2017-06-02 10:32 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de>: > > Individual Geocoding Results that are based on an Indirect Hit > > contain no OSM data and so are free of any obligations under the > > ODbL > > .... > IMO it would make sense to remove this distinction because the guideline > makes no significant difference between these two cases. And even if > indirect hits contain no OSM data they are clearly derived from OSM > data. >
+1 More questions concerning: "A collection of Geocoding Results is not a substantial extract of the OSM database provided: ... 2. the collection is not a systematic attempt to aggregate all or substantially all Primary Features of a given type (as defined in the Collective Database Guideline) within a geographic area city-sized or larger." 2.1 "the collection is not a systematic attempt to aggregate all or substantially all Primary Features of a given type" what if it is not about Primary Features but certain properties (e.g. query in a grid for many points for the language of the name tag of nearby features and then construct language areas by creating hulls around points with the same language. With this guideline it would not fall under ODbL, but IMHO would clearly by a derivative database. 2.2 "all or substantially all Primary Features" If I throw away an arbitrary 5-10% of the results of all places in the world, it would be ok to store name and coordinates in a db and use it without any license obligation? Isn't "all or substantially all" quite exclusive? Why not for example "a majority"? 2.3 "geographic area city-sized or larger. " How big is a "city", which definition of "city" is used? If I use the method to get coordinates for all addresses of Manhattan, this would clearly be less than "city size"? Or 2 thirds of Rome? What is the reason we don't use the introduced "substantial" criteria as defined here, for geocoding as well: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline In particular "The features relating to an area of up to 1,000 inhabitants which can be a small densely populated area such as a European village or can be a large sparsely-populated area for example a section of the Australian bush with few Features." which is way smaller than "city sized". Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
