[talk-au] Suburb boundaries
franc.carter at gmail.com
Thu Feb 5 07:30:58 GMT 2009
I have added an entry to the data catalogue at
and the beginnings of page about the import at
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Franc Carter <franc.carter at gmail.com> wrote:
> All confirmed - let the fun begin.
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Franc Carter <franc.carter at gmail.com>wrote:
>> I just had a conversation with a really helpful person at the ABS.
>> She indicated that the ABS is taking a view of the data that is very
>> with (at least my understanding) the view that OpenStreetMap is taking
>> towards the
>> Specifically she indicated that the ABS was not specifically concerned
>> that attribution was
>> done in a specific manner, just that the attribution was able to be found.
>> She will put
>> something in an email so that we have an official statement.
>> So, it looks like we may well have a some valuable data to add, which is
>> good because
>> I already spent a couple of hours working out hot to import it ;-)
>> There are two issues that I have come across with converting to osm:-
>> 1. What way do we want to represent the data, e.g closed ways or
>> relations consisting
>> of borders - something else ?
>> 2. The more technical problem that the boundaries are defined fairly
>> precisely (or more accurately
>> there are lots of points defining the boundaries). So the .osm file
>> is very large - so eyeballing
>> it in josm is not going to work.
>> So I'm interested in people's suggestions of how we want to represent the
>> data and on methods we can
>> use to sanity check the data before we upload it.
>> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:23 AM, James Churchill <pelrun at gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Franc Carter <franc.carter at ...> writes:
>>> > While putting together an email for this I came across an issue.
>>> > Currently OSM is Creative Commons licensed which looks pretty
>>> compatible with
>>> > their license (ignoring the practicalities of attribution). However the
>>> license > is being discussed at the moment and may well soon change
>>> and/or split.
>>> > Should I wait until the license issue gets 'sorted' ?
>>> I don't see a problem - the CC license the data is under only requires
>>> attribution, it doesn't restrict what the license of the derivative work
>>> is. And
>>> as OSM is looking for a license that (and I quote) "needs to give our
>>> the same three basic licensing elements (freely copiable; share-alike;
>>> attribution required) as it has at present" there's little worry of OSM
>>> At least, the matter shouldn't delay inquiries :)
>>> - James
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-au