Re: [talk-au] Getting is right
Hi Ian Um? Writing to a bureaucracy and reading their response thrills almost as much an month long recital of Vogon poetry. But will give the Minister a shot once I work out the approach. Tempted by something along the lines of During the Second World War Britain made great attempts to keep place names secert. Can you please tell (insert state naming registry authority) that the second world war is over. Something tells me that Minister will not mind but the mapping authorities might come under pressure from the commercial mappers to hold this information back. Stay tune but in the intervening ice age the lakes I have madly been mapping are like to have change. Cheers From: inas66+...@gmail.com Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 13:49:46 +1000 Subject: Re: [talk-au] Getting is right To: brussell...@live.com.au CC: talk-au@openstreetmap.org On 11 September 2012 12:42, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au wrote: I have been looking at few commercial mapping products closely and it is interesting to see the errors. In the cities it seems not so bad, but google maps on minor roads outside of major urban centres is a work of fiction. But I am curious that using the List in Tassie to check names is wrong? It is a Government service and one that actually forces name changes such as the removable of possessive names and even names it does not like. Russell Fallls for example was not correct but it subsequently decreed to be. The government surveyor stuffed that up many years ago. The Tasmanian Government clearly claims copyright. Why not write a nice letter to the General Manager, Information and Land Services. Set out that what OSM is, and ask for permission to check names against the LIST, and release the resulting data under a free and open licence. Say they will be attributed if they wish at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors. If they say yes, we have explicit permission. If they say no, then you probably weren't allowed to begin with. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Getting is right
On 11/09/12 13:49, Ian Sergeant wrote: The Tasmanian Government clearly claims copyright. Why not write a nice letter to the General Manager, Information and Land Services. Set out that what OSM is, and ask for permission to check names against the LIST, and release the resulting data under a free and open licence. Say they will be attributed if they wish at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors. If they say yes, we have explicit permission. If they say no, then you probably weren't allowed to begin with. And if you get no response then that means no. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Getting is right
Hi Brett, Your email prompted me to create something I have been meaning to do for a while: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/GettingPermission Hope it helps. Else, if you think meeting Vogon poetry [1] with Vogon poetry would be better, the License Working Group can help if you can get contact details and links to what the data is and how it is licensed. Mike Proud Vogon Bard [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogon On 11/09/2012 10:59, Brett Russell wrote: Hi Ian Um? Writing to a bureaucracy and reading their response thrills almost as much an month long recital of Vogon poetry. But will give the Minister a shot once I work out the approach. Tempted by something along the lines of During the Second World War Britain made great attempts to keep place names secert. Can you please tell (insert state naming registry authority) that the second world war is over. Something tells me that Minister will not mind but the mapping authorities might come under pressure from the commercial mappers to hold this information back. Stay tune but in the intervening ice age the lakes I have madly been mapping are like to have change. Cheers From: inas66+...@gmail.com Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 13:49:46 +1000 Subject: Re: [talk-au] Getting is right To: brussell...@live.com.au CC: talk-au@openstreetmap.org On 11 September 2012 12:42, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au wrote: I have been looking at few commercial mapping products closely and it is interesting to see the errors. In the cities it seems not so bad, but google maps on minor roads outside of major urban centres is a work of fiction. But I am curious that using the List in Tassie to check names is wrong? It is a Government service and one that actually forces name changes such as the removable of possessive names and even names it does not like. Russell Fallls for example was not correct but it subsequently decreed to be. The government surveyor stuffed that up many years ago. The Tasmanian Government clearly claims copyright. Why not write a nice letter to the General Manager, Information and Land Services. Set out that what OSM is, and ask for permission to check names against the LIST, and release the resulting data under a free and open licence. Say they will be attributed if they wish at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors. If they say yes, we have explicit permission. If they say no, then you probably weren't allowed to begin with. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Getting is right
Hi Looks good. I might just manage not to resort to chewing my own arm off to survive. Get the feeling that relentless pressure from many will get the walls to crumble. So I will be the first assault with my trumpet. Cheers Brett capable of proving that a musical instrument can be an instrument of terror. On 11/09/2012, at 9:30 PM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: Hi Brett, Your email prompted me to create something I have been meaning to do for a while: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/GettingPermission Hope it helps. Else, if you think meeting Vogon poetry [1] with Vogon poetry would be better, the License Working Group can help if you can get contact details and links to what the data is and how it is licensed. Mike Proud Vogon Bard [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogon On 11/09/2012 10:59, Brett Russell wrote: Hi Ian Um? Writing to a bureaucracy and reading their response thrills almost as much an month long recital of Vogon poetry. But will give the Minister a shot once I work out the approach. Tempted by something along the lines of During the Second World War Britain made great attempts to keep place names secert. Can you please tell (insert state naming registry authority) that the second world war is over. Something tells me that Minister will not mind but the mapping authorities might come under pressure from the commercial mappers to hold this information back. Stay tune but in the intervening ice age the lakes I have madly been mapping are like to have change. Cheers From: inas66+...@gmail.com Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 13:49:46 +1000 Subject: Re: [talk-au] Getting is right To: brussell...@live.com.au CC: talk-au@openstreetmap.org On 11 September 2012 12:42, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au wrote: I have been looking at few commercial mapping products closely and it is interesting to see the errors. In the cities it seems not so bad, but google maps on minor roads outside of major urban centres is a work of fiction. But I am curious that using the List in Tassie to check names is wrong? It is a Government service and one that actually forces name changes such as the removable of possessive names and even names it does not like. Russell Fallls for example was not correct but it subsequently decreed to be. The government surveyor stuffed that up many years ago. The Tasmanian Government clearly claims copyright. Why not write a nice letter to the General Manager, Information and Land Services. Set out that what OSM is, and ask for permission to check names against the LIST, and release the resulting data under a free and open licence. Say they will be attributed if they wish at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors. If they say yes, we have explicit permission. If they say no, then you probably weren't allowed to begin with. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Getting is right
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au wrote: Hi Looks good. I might just manage not to resort to chewing my own arm off to survive. [ ... ] Individual OSM contributors have approached dozens (or perhaps hundreds, now) of governments from tiny to big and found success. They've also found some regressive governments, but hey, we won't know until we try. Good luck. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Change to ODbL imminent
As just posted to blog.osmfoundation.org Please translate and propagate to all of our communities. http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2012/09/11/change-to-odbl-imminent/ Hello OpenStreetMap-pers, The change to ODbL is imminent. No, Really. We mean it. At long last we are at the end of the license change process. After four years of consultation, debate, revision, improvement, revision, debate, improvement, implementation, coding and mapping, mapping, mapping, it comes down to this final step. And this final step is an easy one, because we have all pitched in to do the hard work in advance. The last step is so easy, it will be a picnic. On Wednesday, 12 September 2012[1], generation of the next Planet file will begin. At that point, the API will switch over to ODbL and OpenStreetMap will be an ODbL-licensed Open Data project. API transactions and diffs consumed after that point will consist of ODbL-licensed OpenStreetMap data. About thirty hours later, that newly-generated planet file will be available from a href=http://planet.openstreetmap.org/;planet.openstreetmap.org/a for you to consume with your renderers, routers, QA systems, convertors and re-imaginers. You won't want to mix ODbL diffs with old license planets or diffs. Purge and reload your systems with the ODbL planet. Then consume the ODbL diffs. Planet will have a new directory structure. We're taking this opportunity to rationalize the layout of planet directories a bit. You should find it easier to get understand afterwards. This also means that you won't accidentally mix data of different licenses. Mappers Mappers shouldn't see a difference and won't have to change their mapping. Continue to improve OpenStreetMap by mapping from your own survey observations and using OSM-approved external sources. Never copy from other maps. Data consumers If you consume a href=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ODbL/License_Transition/Guidance_To_Data_Consumers;OpenStreetMap data and publish it, we have some guidance for you on the wiki/a. You'll want to consider your obligations under the new license and then proceed to purge your old data and switch to the new. Many consumers, such as custom renderers, will only need to update their attribution of OpenStreetMap to the new simplified attribution. Data consumers may time their upgrades to the new planet and diffs at their convenience. Best regards and happy mapping, The Communication Working Group [1] in case of rain, we won't cancel this picnic, just reschedule it for the subsequent Wednesday, 19 September 2012. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Getting is right
On 12/09/2012, at 2:45 AM, Richard Weait wrote: Individual OSM contributors have approached dozens (or perhaps hundreds, now) of governments from tiny to big and found success. They've also found some regressive governments, but hey, we won't know until we try. Good luck. I've been wanting to contact my own local government about OSM-related matters, but what to say about the license? Do I tell them it's CC-BY-SA, only to cause them confusion when it changes... or make me look like an idiot when they visit the website in the next X days and see that it is something different... or confuse them by saying it's CC-BY-SA right now, but it's going to change to ODbL at some unknown point... Hence I've delayed a lot of such communication (for MONTHS now). Another example - I have a friend doing tertiary studies who had to use content from the internet and explain in his assignment why it was not breaching copyright law to use it. I initially thought OSM would be great for such an assignment, but then reconsidered because he may claim in the assignment that the data is CC-BY-SA, but if/when the teacher goes to check it all out -- for all we know by then it will have changed to ODbL... then he's marked down as a result of giving inaccurate information. These are real practical uncertainties of this license limbo period. Hopefully we can move ahead with certainty very soon. BJ ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Few questions about tagging ways in Australia
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Australian copyright law recognises that copyright can subsist in compilation of facts. Once copyright subsists, the only test is substantial part. Ok, for the sake of argument, how would provider A demonstrate that OSM's data was made by copying its compilation of facts, when providers B and C contain exactly the same facts? For the sake of argument, this has been argued to death on talk@ and legaltalk@ for years. It's a settled matter. Australian copyright law is not relevant[1], it is the globally accepted OSM rule that we do not copy from other maps. We do not copy from any other sources. With the narrow exception of where we have explicit permission. That is the OpenStreetMap way. We don't have to like it, when a local matter MIGHT permit a different interpretation. We just have to accept that We Do Not Copy From Other Sources. and it is not a matter for local rules lawyering. There are other hard and fast rules too, in OSM. Don't engage in edit wars. Treat each other nicely. And then we can express our creativity and genius by fighting over whether this particular way is tertiary or secondary. If you've strong feelings on this topic, and some expertise in the matter, join the License Working Group and start building support for a more flexible set of rules for mappers. Best regards and happy mapping, Richard [1] not on it's own. This is a global project. We have to consider as many jurisdictions, simultaneously as we can. And we all have to live with the consensus. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Getting is right
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Ben Johnson tangarar...@gmail.com wrote: On 12/09/2012, at 2:45 AM, Richard Weait wrote: Individual OSM contributors have approached dozens (or perhaps hundreds, now) of governments from tiny to big and found success. They've also found some regressive governments, but hey, we won't know until we try. Good luck. I've been wanting to contact my own local government about OSM-related matters, but what to say about the license? [ ... ] It's not that tough compared with getting their attention. :-) Granted, it will be simpler to explain next week, after the transition. When we were first talking with the Canadian national mapping agency, we explained the license change process to them. They were fine with it and have been not just licensing to OSM but participating in OSM for years now. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
