[talk-au] license change map
Although the situation does look dire for Australian cities Hi Simon, I think that the situation may may not be quite as dire as you suspect. I believe that most of the yellowness in Australia is due to the max speed bot that added just one tag to a huge number of roads. If this bot's actions are discounted, or indeed just simply reverted, then I suspect that there would be a significant shift to the green end of the spectrum. Anotgher compliant bot could re-add these tags later. Certainly, it unfortunately appears that there will be whole villages/towns that will remain red. These will need to be resurveyed. I believe that this will take about one year (or maybe two at the most) but considereing OSM's huge importance to society, I do not see this as a big issue. In fact it would give me a good reason to visit towns that I have not yet seen since I've run out of roads to survey. If nearmap derived data is not re-licenced to the ODBL then in Canberra we will lose a lot of sidewalks etc. Since walking is now a big part of my daily exercise regime, I look forward to walking all of Canberra. Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 09:48:11 +1100 Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: Certainly, it unfortunately appears that there will be whole villages/towns that will remain red. These will need to be resurveyed. I believe that this will take about one year (or maybe two at the most) I think you are over hopeful here. To do what I have done has taken 3 years. It covers a vast area which people rarely visit as well as areas which are more often travelled. I am not changing from CC-by-SA, and others do feel the same way, The green / yellow / red map only covered ways, and not nodes. I would survey a lot of nodes, marking POI and that work too would be discarded from ODBL-OSM. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
Two years or 3 its not that important osm will recover. Community based mapping is too important to be abandoned for reliance on commercial mapping organisations. Its also a lot of fun which takes the edge off having to re-map areas. I am however kind of surprised at the attitude by some that seems to relish the removal of data from OSM. Leaving it in would result in no loss to the individual at all even if they were to continue mapping on another community based map project. --- On Sun, 21/11/10, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: From: Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net Subject: Re: [talk-au] license change map To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Received: Sunday, 21 November, 2010, 10:13 AM On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 09:48:11 +1100 Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: Certainly, it unfortunately appears that there will be whole villages/towns that will remain red. These will need to be resurveyed. I believe that this will take about one year (or maybe two at the most) I think you are over hopeful here. To do what I have done has taken 3 years. It covers a vast area which people rarely visit as well as areas which are more often travelled. I am not changing from CC-by-SA, and others do feel the same way, The green / yellow / red map only covered ways, and not nodes. I would survey a lot of nodes, marking POI and that work too would be discarded from ODBL-OSM. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 17:00:30 -0800 (PST) Neil Penman ianaf4...@yahoo.com wrote: Two years or 3 its not that important osm will recover. Community based mapping is too important to be abandoned for reliance on commercial mapping organisations. Its also a lot of fun which takes the edge off having to re-map areas. I am however kind of surprised at the attitude by some that seems to relish the removal of data from OSM. Leaving it in would result in no loss to the individual at all even if they were to continue mapping on another community based map project. I find the attitude of those who wish to alter the licence, knowing that a large quantity of data is incompatible, the most community destroying thing in the argument. If Nick wishes to remap he can do as he pleases. I have a different interpretation of the effect of the default residential speed limit change on the red : yellow : green map, that it would have converted some parts to yellow IF the other mapper(s) involved were intending to relicense under ODBL. Red lines represent CC-by-SA data with no mapper involved who has declared an intention to join the ODBL/CT group. Yellow is a mixture, from the history at the date at which the data was downloaded. The system is not perfect - when a way is split the history only goes on one part. I have also noted a dual carriageway, both directions mapped by same mapper with no other mapper involvement, with one lane red and one lane yellow. Nodes, and hence POI, had to be ignored for the process, but considering the source of the node may be more accurate than the source of the way. I'm not sure that OSM will recover, as there is a distinct possibility that OSM will splinter into so many parts that it does not recover. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
In my opinion OSM will never recover to the same point that it is at today if data is removed for the simple reason that most, if not all government data will need to be removed, and there is no way that private mappers can replace this as there are no physical markings on the ground, or water as the case may be. I am also kind of surprised at the attitude by some that seem to relish the removal of data from OSM. There is no advantage to changing the license, irrepearable damage if the license is changed. People might remap areas for a different license, which on the face of it is very petty, or they may simply add to data for a different mapping project, which is inherently better due to extra data. It is a bit like BSD and Linux. Not many people are even aware that Apple use BSD as their foundation, while Linux, Apple and anyone else can use any part of BSD, BSD is by itself. Linux started long after BSD, yet it is very much stronger because of its license. As soon as OSM delete the CC-by-SA data, a number of forks will appear, including FOSM. http://www.fosm.org/ There will be a shakedown period of about a year while different forks fight for critical mass, then there will only be one. The new project will include data from OSM, as well as a lot of CC-by-SA data, making it the best map for public use in both the short and long term. OSM will only have a slight advantage in that OSM is better known, but that advantage will quickly fade as the new project will be advertised where ever it is used, while OSM will probably be rebranded by whoever uses it. The longer new uses do not have the option of a CC-by-SA license, the more people will just not start mapping, and the ratio of public domain data to CC-by-SA data will slightly drift towards the public domain simply due to the lack of other new users using the CC-by-SA data license. If OSM gave people a choice, both when adding data and when viewing maps, or using the data in other ways, all of this in fighting would simply have no point. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On 21/11/2010 12:18 PM, Andrew Laughton wrote: In my opinion OSM will never recover to the same point that it is at today if data is removed for the simple reason that most, if not all government data will need to be removed, Why would government data need to be removed? Australian government geodata, for example, is definitely migrating to CC BY (no SA). Last I looked this is compatible with CC BY-SA and (in spirit) ODbL. It is a bit like BSD and Linux. Not many people are even aware that Apple use BSD as their foundation, while Linux, Apple and anyone else can use any part of BSD, BSD is by itself. Linux started long after BSD, yet it is very much stronger because of its license. This result won't necessarily translate to geodata. Software is subject to patents, rightly or wrongly. In contrast, the collection methods for geodata are pretty much all covered by prior art. Also, would you argue that Apple has a more polished product than anything in the Linux family? Brendan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 12:29:30 +1000 Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au wrote: Also, would you argue that Apple has a more polished product than anything in the Linux family? I don't use apple anything, so cannot speak from experience. I know they have the most locked-down model and that they can expertly create demand for their products. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
In my opinion OSM will never recover to the same point that it is at today if data is removed for the simple reason that most, if not all government data will need to be removed, Why would government data need to be removed? Australian government geodata, for example, is definitely migrating to CC BY (no SA). Last I looked this is compatible with CC BY-SA and (in spirit) ODbL. I am not saying government geodata is not compatible with CC BY-SA, if it was not it should not be there in the first place. Being (in spirit) compatible with ODbL is not the same as being compatible, and it would need to be removed. It is a bit like BSD and Linux. Not many people are even aware that Apple use BSD as their foundation, while Linux, Apple and anyone else can use any part of BSD, BSD is by itself. Linux started long after BSD, yet it is very much stronger because of its license. This result won't necessarily translate to geodata. Software is subject to patents, rightly or wrongly. In contrast, the collection methods for geodata are pretty much all covered by prior art. Yes some software is subject to patents, but this is not the reason people and companies chose this license. They chose this license so that no one else can take their work, and sell it as their own, and then deny the original author access to improvements, which is very relevant to this license discussion. Also, would you argue that Apple has a more polished product than anything in the Linux family? I am not sure of your point here, and even less sure that it has anything to do with OSM. Apple has it's strong points, as does Linux, depending on what you are looking for in an operating system. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au wrote: On 21/11/2010 12:18 PM, Andrew Laughton wrote: In my opinion OSM will never recover to the same point that it is at today if data is removed for the simple reason that most, if not all government data will need to be removed, Why would government data need to be removed? Australian government geodata, for example, is definitely migrating to CC BY (no SA). Last I looked this is compatible with CC BY-SA and (in spirit) ODbL. There was a issue being explored about the fact that the Contributor Terms (rather than ODbL itself) allowed relicencing but didn't explicitly ensure that attribution was maintained: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms/Open_Issues#Incompatibility_with_CC-BY_.2F_Attribution_Data Attribution is a big thing to comply with the spirit of the government data releases but the respondent on that wiki page states Should a data donor feel that this [attribution on derived works] is important, then probably that data should not be in OSM, no matter what license we use.. This seems out of touch with the situation on the ground; one of the big things any data donor is going to get out of providing their data is free advertising for how public minded they are. I would think the better solution is to have the attribution simplified like Google Maps does. eg. Google Maps for canberra says Copyright PSMA, MapQuest etc. OSM post-ODbL could have a technical solution that suggests to derivative users (Mapnik etc.) if you want to make a map of data between -35.15, 149.00 and -35.3, 149.25, it should have Source: OSM Contributors, ABS, Geoscience Australia on it. In the case of Australia, we also have stuff like the Service Stations and I don't know the attribution requirements on those but I'm sure that there aren't so many data imports that there would be difficulty attributing them when they are visible. ie. The ABS suburbs aren't visible on a world map but the UN coastline boundaries are so give credit where credit is due. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
Wouldn't this problem be easier to manage if each CC-BY data source was kept in separate data store which is combined as a layer on the client or tile server? These layers could then be attributed when or if they are actually shown. This would also simplify the situation where data such as the postcode boundaries is being attributed to the ABS but has been changed by an OSM mapper, possibly not for the better, as well as allowing us to easily incorporate updates. From: Alex (Maxious) Sadleir maxi...@gmail.com To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 21 November, 2010 3:13:16 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] license change map ... There was a issue being explored about the fact that the Contributor Terms (rather than ODbL itself) allowed relicencing but didn't explicitly ensure that attribution was maintained: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms/Open_Issues#Incompatibility_with_CC-BY_.2F_Attribution_Data Attribution is a big thing to comply with the spirit of the government data releases but the respondent on that wiki page states Should a data donor feel that this [attribution on derived works] is important, then probably that data should not be in OSM, no matter what license we use.. This seems out of touch with the situation on the ground; one of the big things any data donor is going to get out of providing their data is free advertising for how public minded they are. I would think the better solution is to have the attribution simplified like Google Maps does. eg. Google Maps for canberra says Copyright PSMA, MapQuest etc. OSM post-ODbL could have a technical solution that suggests to derivative users (Mapnik etc.) if you want to make a map of data between -35.15, 149.00 and -35.3, 149.25, it should have Source: OSM Contributors, ABS, Geoscience Australia on it. In the case of Australia, we also have stuff like the Service Stations and I don't know the attribution requirements on those but I'm sure that there aren't so many data imports that there would be difficulty attributing them when they are visible. ie. The ABS suburbs aren't visible on a world map but the UN coastline boundaries are so give credit where credit is due. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
Yup, geocommons.com does this. Just upload the data (in small pieces) to geocommons, and the community can use the data as layers, searching for what i available. I use openJUMP, an easy program to learn, to view shp files, and extract a small area and separating it from feature attribute. cheers, sam On 11/20/10, Neil Penman ianaf4...@yahoo.com wrote: Wouldn't this problem be easier to manage if each CC-BY data source was kept in separate data store which is combined as a layer on the client or tile server? These layers could then be attributed when or if they are actually shown. This would also simplify the situation where data such as the postcode boundaries is being attributed to the ABS but has been changed by an OSM mapper, possibly not for the better, as well as allowing us to easily incorporate updates. From: Alex (Maxious) Sadleir maxi...@gmail.com To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 21 November, 2010 3:13:16 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] license change map ... There was a issue being explored about the fact that the Contributor Terms (rather than ODbL itself) allowed relicencing but didn't explicitly ensure that attribution was maintained: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms/Open_Issues#Incompatibility_with_CC-BY_.2F_Attribution_Data Attribution is a big thing to comply with the spirit of the government data releases but the respondent on that wiki page states Should a data donor feel that this [attribution on derived works] is important, then probably that data should not be in OSM, no matter what license we use.. This seems out of touch with the situation on the ground; one of the big things any data donor is going to get out of providing their data is free advertising for how public minded they are. I would think the better solution is to have the attribution simplified like Google Maps does. eg. Google Maps for canberra says Copyright PSMA, MapQuest etc. OSM post-ODbL could have a technical solution that suggests to derivative users (Mapnik etc.) if you want to make a map of data between -35.15, 149.00 and -35.3, 149.25, it should have Source: OSM Contributors, ABS, Geoscience Australia on it. In the case of Australia, we also have stuff like the Service Stations and I don't know the attribution requirements on those but I'm sure that there aren't so many data imports that there would be difficulty attributing them when they are visible. ie. The ABS suburbs aren't visible on a world map but the UN coastline boundaries are so give credit where credit is due. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: samvekemans IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room) @Acrosscanadatrails ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 21:59:42 -0800 (PST) Neil Penman ianaf4...@yahoo.com wrote: Wouldn't this problem be easier to manage if each CC-BY data source was kept in separate data store which is combined as a layer on the client or tile server? I think it is reasonable to suggest alternate methods of keeping and displaying data, and to consider moves away from the monolithic world database. We can come to agreements then about licences but i'm sure that somewhere layering stuff with different licences is against one of the licence's conditions ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
