Re: [Talk-ca] User r_coastlines
If the source of data in jeopardy is CanVec do we need to remove it given that there are no issues with CanVec data being in OSM? On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Andrew Allison andrew.alli...@gmail.comwrote: Hello: Unless I'm missing something or it's a bug Using the OSM Inspector tool. The coastline data as going to be removed, or at least a significant amount. http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-81.24969lat=42.97091zoom=13overlays=overview,wtfe_point_harmless,wtfe_line_harmless,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_line_created There is a lot of data being flagged by users who haven't been around in years. Sigh Andrew ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] User r_coastlines
Yes because it is the individual contributor who has to accept the OSM's new licensing terms, the data was not imported directly from CANVEC into OSM. As a Canadian tax payer I'm not quite certain I like the idea of OSM having the power to re-license Government data but that is a separate issue. Cheerio John On 19 December 2011 13:33, Gordon Dewis gor...@pinetree.org wrote: If the source of data in jeopardy is CanVec do we need to remove it given that there are no issues with CanVec data being in OSM? On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Andrew Allison andrew.alli...@gmail.com wrote: Hello: Unless I'm missing something or it's a bug Using the OSM Inspector tool. The coastline data as going to be removed, or at least a significant amount. http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-81.24969lat=42.97091zoom=13overlays=overview,wtfe_point_harmless,wtfe_line_harmless,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_line_created There is a lot of data being flagged by users who haven't been around in years. Sigh Andrew ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] User r_coastlines
On 19-12-2011 20:38, john whelan wrote: Yes because it is the individual contributor who has to accept the OSM's new licensing terms, the data was not imported directly from CANVEC into OSM. As a Canadian tax payer I'm not quite certain I like the idea of OSM having the power to re-license Government data but that is a separate issue. John, Whether you like it or not, NRCan explicitly allows it, as long as they are attributed as the source: /All distributed data should be accessed and used relatively to the GeoGratis Unrestricted Use Licence Agreement http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/licence.jsp. With this licence, users are granted a non-exclusive, fully paid, royalty-free right and licence to exercise all intellectual property rights in the data. This includes the right to use, incorporate, sublicense (with further right of sublicensing), modify, improve, further develop, and distribute the data; and to manufacture and/or distribute Derivative Products. The Licensee shall identify the source of the Data, in the following manner, where any of the Data are redistributed, or contained within Derivative Products: © Department of Natural Resources Canada. All rights reserved. / See: http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/index.html Furthermore, NRCan is even spending your tax dollars to facilitate incorporating their data into OSM. Personally, as a former Canadian tax payer I can say that what NRCan does is one of the best ways of my tax dollars being spent :) It's too bad that the national mapping agency which is currently being funded by my tax euros takes a way less proactive stance towards open data. At least by decree of our Ministry of Economy, Agriculture and Innovation, a lot of geospatial and other data will be open in a few weeks :) Every time when your government is doing something you don't like, are you going to share that with the world as well? Frank ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] User r_coastlines
On 19-12-2011 18:57, Andrew Allison wrote: Hello: Unless I'm missing something or it's a bug Using the OSM Inspector tool. The coastline data as going to be removed, or at least a significant amount. http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-81.24969lat=42.97091zoom=13overlays=overview,wtfe_point_harmless,wtfe_line_harmless,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_line_created There is a lot of data being flagged by users who haven't been around in years. Sigh Andrew ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca Hi Andrew, I'm not sure, but r_coastlines only shows up as a value for the created_by tag, which is a deprecated tag for programs / scripts to edit/import data in OSM. The PGS coastline data import doesn't seem to be assigned to a user. So, I would say that this data will remain in OSM, although I don't know for sure if this is true. The data itself comes from the US NGA, so it is Public Domain. See [1] for details. The link you're showing, isn't showing coastlines, but data from London, ON, which has been contributed by RogueGPSer. He has (indeed) not decided about relicensing. [2] Regards, Frank [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/PGS [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/RogueGPSer ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] User r_coastlines
But recently I noted that the CANVEC tags are being removed. Two people in the talk-ca list mentioned recently they had done so. Cheerio John On 19 December 2011 15:38, Frank Steggink stegg...@steggink.org wrote: On 19-12-2011 20:38, john whelan wrote: Yes because it is the individual contributor who has to accept the OSM's new licensing terms, the data was not imported directly from CANVEC into OSM. As a Canadian tax payer I'm not quite certain I like the idea of OSM having the power to re-license Government data but that is a separate issue. John, Whether you like it or not, NRCan explicitly allows it, as long as they are attributed as the source: /All distributed data should be accessed and used relatively to the GeoGratis Unrestricted Use Licence Agreement http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/ **geogratis/en/licence.jsphttp://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/licence.jsp. With this licence, users are granted a non-exclusive, fully paid, royalty-free right and licence to exercise all intellectual property rights in the data. This includes the right to use, incorporate, sublicense (with further right of sublicensing), modify, improve, further develop, and distribute the data; and to manufacture and/or distribute Derivative Products. The Licensee shall identify the source of the Data, in the following manner, where any of the Data are redistributed, or contained within Derivative Products: © Department of Natural Resources Canada. All rights reserved. / See: http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/**geogratis/en/index.htmlhttp://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/index.html Furthermore, NRCan is even spending your tax dollars to facilitate incorporating their data into OSM. Personally, as a former Canadian tax payer I can say that what NRCan does is one of the best ways of my tax dollars being spent :) It's too bad that the national mapping agency which is currently being funded by my tax euros takes a way less proactive stance towards open data. At least by decree of our Ministry of Economy, Agriculture and Innovation, a lot of geospatial and other data will be open in a few weeks :) Every time when your government is doing something you don't like, are you going to share that with the world as well? Frank __**_ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-cahttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Canvec source tags (was: User r_coastlines)
On 19-12-2011 22:20, john whelan wrote: But recently I noted that the CANVEC tags are being removed. Two people in the talk-ca list mentioned recently they had done so. Cheerio John According to my mailbox the answers were different. Jonathan mentioned that he used other data sources, so the data wasn't significantly Canvec anymore. Gordon didn't mention he removed tags, he just offered a possible reason. As to your question in that thread, and not knowing the user you were referring to, I was just wondering whether you sent him/her a PM and asked about the reason (but I didn't bother to post that to the mailing list). So, did you ask that user directly? Also Bing has stated that they should be attributed. That is one of the conditions they provided their imagery to OSM. Of course everyone knows that the source tags aren't absolute guarantees. It is also not practical to enforce them. If that would happen, OSM would not develop as it does right now, so although I would oppose removing source tags knowingly (when the data is not altered significantly), there are many shades of grey. It is often hard to draw a boundary, so we have to rely on the good intentions of the mappers. That makes a project like OSM both challenging and charming :) Regards, Frank ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canvec source tags
On 19-12-2011 22:40, Frank Steggink wrote: On 19-12-2011 22:20, john whelan wrote: But recently I noted that the CANVEC tags are being removed. Two people in the talk-ca list mentioned recently they had done so. Cheerio John According to my mailbox the answers were different. Jonathan mentioned that he used other data sources, so the data wasn't significantly Canvec anymore. Gordon didn't mention he removed tags, he just offered a possible reason. As to your question in that thread, and not knowing the user you were referring to, I was just wondering whether you sent him/her a PM and asked about the reason (but I didn't bother to post that to the mailing list). So, did you ask that user directly? Also Bing has stated that they should be attributed. That is one of the conditions they provided their imagery to OSM. Of course everyone knows that the source tags aren't absolute guarantees. It is also not practical to enforce them. If that would happen, OSM would not develop as it does right now, so although I would oppose removing source tags knowingly (when the data is not altered significantly), there are many shades of grey. It is often hard to draw a boundary, so we have to rely on the good intentions of the mappers. That makes a project like OSM both challenging and charming :) Regards, Frank John, I've got a question for you. I'm planning to (finally) clean up the forests / residential areas in Quebec City for some time. [1] I'll probably do this around Christmas. For this task I'll rely on the Bing imagery. How should I tag the polygons I create / modify? Should I leave Canvec intact as a source, use Bing, or should I cut up the polygons in two? The only difference between the new parts will be the attribution. I usually use a mixed tag in such cases (like source=Canvec;Bing). But since OSM has many users, many which are not experienced and/or do not care about these issues, can you realistically expect that everyone will take care about attribution properly? Regards, Frank [1] http://osm.org/go/cKZOMVgi- ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] User r_coastlines
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:20 PM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote: But recently I noted that the CANVEC tags are being removed. Two people in the talk-ca list mentioned recently they had done so. Yes. All tags may be modified. That's the point of OSM data; it is a wiki, you know? :-) The formal attribution to NRCan, who have been awesome in every transaction I've had with them, is on the Copyright page, which is not a wiki. http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright NRCan attribution is also shown on the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Canvec source tags
If I have my OSM hat on there is no issue, one accepts that because of the large number of users and varying experience levels that not everything will be correctly tagged or even entered but one hopes that over time on average the map will be refined to a better state. With my taxpayer hat on then I'd much prefer to see the map data retain its CANVEC tags, at least I can see my tax dollars in action. With my end user of the data hat on I'm more likely to trust the accuracy of roads that come from CANVEC than those drawn in from satellite imagery. Actually I trust Bing derived roads and footpaths as well. So tags saying CANVEC or Bing are helpful to give an indication of trustworthiness. Yes I know they don't show on the web tiles but I'm not the only person who uses JOSM with a local copy of the data to extract more information from the map such as web site tags etc. It all depends on the requirements and one of the problems for Indian Affairs is there are 500,000 Indians all with different ideas and no consensus on requirements, I think there are now 500,000 people who have contributed to OSM and I don't think there is any consensus on what we are trying to do. I wonder if 500,000 is some magic number. I think CANVEC has made a huge contribution to OSM in Canada, compared to the UK for example I looked up one of my old friends living near Leeds. There was a main road that ran quite close but practically no residential roads in the area. I think we can simply agree to disagree for the moment. Cheerio John On 19 December 2011 16:46, Frank Steggink stegg...@steggink.org wrote: On 19-12-2011 22:40, Frank Steggink wrote: On 19-12-2011 22:20, john whelan wrote: But recently I noted that the CANVEC tags are being removed. Two people in the talk-ca list mentioned recently they had done so. Cheerio John According to my mailbox the answers were different. Jonathan mentioned that he used other data sources, so the data wasn't significantly Canvec anymore. Gordon didn't mention he removed tags, he just offered a possible reason. As to your question in that thread, and not knowing the user you were referring to, I was just wondering whether you sent him/her a PM and asked about the reason (but I didn't bother to post that to the mailing list). So, did you ask that user directly? Also Bing has stated that they should be attributed. That is one of the conditions they provided their imagery to OSM. Of course everyone knows that the source tags aren't absolute guarantees. It is also not practical to enforce them. If that would happen, OSM would not develop as it does right now, so although I would oppose removing source tags knowingly (when the data is not altered significantly), there are many shades of grey. It is often hard to draw a boundary, so we have to rely on the good intentions of the mappers. That makes a project like OSM both challenging and charming :) Regards, Frank John, I've got a question for you. I'm planning to (finally) clean up the forests / residential areas in Quebec City for some time. [1] I'll probably do this around Christmas. For this task I'll rely on the Bing imagery. How should I tag the polygons I create / modify? Should I leave Canvec intact as a source, use Bing, or should I cut up the polygons in two? The only difference between the new parts will be the attribution. I usually use a mixed tag in such cases (like source=Canvec;Bing). But since OSM has many users, many which are not experienced and/or do not care about these issues, can you realistically expect that everyone will take care about attribution properly? Regards, Frank [1] http://osm.org/go/cKZOMVgi- __**_ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-cahttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
