On Feb 5, 2015 5:30 AM, "Mike N" <nice...@att.net> wrote: > > On 2/4/2015 11:48 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Generally, it is not feasible to use OSM as a dataset backing an >>> official GTFS feed. This is because the probability of the GTFS >>> dataset being uploaded to Google and thereby violating the license >>> if the street centerlines or stops were derived from OSM. >> >> >> >> Google isn't the only consumer of GTFS, and it is possible to provide >> attribution in a GTFS feed. > > > It's mostly a matter of probability of being uploaded to Google: if a transportation authority publishes a trip planner that consumes GTFS, there will be a constant stream of requests to have the capability added to Google Maps. The original implementer should know about OSM licensing issues, but if he leaves, the co-workers who take his place will have no chance of knowing about or remembering license terms. The open GTFS format will end up in Google despite any embedded attribution or notes.
In this situation, I'm not sure this isn't difference with significant distinction, since if Tulsa Transit, a government entity, were to clean up their own data to reflect the ground truth they were directly and solely responsible for creating, it would come out to the same result.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us