party, or write to their local paper asking
>> for help or somesuch.
>
>Hear, hear! I believe that this is the stance that we should be taking
>with this. We should encourage people to use the data the OS is
>providing us with but if you're going to do it, do it well.
>
>--
>Matt Williams
>http://milliams.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 9.0.791 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2792 - Release Date: 04/05/10
>07:32:00





More information about the Talk-GB mailing list