On Jan 29, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-01-29 04:37 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
>>
>> OSM is delighted to receive building data in Canada, truly we are.
>> (Provided they are high-quality data). I have heard the process of
>> entering data into OSM, especially "bulk import" OD (which must match
>> license compatibility against OSM's license, our ODbL) described as
>> "inside baseball." It is not.
>
> If you're gonna quote me, at least try to understand me, please.
Stewart, I apologize if I misquoted you or took it out of context, that was not
my intention.
> The open data / OSM dialogue in Canada has been going something like
> this, ever since I started working with municipal groups in 2011 or so:
>
> Municipal data advocate: Please use our data! It's under an open
> licence!
>
> OSM volunteer: But our licences aren't compatible!
>
> Municipal data advocate: But it's an open licence! Our lawyers say
> you'll be fine!
>
> OSM volunteer: But we need … (starts to reel off list of additional
> supporting docs)
>
> Municipal data advocate: Companies like Google and Nokia use our data
> with no problem. Use our data! We are giving it to you!
> Don't complain!
>
> OSM volunteer: but but the licence …
>
> (Municipal data advocate storms off in search of a someone more likely
> to give them corporate recognition.)
>
> Some very tenacious OSM people and some very adaptable government people
> have made things work in a few places in Canada.
I both salute these efforts and bow deeply in obeisance at the good work done
here by them. These are the important seeds of the future, the acorns from
which mighty oaks shall grow. Yes, it will take time, effort, coordination,
management and documentation.
Simply put, (and I don't wish to be rude), "municipal data advocates" cannot
assume that OSM is a "free ride," without some front-loaded effort at planning
and further project guidance along the way. We have our culture and methods in
OSM, and that's the way it is. I am hopeful, as inter-community cooperation is
something Canada has been and is quite good at doing for its entire history.
> Only when we have a way
> forward on data licensing, then BC2020 would be an OSM project.
I respectfully disagree. Yes, "ways forward on data licensing" is vitally
important, as it is a major obstacle. However, BC2020, and the way that it has
morphed into becoming by its very nature using OSM as a repository of data, IS
an OSM project. Therefore, it must hew to OSM tenets, like transparency, good
communication, wiki updates, and in a project of scope this wide, sane and
steady planning and project management.
You can say that license compatibility is "slow going" (and you'd be right) but
OSM is "up to" three cities (from one, Ottawa). Rome wasn't built in a day and
Canada's building data won't be entered into OSM in a day, either. HOWEVER, as
they are being entered now, some "manually," some (few) via OD licence, and
some as simple improvements ("Hey, I'm going to tag this a café because I'm a
local OSM user and I know it is one!"), these efforts MUST BE coordinated (or
managed, I keep saying, though I'm not particularly enamored of the word as it
seems non-OSM, yet on national-scope projects, something like "management"
really is required, even if it is "loose but effective coordination").
Building data being entered into OSM do not have to be part of BC2020i, what is
now WikiProject BC2020: if I simply tag a building polygon amenity=cafe, I
don't become part of a coordinated effort. However, to the extent they strive
to be part of the coordinated effort to enter nationwide building data,
following the guidelines in our wiki of what we mean by acceptable-quality
data, with acceptable tags, they really, really should. Such coordination
benefits everybody, and at minor "cost" (follow some nationwide guidelines,
stay communicative with your status...). Is that so difficult a point upon
which to agree?
Thank you for continuing good dialog,
SteveA
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
