Dave Arquati wrote:


* depending on which maps you consult (A-Z or Bart's) and whether you
prefer the LB Hammersmith & Fulham's usage (which rarely includes an
apostrophe on anything Bush-related).

--
What happened to the publication "Nicholson's London Streetfinder"?
It was much better than the A thru Z.

Adrian.

On 30 Jun 2006 14:23:07 -0700, wrote:


Dave Arquati wrote:


* depending on which maps you consult (A-Z or Bart's) and whether you
prefer the LB Hammersmith & Fulham's usage (which rarely includes an
apostrophe on anything Bush-related).

--
What happened to the publication "Nicholson's London Streetfinder"?

Probably now branded as "Collins" (if still published), my 1995
Nicholson Greater London Street Atlas carrying the information "a
division of HarperCollinsPublishers [sic]".

It was much better than the A thru Z.

If you mean an A-Z, anything used to be better but they seem to
improved in more recent years although whoever's name appears in the
big print, the small print usually credits the Ordnance Survey.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:53:57 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

What happened to the publication "Nicholson's London Streetfinder"?

Probably now branded as "Collins" (if still published), my 1995
Nicholson Greater London Street Atlas carrying the information "a
division of HarperCollinsPublishers [sic]".

I think it's still published as the Collins street atlas. The A5-ish
version covers a slightly different area to the similarly-sized A-Z,
it includes more of the SW London/Surrey bit and a bit less of North
London. Or it did when I lived in New Malden.

Charles Ellson wrote:

If you mean an A-Z, anything used to be better

Better in what way? I always hated the Nicholson's.

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 03:27:08 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:

If you mean an A-Z, anything used to be better

Better in what way?

Starting with the current subject, many details pertaining to railways
were well out of date (The appearance of "LMS", "LNER" and "GWR" in
many places tended to give a warning. Is Shepherds Bush still marked
CLR?) and a lot of the roads weren't much better, but as I also said:-
but they seem to improved in more recent years

I always hated the Nicholson's.

There's not a lot of difference for London now that they all seem to
be O.S.-derived mapping presented via different colour schemes. The
Nicholson's (possibly now merged and re-named) AFAIAA is the only one
which has reasonable coverage of the intra-M25 area, in the past some
other atlases labelled as "Greater London" failed to cover the entire
county never mind the extended conurbation, missing out odd bits at
the periphery (even though they were inhabited) or showing them at a
reduced scale.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 Charles Ellson wrote:

On 30 Jun 2006 14:23:07 -0700, wrote:


Dave Arquati wrote:


* depending on which maps you consult (A-Z or Bart's) and whether you
prefer the LB Hammersmith & Fulham's usage (which rarely includes an
apostrophe on anything Bush-related).

--
What happened to the publication "Nicholson's London Streetfinder"?

Probably now branded as "Collins" (if still published), my 1995
Nicholson Greater London Street Atlas carrying the information "a
division of HarperCollinsPublishers [sic]".

It was much better than the A thru Z.

If you mean an A-Z, anything used to be better but they seem to
improved in more recent years although whoever's name appears in the
big print, the small print usually credits the Ordnance Survey.

Speaking of London atlases and apostrophes, the best atlas I have come
across is Philip's Street Atlas London, published by Philip's.

Those apostrophes are fine. But I also have, dating from an earlier
age, Philips' Modern School Atlas, published by George Philip & Son Ltd.
I wonder what that one is doing there.
--
Thoss

"thoss" wrote:

Those apostrophes are fine. But I also have, dating from an earlier
age, Philips' Modern School Atlas, published by George Philip & Son Ltd.
I wonder what that one is doing there.

If it was father and son, then presumably there were two Philips.

--
Dave Fossett
Saitama, Japan
http://jtrains.fotopic.net/

In message , thoss
writes

Those apostrophes are fine. But I also have, dating from an earlier
age, Philips' Modern School Atlas, published by George Philip & Son Ltd.
I wonder what that one is doing there.

George Philip & Son used the forms Philip's and Philips' totally
interchangeably for a very long time. I even have a copy of their 1862
London map which is entitled "Philip's New Plan of London" on the map
itself, but "Philips' Guide to London" on its cover.

There never has been much consistency in the use of the possessive
apostrophe in the case of words ending in s.
--
Paul Terry