Stewart, that's where you are wrong. Ottawa has supplied data(footprints and address) to Stats Can to import into OSM for their project under the Canada Open Gov License so there would be no issues with licensing.
We are using that data. On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Frederik, > > > Which is why I'm reverting this import (and the deletions that went with > > it) now. Not because we shouldn't ever import the data, but because I > > don't want a fait accompli to stand in the way of a serious discussion > > about the matter. > > There are a *lot* more import changesets by Jamie, aka LogicalViolinist. > All of them seem to be importing City of Ottawa open data. This is > separate from any collaboration with Statistics Canada, as it does not > include the fields that they require. We're still not clear that the > city's building and address data meets the third party clearance > requirement that OGL creates. > > There also a mismatch between Ottawa buildings and address points. If > you look around here - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/446215268 - > there are duplicated address nodes, and some outside building outlines. > > I also have my suspicions that changesets such as 42788839 - > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42788839 (not by > LogicalViolinist, either) are imports. Identical changeset comments to > LogicalViolinist's import ones, and address nodes with source=Bing? Hmm. > > Please, if folks are going to import stuff, play by the rules. Every bad > import makes the possibility of good imports much harder. > > cheers, > Stewart > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > -- 外に遊びに行こう！
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
