Ordnance Survey corrections

[briantrumpet]

A friend and I have a little game of spotting mistakes on Ordnance Survey maps, and getting them corrected, prompted by his noticing that what should have said 'Holcombe Burnell' said 'Holcombe Burnett'. Since then I've got three corrected: 'Nogsland' had been changed to 'Noglands' when the map was digitised, a footbridge near Dunchideock had disappeared (I assume at the same time), and the latest, a road that has been 'degraded' into footpath-only was still shown as yellow, until I pointed it out. Evidence of the latest one below.

Anyone else had OS corrections published?

 

[Legs]

Not quite the same, but there's a brilliant bit of road-naming close to where my parents live - the sign on one side of the road says 'Jonathan Hill', while the other says 'Jonathon Hill'

 

[briantrumpet]

Here's the Nogsland correction:

 

[Drago]

Many are deliberate so they can spot if someone is simply copying their work. Once someone has spotted the "errors" they've completely negated the tactic and they have to correct it...and will simply introduce another at the next update.

 

[markemark]

I read years ago the OS put deliberate, but inconsequential, mistakes in to catch out copyright theft.

Yeah, what ^ said.

 

[Legs]

There's a typo in British Standard 6399 Part 2: Code of Practice for Wind Loads:

and a typo in the Historic Structural Steelwork Handbook:

 

[briantrumpet]

Many are deliberate so they can spot if someone is simply copying their work. Once someone has spotted the "errors" they've completely negated the tactic and they have to correct it...and will simply introduce another at the next update.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_entry

• In the United Kingdom in 2001, the Ordnance Survey (OS) obtained a £20m out-of-court settlement from the Automobile Association (the AA) after content from OS maps was reproduced on AA maps.[18] The Ordnance Survey denied that it included "deliberate mistakes" in its maps as copyright traps, claiming the "fingerprints" which identified a copy were stylistic features such as the width of roads.[19]

 

[a.twiddler]

Again, not quite the same thing, but next time Mrs T takes it upon herself to take me to task over breaking some previously unknown (to me!) miniscule rule I will bear that approach in mind. Pointing out others' shortcomings might not make the recipient happy, but if it makes the pointer-outer happy in their self justification, then in the long term peace reigns. That is, until she asks if I'm doing these things, whatever they are, on purpose!

It could be an urban myth that someone in the OS hierarchy is putting in minor errors for copyright detection reasons, and maybe minor place name errors are tolerable, but it's no joke to plan a route on the map then to find that the minor road you'd planned to use has become a footpath but not been updated. There is a lane near to where I live which many years ago was downgraded to Bridleway status, and in places is more like a narrow footpath now, certainly not something you'd drive a motor vehicle down. Fortunately the maps were updated at the time, and it's quite accessible to me as a cyclist.

It's probably the more out of the way places where more adventurous cyclists and walkers might go where you might find these "errors". It does make you wonder how many more are lurking out there.

 

[presta]

I can remember the girl on reception at Manchester YHA getting annoyed when I kept pointing to a path by the canal near the hostel that was marked on the OS map. She was right, and the map was wrong: there's no path there.

My father used to write to Rothmans correcting the errors in their Football Yearbooks, I've no idea whether they were put there deliberately, but they used to write back and thank him.

The only error I've had corrected was on the packaging of the Cateye EL320 lamp, it used to say that it met Statutory Instrument 2559 when it didn't. I wrote to Zyro first, who told me I was wrong and referred me to a British Cycling webpage that was also wrong, so I wrote to Trading Standards and they got it changed. It was interesting that it took a year or two for the old stock to disappear from the shelves.

 

[Ian H]

A friend and I have a little game of spotting mistakes on Ordnance Survey maps, and getting them corrected, prompted by his noticing that what should have said 'Holcombe Burnell' said 'Holcombe Burnett'. Since then I've got three corrected: 'Nogsland' had been changed to 'Noglands' when the map was digitised, a footbridge near Dunchideock had disappeared (I assume at the same time), and the latest, a road that has been 'degraded' into footpath-only was still shown as yellow, until I pointed it out. Evidence of the latest one below.

Anyone else had OS corrections published?

View attachment 772788

View attachment 772789

The Masons Arms by-pass is still useful on a bike as it maintains height that the main route loses in either direction.

 

[Donger]

Many are deliberate so they can spot if someone is simply copying their work. Once someone has spotted the "errors" they've completely negated the tactic and they have to correct it...and will simply introduce another at the next update.

Just what I was going to say. It's a copyright issue. Anyone who publishes a map containing the sneaky traps has a law suit coming.

 

[DaveReading]

Just what I was going to say. It's a copyright issue. Anyone who publishes a map containing the sneaky traps has a law suit coming.

A favourite of dictionary compilers as well, so I'm told.

 

[Psamathe]

Many are deliberate so they can spot if someone is simply copying their work. Once someone has spotted the "errors" they've completely negated the tactic and they have to correct it...and will simply introduce another at the next update.

I read years ago the OS put deliberate, but inconsequential, mistakes in to catch out copyright theft.

Yeah, what ^ said.

Do OS do that (given they are owned by the Government ie us all). I was aware that some of the commercial operators do that (eg the A to Z/Bathrlkemues, etc.) but I would have expected OS to be definitive.

Maybe a bit "NCAP" but I tend to feel that like US Govrnemnt stuff, all OS data should be available for free. OK, pay for the material produced like printed maps but the data should all be available (to UK residents) for free. Just like NASA images are avaiable free for anybody to use on the basis that those using it have already paid for it through taxes so shouldn't be paying twice.

That said in my experience OSM tends to update significantly quicker than OS when there are changes eg new road junctions.

Ian

 

[Drago]

Do OS do that (given they are owned by the Government ie us all). I was aware that some of the commercial operators do that (eg the A to Z/Bathrlkemues, etc.) but I would have expected OS to be definitive.

Yes, they had some chick from OS on one of the sorts of programmes Dave used to show and she was talking about it.

 

[briantrumpet]

Do OS do that (given they are owned by the Government ie us all). I was aware that some of the commercial operators do that (eg the A to Z/Bathrlkemues, etc.) but I would have expected OS to be definitive.

Maybe a bit "NCAP" but I tend to feel that like US Govrnemnt stuff, all OS data should be available for free. OK, pay for the material produced like printed maps but the data should all be available (to UK residents) for free. Just like NASA images are avaiable free for anybody to use on the basis that those using it have already paid for it through taxes so shouldn't be paying twice.

That said in my experience OSM tends to update significantly quicker than OS when there are changes eg new road junctions.

Ian

OS denied they did in the AA court case. I'd be surprised if they lied in front of a judge.