<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 10 January 2012 18:19, Peter Miller <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:peter.miller@itoworld.com">peter.miller@itoworld.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>Just noticed that this response when to Andy alone. Copying to the list.<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br><div class="gmail_quote">
<div>On 10 January 2012 11:14, Andy Robinson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ajrlists@gmail.com" target="_blank">ajrlists@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Latest HS2 announcement today means that there will be a lot of discussion<br>
about the route (generally and specific locations) over the coming years.<br>
Currently the new route plans [2] have the usual OS copyright notice. What<br>
we need is the bare bones of the proposed infrastructure released under the<br>
open government licence. Any ideas or avenues for achieving that? I'm not<br>
suggesting we rush to put the proposed route into OSM but it would be nice<br>
to be able to do so when the time is ripe.<br></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br>You beat me to it! I was about the do pretty much the same post. Agreed - we should add the route.<br><br>This map (<a href="http://www.umapper.com/maps/view/id/58620/" target="_blank">http://www.umapper.com/maps/view/id/58620/</a>)
has been produced by myself and others and is in my view 100% free of
OS copyright. I suggest we check it for currency and then get on with
it. You will notice that this map is already included in the HS2 article
on Wikipedia. Zoom in and there is detail of the station layout etc.<br>
<br>Regarding OS copyright, the OS do not claim derived copyright any
more for 3rd party content that is displayed on an OS map just so long
as they do not present that sort of feature on their mapping. As such
any copyright infringement would be with the government, not the OS in
my view.<br><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br>I have added the approximate route, based on the umapper resource I
mentioned from Euston as far as Amersham and will add more detail this
evening. To get it much more accurate we are going to need to get the
government to release a KML file or similar for the route or as a mimimum allow us to trace from their route as plotted on the OS mapping. Personally I feel that it is better to have something approximate nothing and it should encourage
them to release it if they are holding back.<br>
<br><br>Regards,<br><br><br>Peter<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>Regards,<br><br><br>Peter<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Cheers<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16485263" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16485263</a><br>
[2] <a href="http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs2-maps-20120110/" target="_blank">http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs2-maps-20120110/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div><br>
</blockquote></div><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>