Lessons learned from Finland and Poland in using OSM and Open Data: https://blog.core.okfn.org/2018/03/28/open-data-day-2018-getting-the-local-communities-in-porto-and-helsinki-to-talk-about-open-mapping/
Also, the research by Professor Peter Johnson at Waterloo on models of direct editing of government spatial data is germane to the BC2020 mapathon events. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15230406.2016.1176536 Two issues related to licensing: A) data ownership and license may permit or restrict government usage of contributed data, integration with existing government data, and hamper its ability to share data with others, particularly under an open license. Governments may face issues with accepting data from individuals through their own data collection system as users would need to acknowledge that they claim no right to the data or the database. Without such a clause, government would be at risk of having data contributors potentially remove their edits from a database. B) A second challenge would come from the integration of part or all of a separate database, such as OSM into a government database, which is then provided under a separate license than OSM (Saunders, Scassa, and Lauriault 2012). OSM currently uses a license that has a share-alike clause, where any significant portion of the OSM data incorporated into a “derivative” database must continue to be licensed under the same Open Database License (ODbL v.1.0), including a share-alike clause. This means that any derivative data set must then be shared with the same or compatible licensing as the current OSM database (for more information, see https://wiki.osmfoundation. org/wiki/License). Through a complex and emerging field of database licensing law and compatibility, this share-alike clause may restrict the potential for blended OSM-government data products to be created as this derivative database would need to be contributed back to OSM and be made available under a separate license than from the government open data license. For example, the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) notes that they cannot integrate OSM data into the USGS National Map since OSM data uses a Creative Commons Share-Alike license, while their work needs to be under the public domain (Wolf, McNinch, and Poore 2011). For the Durham Region Mapathon even that has been rescheduled for May 3, we could use crowdsourcing and data mirroring (below) based on the feedback I got from Professor Johnson who has demonstrated the value of open municipal data and GIS to local K-12 classroom teachers and students. Peter explores the following four models for inputting geospatial data into government databases in the above paper: 1. status quo of open data 2. data curation 3. data mirroring 4. acceptance of external crowdsourced data. Potential Issues with crowdsourcing: • “jurisdictionality of contribution, anonymity, and indeed the authority of contributors to make changes are all relevant in the instance that government were to adopt OSM. Through using OSM as a source of not only geospatial data, but as a conduit for edits, government shifts power over data creation and editing outside the walls of city hall.” (see page 7). Jonathan
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
