Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey National Grid maps of Edinburgh
Hi all,
Thanks Rob for that.
Chris Fleet (NLS) asked me to announce to the OSM community that the NLS is
also adding the Ordnance Survey Maps - 25 inch 2nd and later editions,
Scotland, 1892-1949, which is the most detailed topographic mapping for
all the inhabited regions of Scotland from the 1890s to the 1940s, as
described here: http://maps.nls.uk/os/25inch-2nd-and-later/index.html
At the moment, this layer currently covers selected counties in Southern
Scotland only and can be added using the following URL:
http://geo.nls.uk/mapdata3/os/25_inch/cb/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
Jerry wrote about the MESH project (http://www.mesh.ed.ac.uk/) in which I'm
involved with Richard. Funded by the AHRC, the MESH project is about
mapping the history of Edinburgh. We compared the different solutions to
create an historical GIS and finally decided to use OSM. So since March, we
started to improve OSM in Edinburgh. You can see the results in these two
examples:
- part of New Town: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/55.95750/-3.20140
- part of Old Town: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/55.95005/-3.18792
The mapping is still in progress but we hope to have covered most of the
town before the end of October.
This being said, because it's a 3-year project, the solution to use OSM
would probably not have been possible without the historic maps digitised,
georeferenced and provided online by the NLS. It would have been too
time-consuming. Indeed because we want to map addresses, we need to map
buildings which is sometimes not easy at all in an historic town such as
Edinburgh. Using the historic maps allowed us:
- to speed up the mapping process,
- to add far more details such as walls, gardens or gates (walls and
gardens can seem secondary features but all together with buildings, it
gives an idea of the plots),
- to add some addresses using a combination of maps (OS National Grid maps
of Edinburgh (1940s-1960s) contain the house numbers but don't show where
the entrances are, contrary to the OS 1893 map, which shows the entrances
but not the house numbers) before doing the full survey (thus it saves a
lot of time on the field as it's just a matter of checking things rather
than drawing/writing on the map),
- to improve the accuracy of OSM in term of positioning, at least to be
consistent even if there is a global offset; Bing imagery contains a priori
an offset (in fact many local offsets) which can be corrected using the
features on the grounds such as letter boxes, walls, etc, elements which
are included in the historic maps.
So I take the opportunity here to thank a lot the NLS (partner of the MESH
project) and particularly Chris for their wonderful job here, as well as
the local OSM community in Edinburgh (mainly Bob, Brian, Chris, Donald,
Neil).
And Jerry, yes, you're right, we didn't put many information online yet as
we really wanted to concentrate on the core task which was and still is the
mapping. But before mid-October, we'll put for sure some material online
including maps, some articles and reports to talk about our experience
contributing and using OSM, some web applications, and probably some
surprises we are working on. Every data produced during this project will
be released as open data as we strongly believe that everyone including the
general public, local historians, scholars, academics, etc has the right to
access and play with the data and tools we will produce/develop.
Cheers,
Eric
On 11 August 2014 23:08, SK53 sk53@gmail.com wrote:
I met Richard Rodger who is leading the MESH project at Edinburgh
University. Addresses in central Edinburgh have changed so little in 200
years that they are able to use OSM to map where attorneys were located in
the middle of the 19th Century. The historical addresses were acquired from
Business Directories. And MESH is the reason why these particular maps have
been done. There is a link to the project there.
I dont think there is that much detailed information available yet, but it
looks to be shaping up to be both a fascinating project and a classic
example of how OSM data can be used for purposes very different from what
one might expect.
Jerry
On 11 August 2014 22:52, Donald Noble drno...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Rob,
The alignment matches well with both bing and what is already on OSM
(although this may largely be derived).
Also pleasing to note that the addresses I have surveyed match those
on the OS map - don't suppose they change all that often.
Cheers, Donald
On 10 August 2014 00:04, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, particularly those folk mapping up in Scotland,
The National Library of Scotland has added the earliest editions of
Ordnance
Survey National Grid maps covering the Edinburgh environs to their
online
map offerings.
http://maps.nls.uk/additions.html#28
What's so special about these maps is that they show details right down
to
individual buildings plus their
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey National Grid maps of Edinburgh
Thanks Rob,
The alignment matches well with both bing and what is already on OSM
(although this may largely be derived).
Also pleasing to note that the addresses I have surveyed match those
on the OS map - don't suppose they change all that often.
Cheers, Donald
On 10 August 2014 00:04, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, particularly those folk mapping up in Scotland,
The National Library of Scotland has added the earliest editions of Ordnance
Survey National Grid maps covering the Edinburgh environs to their online
map offerings.
http://maps.nls.uk/additions.html#28
What's so special about these maps is that they show details right down to
individual buildings plus their addresses! I think this is a first for the
UK (Warwickshire CC have a map layer of these National Grid maps but theirs
cover a period which is still in copyright so cannot be used for OSM).
If out mapping and you want to double check an address, this could be a
great asset to have at your disposal.
To add this to JOSM you need to create a new imagery layer with the
following URL:
http://geo.nls.uk/mapdata3/os/edinburgh_1250_out/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
Regards,
Rob
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
--
Donald Noble
http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey National Grid maps of Edinburgh
I met Richard Rodger who is leading the MESH project at Edinburgh
University. Addresses in central Edinburgh have changed so little in 200
years that they are able to use OSM to map where attorneys were located in
the middle of the 19th Century. The historical addresses were acquired from
Business Directories. And MESH is the reason why these particular maps have
been done. There is a link to the project there.
I dont think there is that much detailed information available yet, but it
looks to be shaping up to be both a fascinating project and a classic
example of how OSM data can be used for purposes very different from what
one might expect.
Jerry
On 11 August 2014 22:52, Donald Noble drno...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Rob,
The alignment matches well with both bing and what is already on OSM
(although this may largely be derived).
Also pleasing to note that the addresses I have surveyed match those
on the OS map - don't suppose they change all that often.
Cheers, Donald
On 10 August 2014 00:04, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, particularly those folk mapping up in Scotland,
The National Library of Scotland has added the earliest editions of
Ordnance
Survey National Grid maps covering the Edinburgh environs to their online
map offerings.
http://maps.nls.uk/additions.html#28
What's so special about these maps is that they show details right down
to
individual buildings plus their addresses! I think this is a first for
the
UK (Warwickshire CC have a map layer of these National Grid maps but
theirs
cover a period which is still in copyright so cannot be used for OSM).
If out mapping and you want to double check an address, this could be a
great asset to have at your disposal.
To add this to JOSM you need to create a new imagery layer with the
following URL:
http://geo.nls.uk/mapdata3/os/edinburgh_1250_out/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
Regards,
Rob
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
--
Donald Noble
http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey OpenData Licence - request to OS required
Hi Mike, [posted to legal-talk and talk-gb; responses to legal-talk or personal email please] I understand that you have had previous correspondence with Ornance Survey and on requesting use of the OpenData you received the response that they have no objections to geodata derived in part from OS OpenData being released under the Open Database License 1.0. [1] Since this request, several other UK public bodies have started to release geo data on their own websites using the OS OpenData Licence. Examples include: * Hampshire County Council - Public Rights of Way [2] * Communities.gov.uk - Public Assets [3] Oddly not all releases of geo data use the OS OpenData licence (Natural England's recent release is under the Open Government Licence). The problem with the OS OpenData Licence is two-fold. Firstly, it clearly states that the data is hosted on OS's website. This is not the case for the examples above. Secondly, it may be incompatible with ODbL v1.0 (hence the need to request use of the OpenData). Unfortunately, Ordnance Survey's response gives clearance for only their OpenData TM data sets. Can you kindly contact OS and ask what can be done about this. Does their legal team feel that the permission above can be extended to no objections to geodata derived in part from OS OpenData LICENCED DATA being used under the Open Database Licence 1.0 irrespective of its origin? If not then can I suggest that OS create a v2 of their OS OpenData Licence that both dilutes the statement that the data is hosted on their website and gives explicit clearance for use with ODbL 1.0? Can this be done soon before more public bodies release data under said licence. Kind Regards, RobJN [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.region.gb/6516 [2] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-May/013298.html [3] http://publicassets.communities.gov.uk/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey - State of the Map Scotland
Hi, Is there anyone here that has connections with OS. We are hoping that we might get some representatives along to State of the Map Scotland. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Of_The_Map_Scotland_2011 We are hoping that we can start a discussion on how to use the OS brand and Openstreetmap.org lobby to persuade local councils in Scotland to release their street name data in a standard open format for the mutual benefit of all. If anyone has any contacts please invite them along Cheers Bob___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
I would try to secure a face-to-face meeting with your council's GIS team, and separately with any teams that are custodians of other data you're interested in. Ask to talk generally about OpenStreetMap and raise this in the meeting. I've got a reasonable relationship now with a few people in Southwark Council and while they tend to be pretty busy I have occasionally got some useful data releases from them. It's a lot easier when you have a good relationship and they understand where you're coming from. I'm pretty confident that they'll use the PSMA clause once it comes into force. It also helps to mention how OSM could help them... don't oversell it (they already pay a license for a superior mapping product that they're not going to drop) but point to examples like James at Surrey Heath; the CycleStreets service for councils; the OS Locator fixup helped by ITO's and Rob Scott's tools; work I'm doing with the GLA and councils to map food growing; etc. Let them find applications that might be useful - in my experience councils can take months or even years to do that but it's better than trying to tell them what they could/should do with OSM. Finally, I wouldn't start a petition until I'd tried that initial approach, and I'd use it first to try and demonstrate local demand without antagonism (so get fellow OSM-ers in the council area, businesses, etc.) If you wanted to do a petition, go to the local media, etc. you'd be looking for a corporate decision higher up the food chain which could take a while and put you in a bad position with the people who actually hold the data. Best wishes, Tom On 23 March 2011 19:25, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote: Hi all, Here is part of an email I sent to a few councils regarding rights of way data (footpaths, bridleways, etc): I have a big and fairly complicated request regarding the definitive map. I am interested in making data more accessible to the public (as encouraged by central government [1]). It would be great if the rights of way data could be released without restriction, specifically the definite map. As you probably know, the rights of way data is derived from Ordnance Survey products which until now has prevented this data being released without restriction because of copyright. However OS will soon introduce the Public Sector Mapping Agreement which defines how government bodies can use OS products [2]. This includes a new mechanism for public bodies to request datasets that have been derived from OS products to be release either licensed as OS OpenData or Free to Use (section 2.5 of the license [3]). [1] http://data.gov.uk/ [2] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/ [3] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/docs/psma-member-licence.pdf Kent County Council wrote back: Dear Mr Sheerman-Chase Thank you for your email. I will forward your suggestions and comments to the Head of the Service and Definitive Map Team. Kind regards Countryside Access Service Does anyone have any ideas on how to actually get the councils to apply to OS to exempt their data and release it? Currently, I get the impression that they don't rate data openness as a high priority - they just nod and smile until I go away. It would be good to get this data for quality assurance or even ... dun dun dun... importing. Could we start a petition? Or use any contacts the community has to make this happen? Any other data sets worth liberating? Once we have set a precedent, it should be easier to get other councils to comply, because of the way the OS exemption process works. Thoughts? Regards, TimSC ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
On 23 March 2011 19:25, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote: Hi all, Here is part of an email I sent to a few councils regarding rights of way data (footpaths, bridleways, etc): I have a big and fairly complicated request regarding the definitive map. I am interested in making data more accessible to the public (as encouraged by central government [1]). It would be great if the rights of way data could be released without restriction, specifically the definite map. As you probably know, the rights of way data is derived from Ordnance Survey products which until now has prevented this data being released without restriction because of copyright. However OS will soon introduce the Public Sector Mapping Agreement which defines how government bodies can use OS products [2]. This includes a new mechanism for public bodies to request datasets that have been derived from OS products to be release either licensed as OS OpenData or Free to Use (section 2.5 of the license [3]). [1] http://data.gov.uk/ [2] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/ [3] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/docs/psma-member-licence.pdf Kent County Council wrote back: Dear Mr Sheerman-Chase Thank you for your email. I will forward your suggestions and comments to the Head of the Service and Definitive Map Team. Kind regards Countryside Access Service Does anyone have any ideas on how to actually get the councils to apply to OS to exempt their data and release it? Currently, I get the impression that they don't rate data openness as a high priority - they just nod and smile until I go away. It would be good to get this data for quality assurance or even ... dun dun dun... importing. Could we start a petition? Or use any contacts the community has to make this happen? Any other data sets worth liberating? Once we have set a precedent, it should be easier to get other councils to comply, because of the way the OS exemption process works. Technically I believe that the rights of way on the OS mapping is derived from the legal documentation provided by the council. As it happens I was talking to someone who was in a position to know about this recently and he said that the OS don't even claim ownership of rights of way data. Also. my understanding is that Kent are particularly proactive on open data. This youtube presentation is worth looking at even though it seems to be about their map interface. Clearly they are talking the talk on open data. http://sparkdev.co.uk/showcase/show/open-kent Here is another link. Carol Patrick seems to be the person to talk to. http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=9274627 Regards, Peter Thoughts? Regards, TimSC ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
As I understand it, there is both a written record of where the rights of way go and the definitive map is in addition, with the written record taking precedence? So if a local authority is drawing their map, and it's offset from the line of a wall for example from OS MasterMap, as the written record might say, then it wouldn't represent the wall, nor be a substitute for it, and it could be used independently of the OS data. Under the new derived data rules [1], that seems to make it free to use. Copies of the definitive map go to Ordnance Survey and are used to piece together the 25K and 50K maps, but I'm told Ordnance Survey don't actually digitize it properly, just trace it, they claim not to have a vector dataset. I don't know how local authorities are storing their data, but you can be sure they all do it differently. If we could get our hands on copies of the definitive map to trace (since the only feature you're copying, was put there by the LA, not OS), would that do? I fear the problem is that even under the exemption process of the PSMA, the LAs don't have a dataset per se of PRoWs that they could just release, and might not be able to justify making one. Regards, Luke [1] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/licences/using-and-creating-data-with-os-products/free-to-use-data/index.html On 24/03/2011 12:20, Peter Miller wrote: On 23 March 2011 19:25, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk mailto:mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote: Hi all, Here is part of an email I sent to a few councils regarding rights of way data (footpaths, bridleways, etc): I have a big and fairly complicated request regarding the definitive map. I am interested in making data more accessible to the public (as encouraged by central government [1]). It would be great if the rights of way data could be released without restriction, specifically the definite map. As you probably know, the rights of way data is derived from Ordnance Survey products which until now has prevented this data being released without restriction because of copyright. However OS will soon introduce the Public Sector Mapping Agreement which defines how government bodies can use OS products [2]. This includes a new mechanism for public bodies to request datasets that have been derived from OS products to be release either licensed as OS OpenData or Free to Use (section 2.5 of the license [3]). [1] http://data.gov.uk/ [2] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/ [3] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/docs/psma-member-licence.pdf Kent County Council wrote back: Dear Mr Sheerman-Chase Thank you for your email. I will forward your suggestions and comments to the Head of the Service and Definitive Map Team. Kind regards Countryside Access Service Does anyone have any ideas on how to actually get the councils to apply to OS to exempt their data and release it? Currently, I get the impression that they don't rate data openness as a high priority - they just nod and smile until I go away. It would be good to get this data for quality assurance or even ... dun dun dun... importing. Could we start a petition? Or use any contacts the community has to make this happen? Any other data sets worth liberating? Once we have set a precedent, it should be easier to get other councils to comply, because of the way the OS exemption process works. Technically I believe that the rights of way on the OS mapping is derived from the legal documentation provided by the council. As it happens I was talking to someone who was in a position to know about this recently and he said that the OS don't even claim ownership of rights of way data. Also. my understanding is that Kent are particularly proactive on open data. This youtube presentation is worth looking at even though it seems to be about their map interface. Clearly they are talking the talk on open data. http://sparkdev.co.uk/showcase/show/open-kent Here is another link. Carol Patrick seems to be the person to talk to. http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=9274627 Regards, Peter Thoughts? Regards, TimSC ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
On 24 March 2011 13:56, Luke Smith luke.sm...@grough.co.uk wrote: As I understand it, there is both a written record of where the rights of way go and the definitive map is in addition, with the written record taking precedence? So if a local authority is drawing their map, and it's offset from the line of a wall for example from OS MasterMap, as the written record might say, then it wouldn't represent the wall, nor be a substitute for it, and it could be used independently of the OS data. Under the new derived data rules [1], that seems to make it free to use. Copies of the definitive map go to Ordnance Survey and are used to piece together the 25K and 50K maps, but I'm told Ordnance Survey don't actually digitize it properly, just trace it, they claim not to have a vector dataset. I don't know how local authorities are storing their data, but you can be sure they all do it differently. If we could get our hands on copies of the definitive map to trace (since the only feature you're copying, was put there by the LA, not OS), would that do? I fear the problem is that even under the exemption process of the PSMA, the LAs don't have a dataset per se of PRoWs that they could just release, and might not be able to justify making one. You make a good point. As far as I am aware the OS now allow derived works for things drawn on their maps which weren't on the base map. In the case of rights of way some of them are of course are on the background OS layer which is a limitation (see example definite map - link below). As such I don't think we can use the geometry even if we wanted to. http://rushmerecommon.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/img_1074.jpg Also... I am less interested in rights of way than in paths that can actually be used. There are rights of way around here that are under water now that the rivers have widened. There are other excellent paths that are not rights of way. Here is a nice example of an impossibly right of way where you would need waders and a canoe to follow the path! http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=640205Y=256605A=YZ=120 The thing that I believe we can lift from the definitive maps with confidence is fact that it is a 'right of way' and the right of way code. That was not in the OS base map. Regards, Peter Regards, Luke [1] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/licences/using-and-creating-data-with-os-products/free-to-use-data/index.html On 24/03/2011 12:20, Peter Miller wrote: On 23 March 2011 19:25, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote: Hi all, Here is part of an email I sent to a few councils regarding rights of way data (footpaths, bridleways, etc): I have a big and fairly complicated request regarding the definitive map. I am interested in making data more accessible to the public (as encouraged by central government [1]). It would be great if the rights of way data could be released without restriction, specifically the definite map. As you probably know, the rights of way data is derived from Ordnance Survey products which until now has prevented this data being released without restriction because of copyright. However OS will soon introduce the Public Sector Mapping Agreement which defines how government bodies can use OS products [2]. This includes a new mechanism for public bodies to request datasets that have been derived from OS products to be release either licensed as OS OpenData or Free to Use (section 2.5 of the license [3]). [1] http://data.gov.uk/ [2] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/ [3] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/docs/psma-member-licence.pdf Kent County Council wrote back: Dear Mr Sheerman-Chase Thank you for your email. I will forward your suggestions and comments to the Head of the Service and Definitive Map Team. Kind regards Countryside Access Service Does anyone have any ideas on how to actually get the councils to apply to OS to exempt their data and release it? Currently, I get the impression that they don't rate data openness as a high priority - they just nod and smile until I go away. It would be good to get this data for quality assurance or even ... dun dun dun... importing. Could we start a petition? Or use any contacts the community has to make this happen? Any other data sets worth liberating? Once we have set a precedent, it should be easier to get other councils to comply, because of the way the OS exemption process works. Technically I believe that the rights of way on the OS mapping is derived from the legal documentation provided by the council. As it happens I was talking to someone who was in a position to know about this recently and he said that the OS don't even claim ownership of rights of way data. Also. my understanding is that Kent are particularly proactive on open data. This youtube presentation is worth looking at
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
On 24 Mar 2011, at 13:56, Luke Smith wrote: As I understand it, there is both a written record of where the rights of way go and the definitive map is in addition, with the written record taking precedence? My experience is that it probably depends, and that the statement and map are very closely interwoven. My local definitive statement contains descriptions like: Public Footpath 001/023 - Follows the track to Orwell Farm from the A123 until top of hill, then south west to Bridleway 002/054. So it's usually a good enough description to know what right of way 001/023 refers to, but it's too approximate to draw out tracks in OSM. It's probably accurate enough for you to identify an existing track in JOSM (that follows the path as it exists on the ground) but it's not enough to determine that the track in JOSM is accurate and even if the track in JOSM is an accurate representation of the path on the ground, it's not enough to tell you that the path on the ground still strictly follows the right of way (the right of way IS what's indicated on the map, even if the path on the ground wanders and weaves). Anyhow, now I wander onto something else that I've been thinking about. Hope that helps. I've discussed this issue with my local council and although they appear in principle to be amenable to allowing us to use the definitive statement in OSM, but neither of us are really sure what it'd be useful for :) Question. Is OSM as a project really that interested in mapping the legal route of the right of way, or are we more interested in the utility of knowing that a track on the ground is considered to follow a right of way and that you can ride your horse/cart/motorbike/bicycle down there without being hassled? James ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
On 24/03/2011 17:13, Kevin Peat wrote: On 24 March 2011 16:56, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com mailto:e...@waniasset.com wrote: You could use something like designation=public_footpath highway=no note=Although a right of way, there is no path on the ground. Would work I guess. The only problem is that if there is no path on the ground the only way you can easily map them is by copying from the OS, so a no go. There's also the case where line of the official footpath (as indicated by markers at the field edge) doesn't match the path cut in the crop to help you get across. There's an example of that near me: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.18575lon=-1.33951zoom=17layers=M The path marked by the farmer is the sensible one that you'd actually want to use, but doesn't match what's marked by the public footpath signposts (which is also what's on the OS's maps). Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
Hi all, Here is part of an email I sent to a few councils regarding rights of way data (footpaths, bridleways, etc): I have a big and fairly complicated request regarding the definitive map. I am interested in making data more accessible to the public (as encouraged by central government [1]). It would be great if the rights of way data could be released without restriction, specifically the definite map. As you probably know, the rights of way data is derived from Ordnance Survey products which until now has prevented this data being released without restriction because of copyright. However OS will soon introduce the Public Sector Mapping Agreement which defines how government bodies can use OS products [2]. This includes a new mechanism for public bodies to request datasets that have been derived from OS products to be release either licensed as OS OpenData or Free to Use (section 2.5 of the license [3]). [1] http://data.gov.uk/ [2] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/ [3] http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/business/sectors/government/psma/docs/psma-member-licence.pdf Kent County Council wrote back: Dear Mr Sheerman-Chase Thank you for your email. I will forward your suggestions and comments to the Head of the Service and Definitive Map Team. Kind regards Countryside Access Service Does anyone have any ideas on how to actually get the councils to apply to OS to exempt their data and release it? Currently, I get the impression that they don't rate data openness as a high priority - they just nod and smile until I go away. It would be good to get this data for quality assurance or even ... dun dun dun... importing. Could we start a petition? Or use any contacts the community has to make this happen? Any other data sets worth liberating? Once we have set a precedent, it should be easier to get other councils to comply, because of the way the OS exemption process works. Thoughts? Regards, TimSC ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
For those that haven't seen, the Ordnance Survey is going to provide local authorities with access to its maps free of charge from April 1st. http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk /oswebsite/business/sectors/government/publicpsmafaqs.html This doesn't directly affect OSM but it will provide tougher competition when we try to persuade local councils to use OSM. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Public Sector Mapping Agreement
On 7 March 2011 18:17, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: For those that haven't seen, the Ordnance Survey is going to provide local authorities with access to its maps free of charge from April 1st. http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk /oswebsite/business/sectors/government/publicpsmafaqs.html This doesn't directly affect OSM but it will provide tougher competition when we try to persuade local councils to use OSM. On the other hand, it's great to see that our gratis offering is already pushing down the price of the opposition. -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Are the scripts which were used to generate the tiles from the StreetView data files available anywhere? I am trying to work out how to generate the Streetview tiles myself and am struggling to understand everything (falling at the first hurdle at present unfortunately Kev. osm@countach:~/osm/opendata/1 250 000 Scale Raster/data$ gdalwarp -s_srs EPSG:27700 -t_srs EPSG:900913 HP.tif 900913/HP.tif Copying color table from HP.tif to new file. ERROR 1: Unable to compute a transformation between pixel/line and georeferenced coordinates for HP.tif. There is no affine transformation and no GCPs.) On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote: We're generating StreetView tiles at the moment and some people have already been tracing. :) Small hiccup in the generation process meant that we've just had to restart (there were a couple of blank areas appearing at 'sheet' boundaries) but it's going well. OS have also just announced what VectorMap District, available for free at the start of May, is going to look like: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/vectormap/district/ From what the page suggests, this completely blows Meridian2 out of the water and, in vector format, is likely to be a lot better than StreetView. I'm just playing with the example shapefiles now. So it very much reinforces no need to rush - what there is in a month will be much better than what we have now. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Opendata recent releases
On Thursday 25 November 2010, Bunny wrote: The latest release of OS Streetview® is now available 1/11/10 The November release of OS LocatorTM is now available 16/11/10 The November release of Code-Point Open is now available 18/11/10 See: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/ OS Locator musical chairs has been updated to the Nov 2010 release. http://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs As with the last time I made a data update, anyone wanting to see an approximate visual summary of the changes between the two releases can choose the recent status updates view mode from the top right - for the next few days, most of the displayed changes at low zoom levels will be as a result of the Locator update. robert. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Opendata recent releases
On Thursday 25 November 2010, Bunny wrote: The latest release of OS Streetview® is now available 1/11/10 The November release of OS LocatorTM is now available 16/11/10 The November release of Code-Point Open is now available 18/11/10 See: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/ Excellent! Thanks for the reminder. robert. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Opendata recent releases
Cool! I from looking at whats available, I grabbed a random spot / tile area from the os vectormap http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/vectormap/district/docs/feature_code_list_v1-0.pdf I'll be cross-referencing these map features with the other features around the planet. Does anyone have a list / chart for what OSM tags were chosen for the conversion script? Thanks, Sam On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Robert Scott li...@humanleg.org.uk wrote: On Thursday 25 November 2010, Bunny wrote: The latest release of OS Streetview® is now available 1/11/10 The November release of OS LocatorTM is now available 16/11/10 The November release of Code-Point Open is now available 18/11/10 See: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/ Excellent! Thanks for the reminder. robert. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey National Grid Eastings Northings Re: OS Tile Ref look up by place name Re: Building with mapseg
On Thursday 03 Jun 2010 09:01:27 Philip Stubbs wrote: On 3 June 2010 08:05, Micah li...@j12.org wrote: If you want to find a place by name including quite small localities use http://www.gazetteer.co.uk/ This will give you a tile ref. You may need to chop off 2nd 4th numerical digit (1m x 1m) or get four tile set add NE, NW, SE, SW (500m x 500m) depending on what size tiles you are working with. Thanks. That is just what I was after. Also you can search locations as website: Where is the Path? http://wtp2.appspot.com/wheresthepath.htm by placename, or streetname with placename then choose from drop down. and then set OS grid ref (meter) in bottom right after clicking on map at point you want covered You can even set to have OSM in righthand panel. knock of last 3 digits of Northing and Easting to get 1000mx1000m tile ref. In fact one can work out by if bits knock off over 500 or under 500 if NE, NW, SE or SW tiles. There is plenty of info on Ordnance Survey National Grid Eastings Northings http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/gps/information/coordinatesystemsinfo/guidetonationalgrid/page1.html http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/gps/information/coordinatesystemsinfo/guidecontents/index.html http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/gps/docs/A_Guide_to_Coordinate_Systems_in_Great_Britain.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Grid http://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong-gridref.html At one point I though OS Eastings Norhings so old hat and longitude latitude the way of future with GPS, and world wide coverage. But I really like Easting and Northing where it is much easier to work out distance between points and or even just get a feel for how place relates to another by number of 1km tiles away, or where positioned on a tile. And OS Eastings Northings are embeded in so many records. I even thing good idea to set up website nearly same as 'Where is the Path?' but that defaults to showing British Areas of OSM with search and display using OS Northings and Eastings. Maybe even generate some special tiles that use OSM data but have replace in case of green space coverage, water courses bodies and high tide lines with data from OS Vector District. Though not sure if I will ever find time to do which involved me working out how to. regards, Micah -- -- ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey talk tomorrow
Hello everyone, In case of interest here: There is a British Computer Society talk given by a couple of guys from the Ordnance Survey on OpenSpace and the release of free data at my work place tomorrow. It's at Room HC029, Southampton Solent University, 6pm for 6.30pm. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey talk tomorrow
Can't quite make that one .. but it sounds great. Any chance of a YouTube'd version appearing? Phil On 11 May 2010 09:51, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote: Hello everyone, In case of interest here: There is a British Computer Society talk given by a couple of guys from the Ordnance Survey on OpenSpace and the release of free data at my work place tomorrow. It's at Room HC029, Southampton Solent University, 6pm for 6.30pm. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey talk tomorrow
Nick Whitelegg wrote: Hello everyone, In case of interest here: There is a British Computer Society talk given by a couple of guys from the Ordnance Survey on OpenSpace and the release of free data at my work place tomorrow. It's at Room HC029, Southampton Solent University, 6pm for 6.30pm. I would have liked to have heard that myself, but I can't get down :( Can you ask them when they will be fixing the problem with the 'case' of file names ;) Having a mixture of upper and lower case files with all lower case names in the indexes is a little annoying :( But then they probably only use Windows ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Street View tiles.
I have welcomed the release of Ordnance Survey open data especially Street
View. I would have liked them to release Mastermap and Address Layer 2, but
keeping within realms of likelihood good so far.
I posted about it at:
http://blog.j12.org/2010/04/some-ordnance-survey-royal-mail-data-is-freed/
I used the OSM Word Press plug-in to display example of
The Ordnance Survey 'Street View' tiles served up from OSM servers.
I did it with this code in my post:
[osm_map long=-1.51 lat=53.82 control=scaleline,scale zoom=15
width=500 height=450 extmap_type=OSM extmap_name=UK_OS_StreetView_Map
extmap_address=http://c.os.openstreetmap.org/sv/${z}/${x}/${y}.png;
extmap_init=numZoomLevels: 17, transitionEffect: 'resize', sphericalMercator:
true type=ext]
I have put 'Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right
2010' with link to license underneath map but I would like to replace 'Data by
CC By-CC by OpenStreetMap' within map itself. The author of plugin says future
version may have this ability.
http://www.faktor.cc/Fotomobil/wp-osm-plugin-forum
I intend also to look into directly embed Ordnance Survey Street View
in Wordpress blog using the OS Open Space API
http://openspace.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/openspace/
which uses original tiles.
I have similerly used the wordpress pluging to display the Surrey Aerial
Photos:
http://blog.j12.org/2010/05/surrey-aerial-photo/
I did it with this code in my post:
[osm_map long=-0.59 lat=lat=51.24 control=scaleline,scale zoom=15
width=500 height=450 extmap_type=OSM extmap_name=Surrey_Aerial_Photo
extmap_address=http://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/surrey/${z}/${x}/${y}.png;
extmap_init=numZoomLevels: 21, transitionEffect: 'resize', sphericalMercator:
true type=ext]
I got OS Street View as layer in JOSM with custom WMS layer but found can be a
bit unreliable in a minority of sessions. I think it will be very useful but I
myself still intend to usealong with visits using GPS traces local
knowledge. It can be useful prompt to fill in gaps. In area there a quite a
few branches of short road that are so short almost private drives in feel
when going on them. I did go up them with GPS but felt odd doing to. Somehow
the GPS did not record and was never sure when I would get round to doing them
again so I just have added them from Street View. I may add a few principal
building outlines of building I know, as in many cases seem just as good as
Aerial photos. good to compare combinations.
The coastal high tide mark seems quite accurate from where I followed path
that was just above it, and is much better then what had at that stretch at
the moment. Streams outlines of woods seem pretty good from where I
intesected them or followed them with GPS. And in cases I have looked better
then the NPE traces have at moment, which I see not reason not to realign
where obviously much better.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata#OS_StreetView
regards,
Micah
--
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/%2520Bunny
--
http://j12.org/sb/
---
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
While I understand what you're saying I think it's also important to recognize that we all have different ways to contribute. Some potential OSM contributors may not be interested in on-the-ground surveying, and some aren't interested in chair mapping. Agreed from my point of view. I only get the time to contribute fragments at the moment. I've managed to build those up to a few villages bit by bit, and lots of other fragments round the country as I go away with family (so don't have dedicated mapping time). I recognise this isn't as good as dedicating more time, but it's that or nothing. I view it as a wiki and try to make it better than it was - I'm very reluctant to not improve something I know is missing or wrong, simply because of a possible effect on other contributions. Other than that, +1 to the approach being followed on the OS data, and thanks for all the work thus far. Cautious tracing by humans sounds good to me. Tom ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 17:25 +0100, Jonathan Bennett wrote: If someone who is completely new to OSM sees the streets in their area complete, they may assume the map is complete and there's nothing for them to do. As a lurker, and someone that would be keen to contribute, can I suggest somewhere where effort would be useful - A simple mechanism to attach attributes to streets. Perhaps a web interface with those incomplete streets highlighted. This would be low hanging fruit to a local, with a low barrier to entry. Such a mechanism would separate nicely the problem of street entry and the problem of street tagging. So far, my attempts to contribute have been stifled because of my low attention span and need to spend time doing other things. My perception is that its not trivial to begin to contribute. Can I spend 10 minutes here and there naming streets? Cheers, Henry ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote: 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. Yeah, it's not the accuracy of the OS data that I'm particularly worried about -- it's the accuracy of the tracing that gets done from it. From the looks of it the best data available will be the streetview rasters, and they're missing all kinds of stuff such as one ways, connectivity (mostly over connected), some smaller roads (they probably get classed as driveways), a lot of names, and of course footpaths, POIs, routes etc. But, if you're familiar with an area then I don't see a problem. In that case it's no worse than doing an initial street only survey. Creating a broken map is a very bad idea, but a merely incomplete one is just a fact of life we have to deal with. Or put another way: the data is freely there, it will get traced whether we like it or not, we might as well encourage it to be done in the right way. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Hi Henry As a lurker, and someone that would be keen to contribute, can I suggest somewhere where effort would be useful - A simple mechanism to attach attributes to streets. Perhaps a web interface with those incomplete streets highlighted. This would be low hanging fruit to a local, with a low barrier to entry. Such a mechanism would separate nicely the problem of street entry and the problem of street tagging. You can use the noname layer to view unnamed streets (+ sign on main map and then select). If you want to highlight them in the editor (Potlatch), go to options (the tick-in-a-box icon), tick Highlight unnamed roads and click OK. They will then be highlighted with red borders. Click on one and hit the N key to add the name. (You should really also add the source - +, type source, hit return then text for your source - e.g., local_knowledge). David (davespod) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 1 April 2010 09:41, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote: It's up and available: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/licence/docs/licence.pdf The main wrinkle seems to be this part on their requirement for attribution: include the same acknowledgement requirement in any sub-licenses of the data that you grant, and a requirement that any further sub-licenses do the same Can anyone comment on what that means for us, i.e. whether a simple note on the wiki as per other imports will suffice? The license requires a particular form of attribution and some other conditions, which they claim are compatible with CC-By. But before we get all enthusiastic about importing or tracing things, I think we need to consider the implications of their licence. My reading is that it would require us to include their attribution statement on any product that uses the data, which would include downloads and OSM's slippy may. It may or may not be enough to link to a sources wiki page from the OSM copyright line. More importantly, we also have to ensure that any downstream users are aware of the OS data included, and also ensure that our terms require them to include the OS attribution statement. I don't think the current OSM arrangements would satisfy these requirements, and I'm not sure the viral copyright attributions are something we would really want to accept. I could imagine a point where to print a small OSM derived map in a paper publication would mean including half a dozen copyright lines that would take up more space than the map itself. Moreover, since IIRC ODbL allows rendered maps to be made PD (or any other license) and also allows small data extracts to be used without restriction, I'm not sure that we'd able to use the OS data under their current license if/when we move to ODbL. Until we get clarification on these issues, I'd suggest not importing any of the OS data, or using any of it for tracing. Robert. -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 15:28, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 05/04/10 15:43, Tim François wrote: I understand that with an area mapped there is less impetus to head on over and start making tracks and surveying. But just leaving the area blank when we have this fantastic opportunity to populate seems silly, no? This far down the line, it doesn't look like there are any mappers in the immediate area of which I was talking about. I speak from personal experience - when we first got the Yahoo imagery I enthusiastically traced the nearest largely unmapped area to me (Harlow) from the images. That was several years ago and to this day most of the roads in Harlow exist but are unnamed because nobody has taken up the baton. In the only London meet-up I've been to I spoke at length to a person whose main contribution to OSM is adapting her walks around London to Yahoo! streetname surveying. While I understand what you're saying I think it's also important to recognize that we all have different ways to contribute. Some potential OSM contributors may not be interested in on-the-ground surveying, and some aren't interested in chair mapping. The two can compliment each other. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
To whomever can answer: The fact that the following link is up on the wiki: http://edgemaster.dev.openstreetmap.org/streetview_tiles/ossv.html?zoom=15 http://edgemaster.dev.openstreetmap.org/streetview_tiles/ossv.html?zoom=15; lat=60.16917lon=-1.16243layers=BTF lat=60.16917lon=-1.16243layers=BTF. Does this mean we can (gasp!) start tracing in Potlatch and JOSM? If so, what's the final verdict on source=* tags? Thanks Tim (Who's pretty excited at getting roads up North of Northampton...) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 05/04/2010 12:31, Tim Francois wrote: Does this mean we can (gasp!) start tracing in Potlatch and JOSM? If so, what's the final verdict on source=* tags? Hold your horses, please. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata for a summary of what's happened so far, what could happen and what shouldn't happen. Everything's up for discussion, but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
That's all well and good (I've been editing some of that wiki, so am aware of it!!) but all I see in this mailing list is quick discussions of comparisons, but no real conclusions. Also, why bother to spend the vast amount of time creating tiles if we're not gonna trace it? Street names we can just visually add by opening the tiff in an image viewer, so have we gone to fast by creating the tiles? Or was it all just to create pretty comparison pictures? It's 5 days since the data came out (kinda) - am I being too impatient? Tim --- On Mon, 5/4/10, Jonathan Bennett openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk wrote: From: Jonathan Bennett openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Monday, 5 April, 2010, 12:58 On 05/04/2010 12:31, Tim Francois wrote: Does this mean we can (gasp!) start tracing in Potlatch and JOSM? If so, what's the final verdict on source=* tags? Hold your horses, please. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata for a summary of what's happened so far, what could happen and what shouldn't happen. Everything's up for discussion, but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
... but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. Yes, but Tim only mentioned tracing, not importing. The Wiki is clearly out of date. It says that We are still assessing the open data releases but we seem to have gone past the assessment stage and are able to produce sites like the one Tim first mentioned. Who is this we that's referred to here and on the Wiki that is doing this assessment? We (Tim, myself and I dare say a few others) also want to start doing some tracing. Personally I will have plenty to do over the next month making sure existing roads are in the right place and adding significant buildings and so on that this data, from my own assessment, seems perfectly good for. Assuming that bulk uploads aren't going to change what's there, and I trust the people doing them not to cock anything up, I'm not particularly interested in them and may make use of them if and when they happen. In the meantime, I, as part of the wider community, would like to know more details about what's actually happening at the moment and what the outcomes of these assessments are. Thanks, Steve - Original Message - From: Jonathan Bennett openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:58:29 +0100 On 05/04/2010 12:31, Tim Francois wrote: Does this mean we can (gasp!) start tracing in Potlatch and JOSM? If so, what's the final verdict on source=* tags? Hold your horses, please. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata for a summary of what's happened so far, what could happen and what shouldn't happen. Everything's up for discussion, but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- ___ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Um, what he said. That's what I really meant with my previous rant! --- On Mon, 5/4/10, Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com wrote: From: Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com Subject: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Monday, 5 April, 2010, 13:32 ... but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. Yes, but Tim only mentioned tracing, not importing. The Wiki is clearly out of date. It says that We are still assessing the open data releases but we seem to have gone past the assessment stage and are able to produce sites like the one Tim first mentioned. Who is this we that's referred to here and on the Wiki that is doing this assessment? We (Tim, myself and I dare say a few others) also want to start doing some tracing. Personally I will have plenty to do over the next month making sure existing roads are in the right place and adding significant buildings and so on that this data, from my own assessment, seems perfectly good for. Assuming that bulk uploads aren't going to change what's there, and I trust the people doing them not to cock anything up, I'm not particularly interested in them and may make use of them if and when they happen. In the meantime, I, as part of the wider community, would like to know more details about what's actually happening at the moment and what the outcomes of these assessments are. Thanks, Steve - Original Message - From: Jonathan Bennett openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:58:29 +0100 On 05/04/2010 12:31, Tim Francois wrote: Does this mean we can (gasp!) start tracing in Potlatch and JOSM? If so, what's the final verdict on source=* tags? Hold your horses, please. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata for a summary of what's happened so far, what could happen and what shouldn't happen. Everything's up for discussion, but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- ___ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Put differently -- can anyone think of any specific reason why we can't start tracing? The only thing I can think of is to make sure that we are very careful to include: source=os_meridian2 source=os_streetview source=os_etc Or whatever the particular dataset you are using is, on each way (or node if applicable) you are editing or creating. I don't think the suggestion of hampering import work is a real point, because any import will have to work around all of our other data anyway -- right? Just be prepared for the potential that any tracing work done with the above tags wiped in an import later. (Note, I am geniunly asking a question above, what does everyone think?...) Thanks, JR On 5 April 2010 13:54, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Um, what he said. That's what I really meant with my previous rant! --- On Mon, 5/4/10, Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com wrote: From: Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com Subject: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Monday, 5 April, 2010, 13:32 ... but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. Yes, but Tim only mentioned tracing, not importing. The Wiki is clearly out of date. It says that We are still assessing the open data releases but we seem to have gone past the assessment stage and are able to produce sites like the one Tim first mentioned. Who is this we that's referred to here and on the Wiki that is doing this assessment? We (Tim, myself and I dare say a few others) also want to start doing some tracing. Personally I will have plenty to do over the next month making sure existing roads are in the right place and adding significant buildings and so on that this data, from my own assessment, seems perfectly good for. Assuming that bulk uploads aren't going to change what's there, and I trust the people doing them not to cock anything up, I'm not particularly interested in them and may make use of them if and when they happen. In the meantime, I, as part of the wider community, would like to know more details about what's actually happening at the moment and what the outcomes of these assessments are. Thanks, Steve - Original Message - From: Jonathan Bennett openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:58:29 +0100 On 05/04/2010 12:31, Tim Francois wrote: Does this mean we can (gasp!) start tracing in Potlatch and JOSM? If so, what's the final verdict on source=* tags? Hold your horses, please. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata for a summary of what's happened so far, what could happen and what shouldn't happen. Everything's up for discussion, but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- ___ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
I did some naughty tracing on 1st April to see what the data was like, and I used source=OS StreetView. I do prefer source=os_streetview as it's caps-independent and has no whitespace (much easier to parse if needed...) --- On Mon, 5/4/10, John Robert Peterson jrp@gmail.com wrote: From: John Robert Peterson jrp@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey To: Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Monday, 5 April, 2010, 14:10 Put differently -- can anyone think of any specific reason why we can't start tracing? The only thing I can think of is to make sure that we are very careful to include: source=os_meridian2 source=os_streetview source=os_etc Or whatever the particular dataset you are using is, on each way (or node if applicable) you are editing or creating. I don't think the suggestion of hampering import work is a real point, because any import will have to work around all of our other data anyway -- right? Just be prepared for the potential that any tracing work done with the above tags wiped in an import later. (Note, I am geniunly asking a question above, what does everyone think?...) Thanks, JR On 5 April 2010 13:54, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Um, what he said. That's what I really meant with my previous rant! --- On Mon, 5/4/10, Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com wrote: From: Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com Subject: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Monday, 5 April, 2010, 13:32 ... but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. Yes, but Tim only mentioned tracing, not importing. The Wiki is clearly out of date. It says that We are still assessing the open data releases but we seem to have gone past the assessment stage and are able to produce sites like the one Tim first mentioned. Who is this we that's referred to here and on the Wiki that is doing this assessment? We (Tim, myself and I dare say a few others) also want to start doing some tracing. Personally I will have plenty to do over the next month making sure existing roads are in the right place and adding significant buildings and so on that this data, from my own assessment, seems perfectly good for. Assuming that bulk uploads aren't going to change what's there, and I trust the people doing them not to cock anything up, I'm not particularly interested in them and may make use of them if and when they happen. In the meantime, I, as part of the wider community, would like to know more details about what's actually happening at the moment and what the outcomes of these assessments are. Thanks, Steve - Original Message - From: Jonathan Bennett openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:58:29 +0100 On 05/04/2010 12:31, Tim Francois wrote: Does this mean we can (gasp!) start tracing in Potlatch and JOSM? If so, what's the final verdict on source=* tags? Hold your horses, please. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata for a summary of what's happened so far, what could happen and what shouldn't happen. Everything's up for discussion, but there's a feeling that if we just dive in straight away and start tracing/importing willy-nilly we'll just shoot ourselves in the foot. -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- ___ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
So the solution is to just leave it blank? I understand that with an area mapped there is less impetus to head on over and start making tracks and surveying. But just leaving the area blank when we have this fantastic opportunity to populate seems silly, no? This far down the line, it doesn't look like there are any mappers in the immediate area of which I was talking about. I'd also like to point out that nowhere have I mentioned imports, bulk-imports or anything like that - I just wanna manually trace and manually add road names!!! (Tom: I know you also mentioned remote mapping, which *is* what I meant, so thanks!!) Tim --- On Mon, 5/4/10, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: From: Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu Subject: Re: Ordnance Survey To: Tim Francois sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: r...@phillipsuk.org, 'OSM Talk-GB' Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Date: Monday, 5 April, 2010, 15:26 On 02/04/10 12:02, Tim Francois wrote: I haven't done all the roads yet, nor named all of them, nor added any source tags (not sure which one yet). My intention is just to get the roads in to this forgotten area, for someone else to go verify them with a GPS later (though judging by the lack of tracks in the area, not many mappers about around here?). I added FIXME tags to most roads. The problem is that experience has taught us that once an area has the look of having been mapped by having lots of roads in place it is much less likely that somebody local will jump in and start doing a proper survey of the area. That's why we are much less keen on bulk imports and remote mapping from aerial images etc than we used to be. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Tim François wrote: So the solution is to just leave it blank? Maybe the soution is to encourage people to treat OSM as an outdoor sport, gathering GPS tracks and LOTS of extra data that no one else's maps have, rather than an armchair hobby copying other people's maps. Cheers, Chris P.S. There are large chunks of GB 'up North of Northampton' that are already better quality than OS Streetview ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 05/04/10 15:43, Tim François wrote: I understand that with an area mapped there is less impetus to head on over and start making tracks and surveying. But just leaving the area blank when we have this fantastic opportunity to populate seems silly, no? This far down the line, it doesn't look like there are any mappers in the immediate area of which I was talking about. I speak from personal experience - when we first got the Yahoo imagery I enthusiastically traced the nearest largely unmapped area to me (Harlow) from the images. That was several years ago and to this day most of the roads in Harlow exist but are unnamed because nobody has taken up the baton. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 5 April 2010 16:28, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 05/04/10 15:43, Tim François wrote: I understand that with an area mapped there is less impetus to head on over and start making tracks and surveying. But just leaving the area blank when we have this fantastic opportunity to populate seems silly, no? This far down the line, it doesn't look like there are any mappers in the immediate area of which I was talking about. I speak from personal experience - when we first got the Yahoo imagery I enthusiastically traced the nearest largely unmapped area to me (Harlow) from the images. That was several years ago and to this day most of the roads in Harlow exist but are unnamed because nobody has taken up the baton. On the other hand, when I first started in OSM I didn't have a GPS logger. However, I was lucky enough to live in an area where despite having no roads yet in the database we did have fairly good Yahoo coverage. I traced all the roads in a ~2 mile radius. Since then I have had plenty a nice walk around the area naming roads, finding addresses and other POIs. For me it was enough to get over the initial barrier and now the area round me is one of the most complete in the area. I think we can all agree than mass imports of OS data into OSM isn't the way to go, but providing raster images for tracing and comparing can really help. We must of course be careful that people treat it with the caution it deserves - going out and surveying the roads yourself should always be done but quickly getting roads traced/surveyed lets us OSMers get on to mapping the stuff that gives OSM the advantage over the 'competition' -- the POIs, local knowledge, secret footpaths, traffic restrictions etc. -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 05/04/2010 16:38, Tim François wrote: So then the question is: what's more of a problem? Features with no name, or no features at all? Personally, I'd rather see the road on the map with no name than not see a road at all, especially when using the maps for in-car navigation. Which would you rather see: * A map with just streets (maybe including names) or a map with: * streets and names * speed limits * turn restrictions * postboxes * shops * leisure facilities * tourist attractions * footpaths * bridleways * litter bins ...et cetera If someone who is completely new to OSM sees the streets in their area complete, they may assume the map is complete and there's nothing for them to do. If you're going to trace an area, you should be in a position to fill in the rest of the details, otherwise you're just taking the low-hanging fruit and leaving the hard stuff for someone else. Lots of mappers *do* do this, but putting off potential mappers is a good reason not to go charging into imports and/or tracing, or any other sort of non-survey based mapping. Besides, how do you know the source you're tracing is correct? -- Jonathan (Jonobennett) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
I thought it was very interesting to look at the OS and OSM overlaid on each other on the WMS link someone posted. 1. I was very impressed with how really accurate OSM is compared to OS where I know it has been done systematically 2. I was disappointed to see how out of date the OS data is - streets which I know personally have been there for two years still aren't in the OS data - but it's not all that out of date, some recent streets are there. 3. OS street detail has some real problems where a street is closed off part way along - streets where there is a bollard or a section of footway between street ends look like they are continuous streets on OS where I've looked (maybe this will be better in the vector stuff to be released). No wonder we get these tales of trucks following satnav only to end up stuffed. 4. I'm disappointed how many street names are missing on OS, especially short ones (short street not short name). Mapnik is a much prettier rendering as well, IMO. While I agree with Tom and Jonathan about tracing putting people off doing the base level survey, I have found that where the basic street level survey has been done properly, people will make small corrections from local knowledge and quick checks and surveys, where they aren't prepared to spend a whole day doing something. Quality has improved in most areas I've done over time (though it's still clear to me that we are very poorly represented in very rural villages). I'm not sure tracing is quite so problematic as from satellite, because OS has street names as well, but someone is still going to have to go back and get detail and check it (otherwise what is the point - if all we are going to do is trace OS, the user might as well use OS in the first place). I think one of the problems of this completeness is people don't know. Now I know Harlow needs attention I might well put it on my list for a visit. We did that for King's Lynn where we had the street pattern but no names and no other detail (though we've not finished yet), but only because I looked carefully at what had already been done. Personally I don't see the attraction of just sitting for hours in front of a computer duplicating someone else's product. For me the interest in OSM is the exploring, the wind in my face, the exercise. I think it's actually a shame that if people start tracing everywhere we can't say this is the fruit of our own labours. I'd still really like to complete Cambridgeshire by surveying. At 93%, we're so nearly there, and I'd really like to be able to say yes, *we* did it. Where I think I'll use the OS base most is if I miss a street name by accident, and will save going back to check it. But poersonally I won't be spending yet more time at my computer mindlessly copying. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Tim François sk1pp...@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. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On Monday 05 April 2010, Andy Allan wrote: 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. This may be true when we are the best available source of Free data for a country, but there is the potential for a massive brain-drain on OSM in the UK now that OS have released their data. We stand to lose a lot of participants who are just interested in the source that has the best data available to them for their licensing requirements. If we don't import a lot of OS, that source will be OS. We need to become a superset of what OS can offer (for Free) if we are to remain relevant to anyone other than us Freedom 'nuts'. But of course I agree that this should not be rushed. robert. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Jason Cunningham wrote: Sent: 05 April 2010 7:53 PM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey On 5 April 2010 14:10, John Robert Peterson jrp@gmail.com wrote: Put differently -- can anyone think of any specific reason why we can't start tracing? Thanks, JR JR, you might spend hours tracing Streetview images only to find someone replaces it with 'VectorMap District' vector data in a couple of weeks. Why trace the road when the vector data behind streetview will be released next month? Different products and covering the ground in different ways. Don't assume what you see on StreetView is in 'VectorMap District because the trial data they have released suggests not. I've had my first look through the various datasets this afternoon and I'm really pleased. I agree with those who say we need to wait before tracing, because we'll probably be using 'VectorMap District which is released next month VMD may be useful for targeted importing but Streetview is probably going to be better for general stuff. For instance, VMD doesn't appear to have minor streets named, eg residential streets. Each of the products released by OS contains data which may be of use to OSM. We now need to look at the data within each product, decide what we want to use, and how the data enters OSM. The dominant source of data looks like being the data 'VectorMap District' product, because its vector data and accurate. But there will be data in Streetview not available in VectorMap District which will need tracing. Define accurate. I'd expect the position of most roads and major features to be at least as good as we have now but is it up to date. Just because it's the OS doesn't automatically mean its better than what we have in OSM already. At this moment I do not support a straight import of any data from 'VectorMap District' because much of the data is already present in OSM. I'd suggest something along the lines of converting the 'VectorMap Discrict' data for each 2km grid square and making it available as a download that can be used as a layer in JOSM. The corresponding area in OSM can be downloaded into JOSM and the two 'brought together' if needed. Which I guess may mean deleting a lot of existing OSM data because OS have mapped more accurately in many situations. Its going to need a lot of care this, It could be a great aid to someone who is mapping on the ground. It would save editing time. But if its done remotely we may be no better off than the situation with Yahoo! imagery. If VMD doesn't have naming attributes on all objects, and the trial data suggests it doesn't, then it may not be of as much use as we think. I've had a look at the vector data provided for Milton Keynes and it's clear we will need to discuss the individual layers available. Hopefully on the wiki? For example the 'water area' contains far more detail than I ever hoped to see, and its a very important layer for many map users. It inclusion really stands out when you consider the missing fence lines and 'Rights of Way'. OS appear map the 'areas' of waterways over 1m wide, something OSM has not been able to do with GPSr's and Yahoo imagery. (Waterways under 1m are shown as lines by OS) Yes, I can see that water features is one area the OS vector data could be a big improvement for OSM currently. Looking at the waterways layer (and woodland layer) provides examples of why we couldn't directly import it. Whenever there is a bridge over the waterway the water way stops existing. Similarly the existence of a path causes woodland not to exist over the path, so instead of one large woodland, it's broken up into several small woodlands. (Maybe this is one of the issues OS will address before the release of 'VectorMap District' next month?) Don't hold your breath! For example I used the example vector data for Milton Keynes to look at the water layer. Below the first link show you can see example of the very accurate vector data within 'VectorMap District'. Its a stream running through Milton Keynes and less than two metres wide. But the layer is broken up because the stream is not considered to exist under bridges! The bridges/paths can be seen in the second link to Where's the path http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd132/jamicu/grassvectorofwaterinMiltonK eynes.jpg http://snipurl.com/v9xsq One very good example of using OS data as a reference resource and not wholly relying upon it for direct import. Cheers Andy Cheers, Jason Cunningham 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 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Landform Panorama data
Phil James wrote: Aah! Thanks Richard, I've had a closer look now (I'd only quickly skimmed the SD folder). I took the file numbers to be the same as the sheet references on the First Series sets - don't know why - especially as they are derived from 1:50k data! Just as a matter of interest, I'm viewing the files in Openoffice. The drawing app. provides a quick and easy way to view the files graphically. Phil. How useful, I didn't realise OpenOffice supported DXF, even if it isn't so great with the 20MB file of the Snowdon mountain range that I use as my test case! I've spent most of today working with different tools to convert the raw contour data into other, more useful forms such as a DEM dataset (which is essentially just an image coloured according to height. I've generally found a successful method to do this, and hope to publish my results later this week. Thomas ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey data matching
Please slap me if I'm either jumping the gun, or duplicating here, but I don't think anyone has covered this publicly already. I have had a quick poke around, and the meridian2 data seems to use a UID called OSODR (Ordnance Survey Oscar Database Reference). After some further poking around, it seems that this reference will be consistent across all of their data releases, though this is based in part on assumptions. (anyone have any more detail on this?) Now it seems like a very worthwhile exercise to attempt to do some detailed matching up of the the ways in the OS data and the ways is the OSM data, this is a completely non intrusive process, and can even be done offline, so it's not a problem to be doing now. I'm not well positioned to do this myself due to a lack of sql experience, but here is my suggestions: Pick a county that's a manageable size, and have some well mapped areas, some poorly mapped areas, and some non mapped areas. Ignore everything that isn't a road. Then run a bunch of searches on the 2 datasets to find ways that match between them. if the start and end coords match (within ~5 meters or so), they are likey the same; if the start and end coords match, but backwards, they are likely the same with a reversal. the above ways can then be removed form further searches. Take a look at the matches, and remove any that in fact don't follow the same (or close to) course (for each node in each dataset, check it's proximity to the closest waysegment in the other, not perfect, but good enough i reckon) Take a look at the data that's left, and work out where to go next. I suspect there will be ways that exist as 2 end to end ways (where a road name changes) in one set, but as a single way in the other. Or areas where a road name changes, but the position of the change is different between the datasets. There will be areas that just straight up don't match, these will be numerous, and would be best filtered for carefully, and flagged for human checking (openstreetbugs?) Subtleties that need further investigating would include: split carage ways; roads that only partially exist in our data (country lanes that have poorly defined ends or have not been fully surveyed); anything in our data marked position=approximate The results of this process could lead to some really useful data. our geometry (in general) seems to be better than the meridian2 data, but there are areas where we are missing data such as names, or any data at all in some rural areas. The general idea would be to do an import that takes the best from both data sets, and preserves all of our data except where identified as beeing inferior. If we can generate a list of ways that exist in meridian2, but are absent totally from our data, I say it would be worth importing them (carefully) their geometry is fairly poor, but it's well within usable parameters. And it's complete. If the import is done sensibly, it would be a fairly simple process to reimport any ways that have had no further work on them if better data becomes available from OS (someone said something about that happening) using a filter on last update user and OSODR reference. (this is based on the same assumption as above) Other moderately related points: their coastline data is way ahead of ours (even if offset by a fixed distance from what I've seen, no sure even which side the error is on, email me for a reference if interested, I'll try to find the data I was looking at again). At least in areas where no one has updated it. Unfortunately coastline ways are quite long, (though from what I've seen, not unmanageably so) and may have been updated in part or only very slightly, checking for version of nodes may be worthwhile in this case. So, am I onto somthing, or has this already been descussed to death on some other list? Thanks, JR ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Landform Panorama data
I've had a look at the height data, and it appears that it is incomplete (many tiles are missing altogether). Does anyone know why? I realise that it is the only dataset that won't be updated, but presumably they have a full set. I haven't been able to find an explanation, and the information about it online suggests it is a full set, though the downloaded index shows it to be partial. I thought one of you 'more closely involved ;-) ' guys might know. Presumably any ones which are missing are the ones which are out to sea and therefore have no contours in them? e.g. the 100x100km grid square SV only contains sv80.dxf - as that's the only square which has any land in it (the Scilly Isles) For the ones on land - there should be 25 files per larger-grid square., i.e. each file represents a 20x20km square. I've by no means checked every one on my download, but a look at quite a few squares show that I have all the ones I expcet to have for those squares. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Richard wrote: OS have also just announced what VectorMap District, available for free at the start of May, is going to look like: Pretty, but still no field boundaries :( So, I'm sending my wife armed with Blackadder's Provisional First Series lists to this weekend's boot sales (the first of which she leaves for soon, while I watch F1 qualifying). Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Gazetteer
'Cos I was just playing! ...and it was late... The other reason for not counting was that my search was too simple - as well as the abbrev 'mus' you get loads of names containing mus. You are welcome to have a go - I think the web interface is still working. Graham Graham Jones (from my phone) On Apr 3, 2010 12:10 AM, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: I was disappointed with ***some word*** - only **some number**! (you do get a few more with **some abbreviation**, but not a lot) When people say that, it seems they have also searched for the abbreviation. Why doesn't anyone give a number of abbreviations they found? -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Ed Loach wrote: Sent: 03 April 2010 7:35 AM To: 'Richard Fairhurst' Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Richard wrote: OS have also just announced what VectorMap District, available for free at the start of May, is going to look like: Pretty, but still no field boundaries :( So, I'm sending my wife armed with Blackadder's Provisional First Series lists to this weekend's boot sales (the first of which she leaves for soon, while I watch F1 qualifying). Excellent :-) Cheers Andy Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@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: 271.1.1/2787 - Release Date: 04/03/10 07:32:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 1 April 2010 09:39, Richard Bullock rb...@cantab.net wrote: As Andy says, I say we start with getting boundary data fixed up from Boundary Line and then look at Vector Map District in a month's time and decide what the next step is I agree with this; especially as boundary data is hard to come by any other way I also agree with using OS's boundary data to fix up our boundary data. In the meantime, however, I think the Street View rasters have some use, if only for adding street names for roads that don't already have them. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
To further this, I got a bit excited yesterday at the thought of all this yummy data arriving. So I had to have a go with it. I sometimes travel in and around East Haddon, NW of Northampton - the OSM coverage here is/was patchy at best. I've uploaded some GPX tracks previously, but the distances between places are vast and cycling around is pretty knackering! So I experimented a bit with the StreetView rasters, seeing if I could import them into JOSM and manipulate their size/orientation to fit the existing OSM data. Luckily, this didn't prove too difficult, and so I set about tracing the missing roads in and around East Haddon, West Haddon, Hollowell, Church Brampton, Ravensthorpe, Spratton and Chapel Brampton. It seems to work OK, but manually lining up the tiles takes a bit of time. I haven't done all the roads yet, nor named all of them, nor added any source tags (not sure which one yet). My intention is just to get the roads in to this forgotten area, for someone else to go verify them with a GPS later (though judging by the lack of tracks in the area, not many mappers about around here?). I added FIXME tags to most roads. See the results against Google here: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=14lat=52.3179lon=-0.98652layers=BT See the results against Meridian2 here: http://gibin.geog.ucl.ac.uk/~ollie/osopendata/meridian/?zoom=14lat=52.3179; lon=-0.98652layers=BT Just thought I'd confess, and let you stop me if you think I'm stepping over some boundaries Tim -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Russ Phillips Sent: 02 April 2010 11:09 To: OSM Talk-GB Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey On 1 April 2010 09:39, Richard Bullock rb...@cantab.net wrote: As Andy says, I say we start with getting boundary data fixed up from Boundary Line and then look at Vector Map District in a month's time and decide what the next step is I agree with this; especially as boundary data is hard to come by any other way I also agree with using OS's boundary data to fix up our boundary data. In the meantime, however, I think the Street View rasters have some use, if only for adding street names for roads that don't already have them. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Ah, I see - I've been following the mailing list but must have missed that memo. No problem, I'll hold fire! :) (Out of interest, how is an image tile reprojected? Any good references I could read? Just curious...) Tim -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst Sent: 02 April 2010 12:35 To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Tim Francois wrote: Hollowell, Church Brampton, Ravensthorpe, Spratton and Chapel Brampton. It seems to work OK, but manually lining up the tiles takes a bit of time. Please, have patience. We will have the maps reprojected for you into a background layer in double quick time. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Looks interesting! I have some spare time, computing capacity and programming experience, so if you want me to help I can. Otherwise, I'm waiting patiently! Thanks Tim --- On Fri, 2/4/10, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: From: Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey To: Tim Francois sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: 'talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)' talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Friday, 2 April, 2010, 12:55 Tim Francois wrote: Ah, I see - I've been following the mailing list but must have missed that memo. No problem, I'll hold fire! :) (Out of interest, how is an image tile reprojected? Any good references I could read? Just curious...) A wonderful suite of programs called gdal is your friend. :) The process is pretty much: 1. read StreetView tile 2. add a bit of border from the surrounding tiles 3. reproject using gdalwarp 4. slice into 900913 tiles and save them 5. repeat over entire dataset It's exactly the same as we've done with the out-of-copyright maps, but with the helpful addition that we don't have to faff rectifying them first. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
I was going to say something like Double quick time?? We've been waiting over 28 hours!! ;-), but actually I know that as soon as these layers become available then editing will consume my life! So, no rush ;-) S - Original Message - From: Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:34:56 +0100 Tim Francois wrote: Hollowell, Church Brampton, Ravensthorpe, Spratton and Chapel Brampton. It seems to work OK, but manually lining up the tiles takes a bit of time. Please, have patience. We will have the maps reprojected for you into a background layer in double quick time. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- ___ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Gazetteer
Judging from Defra stats on the number of agricultural businesses (360,000 farms or thereabouts in England), this still only accounts for a fairly small proportion of all UK farms. From: Graham Jones [mailto:grahamjones...@googlemail.com] Sent: 02 April 2010 14:28 To: peter.r...@aligre.co.uk Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Gazetteer Ah yes - I hadn't tried 'Fm' - that does give a lot. I was disappointed with Museum - only 16! (you do get a few more with 'mus', but not a lot). Maybe I will try a comparison with OSM - will just be a bit tricky with the abbreviations. Graham. On 1 April 2010 23:16, Peter Reed peter.r...@aligre.co.uk wrote: A lot more farms are there as . Fm It can't be that all farms are listed as running the query only reveals 372 points with farm in the title. Probably not enough to get too excited about, maybe just deal with them manually? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Dr. Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK email: grahamjones...@gmail.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
We're generating StreetView tiles at the moment and some people have already been tracing. :) Small hiccup in the generation process meant that we've just had to restart (there were a couple of blank areas appearing at 'sheet' boundaries) but it's going well. OS have also just announced what VectorMap District, available for free at the start of May, is going to look like: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/vectormap/district/ From what the page suggests, this completely blows Meridian2 out of the water and, in vector format, is likely to be a lot better than StreetView. I'm just playing with the example shapefiles now. So it very much reinforces no need to rush - what there is in a month will be much better than what we have now. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Richard wrote: Please, have patience. We will have the maps reprojected for you into a background layer in double quick time. I understand that the licence is compatible with OSM's current licence, but has anyone thought about whether it is compatible with ODBL? Should we do this before we begin making use of the data? It would be a shame to have to undo a lot of work later. Just a thought. Cheers David (davespod) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Gazetteer
I was disappointed with ***some word*** - only **some number**! (you do get a few more with **some abbreviation**, but not a lot) When people say that, it seems they have also searched for the abbreviation. Why doesn't anyone give a number of abbreviations they found? -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 1 Apr 2010, at 01:16, Phil Monger wrote: Hi Tom, Not sure I agree that Streetview is 'horrible' - as a free base map it will rival or beat any of the others I have seen. This is even more true for rural areas. I am aware most of the raster stuff got left out, but streetview *is* raster - it says as much in the PDF. What we would want to do, I think, is encourage people to rapidly trace this to form a base map, then set upon the task of checking it for accuracy. Secondly, adding to it all the great features that we know from OSM - with the time burden or walking all the streets gone, that second part should progress more rapidly. But I want to go out on my bike and map, I spend enough time at the computer as it is, without sitting there tracing, missing out on various details that are not or are wrong on the OS maps. Shaun Phil On 1 April 2010 00:47, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 01/04/10 00:06, Phil Monger wrote: The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets / names , etc. StreetView is horrible - the vector data will be far more useful. We can surely get this as a backdrop layer, like the Yahoo imagery? I suspect that will be the best approach, yes. We'll probably want to wait for the Vector Map District release in May though as that will be a better data set than Meridian 2. Of course Boundary Line will also be useful for tracing and that should be available tomorrow. All this assume the license is OK of course, which we won't know until we see it. A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect) It's not raster data. Almost all the raster data got left out. Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire place If it's only a small village then surveying it wouldn't take long anyway ;-) Plus you'll get all sorts of detail that the OS mapping won't have. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
The problem with Meridian 2 is that it's a sampled set, so it's not as spatially accurate as we would like. The objects are present, but we can do better with shape if we wait, as TomH says, till the Vector Map District. We know that with lots of high quality GPS traces we can get very close to the top quality level of the OS in terms of road alignments, but where we have few traces, or the current data has been obtained from NPE for instance, then anything that the OS has is almost certainly going to be better. We are still going to need to walk/cycle all the streets, lots of other stuff, POI's and landuse info still to collect that's not in any of the OS datasets (Even MasterMap), but its going to be a great tool for verification and general improvements in our data. I'd suggest we hit Boundary data first, its an easy win and will fix so many problems with our current boundary relations. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Monger Sent: 01 April 2010 1:17 AM To: talk-gb Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Hi Tom, Not sure I agree that Streetview is 'horrible' - as a free base map it will rival or beat any of the others I have seen. This is even more true for rural areas. I am aware most of the raster stuff got left out, but streetview *is* raster - it says as much in the PDF. What we would want to do, I think, is encourage people to rapidly trace this to form a base map, then set upon the task of checking it for accuracy. Secondly, adding to it all the great features that we know from OSM - with the time burden or walking all the streets gone, that second part should progress more rapidly. Phil On 1 April 2010 00:47, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 01/04/10 00:06, Phil Monger wrote: The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets / names , etc. StreetView is horrible - the vector data will be far more useful. We can surely get this as a backdrop layer, like the Yahoo imagery? I suspect that will be the best approach, yes. We'll probably want to wait for the Vector Map District release in May though as that will be a better data set than Meridian 2. Of course Boundary Line will also be useful for tracing and that should be available tomorrow. All this assume the license is OK of course, which we won't know until we see it. A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect) It's not raster data. Almost all the raster data got left out. Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire place If it's only a small village then surveying it wouldn't take long anyway ;-) Plus you'll get all sorts of detail that the OS mapping won't have. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.791 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2782 - Release Date: 03/31/10 19:32:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 01/04/10 01:16, Phil Monger wrote: Not sure I agree that Streetview is 'horrible' - as a free base map it will rival or beat any of the others I have seen. This is even more true for rural areas. Well the cartography is horrible - the data is fine I'm sure. There just isn't much detail beyond roads and houses. I am aware most of the raster stuff got left out, but streetview *is* raster - it says as much in the PDF. Sure, I just don't think it's a hugely useful data set for us if we're going to have decent vector data available. What we would want to do, I think, is encourage people to rapidly trace this to form a base map, then set upon the task of checking it for accuracy. Secondly, adding to it all the great features that we know from OSM - with the time burden or walking all the streets gone, that second part should progress more rapidly. What on earth would be the point of creating our own vector data from StreetView though. I could understand tracing it into OSM but tracing it into a separate base map before we've even seen what will be in Vector Map District is just insane. Anyway, you still need to walk the streets to collect other information, and walking the streets is at least half the fun of OSM! As Andy says, I say we start with getting boundary data fixed up from Boundary Line and then look at Vector Map District in a month's time and decide what the next step is. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
As Andy says, I say we start with getting boundary data fixed up from Boundary Line and then look at Vector Map District in a month's time and decide what the next step is I agree with this; especially as boundary data is hard to come by any other way In the mean time, can't we just import everything that's available into a database which can be fronted by the OpenOS website that SteveC announced he had secured last week? You could have a database with all of the vector data - which gets rendered - and is displayed as a different layer along with the OS raster stuff. Could use those as a WMS layer for JOSM/Potlatch etc. The data itself could be accessible via an API. Bit like osm.org really. That way, it'd be easy to compare the OS datasets with each other and the OSM data - and we can import anything if-and-when we're ready to - and could import stuff more locally if necessary. Would also be a useful single-point-of-contact for all of the OSOpenData stuff. Any thoughts? (note however that although I am willing to help, I probably don't have the technical know-how to actually put this into action.) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 1 April 2010 09:25, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Gregory wrote: Without restrictions? Does that mean no attribution, it sounds like PD. Or does it mean they haven't told us the exact license yet but it will be nice? The latter, I think. http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendata/ is either still password-protected or Slashdotted as I write (well, more likely Guardian-ed)... a prize to the first person who can get through and find out. ;) It's up and available: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/licence/docs/licence.pdf The main wrinkle seems to be this part on their requirement for attribution: include the same acknowledgement requirement in any sub-licenses of the data that you grant, and a requirement that any further sub-licenses do the same Can anyone comment on what that means for us, i.e. whether a simple note on the wiki as per other imports will suffice? Regards, Tom -- http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 01/04/10 09:39, Richard Bullock wrote: You could have a database with all of the vector data - which gets rendered - and is displayed as a different layer along with the OS raster stuff. Could use those as a WMS layer for JOSM/Potlatch etc. The data itself could be accessible via an API. Bit like osm.org really. There is a viewer on the OS web site (when you can get in). Obviously we will need to set up WMS or something for tracing of certain layers as well. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
And again, I sent this to Richard instead of Talk-GB On 1 April 2010 09:44, Russ Phillips r...@phillipsuk.org wrote: On 1 April 2010 09:25, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Gregory wrote: Without restrictions? Does that mean no attribution, it sounds like PD. Or does it mean they haven't told us the exact license yet but it will be nice? The latter, I think. http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendata/ is either still password-protected or Slashdotted as I write (well, more likely Guardian-ed)... a prize to the first person who can get through and find out. ;) My reading of it is that it's roughly equivalent to CC-BY. There's a paragraph at the end that says: These terms have been aligned to be interoperable with any Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence. This means that you may mix the information with Creative Commons licensed content to create a derivative work that can be distributed under any Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence. A more sensible approach: Let's use OS data as one of the many sources that helps us map. Quite often I'll add something to the map based on a combination of survey, previous experience, out-of-copyright sources (e.g. NPE), maybe an openly licensed photo (e.g. Geograph), other map information (e.g. street names on NAPTaN nodes), and so on; I'm sure most OSMers are similarly catholic. OS data is one more source. I'd be happy using OS data to help complete Banbury and Worcester, for example, because these are places I know well; I can bring something extra to the map. But I don't think it would do OSM, or any users, any favours if I were to import OS data for Bradford, where I've never been. If you want the raw OS map of Bradford, you might as well use the OS map. The guy who knows Bradford should be the one to add those streets into OSM. I'm inclined to agree. I'm originally from Maltby, a mining village near Rotherham in South Yorkshire. I've been slowly mapping it with my GPS when I've gone to visit people, and I've added some roads from NPE. I know it well enough to be sure that the roads I add from NPE are still there. In the same way, I could use OS data to add roads, then use on-the-ground surveying to add more detail as when I get the chance. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 1 April 2010 00:47, Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk wrote: is encourage people to rapidly trace this to form a base map, then set upon the task of checking it for accuracy. But I want to go out on my bike and map, I spend enough time at the computer as it is, without sitting there tracing, missing out on various details that are not or are wrong on the OS maps. Shaun I encourage you to rapidly go out on your bike and beat the people mapping at their computer. I know you can be quite fast and would travel wherever people were copying OS. My interest from the OS is helping out OSM-dragon places such as Cornwall. It's a lot easier to get people like my parents adding features if the basic structure exists (plus they don't have a GPS). They're going down there this weekend, but sadly I don't think that's enough time for me to add the roads of the local town in. -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Regarding the OS datasets, here is a suggestion: use it is to update the name tag and fill in the missing gaps in attributes. For most of the datasets, the quality of the positional information (that's the geometry) is lower than that of OSM and it will make much more sense just to identify where there are overlaps and a road can be recognised quite well, so the attributes can be transferred... Cheers Muki -- Dr. Muki Haklay: Senior Lecturer in GIS Department of Civil, Environmental Geomatic Engineering University College London (UCL) Gower St. London WC1E 6BT T: +44 20 7679 2745 E: m.hak...@ucl.ac.uk mailto:m.hak...@ucl.ac.uk W: http://www.ge.ucl.ac.uk/~mhaklay/ http://www.ge.ucl.ac.uk/%7Emhaklay/ Towards Successful Suburban Town Centres - www.sstc.ucl.ac.uk http://www.sstc.ucl.ac.uk/ Bridging the Gaps - www.ucl.ac.uk/btg http://www.ucl.ac.uk/btg/ Mapping for Change - www.mappingforchange.org.uk http://www.mappingforchange.org.uk Po ve Sham blog - povesham.wordpress.com http://povesham.wordpress.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Meridian covers the countryside - but the data is derived at lower resolution than in urban area, and some small roads are missing. Muki On 01/04/2010 12:16, Nick Whitelegg wrote: From the grough site: http://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2010/04/01/no-change-for-walkers-maps-as-os-frees-data Instead, Ordnance Survey will in May launch VectorMap District, which will include midscale data and replaces the 1:25,000 and 1:50,000 originally proposed in the consultation document but, grough can reveal, will not have footpaths and other detail vital to walkers, mountain bikers and other outdoor enthusiasts. Does that mean there's nothing at all for countryside users in the OS data being released? Or does Meridian have it? Disappointing if there's no countryside data. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Dr. Muki Haklay: Senior Lecturer in GIS Department of Civil, Environmental Geomatic Engineering University College London (UCL) Gower St. London WC1E 6BT T: +44 20 7679 2745 E: m.hak...@ucl.ac.uk mailto:m.hak...@ucl.ac.uk W: http://www.ge.ucl.ac.uk/~mhaklay/ http://www.ge.ucl.ac.uk/%7Emhaklay/ Towards Successful Suburban Town Centres - www.sstc.ucl.ac.uk http://www.sstc.ucl.ac.uk/ Bridging the Gaps - www.ucl.ac.uk/btg http://www.ucl.ac.uk/btg/ Mapping for Change - www.mappingforchange.org.uk http://www.mappingforchange.org.uk Po ve Sham blog - povesham.wordpress.com http://povesham.wordpress.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Does that mean there's nothing at all for countryside users in the OS data being released? Or does Meridian have it? Sorry to follow up my own post - it would appear not. A real shame about the lack of countryside data in this free OS dataset. The Meridian data doesn't really contain anything that isn't in OSM already, and it's the countryside stuff, particularly things like field boundaries and wood outlines, and exact courses of rights of way, that would be really valuable. Oh well, at least it still means I can continue to spend my time mapping the footpaths, I guess. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
I'm not sure the OS has reliable footpath data for the countryside anyway. Last time I chatted with the OS about this they were interested in whether OSM could work with them to update rural ROW footpaths because they don't survey them anymore. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Nick Whitelegg Sent: 01 April 2010 12:23 PM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Does that mean there's nothing at all for countryside users in the OS data being released? Or does Meridian have it? Sorry to follow up my own post - it would appear not. A real shame about the lack of countryside data in this free OS dataset. The Meridian data doesn't really contain anything that isn't in OSM already, and it's the countryside stuff, particularly things like field boundaries and wood outlines, and exact courses of rights of way, that would be really valuable. Oh well, at least it still means I can continue to spend my time mapping the footpaths, I guess. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@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: 271.1.1/2782 - Release Date: 03/31/10 19:32:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Hi Andy, I'm not sure the OS has reliable footpath data for the countryside anyway. Last time I chatted with the OS about this they were interested in whether OSM could work with them to update rural ROW footpaths because they don't survey them anymore. Really? - that's interesting. Do you have a contact, seeing as I'm down their way... Thanks, Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 12:22 +0100, Nick Whitelegg wrote: Does that mean there's nothing at all for countryside users in the OS data being released? Or does Meridian have it? Sorry to follow up my own post - it would appear not. A real shame about the lack of countryside data in this free OS dataset. The Meridian data doesn't really contain anything that isn't in OSM already, and it's the countryside stuff, particularly things like field boundaries and wood outlines, and exact courses of rights of way, that would be really valuable. Oh well, at least it still means I can continue to spend my time mapping the footpaths, I guess. While not directly of interest to OSM, I think the elevation data could be quite useful. Does anyone know how it compares to the SRTM data most people currently use? Keith. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Tom Hughes [mailto:t...@compton.nu] wrote: Sent: 01 April 2010 3:06 PM To: Kai Krueger Cc: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists); 'talk-gb' Subject: Re: Ordnance Survey On 01/04/10 14:42, Kai Krueger wrote: Perhaps even easier and a bigger win, would be to import the postcode data. It is only points anyway, so many of the aspects making data imports hard, such as connectivity and duplication, don't apply as much here. Furthermore, given postcodes are unique identifiers, it would be very easy to spot which (full) postcodes are already in the database and only import those that aren't yet mentioned. Are random points that just mark postcodes appropriate? I know people have in the past added so called postcode centroid points but I have tended to remove those when I come across them. Likewise, You can't possibly verify them. For those thinking about all of this please refer to add add to the wiki page at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata Cheers Andy Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.791 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2782 - Release Date: 03/31/10 19:32:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Gazetteer
A lot more farms are there as . Fm It can't be that all farms are listed as running the query only reveals 372 points with farm in the title. Probably not enough to get too excited about, maybe just deal with them manually? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Gazetteer
On 1 April 2010 22:40, Graham Jones grahamjones...@googlemail.com wrote: I have been playing with the Ordnance Survey 50k gazetteer to see if it looks useful (very simple search tool at http://maps2.webhop.net/openos/gaz/www/doSearch.php). As a 'point of interest' database it does not have anywhere near as much in it as OSM does, which is quite nice really, so it is less useful from that point of view, so I probably won't bother extending the search tool to display them on a map as I had intended. It does have quite a lot of named hills, and farms which might not be in OSM though, which could be useful for countryside mapping - would it be useful if I were to do a query to look for things that are in that database, but not the OSM one? Could this potentially help with is in type searches for the times where our naive algorithms aren't good enough? Could at least help supplement Nominatim? -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
For those who don't live on Twitter: The UK Government has just announced its decision on freeing Ordnance Survey data. Full document is at http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/corporate/pdf/1528263.pdf Quick summary of what'll be released: - medium-resolution vector data (Meridian2), includes street geometries and names though the curves are a bit angular: see http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/meridian2/ - another new vector dataset called OS VectorMap District, scope as yet unknown - StreetView raster data (includes street names, building outlines) - postcodes, though with points (unit centres) not areas (Code-Point Open) - administrative boundaries (Boundary-Line) - gazetteer (OS Locator) - terrain data (Land-Form PANORAMA) - a couple of negligible very small-scale maps Contrary to original proposal, Landranger and Explorer rasters (1:25k/1:50k) will not be included. Data available tomorrow (Thursday) at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendata . Licence will be without restrictions on use and re-use. Original proposal was CC-BY. The response notes that several respondees (many of whom read this list, I suspect) suggested either pure PD or the ODC licences because of the database rights issue, but doesn't actually say what the licence will be. I'm sure there are a few other things we'd have liked to have seen (aerial imagery, for example) but on balance this is a great result IMO - and one that wouldn't have happened without OSM. Suggest follow-ups to talk-gb. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Slap on the back all round I think. I'll raise a glass at the Brum social tomorrow night :-) Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst Sent: 31 March 2010 9:36 PM To: t...@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) Subject: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey For those who don't live on Twitter: The UK Government has just announced its decision on freeing Ordnance Survey data. Full document is at http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/corporate/pdf/1528263.pdf Quick summary of what'll be released: - medium-resolution vector data (Meridian2), includes street geometries and names though the curves are a bit angular: see http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/meridian2/ - another new vector dataset called OS VectorMap District, scope as yet unknown - StreetView raster data (includes street names, building outlines) - postcodes, though with points (unit centres) not areas (Code-Point Open) - administrative boundaries (Boundary-Line) - gazetteer (OS Locator) - terrain data (Land-Form PANORAMA) - a couple of negligible very small-scale maps Contrary to original proposal, Landranger and Explorer rasters (1:25k/1:50k) will not be included. Data available tomorrow (Thursday) at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendata . Licence will be without restrictions on use and re-use. Original proposal was CC-BY. The response notes that several respondees (many of whom read this list, I suspect) suggested either pure PD or the ODC licences because of the database rights issue, but doesn't actually say what the licence will be. I'm sure there are a few other things we'd have liked to have seen (aerial imagery, for example) but on balance this is a great result IMO - and one that wouldn't have happened without OSM. Suggest follow-ups to talk-gb. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@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: 271.1.1/2780 - Release Date: 03/31/10 07:32:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Well, I've been trying to spot the 'April Fool' in this, but can't! It will be interesting to see what gets released tomorrow. Well done! Graham. On 31 March 2010 22:09, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote: Slap on the back all round I think. I'll raise a glass at the Brum social tomorrow night :-) Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst Sent: 31 March 2010 9:36 PM To: t...@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) Subject: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey For those who don't live on Twitter: The UK Government has just announced its decision on freeing Ordnance Survey data. Full document is at http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/corporate/pdf/1528263.pdf Quick summary of what'll be released: - medium-resolution vector data (Meridian2), includes street geometries and names though the curves are a bit angular: see http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/meridian2/ - another new vector dataset called OS VectorMap District, scope as yet unknown - StreetView raster data (includes street names, building outlines) - postcodes, though with points (unit centres) not areas (Code-Point Open) - administrative boundaries (Boundary-Line) - gazetteer (OS Locator) - terrain data (Land-Form PANORAMA) - a couple of negligible very small-scale maps Contrary to original proposal, Landranger and Explorer rasters (1:25k/1:50k) will not be included. Data available tomorrow (Thursday) at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendata . Licence will be without restrictions on use and re-use. Original proposal was CC-BY. The response notes that several respondees (many of whom read this list, I suspect) suggested either pure PD or the ODC licences because of the database rights issue, but doesn't actually say what the licence will be. I'm sure there are a few other things we'd have liked to have seen (aerial imagery, for example) but on balance this is a great result IMO - and one that wouldn't have happened without OSM. Suggest follow-ups to talk-gb. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@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: 271.1.1/2780 - Release Date: 03/31/10 07:32:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Dr. Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK email: grahamjones...@gmail.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Thanks very much Richard. I had been sitting in my GIS class this morning thinking about the due announcement as the lecturer mentioned OS OpenSpace, and said OS is like the Canada and USA mapping agencies. More on my blog http://www.livingwithdragons.com/2010/03/teaching-neogeography http://www.livingwithdragons.com/2010/03/teaching-neogeography On 31 March 2010 13:36, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Licence will be without restrictions on use and re-use. Original proposal was CC-BY. Without restrictions? Does that mean no attribution, it sounds like PD. Or does it mean they haven't told us the exact license yet but it will be nice? I'm sure there are a few other things we'd have liked to have seen (aerial imagery, for example) but on balance this is a great result IMO - and one that wouldn't have happened without OSM. Should we be importing anything to OSM? Or at least making comparison tools around this OS data to compare our coverage? If there is tracing to be done then it might make a great project of the week. -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
As a rare contributor, sorry if my questions seem a bit obvious. What does this actually mean? ie. will OSM now have every single street in it (once imported obviously) and so contributors won't be able to contribute by adding roads (other than new ones)? Sounds like a very good result though! Tristan On 31 March 2010 22:15, Graham Jones grahamjones...@googlemail.com wrote: Well, I've been trying to spot the 'April Fool' in this, but can't! It will be interesting to see what gets released tomorrow. Well done! Graham. On 31 March 2010 22:09, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote: Slap on the back all round I think. I'll raise a glass at the Brum social tomorrow night :-) Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst Sent: 31 March 2010 9:36 PM To: t...@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) Subject: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey For those who don't live on Twitter: The UK Government has just announced its decision on freeing Ordnance Survey data. Full document is at http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/corporate/pdf/1528263.pdf Quick summary of what'll be released: - medium-resolution vector data (Meridian2), includes street geometries and names though the curves are a bit angular: see http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/meridian2/ - another new vector dataset called OS VectorMap District, scope as yet unknown - StreetView raster data (includes street names, building outlines) - postcodes, though with points (unit centres) not areas (Code-Point Open) - administrative boundaries (Boundary-Line) - gazetteer (OS Locator) - terrain data (Land-Form PANORAMA) - a couple of negligible very small-scale maps Contrary to original proposal, Landranger and Explorer rasters (1:25k/1:50k) will not be included. Data available tomorrow (Thursday) at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendata . Licence will be without restrictions on use and re-use. Original proposal was CC-BY. The response notes that several respondees (many of whom read this list, I suspect) suggested either pure PD or the ODC licences because of the database rights issue, but doesn't actually say what the licence will be. I'm sure there are a few other things we'd have liked to have seen (aerial imagery, for example) but on balance this is a great result IMO - and one that wouldn't have happened without OSM. Suggest follow-ups to talk-gb. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@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: 271.1.1/2780 - Release Date: 03/31/10 07:32:00 ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Dr. Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK email: grahamjones...@gmail.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 31 March 2010 15:16, Tristan Thomas tristan.tho...@wikinewsie.orgwrote: As a rare contributor, sorry if my questions seem a bit obvious. What does this actually mean? ie. will OSM now have every single street in it (once imported obviously) and so contributors won't be able to contribute by adding roads (other than new ones)? I don't know exactly what is going to make it from OS to OSM yet, but... It is still good (very important in my opinion) for the map to be checked. For one reason, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright_Easter_Eggs You can check roads while adding valuable other data, bicycle racks, recycling bins, restaurants, shops, and stuff that might not be on the OS maps (or not on what they have released). In some places it may even be tricky to do an automatic bulk import of OS data, because of duplicating extensive data already added to OSM. -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets / names , etc. We can surely get this as a backdrop layer, like the Yahoo imagery? A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect) Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire place (apologies to the person I may have double replied this to!) On 31 March 2010 23:31, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: On 31 March 2010 15:16, Tristan Thomas tristan.tho...@wikinewsie.orgwrote: As a rare contributor, sorry if my questions seem a bit obvious. What does this actually mean? ie. will OSM now have every single street in it (once imported obviously) and so contributors won't be able to contribute by adding roads (other than new ones)? I don't know exactly what is going to make it from OS to OSM yet, but... It is still good (very important in my opinion) for the map to be checked. For one reason, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright_Easter_Eggs You can check roads while adding valuable other data, bicycle racks, recycling bins, restaurants, shops, and stuff that might not be on the OS maps (or not on what they have released). In some places it may even be tricky to do an automatic bulk import of OS data, because of duplicating extensive data already added to OSM. -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 01/04/10 00:06, Phil Monger wrote: The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets / names , etc. StreetView is horrible - the vector data will be far more useful. We can surely get this as a backdrop layer, like the Yahoo imagery? I suspect that will be the best approach, yes. We'll probably want to wait for the Vector Map District release in May though as that will be a better data set than Meridian 2. Of course Boundary Line will also be useful for tracing and that should be available tomorrow. All this assume the license is OK of course, which we won't know until we see it. A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect) It's not raster data. Almost all the raster data got left out. Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire place If it's only a small village then surveying it wouldn't take long anyway ;-) Plus you'll get all sorts of detail that the OS mapping won't have. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Hi Tom, Not sure I agree that Streetview is 'horrible' - as a free base map it will rival or beat any of the others I have seen. This is even more true for rural areas. I am aware most of the raster stuff got left out, but streetview *is* raster - it says as much in the PDF. What we would want to do, I think, is encourage people to rapidly trace this to form a base map, then set upon the task of checking it for accuracy. Secondly, adding to it all the great features that we know from OSM - with the time burden or walking all the streets gone, that second part should progress more rapidly. Phil On 1 April 2010 00:47, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 01/04/10 00:06, Phil Monger wrote: The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets / names , etc. StreetView is horrible - the vector data will be far more useful. We can surely get this as a backdrop layer, like the Yahoo imagery? I suspect that will be the best approach, yes. We'll probably want to wait for the Vector Map District release in May though as that will be a better data set than Meridian 2. Of course Boundary Line will also be useful for tracing and that should be available tomorrow. All this assume the license is OK of course, which we won't know until we see it. A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect) It's not raster data. Almost all the raster data got left out. Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire place If it's only a small village then surveying it wouldn't take long anyway ;-) Plus you'll get all sorts of detail that the OS mapping won't have. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey field boundaries etc. (moved from Newbies)
Phil Monger wrote: The field boundaries on 25k maps are a derivative layer based on the larger scale surveys - they come from data from as recently as 2009 and not older than 2002. You're 'avin' a larf, surely? Strictly speaking, a line on a 25k map is a linear topographical feature and they implicitly state on the bottom that they should not be seen as field boundaries. But if there's no linear topographical feature any more surely the line should not be there any more? Having said that, it all depends on where you are. When I led a geological project in the Mendips we found that the field boundary lines were completely invaluable - only a couple were out and it was clear why - wire fences! Nearly all were exactly right. My experience (primarily Derby, Notts, Staffordshire, Yorkshire) is that OS field boundaries (and the footpath overprint) simply aren't reliable enough. It was primarily because of this that I'm here. Even new data isn't always correct - the Pennine Bridleway in West Yorkshire is an example. The OS seem to have taken a punt on a possible route before it got waymarked (or perhaps they just got it wrong), but either way, their map of that area is inaccurate. OSM isn't perfect in that area - but it's mostly incomplete rather than inaccurate. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[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 it. 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. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
Richard your views on the rasters seem a little bizarre, harking back to a golden era where cartography was respected by the good folk of the land and had pride of place... etc. Basically you're shamelessly protecting your own pretty small industry from competition with a lot of waffle about OS' mapping the far north and how they need 9 million quid. I know you don't like the free market, but surely them opening up the rasters too would provide more interesting and better maps, and the rising tide would raise all the boats. I don't buy the vision that it would decimate the 'industry' I think if anything it would strengthen and improve it. Yours c. Steve On Jan 14, 2010, at 3:52 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Hi all, As threatened I've finished a response to the Ordnance Survey consultation: http://www.systemeD.net/documents/os_consultation.pdf For those without the appetite to read five pages of PDF, the summary is: - Good news generally - Releasing 1:25k and 1:50k rasters is not necessary and may be harmful - Access to aerial imagery should be provided, with no restrictions on tracing - Licence should take account of EU database rights I'd encourage everyone here, whether or not you agree with this, to send your own response to the consultation. You can bet that there will be well-funded people lobbying for the other side. Volunteer projects like OSM have traditionally not been great at having their voices heard in the corridors of power; let's make sure this one doesn't get away. The original consultation is at http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/ordnancesurveyconsultation . cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Jan 14, 2010, at 9:55 AM, Andy Allan wrote: On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Though custom cartography is the right answer for many applications, it will find it difficult to compete with the free, universally-recognised cartography of the OS. Are you saying you want to prevent these releases to protect the likes of OSM? Competition leads to improved services through innovation. Ah, but you need to consider this not simply as competition, but as state-funded destruction of a competitive market. Tax-payers money would be being ploughed into producing raster maps, which are then given away well below production cost in order to destroy the businesses of other companies and individuals. Anyone trying to compete would be up against the government who aren't trying to cover their costs - pretty hard to compete with, and not really a level playing field. Well, it also damages the OS in that Richard thinks they'll lose 9 million quid, or about 10% of their income from what I remember. I think you have the wrong vision that you'll be competing with free maps, just the same as the big guys are terrified of competing with a free OSM. The value just moves to more interesting things up the stack. You also ignore the potential it has to enlarge the market, and thus bring in more paying consumers. Have you guys read Free by Chris Anderson yet? Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:40 AM, David Earl wrote: On 14/01/2010 18:27, Dave F. wrote: Andy, The taxpayers have already paid for it, many times over. I resent having to pay £7.50 for a map I've already financed to construct. As I've paid for it, I think it should be given to me free of charge. For a paper map, I think not. You've helped pay for the data collection and technology, but not for the printing and paper etc for your particular map. As the printing is to a particularly high standard, and in 6 colour, I'm sure that is a very substantial part of the cost (and of course, probably half the selling price is from the retailer's markup anyway). Which gets to andy's point that anyone should be able to print them and just pay OS for the data, which is a nice idea but not the one being consulted on AFAIK. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
SteveC wrote: Basically you're shamelessly protecting your own pretty small industry What, magazine publishing? :p Looking forward to your, and others', response to DCLG. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Jan 18, 2010, at 9:38 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: SteveC wrote: Basically you're shamelessly protecting your own pretty small industry What, magazine publishing? :p No, carto Looking forward to your, and others', response to DCLG. Yeah, it's very cool you've put it together and I generally like it, but the protectionism for your specific use case is pretty odd in the middle of it. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Jan 18, 2010, at 10:28 AM, Andy Allan wrote: On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:21 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: I think you have the wrong vision that you'll be competing with free maps, just the same as the big guys are terrified of competing with a free OSM. The value just moves to more interesting things up the stack. Except you can't. This isn't the OS releasing data plus an example end product built from that data, since (unless someone wants to correct me) the data needed to recreate Landranger maps isn't the data that's being released. You also ignore the potential it has to enlarge the market, and thus bring in more paying consumers. Have you guys read Free by Chris Anderson yet? I have, but I must have missed the chapter that says the government should provide free consumer goods in order to stamp out innovation and competition. Can you point me to it? What, like it's not holding back innovation and competition already? Why're you guys so hung up on this one or two maps but totally fine with everything else? Richard's a socialist so I can see him arguing for weird government monopolies on making pinball machines for one-legged immigrants living in wales or whatever, but what are you arguing this for? What product will be nuked by OS releasing this? Are your commercial interests in OCM somehow affected? I don't get it. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:33 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Richard's a socialist so I can see him arguing for weird government monopolies on making pinball machines for one-legged immigrants living in wales or whatever, but what are you arguing this for? What product will be nuked by OS releasing this? Are your commercial interests in OCM somehow affected? I don't get it. I'd be much more interested in replying if you discussed the issue, instead of attacking the people. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Jan 18, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Andy Allan wrote: On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:33 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Richard's a socialist so I can see him arguing for weird government monopolies on making pinball machines for one-legged immigrants living in wales or whatever, but what are you arguing this for? What product will be nuked by OS releasing this? Are your commercial interests in OCM somehow affected? I don't get it. I'd be much more interested in replying if you discussed the issue, instead of attacking the people. Oh don't be so sensitive, Richard and I go back and forth on this all the time. I can understand why he argues for strange monopolies given his politcal ideals. Is that better? Now, why shouldn't I get free access to these maps? What is so special about them that we ned to grant a monopoly to protect a supposedly valuable sub-industry? I find it super weird you want a monopoly to protect industry, but there you go. What are the companies, products or jobs that will be hurt by it? Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:41 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Oh don't be so sensitive, Richard and I go back and forth on this all the time. I can understand why he argues for strange monopolies given his politcal ideals. Is that better? It's a bit of a recurring theme on these lists though - when the discussion gets going, the personal statements come out. It's weak debating skills. Now, why shouldn't I get free access to these maps? What is so special about them that we ned to grant a monopoly to protect a supposedly valuable sub-industry? I find it super weird you want a monopoly to protect industry, but there you go. What are the companies, products or jobs that will be hurt by it? I didn't say I wanted a monopoly. I'd rather either a) the government (i.e. the OS now, and doubly so if they stop trying to cover costs and just take subsidies instead) didn't produce printed maps at all b) or if the OS is going to produce finished maps, they spin out the cartographers and printing presses into a commercial organisation and let it sink or swim without government subsidy in competition with the like of, well, everyone else. This isn't me saying that I disapprove of a commercial company giving away a whole load of raster maps for free, I'm saying I don't think the government should be funding it. The only analogies I've thought of are if the government was to start up a department in Southampton employing authors to write novels and give them away to ebook readers, or if they paid civil-servant photographers to go round taking pictures of cats, caption them and run icanhascheezburger.gov.uk - both of which seem a bit weird and a misuse of public funds. Now I think we need a national mapping agency, since there are lots of bits of government (and society) that wouldn't work without having someone saying this line goes here. And the kind of data that a government collects in order to have a functioning government should also be public domain. But beyond that, it's a sliding scale into competing with a whole load of organisations who could be doing it themselves. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
Wading in (though for the purposes of a putative OSMF response, we can just leave this whole argument to one side and focus on the data)... 2010/1/18 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com I didn't say I wanted a monopoly. I'd rather either a) the government (i.e. the OS now, and doubly so if they stop trying to cover costs and just take subsidies instead) didn't produce printed maps at all b) or if the OS is going to produce finished maps, they spin out the cartographers and printing presses into a commercial organisation and let it sink or swim without government subsidy in competition with the like of, well, everyone else. I think approach (b) is about right, although there are a lot of public bodies using the raster maps too. Presumably we'd then have to suggest that they just pick any product on the open market for their own use, and perhaps that in certain circumstances where uniformity across local authorities is important there would be a centrally procured contract with a particular company or a standard stylesheet. I find it a bit odd to attack somebody as a socialist whilst advocating a free-of-charge state-run enterprise! The only part of the OS that is incredibly hard to replicate commercially, and that would suffer if commercial forces led its specification, is the data collection, maintenance and provision. Best, Tom -- http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Jan 18, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Andy Allan wrote: This isn't me saying that I disapprove of a commercial company giving away a whole load of raster maps for free, I'm saying I don't think the government should be funding it. Okay so you feel rasters are a special case, different to vectors. But given the choice between a) giving away the rasters and OS losing 9 million quid a year, or b) selling them as they do now surely (a) is better because it frees up the maps, provides a better platform for innovation and weakens the OS? And I say weaken, because a weaker OS is far and away more likely to be more clueful about licensing and so on than it is now. And if it isn't, then a weaker OS is far better for the british geodata industry in that it will allow more competition. I think the point we're disagreeing on is that you would see that 9 million quid as filled in by central government raising their funding, whereas I'd expect the budget to remain static (I can't see central government upping OS at the expense of hospitals and schools right now) and OS to have to cut other activities or start other for-profit activities to compensate. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
On Jan 18, 2010, at 11:19 AM, Tom Chance wrote: Wading in (though for the purposes of a putative OSMF response, we can just leave this whole argument to one side and focus on the data)... 2010/1/18 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com I didn't say I wanted a monopoly. I'd rather either a) the government (i.e. the OS now, and doubly so if they stop trying to cover costs and just take subsidies instead) didn't produce printed maps at all b) or if the OS is going to produce finished maps, they spin out the cartographers and printing presses into a commercial organisation and let it sink or swim without government subsidy in competition with the like of, well, everyone else. I think approach (b) is about right, although there are a lot of public bodies using the raster maps too. Presumably we'd then have to suggest that they just pick any product on the open market for their own use, and perhaps that in certain circumstances where uniformity across local authorities is important there would be a centrally procured contract with a particular company or a standard stylesheet. I find it a bit odd to attack somebody as a socialist whilst advocating a free-of-charge state-run enterprise! No no, I'm picking the least worst solution. If we have to have an OS, then we should make it as open and free as possible and allow competition on top. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
