Hi Jon, As OSM is changing data licence on 1st April [1] there has been an un-coordinated effort underway globally to replace OSM data that is incompatible with the new licence. The primary reason for incompatibility is where a mapper has declined (or not yet decided) to sign up to the contributor terms that go with the new licence. As you signed up to OSM in the last 6 months you are already contributing under the new terms anyway.
Some locations need more remapping work than others and generally we have been lucky in the west midlands that we haven't had too much to look at. Coventry was an exception however and Rob and others have done sterling work to bring the data into a better state for relicensing come 1st April. There are a number of tools to check for issues with existing data. The one I use most is Geofabrik's OSM Inspector tool [2] When remapping objects you need to remember that the same rules apply to mapping from scratch, ie no use of copyright data etc. Copying the existing data to new objects is not satisfactory either. So limit sources to such information as the OS Opendata products and BING imagery etc. or of course your own survey. Unless you are familiar with what you are doing I'd steer away from using the ODBL=clean tag on existing objects. There is some concern within the wider OSM community that some mappers have been using this tag inappropriately which reduces confidence that the items tagged as such are truly compatible with the new licence. Cheers Andy [1] http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/We_Are_Changing_The_License [2] http://is.gd/OCEI2G (shortend URL from permalink) > -----Original Message----- > From: Big Fat Frog [mailto:bigfatfro...@gmail.com] > Sent: 25 March 2012 12:19 > To: talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Remapping efforts in Coventry > > Can someone help me on the background to this effort? What are these > licensing issues and the tool that is linked, is that a private tool or is is > provided for use by anyone? > > I've only been doing this mapping for 6 months or so and am still trying to get > to know what tools are available and what efforts are going on. > > Cheers > > BTW I'm based in Redditch, although this w/e I'm down in North London! > > Jon > (bigfatfrog67) > > On 23/03/2012 20:16, Rob Nickerson wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > Over the last few weeks there has been a lot of effort made on > > remapping Coventry so that it remains in a reasonable state when we > > shift to the new license/contributor terms. If you can remember the > > amount of bad orange & red ways from a month ago, take a look on [1] > > to see the fantastic amount of work that has been done. We have had > > several users contributing, both in replacing v1 roads and generally > > taking the opportunity to improve the map (e.g. using Bing imagery). > > > > I have recently focused on examining the history of many of the 'orange' > > status roads, and applying the odbl=clean tag when appropriate. Many > > of these roads were flagged as orange due to highway=unclassified > > being changed to highway=residential. As this is deemed a trivial edit > > (as it is clear from Bing which roads are residential), I have marked > > them as clean (this easily took longer than had I been the original > > mapper setting the residential tag as I had to examine the history of > > each way to check for other non-relicensable edits :-( ) > > > > I have (99%) completed this task now - Thus any objects still > > highlighted on [1] will likely need a ground survey as the > > non-compliant tags can not be determined from Bing. This includes: > > > > 1. Places of Worship (marked on OS StreetView but often requires a > > site visit for the name) 2. A couple of schools (as above) 3. Post > > Boxes 4. A few roads with restrictions (e.g. maxheight/maxweight) > > > > I am away for the following week so will unfortunately not be able to > > continue ground surveys to collect this information. If anyone has the > > time then that would be much appreciated, otherwise we can fill in the > > missing info at a later date :-) > > > > > > Relations > > -------------- > > Some relations (bus routes) may be missing a few roads come April. I > > have yet to have a look at relations but believe that if you view the > > relations history (on DeepDiff or JOSM) and it is ok then you can > > apply the odbl=clean tag to the RELATION (i.e. not the individual roads). > > Seeing as Curran1980 appears to have recently updated all bus routes > > after the network changes in February, you could easily argue that > > they can all be marked as clean (?). > > > > > > Thanks again to everyone helping out with remapping efforts - even if > > just a few nodes. > > > > Cheers, > > RobJN > > > > [1] > > http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfe&lon=- > 1.52133&lat=52.41458&zo > > > om=12&overlays=overview,wtfe_line_inrelation,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe > _ > > > line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_creat > > ed_cp,wtfe_line_created > > <http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfe&lon=- > 1.52133&lat=52.41458&z > > > oom=12&overlays=overview,wtfe_line_inrelation,wtfe_point_modified,wtf > e > > > _line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_crea > > ted_cp,wtfe_line_created> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list > > Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list > Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands _______________________________________________ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
