[Legal-general] Who would start using an OSM PD repository?

[Sunburned Surveyor]

Why not put your basic road data in the public domain repository (when
it gets set up) and put your more detailed mapping data in the regular
OSM database, which is share-alike?

Landon

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 8:21 AM, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> One of the ways I might consider contributing to a PD dataset would be if it
> were possible to license basic elements such as roads and landuse as PD but
> retain more detailed elements as CC-BY-SA.
>
> A basic road layout is pretty much a commodity these days whereas some of
> the very detailed micro-mapping that requires the exploration of every
> back-alley has greater value and deserves (IMHO) greater protection.
>
> I'm thinking there could be mechanism that allowed basic elements to be PD
> licensed, but still enabled POIs and more detailed elements to be maintained
> under a different license.  This is a variation on the differently licensed
> layers scheme, with a bit more structure for what gets stored under each
> license (perhaps each user might choose differently).
>
> 80n
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:47 PM, TimSC <mapping at sheerman-chase.org.uk>
> wrote:
>>
>> Landon,
>>
>> Yeah the database approach is pretty cool - all the tools from the main
>> OSM can be reused.
>>
>> I did have a thought, which is probably obvious to everyone already. The
>> OSM dev server has rails and databases are available. It is also has apache
>> configured to render rails pages (I guess using passenger). But it does say
>> on the wiki to not install big web apps, and I would imaging the rails port
>> would qualify as big. From my personal experience, the load on the dev
>> server is generally light(?). (At least as far as I can tell in munin[1]) So
>> in principle, no new hardware or serious reconfiguration is needed for a
>> test database.
>>
>> Who was saying OSM was a do-ocracy?...
>>
>> This would obviously not be a practical solution, if it became popular.
>> But looking around for 3rd party options looks more attractive, if we get
>> the cold shoulder from OSMF.
>>
>> TimSC
>>
>> [1]
>> http://munin.openstreetmap.org/openstreetmap/errol.openstreetmap/index.html
>>
>> On 29/07/10 22:23, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
>>>
>>> TimSC,
>>>
>>> I've had some time to consider your questions. After some serious
>>> thought I realize that a database is the best way to store a seamless
>>> geospatial data set.
>>>
>>> It doesn't sound like your getting a lot of love from the OSMF board.
>>> :] You can contact me if you want to explore the idea of setting up an
>>> expiremental PD database.
>>>
>>> Landon
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Legal-general mailing list
>> Legal-general at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-general
>
>