[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response (again)

Steve Chilton S.L.Chilton at mdx.ac.uk
Tue Jan 19 14:44:22 GMT 2010

I would encourage anyone with an interest (and from the submissions
several on this list seem to have) to actually send a personal response
to the OS consultation.
(Dis)agreeing on this list is never going to change anything. Submitting
your views (whatever they may be) as a response, as Richard suggests,
just MAY have an affect if there is some commonality of view on one, or
several, of the response points.
Although the document itself is quite daunting - and yes you should read
it all (Steve) - responding to any or all of the twelve specific
questions should not take too much time, once you understand the issues.
Richard has chosen to bravely share his response and should not be
pilloried for having those particular views.


Steve Chilton, Learning Support Fellow
Manager of e-Learning Academic Development
Centre for Educational Technology
Middlesex University
phone/fax: 020 8411 5355
email: steve8 at mdx.ac.uk

Chair of the Society of Cartographers: http://www.soc.org.uk/

SoC conference 2009:

-----Original Message-----
From: talk-gb-bounces at openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-gb-bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard
Sent: 19 January 2010 13:52
To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response (again)

I wouldn't for a moment expect everyone to agree on the 1:25k and  
1:50k stuff. That's ok, you have the right to be wrong <grins, ducks  
and runs>

But, more seriously, I would draw your attention away from that and to  
the point about the Ordnance Survey's aerial imagery:

- OS has good aerial imagery
- OSM, Google Earth etc. demonstrate that tracing from aerial imagery  
is "additive" rather than "subtractive" - i.e. people like us often  
trace things that the professional surveyors don't
- OS doesn't need to fully release aerial imagery for it to be useful:  
they can simply "do a Yahoo" and enable others to trace from it via an  
API, as long as there are no restrictions on derived data

To my mind this could, and should, potentially be the biggest gain for  
OSM from the whole exercise.

If one bloke living in deepest darkest Charlbury says "you should do  
this" then DCLG is quite at liberty to say "yeah yeah yeah" and ignore  
the suggestion. But if lots of people ask, they will at least consider  

This is actually the sort of suggestion that works well in  
consultations - there's virtually no downside (OS and Getmapping still  
retain their business model), a lot of up, and good PR value.


Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list