Re: [Talk-GB] OS OpenData and accepting the new contributor terms
On 18 June 2011 15:01, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: In other words, for the LWG, if data is compatible with *current* license terms, then there is no problem contributing it and accepting the contributor terms. Many thanks for this. If that's how the Contributor Terms are to be interpreted then that's fantastic, as it means I personally only need to worry about OS OpenData being compatible with CC-By-SA -- which I believe there's no issue with at all. One has to wonder why LWG has taken so long to explain this though -- if you'd told me this when I first emailed you with my argument as to why OS OpenData wasn't compatible with Clause 2 of the CTs, you'd have saved a lot of trouble. Nevertheless, LWG's interpretation seems contrary to what a lot of people were assuming. In particular, Francis Davey, the only Lawyer that I know of who's publicly discussed the CTs, seems to take the position that clause 2 applies to all contributions in his posts on legal-talk. (In particular, he stated that you couldn't comply with the CTs and make use of CC-By licensed data.) NearMap's lawyers also apparently took the view that their CC-By-SA data wasn't compatible with the CTs because of clause 2, and this wasn't challenged by LWG. At worst the CTs are incorrectly drafted, and at best they're sufficiently ambiguous that a trained lawyers interpret them in a completely different manner to LWG. This really needs addressing, and I'd like to see it done before the move to phase 4, or at least as quickly as possible thereafter. You really should make sure the wording of contracts correctly express your intentions before you ask people to sign them. I still take the view that *as the CTs are written* clause 2 would apply to all contributions, which makes me uncomfortable signing them. However, since the CTs represent a contract between myself and OSMF, if it can be confirmed (eg by a statement from the OSMF chairman) that your statement about the CTs is the official policy of OSMF, then I'd be prepared to sign them based on that assurance. Best wishes, Robert. -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Potlatch 2.2
Hi all, I'm pleased to announce Potlatch 2.2 is live. New features include: - Greatly improved vector background layer support (load shapefiles in the background and bring elements through one-by-one), including reprojection from OSGB - Control-drag an area to select multiple elements - MapCSS 0.2 support - Highlight 'merged' tags (e.g. name=High Street;Main Road) - 'View data' button in the upload progress dialogue, so you can select, copy and paste the changeset XML - Timed reminders to save your work! - Lots of bugfixes and little improvements As ever, thanks to everyone who's helped, particularly Andy (A) who contributed lots to the unglamorous refactoring behind the vector background layer improvements. There's also a special mode to show the licence status of the elements you're editing. This will help you not to waste time editing an element that may be deleted later, and make it easier to get areas ODbL-ready. To use it, simply choose 'Show licence status' from the Options dialogue, and make sure you're editing with the standard Potlatch map style. It will show: - Elements where version 1 was created by someone who's declined ODbL+CT: solid red - Elements where a later version was edited by a decliner: transparent red - Elements with a version edited by someone who hasn't decided yet: transparent orange (As yet it only shows node/way status, not relations.) Results are from wtfe.gryph.de. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Potlatch 2.2
On 19/06/2011 18:12, Richard Fairhurst wrote: To use it, simply choose 'Show licence status' from the Options dialogue, and make sure you're editing with the standard Potlatch map style. It will show: - Elements where version 1 was created by someone who's declined ODbL+CT: solid red - Elements where a later version was edited by a decliner: transparent red - Elements with a version edited by someone who hasn't decided yet: transparent orange (As yet it only shows node/way status, not relations.) Results are from wtfe.gryph.de. Hmm - not seeing any difference here. The browser (FF4 on Windows 7) does display Transferring data from wtfe.gryph.de in the corner though - maybe gryph.de is struggling under the load (with it being late Sunday in Europe)? Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what's supposed to happen... Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
