[Talk-GB] OS and OSM

[Ed Avis]

Andy Allan <gravitystorm at ...> writes:

>>It is great to do a ground survey and then use OS Locator to check for
>>mistakes, but it would be equally possible to populate names from OS Locator
>>and then do a ground survey to check for mistakes.
> 
>Riiiigggghhhttt - that's not exactly an interesting day out for most
>people.

Walking round collecting street names.  That is how I started in OSM and it is
still today the core of my mapping activity.  (Although these days, a typical
'noname hunt' ends up with mostly building names and POIs mapped, most of the
unnamed streets having turned out to be service roads or footways.  But I do
try to walk along them all on foot.)

>Great. An OSM database filled with only OS data is a) at very best,
>only as accurate as OS data and b) a massive disincentive to people to
>go out mapping.

As I've mentioned this 'complete disincentive' is opinion, not fact, and
for me personally it's an opinion I do not agree with.  I have found the OS
data invaluable for provoking further mapping expeditions and refinement of
areas which, until the OpenData release, had appeared to be complete.  (They
weren't.)

For example, at
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.548234&lon=-0.157174&zoom=18&layers=M>
OS Street View showed some extra roads which weren't mapped.  I traced in the
roads and then walked along each one finding building names and other features.
In the end, they turned out to be un-named service roads, but it was useful to
revisit the area to check it in more detail.

>I really don't understand why you keep arguing against the sequence of
>a) send some mappers out then b) use OS as a check for the minority of
>mistakes.

I don't argue against that at all, I think it's great.  But in fact that is not
the classical OSM way, which has been (a) armchair trace from Yahoo imagery
then (b) send out the mappers to find street names and other stuff.

-- 
Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com>