I did a survey regarding OS launching a walking/cyclings etc route type site some months back, so its interesting to actually now give it a go. Still a beta, and has a good few faults, but not bad overall.
Might actually prove interesting especially for off road cyclists as its often near impossible from a map to tell the difference between unrideable bridleway and great singletrack. A little local knowledge goes a long way.
I did a survey regarding OS launching a walking/cyclings etc route type site some months back, so its interesting to actually now give it a go. Still a beta, and has a good few faults, but not bad overall.
"Señor Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Steve said:
I did a survey regarding OS launching a walking/cyclings etc route type site some months back, so its interesting to actually now give it a go. Still a beta, and has a good few faults, but not bad overall.
Looks quite useful - would be even better if you could download routes in GPS format.
I like the draggable OS maps but these are available on Multimap in a larger, more usable window. I would also like to see a road following ability like Mapmyride or Toporoute.
"Señor Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
[10 quoted lines suppressed]
I like the draggable OS maps but these are available on Multimap in a larger, more usable window. I would also like to see a road following ability like Mapmyride or Toporoute.
Any idea if it is possible to delete routes ?
It appears you cannot yet alter or delete routes, its an obvious problem so I expect them to fix that one.
As for GPS, the original survey talked about import and export to GPS so I guess they have the idea of it. I don't know if they plan to do that though.
The other obvious problem is that its 1:50, given that they own all the maps I don't see why they couldn't have used 1:25.
"Steve" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
The other obvious problem is that its 1:50, given that they own all the maps I don't see why they couldn't have used 1:25.
Apparently the OS are a bit protective of their 1:25 mapping. Eg you can't get electronic versions for a sensible price - they'll do lots of small areas, but if you want the UK, rather than 600 quid or so (=150 quid for 1:50 x 4), it ends up more like 10,000 quid.
"Steve" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
[2 quoted lines suppressed]
Apparently the OS are a bit protective of their 1:25 mapping. Eg you can't get electronic versions for a sensible price - they'll do lots of small areas, but if you want the UK, rather than 600 quid or so (=150 quid for 1:50 x 4), it ends up more like 10,000 quid.
You would have thought they would have put it on their own website though, it not like everyone is oging to steal it in tiny 2"x3" chunks!
I've been peering at that new satmap device, 1:25 county size is £90, 1:50 is £60 for 17 counties!
"Steve" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Apparently the OS are a bit protective of their 1:25 mapping. Eg you can't get electronic versions for a sensible price - they'll do lots of small areas, but if you want the UK, rather than 600 quid or so (=150 quid for 1:50 x 4), it ends up more like 10,000 quid.
You would have thought they would have put it on their own website though, it not like everyone is oging to steal it in tiny 2"x3" chunks!
It is available on their Get-a-map service, so it's odd they haven't included it this time:
I did a survey regarding OS launching a walking/cyclings etc route type site some months back, so its interesting to actually now give it a go. Still a beta, and has a good few faults, but not bad overall.
Might actually prove interesting especially for off road cyclists as its often near impossible from a map to tell the difference between unrideable bridleway and great singletrack. A little local knowledge goes a long way.
Steve
It would be even better if it did not restrict browser versions.
"Unfortunately your browser is not currently supported by Ordnance Survey Explore.
We don't want this to spoil your experience of our website; the browsers currently supported are: Firefox 1.5.x (OS X), Firefox 2.0.x (all platforms) and Internet Explorer 6 and 7."
I did a survey regarding OS launching a walking/cyclings etc route type site some months back, so its interesting to actually now give it a go. Still a beta, and has a good few faults, but not bad overall.
Might actually prove interesting especially for off road cyclists as its often near impossible from a map to tell the difference between unrideable bridleway and great singletrack. A little local knowledge goes a long way.
Steve
It would be even better if it did not restrict browser versions.
"Unfortunately your browser is not currently supported by Ordnance Survey Explore.
We don't want this to spoil your experience of our website; the browsers currently supported are: Firefox 1.5.x (OS X), Firefox 2.0.x (all platforms) and Internet Explorer 6 and 7."
Julian Gallop
But it does manage to work with Opera if Opera tells the site that it is Internet Explorer. So why bother with the restriction? Surely they can be arsed to test it?
Looks quite useful - would be even better if [...]
Looks quite useless:
Unfortunately your browser is not currently supported by Ordnance Survey Explore.
and the "continue" link just redisplays the same page.
These muppets should be required to FreeOurData.org.uk so they are subject to fair competition from competent webmasters, who test against web standards as well as verify it works in particular popular browsers.