<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2016-02-26 15:23, Thib wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJDDYZMk8j-Aic=XKby7zKeWiJsnwKytnrkVXkc1dAgGPa=u8g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>SPW PICC tiles layer is available in JOSM for mapping
Belgian Southern area but I can't find enough information
about the license terms.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Is it allowed to :</div>
<div>- copy (doing"calc") buildings and other objects boundaries
(as we do with bing tiles)</div>
<div>- get address house numbers</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
According to a phone conversation Julien Fastré had with the SPW,
what we are doing is <b>not</b> copying the data in their eyes. (I
suppose this is akin to map licenses often considering the copyright
as a right to reproduce the picture (and wasting paper "you can
print...") and not the right to make measurements on it.<br>
On the other hand, Minister Henry ordered the SPW to free their
geographic data.<br>
<br>
The PICC story is a pity.<br>
In 2010, I notified the SPW helpdesk that the PICC server was
returning blank tiles in EPSG:4326 which is practically a
requirement for JOSM and which is served by almost all servers in
the world. No answer.<br>
Later on, I asked to feed this request through our official channel
with the SPW and my insistence was laughed at by Julien Fastré whose
own insistence was "we cannot copy yet".<br>
Now, that bug has finally been fixed.<br>
In short, if the SPW had fixed that bug when I reported it, we would
have enjoyed a 5-year JOSM tagging at a 20 cm precision since what
we do is not copy. I was able to use the PICC with Mapproxy, I did
not because of the false instructions but yet I have been suspected
to be a copying pirate!<br>
And nowadays, it's a real pity to find most houses and roads at a 2
to 5 m distance of their real location, especially those who were
and still are mapped with other tools than JOSM and PICC. It makes
feel like everything has to be redone again at 20 cm precision..<br>
Making corrections is difficult because I proposed a revision date
tagging that could have been very useful in this case but there was
no interest on the Tagging list and even Marc Gemis was on my tracks
to say it's impossible.<br>
In consequence, if you find the following tag, it means that I have
rectified the geometry.<br>
source=20cm-near PICC <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://geoportail.wallonie.be">http://geoportail.wallonie.be</a> 2015 or
source:geometry=same.<br>
Unfortunately, I have made many many untagged corrections.<br>
<br>
Cheers
<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJDDYZMk8j-Aic=XKby7zKeWiJsnwKytnrkVXkc1dAgGPa=u8g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I've found some old threads talking about that interesting
source but no real answer...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If someone has any information about it, It would be very
useful.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks in advance.</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thib</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>