Good for you, Simon! :)
2009/5/28 Simon Chapman <[log in to unmask]>
> As a retired cartographic surveyor, and apologising for potentially
> upsetting other contributers to this site, I've always believed in keeping
> it simple. Whether it's a WSG or an ETR geoid I couldn't give a monkey's but
> what I do find frustrating is talk of Great Mine or Little Level without any
> other reference. Great Mine at TA 123 456 is quickly identifiable because
> it's based on O.S. national grid co-ords and can be found on such mapping. I
> live in Cleveland (U.K.) but if I were to be visiting Devon and wanting to
> look at mine sites there, or even to do some site recording, then I would go
> equipped with O.S. mapping of the area or buy some when there. I could then
> identify a site and give it a unique reference for the benefit of self and
> others, that's keeping it simple for general use.
>
> Gazetteers of sites usually are, and have been for years, compiled based on
> national grid references; adding further complications of extra co-ordinates
> is not encouraging people to give n.g.r.'s in the first place.
>
> I know the future is digital but not everyone can afford, or is interested
> enough, to take a g.p.s. device or laptop on site; and when on a remote moor
> top with a tattered 1:25000 map in hand looking for some obscure adit at
> least its battery won't go flat.
>
> Simon.
>
|