[OSM-legal-talk] CT-compatible data recycling imported nodes

[Simon Poole]

The v0 rule essentially states that allocating an object in the DB 
doesn't create IP, so if you have an object that has lost all of the 
attributes it originally had it is essentially a new object.

However in your case that really doesn't apply (IMHO), because what I've 
seen from your examples is that you actually imported the data yourself 
and at least some of the original tags have survived. Note that the data 
would actually survive the redaction process at this point in time, but 
naturally you shouldn't have agreed to the CTs in the first place.

The preferred way to proceed would be for you to get permission to 
release the data you imported under the ODBL from the original creator 
in the UMP project, as you probably know there is an effort under way to 
organize exactly that in Poland.

Simon

Am 28.03.2012 22:43, schrieb rhn:
> Three different examples; all of them were remapped&  verified in respect to location and tags (except of name=* in most cases). That doesn't mean the tags have changed though, sometimes they were imported just right.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28099536/history
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28099539/history
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28099452/history
>
> Could you point me to the v0 rule you're referring to?
>
> Cheers,
> rhn
>
>> If you essentially remapped the objects it may be that some or most of
>> your data would be safe due to the v0 rule (regardless of any other
>> developments wrt UMP). It is difficult to answer this more definitely
>> we would need to see some examples.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> Am 28.03.2012 22:12, schrieb rhn:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Please excuse me if my question has been asked before, I don't follow this list.
>>>
>>> Today I found information about the way data is going to be marked as incompatible - the way I understood it, all ways and nodes are going to be reverted to the latest compatible version (i.e. the one before first CC-only changeset).
>>>
>>> This worries me, as it seems the bulk of my changesets will be deleted.
>>> I focused on an area with data coming nearly exclusively from an incompatible source (UMP). Before a license change was even in plans, I managed to replace the road network almost completely with GPS traces and some landuse data with WMS and traces.
>>> The problem is, I never bothered too much with replacing the actual database objects (takes too much time), thinking removal of source=* would be enough. Let me mention that I removed source only from  nodes and ways that I had precise data about (and would have deleted if it wasn't a hassle).
>>>
>>> My questions are: Is it acceptable to copy the snapshot of my current data that would otherwise get deleted and restore it as CT-compatible?
>>> If yes, should the backup be performed now or is there going to be a way to access CC data after the license change?
>>> If not, is there any other way to preserve the data?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> rhn
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> legal-talk mailing list
>>> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> legal-talk mailing list
>> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk