[Talk-GB] OS StreetView accuracy: caution!

Jason Cunningham jamicuosm at googlemail.com
Fri Apr 9 19:03:42 BST 2010

On 9 April 2010 18:40, Robert Scott <lists at humanleg.org.uk> wrote:

> I'm not really sure about this whole attitude of "OS data is not perfect,
> so let's ignore the imperfect bits".

I agree, and I'd go further

The accuracy of OS data looks vastly superior to our data. Its always hard
to keep track of discussions in OSM lists, but I can't work out the apparent
attitude of many towards the OS data.
It appears many who have given up 100's (1000's?) of hours to help create
the OSM map don't want to see their work replaced by more accurate OS data,
and are looking for errors in the OS data?
There seems to be an movement towards arguing OSM is about people going out
and gathering data in the field, and not simply bulk importing other peoples

This thread started off by mentioning errors seen in the OS map when out
mapping the Centenary Way, but can we be sure the OS map was wrong? Handheld
GPSr receivers can be out by 10's of meters. Looking at the Centenary Way
route (from OSM) as kml within Google Maps shows we clearly have the route
'off the path', and in places it goes through water. Is that accurate?
Download any OSM path/walkway/route and look at it using google aerial maps,
the path is nearly always out.

OS products wont be perfect, and should not be bulk imported, but the
supplied data will still be more 'accurate' than the OSM


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20100409/c07dfe47/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list