Jon makes a good point about the Definitive Statement - at least in principle - indeed it is the process I described in an earlier message to this thread describing how the Definitive Maps were originally created. There is a big 'but' though - from my own experience the Definitive Statements are almost or completely empty for hundreds of paths - sometimes not a single path in a parish has a meaningful Definitive Statement! This is an illegal state of affairs but that is simply the case and cannot now be changed (other than by a Definitive Map Modification Order - of which, with current resources, you are unlikely to see more than a few dozen (at most) per year per county.
Mike Harris > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Stockill [mailto:li...@stockill.net] > Sent: 25 September 2009 15:54 > To: OSM Talk > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Breach of Copyright? > > Tom Hughes wrote: > > On 25/09/09 14:30, Dave F. wrote: > > > >> The map he sent is titled as a Definitive Map. It has an > OS underlay, > >> but the information laid on top is compiled from Council > gathered info. > >> eg GPS survey equipment from an independent company employed to > >> produce the definitive maps. > > > > Do you know for absolute certainty that every single detail was > > gathered from first principles like that? If it was then it > is a very > > unusual bit of local council mapping as they are not generally that > > scrupulously careful... > > > > The reason of course is that they have a license to do what > they like > > with OS data so it largely doesn't matter to them whether > they derive > > things from it (well at least until they try and overlay > that data on > > a google map and get nastygrams from the OS). > > The simplest solution would be to work from the definitive > statement, rather than the definitive map, except where the > statement includes OS grid references. > > Jon > > > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
