Digital maps

Phil Cook said:

They used to do Southampton. Perhaps they got scared of terrorists using their maps to locate
their premisses and bomb them. That word "ordnance" surely means it's a military target
doesn't it?

Not many mountains in Southampton so it doesn't show off steep contours very well. Port Talbot is
one of the few areas in Wales where the mountains reach the sea *and* has a decent sized urban area
with motorway to show off.

In fact, if anyone wants to walk the whole length of Wales from coast to coast (north and south)
following a route that takes in as many hills and mountains as possible, then Port Talbot would be
the ideal place to start or end (best to start there as it's not the ideal place to look forward to
finishing at). At the other end the Carneddau would be the obvious end point. If you wanted to take
in all three coasts (stepping on the sand or in the water at each) then Barmouth would be the
obvious spot, conveniently located at the crossing point between Cadair Idris and the Rhinogs.

In fact I actually worked out such a route once. Never attempted it though. Long distance walking
has never been my thing.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukcal.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Bernard Hill <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Keith Sheppard
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>gif is far better for maps.

The problem with GIF is the licencing issue. You can't release software with GIF encoding in it
without being hounded by the patent owners for royalties. JPEG is at least "open source".

The gif licence has now expired apparently.

In the US but does not expire in the UK until 18 June 2004:

unisys.comlzwOpen ↗

Like Paul says I would be rather more concerned by the OS going after the author for providing a
tool for users to breach the Get A Map Terms & Conditions - which are shown on the main page:

getamap.co.ukgetamap.co.ukOpen ↗

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

gif is far better for maps.

The problem with GIF is the licencing issue. You can't release software with GIF encoding in it
without being hounded by the patent owners for royalties. JPEG is at least "open source".

I believe that the 'PNG' format produces similar results to 'GIF' for vector graphics - and I
also believe that it's free (although I'm not sure where you could get code libraries for
processing them).

"Keith Sheppard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Another option, although slightly more labour intensive...

I am currently working on an enhancement to my "MapMan" mapping software package which will allow
it to automatically download any number of map tiles from the OS Get-a-map web site and glue them
together into single (jpeg) image. If that would be of use, let me know and I can let you have a
beta when it's ready. What's your deadline for getting hold of the maps?

Keith

Would the pocketstreetmap interface do the job ? That costs 35 quid a year, but it does allow simple
access to the 1:50000 tiles. Not unrestricted, unfortunately, but maybe good enough for some jobs.

Maybe the 35 quid will help ensure the maps stay available, rather than getting pulled because not
enough people pay.

-adrian

As I understand it, the digital maps on offer are limited to the equivalent of those paper products
provided by Ordnance Survey i.e. 1:50,000 maps of all of Great Britain in the 'Landranger' series
and 1:25,000 maps of certain areas including national parks i.e. Snowdonia, the Brecon Beacons etc.
in the 'Explorer' series. I can't see any prospects of the digital maps on offer going beyond these
limits for the forseeable future but no doubt if I'm wrong on this someone will put me right. From a
look at the comparative prices of the Fugawi and Memory Map products, the latter seems to be quite a
bit more expensive. It does offer 3D imaging but I struggle to see that this justifies the premium.

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Nick Hopton said:

I'm holding off buying digital maps just at the moment because the signs are that it might soon
be possible to obtain digital
1:25,000-scale OS maps centred as one requires, see

memory-map.co.ukmaps uk onland 1 25000.htmOpen ↗

Well I've been playing with the demo software and maps and I'm quite impressed. Exceedingly nice
of them to provide Swansea-Neath-Port Talbot as the demo area. I'm not sure why some have
dismissed the 3D visualisation as a gimmick of not much use. Not only does it look very pretty but
it helps considerably in visualising the shape of an area, and not only for photographic purposes,
but for planning walks. There are a couple of localish hills which I haven't yet climbed which
I've been planning to, and the 3D visualisation with aerial imagery has made it so much easier to
assess the steepness of paths and the nature of the terrain. By alterning the light source it
brings out the relief excellently well thus giving a much clearer idea of the shape of the terrain
than contours alone.

However, I'm a bit baffled by the areas on offer at the moment. In Wales they are only offering
the Beacons, Pembrokeshire and Snowdonia in 25k scale, yet the demo is of the Swansea area. Is
Swansea only available at 25k in demo form? I want the whole of Wales in 25k!!!

And while I'm on the subject, £100 for Snowdonia in 25k is a bit steep isn't it? The 50k mapping
represents good value for money, being much cheaper than buying all of the equivalent Landrangers,
but I can buy 25k maps of Snowdonia for just £21. Yeah I know it's got the height data and aerial
photos too, but the height data is included with the 50k mapping and the aerial photos can be
purchased relatively cheaply separately (covering the whole of the UK apparently), so the 25k
mapping seems to be a bit of a rip off at the moment. Limited coverage, excessive price.

Maybe if nobody buys them they'll drop the prices to something a bit more sensible. I'd prefer to
wait until they have better coverage at a reasonable price.

Quoted message said:

I guess the other suppliers will be doing much the same sort of product, too.

Anquet is promising limited coverage at 25k (selected nat parks) for £80 each. No aerial or 3D
though. Cheaper but still too expensive and even less useful.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004 wildwales.fsnet.co.ukcal.htmlOpen ↗ wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Keith Sheppard
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I would be rather more concerned by the OS going after the author for

providing a tool for users to breach the Get A Map Terms & Conditions

I already read those, and I just read them again. I can't see anything there which says folk can't
copy displayed maps within their own personal computers, or combine the images, or sketch over them
to make maps to load into their personal GPS units.

Sketching / tracing over an OS map or the image of an OS map has got people in trouble with the OS
before. The OS are very keen on what they see as protecting their rights.

I wish it were not so but unfortunately that is the way things stand at the moment. Bit like the
Unisys LZW issue but at least that expires in 5 months.

Quoted message said:

All it says is that if I want to re-publish to a web site I am limited to 10 tiles and have to
include an acknowledgement, and that I am limited to 10 hard copies of any individual tile.

It specifically allows those uses. It does not specifically allow any other uses.

To save yourself later flack you might want to contact them as suggested in the terms and clarify
the situation:

"If you need to extend this licence for other uses not defined here, please write to Ordnance Survey
Copyright Licensing, Romsey Road, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 4GU or fax 023 8079 2615. email:
[email hidden]"

Good luck to you but just beware that the OS legal department may be getting in touch 🙁

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, David Needham
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

As I understand it, the digital maps on offer are limited to the equivalent of those paper products
provided by Ordnance Survey i.e. 1:50,000 maps of all of Great Britain in the 'Landranger' series
and 1:25,000 maps of certain areas including national parks i.e. Snowdonia, the Brecon Beacons etc.
in the 'Explorer' series.

Explorer 25K covers the whole country afaik. I use it all the time in remote areas. After the named
areas they went to numbered maps.

Quoted message said:

I can't see any prospects of the digital maps on offer going beyond these limits for the forseeable
future but no doubt if I'm wrong on this someone will put me right. From a look at the comparative
prices of the Fugawi and Memory Map products, the latter seems to be quite a bit more expensive. It
does offer 3D imaging but I struggle to see that this justifies the premium.

Bernard Hill Selkirk, Scotland

In article <[email hidden]>, Keith Sheppard
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Didn't someone else write something like this (was it called Mapgrabber?)

and he was forced by Streetmap (I think) to stop distributing it because it breached copyright?

That's interesting. I would expect the copyright folks to come after me if I actually included
copyright material in the product, but if I just provide others with a means to breach copyright?

You may be right but the question really is can you afford to contest it in court?

Quoted message said:

In my MapMan help system, every help topic covering capturing and scanning maps starts with a big
notice warning that you may be breaching copyright by so doing but I have no more control over what
maps my users might choose to download or scan than a tape recorder manufacturer has control over
what recordings their users choose to copy.

I must say I did wonder about the feature I am currently working on which allows you to download
and piece together map tiles obtained from a certain well known UK web site (dare I say which?),
because it is specifically targetted at that site's web pages. However, I read the web site's
conditions of use fairly carefully and couldn't find anything which said my users couldn't do that,
provided the maps were for own use only and not republished on the web or anywhere else. Sketching
over the map and uploading the result into your personal GPS unit didn't seem to contravene any of
the conditions of use.

As for the GIF issue, firstly I have heard stories (although they could be urban myth) about owners
of that particular copyright chasing even freeware producers

that's correct. Whether you charge or how much you charge was not relevant. It was a fixed fee
(iirc) for permission to use the code. £1500 sticks in my mind... I was considering it myself at
one point.

Quoted message said:

and secondly, although I'm giving away early versions of my product today, if I were ever to get it
into a saleable state then I wouldn't want to have shot myself in the foot by including patented
compression routines.

Bernard Hill Braeburn Software Selkirk, Scotland

In article <[email hidden]>, Graeme Cogger
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>gif is far better for maps.

The problem with GIF is the licencing issue. You can't release software with GIF encoding in it
without being hounded by the patent owners for royalties. JPEG is at least "open source".

I believe that the 'PNG' format produces similar results to 'GIF' for vector graphics - and I
also believe that it's free (although I'm not sure where you could get code libraries for
processing them).

Yes, PNG was invented mostly because of the GIF unisys problem. It gives excellent results and is
24-bit (GIF is 256 colour only) and has other advantages. BMP, GIF, JPG and PNG are the picture
formats that most browsers can handle.

Many people don't realise that there is a compressed TIF format which uses LZW compression and so
comes under Unisys' claim.

Bernard Hill Braeburn Software Selkirk, Scotland

David Needham said:

As I understand it, the digital maps on offer are limited to the equivalent of those paper
products provided by Ordnance Survey i.e.
1:50,000 maps of all of Great Britain in the 'Landranger' series and
1:25,000 maps of certain areas including national parks i.e. Snowdonia, the Brecon Beacons etc. in
the 'Explorer' series.

Originally known as Outdoor Leisure maps.

Quoted message said:

I can't see any prospects of the digital maps on offer going beyond these limits for the
forseeable future but no doubt if I'm wrong on this someone will put me right.

Well I certainly hope they will, the national parks are not the only places people go walking.

Quoted message said:

From a look at the comparative prices of the Fugawi and Memory Map products, the latter seems to
be quite a bit more expensive. It does offer 3D imaging but I struggle to see that this justifies
the premium.

Anquet will be giving away a free upgrade to existing users with 3D included shortly, so they aren't
charging any extra for it. Given that the height data is already included, it shouldn't be that hard
to tag on a 3D viewing engine.

I do think that current prices being asked for 25k mapping is way over the top given the small areas
covered (even allowing for the different scale), certainly not the bargains that the 50k mapping
are. I've got no immediate intention of forking out £100 for the equivalent of three maps costing
£6.95 each.

Perhaps it's the OS who are indirectly responsible for these high prices? Perhaps if no-one buys
them they'll be forced to lower their prices.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukcal.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Didn't someone else write something like this (was it called Mapgrabber?)

and he was forced by Streetmap (I think) to stop distributing it because it breached copyright?

That's interesting. I would expect the copyright folks to come after me if I actually included
copyright material in the product, but if I just provide others with a means to breach copyright?

In my MapMan help system, every help topic covering capturing and scanning maps starts with a big
notice warning that you may be breaching copyright by so doing but I have no more control over what
maps my users might choose to download or scan than a tape recorder manufacturer has control over
what recordings their users choose to copy.

I must say I did wonder about the feature I am currently working on which allows you to download
and piece together map tiles obtained from a certain well known UK web site (dare I say which?),
because it is specifically targetted at that site's web pages. However, I read the web site's
conditions of use fairly carefully and couldn't find anything which said my users couldn't do that,
provided the maps were for own use only and not republished on the web or anywhere else. Sketching
over the map and uploading the result into your personal GPS unit didn't seem to contravene any of
the conditions of use.

As for the GIF issue, firstly I have heard stories (although they could be urban myth) about owners
of that particular copyright chasing even freeware producers and secondly, although I'm giving away
early versions of my product today, if I were ever to get it into a saleable state then I wouldn't
want to have shot myself in the foot by including patented compression routines.

Keith

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I would be rather more concerned by the OS going after the author for

providing a tool for users to breach the Get A Map Terms & Conditions

I already read those, and I just read them again. I can't see anything there which says folk can't
copy displayed maps within their own personal computers, or combine the images, or sketch over them
to make maps to load into their personal GPS units.

All it says is that if I want to re-publish to a web site I am limited to 10 tiles and have to
include an acknowledgement, and that I am limited to 10 hard copies of any individual tile.

Keith

Keith Sheppard said:

That's interesting. I would expect the copyright folks to come after me if I actually included
copyright material in the product, but if I just provide others with a means to breach copyright?

Well if you want to stop people taking drugs, go after the drug dealers.

Quoted message said:

In my MapMan help system, every help topic covering capturing and scanning maps starts with a big
notice warning that you may be breaching copyright by so doing but I have no more control over
what maps my users might choose to download or scan than a tape recorder manufacturer has control
over what recordings their users choose to copy.

But tape recorders aren't designed specifically to copy other recordings, that's just one possible
use. There are many things you can record with a tape recorder which don't breach copyright. What
other use could you put your suggested software to other than downloading OS maps? Putting in a
copyright notice sounds a bit lame if the only possible use of your software is to breach copyright.

Quoted message said:

I must say I did wonder about the feature I am currently working on which allows you to download
and piece together map tiles obtained from a certain well known UK web site (dare I say which?),
because it is specifically targetted at that site's web pages. However, I read the web site's
conditions of use fairly carefully and couldn't find anything which said my users couldn't do
that, provided the maps were for own use only and not republished on the web or anywhere else.

They specifically state that you can download no more than 10 images. Also, the terms that I've just
read apply specifically to the Get-A-Map service, but the maps themselves are still subject to the
OS's terms and conditions, and they are very strict about such things.

Quoted message said:

Sketching over the map and uploading the result into your personal GPS unit didn't seem to
contravene any of the conditions of use.

You might be surprised. The OS don't allow any form of copying, even rough sketching. Someone on
this newsgroup put a rough sketchmap of an area on his website once and the OS forced him to remove
it because it was obviously based on an OS map, even though it wasn't even drawn to scale!

Discussions on this group suggest that the only methods of creating your own maps legally are to
survey the area yourself (using GPS would be easiest) or to base them on very old OS maps which are
now out of copyright.

Of course, like copying music with a tape recorder, it may be technically illegal but many people do
it and who's ever heard of anyone being prosecuted for it?

Quoted message said:

As for the GIF issue, firstly I have heard stories (although they could be urban myth) about
owners of that particular copyright chasing even freeware producers and secondly, although I'm
giving away early versions of my product today, if I were ever to get it into a saleable state
then I wouldn't want to have shot myself in the foot by including patented compression routines.

A fair point, but if you're worried about GIF copyright owners chasing you I'd also worry about the
OS chasing you. They are extremely intolerant of people doing things with their maps without paying
them lots of money for the privilege.

Check this thread for some discussion about MapGrabber; groups.google.comgroupsOpen ↗
8&threadm=a82bjg%24b1%2 41%40s1.uklinux.net&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Duk.rec.walking%2Bmapgrabbe r%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-
8%26selm%3Da82bjg%2524b1%25241%2540s1.ukl inux.net%26rnum%3D4

Or if that link is too long, try this and then view the whole thread.
groups.google.comgroupsOpen ↗ =UTF-
8&selm=a82bjg%24b1%241%40s1.uklinux.net&rnum=4

Or take a look at the original web page. azwhaley.uklinux.netmapgrabber.htmlOpen ↗

Maybe you could contact Andrew Whaley to get some advice from him since he has real experience in
these matters.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukcal.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Keith Sheppard said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I would be rather more concerned by the OS going after the author for

providing a tool for users to breach the Get A Map Terms & Conditions

I already read those, and I just read them again. I can't see anything there which says folk can't
copy displayed maps within their own personal computers, or combine the images, or sketch over them
to make maps to load into their personal GPS units.

All it says is that if I want to re-publish to a web site I am limited to 10 tiles and have to
include an acknowledgement, and that I am limited to 10 hard copies of any individual tile.

Keith

Mapgrabber, and the follow up Streetgrabber (made by someone else) didn't infringe copyright as far
as I can tell - though as you say before, they might have provided the means for people to do so.
It's a shame that the authors didn't shrug off the threats of legal action, but of course that's
easy for me to say! All the map info is available on the web, and I can't see anything untoward
about assembling it on my own PC in any way I like!

--

Paul

My Lake District walking site (updated 29th September 2003):

paulrooney.netfirms.compaulrooney.netfirms.comOpen ↗

Paul Saunders said:

Perhaps it's the OS who are indirectly responsible for these high prices [for 25k raster]?

ordnancesurvey.co.ukpricing.htmlOpen ↗

If you buy the tiles from OS, the whole of Wales would cost you GBP 7,000 for a one year licence for
a single terminal. The whole of GB would cost GBP 35,000, ditto. So I guess the answer to the
question is an emphatic "Yes".

Quoted message said:

Perhaps if no-one buys them they'll be forced to lower their prices.

I think even companies with large budgets will baulk at official OS prices.

--
Pete Bland

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Someone on this newsgroup put a rough sketchmap of an area on his website

once and the OS forced him to remove it because it was obviously based on an OS map...

But putting it on his web site was publishing it. I'm not suggesting that anyone re-publish maps or
publish other maps derived from them, nor am I providing a means to do so.

If I took careful measurements from an OS map and used them to upload waypoints to my GPS for my own
personal use, surely that wouldn't be a breach of copyright? All I am doing is providing a means to
automate that process.

Keith

Keith Sheppard said:

But putting it on his web site was publishing it.

True.

Quoted message said:

I'm not suggesting that anyone re-publish maps or publish other maps derived from them, nor am I
providing a means to do so.

No, but even copying is frowned upon. The OS won't even let you scan paper maps that you've bought.

Quoted message said:

If I took careful measurements from an OS map and used them to upload waypoints to my GPS for my
own personal use, surely that wouldn't be a breach of copyright?

That's crossed my mind too, but the OS probably aren't that petty, after all, a few waypoints
doesn't amount to copying a map. Besides, grid refs and waypoints are navigational aids, the OS even
tell you how to take a grid ref from a map, so disallowing that would make no sense.

Quoted message said:

All I am doing is providing a means to automate that process.

You don't have to convince me, it's the OS you have to worry about. Trouble is, you are providing a
means for people to do something that they almost certainly don't want you to do. I'm not saying
it's a bad idea, and I'm sure there are many people around who would appreciate it, but after what
happened to MapGrabber I'm just warning you that you may be in for some hassle, and you may be
better off saving yourself the effort, or keeping it quiet.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukcal.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

the arguments and the concern for corporate profit and the word of the good lord Jesus is well
applicable to users in the USA, but what abut us poor saps in CAnada that paid thru taxes to get
geomatics data then the rights were sold to private firms that copyrighted the info and essentially
lost all ability for any use..legal or otherwise? Witness NDA...all rights to CAnadian hydrographic
data and they charge heavilly and are slow to get new updated charts to use recreational users. I am
new to this forum but i finally made the plunge with an Etrex vista and can't belive that 30million
of us (canucks)don't warrant garmin loadable topo maps! sheesh, copyright or wrong i think we should
start a topo sharing facility and make grassroots action...ZZZZZZZZZwake me when it happens. rick

Paul Saunders said:

Keith Sheppard said:

But putting it on his web site was publishing it.

True.

Quoted message said:

I'm not suggesting that anyone re-publish maps or publish other maps derived from them, nor am I
providing a means to do so.

No, but even copying is frowned upon. The OS won't even let you scan paper maps that
you've bought.

Quoted message said:

If I took careful measurements from an OS map and used them to upload waypoints to my GPS for my
own personal use, surely that wouldn't be a breach of copyright?

That's crossed my mind too, but the OS probably aren't that petty, after all, a few waypoints
doesn't amount to copying a map. Besides, grid refs and waypoints are navigational aids, the OS
even tell you how to take a grid ref from a map, so disallowing that would make no sense.

Quoted message said:

All I am doing is providing a means to automate that process.

You don't have to convince me, it's the OS you have to worry about. Trouble is, you are providing
a means for people to do something that they almost certainly don't want you to do. I'm not saying
it's a bad idea, and I'm sure there are many people around who would appreciate it, but after what
happened to MapGrabber I'm just warning you that you may be in for some hassle, and you may be
better off saving yourself the effort, or keeping it quiet.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004 wildwales.fsnet.co.ukcal.htmlOpen ↗ wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: opera.comm2Open ↗

Quoted message said:

Maybe you could contact Andrew Whaley to get some advice from him since he has real experience in
these matters.

Sorry I'm late to this, I've not been reading recently.

I would strongly recommend that you don't do this. I did it a couple of yeats ago and wrote a
program called 'MapGrabber' that downloads the OS
1:50,000 tiles from Streetmap or Multimap and assembled them into a larger useful map. It's
obviously easy to do and saves people like Paul an awful lot of time hand assembling them.

Unfortunately I received a letter from the OS legal department threatening to sue me unless I
withdrew the application. We could argue all day long on here whether they had any case or not but I
certainly don't have any money to contest it with or risk paying damages.

I even spoke to people at the OS and offered to do a version that complied with the Get-a-map t &
c's but they referred me to the earlier letter.

It's a shame that the OS don't sell digital maps for personal use for a reasonable price i.e. the
same as paper maps and then there would really be no reason to want to go to this trouble.

In article <[email hidden]>, Andrew W <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

It's a shame that the OS don't sell digital maps for personal use for a reasonable price i.e. the
same as paper maps and then there would really be no reason to want to go to this trouble.

Um. I bought the whole of Scotland (half the UK actually) for £160 as Memory Map North (50,000
series) That's about 100 maps at, what, £6 each in paper?

Seems it's cheaper to me...

Of course some of us think it should be say £30 for the software and then free after that since

1 we paid for the surveys through our taxes 2 there is almost no overhead in selling digital
versions, unlike paper printing, binding, distribution...

Bernard Hill Selkirk, Scotland