Paths - on map and ground
George
this forum before.
I have just spent the last week in the Lake District with my trusty
Etrex H. Like others, I use it generally to create a track log as part
of my personal walk record. Uploading the track log into Anquet, I have
noticed that, while the actual track is mostly on top of (or at least
close to) the path or bridleway shown on the map, occasionally there is
a clear deviation between the two. This might be a historic change in
the line of a path, or possibly the due to the line on the map being a
guestimate by the cartographers.
It occurred to me that the OS has a valuable pool of correction data
available: us. My GPS accuracy is frequently below 5m - sometimes as
low as 2m. Walkers might be encouraged to upload track logs of specific
routes to the OS. After removing obvious inaccurate logs, the remainder
could then be averaged out and the track of paths used corrected in the
map database.
--
George from Cartland
John Dawson
<nor...@cartland-village.co.uk> wrote:
>It occurred to me that the OS has a valuable pool of correction data
>available: us. My GPS accuracy is frequently below 5m - sometimes as
>low as 2m. Walkers might be encouraged to upload track logs of specific
>routes to the OS. After removing obvious inaccurate logs, the remainder
>could then be averaged out and the track of paths used corrected in the
>map database.
I would if they would pay me for it. They've had enough of my money.
John D.
Tim Jackson
> Walkers might be encouraged to upload track logs of specific
> routes to the OS. After removing obvious inaccurate logs, the remainder
> could then be averaged out and the track of paths used corrected in the
> map database.
Good idea in principle, but I suspect the OS won't do it.
I've not tried it myself, but why not consider uploading your tracklogs
to OpenStreetMap?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Making_Overview
If you have a Garmin GPS which accepts maps, you can then download
OpenStreetMap data for it. This can be either with or without the free
SMC contour maps, which were compiled by u.r.w contributor 'GSV Three
Minds in a Can'.
http://sites.google.com/site/talkytoasteruk/ukmaps
--
Tim Jackson
ne...@timjackson.plus.invalid
(Change '.invalid' to '.com' to reply direct)
George
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:08:19 +0100, George wrote...
>> Walkers might be encouraged to upload track logs of specific
>> routes to the OS. After removing obvious inaccurate logs, the remainder
>> could then be averaged out and the track of paths used corrected in the
>> map database.
>
> Good idea in principle, but I suspect the OS won't do it.
>
> I've not tried it myself, but why not consider uploading your tracklogs
> to OpenStreetMap?
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Making_Overview
>
> If you have a Garmin GPS which accepts maps, you can then download
> OpenStreetMap data for it.
...Etrex H is basic (yellow) Etrex. No graphics beyond breadcrumb trail
and compass. The immanent potential deterioration of the GPS satellites
makes upgrading to a mapping instrument questionable. In any case, I'm
old-school enough to prefer a paper map (albeit an A4 printout from
Anquet) to an electronic version in the hills.
--
George from Cartland
Tim Jackson
> In any case, I'm
> old-school enough to prefer a paper map (albeit an A4 printout from
> Anquet) to an electronic version in the hills.
Oh, I would always want a paper map. A mapping GPS is just a toy - I
would never rely exclusively on it.
Paul - xxx
Your gps might be accurate, but you might not, and there are some
groups who might try to use this to their advantage!
Besides, for the cost of the maps the OS produce I'd want some form of
recompense ... ;)
--
Paul - xxx
'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp
Dominic Sexton
<nor...@cartland-village.co.uk> writes
>The immanent potential deterioration of the GPS satellites
is scaremongering - most probably in an attempt to secure future funding
in difficult financial times.
--
Dominic Sexton
Nicholas Wilson
Remember that although GPS accuracy may be very good, the track log does
not record every 1 second fix. If it did, it would very quickly run out
of memory. All GPSs that keep a log use an algorithm which aims to
ensure that a track point is recorded whenever there is a significant
change in speed or direction, whilst conserving memory. This tends to
work best in a car, aircraft or boat which travels in straight lines or
sweeping curves at reasonably constant speeds; low speed meandering
walkers tend to leave it a bit confused. This may well be why your
trail is not on top of the path.
Another source of error is that many GPSs go into a dead reckoning mode
if they lose signal, making the assumption at least for a few seconds
that they continue on the last speed and bearing. If you go into a
tunnel, you will see that the speed and heading are held for a while.
This assumption rarely holds true for walking, so if signal is lost
under a tree canopy, the GPS will return an inaccurate course, possibly
drop out, then pick up again when coverage returns.
Of course, the map may be inaccurate or the path may have moved (as an
erosion control measure).
Nick
Neil Pugh
Jackson <ne...@timjackson.plus.invalid> writes
>
>If you have a Garmin GPS which accepts maps, you can then download
>OpenStreetMap data for it. This can be either with or without the free
>SMC contour maps, which were compiled by u.r.w contributor 'GSV Three
>Minds in a Can'.
>http://sites.google.com/site/talkytoasteruk/ukmaps
>
... and there's me not knowing that GSV and Talkytoaster were one in the
same.
Where appropriate I put my tracklogs onto OSM these days. It's very
satisfying to see footpaths on the map and know that I put them there.
Regards,
--
Neil
http://www.blacknail.org.uk/
The online organ of the Black Nail Fellwalking and Climbing Club
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Pugh <ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> said
>In message <MPG.2543cfcc7...@text.usenet.plus.net>, Tim
>Jackson <ne...@timjackson.plus.invalid> writes
>>
>>If you have a Garmin GPS which accepts maps, you can then download
>>OpenStreetMap data for it. This can be either with or without the free
>>SMC contour maps, which were compiled by u.r.w contributor 'GSV Three
>>Minds in a Can'.
>>http://sites.google.com/site/talkytoasteruk/ukmaps
>>
>
>... and there's me not knowing that GSV and Talkytoaster were one in
>the same.
They ain't. 8>.
>Where appropriate I put my tracklogs onto OSM these days. It's very
>satisfying to see footpaths on the map and know that I put them there.
GSV is just doing Shropshire (and only 52.9% of the way round that - the
.sig is out of date .. OK, some of the surrounding counties slipped in
too).
But back on topic - OS maps =frequently= have roads off by 20m from the
repeatable GPS position, and I've found one case where the Garmin UK
Topo (road data from Navteq, not OSGB) was off by 60 or 70m.
FPs (even in civilized areas) are often much worse, being shown wrong
side of hedges and all sorts. Overlaying council's idea of FP's on
Google Earth (using gpsmapedit and shape files) is often hilarious
(although Google Earth isn't right all the time either).
I have seen GPS errors of 20 or 50m on rare occasions (reflected
satellite signals, or sick satellite clocks) but that's usually not
repeatable. If we had some more EGNOS ground stations, presumably we
could do better. A dual frequency (consumer) GPS handset would be even
better.
--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
15,621 Km walked. 2,882 Km PROWs surveyed. 52.1% complete.
Simon Challands
George <nor...@cartland-village.co.uk> wrote:
> The accuracy (or lack) of paths shown on OS maps has been discussed in
> this forum before.
> I have just spent the last week in the Lake District with my trusty
> Etrex H. Like others, I use it generally to create a track log as part
> of my personal walk record. Uploading the track log into Anquet, I have
> noticed that, while the actual track is mostly on top of (or at least
> close to) the path or bridleway shown on the map, occasionally there is
> a clear deviation between the two. This might be a historic change in
> the line of a path, or possibly the due to the line on the map being a
> guestimate by the cartographers.
Are we talking about the line of the path as marked by the OS (black
dashed line), or the line of the right of way (dashed green lines)?
--
Simon Challands
mr p
wrote:
> In message <hbcc3j$o1...@news.datemas.de>
I've been trying out the 50k Landranger maps using Viewranger
recently, the paths seem pretty accurately matched to the track logs
by and large, at least in the areas of the Lakes I visited. I would
have thought OS could correct the path details from satellite imagery
these days, it's not like you can't see most of the paths in the lakes
from space !
The paths on the Landranger maps seem kind of sketchy some times but
do give you the general idea, they are not as accurate as roads for
example, which are amazingly accurately matched to the track log.
I've not tried overlaying my route logs over the 25k maps much, my
version of memory map wont let me do it and I can't justify spending
out for 25k maps for my mobile phone really.
My Nokia 5800 did try to tell me I was in the wrong national park at
one point,which meant I had to reset the entire phone.
I could not find a way to make it re-calculate the gps position
My Garmin has never done any thing like that in 5 years, which means I
now need TWO gps units to go with my map and compass and DSLR camera,
so unfortunately I'm now the uber-geek of the fells :-(
Ted
I am sure you appreciate the GPS can be set to get a track point at a
pre set time interval, mine is set to every 20 seconds. Which I find
adequate for my walking speed, or lack of it! Plus it takes less
memory.
IMHO when the Etrex looses a signal it terminates the existing track
log and starts a new one, so when I merge all segments together I get
a straight line from where the signal was lost to where it was
regained.
When I upload the track to my web site and display it on the 1:25000
OS maps using the OS API the track usually follows the path exactly,
mostly differences are when I am off track. But with the best will in
the world maps will never be 100% accurate, but the OS maps do take
some beating.
Ted
Yo$$1960
> satisfying to see footpaths on the map and know that I put them there.
I really must get around to signing up;
Currently, according to OSM, the road I live along doesn't exist. :-)
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
Love is a temple, love is a shrine
You Have Placed A Chill In My Heart - Eurythmics
Dave W
What is OSM please?
Dave W
Neil
<aca52bd5-a145-4afa...@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Dave W <dave...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
Open Street Map
"OpenStreetMap creates and provides free geographic data such as street
maps to anyone who wants them. The project was started because most maps
you think of as free actually have legal or technical restrictions on
their use, holding back people from using them in creative, productive,
or unexpected ways. "
Regards,
--
Neil Pugh
Neil
<pan.2009.10.20...@yoss1960.eternal-september.org>, Yo$$1960
<br...@yoss1960.ukfsn.org> writes
>On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:20:09 +0100, Neil Pugh wrote:
>
>> satisfying to see footpaths on the map and know that I put them there.
>
>I really must get around to signing up;
>
>Currently, according to OSM, the road I live along doesn't exist. :-)
>
Ditto for the road I live along when I signed up. That was one of the
first things I put right!
I was surprised how much I was able to put in from my old GPS tracks,
including a large chunk of the Pembrokeshire Coast Path, some miles of
north Devon coast and the Severn Way, about half of the Kentmere round
and lots of other bits and pieces. At present I am concentrating on the
footpaths in my local area, but I add an odd bit of woodland or similar
if I have an idle 10 minutes.
Regards,
--
Neil Pugh
Yo$$1960
> Ditto for the road I live along when I signed up. That was one of the
> first things I put right!
:-)
> I was surprised how much I was able to put in from my old GPS tracks,
I've a few lying around, so I'll be able to get off to a reasonable start,
I'm sure.
> north Devon coast and the Severn Way, about half of the Kentmere round and
Most of my walking is done in N. Devon/Somerset, on and around Exmoor.
> I have an idle 10 minutes.
Things like OSM can really suck up the time, IME. Not that that's a bad
thing, necessarily. :-)
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
Your father was a megalomaniac, you've got an insane brother
Pure Mania - The Vibrators
Tim Jackson
> ... and there's me not knowing that GSV and Talkytoaster were one in the
> same.
GSV produced the SMC contour maps. Talkytoaster combined them with OSM
data.
--
Tim Jackson
ne...@timjackson.invalid
(Change '.invalid' to '.plus.com' to reply direct)
Jon Combe
> It occurred to me that the OS has a valuable pool of correction data
> available: us. My GPS accuracy is frequently below 5m - sometimes as
> low as 2m. Walkers might be encouraged to upload track logs of specific
> routes to the OS. After removing obvious inaccurate logs, the remainder
> could then be averaged out and the track of paths used corrected in the
> map database.
I think it's a good idea and would like to see it as well. I don't want
to sound critical of the OS because in my opinion they create the best
maps for walkers I have seen. However I would like to see a lot more
permissive paths marked on the map. I can think of lots of places where
there is a footpath to which public access is permitted but is not a
legal right of way. When planning a walk it is very useful to know about
these (canal towpaths being one obvious example). Also there are quite a
lot of places (woodland, particulary) where there is in effect open
access but it is not marked as access land on the map. Lastly in area
outside of open access there are often tracks marked on the map.
Sometimes when walking in the area you find there is permitted access on
the track (e.g. a sign saying access is permitted) and sometimes you find
a "private keep out" kind of sign. It would be could to see tracks on
which access is permitted marked with the orange permissive path dots.
Perhaps that could be another community effort to mark these routes? Yes
I realise they could come and go but the maps are revised on a regular
basis anyway because there are often changes (new housing estates, roads
etc). For example in Great Yarmouth the very south end of the beach has
no been taken over to expand the port and built on - but this is not yet
shown on the OS maps.
Jon.
Neil Pugh
Jackson <ne...@timjackson.invalid> writes
>On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:20:09 +0100, Neil Pugh wrote...
>> ... and there's me not knowing that GSV and Talkytoaster were one in the
>> same.
>
>GSV produced the SMC contour maps. Talkytoaster combined them with OSM
>data.
>
Yes, I misinterpreted your previous posting in a fairly comprehensive
manner! Perhaps I should try harder to engage my brain when reading.
Apologies if required to both GSV (all three of him) and TT who
occasionally turns up around here.
Regards,
--
Neil Pugh
Gordon H
<simon_...@helvellyn.plus.com> writes
as fact v fiction. My GPS often plots the black lines rather than
the green uns.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply
Simon Challands
Gordon H <Gordo...@g3snx.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> In message <4942d5ab...@helvellyn.plus.com>, Simon Challands
> <simon_...@helvellyn.plus.com> writes
>>Are we talking about the line of the path as marked by the OS (black
>>dashed line), or the line of the right of way (dashed green lines)?
>>
> I see the difference between black dashed lines and green dashed lines
> as fact v fiction. My GPS often plots the black lines rather than
> the green uns.
I'd expect that. It's not quite fact v. fiction - the green dashed
lines are where the legal right of way is (assuming the map has put
them where they're supposed to be), and the black lines are where the
path actually is on the ground. No doubt they don't line up because
the original definition of the actual right of way was never accurate
in the first place (someone drawing a straight line along the course
of a slightly winding path, for example), or because most paths, not
being built*, have meandered a bit over time.
* before the spate of modern path vandalism
--
Simon Challands
Stewart Robert Hinsley
>In message <ThzkXzCG...@g3snx.demon.co.uk>
> Gordon H <Gordo...@g3snx.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In message <4942d5ab...@helvellyn.plus.com>, Simon Challands
>> <simon_...@helvellyn.plus.com> writes
>
>>>Are we talking about the line of the path as marked by the OS (black
>>>dashed line), or the line of the right of way (dashed green lines)?
>>>
>> I see the difference between black dashed lines and green dashed lines
>> as fact v fiction. My GPS often plots the black lines rather than
>> the green uns.
>
>I'd expect that. It's not quite fact v. fiction - the green dashed
>lines are where the legal right of way is (assuming the map has put
>them where they're supposed to be), and the black lines are where the
>path actually is on the ground. No doubt they don't line up because
>the original definition of the actual right of way was never accurate
>in the first place (someone drawing a straight line along the course
>of a slightly winding path, for example), or because most paths, not
>being built*, have meandered a bit over time.
>
>* before the spate of modern path vandalism
>
there was a right of way between points A and B, and drew a straight
line on the definitive map.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley
Roger Chapman
I have long held the view that those who did bulk registrations of PROWs
did so by means of carelessly drawn lines on transparent overlays. And,
in a few cases at least, with dishonestly drawn lines where the
perpetrator thought it would be a good idea to have a PROW. There are
PROWs both sides of Greenburn where no path existed at the time of
registration and which do not match AW's suggested routes which is the
usual precursor to a new footpath, albeit one that wouldn't count as a
PROW at the time.
Looking at a 1960 edition of the 1" map of the ELD there are remarkably
few paths shown compared with later editions. Was the OS behind the
times or should we blame AW for most of the additional paths? I lack the
patience to check but AW's routes quite often didn't originally follow a
visible path.
Simon Challands
Roger Chapman <ro...@nospam.zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Looking at a 1960 edition of the 1" map of the ELD there are remarkably
> few paths shown compared with later editions. Was the OS behind the
> times or should we blame AW for most of the additional paths? I lack the
> patience to check but AW's routes quite often didn't originally follow a
> visible path.
A few times AW comments about the lack of accuracy of the OS maps and
paths. From what he's saying I suspect that he's referring to rights
of way instead of physical paths on the ground too, although it's
usually a safe bet to say that just about any route marked in his
books is a highway by now.
--
Simon Challands
Roger Chapman
say that there aren't any) but AW was labouring under a disadvantage in
that he had to use large scale maps based on a pre war survey to work
from. It is not clear to me how AW got round the copyright problem
unless the copyright period was shorter back in the 50's.
Having written the above paragraph I thought I should at least check to
see if there was an acknowledgement that AW's maps were based on the OS
maps and found what I should have remembered in the first place:
"THE MAPS .......... Many excellent books have been written about
Lakeland, but the best literature of all for the walker is that
published by the Director General of Ordnance Survey, the 1" map for
companionship for companionship and guidance on expeditions, the 2.5"
map for exploration both on the fells and by the fireside. These
admirable maps are remarkably accurate topographically but there is a
crying need for a revision of the paths on the hills: several walkers
tracks that have come into use in the past few decades, some of them now
broad highways are not shown at all; other paths still shown on the the
maps have fallen into neglect and can no longer be traced on the ground.
The popular Bartholomew 1" map is a beautiful picture, fit for a frame,
but this too is unreliable for paths; indeed here the defect is much
more serious, for routes are indicated where no paths ever existed, nor
ever could - the cartographer has preferred to take precipices in his
stride rather than deflect his graceful curves over easy ground.
Hence the justification for the maps in this book: they have the one
merit (of importance to walkers) of being dependable as regards
delineation of paths. They are intended as supplements to the Ordnance
Survey maps, certainly not as substitutes."
Sadly AW was wrong to consider the then current OS maps "remarkably
accurate topographically" but it wasn't till I came to do the Outlying
Fells with the benefit of access to the latest survey that I realised
quite how frequent minor mapping errors were in the maps AW used as a
basis for his guides and which I had used for most of my walking life.
AW's scathing reference to Bartholomew's maps introduces at least the
possibility that the bogus PROWs near Greenburn and elsewhere and
perhaps the casual curves of so many others perhaps came directly from
that 1" map although it was my understanding that proposals for PROW
registration had to be made at the 1:25000 scale.
George
> Remember that although GPS accuracy may be very good, the track log does
> not record every 1 second fix.
I set mine to every 30 seconds.
> ...low speed meandering walkers tend to leave it a bit confused.
I am slow, but not that slow. And I try not to meander.
> Another source of error is that many GPSs go into a dead reckoning mode
> if they lose signal
I am aware of this, especially in wooded areas. However, my OP was
prompted by a track which started off on the "right track", but
"meandered" off it despite me being on the path (at reasonable walking
speed and in the open) before returning to it.
> Of course, the map may be inaccurate or the path may have moved (as an
> erosion control measure).
I did mention this in OP. I have experienced just this in the Lake
District. In this case, surely OS would be pleased to have corrections.
--
George from Cartland
George
...actually, both.
I did, at one point, think that the black dashed lines were more likely
to be accurate that the green or brown/orange ones, these latter ones
being later additions (I think). But in recent tracklogs, the logged
track deviates from all dahsewd lines of any colour.
--
George from Cartland
Roger Chapman
>> Are we talking about the line of the path as marked by the OS (black
>> dashed line), or the line of the right of way (dashed green lines)?
>
> ...actually, both.
>
> I did, at one point, think that the black dashed lines were more likely
> to be accurate that the green or brown/orange ones, these latter ones
> being later additions (I think). But in recent tracklogs, the logged
> track deviates from all dahsewd lines of any colour.
>
But if you walk the same route again the chances are your tracklog will
not match your previous one.
The black dashed lines should be a more accurate representation on the
path on the ground. They do after all reflect attempts by OS surveyors
to plot the path while all that can be said of the qualifications of
those that drew the lines of the PROWs is that they may possibly have
been able to read a map.
Paths do change position over time but rarely (in the hills at least)
will the deviation of the same line (as opposed to an alternative route)
be greater than the margin of error of the typical hand held gps. A more
common occurance is the creation of 'short cuts' that don't actually
save time or energy. Viz the variations in the routes up Rossett Gill.
Curiously the PROW is shown following the zigzags of the old packhorse
route rather than the direct route. IIRC (and I may not after 50 odd
years) back in the 50s the direct route was the way to go and the
zigzags unmarked by boots. Also curious the path of the adjacent Stake
Pass is shown as a reasonably straight path while the PROW has several
zigzags in its upper section.
A quick dip into Book Four suggests that only part of the upper section
of the "pony route" has remained in use (and included as PROW) and that
both the straight route and the zigzags were in common use in the 50's.
AW also shows alternative routes to Stake Pass but AFAICT not preciesly
the same zigzags as now shown as a PROW.
Mike Mason
"Roger Chapman" <ro...@nospam.zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:K5CdnffHNJaOlH7X...@bt.com...
is starting to recover and is in places now well grassed over. Probably as a
result of the path builders doing a lot of work.
Mike Mason
Roger Chapman
snip
>> A quick dip into Book Four suggests that only part of the upper section of
>> the "pony route" has remained in use (and included as PROW) and that both
>> the straight route and the zigzags were in common use in the 50's. AW also
>> shows alternative routes to Stake Pass but AFAICT not preciesly the same
>> zigzags as now shown as a PROW.
>>
> It's now the other way round, the zigzags are well marked, the direct route
> is starting to recover and is in places now well grassed over. Probably as a
> result of the path builders doing a lot of work.
It's probably well over 10 years since i last visited the Rossett Gill
path and much longer for Stake Pass. :-(
I have just had a look at the Jesty update. He has retained the dotted
line for the route of the old packhorse track where it doesn't coincide
with the modern PROW but he has deleted non PROW variations on both the
Rossett Gill path and the Stake Pass path.
Jesty has also downgraded the route from the Stake Pass path to the
summit of Rossett Pike from "intermittent footpath" to "route
recommended but no path". Now that must be a first! He also seems to
have recorded evidence of Martin passing that way. The reference to
cairns on that route on the map has been deleted and the text makes
reference to "the few surviving cairns ... are no help ..."
Martin Richardson
<ro...@nospam.zetnet.co.uk> writes
I am not the only member of the Gadarene Club. And anyway I am too busy
countering the incipient growth of cairns in Scotland.
--
Martin Richardson
47/224 Grahams - 21% 64/221 Corbetts - 29%
815/1556 Marilyns - 52% 118/211 Irish Hewitts - 56%
Gwyn
<nor...@cartland-village.co.uk> wrote:
>It occurred to me that the OS has a valuable pool of correction data
>available: us. My GPS accuracy is frequently below 5m - sometimes as
>low as 2m. Walkers might be encouraged to upload track logs of specific
>routes to the OS. After removing obvious inaccurate logs, the remainder
>could then be averaged out and the track of paths used corrected in the
>map database.
The OS would never do that as the map would then be seemed to be in
the public domain and as the OS jealously guard their copyrights I
think this is a non starter.
A much better example is OSM where its open source and if you
contribute to thjs you are doing an invaluable service to other users.
Like others that have replied I too have put on the paths in my local
area and it seems to have brought praise from the guy who mapped the
roads in my local area at least.
Use OSM and bypass the OS.
Gwyn
wrote:
>IMHO when the Etrex looses a signal it terminates the existing track
>log and starts a new one, so when I merge all segments together I get
>a straight line from where the signal was lost to where it was
>regained.
My etrex does that too sometimes I have 2 gpx's saved on my memory
card how do you stitch the two together what tool do you use.
Gwyn
<nor...@cartland-village.co.uk> wrote:
>I did mention this in OP. I have experienced just this in the Lake
>District. In this case, surely OS would be pleased to have corrections.
I am not so sure that the OS are bothered I know this is a bit old but
some of the heights of scottish hills where off as much as 100m and
instead of accepting peoples corrections they ignored them for 40
years till they did this century's main survey.
Yo$$1960
> The OS would never do that as the map would then be seemed to be in the
> public domain and as the OS jealously guard their copyrights I think this
> is a non starter.
They could easily write a set of T&Cs about how anything uploaded to their
dataset becomes their property, their copyright, and theirs to do with as
they wish.
There are plenty of organisations that do this sort of thing already.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
Watching the people get lairy
I Predict A Riot - Kaiser Chiefs