[OSM-legal-talk] What happens on April 1?

andrzej zaborowski balrogg at gmail.com
Wed Mar 7 19:40:09 GMT 2012


On 7 March 2012 16:57, Chris Hill <osm at raggedred.net> wrote:
> On 07/03/12 15:45, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
>>
>> I was wondering why people think that.  Even trying to put myself in
>> place of someone who thinks the license change is the best thing since
>> sliced bread I still can't see the reasons for remapping.  First of
>> all it costs more work than adding data from scratch and it takes
>> people's time away from doing actual mapping -- creating new data.  So
>> it's not a zero net gain operation -- i.e. we lose new contributions,
>> but we get to keep the same amount of work which would have been
>> deleted.  Rather, after the potential switch-over we will have less
>> data than if we kept on doing on what we always did.
>
> I have been examining the data marked as something that will be lost in an
> area fairly close to me. Much of this was created many years ago and the
> original editor has not responded to attempts to contact them.
>
> Much of this is based on poor-quality aerial imagery. Replacing it with a
> survey or even more recent imagery creates much higher quality data, not
> least better geometry. I have gone on to improve other work sometimes by
> adding extra detail for example roundabout flares, road names (from survey
> or other open sources) and adding otherwise missing roads, tracks etc.
>
> Like-for-like replacement might not be useful, but much of this is a
> positive improvement and worthwhile in its own right. I might not have
> looked at some of these areas without the process of licence change. I will
> now be reviewing the whole area (northern Lincolnshire, UK) over the next
> few months and I expect to find lots of potential improvements, just like
> anywhere else.

Those are useful improvements, I'm not saying they aren't.  But you
did have to manually delete the existing data, something that is
expected to be done by a bot anyway.  You may have spent as little as
1% of the mapping time on it, but it is still a slight overhead.
Likely it was higher if you had to investigate the situation, install
an editor plugin and so on.

So if those deletions were done automatically you could have added
those same details and a hypothetical 0.01 more.  Assuming that there
are other things to add to OSM (and I've not yet been to a place where
there weren't, maybe except one neighbourhood in Dublin), remapping
before the cut-off date can at best have a close to zero negative
result.

Cheers



More information about the legal-talk mailing list