Ordnance Survey corrections

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
Location
Devon & Die
Yet they have been on telly talking about it...

It was one of those Secrets of the Larndan Underground type programmes.

🤷🏻‍♂️
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Yet they have been on telly talking about it...

It was one of those Secrets of the Larndan Underground type programmes.

A gross failure of memory on my part, for which I apologise and prostrate myself before the mods for flagellation across the back of the thighs.

It's the A to Z, not OS, which was on telly...

https://greatwen.com/2014/11/09/secret-london-deliberate-mistakes-in-the-a-z/#:~:text=A

But it opens an interesting rabbit hole...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-06-29/maplab-the-legacy-of-copyright-traps

And...

https://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/47/bridle.php
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
Location
Devon & Die
A gross failure of memory on my part, for which I apologise and prostrate myself before the mods for flagellation across the back of the thighs.

It's the A to Z, not OS...

https://greatwen.com/2014/11/09/secret-london-deliberate-mistakes-in-the-a-z/#:~:text=A

But it opens an interesting rabbit hole...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-06-29/maplab-the-legacy-of-copyright-traps

And...

https://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/47/bridle.php

That seems more plausible. Thanks for fessing up. We'll send ICE round to deport you to Nogsland. No trial, obvs.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Although if you read the links the OS do put in false details, as the AA discovered to their expense, it's just they're very subtle. The exact placement of a small thicket, the width or curve of a road, nothing that makes the maps misleading but enough to identify the origin if copied.

It was the TV programme I was apologising for, not the fact that OS deliberately put false detail in to catch copyright thieves...

The dispute—which had been rumbling on for some time, first surfacing in the courts in 1996 and dating back as far as 1990—ended when the Automobile Association agreed to pay twenty million pounds to the Ordnance Survey in a settlement agreed just hours before the case was due before a judge. Centrica, the multinational utility which acquired the Automobile Association in 2001, made a statement that “the AA’s processes were not as robust as they should have been,” while stressing that they had “genuinely sought” to create their own maps from scratch.

The case rested on a series of unique fingerprints within the maps themselves described by the Ordnance Survey’s chief executive Vanessa Lawrence as “design elements in the way we show things which are not obvious to either the user or the copier. When we see the two versions side by side, we can spot clues.” The Guardian reported that these features were pure design elements such as the width of roads, and did not extend to putting misleading features into the maps themselves, corroborating what Lawrence had claimed: “There are some publishers who put deliberate mistakes in their maps. We don’t do that—it would mislead our customers. For us, it’s more about the style we use.”
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
Location
Devon & Die
Although if you read the links the OS do put in false details, as the AA discovered to their expense, it's just they're very subtle. The exact placement of a small thicket, the width or curve of a road, nothing that makes the maps misleading but enough to identify the origin if copied.

It was the TV programme I was apologising for, not the fact that OS deliberately put false detail in to catch copyright thieves...

The dispute—which had been rumbling on for some time, first surfacing in the courts in 1996 and dating back as far as 1990—ended when the Automobile Association agreed to pay twenty million pounds to the Ordnance Survey in a settlement agreed just hours before the case was due before a judge. Centrica, the multinational utility which acquired the Automobile Association in 2001, made a statement that “the AA’s processes were not as robust as they should have been,” while stressing that they had “genuinely sought” to create their own maps from scratch.

The case rested on a series of unique fingerprints within the maps themselves described by the Ordnance Survey’s chief executive Vanessa Lawrence as “design elements in the way we show things which are not obvious to either the user or the copier. When we see the two versions side by side, we can spot clues.” The Guardian reported that these features were pure design elements such as the width of roads, and did not extend to putting misleading features into the maps themselves, corroborating what Lawrence had claimed: “There are some publishers who put deliberate mistakes in their maps. We don’t do that—it would mislead our customers. For us, it’s more about the style we use.”

Indeed - that's what I referenced in my first reply to you.
 
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
Location
Devon & Die
That "correction" is from "road generally less than 4m wide" to "other road", not to footpath.

True, though as there are bollards either end, it'll be quite hard to put it to the test. Well, half the 'road' is slipping down the hill too.
 
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Legendary Member
Location
Devon & Die
That "correction" is from "road generally less than 4m wide" to "other road", not to footpath.

...or "drive or track". Seems about right. Still cyclable, as Ian H notes, so I'm happy he's not breaking any regulations in doing so.

1747080636359.png
 

Ian H

Ancient randonneur
Given that OS maps are essentially diagrams consisting of conventional symbols*, it would be easy to introduce small traps for unauthorised copyists without undermining the usability of the map.

*e.g. because roads are shown much wider than they actually are, adjacent buildings are moved out of position. Junctions, particularly complex ones, are drawn for clarity not accuracy. Overlaying an OS map on a satellite view will demonstrate this.

OSM maps are more 'accurate' because they are created from actual GPS tracks pretty much (as far as I'm aware) unedited.
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
OSM maps are more 'accurate' because they are created from actual GPS tracks pretty much (as far as I'm aware) unedited.
But we can all edit the details shown... I have found a few mistakes in Yorkshire and Devon which I have corrected.

I am not sure what happens if two or more people don't agree on such details and repeatedly re-edit the other's changes!? :whistle:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom