[OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license

[Chris Hill]

To be clear, I did not describe OS data as crap, I described the 
*quality* of data only based on OS StreetView with no extra surveyed 
data as crap.

So you think that only experienced OSmers add shops, churches, schools, 
footpaths, cycletracks ... ?

In the Hull area there are about 120 roads with the wrong names on OS 
StreetView and OS Locator. OS StreetView is very far from the best 
quality OS data - it has for example approximations for buildings, it 
has most of the excellent OS detail removed and is laid out as a print 
layer.

OS OpenData may suit your needs, but I aim higher.

Kevin Cordina wrote:
> I see the point, but am not convinced.  
> I think categorising the OS data as 'crap' is a huge exaggeration. Yes, there are errors, but in the general scheme of things are minor.
>
> This is also where the source tags come in handy.  A user who is experienced enough to want to add the extra detail is also likely experienced enough to spot the OS source tag and realise a survey would benefit the data.
> As to the usefulness - a map compiled from purely the OS streetview data would serve one of my purposes for OSM data (rendering nameless maps of streets and natural features) 100% perfectly, so it is not a fair assumption that more data = more value.
>
> A fundamental difference arises based on the intended use - my use is better served by better geographic coverage, without the subtleties, and therefore tracing/importing is valuable to me.
>
> Kevin
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org <legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org>
> To: kevin at cordina.org.uk <kevin at cordina.org.uk>; Licensing and other legal discussions. <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Sent: Tue Sep 28 17:55:24 2010
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license
>
> kevin at cordina.org.uk wrote:
>   
>> OK, so transferring data isn't as academically pleasing as gaining a GPS trace and basing a map on that, but I don't see how a road in OSM from OS data is worse than no road being present.
>>   
>>     
> Gathering data for OSM on the ground is so much more than just the track 
> of a road. When someone just traces the OS data with the names it 
> superficially looks complete, but all of the additional data that a 
> survey would bring is missing and that is where much of the value comes 
> from. This 'complete' look puts off other OSMers so the net result is 
> long-lasting, crap quality data with all of the OS errors and omissions 
> and no added detail. Speed of completion comes a poor second to real 
> quality in my mind.
>
> There are a few useful imports such as boundary data which are not 
> available from a survey.  Using OS Locator to compare with OSM to help 
> establish what is missing is useful too, but I believe that should lead 
> to a survey to add anything to OSM.
>
>   


-- 
Cheers, Chris
user: chillly