(continuing down the OSM tangent...) I was thinking the same thing, Reid, but in the metadata for the MN DOT roads, under Use Constraints, it says "By accepting this data, the user agrees not to transmit this data or provide access to it or any part of it to another party unless the user shall include with the data a copy of the disclaimer." Does that rule out use in something like OSM?
Brad > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:06:39 -0500 > From: Reid Priedhorsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [Geowanking] Re: California roads data > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Mikel Maron wrote: >> Hi Jennifer >> >> Another option could be OpenStretMap, http://www.openstreetmap.org/ >> >> We have long intended to jump start in the US by uploading TIGER into >> the OSM database. Once in OSM, the data is ready to be improved apon .. >> creation of custom basemaps is what it's all about. > > Many states maintain base maps which are better than TIGER. I think it > would be better to do this on a state-by-state basis. Here in Minnesota > you can download the data from MNDOT. > > For the OP: I'm not sure if Caltrans is the CA equivalent of MNDOT, but > that's where I'd start. > > Good luck, > > Reid > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking > > > End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 40, Issue 18 > ****************************************** > _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
