Simon Ward <simon <at> bleah.co.uk> writes: > > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 02:25:24PM -0400, Russ Nelson wrote: > > Earlier, I proposed that certain datasets should be immutable; whether > > by policy or mechanism as needed. I propose importing the NYS DEC > > Lands as an immutable set of data. If you read this exchange with > > Robert Morrell, you can see why they feel that NO changes AT ALL are > > appropriate. I agree with them. This dataset constitutes a legal > > description of the property managed by the NYS Department of > > Environmental Conservation, and changes by any OSM editor are not > > consistent with the nature of the data. > > > > How do people feel about me importing this data (with all of their > > metadata), adding an immutable=yes tag, with the intent of tracking > > their dataset, and deleting --outright-- any changes made by OSM > > editors. > > -1 > > It’s a sign of success for OSM when people want all sorts of data to be > “in” it, but an immutable dataset just isn’t in the spirit of the > project, not to mention that it would violate any sharealike licence > placed on it (adds restrictions, like invariant sections in the GFDL). > > Simon
Why not to store this kind of datasets as own layers in the database? DEC data could be on its own, non-editable layer, but if there's something that people would like to edit those features could be copied or lifted to anothet, OSM layer. That would make DEC updates easier as well, they would just update the DEC layer. The same approach would suit other data of similar nature as well, like TIGER or cadastrial data. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
