Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

I am the Michael Collinson mentioned by Simon, (hello Simon, it has been a while!). I still lurk on this list and after a long gap will be spending time in Australia each year. I am in Melbourne at the moment and look forward to meeting mappers here on my hopefully less busy visit later this

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

Am 14.03.2018 um 22:50 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick: > > > OK, a stupid, well & truly outside the box, thought here! :-) > > If we have discussions with CC, is there any possibility of getting > them to write into CC BY 4.5 & following editions, that "by the > Organisation agreeing to the terms of

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

Thanks mate - much nicerer! (at least for these tired old eyes) :-) Good luck with your continuing efforts Thanks Graeme On 14 March 2018 at 23:12, Andrew Harvey wrote: > Hey Graeme, > > Really appreciate the feedback! > > > What does the black type for CC BY 4.0

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

On 13 March 2018 at 19:47, Simon Poole wrote: > > * a small note on the side, when discussing ODbL and CC BY 4.0 > compatibility with Creative Commons, representatives of the organisation > voiced the opinion that most of the rewrite was just clarification of > terms that the

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

Apologises, I missed that. BCC definitely seem one of the most progressive Australian agencies surrounding open data so that should go well. Thanks again for your work. On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:37 PM Andrew Harvey wrote: > Oh I was referring to the Brisbane City

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

Oh I was referring to the Brisbane City Council data you mentioned not DNRM. On 15 Mar. 2018 12:26 am, "Jonathon Rossi" wrote: I'll reach out to them to see if we can get the waiver completed tomorrow, > in the meantime I've added it too the list. > This isn't intended to

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

> > I'll reach out to them to see if we can get the waiver completed tomorrow, > in the meantime I've added it too the list. > This isn't intended to sound rude, but why do you think they would have a different opinion on the CC BY 2.5 waiver and not just get the same response Joel received? It

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

> I like the idea of getting a fresh agreement about attribution to continue using the CC BY 2.5/3.0 licensed data, even if we cannot use the CC BY 4.0 data today. I don't think it would be hard to get the rights holder's okay that they are happy with our attribution of their data. Agreed, that's

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

Am 14.03.2018 um 13:06 schrieb Jonathon Rossi: > ... > > Could you please point me to a good resource that explains why CC BY > 2.5 and 3.0 don't have the same problem with "technical protection > measures" that we've got in the waivers because I'm obviously missing > something. I've read the

Re: [talk-au] I have written a response to DNRM, please give feedback

> > No, that was a deliberate attempt to take this discussion off-list as > I'm not sure that there is much point in raking over old mistakes > unless we are trying to learn from our mistakes. > I know at least I am learning a lot about the whole licensing area and from these past mistakes here