On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:43:57AM -0700, Paul Norman wrote: > in a RDBMS table. For example, you could use a RDBMS as a k-v > store and store both OSM data and a completely unrelated set > of photos in it. On the other hand, you could use a schema which
I guess I was just trying to make the (trivial?) point that data coexistant in an RDBMS or even within a table therein has no bearing on whether it is derivative of OSM data. > I still believe it's best to avoid talking about a technology-specific > way of storing databases, particularly when the OSM database comes as > an XML file, which is closer to a set of flat text files than an RDBMS > in many ways. Well, if most consumers of your data are like me, technology-specific references are helpful. > I'm not sure what you mean. The meta-data included in planet.osm is part of > the OSM map database, although most consumers drop the user-related metadata > because it unnecessary for most applications. I thought that OSM does not consider the user data derivative and does not distribute it (or, is not compelled to, by the ODBL). > Well, in RDBMS terms SELECT produces a rowset which is closer to a table, > not a "database". My point was that select produces a rowset that may exclude columns. John _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
