National Grid OS ref for UK locations

A lot of UK locations that have been added have been located by latitude/longitude, but not also by the OS NGR.

Adding just the OS NGR to a location appears to convert to and add the latitude/longitude to the entry automatically, but just adding the latitude/longitude does not convert to and add the OS NGR. Unfortunately, without having the OS NGR, the location does not then get included in any search done for nearest locations.

I have searched the last 400 UK locations added and converted latitude/longitude to OS NGRs and added them where missing, but there is no obvious way to find others without going through every single UK entry. So, is it possible to code this to convert latitude/longitude to OS NGR automatically?

There are only 81 entries where this occurs. The latitude/longitude is three times more precise than the OS grid values we use (100m versus 30m for a 1 second of lat/long). You now have to check the box after the OS grid if you want to have the program recalculate lat/long from an OS grid entry.
956
1089
1147
1196
1197
1203
1245
1253
1257
1260
1329
1340
1350
1375
143856
2452
3009
5002
5174
9420
13211
30705
32946
36594
39319
41724
64500
69452
123084
143866
146873
156091
157340
157341
180850
180852
185321
185845
186325
189720
189817
189818
189820
189831
189832
190713
191253
191257
192271
193232
206146
209642
210325
214681
215682
215818
215819
215863
216040
216068
219785
221454
221458
221475
221480
221558
221572
221583
222054
222308
222368
223633
225383
225664
226369
226862
233431
233572
233577
233578
233667

I am a believer that ancronyms inhibit communications.

Some one didn't understand Ontario's Twp. Lots and Con.

As so with GB NGR and OS

To me being in the paint industry NGR is Non Grain Raising stains our 1inch to one mile are Ordnance maps

Thanks David, I'll have a look at them and add NGRs where needed.

I realise that the way they are entered, the NGRs are less accurate. But the accuracy issue is largely because MINDAT only uses 6 digit NGR refs, so they often have to be truncated when being entered and accuracy is thus reduced. However, regardless of absolute accuracy, the NGR refs still need to be there if you want to be able to find them in a "nearest locations" search.

On that basis, I still think that an automatic translation from latitude/longitude to NGR would be better than having to look for them and do it manually as, doing the latter, it remains possible for them to slip though.

It would be much simpler to just get the UK nearest to use the "nearest" program that uses latitude/longitude.

David Von Bargen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would be much simpler to just get the UK
> nearest to use the "nearest" program that uses
> latitude/longitude.

I don't have any preference for how it's done, so long as as the location links to others nearby in "nearest locality" search.

Can the code be changed to do this?

The nearest locality report is one of the earlier attempts by Jolyon to give a spatial "feel" of an area. In my mind, it has been greatly superseded by the maps displayed on locality pages that were later added.

David

Am I missing something? Whilst having comprehensive mapping options, I didn't think that the mapping in the locality pages for a specific site gave any indication of the other localities in the area. They all just show the individual site.

However, the "nearest locality" search does exactly this for the UK. It is an extremely useful facility given the comprehensive mapping that we have here, and ought to be developed (or at least maintained).

Which brings me back to my original question, can either the OS NGR for a location be converted to latitude/longitude automatically, or vice versa, so that the location gets included in any search done for nearest locations. At the moment, some are included and some are not depending on how the location of the entry is added.

ian

"They all just show the individual site. " Yes, you have to look at the locality pages higher up on the hierarchy.

About the conversions, I would like to get Jolyon to chime in on this. One of the problems that we have is that Jolyon wants to use a standard WGS84 datum on mindat. The Ordnance Survey seems to use other datums.

thanks

let's see what Jolyon has to say