The momentum within Australian Governments is now to foster an environment of
99% free with 99% coverage. Best of both worlds, but requires a shift to CCBY
thinking.
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 01:56:12 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote:
I just assumed street maps was its original purpose that it outgrew as it
became more popular.
However, there's great value in having everything with a position on the
Earth in the one true geofabric. Assuming the OSMF is happy to have the
database be populated with said objects.
I'm sure
On 11/12/2009, at 8:02 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
so we don't need imported data?
In most cases we don't need imported data, but it can be useful. For example
rather than painstakingly crafting the entire coastline of Australia from a few
GPS traces and a lot of imagery (much is relatively
James,
I am sure there are other examples of things that can't be easily
mapped by humans walking, cycling and kayaking around (drains,
underground tunnels and long lines of electricity pylons spring to
mind). Luckily street maps don't usually depend on these things to be
useful.
PY
On Fri,
paul youlten wrote:
James,
I am sure there are other examples of things that can't be easily
mapped by humans walking, cycling and kayaking around (drains,
underground tunnels and long lines of electricity pylons spring to
mind). Luckily street maps don't usually depend on these things to be
2009/12/11 Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net:
so we don't need imported data?
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Why PD is not better for business
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009
From: paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.com
To: Liz ed...@billiau.net
Liz,
The coastline
34,218 kilometres of beautiful, sunny coastline.
... sounds like you need to organise a huge mapping party...
... or maybe someone should set up a OSM-au holiday company - people
in Northern Europe would pay good money to go on that sort of mapping
adventure.
PY
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:11
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:39 PM, paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.com wrote:
James,
I am sure there are other examples of things that can't be easily
mapped by humans walking, cycling and kayaking around (drains,
underground tunnels and long lines of electricity pylons spring to
mind).
But it is still a street map that we are making - administrative
boundaries, top secret government installations, Al Qaeda training
camps, water catchment areas and so on are fascinating (and probably
great fun to map) but they are not necessarily part of a street map.
PY
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at
paul youlten wrote:
But it is still a street map that we are making - administrative
boundaries, top secret government installations, Al Qaeda training
camps, water catchment areas and so on are fascinating (and probably
great fun to map) but they are not necessarily part of a street map.
PY
Dave,
Clearly all those things, and much more, can and should be mapped.
They can all be seen on the street and they all have public access. I
agree: If it's a physical entity then it can be mapped. ++
What is less clear is what happens if changing the licence means we
lose invisible
2009/12/11 paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.com:
Dave,
Clearly all those things, and much more, can and should be mapped.
They can all be seen on the street and they all have public access. I
agree: If it's a physical entity then it can be mapped. ++
What is less clear is what happens if
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote:
From having seen it in quite a few Open Source projects, it would be a
death sentence.
I'll have to take your word for it. From my point of view, I think I'd
rather see a 70% free project with 100% coverage, than a 100% free
Peter,
That sounds bad. Can you give us some examples?
PY
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote:
2009/12/11 paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.com:
Dave,
Clearly all those things, and much more, can and should be mapped.
They can all be seen on the street and
2009/12/11 paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.com:
Peter,
That sounds bad. Can you give us some examples?
PY
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote:
2009/12/11 paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.com:
Dave,
Clearly all those things, and much more, can and should be
Dont see that as necessarily bad. If there is a fundamental difference in
ideologies/beliefs of members, I think the project, in the longer term is
better served by a split. Neither do I see it as a setback, its more like a
step backward to take many steps forward for each of the splits.
Regards,
Oh, so you are talking about a fork in an open source project. Of
course I realised that you didn't really mean death but I thought
you might mean that Liz Dodds and Talk-au were going to cut my nodes
off. ;-)
I was under the impression that a certain amount of forking was
encouraged in open
2009/12/11 Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org
Hmm Maybe these have not all died but the split did cause serious damage.
X (You now have a choice of X.org and XFree86), The split caused a
long halt in development and the original is hardly used now, only the
branch
Joomla/Mambo
I'm sure
2009/12/11 Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com:
2009/12/11 Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org
Hmm Maybe these have not all died but the split did cause serious damage.
X (You now have a choice of X.org and XFree86), The split caused a
long halt in development and the original is hardly used
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote:
2009/12/11 Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com:
2009/12/11 Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org
Hmm Maybe these have not all died but the split did cause serious
damage.
X (You now have a choice of X.org and
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Shalabh wrote:
While I am not advocating a fork (I am anyway voting a yes to ODBL), I dont
think a single community is always the answer. Single communities tend to
get static for the lack of competition. All successful open source projects
have parallels, whether through
On 11/12/2009 16:16, Peter Childs wrote:
Hmm the Fork is strong? in the case of X XFree86 (ie the original) is
almost unknown now. and the Fork meant many years of little or no
development on what is the main graphics sub-system used across
multiple operating systems.
In the case of
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Shalabh wrote:
While I am not advocating a fork (I am anyway voting a yes to ODBL), I
dont
think a single community is always the answer. Single communities tend to
get static for the lack of competition.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Shalabh shalab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Shalabh wrote:
While I am not advocating a fork (I am anyway voting a yes to ODBL), I
dont
think a single community is always the answer.
24 matches
Mail list logo
