OpenStreetMap
Saw the article on the BBC News site, so thought I'd check out my area. Not a lot there. So I put a copy of BSGPSPDA on my phone and had a bit of a travel through the non-existent streets. JOSM is easy enough too and runs fine on Linux. Although I was caught out when I didn't close my BSGPAPDA log file correctly before exiting. A quick script easily converts the *.jny CSV files to a structured *.gpx file.
The whole thing seems like a nice idea, but I'm not sure how far it will get. There is no trace of a stream that runs through the valley near my home - and there is no way I'm trudging through it.
I've been doing a lot of work on address data and positioning with my job, so this sort of tool may be handy for a graphical display. But when Google has a far more accurate map, why use this? I couldn't expect anybody to rely on this as there are still so many major things missing.
Keep up the excellent quality of work, I'll try and add bits when I remember. It's quite an interesting thing to do for a while.
Discussion
Comment from awesm on 30 August 2008 at 23:55
Oh, yeah: "I'm only seeing what it's like - I won't get hooked." :~)
Comment from Dashers on 30 August 2008 at 23:57
Spot on! I have consumed much of my time today seeing what it's like. I'm sure having addictive and perfectionist in my list of personality traits doesn't do me any favours...
Comment from SuborbitalPigeon on 31 August 2008 at 00:46
"I've been doing a lot of work on address data and positioning with my job, so this sort of tool may be handy for a graphical display. But when Google has a far more accurate map, why use this? I couldn't expect anybody to rely on this as there are still so many major things missing."
The data that Google makes its maps from costs a lot of money, and is very inaccurate.
Comment from LivingWithDragons on 31 August 2008 at 01:10
Where abouts are you?
There's places(cities, towns, countys) where I'd trust OSM to be more accurate than Google Maps even if I haven't been there. Your probably just in a place which nobody has been near to map, often if you start the ball rolling others will want to add stuff too (or tell them about it and even get a mapping party/weekend set up to let people come and help you!).
Comment from Mark Williamson on 31 August 2008 at 01:55
Further to what LivingWithDragons said - I live in Cambridge and the data here is genuinely way better than Google's is. No disrespect to gmap intended - they have excellent and *consistent* coverage over much of the world. It's just not as good as OSM in a number of well surveyed areas. I can't take credit for the vast majority of surveying around my home town. I am putting in quite a lot of miles surveying footpaths and bridleways, which leads me to another OSM advantage - OSM includes more map features than Google (though Google tends to have significantly better coverage of shops and businesses).
For not-directly-accessible features like streams there are a number of possible techniques:
* Often you can trace from the Yahoo satellite maps, if available (these are displayed by default in the Potlatch editor and there's a plugin to display them in JOSM. Traces created from them are suitable, license-wise, for OSM).
* Landsat imagery is available for (AFAIK) the whole world and can sometimes help you get an approximate trace. You can display this in JOSM, I don't know about Potlatch.
* npemap.org.uk provides out-of-copyright Ordnance Survey maps (for the UK) which can also be traced, though you have to take care to line them up with existing map data or they come out quite inaccurate.
* Finally, it's possible to connect up streams by more traditional survey techniques: going to crossing points (bridges, etc) and joining them up, taking bearings, triangulation, etc.
Comment from amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️🌈 on 31 August 2008 at 02:29
There are some areas where, in my opinion, openstreetmap is better than google maps. Compare these 2 areas: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=53.282664,-6.222467&spn=0.023246,0.077162&z=14 and osm.org/?lat=53.28563&lon=-6.22967&zoom=15&layers=B00FTF
Comment from Dashers on 31 August 2008 at 09:26
Thanks for your comments all. I get the impression I may just happen to be unlucky with the area I live.
Some interesting suggestions Mark, I'll try some of those methods out, thanks.
It seems that the cities have far more detailed coverage, but the "gaps" such as quiet suburbs are missing. Playing devil's advocate for rorym, compare these two:
osm.org/?lat=53.2994&lon=-3.7098&zoom=13&layers=B00FTF
and
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=53.296824,-3.72076&spn=0.056531,0.181789&z=13
Don't get me wrong, I think this is a very good idea, but still has a long way to come generally.
Comment from Mark Williamson on 31 August 2008 at 18:23
I think you probably are unlucky. There are a number of places in the UK where there are coverage gaps. I would think Wales (as in your example) probably would have the lowest contributor density, so I'm definitely not surprised that's lagging. There were some interesting pictures of OSM's progress in the UK over time but I can't find those at the moment. You'll find that there are some interesting things if you Google around, though... Every so often somebody / some group of people starts mapping an area (often through a "mapping party") and it develops very quickly. This is happening to some towns near me right now. Development often has to wait for this to happen if there's bad aerial photo coverage for that area.
I definitely agree that if you want really *consistent* national coverage then Google or OS is the way to go still (although for many uses, OSM's national coverage is "good enough" already). Locally, OSM can be better for navigation and has the advantage of being reusable for e.g. tourist maps, clubs and societies, etc.
Some important things I thought I'd note though, since they helped me see new angles on OSM's long term viability:
1) There is a motivation for companies (i.e. focused resources and money) to get involved without compromising the project. For instance, GPS *device* manufacturers, online map provides, etc can avoid paying map licensing fees if "good enough" maps are available from OSM. It's in their interest to help out. A navigation company from the Netherlands contributed mapping data for that entire country as well as for some other areas of the world (nb. I don't know exactly what their product is). Freely available map data is also valuable to start-up companies developing new services.
2) OSM can scale similarly to Wikipedia - especially once there's an initial streetmap, random individuals can improve the map fairly easily using local knowledge. *everyone* is an expert on their own area, regardless of qualifications.
3) There's actually a lot of public domain mapping data to be had. The TIGER data sets in the US, out of copyright OS maps in the UK, etc. Some countries of various sizes (the Isle of Man springs to mind) are amenable to providing data that can be used by OSM, if they consider it in their interest.
4) OSM maps features that other mapping projects can't / don't and it can be far more agile about doing so. For instance, OSM includes locations of post boxes, telephone boxes and various other commonly unmapped features. The Ordnance Survey probably has many of these features, at least in their master map, if not in print - but that's limited to the UK. There's an experimental routing service that can plot routes on cycleways / bridleways / footways as well as roads - Google can't do that because it doesn't show those features.
5) OSM is becoming able to stay more up-to-date with new developments than printed maps (where a new print run is required) or online maps with fewer resources.
None of this invalidates what you've said, of course. But I think it does parallel some aspects of e.g. Linux development where it turns out that Open Source makes pragmatic good sense (in terms of scalable development, economic / business benefits, etc) as well as being idealistically attractive.
OSM is also really good fun, even just to edit using Potlatch. Add in the benefits I'm getting in exercise and improved local geography and it really rocks! :-)
Comment from EdLoach on 31 August 2008 at 19:50
If the stream that you refer to is the Cam Brook to the north/west of the village where you made your trace, I switched to edit mode to use Potlatch and the NPE map background, and it looks like someone has already added it, but as yet the rendering hasn't been done to put it on the default Mapnik layer, though it does show on the Osmarender one.
Comment from DrMark on 31 August 2008 at 19:54
Not to mention abroad - I've just come back from a Capital City (Gaborone) in Africa; when I went, it had just 2 roads. Google showed about 4. Now, it has a fair chunk of the basic structure there & some POI's. My previous holiday, I took the Garmin pre-loaded with the OSM map, and it was brilliant! Go on, do that with Google or OS...
Mark
Comment from Dashers on 31 August 2008 at 23:04
Thanks for looking EdLoach, it was I who added the brook thanks to Mark's suggestion of the old OS map trace.
I've added a number of missing roads to that area. The more I check and compare with other maps the more I notice discrepancies with their work. It's taken for granted that maps are correct, but short of the OS maps I'm not so sure.
Still I think Mark has it spot on. There is vastly more detail in areas with focus, and it does have a lot of benefits for users and business. The ability to quickly update is a major feature in keeping something alive.
Is it enough though? Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell - the more time the more chance it will be!
The UK is especially lucky with the detail and quality of mapping thanks to the OS. Where this site really has it's advantages is in areas such as DrMark's (too may Mark's already) situation.
Comment from Mark Williamson on 1 September 2008 at 01:40
The opengeodata.org blog came back up so I was able to dig out the growth links that I mentioned earlier:
The OpenGeodata post: http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=309
Progress of OSM maps for the UK: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/30/google_streetview_open_street_map/
I'm not entirely convinced El Reg has the right balance between Yahoo satellite content vs new users and more intensive mapping - but it's certainly true that a good aerial view makes a huge difference. The pics of coverage are very interesting.
As for detail in my own region, it currently stacks up like this:
Google: http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll=52.205503,0.12394&spn=0.023118,0.052357&z=15
OSM: osm.org/?lat=52.2041&lon=0.117638&zoom=18
Ordnance Survey: http://getamap.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/getamap/frames.htm?mapAction=gaz&gazName=p&gazString=CAMBRIDGE
The OS is ahead in the detail of mapped private properties, buildings, gardens, etc, although their online interface is a bit nasty! It would be hard to map that level of detail on OSM without improved aerial photos for Cambridge.
Oh and here's the awesome OSM fieldwork project: http://www.pledgebank.com/osmfieldwork
Comment from randomjunk on 1 September 2008 at 10:11
More progress stuff:
http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/progress/
And some nice draggable time sliders at:
http://www.geofabrik.de/gallery/history/