It is, the thing they changed was federal references to municipal ones. Which is why i'm confused the license is "not compatible"
On Jan 21, 2017 6:42 PM, "john whelan" <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote: > >I kept it generic, not specifying a particular dataset. That way we'll > have a final answer one way or the other and won't have to go back to them > all the time. > > My understanding is the City of Ottawa one is based on the Federal > Government one. > > Cheerio John > > On 21 January 2017 at 18:11, Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com> wrote: > >> On 1/20/2017 5:33 PM, john whelan wrote: >> >>> Did you include permission for the bus stops as well? They are from the >>> same source and the same licence. I think I might have included one pitch >>> sport soccer. The pitch was mapped but the sport soccer was I must confess >>> taken from their open data source. >>> >> >> I kept it generic, not specifying a particular dataset. That way we'll >> have a final answer one way or the other and won't have to go back to them >> all the time. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-ca mailing list >> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
