I am also surprised that we are going to the compulsory re-licensing
when there are still (as far as I can tell without looking too closely)
doubts over the compatibility of significant datasources with the new
licence or contributor terms - From what I can tell from a few wiki
pages, it is not clear whether OS Opendata in the UK, or Nearmap in
Austrailia is compatible. I would have expected these issues to be
resolved before forcing people to re-licence.
Isn't it funny how, just over a year ago, we couldn't care less about
anything the Ordnace Survey did, and suddenly we are a project that must
choose their license according to what is compatible with OS?
Probably because OS OpenData has been used fairly significantly by many folk
in the UK since released. Without any sort of public indication otherwise
from the LWG, it was difficult to believe that a new licence chosen wouldn't
be compatible with data which appears to only require attribution.
Not that I agree with it, but OS StreetView has been used to map out entire
towns in the UK
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
