OpenStreetMap rocks (especially on foot)

Especially outside of urban centres, and especially if you’re on foot, OpenStreetMap is way better than Google Maps, Bing Maps, Apple Maps, or what-have-you.

Animated GIF comparing maps of the Sutton Lane/Beaumont Green area of Sutton/Stanton Harcourt. Google Maps shows only the streets and building outlines, and the name of only one property, whereas OpenStreetMap also includes public footpaths, gates, bridges, house names, and land use indicators.
The area at the North end of Sutton Lane, near where I live, is mostly just a huge expanse of nothing in Google Maps, but OpenStreetMap shows footpaths, gates, bridges, house names, driveways, and land use indicators.

OpenStreetMap is especially good for walkers, with its more-comprehensive coverage of public footpaths as well as the ability to drill-down for accessibility information: whether a path ends in a gate or a stile matters a lot if you can’t climb the latter (or you’re walking with a small-but-muddy dog who’ll need lifting over).

Sure, you don’t get (as much) street view photography. But how often do you use that, anyway?1

Animated GIF comparing maps of Halifax Way (the Hayfield Green estate) in Stanton Harcourt. Google Maps shows streets only, some of them not even named (and one of them obstructed by a nonexistent building). OpenStreetMap includes house numbers, footpaths, and even the locations of play equipment and benches.
Of course, some of the places near me at which OpenStreetMap especially excels are… because of me! A little amateur cartography can go a long way.

I’ve heard it argued that OpenStreetMap, with its Wikipedia-like “anybody can edit it” model, cannot be relied upon. And sure, if you’re looking for an “official” level of accuracy and the alternative is an Ordinance Survey map, then that’s what you should go for.

But there’s nothing specific to, say, Google Maps that makes it fundamentally more “accurate” for most2 geographic features than OpenStreetMap. The vast of cartographic data on Google Maps is produced by humans, looking at satellite photos, and then tracing the features on them, probably with AI assistance. And the vast majority of cartographic data on OpenStreetMap is produced… exactly the same way, although without the AI “helping”.

Google Maps has mistakes, just like every map3. And it’s got trap streets, like most commercially-produced maps (including the Ordinance Survey). Google Maps’ mistakes tend to be made by somebody on the other side of the world from the feature, doing a bad job of tracing what they think might be a road… while OpenStreetMaps’ mistakes are for the most part omissions in areas that are under-explored by local contributors. And there are plenty of areas – like those near where I live, especially if you’re on foot – where the latter mistakes are much less-troublesome.

Animated GIF comparing maps of Main Road and The Green in Stanton Harcourt. Google Maps shows streets and building outlines, and the general location of the primary school (although not all of its buildings). OpenStreetMap includes all the same detail but also shows the location of the village green, several footpaths, benches, house names, and car parking areas.
If you’re looking to make a delivery to my village, where most buildings are named rather than numbered, postcode areas are broad, and it’s not always clear where it’ll be safe to park… you’d do a lot better to use OpenStreetMap than any other digital map.

I fixed a couple of omissions on OpenStreetMap just earlier today. While I was out walking the dog, earlier, I added the names of two houses whose identities weren’t specifically marked on the map, and I added detail to the newly-constructed Deansfield estate. Google Maps shows there being only two houses on Deansfield Estate, among other inaccuracies, even though they’ve got up-to-date aerial and street photography.

Google Maps is fine if you want to drive to Sheffield, you need public transport connections to Plymouth4, or you’re looking for a restaurant nearby and you want the data about them to be accurate. But next time you’re walking somewhere, or when you’re looking for a specific address… I’d suggest you give OpenStreetMap a go. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Footnotes

1 I say that as somebody who uses street view and satellite photography a more than average amount, for geohashing purposes. But I can switch mapping software on-the-fly; nobody’s stopping me looking at “ostrich” photos when I need them.

2 The place that Google Maps really beats OpenStreetMap, in my mind, is in the integration of its business directory. If you search for a business in Google Maps, you’ll probably find it and get reasonably-accurate opening hours and contact details. But that’s a factor of two things: the Google My Business directory, and – more importantly – the popularity of the application and the fact that the mobile app “nudges” people to check on the places around them. By the way: if you want to contribute to making maps better in that way without becoming an unpaid researcher working to line Google’s pockets, StreetComplete is an app that helps fill-out business and related information on OpenStreetMap!

3 Google Maps used to show Vauxhall tube station on entirely the wrong side of the River Thames, for example.

4 Public transport’s another thing Google Maps does very well.

× × ×

Spring is coming

A lunchtime dog walk was made especially delightful by the growing warmth of the approaching British springtime. It’s really bright and pretty out, this afternoon!

A French Bulldog in a harness but no lead stands in front of a empty field, under bright blue skies with sparse clouds. Bare wintery trees can be seen in the background, bathed in warm yellow light.

×

Yr Wyddfa’s First Email

On Wednesday, Vodafone announced that they’d made the first ever satellite video call from a stock mobile phone in an area with no terrestrial signal. They used a mountain in Wales for their experiment.

It reminded me of an experiment of my own, way back in around 1999, which I probably should have made a bigger deal of. I believe that I was the first person to ever send an email from the top of Yr Wyddfa/Snowdon.

Nowadays, that’s an easy thing to do. You pull your phone out and send it. But back then, I needed to use a Psion 5mx palmtop, communicating over an infared link using a custom driver (if you ever wondered why I know my AT-commands by heart… well, this isn’t exactly why, but it’s a better story than the truth) to a Nokia 7110 (fortunately it was cloudy enough to not interfere with the 9,600 baud IrDA connection while I positioned the devices atop the trig point), which engaged a GSM 2G connection, over which I was able to send an email to myself, cc:’d to a few friends.

It’s not an exciting story. It’s not even much of a claim to fame. But there you have it: I was (probably) the first person to send an email from the summit of Yr Wyddfa. (If you beat me to it, let me know!)

Dan Q found GC4PYCF Thames Path – Floodproof

This checkin to GC4PYCF Thames Path - Floodproof reflects a geocaching.com log entry. See more of Dan's cache logs.

Excellent cache, which I was pleased to observe has the largest conceivable container possible for its hiding place: nice one! I love a good treetop cache!

Once I’d free the right tree, getting up was relatively easy: the limb next over from the one mentioned in the hint provided a good launching-off point and a short scramble later I was sat at height with the container in hand. Getting down, though, proved more challenging as I slipped on a low bough and plummeted to the ground!

Dan, up a tree, holds a geocache secured high up the trunk.

Aside from my pride, the biggest injury was to my thumb, which nicked some kind of fierce plant on the way down and is bleeding as I type this. Still 100% a worthwhile effort to find a great cache, so an FP awarded.

A hand with a small chunk torn out of the back of the thumb, exposing bright red flesh beneath.

Now I’ve gotta start jogging again if I’m to have any chance of catching up to my partner Ruth, who I’ve joined in this leg of her effort to walk the entire Thames Path (I swear I didn’t just agree to tag along for the caching opportunities!).

× ×

Dan Q wrote note for GC4QAED Leonard

This checkin to GC4QAED Leonard reflects a geocaching.com log entry. See more of Dan's cache logs.

Skipped this one as I’m still playing catchup to the rest of my group and wasn’t interested in a long search. Many previous finders note that the coordinates are significantly off but I couldn’t see anybody posting alternates. Maybe next time I’m down here!

Dan Q found GC4QAE6 Bernadette

This checkin to GC4QAE6 Bernadette reflects a geocaching.com log entry. See more of Dan's cache logs.

After a brief overshoot – too excited to finally be catching up to Ruth and the rest of my squad! – doubled back to find this easy location. Cache was lying on the floor which I assume isn’t the right hiding place, so I returned it to the V. While running from the last cache I’ve dropped my writing implement somewhere, so have photographed the (almost pristine!) logbook as proof that I actually found it. This has been my favourite of this mini-series so far; FP awarded for the enjoyable container theming if nothing else!

A replacement geocache logbook with only a single entry.

×

Dan Q did not find GC4QADB Sheldon

This checkin to GC4QADB Sheldon reflects a geocaching.com log entry. See more of Dan's cache logs.

No luck here. Couldn’t spare more than a little while to hunt without Ruth and the rest of the Thames Path Source-to-Mouth party getting too far ahead but spent that time getting thoroughly nettled. They’re fierce around here! Maybe another time.

Dan Q found GC2W97E Messing about by the river

This checkin to GC2W97E Messing about by the river reflects a geocaching.com log entry. See more of Dan's cache logs.

Found after a brief search while accompanying my partner Ruth on the latest leg of her effort to (by instalments) walk the entire length of the Thames from its source to its mouth. Initially looked in the wrong place but once I was willing to brave the nettles and hack my way off the footpath the cache location became obvious. A bit damp, but serviceable. TFTC!

Dan, on an overgrown riverside footpath, waves to the camera.

×

Thames Path 2

This is a repost promoting content originally published elsewhere. See more things Dan's reposted.

On our first day‘s walking along the Thames Path, Robin and I had trouble finding any evidence of water for some time. On our second day, we did not have this problem.

After weeks of sustained rain, the fields we walked over as we left Cricklade behind were extremely soggy. On our way out of town we passed Cricklade Millennium Wood, I took a picture for the purpose of mocking it for being very small but later discovered it’s too small to appear on Google Maps and became oddly defensive of it – it’s trying, damn it, we should at least acknowledge its existence.

Ruth and her brother Robin (of Challenge Robin/Challenge Robin II fame on this blog, among many other crazy adventures) have taken it upon themselves to walk the entirety of the Thames Path from the source of the river (or rather, one of the many symbolic sources) to the sea, over the course of a series of separate one-day walks. I’ve mostly been acting as backup-driver so far, but I might join them for a leg or two later on.

In any case, Ruth’s used it as a welcome excuse to dust off her blog and write about the experience, and it’s fun and delightful and you should follow along and give her a digital cheer. The first part is here; the second part landed yesterday.

The Search for England’s Forgotten Footpaths

This is a repost promoting content originally published elsewhere. See more things Dan's reposted.

Nineteen years ago, the British government passed one of its periodic laws to manage how people move through the countryside. The Countryside and Rights of Way Act created a new “right to roam” on common land, opening up three million acres of mountains and moor, heath and down, to cyclists, climbers, and dog walkers. It also set an ambitious goal: to record every public path crisscrossing England and Wales by January 1, 2026. The British Isles have been walked for a long time. They have been mapped, and mapped again, for centuries. But that does not mean that everything adds up, or makes sense. Between them, England and Wales have around a hundred and forty thousand miles of footpaths, of which around ten per cent are impassable at any time, with another ten thousand miles that are thought to have dropped off maps or otherwise misplaced. Finding them all again is like reconstructing the roots of a tree. In 2004, a government project, named Discovering Lost Ways, was given a fifteen-million-pound budget to solve the problem. It ended four years later, overwhelmed. “Lost Footpaths to Stay Lost,” the Daily Telegraph reported. Since then, despite the apparent impossibility of the task, the 2026 cutoff has remained on the statute books, leaving the job of finding and logging the nation’s forgotten paths to walkers, horse people, and other obsessives who can’t abide the muddled situation.

A couple of days into the New Year, with the deadline now only seven years off, I met Bob Fraser, a retired highway engineer, in a parking lot a few miles outside Truro, in Cornwall, in the far west of England. Fraser grew up in Cornwall and returned about thirty years ago, which is when he noticed that many footpaths were inaccessible or ended for no reason. “I suppose that got me interested in trying to get the problem sorted out,” he said. Since he retired, seven years ago, Fraser has been researching and walking more or less full time; in the past three years, he has applied to reinstate sixteen lost paths.