I have added an entry to the data catalogue at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue#One-Time_Imports
and the beginnings of page about the import at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/ABS_Data cheers On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Franc Carter <franc.car...@gmail.com> wrote: > > All confirmed - let the fun begin. > > cheers > > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Franc Carter <franc.car...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> I just had a conversation with a really helpful person at the ABS. >> >> She indicated that the ABS is taking a view of the data that is very >> similar/compatible >> with (at least my understanding) the view that OpenStreetMap is taking >> towards the >> data. >> >> Specifically she indicated that the ABS was not specifically concerned >> that attribution was >> done in a specific manner, just that the attribution was able to be found. >> She will put >> something in an email so that we have an official statement. >> >> So, it looks like we may well have a some valuable data to add, which is >> good because >> I already spent a couple of hours working out hot to import it ;-) >> >> There are two issues that I have come across with converting to osm:- >> >> 1. What way do we want to represent the data, e.g closed ways or >> relations consisting >> of borders - something else ? >> >> 2. The more technical problem that the boundaries are defined fairly >> precisely (or more accurately >> there are lots of points defining the boundaries). So the .osm file >> is very large - so eyeballing >> it in josm is not going to work. >> >> So I'm interested in people's suggestions of how we want to represent the >> data and on methods we can >> use to sanity check the data before we upload it. >> >> cheers >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:23 AM, James Churchill <pel...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Franc Carter <franc.car...@...> writes: >>> >>> > While putting together an email for this I came across an issue. >>> > Currently OSM is Creative Commons licensed which looks pretty >>> compatible with >>> > their license (ignoring the practicalities of attribution). However the >>> license > is being discussed at the moment and may well soon change >>> and/or split. >>> > Should I wait until the license issue gets 'sorted' ? >>> >>> I don't see a problem - the CC license the data is under only requires >>> attribution, it doesn't restrict what the license of the derivative work >>> is. And >>> as OSM is looking for a license that (and I quote) "needs to give our >>> database >>> the same three basic licensing elements (freely copiable; share-alike; >>> attribution required) as it has at present" there's little worry of OSM >>> becoming >>> incompatible. >>> >>> At least, the matter shouldn't delay inquiries :) >>> >>> - James >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-au mailing list >>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Franc >> > > > > -- > Franc > -- Franc
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au