There are plenty of maps around, printed and otherwise, with numbered grids that do not directly equate to real-world coordinate systems.
Typically these grids will have 0,0 in the bottom-left corner - at least, in the most of cases that I have personally seen.
This seems to be at least an informal convention. My question is whether this convention is more established?
Are map-makers just gravitating towards something that they think most people will instinctively understand, or are there additional reasons for them to follow this approach?
Background: All developer-created maps and most community-created maps in a particular computer game follow this convention. However a very small number of community-created maps have a Y-axis that goes in reverse, so 0,0 is in the top-left corner.
Not only do players often miss this, and thus misread coordinates, but even in-game tools misread these coordinates - both being one grid out on the Y coordinates.
For example, a point on the map, might be denoted as (0125, 0125) on the grid, but read as (0125, 0135) by the in-game tools.
So as a matter of curiousity, I'm trying to find out which of the following cases is most accurate:
- The map is 'wrong' - the convention is that 0,0 is bottom-left
- The game tools are 'wrong' - there are additional, competing conventions that use top-left as 0,0, and said tools ought to cater for this eventuality
- Neither are wrong - there are no firm conventions and though the many maps might tend towards 0,0=bottom-left, there are lots of other approaches commonly in use.
Note: A whole host of maps have A-Z+ as the x-axis and 0-n as the y-axis, with A1 being at the top-left, but I consider these as separate - these are intended to identify grids squares but not 6 and 8-figure coordinates.
I suspect the answer will be #3 but I will be interested to hear of any background/historical/supporting evidence.