Am 23.09.2015 um 01:26 schrieb Alex Barth: > ...... > > The Fairhurst Doctrine won't get us all the way on geocoding. It still > leaves open what happens in scenarios where elements of the same kind > in third party databases are geocoded with OSM data and others with > third party data. This is a highly relevant scenario as OSM data > particularly for geocoding (addresses, POIs) is usually not complete > enough. The ability to use OSM for geocoding and "backfill" it with > (non-license-compatible) third party data is exactly what would would > make a gradual adoption of OSM possible. > > .....
This is obviously off topic as it has little to do with comments and input on the proposed guideline (and the proposed guideline has nothing directly to do with geo-coding), however I'm curious: why wouldn't you want to provide OSM with a list of addresses that you tried to geo-code (successfully and non-successfully), for example as proposed in: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Geocoding_-_Guideline#The_Failover_Issue_and_Publishing_Derived_Datasets Simon
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
