>
> My argument is about the geometry information. The friction map
> combines road geometries from OSM and Google road geometry information.
> I see no way it can be argued that this combination of road geometry
> data which is rendered into the friction map is a collective database.
> None of
On Friday 12 January 2018, Kathleen Lu wrote:
> Your analysis does not follow.
>
> The researcher's description says: "These datasets were each
> allocated a speed or speeds of travel in terms of time to cross each
> pixel of that type. The datasets were then combined to produce a
> 'friction
They are using OSM road data and Google road data to generate what they
> call a "friction surface" which is essentially a raster map indicating
> how fast you can move at every point of the map - faster on roads,
> slower elsewhere depending on relief and landcover. This friction map
> you can
On Friday 12 January 2018, Rory McCann wrote:
> As near as I can see, the only data they are distributing (publicly)
> is the 2 GeoTIFF files in the "map.ox.ac.uk" page. The question is:
> Is a GeoTIFF file created like this from OSM data which has been
> mixed with other data, a Produced Work, or
As near as I can see, the only data they are distributing (publicly) is
the 2 GeoTIFF files in the "map.ox.ac.uk" page. The question is: Is a
GeoTIFF file created like this from OSM data which has been mixed with
other data, a Produced Work, or a Derived Database?
In support of "Produced Work",
