On Sun, 6 Dec 2009, James Livingston wrote: > On 05/12/2009, at 7:10 AM, Ben Kelley wrote: > > In places where this is the case, and there is no good survey data for > > the creek, I generally re-use the way to be the creek as well. > > This is what I've been doing. If I know there is a currently unmapped > creek/river which roughly follows the boundary, I'll re-use the boundary > because I don't have anything better, but I'm wary of moving anything that > is already mapped, because it might not be the same as the boundary.
This is what we are doing, but if everything attributed ABS2006 was removed from the database, we're up the creek without a paddle. I feel very strongly about this, and vague reassurances that OSMF will talk to people like the AU government to get the stuff under an alternate licence belongs in la-la land. I've met those bureaucrats (in general). They are nice people, but even if they were agreeable I would estimate 5 years for relicensing. If they were not agreeable it would be filed forever. James has pointed out that the Au guvmint decision to license the geo-data under CC-by-SA is good evidence that the licence is not "broken" in Australia. Liz _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au