Hi, Graham. The https://www.google.com/url?q=http://trigpointing.uk&source=gmail&ust=1781103297783000&sa=E community database might also be worth a look as a cross-reference — it's built on the same OS archive and has 26,976 records with community-contributed condition data, which could help with your 1,335 ambiguous cases. It won't be appropriate as an import source (the licensing chain for OSM isn't clear), but as a reference to resolve human-review cases it could be useful.
Chris On Tue, Jun 09, 2026 02:50 PM, Owen Boswarva <[email protected]> wrote: > > There's a current page on the Ordnance Survey website with a download of > the legacy Trig Archive. It says the data is re-usable as open data under > the Open Government Licence: > > Click on 'Read more': > https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/geodesy-positioning/legacy-data/trig-search > > -- Owen Boswarva > > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 at 14:41, Graham Whaley <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Chris, >> thanks for the reply. Is your work also around OS trigpoint data, or >> some other dataset? >> Licensing indeed - back in 2016 @gregrs approached the OS (it's listed >> on the wiki page for trigpoints), and their response at that time was >> positive: >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Gregrs/Ordnance_Survey_triangulation_stations/Licence_emails >> >> I'm starting with the presumption that that still holds - but we should >> indeed verify that before an import, no doubt in the import proposal page >> phase. >> >> Graham >> >> On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 at 13:19, Chris Andrew <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, Graham. >>> >>> Just for wider knowledge, I'm doing some work at the moment, along >>> similar lines, but in support of an app, not a bulk import. >>> >>> Stating the obvious, before any bulk imports are considered, the source >>> data licensing would need to be checked. >>> >>> I suspect people have been round this bouy a few times, so I'll step >>> back, now. >>> >>> Chris >>> chris_debian >>> >>> On Tue, 9 Jun 2026, 12:01 , <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>>> than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..." >>>> Today's Topics: >>>> >>>> 1. Revisiting OS trigpoints - viability of importing? () >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: Graham Whaley <[email protected]> >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Cc: >>>> Bcc: >>>> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 11:55:01 +0100 >>>> Subject: [Talk-GB] Revisiting OS trigpoints - viability of importing? >>>> Hello, >>>> first time poster here. I've done a very few small submissions to OSM >>>> in the past (user gwhaley), and just restarted updating small items around >>>> my location (having spotted some new bins and benches etc. appearing). >>>> >>>> During that work I realised the trigpoints near me are not in OSM, >>>> which led me down the path to this very useful wiki page from @gregrs >>>> around 2016: >>>> >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_triangulation_stations >>>> and a small related discussion on the list around 2019: >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2019-July/023176.html >>>> >>>> This inspired me to grab the current datasets and do some crunching. >>>> I've posted my code and findings on github at: >>>> https://github.com/grahamwhaley/OSM_UK_trigpoints >>>> >>>> I'd like to discuss if the community think it is viable to import a >>>> bunch of OS trigpoint data? I think it is. I don't think we could automate >>>> every trigpoint found in the OS data (see below and/or the github page for >>>> details), but I think there is scope to import the vast majority of OS >>>> trigpoints as nodes. Of course any import would follow the path of >>>> following the import guidelines, writing an import plan and >>>> approaching/announcing to the wider community before any automation >>>> occurred. I'd also fully expect to do some dry runs and some smaller region >>>> imports before doing the bulk of the data. I'd also gladly welcome any >>>> help, reviews etc. >>>> >>>> I'll drop a few statistics here... >>>> >>>> - The OS trigpoint database has 6081 'live' pillars >>>> - The OSM database has 2804 items purporting to be trigpoints - 2560 >>>> after some filtering >>>> - The OS benchmark data (which gives us FlushBracket numbers) has 3703 >>>> useable entries >>>> >>>> After some data crunching and filtering (see the github page - but I >>>> fully expect to adapt and refine the current code), we end up with the 6081 >>>> OS nodes being classified into the following groups: >>>> >>>> - 60 OS entries that seem to align with existing OSM entries so likely >>>> need no or little change >>>> - 4440 potential 'new' OSM trigpoint entries - entries from the OS data >>>> that do not seem to align with any existing OSM nodes >>>> - 246 'editable' entries, where an OS entry nearly aligns with an OSM >>>> entry, but we could 'coerce' the OSM entry to match the OS entry >>>> - 1335 entries that could do with human review - the OS and OSM entries >>>> are both similar and different (for example, might have matching names but >>>> different FB numbers), and we could try and figure out why and what to do >>>> in each instance. >>>> >>>> I have some ideas about how to proceed, but obviously would like >>>> community input. My overview thoughts are: >>>> >>>> - Adding the 4440 'new' OS trigpoints feels like the least risk, as it >>>> would not be trying to duplicate or modify any existing OSM nodes >>>> - The 'editable' nodes might be moderately easy to apply after a >>>> fairly thorough human review of the changes. >>>> - The 1335 entries that could do with human review - maybe we can get >>>> them on a >>>> site like/similar to Survey Me or FHODOT to make them accessible for >>>> ongoing community review. >>>> >>>> Many thanks, >>>> Graham >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Talk-GB mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-GB mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-GB mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
