[OSM-legal-talk] FW: OSM place name data from Turkey

[Simon Poole]

Paul

I was basing my thoughts on this statement

> There a total of 31k objects, of which 28k are version 1.

"Version 1" would seem to imply not moved, or am I mixing something up?

Simon
/
/
Am 29.04.2013 11:40, schrieb Paul Norman:
>
> Clarification on numbers:
>
>  
>
> Assuming every node has been moved, we'd be talking about 26k place or
> mountain peak nodes I can definitely keep, about 3k I can restore from
> the existing redactions, and about 3k that I'm not sure about.
>
>  
>
> Now, it's entirely possible a bunch of nodes haven't been moved from
> the HGK positions, in which case they'd be completely removed. I won't
> know that until I go ahead with the SQL to identify the nodes.
>
>  
>
> *From:*Henning Scholland [mailto:osm at aighes.de]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 29, 2013 2:31 AM
> *To:* Licensing and other legal discussions.
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-legal-talk] FW: OSM place name data from Turkey
>
>  
>
> Am 29.04.2013 11:27, schrieb Simon Poole:
>
>      
>
>     I would agree that there is some value in having "naked" place
>     nodes. However considering that at best we are talking about 2-3k
>     such nodes surviving it is a question if doing an  imagery based
>     "add a place" drive or similar for Turkey after the redaction
>     wouldn't be more efficient.
>
>     Simon
>
> Yes, maybe this would be a better solution.
>
> Henning
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20130429/c97eb0bb/attachment.html>