Cartographic Projection
every map is wrong, and by exactly how much
Figure

53° north, 2° west: four places one pair of numbers could be

Drawn here at the parameters it defaults to, with every essay that calls it.
53° north, 2° west: four places one pair of numbers could be. The same two numbers, read as three datums and as the pair in the other order. The centre is the WGS84 reading; the marks are where the ground is if the numbers were measured against OSGB36, ED50, NAD27 instead, at 103 m, 138 m, 195 m. Every one of those is a plausible position — near enough to look like a survey difference and far enough to be a different field. Reversing the two numbers instead moves the point 7942 kilometres, and is the mistake nobody worries about because it is usually obvious.

The same two numbers, read as three datums and as the pair in the other order. The centre is the WGS84 reading; the marks are where the ground is if the numbers were measured against OSGB36, ED50, NAD27 instead, at 103 m, 138 m, 195 m. Every one of those is a plausible position — near enough to look like a survey difference and far enough to be a different field. Reversing the two numbers instead moves the point 7942 kilometres, and is the mistake nobody worries about because it is usually obvious.

It is drawn by operation-figure with show: "coordinate-readings" — one member of a family of 14 figures that share a generator, so the drawing above is what that generator returns when it is asked for this one and given nothing else.

2 essays call it. Every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.

Where it is called

Changing this changes every one of these figures.

53° north, 2° west: four places one pair of numbers could be. The same two numbers, read as three datums and as the pair in the other order. The centre is the WGS84 reading; the marks are where the ground is if the numbers were measured against OSGB36, ED50, NAD27 instead, at 103 m, 138 m, 195 m. Every one of those is a plausible position — near enough to look like a survey difference and far enough to be a different field. Reversing the two numbers instead moves the point 7942 kilometres, and is the mistake nobody worries about because it is usually obvious. What a machine does with it

A coordinate without its system is not a location

The same two numbers name ground 103 metres apart on one datum, 195 on another, and 7,942 kilometres away if the pair is read in the other order. The datum errors are the dangerous ones because they are plausible — and the axis swap, which everyone calls obvious, does nothing at all along a line that crosses three continents.

 Every candidate fitted to one map's graticule, ranked by what is left over. The map is drawn in Conformal conic over a region 40° tall centred at 45° north, and the projection is not told to the fit. Each candidate is evaluated at the same 121 graticule crossings, its own parameters are searched, the best plane similarity between its output and the picture is removed, and what remains is drawn as a proportion of the map's own width on a logarithmic scale. Conformal conic fits to 1.3e-10, which is the arithmetic's floor; the next candidate is 3.7e+7 times worse. What is taught wrongly

A map does not say what it is

Every map on this site is one the site drew, from a projection it chose. Every map a reader has ever used is the other kind — a picture whose projection is a sentence in a corner, a legend, or nothing at all. The graticule is enough to recover it: fit every candidate to the crossings and rank what is left over.

The whole library